I understand that IVF often results in the death of blastocysts, or at least embryos that are never implanted into any womb. So if you believe that destroying a fertilized egg is murder, you presumably wouldn’t want to undergo IVF. Which religious sects explicitly oppose IVF?
Bonus questions: how much opposition to IVF exists? How often do women or couples refuse the procedure because they believe that life begins at conception?
The Catholic Church has declared that IVF has been “clearly and unequivocally judged to be immoral.” The church considers that the procedure “does violence to human dignity and to the marriage act” because it eliminates the act of love between husband and wife and, worse, involves destroying embryos that are defective or surplus.
I don’t think people are ordinarily in the position of having IVF pushed on them, such that they might “refuse”. It’s a thing some people choose to do, and others don’t choose to do.
There are lots of reasons for not choosing something, and I’m sure “we’ll probably end up killing embryos” plays a part for some women. But i doubt it’s easy to count how many. There’s probably a bit of a continuum between feeling squeamish about it and feeling it’s immoral, for instance.
(It’s also expensive and physically very rough on the woman.)
Thank you. Article length description of the Catholic Church’s position:
Quote from abstract:
The Church says “no” to IVF due to the massive destruction of embryonic life, the assault on the meaning of the conjugal act and the treatment of the child as a product not a gift. She continues to announce a loud “yes” to life, endeavoring to take care of the human embryo, the least of our brothers and sisters (see Matthew 25:40).
For reference Matthew 25:40:
The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
I agree this would be difficult to survey. As for religious views, I found this roundup. My summary:
Catholic: Against
Eastern Orthodox Church: Against
Anglican: Ok, in the context of a married couple. No gamete or sperm donors.
Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, Mormon, Presbyterian, Episcopal, United Church of Christ, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, Mennonites: Accept IVF with spouse’s gametes and no embryo wastage.
Q: Is, “No embryo wastage”, something that can be guaranteed with the appropriate procedures? I’ve read about fertilizing one egg at a time and then implanting it. mjmartin explains current practice here, which seems a little at odds with this proposal:
2013 polling from Pew suggests little opposition to IVF:
In vitro fertilization is:
Wrong: 12%
Not a moral issue: 46%
Morally Acceptable: 33%
Interestingly, Protestants and Catholics are tied in their (slight) opposition to IVF - 13% each. White evangelicals oppose by about the same amount - 14%. College grads oppose at 7%, while High School or less oppose at 16%. There appear to be a lot of respondents that are fine with IVF, but think abortion is morally wrong. 49% - 12% = 37%.
I don’t know how often, but I do know a couple that found out that they both carried the gene for cystic fibrosis, after their first child was diagnosed. By that time they had already had a second child, who was immediately tested. I don’t remember if that child also had CF. I do know that they wanted a third child.
They were against doing IVF and preimplanting testing, as that would have meant aborting embryos. They adopted their third child.
Neither were Catholic. At the time they were both evangelical Christians (think Focus on the Family). At least one of them, if not both, has split from the Focus on the Family mindset.
I have a friend who is an Orthodox Jew whose first child has hemophilia. He wanted to either adopt or use IVF for the second child, to avoid a second child with hemophilia, but his wife objected on moral grounds. But the moral grounds there may have been the Orthodox Jewish position against masturbation, which is required to make the fertilized eggs. (There are also issues with adoption. Orthodox Jews can take in orphans and care for them, but Jewish law doesn’t recognize those orphans as their children.) It’s not the kind of issue where you probe the details, i only know what he told me. Which is that his wife had “moral objections”.
Does the Jewish faith also see the story of Onan as being a condemnation of masturbation? IIRC the real sin of Onan was disobeying his duty to his dead brother to produce a child in his name, the spill was merely a byproduct of the offense… (And not even masturbation).
See also Leviticus 15:16:
And if any man’s seed of copulation go out from him, then he shall wash all his flesh in water, and be unclean until the even.
Deleted as inappropriate for FQ st this stage.
AIUI, that’s not necessarily true, that masturbation is required. I’ve been exploring a range of reproductive options, and as far as IVF I have come to understand that a doctor can help a patient morally opposed to masturbation get around that by offering a special type of condom to collect and deliver the sperm in following regular sex.
While you might imagine that surely anyone opposed to masturbation would also be opposed to condom use, consider: here, the condom’s role is actually not to prevent insemination and pregnancy. Rather, the condom is what may actually make a viable pregnancy possible, following a sexual act between husband and wife for the purpose of bearing children. What could be more acceptable than that?
You were faster than me. But yes, the prohibition is actually against spilling seed. Men who have wet dreams and women who menstruate have both been in contact with something dead (a failed act of reproduction) and need to wash in the mikvah to become clean again. And it’s generally frowned on to intentionally make yourself unclean.
This also means that Orthodox Jews don’t believe in using condoms, because it causes the man to have a discharge of semen that isn’t into a woman’s womb.
On the flip side, some Orthodox Jews engage in IVF and use a condom during an act of marital sex to collect the semen. There are always a variety of interpretations in matters if Jewish law.
We typed at the same time.
I don’t know if that is something that can be guaranteed - but I can say that even without the deliberate destruction of embryos, the Catholic Church would still be against it because the destruction of embryos is not the only issue. There’s also the issue of separating the sex act from reproduction. Catholic teaching is against that separation in both directions - no sex without the possibility of pregnancy and no reproducing without sex. No IVF, not even if only a single embryo is created , and generally no artificial insemination. There hasn’t been a definitive statement about whether artificial insemination using semen collected by means of a perforated condom is acceptable but they have clearly taken a position against semen collection using an ordinary condom or masturbation.
Wait til they hear about anal sex!
Oh, they have heard of it
https://ph.yhb.org.il/en/14-02-18/
Most Rishonim explain that when a couple engages in anal intercourse in order to avoid pregnancy, it is considered a waste of seed and is forbidden. However, if they engage in it occasionally, it is not prohibited. Some Rishonim explain that the Sages permitted anal sexual intercourse as long as the husband does not ejaculate in the anus. Rather, the couple must later engage in vaginal intercourse, culminating in ejaculation. Some halakhic authorities forbid even this.
There’a rule for everything!!!
The only thing we don’t have a rule for is premature ejaculation.
…but I hear that’s coming quickly.