I think one big issue with this is the mindset it create. That you can just by everything you want, get babies engineered for you etc. Or if you don't want baby, just kill it.
I believe God wants us to carry certain crosses. Yes, not having a baby you want can be devastating. Having a baby you do not want (to begin with, usually 9 months is enough to make unwanted baby beloved one) can be devastating. But these sort of things help us grow as people and as christians.
If everything is always easy and sugarcoated, we and up in a society where people get upset when you use wrong pronoun of them.
Also it makes no sense that like half of the female population is happily murdering their babies and other half is desperate to get pregnant at all costs. Both options are seen ase "woman choice" -but also something society must pay for, not the woman in question.
The problems with IVF are three-fold: 1st, apparently, the majority of IVF attempts don't result in life births. According to this site, the chance of success is 20%, and that is true even for women in their 20s, while the complications for your mental and physical health are often severe and last for years.
2nd, many embryos are just routinely destroyed for various reasons, which is somewhat akin to abortion, and one of the reasons the Catholic Church is against it.
And the last one, children born through IVF have a higher rate of health problems and birth defects, something they will even warn you about at a fertility clinic.
Things like PGD testing turn children into consumer products, which is very much in the spirit of our age, when "being good for economy" is everything that matters.
I'm going to toss my $0.02 into the ring. I think we should take 2 steps back and 1 forward. I think the IVF should be allowed, but only if the woman in question absolutely cannot have kids. Not the doc said I can't but I probably could if I got off my drugs. Not I waited till 40 but I really want one now. I mean those who truly cannot.
The two steps back are I think that the pill and other forms of contraception with the exception of condoms should be completely banned. Think about it for a second. With the exception of the condom all and I do mean all of the other forms of contraception are basically a woman ingesting poisons and drugs and not considering how much damage they are doing to her mind, her body, and her reproductive organs.
The second step is to get to find a way to break this mindset of you should go to school and then get a career and have kids last. This needs to go soonest. Women were designed to have kids in their teens and early to mid 20s. Waiting till the 30s up to 40 is rolling the dice with health and mental issues for kids. Especially considering the endless cocktail of drugs most (Americans as I can't speak for Europe) are taking on almost a daily basis. Seriously it is a miracle that as few kids are being born with issues as there is.
Now to be fair I don't actively know that much about IVF so I don't know if what Sanne is saying is correct or not. What I can observe with my eyes is that the pharmaceutical companies have absolutely no issue with pushing pure poison while calling it a miracle drug so I wouldn't doubt it is the case.
Either way something needs to change soon as we are about to suffer from a massive population decline by all reports.
Women were designed to have kids as long as they have their menstruation. This is called reproductive years. Nowadays girls are having their 1st period quite young, so 16 seems like a reasonable age of consent, but older women used to keep having children until their late 40s. They stopped doing it in the 1960s when the doctors started pushing the pill on married women with 2 children.
If there is anything good what came out of IVF it's that it took away the stigma of older women having children, something they used to do throughout the whole of history.
However, fertility clinics often sell people false hope, as documented by that site I linked to. They don't really try to look into the causes behind fertility problems, or offer a holistic approach. It's just one size fits all and a way to make money out of people's misery. And they make you sign papers to prevent you from suing them, too.
Its not that girls are having their 1st period younger. That has never actually changed, its the perception of things. When people are seen as children into their late 20s, a girl starting her menstruation at 11 to 13 is seen as extremely young. Except that the age she receives it was the same age as a girl did 100 years ago, as a girl did 1,000 years ago, and as a girl did 5,000 years ago. It is simply our perception. Just like how previously marriages were expected in the 14 to 18 age range, but now its perceived as predatory if the girl is under 20. It is all from how a society or culture views things. Remember at one point it was considered scandalous for a woman to show her ankles. Perception is key, and our perception is badly broken.
This needs to come to an end. I push for women to have kids early for several reasons. In your late teens are early to mid 20s you have plenty of energy and the first baby is almost always going to need it. If you want a large family odds are the wife doesn't want to have the kids in a rushed period so starting young is better as it gives more time for them to be spread out. Lastly starting around 32 to 35 the odds of kids having increase physical and mental issues goes up dramatically, not a 5 or 7% increase, but a sizable one a 1 in 3 level. This is something that should be avoided if possible.
I do agree with Sanne that the fertility clinics often sell false hope. It is a tragedy, but not one I think we will see end anytime soon.
W, you might want to do some reseach before making up your opinions.. It is well documented fact, that girls get their periods earlier.
Another thing, in IVF many embryos are "made" in tube, and the best ones are inserted to womans uterus. Others are deleted. Embryo, if you do not know, is where human life starts, so it is technically making a baby in a tube and then aborting it.
Also in US they usually insert more embryos than needed, and if they all attach, abort some of them. In that case, there is of course a risk that you end up aborting them all. (Here in Europe they usually insert only one or to, so no need to abort extra embryos from uterus).
One simply cannot be honestly pro-life, against abortion AND pro IVF. Because if there is IVF, there is always abortion. Always.
Insemination, where just sperm is put to uterus, is another thing. In that case, woman is given huge doses of hormones to make her release several eggs on particular day. This mostly works if man is sterile but there is nothing wrong with woman. Or if woman has PCOS and does not release eggs regularly, then they can use husbands sperm. Or some cases woman is jus given those hormone shots and told to have sex with hubby. Obviously there is nothing abortive in those procedures.
I'm not against early marriage but 14 is too young, imo. The age of consent throughout Europe is 15 to 16 years old. The problem is that nowadays the age of consent is about casual s8x, not marriage. The reasons for this are s8xual revolution and the schooling laws which often make education mandatory till 18 and push girls to go on studying well into their mid-20s plus accumulate student debt. Many of these changes happened not that long ago, btw, and again, I attribute it to the deliberate EU policy.
Starting your family around 32 is on the late side sure, but it's not unusual for some countries, either. Darwin's wife was 30 when she married him, and they had 10 children together somehow. She was about 48 when the last one was born. But then, she didn't take hormonal anticonception or have a career, and in all probability, married a virgin.
If women were not supposed to have children in their 30s, their period would stop at 35, not 51. The idea that older women should refrain from getting pregnant is part of the same anti-family mentality as the idea that they should all wait till 40 to get married, or that a 30 year old guy interested in a 22 year old woman is a p8dophile somehow.
I think one big issue with this is the mindset it create. That you can just by everything you want, get babies engineered for you etc. Or if you don't want baby, just kill it.
ReplyDeleteI believe God wants us to carry certain crosses. Yes, not having a baby you want can be devastating. Having a baby you do not want (to begin with, usually 9 months is enough to make unwanted baby beloved one) can be devastating. But these sort of things help us grow as people and as christians.
If everything is always easy and sugarcoated, we and up in a society where people get upset when you use wrong pronoun of them.
Also it makes no sense that like half of the female population is happily murdering their babies and other half is desperate to get pregnant at all costs. Both options are seen ase "woman choice" -but also something society must pay for, not the woman in question.
ReplyDeleteThe problems with IVF are three-fold: 1st, apparently, the majority of IVF attempts don't result in life births. According to this site, the chance of success is 20%, and that is true even for women in their 20s, while the complications for your mental and physical health are often severe and last for years.
ReplyDelete2nd, many embryos are just routinely destroyed for various reasons, which is somewhat akin to abortion, and one of the reasons the Catholic Church is against it.
And the last one, children born through IVF have a higher rate of health problems and birth defects, something they will even warn you about at a fertility clinic.
Things like PGD testing turn children into consumer products, which is very much in the spirit of our age, when "being good for economy" is everything that matters.
I'm going to toss my $0.02 into the ring. I think we should take 2 steps back and 1 forward. I think the IVF should be allowed, but only if the woman in question absolutely cannot have kids. Not the doc said I can't but I probably could if I got off my drugs. Not I waited till 40 but I really want one now. I mean those who truly cannot.
ReplyDeleteThe two steps back are I think that the pill and other forms of contraception with the exception of condoms should be completely banned. Think about it for a second. With the exception of the condom all and I do mean all of the other forms of contraception are basically a woman ingesting poisons and drugs and not considering how much damage they are doing to her mind, her body, and her reproductive organs.
The second step is to get to find a way to break this mindset of you should go to school and then get a career and have kids last. This needs to go soonest. Women were designed to have kids in their teens and early to mid 20s. Waiting till the 30s up to 40 is rolling the dice with health and mental issues for kids. Especially considering the endless cocktail of drugs most (Americans as I can't speak for Europe) are taking on almost a daily basis. Seriously it is a miracle that as few kids are being born with issues as there is.
Now to be fair I don't actively know that much about IVF so I don't know if what Sanne is saying is correct or not. What I can observe with my eyes is that the pharmaceutical companies have absolutely no issue with pushing pure poison while calling it a miracle drug so I wouldn't doubt it is the case.
Either way something needs to change soon as we are about to suffer from a massive population decline by all reports.
- W
Women were designed to have kids as long as they have their menstruation. This is called reproductive years. Nowadays girls are having their 1st period quite young, so 16 seems like a reasonable age of consent, but older women used to keep having children until their late 40s. They stopped doing it in the 1960s when the doctors started pushing the pill on married women with 2 children.
ReplyDeleteIf there is anything good what came out of IVF it's that it took away the stigma of older women having children, something they used to do throughout the whole of history.
However, fertility clinics often sell people false hope, as documented by that site I linked to. They don't really try to look into the causes behind fertility problems, or offer a holistic approach. It's just one size fits all and a way to make money out of people's misery. And they make you sign papers to prevent you from suing them, too.
Its not that girls are having their 1st period younger. That has never actually changed, its the perception of things. When people are seen as children into their late 20s, a girl starting her menstruation at 11 to 13 is seen as extremely young. Except that the age she receives it was the same age as a girl did 100 years ago, as a girl did 1,000 years ago, and as a girl did 5,000 years ago. It is simply our perception. Just like how previously marriages were expected in the 14 to 18 age range, but now its perceived as predatory if the girl is under 20. It is all from how a society or culture views things. Remember at one point it was considered scandalous for a woman to show her ankles. Perception is key, and our perception is badly broken.
ReplyDeleteThis needs to come to an end. I push for women to have kids early for several reasons. In your late teens are early to mid 20s you have plenty of energy and the first baby is almost always going to need it. If you want a large family odds are the wife doesn't want to have the kids in a rushed period so starting young is better as it gives more time for them to be spread out. Lastly starting around 32 to 35 the odds of kids having increase physical and mental issues goes up dramatically, not a 5 or 7% increase, but a sizable one a 1 in 3 level. This is something that should be avoided if possible.
I do agree with Sanne that the fertility clinics often sell false hope. It is a tragedy, but not one I think we will see end anytime soon.
- W
W, you might want to do some reseach before making up your opinions.. It is well documented fact, that girls get their periods earlier.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing, in IVF many embryos are "made" in tube, and the best ones are inserted to womans uterus. Others are deleted. Embryo, if you do not know, is where human life starts, so it is technically making a baby in a tube and then aborting it.
Also in US they usually insert more embryos than needed, and if they all attach, abort some of them. In that case, there is of course a risk that you end up aborting them all. (Here in Europe they usually insert only one or to, so no need to abort extra embryos from uterus).
One simply cannot be honestly pro-life, against abortion AND pro IVF. Because if there is IVF, there is always abortion. Always.
Insemination, where just sperm is put to uterus, is another thing. In that case, woman is given huge doses of hormones to make her release several eggs on particular day. This mostly works if man is sterile but there is nothing wrong with woman. Or if woman has PCOS and does not release eggs regularly, then they can use husbands sperm. Or some cases woman is jus given those hormone shots and told to have sex with hubby. Obviously there is nothing abortive in those procedures.
I'm not against early marriage but 14 is too young, imo. The age of consent throughout Europe is 15 to 16 years old. The problem is that nowadays the age of consent is about casual s8x, not marriage. The reasons for this are s8xual revolution and the schooling laws which often make education mandatory till 18 and push girls to go on studying well into their mid-20s plus accumulate student debt. Many of these changes happened not that long ago, btw, and again, I attribute it to the deliberate EU policy.
ReplyDeleteStarting your family around 32 is on the late side sure, but it's not unusual for some countries, either. Darwin's wife was 30 when she married him, and they had 10 children together somehow. She was about 48 when the last one was born. But then, she didn't take hormonal anticonception or have a career, and in all probability, married a virgin.
If women were not supposed to have children in their 30s, their period would stop at 35, not 51. The idea that older women should refrain from getting pregnant is part of the same anti-family mentality as the idea that they should all wait till 40 to get married, or that a 30 year old guy interested in a 22 year old woman is a p8dophile somehow.