I was intrigued by this article -- (http://www.keeperofthehome.org/2011/09/embryo-adoption-a-unique-option-to-give-a-child-life.html#more-12355) -- and the discussion that resulted from it.
Frankly, I was surprised that so many people were unequivocally positive about it.
While I understand that a baby out of the freezer and into the world, rather than being destroyed, is a good thing, I still can't help but think that embryo adoption is a small band aid cover that could easily allow otherwise well meaning Christians to condone and continue to practice IVF and freezing embryos. Making the problem that much bigger.
Personally I feel, that if we had ever had a hard time conceiving children, adoption of already born children, domestic or international would have been our first option, and I don't think... no, I KNOW we never would have considered IVF.
Even though we didn't have a hard time conceiving children, we feel that caring for orphans is something ALL Christians are called to do, and adoption has always been on the back burner of our mind, waiting for it's time.
Do we really need our own biological children SO badly that we will spend thousands of dollars implementing morally questionable technology to make it happen? Especially when there are so many children in the world already waiting and longing for loving homes?
And how much of IVF/embryo adoption is actually just a flat out refusal to show the love of Christ to children who may come with scars and emotional baggage?
But then again, it can only be good when one of these little embryos is given a chance at life.
I'm very interested to know other peoples opinions. Please share.
2 comments:
I will think/pray about this, and comment another time when I come up with my opinion.
It is important to emphasize that life is life, and if it begins at conception, then it should be our our hope that those babies find homes. Otherwise my position would be inconsistent. However, we have a kind of triage situation here. Sooo many children in orphanages, or in foster care, waiting for adoptive parents, and with a much greater capacity to suffer. And, frankly, not enough people willing to adopt as compared to the number of children needing parents. My first thought was in a war-time situation, when an army medic would have to decide how to treat two fallen soldiers--both, perhaps, experiencing extreme pain, and only enough time and/or medicinal supplies to treat one. Treat the one with the best chance of survival, and move on, treating the next if possible.
This might mean one soldier(baby) will die, or be neglected, if there is a lack of time or resources to help. This is sad, and a consequence of the fallen state of man.
Post a Comment