rachelschild asks:
Is it moral/ethical to adopt out frozen, spare embryo'sas the Snowflakes program is espousing? Yes or no? why or why not?>>

Now we are getting somewhere.

Is it moral or ethical to introduce egg and sperm in a petri dish in the first
place?
Next question: Once fertilized, is it moral or ethical to NOT implant some of
the fertilized eggs? Or, is the moral/ethical thing to do use them *all*
regardless of risks to the parents who generated them or their desired size of
family?

Next question: If people who opt for in vitro fertilization do not use all the
fertilized eggs, is it moral/ethical to flush them down the drain? Or, is the
moral and ethical thing to do pass them on to another person who wishes to
gestate them?

IMO, there are no morals or ethics involved in any of these scenarios. They
fall entirely into the realm of personal choice. Whose business is it, really?




P2P

On 14 Oct 2003 20:46:45 GMT, palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines)
wrote:
IMO, there are no morals or ethics involved in any of these scenarios. Theyfall entirely into the realm of personal choice. Whose business is it, really?


What if the anti aborts lobby to stop the killing of fertilized eggs?


Jackie

palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines) wrote in message news:<20031014164645.28218.00000262@mb-m05.aol.com>... rachelschild asks:Is it moral/ethical to adopt out frozen, spare embryo'sas the Snowflakes program is espousing? Yes or no? why or why not?>> Now we are getting somewhere. Is it moral or ethical to introduce egg and sperm in a petri dish in the first place? Next question: Once fertilized, is it moral or ethical to NOT implant some of the fertilized eggs? Or, is the moral/ethical thing to do use them *all* regardless of risks to the parents who generated them or their desired size of family? Next question: If people who opt for in vitro fertilization do not use all the fertilized eggs, is it moral/ethical to flush them down the drain? Or, is the moral and ethical thing to do pass them on to another person who wishes to gestate them? IMO, there are no morals or ethics involved in any of these scenarios. They fall entirely into the realm of personal choice. Whose business is it, really? P2P

Whose business is it anyway? I'd think it's going to be the child's
business someday. Actually, personal choice is a poor defense for
irresposible reproduction practices.

R/C

palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines) wrote in message news:<20031014164645.28218.00000262@mb-m05.aol.com>... rachelschild asks:Is it moral/ethical to adopt out frozen, spare embryo'sas the Snowflakes program is espousing? Yes or no? why or why not?>> Now we are getting somewhere. Is it moral or ethical to introduce egg and sperm in a petri dish in the first place? Next question: Once fertilized, is it moral or ethical to NOT implant some of the fertilized eggs? Or, is the moral/ethical thing to do use them *all* regardless of risks to the parents who generated them or their desired size of family? Next question: If people who opt for in vitro fertilization do not use all the fertilized eggs, is it moral/ethical to flush them down the drain? Or, is the moral and ethical thing to do pass them on to another person who wishes to gestate them? IMO, there are no morals or ethics involved in any of these scenarios.They fall entirely into the realm of personal choice. Whose business
is it, > really? >


Acts may be neutral in and of themselves, but most will come with
moral implications.
We seem to spend a lot of time discussing moral responsibility in
other contexts on alt.a.
Any reason why this should be excepted?





Rh.

P2P

> Actually, personal choice is a poor defense forirresposible reproduction practices.R/C


It it your business, rachelschild? Do you actually feel you or the general
public have a place in the decisions others make about technology-assisted
reproduction?


P2P

>Acts may be neutral in and of themselves, but most will come withmoral implications.We seem to spend a lot of time discussing moral responsibility inother contexts on alt.a.Any reason why this should be excepted?


None at all, Rh. Discuss away. For now, making decisions concerning how far to
go to achieve pregnancy is a private matter not generally subject to public
scrutiny, others' moral judgments or legislation. Thank goodness. But, it
doesn't hurt to talk about the lives of others, I suppose.




P2P

palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines) wrote in message news:<20031015175823.09953.00000337@mb-m24.aol.com>...Acts may be neutral in and of themselves, but most will come withmoral implications.We seem to spend a lot of time discussing moral responsibility inother contexts on alt.a.Any reason why this should be excepted? None at all, Rh. Discuss away.



Thanks, Palms.
I feel so much better doing so with your permission.

For now, making decisions concerning how far to go to achieve pregnancy is a private matter not generally subject to public scrutiny, others' moral judgments or legislation. Thank goodness.




Indeed. Unlike decisions on how or whether to parent children when the
natural parent's circumstances don't meet with public approbation.

Passing moral judgements is like breathing, and almost as necessary,
IMO.
And, like breathing, some people don't even recognise when they are
doing it.
Legislation is quite another kettle of slimey frogs.


But, it doesn't hurt to talk about the lives of others, I suppose.



You suppose? You don't sound too certain.
Do you think these kinds of issues should only ever be discussed in
the abstract? If so, why so?




Rh. P2P

sarallewellyn@gosympatico.ca (Rhiannon) wrote > Acts may be neutral in and of themselves, but most will come with moral implications. We seem to spend a lot of time discussing moral responsibility in other contexts on alt.a. Any reason why this should be excepted?

I think it's immoral to try to implant embryos that have little chance
of succeeding, because of the substantial waste of resources.

Rupa