Showing posts with label Bioethics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bioethics. Show all posts

Saturday, November 13, 2010

Inspired night!! And, my first blogger meet-up!!


What a great night! 

Dean and I were one of several couples to co-host the Bioethics Defense Fund's annual event. As usual, we were beyond inspired! 

Our dear friends Nik and Dorinda are attorneys who travel the country (and world) speaking at law schools (and now medical schools), educating the students about about the full range of life issues, from a legal perspective. (The vast majority of law students have never even heard of the Natural Law, pro-life perspective.)

They also are in the trenches, drafting legislation and shaping law on abortion, human cloning, egg harvesting, euthanasia, etc. I wish I could do justice to what they do and where they go, but trust me, it's beyond impressive, very effective and worthy of every ounce of support they can get. They are virtually the only attorneys in the nation doing this work full-time, and their impact is huge! 

Check out their site. They are true professionals, tireless warriors, and they operate on a shoestring.

Their presentation was ushered in by the most amazing video, which gave me chills. You should watch! It's only a couple minutes long. My friend Corey and his team produced it through his company, StormWind Studios. (Yes, we have an amazing Catholic community here in Phoenix!) Check it out:






And, if that weren't enough, this year's honorees were EWTN's Mother Angelica (who, of course, could not be in attendance) and Raymond Arroyo! Here is Raymond, graciously posing with me, Dean and our little guy.




And just when I thought things could not get any better, I met a blogger at the event!! You know her as the frequent (and excellent) commenter, JoAnna! My first blogger meet-up!! And, as fate would have it, dear Danya (HE Adopted Me First) was on hand as well, so we got a blogger picture to show you all! The tall beauty with us there on the left is LaToya, a brilliant young woman (and on-fire convert) who is soon to start her own blog (hint, hint, LaToya!). She has a lot to say, and I want to hear it. 

Oh, and she's single, too. Yes, I had permission to say that! ;)

LaToya, Leila, unhappy Matthew, JoAnna, Danya!**
(No, JoAnna and I don't have small black beads for eyes, but I guess that's better than the redeye that was there before I fixed it??)


Basically, it was pretty much the best night ever!  :)


**Alishia (a Catholic Phoenix blogger, along with JoAnna), how did we not get you in this picture???

Monday, October 11, 2010

One more IVF post (blame Fr. Tad, the brainiac!)





The blogs saw a flurry of emotional IVF posts and debates recently. Then, the inventor of IVF won the Nobel Prize last week. Then yesterday, my parish bulletin carried this article, by Fr. Tad Pacholczyk, Ph.D (who earned a doctorate in neuroscience from Yale University, did post-doctoral work at Harvard, has four undergraduate degrees -- in molecular and cellular biology, chemistry, biochemistry and philosophy -- and has two degrees in advanced theology from the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome. I note that so that no one jumps in to claim that he or the Church is anti-science.)

I think he says it all. Have a read:
Babies In Test Tubes

When I give talks about in vitro fertilization (IVF), I usually ask my audience the following question: "How many of you know a baby born by IVF, or know a couple who has tried to get pregnant this way?" Usually about half the hands in the room go up. Then I ask them to raise their hands if the couple was Catholic. Virtually all the same hands go up a second time. I have the sense that Catholics are making use of IVF at about the same rate as non-Catholics, and that most of them are only vaguely aware of the Church's position on making test tube babies.
When asked why IVF might be immoral, people will usually mention the extra embryos that are frozen or discarded. Such embryos are certainly a serious concern, but they are not the primary reason the Church insists the procedure is immoral. Even if IVF were done without making any extra embryos at all, this way of making babies would still be morally objectionable, because the procedure strikes at the very core and meaning of marital sexuality. It substitutes an act of laboratory manipulation for an act of bodily union between spouses. It turns procreation into production. IVF is really the flip-side of contraception: rather than trying to have sex without babies, we try to have babies without sex. Because many Americans have come to view sex largely in terms of recreation, ignoring its procreative orientation, they have lost touch with the grave violations that occur both in contraceptive sex and in making babies in test tubes.
Clearly, the moral violations that occur in IVF do not reflect upon the child, who is innocent. It is not the baby's fault in any way. The child has no control over how he or she got here. Regardless of how a baby comes into the world, whether by IVF, whether by adultery, by pre-marital sex, or even by cloning, that baby is always a gift and a blessing. The problem with IVF is not with the child, but with a decision made by the parents concerning how to pursue the satisfaction of their own desire for a child. In other words, babies, even when very much desired, should not be brought into the world by making use of disordered means such as adultery, pre-marital sex, IVF, or cloning. They should be brought into the world only within that intimate love-giving moment of the marital embrace. Children are entitled to come into being as the fruit of a singular parental love that is uniquely manifested in the spousal moment of bodily surrender to each other. Through the incredibly rich language of the parents' bodies, through their body to body contact, the new body of their child is engendered. In their one-flesh union, they enflesh new life. That intimate bodily embrace is a sacred action that only spouses may share, and it represents the unique and privileged locus, by God's design, in which human love is translated into new life. IVF violates this design by replacing that love-giving act with an act of production, whereby we manufacture our own children in petri dishes and test tubes, as if they were products or objects to be manhandled at will. In this way, IVF incidentalizes and adulterates sex, reducing it to another arena for manipulation according to our own desires. When we take this immoral step, others quickly follow, including the freezing or even the discarding of our own children, as if they were a form of medical waste. By making test tube babies, we first violate the sacred human act by which we hand on life. It is then but a short step to go further and violate the very life itself that we produce in the laboratory.
Is it not reasonable and right to insist, as the Church does, that new human life should be the fruit of married love, carried out through bodily self-giving between spouses, this act which allows each partner to enrich the other with the total gift of himself or herself? The marital act embodies spousal love directly, exclusively and authentically. Can we say the same for IVF, where the woman upsets her delicate hormonal cycles and subjects herself to repetitive injections with powerful drugs to make her body produce unnaturally large numbers of eggs, and where the man may be expected to go into a back room with salacious magazines and videos to "provide a sample"? Can we really say that IVF embodies spousal love in an authentic and exclusive way when a lab technician ends up being the causal agent of the pregnancy, instead of the spouses themselves through a sacred act proper to their married love? By any stretch, can we honestly believe that IVF is faithful to God's design for marriage?
We sometimes tend to brush the ungainly and unsightly parts of the procedure under the rug and instead try to focus on the result, the baby, so as to mitigate the disturbing reality of what we are really engaging in. Some couples also may rest their approval for IVF on a perfunctory assumption, namely: "We have a right to a child when we get married, so any means, even IVF, should be okay." But the deeper truth is that we never have a right to a baby. A child is not our property or our possession. Rather, a child is a gift, one we hope God will send us, one we stand ready and eager to receive, but certainly not an entitlement or a right for us. When we marry, we properly have a right to those beautiful, life-giving acts we call marital acts, which open us up to the mysterious divine spark at the heart of human love. Those remarkable marital acts are the only human acts appropriately ordered to engendering the incredible gift of new human life.


Catholics, we need to know this. And if you want to see a list of Fr. Tad's articles on every conceivable bioethics issue out there, click this icon and bookmark it. You won't be disappointed.



Thursday, October 7, 2010

Clarifying, and a PSA



Hi all! I just want to clarify a couple of things.


First, bear with me if my posts are simple and short, and if my responses in the comments are even simpler and shorter. I think I must have A.D.D! I always need to get right to the heart of it, in as few words as possible. And, I can't handle the "multiplication of words" that seems to come when I try to address every single point that is brought up (which is a battle for me, because I always want to address every single point that is brought up!). So, forgive me. It's not you, it's me. That's why I love when other commenters jump in and address whatever points I may have missed or can't get to. Thank you all, on both sides of the spectrum!


Second, I am so sorry I didn't clarify this earlier. I am not writing this blog to find "consensus." The idea that "consensus" can be found on every issue is a liberal model. I don't subscribe to the consensus model when it comes to issues of objective truth, life or death, etc. We cannot find "consensus" between truth and error. Now, that is not popular to say in this culture, but I just said it. :) 


Still.... that does not mean that I don't strive to understand the other side. As I've said many times, I am interested in understanding why liberals think as they do. My oft-repeated line from Dennis Prager: I prefer clarity to agreement. We don't have to agree, and we don't have to find "consensus." But we do need to be clear on what we believe and what others believe. At least then no one is misrepresenting the other side, and we can begin to understand each other. Clarity is good.


So, I was disappointed when Gwen and Mai decided not to even touch the issue of suffering in my last post, but bowed out immediately. I presented what I thought was a fair representation of the liberal view of suffering. If I was wrong, tell me. Show me how I misrepresented things, and set me straight with the correct view. Tell me where I am not understanding. It's really not a trap.


Finally, a little Public Service Announcement:


If you love EWTN, Mother Angelica and Raymond Arroyo, and if you live in the Phoenix area, please join us on November 12, for the Bioethics Defense Fund's "Passion for Life" benefit!  Both Mother Angelica and Raymond Arroyo will be receiving the Witness for Life Award (better than a Bubble Award!!). Mother cannot be in attendance due to her fragile health, but Mr. Arroyo will be accepting the award on her behalf. I personally cannot wait! Register here, if interested!


And, for more information about Bioethics Defense Fund, go here. BDF was founded by my dear friends, Nik Nikas and Dorinda Bordlee, two of the nation's very few full-time pro-life attorneys. Nik and Dorinda speak at law schools all over the country, they draft pro-life legislation nationally and internationally, and they are two of the greatest people I know. I love, love, love them, and they are definitely Bubble Buddies! They are heroes in the trenches, fighting the Culture of Death on the legal and legislative front every single day, and they are worthy of our support!


Here is the BDF Mission Statement:


Bioethics Defense Fund is a public-interest law firm whose mission is to advocate for the human right to life through litigation, legislation and public education, on the issues of healthcare rights of conscience, abortion, human cloning/destructive human embryo research, and end of life issues including physician-assisted suicide and healthcare rationing.


I hope to see you there! I would love to finally meet some bloggers.... :)




PS: I will get to the post on the Christian meaning of suffering just as soon as I can.