Christians and Genetics

This one came in from brad (Said he wrote it for us but then put it on his myspace page...? Seriously man how old are you?)

Anyway Here it is:


We live in a world where the virgin birth in no more miraculous. The reality of the issue is that almost anyone can be a mother now and the new survival of five different tubule pregnancies makes it suggestible that a male could even carry a child. The topic of reproductive technologies and genetics is a very difficult one for me, but I do have some lines drawn in the sand.

Personally I find that Artificial Insemination (AID) is not immoral in and of itself. If seems to me that these implantations have nothing to do with adultery and to suggest so seems also to suggest that women commit adultery every time they visit the gynecologist. Though some complications exist with AID I see no reason to oppose it as an option and I find AIH to be even less problematic. This is not to say that I have no concerns when it comes to Artificial Insemination. In fact I do but my concerns do not lie with the "creation" of implanted fertilized eggs, but rather they lie with the discarded or unused eggs. In my view, as soon as the eggs have been fertilized; life has begun to develop. As such, anything that calls for the creation of fertilized eggs that could become little more than "medical waste" or "research material" is immoral because of the secondary outcomes. This means that Artificial Insemination is not wrong in and of it self but that some of the things that go along with it are. If Artificial Insemination would be done one egg at a time, I could not oppose it. (It seems the main problem people have with this is monetary and I do not see any relevance between cost and morality. It may cost more but the price tag is well worth the clean conscience.) Embryo Transfer is another interesting option but again I do not have any problems with the process per se. In stead I have a problem with the creation of life that will then not be allowed to develop to its full potential.

I have to say, though I find no real moral difficulties with these procedures, (save certain secondary concerns that could easily be eliminated) I would much rather opt for adoption. This is not because I see infertility as a sign. In fact, I see infertility as a medical condition and believe that much like cancer it should be treated wherever possible. The idea that people should accept there situation is ridiculous. This kind of position is a slippery slop that soon finds its way into trouble. Instead I merely favor adoption because adoption seems to be the greater good. Moses was adopted; Jesus as well. It is certainly a good option for Christians and I do not believe that waiting matters one bit. Impatient does not create morality.

Selective Genetics
For me it seems that the choosing of characteristics for you children is an error. The problem I find with this sort of thing is not that it is evil to want your children to be red headed or blue eyed or taller; it is in the issue of betterment. When we begin to believe that people can be better if only they hold certain characteristics, it shows that we have little respect for the differences in us as a people. In making an active choice to have a child without a handicap, we are essentially saying to all handicapped people that they are somehow lesser beings. This is not to say that we should not attempt to correct medical problems. In fact, if possible we should perform life saving surgery on unborn babies inside the uterus and this is of little difference from the illumination of disease causing genes in embryos, but it is a far step to get to eye color or height or even choosing what gender to have. In my view, these kinds of technologies carry with them great power. They could help us to eliminate disease, but the question comes in differentiating disease from discomfort; healing from "bettering".