Focus on the Family Demands Global Halt to In Vitro Fertilization
Standard methods lead to death of thousands of unborn children
Colorado Springs, Colo. — EMBARGOED UNTIL June 6, 2005 Focus on the Family Founder Dr. James Dobson, today called for an immediate worldwide halt to all in vitro fertilization procedures. “This procedure almost always results in the death of unborn children, often several unborn children die for each successful attempt. I said it regarding stem cell research and it’s time to apply it to in vitro fertilization --it is never morally or ethically justifiable to kill one human being in order to benefit another.”
In addition to calling a halt to these procedures, Focus on the Family will be funding a number of lawsuits against clinics that support these procedures, doctors who perform them and couples who partake in IVF. “On behalf of the thousands of babies trapped in freezers who can’t speak for themselves, we will be their voice in court. And yes, in accordance with Exodus 21:22-25 we will be seeking the death penalty for doctors, clinic administrators and couples who allowed their unborn children to be killed in an experimental procedure. The bible compels us to take the life of anyone who is responsible for the death of these unborn children and who has been found guilty of a capital offense in a legal trial. The Scriptures are clear that the state alone is ordained by God to "bear the sword" and "execute wrath on the wrongdoer." (Position statement on Violence against abortionists)
The announcement comes following the release of the Focus on the Family’s Position Statement on Stem Cell Research.
“The stem cell debate finally brought this issue into focus for us. No person that calls themselves a Christian should be involved in IVF. It is morally inconsistent to say we support a culture of life and then prepare tiny babies to die in a test tube or to languish in a freezer never knowing God’s love.” said Carrie Gordon Earll, Senior Policy Analyst for Bioethics at Focus on the Family and a fellow with the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity. “We regret having to prosecute Christians who thought that IVF was different than abortion, but as Exodus 21:22-25, NIV tells us, “If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.’
“Activist judges that have allowed abortion are being replaced with judges who are more constitutional originalists.” stated Bruce Hausknecht, the Judicial Analyst for Focus on the Family, “The pressure that Focus on the Family members have been putting on congress, senators and the President have really been paying off. We fully expect these new judges to support our lawsuits and ultimately God’s law.” Said Hausknecht.
# # #
NOTE: This is a parody press release. Although quotes were made up, the majority of this fake press release was based on documents found on the Focus for the Family website. If you don’t believe me look at the links yourself. If you don’t think this is funny, but scary because it seems like a logical next step for Focus on the Family, then you got the ‘joke’.
Colorado Springs, Colo. — EMBARGOED UNTIL June 6, 2005 Focus on the Family Founder Dr. James Dobson, today called for an immediate worldwide halt to all in vitro fertilization procedures. “This procedure almost always results in the death of unborn children, often several unborn children die for each successful attempt. I said it regarding stem cell research and it’s time to apply it to in vitro fertilization --it is never morally or ethically justifiable to kill one human being in order to benefit another.”
In addition to calling a halt to these procedures, Focus on the Family will be funding a number of lawsuits against clinics that support these procedures, doctors who perform them and couples who partake in IVF. “On behalf of the thousands of babies trapped in freezers who can’t speak for themselves, we will be their voice in court. And yes, in accordance with Exodus 21:22-25 we will be seeking the death penalty for doctors, clinic administrators and couples who allowed their unborn children to be killed in an experimental procedure. The bible compels us to take the life of anyone who is responsible for the death of these unborn children and who has been found guilty of a capital offense in a legal trial. The Scriptures are clear that the state alone is ordained by God to "bear the sword" and "execute wrath on the wrongdoer." (Position statement on Violence against abortionists)
The announcement comes following the release of the Focus on the Family’s Position Statement on Stem Cell Research.
Focus on the Family opposes stem cell research using human embryos. In order to isolate and culture embryonic stem cells, a living, human embryo must be killed. It is never morally or ethically justifiable to kill one human being in order to benefit another. By requiring the destruction of embryos — the tiniest human beings — embryonic stem cell research violates the medical ethic, “Do No Harm.”
“The stem cell debate finally brought this issue into focus for us. No person that calls themselves a Christian should be involved in IVF. It is morally inconsistent to say we support a culture of life and then prepare tiny babies to die in a test tube or to languish in a freezer never knowing God’s love.” said Carrie Gordon Earll, Senior Policy Analyst for Bioethics at Focus on the Family and a fellow with the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity. “We regret having to prosecute Christians who thought that IVF was different than abortion, but as Exodus 21:22-25, NIV tells us, “If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.’
“Activist judges that have allowed abortion are being replaced with judges who are more constitutional originalists.” stated Bruce Hausknecht, the Judicial Analyst for Focus on the Family, “The pressure that Focus on the Family members have been putting on congress, senators and the President have really been paying off. We fully expect these new judges to support our lawsuits and ultimately God’s law.” Said Hausknecht.
# # #
NOTE: This is a parody press release. Although quotes were made up, the majority of this fake press release was based on documents found on the Focus for the Family website. If you don’t believe me look at the links yourself. If you don’t think this is funny, but scary because it seems like a logical next step for Focus on the Family, then you got the ‘joke’.
The truth is that the greatest enemies to the doctrines of Jesus are those calling themselves the expositors of them, who have perverted them for the structure of a system of fantasy absolutely incomprehensible, and without any foundation in his genuine words. And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with all this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this the most venerated reformer of human errors.As the "silent member" of the Congress, Thomas Jefferson, at 33, drafted the Declaration of Independence. In years following he labored to make its words a reality in Virginia. Most notably, he wrote a bill establishing religious freedom, enacted in 1786.
7 Comments:
For completeness here is the actual position statement
http://www.family.org/cforum/fosi/bioethics/facts/a0035066.cfm
Yep. I got a little scared when I realized I couldn't tell if it was a joke or not.
Thanks Jim. I really should include that on the main page.
Pusboy. I'm curious at what point did you realize it was a joke?
What scared me was finding all these parts of the press release RIGHT FROM THE FOTF WEBSITE!
I just keep wanting to push the press releases a bit farther, just to be morally consistant. Actually they should be anti-war and anti-death penality.
I've been waiting for some right wing organization to try this approach, but I think even the craziest among them realize what the backlash would be
I think it truth masquerading as parody...
..which really describes where we are today. The Onion and commedians can't keep up with Bush and the Neocons. Truth is funnier than fiction.
After reading some of the comments, a question I'd love to see the readers and Spocko comment on is:
Given that embryo's are in fact unborn children (and that is a related but entirely different debate) is it ever morally or ethically justifiable to kill one human being in order to benefit another? If the answer is no, how can you then not agree with FOTF? If yes please descibe the circumstances.
Jim: I think that we do have to go all the way back and look at that premise. "Given that embryo's are in fact unborn children" This is the question. If I remember correctly a huge part of the early debate over abortion had to do with viability out side of the womb and as medicine marched on that got reduced further and further till the only way that seemed "logical" to the theologians was to say. "Since science has pushed viability all the way back to conception then that is when we will say that the human soul has arrived. Any later is just guessing. Maybe the soul isn't there until the Brain is 'developed' but when is that? Therefore, we will set the soul and human life at that instant when sperm and egg unite." Now note, this is a theological decision and definition that not everyone agrees with.
When I created this spoof I was looking at how FOTF was dancing around this issue, I know some of the ways they talk about it and given a definition of life begins with sperm and egg uniting then there are a lot of "souls on ice" in liquid nitrogen tanks out there.
Now here of course is the kicker. If you are a certain kind of Christian and you believe that the instant that a sperm and egg unite you have a soul-filled tiny child, is it okay to make a bunch of these and knowingly (although with out malice) implant them in a situation where most will die? Now I would say that from the FOTF comments the answer should be no.
As to your earlier question "is it ever morally or ethically justifiable to kill one human being in order to benefit another?" some times it is about consent. Would you give your life to protect the life of your child? Would you take a life to benefit your child? A lot of people would say yes. But maybe not everyone would. That is a hard one that could come down to how strong beliefs. It is when you move away from the 'easy' answers that we start to have moral complexity. Would you give your life to protect your country? Would you take life to benefit your country? What do you mean by protect and benefit?
Would you give your life to benefit some rich people? Would you take life to benefit some rich people? Would you give your life so that your friends and relatives can waste energy foolishly? Would you feel used if they weren't doing their part? Would you give your life to benefit a multinational company?
There is right now a focus on the beginnings of life. I understand that, I also understand not everyone defines life and soul the same way.
What frustrates me is a lack of consistent morality across the board. If you are of the belief about when life begins then shouldn't that belief extend to ALL human life? How far are you going to go to protect children in Iraq? Children in Durfor?
It is different asking someone to make a choice to protect and benefit another life through killing or being killed vs. forcing that choice on them through deceit or conscription.
I could understand people feeling that they are doing something that is ethically acceptable by telling themselves I'm protecting my family by taking the lives of these people who are plotting to kill my children in Kansas City. Now what if that initial intention gets transmuted and you find out that you are not really protecting your children in Kansas City but actually co-opting and invading a geopolitical location that is seen as essential to the continued "American way of life" (and incedentally the profits of a multinational company)? Now you might feel different. What if the people who designed this KNEW that they could count on the good will of people who want to and are willing to kill and be killed for these values? Would you be pissed if you found out?
Is Focus on the Family strongly and firmly anti-war? No. So in their mind it IS morally and ethically justifiable to kill one human being to benefit another.
http://www.family.org/welcome/press/a0025247.cfm
(Dobson Supports War Efforts in Iraq )
They also talk about support of the death penalty (and of course use the old testament as justification). That to me seem wildly inconsistent with Jesus' teachings. And I'm not talking about PAUL or the Church after Jesus, I'm talking about what can be seen as the authentic passages of Jesus. "Love your enemy" is bit different than, 'eye for an eye'"
Love your neighbor as yourself is actually a pretty damn radical notion.
Speaking of loving your neighbor, thank you for posting, I've decided to move this conversation to the main page.
Post a Comment
<< Home