The editors of the Chronicle have an interesting relationship with the Catholic Church. Sometimes, the editors dictate church policy. Other times, they simply pretend Catholic teaching doesn’t exist:
President Bush and other Americans who oppose embryonic stem cell research say they believe that the destruction of a human embryo, even in the process of research to reduce human suffering, is immoral. It is immoral, they say, because human life begins at conception, therefore destruction of a human embryo equals the taking of life.
Curiously, opponents of embryonic stem cell research raise no serious objection to fertility clinics, the source of the embryos used in embryonic stem cell research.
That’s absolute nonsense. The Catholic Church has been at the forefront of the pro-life issue for decades. Indeed, contrary to the Chronicle’s dismissing wave, Catholic teaching has long condemned fertility clinics on a couple different grounds.
First, technologies like in vitro fertilization and cloning wrongly separate conjugal love from procreation. Secondly, they cause the death of many embryos throughout the process.
When IVF is done, doctors don’t just make one embryo, put it in the woman, and wait nine months. They make a bunch of embryos. Some are discarded, some are often frozen, and several are implanted into the uterus at once, knowing that only one will "take." That is, in the eyes of the Catholic Church, the destruction of several human lives.
I don’t expect the Chronicle to agree with everything the Church says. But it’s irresponsible to pretend that strong arguments don’t exist.
MORE READING:
- Catechism of the Catholic Church (here and here)
- Humanae Vitae
Filed Under Uncategorized · · · · 
Print This Post
··
Comments
13 Responses to “Chron ignores Catholic view on stem cells”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...
That’s just one opponent, Matt. I think the Chronicle has a point from a purely political standpoint. Few Republicans, if any, have come out against fertility clinics per se. It would be, I believe, very unpopular for them to do so, even among their own base.
Fine. Then the Democratic Party is just one proponent. See? It’s disingenuous. Both organizations represent millions of people.
Words mean things. In the Chron’s words,
That’s simply untrue.
Just because the President doesn’t want federal funds to go to stem cell research doesn’t mean the private sector cannot. That’s always been the problem, the liberal media points out only one aspect of the debate, chastises the President for it. Let’s face it, money talks, if the private sector can profit from stem cell research, they will do it.
FINALLY! Someone who goes to the effort to actually find out what the Church teaches and stands for! I get soooo tired of explaining my faith when some idiot who tries to sound “informed” makes a real jackass of him/herself. There are so many misconceptions of our faith, it’s almost as bad as the sex “information” that I’ve heard teenagers give each other (can you believe that some of them still believe that sex in hot tubs, standing up, and first time will not result in pregnancy?)
THANK YOU for making the effort!
BTW, note to general audience: please stop saying “Christians and Catholics.” When it comes to our belief in Christ, we all share our love for Him. “Christians” is good enough for us!
-one really grateful Catholic
Matt,
Excellent posting.
Conjugal love cannot (ever) be seperated from procreating. It is one and the same. To do otherwise is to deam life irrelevent and utilitarian at best.
tedtam,
Excellent point. Catholics are Christians. We are referred to as Catholics because of the Protestants protesting too much.
Whenever a non-denomination Christian responds that he or she is a Christian, I ask them what parish they attend. I get blank stares.
Anyways, the Houston Chronicle is a joke when it comes to any debate. They act like a bunch of liberal sophisticates yet fumble in their spelling and arguments.
God bless the.
awww Matt..What a good Catholic boy..*pinches cheek*
We all ignore this “playing God” with embryos. Now we have who knows how many half brothers and sisters out there no knowing who each other are and could easily marry or sleep together without ever knowing.
I read a story the other day about 2 lesbians who had a little 3yr old boy and at his birthday party his class attended they saw a boy who looked like him. Turns out they had the same “dad.” who was a 31 yr old Doctor who donates sperm and has 9 children that he knows so far.
Does anyone else see how WRONG this is? And it’s all because we are so selfish. So many children out there who need parents, but nooo…. we want OUR own. With our eggs. And to hell with the consequences.
And don’t get me started on federally funded stem cell research….
The Catholic stance on issues often has little to do with the opinions of the American populace. Just take capital punishment as an example. The Catholic church officially holds that capital punishment, while allowable, is not necessary in today’s society. And yet professed Catholics all over still support it. The Catholic Church opposed the war in Iraq, but Catholics throughout the US still supported it.
So until the statements from the church translate to widespread calls in the US, I believe the Chronicle statement is fairly accurate. There’s obviously some who oppose fertility clinics, but it hardly represents a significant opposition, at least hear in the US.
It doesn’t surprise me that the American populace doesn’t support or agree with the Church. Most people don’t support (or live) the teachings of the guy that started my Church either.
Morals. Bah. Too hard to live up to.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/11/15/poll-catholics.htm
Actually, this poll in 2001 showed that half of American Roman Catholics did not see anything wrong with IVF - the original subject of the Chronicle’s article.
Since roughly 25% of Americans self-identify as Roman Catholics, I suppose that poll places Matt’s argument as applying to about 12-13% of Americans.
Last I checked, few conservative political groups, including the GOP, have an official stance against IVF. I think that was the article’s point.
Say what you will about the numbers, but to characterize the Church’s position as not “serious” is pretty absurd. It’s had a consistent, well-thought-out, and well-documented position on IVF and other reproductive matters for decades.
To dismiss it as not “serious” shows a profound, if not at all surprising, ignorance on the part of the editorial board.
Tim,
That is an ignorant statement if I ever read one. Many, maybe not the majority, do adhere to the teachings of the Church. To delegate a liberal fishwrap such as the Chron to be a spokesperson for all Catholics is simply childish.
It’s like saying Charles Manson speaks for all German-Americans because he has a swastika tatooed on his forehead.
…that is the sound of common sense seeping into little Timmy’s brain.
Where in my post did I say that the Chronicle speaks for all Catholics? They do not (nor should they). But they are right in that there is not a substantial opposition here against fertility clinics, regardless of what the Catholic doctrine states.
In the future, I’d prefer you reserved your personal insults of me to non-imagined statements I’ve made.
Tim, the poll Bobby cited included the following:
Doesn’t that mean that 50 percent think they’re wrong? Isn’t that a “substantial opposition?”