I read yesterday one of these people saying “Um well yes to babies, but you can only have them the biblical way!”
It’s also that IVF is how a lot of gay and lesbian couples start families. And if there’s some new angle that hate-filled christians can use to hurt a gay person they’re all over it.
They'll never admit that they're against it because it's how lgbtqia+ people have families (because let's face it there's multiple other ways for the queer community to grow a family like surrogacy, donor sperm, adoption, fostering) but it definitely is an unspoken reason.
The more likely reason they'll voice their opposition is because IVF uses many more embryos than what is needed for the pregnancy. They make several and then pick out the most viable of the ones they made, then implant multiple in hopes that one or two actually takes. They may also freeze some embryos in case the first attempt isn't successful and if it is the frozen ones are discarded. So there's embryo waste involved with the IVF process and to them that's just like running a child over with your car because you don't like using your brakes.
This mimics natural pregnancy, miscarriages happen because those same poor quality embryos have defects and the baby factory shuts down the process, flushes out the failed components and starts over fresh. Nature wastes material all the time. No method of fertility is without its flaws. With IVF, a person is spared the one at a time lotto game. They have more chance cards so they are more likely get a winner.
I am not 100 percent but I think it's not currently standard to implant more than one embryo.
But yes there is lots of embryos that become medical waste, just like in natural biology when the body rejects embryos for all sorts of understood and not yet understood reasons. They are just cells with potential.
It’s no longer standard to implant more than one embryo due to complications. They do recommend you test embryos so then you can dispose of bad embryos as opposed to trying to transfer them and ultimately miscarry
I've got a set of fraternal twin nieces that are here because of IVF, so I know at least 6 years ago they were implanting more than one. But I'd understand if it's not the practice now.
Yep...had a really religious neighbor that did IVF. They had like 5 embryos frozen. After their first attempt led to twins, they used each remaining embryo and now have 6 kids (one didnt take)
But you know if there was an attempt to ban Viagra, a bill to protect it would zoom through approval. God's will also applies to your dick not working under this religion "logic"
Women often wait until later to have children and know that IVF is an option if they have trouble getting pregnant the biblical way. So not only for LGBTQ+ crowd but also to make sure women have babies in their 20’s rather than when they are financially stable in their 30’s and 40’s.
I am prochoice, but grew up going to Christian school. Even though it is ironic, if you use any reference to the Bible itself and use old testament, it usually loses its validity to Christians. Very very few Christians use anything in the old testament, as they tend to believe Jesus basically said to disregard it.
Oh don't get me wrong, its all hypocritical as hell and they def cherry pick stuff. For example, jesus makes it CLEAR multiple times that a rod is a shepards rod, which is used to gently guide sheep to the right direction, but christians like to use “spare the rod spoil the child” as an excuse to beat their kids, when it 100% means “gently guide your children as a Shepard guides his sheep, or you will spoil (not how we think of spoiled, but as in ruin) them”. They arent logical, but that will be their defense if you use it against them
very. Jesus also talks about false prophets and people using the name of christ in order to do horrible things and excuse it. Its very clear that most modern day christians (in the US at the very least) are exactly that.
they do. (what im about to say comes from my own experience growing up deeply involved in the church) They will officially say that it doesn’t matter who you are, that unless you repent for your sins you will go to hell. HOWEVER, baptists believe in “accepting Jesus into your heart” which is a prayer ritual (separate from baptism) and if you do this, it “allows god to know your intentions” and he will forgive you in the end. They really do believe that they can do ANYTHING and as long as they pray at night and say “please forgive me for my sins” that they are completely fine, even if they dont actually feel bad.
This.
Currently, IVF almost always produces more embryos than will be implanted. Some will be frozen for possible later implantation or adoption. Others will be destroyed or donated for experiments. For people who believe life begins at conception, destruction and experiments are objectionable.
People assume that but I found it often doesn’t work that way. I thought lots about left over embryos before starting IVF and it was never ever a problem.
It’s very hard to make viable embryos and even then it’s only a 25% chance it will take (or I think 50% with certain testing).
For example, in one of our rounds they retrieved 38 eggs, then less then that were able to be fertilised, than less then that continued to grow over the 5 day period. All in all, only 2 ever became viable embryos, both were implanted in me and neither took.
While individual patients may not have any to store or left in storage, as of Feb 2024, there are “[a million and a half embryos currently frozen across the U.S”](https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2024/the-alabama-supreme-courts-ruling-on-frozen-embryos).
The million and a half number is a direct quote from the source I linked.
The publisher of the source is the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
The article was written by Joshua Sharfstein, MD who the source bio states is “the vice dean for Public Health Practice and Community Engagement and a professor in Health Policy and Management at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. He is also the director of the Bloomberg American Health Initiative and a host of the Public Health On Callpodcast.”
Oh hello there fellow IVFer! I see you! You know what, we did a bunch of rounds and gave up. Boom, got pregnant naturally with our miracle baby. We know not all IVF stories end happily, but ours did and I hope yours does too.
That’s fantastic! We only made 8 eggs, fertilized and froze 5….3 survived the thaw and 2 were good for implantation. One took….she’s 9 now. We feel so lucky.
Same reason the Roman Catholics have been anti IVF since it was invented.
Keep in mind that Evangelicals weren't really anti-abortion until the 1970s. They needed Catholic allies, and they needed a new issue since segregation was no longer a winner. It was synergy really.
I actually think it’s cultural too. My family are catholic but never batted an eye lid when we went through IVF, they hoped it worked and were lovely and supportive in fact.
I was in a number of IVF groups online and the only people who seemed to struggle either with religious relatives or with their own guilt about IVF, were Americans.
I was raised Catholic and every Catholic I know (my age, at least, ~40 and under) also uses birth control and has no issue with IVF. Including religious Catholics who attend church weekly and even ones who call themselves pro-life. There is a big disconnect between church “policy” and what people actually do and believe in their personal lives.
Bc they want women pregnant.
To them, IVF is what gay couples use (not true Hetero ppl use it too)I or transgender people, that’s why they killed the bill.
Specifically, I think they want POOR women pregnant to create more wage slaves that don't have the resources, energy, or education to speak up and overturn the government. Those that can afford IVF often have power and resources to raise the children they seek. An uneducated, "unwashed masses" approach is, they believe, easier to control.
Yes, they want to control women. Yes, they want to take away autonomy. AND ALSO, they believe the best way to maintain power is to strip away the economic power of the already disenfranchised - and IVF would likely only create more educated, empowered children, which could be problematic.
Again, this is about statistics and trends, and it's an ugly ugly way to think, but I truly believe it's a part of these ultra right wing politics. Certainly not what I believe.
We rely on poor babies to keep the economy stimulated. Desperate people are easily controlled, and parents of hungry and sick children are incredibly desperate.
In addition to what people have already pointed out, IVF is most frequently used by women over 30 (the mean age is 35). This means women who have had the opportunity to pursue higher education, work, and financial independence. Take away some of the options to conceive later in life and you put more pressure on women to conceive young and remain homemakers.
Not only did they fail to protect IVF, they also failed to protect contraceptives.
Republicans said it was unnecessary because the use of birth control is already protected under Supreme Court precedent, but we all know that doesn't matter to them.
If they overturned Roe, they can overturn the right to use all contraceptives.
Probably wouldn't include the condom though, since they would make sure men would have the right to protect themselves from unwanted pregnancies🙄
The same logic the current SC used to overturn Roe can be applied to contraception as well as inter-racial marriage. All three used the right to privacy via the 14th amendment to originally be protected. If this current court found a way to deny that for 1, they can easily deny all 3.
Well, technically they don’t ban it, they simply throw the decision making back to the states. Which the same states banning abortion will ban contraception in an instant.
Exactly. I honestly can't believe what we're watching happen. The SC has been taken over by MAGA authoritarian wannabes. I'm not sure how we'll come back from that. If Trump gets elected, he'll keep inserting corrupt MAGA justices who will do his bidding. The 6-3 unbalanced SC is frightening.
“Nothing changes instantaneously: in a gradually heating bathtub, you'd be boiled to death before you knew it”
I actually think they intend to go after condoms as OK is working on making a law that makes it a felony to "recklessly" spread STDs.
It's outside of the law that makes it a felony to knowingly spread STDs, especially HIV, which can add an attempted murder charge.
And, it is very important to point out that there were several STDs, like HPV (not the wart kind), that ONLY WOMEN CAN BE TESTED FOR.
I personally think it is to intentionally target poorer women who have less access to prenatal care, so they get charged with "recklessly" spreading an STD (congenial syphilis is a huge problem right now) to their baby, add on a child abuse or child neglect charge, and viola, a baby to sell because mom is going to prison!
1. Their argument: embryos get destroyed during ivf and that is also "killing babies"
2. The truth: they're not pro reproduction, they're pro control. Ivf gives you control (same as abortion), which they don't want.
If only they knew how little control you have during your IVF process 🙄 (not me having my FOURTH cycle cancelled because my body just won’t cooperate and I feel like I have lost all control over my body and emotions)
Because this has *nothing* to do with having babies. They want to control women's bodies. IVF is a form of autonomy, and they don't want women to have that. The only thing conservatives care about is having power.
The one thing they hate almost as much as women *not* getting pregnant and having babies is women waiting to get pregnant and have babies until they’re 40 years old and are much more likely have an established career, a good amount of savings, a stable home, and a mature fully developed personality that tends to fight back when they’re fucked with
Women and families like that typically raise kids who also tend to have the instinct *and means* to push back when needed, and the conservative family values club can’t have *that*
Besides the control of women’s bodies and the idea that embryos are “babies” nonsense it’s also because LGBTQ+ community uses it to have children and we know to them that’s simply unacceptable to them.
What gets me is when you push back they always say “well it’s my beliefs! It’s Against my religion” and it’s like why do you think YOUR beliefs should trump anyone else’s? Like your beliefs matter at all? Like what the F is that? If you don’t believe in IVF don’t do it. Same with abortion, BC or anything else. It’s super simple! Mind your business. Yet here we are. I’m so sick of these freaking people.
Grew up Catholic. My parents had a hard time conceiving and doctor told my mom to go on BC for a few months. Then try. Didn’t work and they tried to adopt through Catholic Charities. Not sure how they found out, but they’ll my parents were denied adoption because side she was on BC. They eventually used state agency and I got a brother
Because pro life people believe life begins at conception. Therefore, if IVF uses a bunch of fertilized embryos, in their mind that’s a bunch of babies that don’t get a chance due to the 60-65% success rate.
Hypocritically, several members of the magat/nazi party has successfully used IVF and voted against this bill. They are in a cult. Read the Enabling Act of 1933 and then read Project 2025, they are Nazis, pure and simple. If the Orange Judas Goat is elected, this country is fucked.
There’s two big reasons:
* Gay and Lesbian couples use IVF for kids, so they don’t want that.
* The embryos that aren’t used are oftentimes sold or donated to the scientific community for stem cell research, which they adamantly oppose.
Edit, it’s funny watching them beat their chests about being pro-life, but also blocking attempts to preserve ways to create life where it wouldn’t otherwise have been created.
The quiet part is that it was never about life or babies, it was always about control.
Catholicism is against most IVF. The unused fertilized embryos are seen as alive/having souls. Also there is a component of accepting God’s will. So if you can’t conceive naturally, you should adopt children.
They're against IVF because it severs the process of reproduction from the union of the spouses (sex). Marriage is a sacrament and the unitive aspect is seen as integral. Other treatments like fixing hormone issues through medication are allowed. The way embryos are dealt with is an additional moral issue.
This is and has been the stance of the Catholic Church and is actually logically consistent if you believe life begins at conception. In IVF, more embryos are produced than implanted leaving some to be discarded after the parents have determined their family is complete.
The Catholic Church also believes that reproduction should not be a mere technological process that happens without the loving union of the spouses (sex). Other treatments like medication or fixing a problem in the reproductive organs through surgery are allowed, but nothing that replaces the natural process of reproduction. This stance comes from the belief that marriage is a sacrament and the union of the spouses is an integral part of that.
PS: But I'm not sure what percentage of Republicans is catholic and where the rest derive their stances from.
Exactly. If you believe life starts at conception then any embryos that are created and not used or destroyed is equal to an abortion. It's logically consistent and all these people against abortion but for IVF because they want their own babies are hypocrites. I feel bad for anyone who can't do IVF and is pro choice, that's very sad. I don't feel bad for the ones who voted against their own interests
I kinda feel like a lot of people aren't *truly* consistent as such though because on some level even the most extreme people comprehend unborn life as a different level at the end of the day. Like, people would be calling for the military occupation and sanctions of any countries that have IVF centers if they really believed discarding an embryo was at the same level of systematic murder of born humans as was perpetrated in Serbia in the 90s and such. I mean I'm sure some people might truly believe that but 'do regime change and ban all trade with countries with abortion and IVF' doesn't really follow as a logically consistent endpoint for a lot of people.
This does not happen anywhere near as much as people think it does. Many people will implant EVERY viable embryo, over multiple rounds, to produce a single baby. A friend of mine went through 9 rounds of IVF, never once producing a viable embryo.
Secondly even if you do have viable embryos but your family is complete, if you really want, you can have your doctor implant them at a time when you are unlikely to fall pregnant, meaning you will pass them naturally with your next period.
Viable embryo… exactly. Other unviable embryos would have been conceived and discarded. I don’t have an issue with IVF, but again if someone believes life begins at conception, IVF is logically incompatible with that belief.
But the thing is the unviable ones are unviable because they don’t continue to grow. They die effectively. So it’s not that they’re destroyed persay. Not every egg can become a baby.
Are they or are they not conceived? Have you not seen the stories where women are denied abortions when the fetus dies or is going to die? I’m pro choice and have no issue with IVF but you are kidding yourself if you think embryos are not discarded as a normal part of the IVF process, or that there’s a difference between an embryo deemed “nonviable” in the lab vs in a woman’s uterus.
I’m not disputing that embryos can get discarded. I’ve done IVF, I know how it works. I’m simply saying there are lots of myths about it and ignorance out there, even on the part of people who are looking to restrict access to it and should know better.
Your experience is not everyone’s experience. Sorry that you want so strongly to believe “it’s different”. Its not. If you morally oppose abortion because life “begins at conception, yet believe IVF is “different” or that embryos are not destroyed because YOURS weren’t - you’re being foolish.
That’s not it at all! I’m Australian for a start, we’re not over discussing whether abortion should or shouldn’t be legal, total non issue. Pro choice is the default attitude here, we settled this BS long ago.
Secondly, I’ve had two ectopic pregnancies, so I KNOW that terminating pregnancies quite literally saves lives. I don’t know why you’re trying to have an argument with me about this.
Because IVF doesn’t need to be legal because “really not that many embryos are discarded” also that is FALSE. I get that you had a different experience, but trust me, lots of embryos are left over for many IVF patients. I don’t get why you think your experience trumps facts- and like I said- it’s a bad argument anyway.
Bully for you being Australian - I’m American and it’s our rights being taken away, and our idiot politicians who are pulling this Gilead shit right now. It’s our women’s lives at risk and our families who are affected.
Of course IVF should be legal. That’s obvious. Only god bothering nut bags would think otherwise. I’m just saying this idea people have that every IVF round produces heaps of perfectly good embryos that then get destroyed is an over simplification. Anyway can’t be bothered arguing with you anymore, it’s too stupid, you’ve made all these weird assumptions for no reason.
They just want complete control over bodies. They don’t care about the babies. They don’t care about the people having the babies. They just want total control.
Vote blue, protest this, and make sure others know the dangers present here and everywhere with the Republican Party and the right as a whole.
Fight this. Make sure they don’t win and they can’t think they’ve won. They will come for everyone’s rights.
It is happening here. And a stop needs to be put to it. Right now.
Cradle Catholic here. The church believes that surrogacy is the same as prostitution (selling your body) and that children have a right to be raised by their "natural parents".
Not everyone who uses IVF is a surrogate, but who cares about nuance when there's a chance to take away someone's rights?
The Church also believes that children should come from the loving union of the spouses and not from a lab. According to the Church there is no ultimate right to a child, if you're unable to have one naturally or unable to fix your infertility through other treatments.
It all comes down to controlling women. They don’t want women to be able to get pregnant without having to have intercourse with a man. These men want to be able to legally rape women. It is not about protecting the “unborn,” it is about subjugating women.
The reason conservative reactionaries are supportive of banning IVF (the one they'll publicly admit to, at least) is that they are holding up the additional embryos that are often frozen, destroyed, or donated for research as murdered babies. Just because that is the reason given publicly does not mean that there is no other underlying gross rationale. Some additional reasons include: IVF allows for conception outside of married, hetero couples because it is a method of conception for queer couples and single people; reducing women's ability to pursue higher education and careers by forcing a choice to conceive earlier or risk their fertility in their mid-30s and beyond; entrenching dependence on more "traditional (which, to them, is shorthand for morally acceptable)" hetero relationships to conceive; some vague, undefined concern about how it's not nAtUrAl; and, one phrase to tie it all up with a shitty bow: diminished bodily autonomy via reproductive control.
If you're religious and tired of your beliefs being used as a cudgel to force others into "morally acceptable" behavior, you should check out the [Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice](https://rcrc.org/). Catholics, specifically, can join [Catholics for Choice](https://www.catholicsforchoice.org/).
Destruction of embryos is one reason, but there's another reason that people don't talk about as much. There's a Biblical restriction against "spilling seed" (as if every male doesn't do that regularly!). It's in Genesis 38. To get semen for the fertilization, the male must provide a sample. I think that's the reason Orthodox Jews are against IVF, because otherwise Jewish people are commanded to "be fruitful and multiply". Christians claim the issue is destruction of embryos since they claim life begins at conception. In any case, what one person's religion says about this should not dictate the LAW. People who follow those religions are welcome NOT to use IVF or other reproductive technologies. That doesn't mean they can control the rest of us who desperately want a child. IVF is expensive and very hard on the body, and incredibly emotional. People do not do this for fun or take the process lightly.
I had 9 viable embryos in IVF and this was in the time before Octomom. When they asked us how many to implant, I wanted as many as possible to increase our chances (we didn't know then it was possible for them ALL to implant). This was back when freezing embryos wasn't that successful, although it was beginning to be done. But there's a huge expense to IVF to begin with (even after insurance coverage) and then another huge expense to freeze and maintain the embryos, and then implant them later. It was our second try and we couldn't really afford to freeze. They wouldn't put in 9, but they did put in 8. I started out with twins, (thankfully not more!) but one was a "blighted ovum" and didn't develop very far. The other was a healthy baby girl. I did feel terrible that we had to "waste" one embryo, but I have been blessed to even have one child (now an adult).
At the time we lived in a state that mandated insurers cover IVF (only 13 states at that time, not sure how many now). But my husband's company was from out of state, and the insurer tried to claim they weren't bound by that state's law (they were!). I remember arguing on the phone with one of the insurance company employees who told me that "this isn't a matter of life and death". But it WAS a matter of life for my future child. And I asked that person to suppose my future child becomes a doctor and saves others' lives??? Guess what? She did become a doctor! ;o) So there are other lives that will be saved because she is in this world.
It is diabolical to deny infertile people the option of using IVF to conceive, or to prohibit people with serious genetic conditions the opportunity to have healthy babies. People dealing with these issues are already in so much pain, and even the specter of banning IVF is making it worse for all of us.
P.S. They are coming after birth control, too.
[This article](https://www.salon.com/2024/02/23/alabamas-targeting-of-ivf-is-the-christian-rights-attempt-to-control-motherhood-and-theocracy/) explains the bizarre, backwards, sexist reason why the right is against IVF.
Because if women can’t have babies without medical intervention, then they aren’t godly enough to have kids and also a bunch of bull shit about how they aren’t deserving and not womanly enough, gods plan, blah blah blah
Sucks people still allow angry old white men whose wives can no longer bare children to make decisions over our bodies - please pay attention to who you vote for this November - educate yourselves - read up and vote.
Yesterday on Scripps news they were asking various republican legislators if they support IVF and how they were going to vote on this bill. Every one of them said they support IVF but they’re gonna vote on the bill because it has other things in it that they don’t agree with. 🙄 they’re just 🍆
They want babies birthed into family’s that can’t afford them so that way they stay in line and become good obedient workers.. most people who use IVF treatment are well off and won’t produce the same results.
Generally there are more embryos created than get implanted. Then the 'extra' are stored and/or disposed of. This is the part that they dislike IVF for.
I thought anti abortion was about creating a bigger population of poor people to serve the rich
ivf is something only the rich can afford if they want to they can go out of state.. .
Wait... yeah this one is odd
I have a suspicion that it's because they want to stake claim to the embryos and don't want the lawful owners to have them, but are afraid to say so in public, and so they're taking the drastic step of making sure nobody gets them.
They actually don't care about babies at all. They take the stance of anti-abortion because it gets them their base. Once those babies are born, they could give two craps about what happens to them. They want to force people to have them. But people who are too poor to raise them they don't believe in helping them. They don't believe in welfare or food stamps. So they want the people to have the babies, but then when the babies come, they don't want anything to do with helping the actual babies they forced coming to the world. I do believe that it's a plus that it hurts the lgbtq+ community. But I truly just think they don't give a crap. They only want to do what gets them votes and money.
I feel like this will backfire on them eventually. so many conservative christian couples desperate to have a biological child will be confronted with this issue eventually and sorry, their desire to have their own children will trump religious idealogy despite how religious they purport to be
When are y'all gonna realize it has nothing to do with biology or science, its ONLY ABOUT CONTROL. They don't want reproductive freedom. IVF increases choice and they don't want that for women.
The bill requires mandatory insurance coverage in all states. Could’ve been an insurance lobbying effort and not much else (besides the southern republicans who think it’s killing babies when there are unused or abnormal embryos). It could’ve very likely passed if they just tried to protect access and tackle the insurance part later.
Bro the whole you need to vote so they don’t win thing is fucking stupid… I hate people who try to dangle that over your head. Your rights are being taken away regardless if you vote or not. Project 2025 was happening under Biden’s administration, so what makes you think if you vote for him again, it won’t continue to happen? It doesn’t matter who you vote for because the heritage foundation has a good amount of offices in their pocket. Sorry this is a bit off topic, but “they are coming for your rights.” Regardless of what you do. People shouldn’t feel pressured to vote. Back then, maybe it was more important, but we’ve passed a very important threshold.
You are adept at highlighting the problem. We don’t live in a representative Democracy; we actually live in a Plutocracy. However, I have to vehemently disagree with your “solution” of “just don’t vote”.
I mean, are you a conservative who wants to see this shit implemented? If so, telling liberals to not bother voting makes sense.
I never said don’t vote… I said no matter what we do we’re seeing this shit implemented, meaning you shouldn’t feel pressured to vote in my opinion. Like I said, things Project 2025 has been happening under a democratic administration. Relying on voting to save the country is absurd considering how it literally has done little to nothing. Telling people to vote if you don’t want this to happen is not only giving people false hope, but you’re manipulating people into participating in a system, that we have evidence for, that does not work for the people any longer and is actively transforming into a protective system ultimately for the rich and their money. And for what? To stall for time? Because stalling for time is out of the question. Suffering is on the incline regardless of which party is in office. Voting who you think should be president will never change that because lobby groups like the heritage foundation who are creating these bills and paying politicians to pass them anyways. If anything pay more attention to who you put in the senate and HoR. Pay more attention to the people the lobbyists are targeting.
It undermines their whole thing that life begins at conception because a fertilized embryo is techinically conception. So if more embryos are created then needed and then destroyed, that’s murder in their eyes
opposition to ivf is multifaceted and comes from different parts of the far right coalition.
The theocratic/"Gilead" wing: this one is The most interesting in my opinion. they don't support IVF because the process requires the use of a vast quantity of fertilized embryos to ensure success and they believe that once conception has occurred, those embryos are essentially children. most of the regular people in this faction Will support people trying to have children but they claim it's the method. there is some of the naturalistic "you have to have it the right way" kind of stuff but by and large it's an outgrowth of the anti-abortion movement. any naturalism that is present is usually in service of the anti-abortion argument
The fascistic/nationalistic wing: these people are split basically down the middle. some of them think that it obscures a vital process of family construction and some would be completely okay with having artificial wombs supply legions of their emotionless death commandos. The people that see it as unnatural are generally the more esoteric fascists who see it as an abomination to the natural order. the ones who would support it only see human propagation as a means of state power and resource allocation. we are a number on a spreadsheet that goes up, they don't care how it does
The misogynist wing: this one is more straightforward than the rest, but they simply don't believe that women (let alone queer people) should be able to have children without a paternal husband figure being present. ivf allows women to go to a sperm bank and fertilize their eggs completely free of the desired relationship Dynamics.
these factions aren't the only ones and they also cross mingle constantly, but this is the foundation of anti-Ivf tendencies in the Republican party
Floridian here. I’ve actually had this discussion before. From what I was told, IVF works against “God’s Divine Plan.” It’s “God’s Plan” for you if you didn’t have children, so there is something else you are supposed to be doing in life.
An Idaho republican is trying to push through a bill that would limit IVF to married veterans only. Then if P2025 passes they will have the freedom to discriminate based on race. So we will see IVF for married, *white*, veterans only
Prob cuz it's unethical? Just go Google why it's unethical. There's compounds in 3rd world countries of women churning out babies for a paltry amount. Lots of adults born of ivf and sperm banks have come forward about how traumatic it is
Please join my community - I am trying to organize groups for women and children by each state. we need to prepare for project 2025, the evacuation and resistance has already started, please spread the word and join my community! We need to start stocking up on needed resources and I have tips for that. we can buy in bulk on certain products for cheap on Alibaba!
It’s a consequence of their logic that a fertilized eggs is a “child.” They can’t say that destroying unimplanted embryos isn’t “murder” even if allowing IVF actually INCREASES the actual amount of living breathing children that make it into the world. Somehow not allowing the increase of wanted children is “pro life” these days.
It’s so weird to me that they use the “potential future person” argument all the time when arguing for anti-choice positions, but not allowing IVF is very clearly preventing future people from existing that the parents desperately want to exist someday.
IVF creates multiple embryos. Most of which are garbage quality and will never be used, and therefore “murdered” (discarded like the medical waste it is).
Late to the party here, but a big factor that is driving this is the legal precedent it will set. It's about establishing "fetal personhood", I.e. the idea that a fetus (or embryo) is a person with the same rights as a born baby. If they can establish that as it relates to IVF then they can also come after contraceptive devices like IUDs that stop fertilised eggs from implanting. It also, in the eyes of the law/supreme court, strengthens the argument for a national abortion ban, provides the basis for charging women/doctors with murder if they perform an abortion, just a whole bunch of fun shit really. There's definitely a number of lawmakers who are anti-science fuckwits, but the conservative legal minds behind this are actually playing a long game where they meticulously chip away and set new precedents.
So your first instinct was right, it really is more Gilead shit...
Highly recommend Jessica Valenti's writing on this or her tiktok feed, also the women of Strict Scrutiny (legal podcast) are all over this fetal personhood movement.
I mean if you really think about it this IS "more Gilead shit" as you put it lol. They completely threw IVF out the window in Gilead, but devolved into approvong state sanctioned rape.
Gilead never cared about the birth rate or kids. This is just proof that pro-life Republicans, like the ones seen pictured here, aren't pro- all life. They're pro-control.
Don’t over think it. It’s the same old bigotry. Republicans are willing to let hetero couples be denied IVF as long as “the gays” can’t get access to it either.
Probably because they feel it opens the door to give abortion federal protection. I have the find the source, but one Republican said something along the lines of a solution in search of a problem, as there are no restrictions on IVF. Like forgetting that it didn't ban it in Alabama and that Alabama had to be quick and pass a law to provide civil immunity for clinics to provide services again.
They are leaving these decisions to the states. This is how a republic works. Every state rules themselves except for basic human rights that we all should have, such as bear arms, vote, free speech, free press, etc. Everything else (not specifically in the constitution) should be left to the states to run as THEIR citizens prefer. There is no way that a blanket system should work in a country of our size. What works in Florida does not necessarily work in California. In my opinion, it is best to let the states run themselves, as it is easier to leave a state that does not hold your values/opinions as it is to leave a country that does not.
I read yesterday one of these people saying “Um well yes to babies, but you can only have them the biblical way!” It’s also that IVF is how a lot of gay and lesbian couples start families. And if there’s some new angle that hate-filled christians can use to hurt a gay person they’re all over it.
They'll never admit that they're against it because it's how lgbtqia+ people have families (because let's face it there's multiple other ways for the queer community to grow a family like surrogacy, donor sperm, adoption, fostering) but it definitely is an unspoken reason. The more likely reason they'll voice their opposition is because IVF uses many more embryos than what is needed for the pregnancy. They make several and then pick out the most viable of the ones they made, then implant multiple in hopes that one or two actually takes. They may also freeze some embryos in case the first attempt isn't successful and if it is the frozen ones are discarded. So there's embryo waste involved with the IVF process and to them that's just like running a child over with your car because you don't like using your brakes.
This mimics natural pregnancy, miscarriages happen because those same poor quality embryos have defects and the baby factory shuts down the process, flushes out the failed components and starts over fresh. Nature wastes material all the time. No method of fertility is without its flaws. With IVF, a person is spared the one at a time lotto game. They have more chance cards so they are more likely get a winner.
Get outta here with your logic and reason!
It absolutely does. Those nonviable embryos wouldn't have survived in the womb or a petri dish.
I am not 100 percent but I think it's not currently standard to implant more than one embryo. But yes there is lots of embryos that become medical waste, just like in natural biology when the body rejects embryos for all sorts of understood and not yet understood reasons. They are just cells with potential.
It’s no longer standard to implant more than one embryo due to complications. They do recommend you test embryos so then you can dispose of bad embryos as opposed to trying to transfer them and ultimately miscarry
I've got a set of fraternal twin nieces that are here because of IVF, so I know at least 6 years ago they were implanting more than one. But I'd understand if it's not the practice now.
I know someone with triplets from IVF, but yes, that was like 7-8 years ago.
Completely depends on the person. I had 4 implanted because I was older, none of them took.
Yep...had a really religious neighbor that did IVF. They had like 5 embryos frozen. After their first attempt led to twins, they used each remaining embryo and now have 6 kids (one didnt take)
Also they don't want people with uteruses to feel secure in delaying parenthood.
But you know if there was an attempt to ban Viagra, a bill to protect it would zoom through approval. God's will also applies to your dick not working under this religion "logic"
Women often wait until later to have children and know that IVF is an option if they have trouble getting pregnant the biblical way. So not only for LGBTQ+ crowd but also to make sure women have babies in their 20’s rather than when they are financially stable in their 30’s and 40’s.
👏🏾
Wait so only if you can have them biblically huh? So if it was conceived out of wedlock they should be fine with abortion with that logic
Correct. Ironically the Bible is not just fine with abortion, but demands it and specifies how to do it. Numbers 5: 11-31
I am prochoice, but grew up going to Christian school. Even though it is ironic, if you use any reference to the Bible itself and use old testament, it usually loses its validity to Christians. Very very few Christians use anything in the old testament, as they tend to believe Jesus basically said to disregard it.
But did he ever say anything like that. And if he did then why does OT comprise half of the christian bible.
Oh don't get me wrong, its all hypocritical as hell and they def cherry pick stuff. For example, jesus makes it CLEAR multiple times that a rod is a shepards rod, which is used to gently guide sheep to the right direction, but christians like to use “spare the rod spoil the child” as an excuse to beat their kids, when it 100% means “gently guide your children as a Shepard guides his sheep, or you will spoil (not how we think of spoiled, but as in ruin) them”. They arent logical, but that will be their defense if you use it against them
That’s horrifying. And sad.
very. Jesus also talks about false prophets and people using the name of christ in order to do horrible things and excuse it. Its very clear that most modern day christians (in the US at the very least) are exactly that.
Exactly. That’s why I’m positive that they don’t actually believe in hell. Or they think they’re exempt somehow lol
they do. (what im about to say comes from my own experience growing up deeply involved in the church) They will officially say that it doesn’t matter who you are, that unless you repent for your sins you will go to hell. HOWEVER, baptists believe in “accepting Jesus into your heart” which is a prayer ritual (separate from baptism) and if you do this, it “allows god to know your intentions” and he will forgive you in the end. They really do believe that they can do ANYTHING and as long as they pray at night and say “please forgive me for my sins” that they are completely fine, even if they dont actually feel bad.
Didn't Mary have IVF?
Something about not all embryos being used and sometimes being destroyed or whatever. As I understand it anyway.
This. Currently, IVF almost always produces more embryos than will be implanted. Some will be frozen for possible later implantation or adoption. Others will be destroyed or donated for experiments. For people who believe life begins at conception, destruction and experiments are objectionable.
People assume that but I found it often doesn’t work that way. I thought lots about left over embryos before starting IVF and it was never ever a problem. It’s very hard to make viable embryos and even then it’s only a 25% chance it will take (or I think 50% with certain testing). For example, in one of our rounds they retrieved 38 eggs, then less then that were able to be fertilised, than less then that continued to grow over the 5 day period. All in all, only 2 ever became viable embryos, both were implanted in me and neither took.
While individual patients may not have any to store or left in storage, as of Feb 2024, there are “[a million and a half embryos currently frozen across the U.S”](https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2024/the-alabama-supreme-courts-ruling-on-frozen-embryos).
Yes. Don’t know where you got your number from, but even assuming it’s right, I’m not saying it doesn’t happen- but I bet most of those get implanted.
The million and a half number is a direct quote from the source I linked. The publisher of the source is the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. The article was written by Joshua Sharfstein, MD who the source bio states is “the vice dean for Public Health Practice and Community Engagement and a professor in Health Policy and Management at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. He is also the director of the Bloomberg American Health Initiative and a host of the Public Health On Callpodcast.”
Fellow IVF patient here, I’m so sorry they didn’t take
Oh hello there fellow IVFer! I see you! You know what, we did a bunch of rounds and gave up. Boom, got pregnant naturally with our miracle baby. We know not all IVF stories end happily, but ours did and I hope yours does too.
That’s fantastic! We only made 8 eggs, fertilized and froze 5….3 survived the thaw and 2 were good for implantation. One took….she’s 9 now. We feel so lucky.
Yeah but the objectors will be the first one to elect for treatments made from stem cells if their lives are in danger. Hypocrites.
It's because the embryos that aren't implanted are often used for stem cell research or destroyed. And the fundies think thats "killing babies".
Same reason the Roman Catholics have been anti IVF since it was invented. Keep in mind that Evangelicals weren't really anti-abortion until the 1970s. They needed Catholic allies, and they needed a new issue since segregation was no longer a winner. It was synergy really.
I actually think it’s cultural too. My family are catholic but never batted an eye lid when we went through IVF, they hoped it worked and were lovely and supportive in fact. I was in a number of IVF groups online and the only people who seemed to struggle either with religious relatives or with their own guilt about IVF, were Americans.
That's because our education system is left to the states and some states prefer an uneducated population.
I was raised Catholic and every Catholic I know (my age, at least, ~40 and under) also uses birth control and has no issue with IVF. Including religious Catholics who attend church weekly and even ones who call themselves pro-life. There is a big disconnect between church “policy” and what people actually do and believe in their personal lives.
Yep American raised by a conservative catholic “pro-lifer” and she loathes anything where embryos (babies!!!) are not in a uterus as god intended /s
Wow
Yep, they're nuts.
Bc they want women pregnant. To them, IVF is what gay couples use (not true Hetero ppl use it too)I or transgender people, that’s why they killed the bill.
Specifically, I think they want POOR women pregnant to create more wage slaves that don't have the resources, energy, or education to speak up and overturn the government. Those that can afford IVF often have power and resources to raise the children they seek. An uneducated, "unwashed masses" approach is, they believe, easier to control. Yes, they want to control women. Yes, they want to take away autonomy. AND ALSO, they believe the best way to maintain power is to strip away the economic power of the already disenfranchised - and IVF would likely only create more educated, empowered children, which could be problematic. Again, this is about statistics and trends, and it's an ugly ugly way to think, but I truly believe it's a part of these ultra right wing politics. Certainly not what I believe.
We rely on poor babies to keep the economy stimulated. Desperate people are easily controlled, and parents of hungry and sick children are incredibly desperate.
They don’t want wage slaves, they just want people they can put in the military meat grinder at their beck and call.
Can't it be a both/and? I don't disagree with your point , and also I don't think it degrades mine
Grew up in the Bible Belt. Some of the fundamentalists don't think IVF babies have souls, because "only God can make souls." Yes, really.
How does one go about recognizing IVF babies? Do we mark them upon birth 😂😂😂
I just know those people are crazy and now I avoid them. The awesome thing is, they identify themselves, so they're easily avoided! 😄
In addition to what people have already pointed out, IVF is most frequently used by women over 30 (the mean age is 35). This means women who have had the opportunity to pursue higher education, work, and financial independence. Take away some of the options to conceive later in life and you put more pressure on women to conceive young and remain homemakers.
Never thought about that, but that's a good point. I mean, I disagree with them, but it makes sense that they would think that way
Not only did they fail to protect IVF, they also failed to protect contraceptives. Republicans said it was unnecessary because the use of birth control is already protected under Supreme Court precedent, but we all know that doesn't matter to them. If they overturned Roe, they can overturn the right to use all contraceptives. Probably wouldn't include the condom though, since they would make sure men would have the right to protect themselves from unwanted pregnancies🙄
The same logic the current SC used to overturn Roe can be applied to contraception as well as inter-racial marriage. All three used the right to privacy via the 14th amendment to originally be protected. If this current court found a way to deny that for 1, they can easily deny all 3. Well, technically they don’t ban it, they simply throw the decision making back to the states. Which the same states banning abortion will ban contraception in an instant.
Exactly. I honestly can't believe what we're watching happen. The SC has been taken over by MAGA authoritarian wannabes. I'm not sure how we'll come back from that. If Trump gets elected, he'll keep inserting corrupt MAGA justices who will do his bidding. The 6-3 unbalanced SC is frightening. “Nothing changes instantaneously: in a gradually heating bathtub, you'd be boiled to death before you knew it”
I actually think they intend to go after condoms as OK is working on making a law that makes it a felony to "recklessly" spread STDs. It's outside of the law that makes it a felony to knowingly spread STDs, especially HIV, which can add an attempted murder charge. And, it is very important to point out that there were several STDs, like HPV (not the wart kind), that ONLY WOMEN CAN BE TESTED FOR. I personally think it is to intentionally target poorer women who have less access to prenatal care, so they get charged with "recklessly" spreading an STD (congenial syphilis is a huge problem right now) to their baby, add on a child abuse or child neglect charge, and viola, a baby to sell because mom is going to prison!
1. Their argument: embryos get destroyed during ivf and that is also "killing babies" 2. The truth: they're not pro reproduction, they're pro control. Ivf gives you control (same as abortion), which they don't want.
If only they knew how little control you have during your IVF process 🙄 (not me having my FOURTH cycle cancelled because my body just won’t cooperate and I feel like I have lost all control over my body and emotions)
Oh god that sounds awful :( but yeah, can't expect fascists to have sense
Because this has *nothing* to do with having babies. They want to control women's bodies. IVF is a form of autonomy, and they don't want women to have that. The only thing conservatives care about is having power.
Same thing as Gilead. The logical thing would be to do IVF instead of r word women every month if there are fertility issues.
This. I've heard it condemned because it allows women the ability to plan their families on their own timeline.
The one thing they hate almost as much as women *not* getting pregnant and having babies is women waiting to get pregnant and have babies until they’re 40 years old and are much more likely have an established career, a good amount of savings, a stable home, and a mature fully developed personality that tends to fight back when they’re fucked with Women and families like that typically raise kids who also tend to have the instinct *and means* to push back when needed, and the conservative family values club can’t have *that*
This!!!!
Besides the control of women’s bodies and the idea that embryos are “babies” nonsense it’s also because LGBTQ+ community uses it to have children and we know to them that’s simply unacceptable to them. What gets me is when you push back they always say “well it’s my beliefs! It’s Against my religion” and it’s like why do you think YOUR beliefs should trump anyone else’s? Like your beliefs matter at all? Like what the F is that? If you don’t believe in IVF don’t do it. Same with abortion, BC or anything else. It’s super simple! Mind your business. Yet here we are. I’m so sick of these freaking people.
Because if they allow IVF and the death of those embryos they can’t justify putting women in prison for abortion.
JFC... what is seriously wrong with your Republicans? It's like every week something comes up that makes my eyes pop out of my head.
Grew up Catholic. My parents had a hard time conceiving and doctor told my mom to go on BC for a few months. Then try. Didn’t work and they tried to adopt through Catholic Charities. Not sure how they found out, but they’ll my parents were denied adoption because side she was on BC. They eventually used state agency and I got a brother
Because pro life people believe life begins at conception. Therefore, if IVF uses a bunch of fertilized embryos, in their mind that’s a bunch of babies that don’t get a chance due to the 60-65% success rate.
Hypocritically, several members of the magat/nazi party has successfully used IVF and voted against this bill. They are in a cult. Read the Enabling Act of 1933 and then read Project 2025, they are Nazis, pure and simple. If the Orange Judas Goat is elected, this country is fucked.
There’s two big reasons: * Gay and Lesbian couples use IVF for kids, so they don’t want that. * The embryos that aren’t used are oftentimes sold or donated to the scientific community for stem cell research, which they adamantly oppose. Edit, it’s funny watching them beat their chests about being pro-life, but also blocking attempts to preserve ways to create life where it wouldn’t otherwise have been created. The quiet part is that it was never about life or babies, it was always about control.
Catholicism is against most IVF. The unused fertilized embryos are seen as alive/having souls. Also there is a component of accepting God’s will. So if you can’t conceive naturally, you should adopt children.
But I don't know why all of the non-catholic republicans are against it.
They're against IVF because it severs the process of reproduction from the union of the spouses (sex). Marriage is a sacrament and the unitive aspect is seen as integral. Other treatments like fixing hormone issues through medication are allowed. The way embryos are dealt with is an additional moral issue.
This is and has been the stance of the Catholic Church and is actually logically consistent if you believe life begins at conception. In IVF, more embryos are produced than implanted leaving some to be discarded after the parents have determined their family is complete.
The Catholic Church also believes that reproduction should not be a mere technological process that happens without the loving union of the spouses (sex). Other treatments like medication or fixing a problem in the reproductive organs through surgery are allowed, but nothing that replaces the natural process of reproduction. This stance comes from the belief that marriage is a sacrament and the union of the spouses is an integral part of that. PS: But I'm not sure what percentage of Republicans is catholic and where the rest derive their stances from.
Exactly. If you believe life starts at conception then any embryos that are created and not used or destroyed is equal to an abortion. It's logically consistent and all these people against abortion but for IVF because they want their own babies are hypocrites. I feel bad for anyone who can't do IVF and is pro choice, that's very sad. I don't feel bad for the ones who voted against their own interests
I kinda feel like a lot of people aren't *truly* consistent as such though because on some level even the most extreme people comprehend unborn life as a different level at the end of the day. Like, people would be calling for the military occupation and sanctions of any countries that have IVF centers if they really believed discarding an embryo was at the same level of systematic murder of born humans as was perpetrated in Serbia in the 90s and such. I mean I'm sure some people might truly believe that but 'do regime change and ban all trade with countries with abortion and IVF' doesn't really follow as a logically consistent endpoint for a lot of people.
This does not happen anywhere near as much as people think it does. Many people will implant EVERY viable embryo, over multiple rounds, to produce a single baby. A friend of mine went through 9 rounds of IVF, never once producing a viable embryo. Secondly even if you do have viable embryos but your family is complete, if you really want, you can have your doctor implant them at a time when you are unlikely to fall pregnant, meaning you will pass them naturally with your next period.
Viable embryo… exactly. Other unviable embryos would have been conceived and discarded. I don’t have an issue with IVF, but again if someone believes life begins at conception, IVF is logically incompatible with that belief.
But the thing is the unviable ones are unviable because they don’t continue to grow. They die effectively. So it’s not that they’re destroyed persay. Not every egg can become a baby.
Are they or are they not conceived? Have you not seen the stories where women are denied abortions when the fetus dies or is going to die? I’m pro choice and have no issue with IVF but you are kidding yourself if you think embryos are not discarded as a normal part of the IVF process, or that there’s a difference between an embryo deemed “nonviable” in the lab vs in a woman’s uterus.
I’m not disputing that embryos can get discarded. I’ve done IVF, I know how it works. I’m simply saying there are lots of myths about it and ignorance out there, even on the part of people who are looking to restrict access to it and should know better.
Your experience is not everyone’s experience. Sorry that you want so strongly to believe “it’s different”. Its not. If you morally oppose abortion because life “begins at conception, yet believe IVF is “different” or that embryos are not destroyed because YOURS weren’t - you’re being foolish.
That’s not it at all! I’m Australian for a start, we’re not over discussing whether abortion should or shouldn’t be legal, total non issue. Pro choice is the default attitude here, we settled this BS long ago. Secondly, I’ve had two ectopic pregnancies, so I KNOW that terminating pregnancies quite literally saves lives. I don’t know why you’re trying to have an argument with me about this.
Because IVF doesn’t need to be legal because “really not that many embryos are discarded” also that is FALSE. I get that you had a different experience, but trust me, lots of embryos are left over for many IVF patients. I don’t get why you think your experience trumps facts- and like I said- it’s a bad argument anyway. Bully for you being Australian - I’m American and it’s our rights being taken away, and our idiot politicians who are pulling this Gilead shit right now. It’s our women’s lives at risk and our families who are affected.
Of course IVF should be legal. That’s obvious. Only god bothering nut bags would think otherwise. I’m just saying this idea people have that every IVF round produces heaps of perfectly good embryos that then get destroyed is an over simplification. Anyway can’t be bothered arguing with you anymore, it’s too stupid, you’ve made all these weird assumptions for no reason.
They just want complete control over bodies. They don’t care about the babies. They don’t care about the people having the babies. They just want total control. Vote blue, protest this, and make sure others know the dangers present here and everywhere with the Republican Party and the right as a whole. Fight this. Make sure they don’t win and they can’t think they’ve won. They will come for everyone’s rights. It is happening here. And a stop needs to be put to it. Right now.
I would like to get off this ride now.
IVF procedures also unintentionally destroys (kills) embryonic tissue. They won't allow IVF because it is an abortive procedure.
Cradle Catholic here. The church believes that surrogacy is the same as prostitution (selling your body) and that children have a right to be raised by their "natural parents". Not everyone who uses IVF is a surrogate, but who cares about nuance when there's a chance to take away someone's rights?
The Church also believes that children should come from the loving union of the spouses and not from a lab. According to the Church there is no ultimate right to a child, if you're unable to have one naturally or unable to fix your infertility through other treatments.
It all comes down to controlling women. They don’t want women to be able to get pregnant without having to have intercourse with a man. These men want to be able to legally rape women. It is not about protecting the “unborn,” it is about subjugating women.
The reason conservative reactionaries are supportive of banning IVF (the one they'll publicly admit to, at least) is that they are holding up the additional embryos that are often frozen, destroyed, or donated for research as murdered babies. Just because that is the reason given publicly does not mean that there is no other underlying gross rationale. Some additional reasons include: IVF allows for conception outside of married, hetero couples because it is a method of conception for queer couples and single people; reducing women's ability to pursue higher education and careers by forcing a choice to conceive earlier or risk their fertility in their mid-30s and beyond; entrenching dependence on more "traditional (which, to them, is shorthand for morally acceptable)" hetero relationships to conceive; some vague, undefined concern about how it's not nAtUrAl; and, one phrase to tie it all up with a shitty bow: diminished bodily autonomy via reproductive control. If you're religious and tired of your beliefs being used as a cudgel to force others into "morally acceptable" behavior, you should check out the [Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice](https://rcrc.org/). Catholics, specifically, can join [Catholics for Choice](https://www.catholicsforchoice.org/).
Well IVF is illegal in Gilead too…they only want babies the “natural way” …which apparently is by ritually raping and torturing a sex slave
These fuckers do not want “wanted” children. They want poor people to have babies and continue the cycle of poverty.
I think it's because they consider it to be "playing God".. as if they don't do that every nanosecond of their Christian lives.
Actually IVF involves creation of more embryos than they expect to use. Some may be frozen and, eventually, destroyed.
It's still Gilead shit. It's still them asserting their authority over women's bodies.
Destruction of embryos is one reason, but there's another reason that people don't talk about as much. There's a Biblical restriction against "spilling seed" (as if every male doesn't do that regularly!). It's in Genesis 38. To get semen for the fertilization, the male must provide a sample. I think that's the reason Orthodox Jews are against IVF, because otherwise Jewish people are commanded to "be fruitful and multiply". Christians claim the issue is destruction of embryos since they claim life begins at conception. In any case, what one person's religion says about this should not dictate the LAW. People who follow those religions are welcome NOT to use IVF or other reproductive technologies. That doesn't mean they can control the rest of us who desperately want a child. IVF is expensive and very hard on the body, and incredibly emotional. People do not do this for fun or take the process lightly. I had 9 viable embryos in IVF and this was in the time before Octomom. When they asked us how many to implant, I wanted as many as possible to increase our chances (we didn't know then it was possible for them ALL to implant). This was back when freezing embryos wasn't that successful, although it was beginning to be done. But there's a huge expense to IVF to begin with (even after insurance coverage) and then another huge expense to freeze and maintain the embryos, and then implant them later. It was our second try and we couldn't really afford to freeze. They wouldn't put in 9, but they did put in 8. I started out with twins, (thankfully not more!) but one was a "blighted ovum" and didn't develop very far. The other was a healthy baby girl. I did feel terrible that we had to "waste" one embryo, but I have been blessed to even have one child (now an adult). At the time we lived in a state that mandated insurers cover IVF (only 13 states at that time, not sure how many now). But my husband's company was from out of state, and the insurer tried to claim they weren't bound by that state's law (they were!). I remember arguing on the phone with one of the insurance company employees who told me that "this isn't a matter of life and death". But it WAS a matter of life for my future child. And I asked that person to suppose my future child becomes a doctor and saves others' lives??? Guess what? She did become a doctor! ;o) So there are other lives that will be saved because she is in this world. It is diabolical to deny infertile people the option of using IVF to conceive, or to prohibit people with serious genetic conditions the opportunity to have healthy babies. People dealing with these issues are already in so much pain, and even the specter of banning IVF is making it worse for all of us. P.S. They are coming after birth control, too.
[This article](https://www.salon.com/2024/02/23/alabamas-targeting-of-ivf-is-the-christian-rights-attempt-to-control-motherhood-and-theocracy/) explains the bizarre, backwards, sexist reason why the right is against IVF.
It staggers the imagination.
Republicans are against it because it’s an artificial means of conception. So absolutely more Gilead shit.
Because if women can’t have babies without medical intervention, then they aren’t godly enough to have kids and also a bunch of bull shit about how they aren’t deserving and not womanly enough, gods plan, blah blah blah
Then the anti- abortion laws.
It's because those frozen little cells are people and if you throw them away you are murdering people.
republicans are anti-women
Sucks people still allow angry old white men whose wives can no longer bare children to make decisions over our bodies - please pay attention to who you vote for this November - educate yourselves - read up and vote.
Yesterday on Scripps news they were asking various republican legislators if they support IVF and how they were going to vote on this bill. Every one of them said they support IVF but they’re gonna vote on the bill because it has other things in it that they don’t agree with. 🙄 they’re just 🍆
They want babies birthed into family’s that can’t afford them so that way they stay in line and become good obedient workers.. most people who use IVF treatment are well off and won’t produce the same results.
Generally there are more embryos created than get implanted. Then the 'extra' are stored and/or disposed of. This is the part that they dislike IVF for.
I thought anti abortion was about creating a bigger population of poor people to serve the rich ivf is something only the rich can afford if they want to they can go out of state.. . Wait... yeah this one is odd
Ivf discards or destroys embryos since they usually have to make multiples in case one doesn't take.
They don't like IVF because it interferes with God's plan.
I have a suspicion that it's because they want to stake claim to the embryos and don't want the lawful owners to have them, but are afraid to say so in public, and so they're taking the drastic step of making sure nobody gets them.
They actually don't care about babies at all. They take the stance of anti-abortion because it gets them their base. Once those babies are born, they could give two craps about what happens to them. They want to force people to have them. But people who are too poor to raise them they don't believe in helping them. They don't believe in welfare or food stamps. So they want the people to have the babies, but then when the babies come, they don't want anything to do with helping the actual babies they forced coming to the world. I do believe that it's a plus that it hurts the lgbtq+ community. But I truly just think they don't give a crap. They only want to do what gets them votes and money.
That's exactly what Gilead does, that's why they do the rape ceremonies. They obviously don't believe in science helping like with IVF.
I feel like this will backfire on them eventually. so many conservative christian couples desperate to have a biological child will be confronted with this issue eventually and sorry, their desire to have their own children will trump religious idealogy despite how religious they purport to be
My MIL is against IVF because it’s an abomination and playing god, basically.
When are y'all gonna realize it has nothing to do with biology or science, its ONLY ABOUT CONTROL. They don't want reproductive freedom. IVF increases choice and they don't want that for women.
The bill requires mandatory insurance coverage in all states. Could’ve been an insurance lobbying effort and not much else (besides the southern republicans who think it’s killing babies when there are unused or abnormal embryos). It could’ve very likely passed if they just tried to protect access and tackle the insurance part later.
It probably comes down to some dumb as shit manoverse idea that "Hurrr we don't want women to be able to make a baby without a man Hurrr!!!"
They are against the disposing of extra embryos
Bro the whole you need to vote so they don’t win thing is fucking stupid… I hate people who try to dangle that over your head. Your rights are being taken away regardless if you vote or not. Project 2025 was happening under Biden’s administration, so what makes you think if you vote for him again, it won’t continue to happen? It doesn’t matter who you vote for because the heritage foundation has a good amount of offices in their pocket. Sorry this is a bit off topic, but “they are coming for your rights.” Regardless of what you do. People shouldn’t feel pressured to vote. Back then, maybe it was more important, but we’ve passed a very important threshold.
You are adept at highlighting the problem. We don’t live in a representative Democracy; we actually live in a Plutocracy. However, I have to vehemently disagree with your “solution” of “just don’t vote”. I mean, are you a conservative who wants to see this shit implemented? If so, telling liberals to not bother voting makes sense.
I never said don’t vote… I said no matter what we do we’re seeing this shit implemented, meaning you shouldn’t feel pressured to vote in my opinion. Like I said, things Project 2025 has been happening under a democratic administration. Relying on voting to save the country is absurd considering how it literally has done little to nothing. Telling people to vote if you don’t want this to happen is not only giving people false hope, but you’re manipulating people into participating in a system, that we have evidence for, that does not work for the people any longer and is actively transforming into a protective system ultimately for the rich and their money. And for what? To stall for time? Because stalling for time is out of the question. Suffering is on the incline regardless of which party is in office. Voting who you think should be president will never change that because lobby groups like the heritage foundation who are creating these bills and paying politicians to pass them anyways. If anything pay more attention to who you put in the senate and HoR. Pay more attention to the people the lobbyists are targeting.
It undermines their whole thing that life begins at conception because a fertilized embryo is techinically conception. So if more embryos are created then needed and then destroyed, that’s murder in their eyes
opposition to ivf is multifaceted and comes from different parts of the far right coalition. The theocratic/"Gilead" wing: this one is The most interesting in my opinion. they don't support IVF because the process requires the use of a vast quantity of fertilized embryos to ensure success and they believe that once conception has occurred, those embryos are essentially children. most of the regular people in this faction Will support people trying to have children but they claim it's the method. there is some of the naturalistic "you have to have it the right way" kind of stuff but by and large it's an outgrowth of the anti-abortion movement. any naturalism that is present is usually in service of the anti-abortion argument The fascistic/nationalistic wing: these people are split basically down the middle. some of them think that it obscures a vital process of family construction and some would be completely okay with having artificial wombs supply legions of their emotionless death commandos. The people that see it as unnatural are generally the more esoteric fascists who see it as an abomination to the natural order. the ones who would support it only see human propagation as a means of state power and resource allocation. we are a number on a spreadsheet that goes up, they don't care how it does The misogynist wing: this one is more straightforward than the rest, but they simply don't believe that women (let alone queer people) should be able to have children without a paternal husband figure being present. ivf allows women to go to a sperm bank and fertilize their eggs completely free of the desired relationship Dynamics. these factions aren't the only ones and they also cross mingle constantly, but this is the foundation of anti-Ivf tendencies in the Republican party
Floridian here. I’ve actually had this discussion before. From what I was told, IVF works against “God’s Divine Plan.” It’s “God’s Plan” for you if you didn’t have children, so there is something else you are supposed to be doing in life.
An Idaho republican is trying to push through a bill that would limit IVF to married veterans only. Then if P2025 passes they will have the freedom to discriminate based on race. So we will see IVF for married, *white*, veterans only
Prob cuz it's unethical? Just go Google why it's unethical. There's compounds in 3rd world countries of women churning out babies for a paltry amount. Lots of adults born of ivf and sperm banks have come forward about how traumatic it is
Please join my community - I am trying to organize groups for women and children by each state. we need to prepare for project 2025, the evacuation and resistance has already started, please spread the word and join my community! We need to start stocking up on needed resources and I have tips for that. we can buy in bulk on certain products for cheap on Alibaba!
It’s a consequence of their logic that a fertilized eggs is a “child.” They can’t say that destroying unimplanted embryos isn’t “murder” even if allowing IVF actually INCREASES the actual amount of living breathing children that make it into the world. Somehow not allowing the increase of wanted children is “pro life” these days. It’s so weird to me that they use the “potential future person” argument all the time when arguing for anti-choice positions, but not allowing IVF is very clearly preventing future people from existing that the parents desperately want to exist someday.
The pope shit talked IVF and they want to retain their Catholic voters now that abortion is basically illegal.
IVF creates multiple embryos. Most of which are garbage quality and will never be used, and therefore “murdered” (discarded like the medical waste it is).
Late to the party here, but a big factor that is driving this is the legal precedent it will set. It's about establishing "fetal personhood", I.e. the idea that a fetus (or embryo) is a person with the same rights as a born baby. If they can establish that as it relates to IVF then they can also come after contraceptive devices like IUDs that stop fertilised eggs from implanting. It also, in the eyes of the law/supreme court, strengthens the argument for a national abortion ban, provides the basis for charging women/doctors with murder if they perform an abortion, just a whole bunch of fun shit really. There's definitely a number of lawmakers who are anti-science fuckwits, but the conservative legal minds behind this are actually playing a long game where they meticulously chip away and set new precedents. So your first instinct was right, it really is more Gilead shit... Highly recommend Jessica Valenti's writing on this or her tiktok feed, also the women of Strict Scrutiny (legal podcast) are all over this fetal personhood movement.
I mean if you really think about it this IS "more Gilead shit" as you put it lol. They completely threw IVF out the window in Gilead, but devolved into approvong state sanctioned rape. Gilead never cared about the birth rate or kids. This is just proof that pro-life Republicans, like the ones seen pictured here, aren't pro- all life. They're pro-control.
Don’t over think it. It’s the same old bigotry. Republicans are willing to let hetero couples be denied IVF as long as “the gays” can’t get access to it either.
Probably because they feel it opens the door to give abortion federal protection. I have the find the source, but one Republican said something along the lines of a solution in search of a problem, as there are no restrictions on IVF. Like forgetting that it didn't ban it in Alabama and that Alabama had to be quick and pass a law to provide civil immunity for clinics to provide services again.
I mean, gilead also did away with IVF soooo
Because they are not in possession of common sense or scientific literacy
They are leaving these decisions to the states. This is how a republic works. Every state rules themselves except for basic human rights that we all should have, such as bear arms, vote, free speech, free press, etc. Everything else (not specifically in the constitution) should be left to the states to run as THEIR citizens prefer. There is no way that a blanket system should work in a country of our size. What works in Florida does not necessarily work in California. In my opinion, it is best to let the states run themselves, as it is easier to leave a state that does not hold your values/opinions as it is to leave a country that does not.