: Paul Gerhardt, Barbara Gerhardt
: Choice Matters
: The Peppertree Press
: 9781617920431
: 1
: CHF 2.30
:
: Sonstiges
: English
: 164
: kein Kopierschutz
: PC/MAC/eReader/Tablet
: ePUB
This is a book about choices. It is about the choices we can make and the choices we would like to make, but which are forbidden to us. The choices are not only personal, but societal as well. This book takes the position that freedom to choose is important. Is essential to ultimate happiness and to a truly free and just society. True freedom means choice.

“CONCEPTIONIST” CONCEPTIONS

 

“Conceptionists” beliefs raise many questions.  About 50% of the fertilized

ova develop into a baby.  Some just never implant or become a pregnancy and some, fortunately, are miscarried because of abnormalities.  Do“conceptionists” have funerals for every miscarriage?  Should women be forced to spend half of their lives resting in bed to give the possibly-fertilized egg a good chance to implant?  Pharmacists who are“conceptionists” are refusing to fill prescriptions for Plan B, RU486 and even the birth control pill. 

 

Catholic dogma holds to the position that using any contraceptives is a sin.  The sexual act is strictly relegated to marriage and, then, the intent should be strictly for procreation.  Since Italy, the home of the Vatican, has one of the lowest birth rates of any country, it is obvious that Catholics there are pretty much ignoring the Pope and the church’s bans.  This is also true in other predominantly Catholic countries in Europe.  In other sexual areas, the Catholic church has, shamefully, been in the forefront news-wise regarding their pedophile priests and their questionable handling of this sinful, illegal behavior. It is unbelievable to us, as non-Catholics, that a Catholic woman  would have to confess her sin of using contraception to a priest who may be guilty of an immoral and illegal act against a child - who could be hers.  Another Catholic dogma which most non-Catholics can not understand is that of requiring a doctor, faced with the decision between saving the life of the mother or child, to save the life of the child.  How many dutiful Catholic mothers, unwillingly, leave this earth dumping a new-born and several other children on their disconsolate husbands?  The logic escapes most pragmatic people.

 

In-vitro fertilization poses another dilemma for“conceptionists“.  In their zeal to have a baby, many of them can rationalize the use of fertility clinics, in-vitro fertilization, and the implantation of the resulting embryos into the womb.  The fertility clinics extract a dozen or more eggs, fertilize them in dishes and then implant two or three in hopes that one or two will“take” and result in a child or two.  The moral dilemma for the“conceptionist” is what to do with the extra fertilized eggs.  If they are human beings, is it morally correct to freeze them for an undetermined period until they, perhaps, will also be able to be implanted and fulfill their destiny?  Most are unneeded and destroyed because“conception