It's been a busy week; new job syndrome, new commute, and lots of Scouting, too!
Even though it's snowing slightly, I'll soon be headed out to lead a walk through Rock Meadow in nearby Belmont for the store...we even have folks registered this time.
But on to the matters at hand. There's been a lot of debate this week about birth control. Of course, it's entirely regilious, and the heart of the debate according to the right is whether the President can force religious institutions to abandon their principles for the sake of fairness.
I don't suppose that he can, but in recent days there's been some softening of the administration's stance, and indeed some waivers granted. But despite all the histrionics, it doesn't really affect anything...at the end of the day, isn't it still the individual's choice whether or not they want contraception? Just looking at the Catholic Church...say for example, you have a network of Catholic hospitals in your city. (Boston does - the Caritas group). All the doctors, nurses, administrators, etc., are all technically employed by the Boston Archdiocese. All the President's position does is give access to these things to everyone. The hospitals don't provide concraception or abortion services, for example...but they can't prevent anyone from seeking those services elsewhere. That's all this should be about.
But I do want to ponder a child for a minute....mine. By now you know the long, convoluted road we took to get here. Mrs. TriSec and I did things old-school. I went so far as to go to adult confirmation classes so we could get married in the church with a full mass...and needless to say, our first night together was indeed our wedding night.
However....we knew we weren't ready for babies yet, so we violated church dogma from the very beginning. My theory has always been that it's a bigger sin to bring a child into the world when the parents are unwilling or unready, and the living situation might not be what it should be. In any case...we acted like newlyweds for a while, then eventually decided that maybe it was time.
And then nothing happened. We went over a year with no results, then gradually decided that the process wasn't working according to code. So, it was off to a series of doctors to find out what was wrong. Here's where we ran into trouble. Mrs. TriSec and I were de facto excommunicated by the church, simply because we wanted a child. You see, advanced reproductive therapy is every bit as bad as abortion
according to the Catholic Church. While it hadn't been truly codified for quite some time, Pope Benedict has issued a catechism on the subject.
CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH - SECOND EDITION
Techniques that entail the dissociation of husband and wife, by the intrusion of a person other than the couple (donation of sperm or ovum, surrogate uterus), are gravely immoral. These techniques (heterologous artificial insemination and fertilization) infringe the child's right to be born of a father and mother known to him and bound to each other by marriage. They betray the spouses' "right to become a father and a mother only through each other."
Techniques involving only the married couple (homologous artificial insemination and fertilization) are perhaps less reprehensible, yet remain morally unacceptable. They dissociate the sexual act from the procreative act. The act which brings the child into existence is no longer an act by which two persons give themselves to one another, but one that "entrusts the life and identity of the embryo into the power of doctors and biologists and establishes the domination of technology over the origin and destiny of the human person. Such a relationship of domination is in itself contrary to the dignity and equality that must be common to parents and children."
"Under the moral aspect procreation is deprived of its proper perfection when it is not willed as the fruit of the conjugal act, that is to say, of the specific act of the spouses' union . . . . Only respect for the link between the meanings of the conjugal act and respect for the unity of the human being make possible procreation in conformity with the dignity of the person."
So this finally brings me to my point. Re-iterating that the Catholic Church considers ART to be every bit as bad as contraception or abortion; where are the Republicans on this issue? None of them are lining up to denounce Boston IVF
, nor has a single one of them assailed the practices that yielded "Octomom".
I do find it curious that the candidates pick and choose which part of the Christian belief system they want to enforce as policy. But even then, looking over the link I referenced above, it's only Catholic Dogma that is truly opposed. Protestants, most facets of Judaism, and even Islam are generally supportive of ART. Curiously enough, I could find no position on the subject from the Church of Latter-Day Saints, which may be relevant to the debate.
In any case...the double-standard is irritating to me. Most of the population will never have to do what we did for the sake of a child. But then again, most of the population will never have to have an abortion, either. Why does one get all the attention, while the other is barely mentioned at all? You can't have it both ways, folks.