If you believe in what Charles Darwin said, and that natural selection brought about not only man, but also the other species that inhabit the planet today, then isn’t IVF messing with this ?
There is huge debate about the cloning of humans and all the ethical and moral implications, but IVF is almost a procedure warranting little or no conversation. It’s commonplace.
Yet if natural selection determines the progress of homo sapiens, and that means that only the fittest produce (define your own version of fittest in this age of technology and capitalism), then surely IVF goes completely against this? If your genetic make-up means that you are unable to produce children, or fate (if you believe in that too) has conspired to leave you unable to produce children, then in some ways, that should be accepted should it not ?
And all this technology, all these processes, all this work, had yet to help a man. It’s all about eggs, not sperm. Why ?
And if cloning means the ability to create sperm for a man who otherwise is unable to do so, then why all the fuss ? Surely that’s just levelling the playing field ?
Since when was being able to bear a child a right ?
(note: I have not said what I actually believe in here…..)