we increasingly talk about the “global community” and the need for humanity to get past geographical boarders and boundaries, yet we take every opportunity to circumvent our own heartbreak, our own spiritual challenges by any means necessary. In the case of infertility, it seems we first-worlders hold the needs of third-world global communities—like those with children who desperately need to be adopted—in abeyance, only bringing them into focus once our self-reliant technological options have been exhausted. Their needs finally pierce our awareness when our own desires force us to look their way.Scalia wants us to consider not just the reality of artificial creation of a natural gift but also how this technology blinds us to those in need. This solution of science has created a larger gap between rich and poor as we find solutions within our power to control rather than our power to be generous. Scalia raises some interesting questions- maybe imperfectly- but they are still worth considering these unthought of costs of this immoral technological marvel. Read it all here.
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
The unthought costs
Elizabeth Scalia, who blogs for First Things.com has an interesting article today concerning the 2010 Nobel Prize in Medicine, awarded to the developer of in vitro fertilization (IVF). IVF is immoral because it separates children from the natural act of reproduction within marital sex and it is immoral because it invariably involves the destruction of human life. Ms. Scalia offers other considerations as well, what she considers a "global by-pass of the heart:"