know its rightful parents and in Christianity that is sinning. The child must know its
parent to lead a normal Christian life. Moreover, Christians believe that if a couple are
infertile, it paves the way for doing a good deed and adopting a child which further backs
up their idea that IVF treatment is forbidden.
On the other hand, other Christians believe that everything has a purpose in life and humans’ purpose is to worship God and have babies. “Go fourth and Multiply,”(Bible) God wants humans to experience the joy of having kids and if you don’t, you’re disobeying God which is a sin so IVF should be allowed. Also, AIH and AID treatments use the egg and sperm of the parents so its not adultery as some Christians would say so.. Furthermore, Christians believe life begins after 14 days of the fertilized egg so effectively, the sperm you throw away after the masturbation action is not alive so it doesn’t matter. “the investigation is permissible up to 14 days” (statement of what the Church Says) In addition, Jesus was a healer. He healed many deformalities and diseases so why would he be against IVF? He wouldn’t. You’re following Jesus’ example if you use IVF and are doing good.
Muslims generally accept IVF and AIH if a couple have fertility problems as they are simply using medicine to help them and promote family life which is essential in Islam. Also, the egg and sperm is also used from the husband and wife so adultery is not committed. Furthermore, the doctrine of double affect means that Muslims can discard waste embryos as their intention was to make babies, not kill them. “if the semen of a man is placed in a artificial womb…it is permissible..” (Imam Khoei)
On the other hand, Islamic lawyers ban all other embryo technology as its mandatory for a Muslim baby to know its original parents. Also some Muslims would be against IVF altogether as throwing away the potential life (embryo) coincides with the verse in the Quran, “slain not your children,” Also, some Muslims believe taking IVF is shirk (sin) as it’s playing God which is not permissible. Also, if there’s the choice of adopting, then some Muslims believe IVF is not permissible as the chance of doing good goes away.
iii)
In humans, there are two types pf transplant surgery. The first takes organs from a dead person, and is concerned with organs that a living person could not stay alive without, such as the heart. The second uses organs from a living person that the donor can live without but are vital to the recipient, such as bone marrow or single kidney transplants.
Many religious people would say that transplanting organs can violate the sanctity of life, as all life belongs to God and only God has the right to give and take life.
“Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own.”
1 Corinthians 6:19 from info
Transplanting organs could also mean that doctors are ‘playing God’, which is a great sin. The organs in an individual’s body have been created specifically by God and should not be placed in another’s body as God has designed everything and everyone for a reason. Also, transplant surgery causes a trade in human organs and so many religious people are apprehensive with the moral issues of this, as poor people may be tempted to sell their organs for money and so the people concerned in trading these organs are exploiting the poor.
Some religious people also believe that transplant surgery can affect a person’s religion. For example, in Judaism transplant surgery from an anonymous donor is condemned because being a Jew is passed on by the blood of the mother and so an organ transplanted from a non-Jew to a Jew might affect a person’s Jewishness. Also, in Hinduism, it is believed by some that transplants break the law of karma (the result of one’s actions). If a person is intended to suffer from a diseased or malfunctioning organ as a result of their previous bad deeds and sins, then it should not be avoided by transplantation.
Organ transplants also go against the teachings of many religions. In Islam, for example, the Shari’ah teaches that after death, nothing should be removed from the body. This means that organs should not be removed after a person has died and so opposes transplant surgery from a dead person. The Qur’an teaches that God created the body of every person and so to transplant organs is to act as God, and so is condemned. Similarly, Hindus believe in ahimsa (non-violence) and it is thought by some that transplant surgery is doing violence to the person whom the organ originally belongs to, so it is condemned.
“Non-violence is the highest ethical code of behaviour. It includes non-killing, non-injury and non-harming.”
Shikshapatri of lord Swaminarayan
There are also a number of moral and ethical issues regarding transplant surgery that have raised concerns amongst both religious and non-religious people. Many people are apprehensive about carrying a donor card because of the worry about whether a surgeon who has a patient desperate for a transplant will work to the best of his or her ability to save the life of a potential donor. There is also the problem of distinguishing when a person is actually dead, as heart transplants require the removal of the heart from the body before it has actually stopped beating. Other concerns involve the expense of such operations, ensuring that the original ‘donor’ really has really given his or her consent for the organ to be used and the concern that transplant surgery diverts resources away from less expensive cued which could effectively improve a much greater number of lives than transplant surgery.
However, despite the moral and ethical issues raised as a result of the developing of such techniques as transplant surgery, religious groups do not have the power to stop the practise of such techniques. Any medical treatment could be seen as ‘playing God’ if it prevents natural illness and it could be argued that if transplant surgery was banned on religious grounds then to some extent all medical technology could be banned. Nonetheless, doctors should respectably do their best to save any person from dying and cannot leave somebody to die if they have the means to save them.
Furthermore, some religious groups say that with the high price of having transplant surgery, the money could instead be used for more religious matters such as giving alms and charity. Moreover, other Religious groups say transplant surgery encourages trade in organs from people in the developing world to rich people in the developed world which in turn creates an unstable rich-get-richer, poor-get-poorer worldwide society which would displease God.
B)
‘Only God has the right to interfere with out genes’
Many people would say that genetic engineering is perfectly justifiable, and it is not ‘playing God’ as many religious people would say, but it is merely the use of the medical technologies that we have to use to save and improve the lives of many people. Genetic diseases affect large numbers of people, and doctors can use techniques of genetic engineering to find cures and preventions for such diseases. Defective inherited genes can be responsible for mental retardation, physical deformities and early deaths, and so it is argued by many people that doctors and medical researches should do all that they can towards the curing and prevention of these genetic diseases.
“Clearly, where genetic manipulation is the means of healing diseases - in animals or humans - it is to be welcomed.”
Statement from the Methodist Church in ‘What the Churches Say’
With the continuation of genetic research, doctors and scientists could, in the future, find the cures for such catastrophic genetic disorders as cystic fibrosis and Huntington’s disorder.
Many people can also argue that genetic engineering is no different to the use of drugs or other medical techniques that can be used to improve human life, and that it is difficult to know where to draw the line regarding which medical techniques are classed as ‘playing god’ and which are merely improving human life. If genetic engineering is stopped for moral implications, then the same could be done with all medical techniques, which could have disastrous effects. For this reason, many people support genetic engineering and believe that it is of great use towards improving the quality of human life. This view tends to be shared among non-religious people. However, some religious people also agree with the view that genetic engineering is a good thing, as long as it is used to cure and prevent diseases rather than social engineering in an attempt to create ‘perfect humans’. Such religious people have this view because they believe that they should do all they can to cure disease, and that the use of genetic engineering to improve human life is what God wants humans to do as ‘stewards to his creation’.
However, many other people would say that genetic engineering is unethical and involves doctors ‘playing God’, which is unacceptable. This is because God has created the genetic make-up of each individual human being, and so no human has the right to interfere with God’s will. In most religions, ‘playing God’ is regarded as a great sin, and is extremely wrong.
“See now that I myself am He! There is no god beside me. I put to death and I bring to life.”
Deuteronomy 32:30
Many people would say that not only is it ‘playing God’, it can result in the killing of embryos which have the potential for life which is murder.
“To create and destroy human lives simply to extract cells for research is wrong. Such procedures use human lives as disposable objects.”
The Roman Catholic Archbishops of Westminster and Glasgow
Too much unnecessary power would be put in the hands of scientists which could have knock-on effects. Also, if information or equipment gets into the wrong hands, it could have terrible effects and cause incredible damage if it got out of hand. For example, if a person equivalent to Hitler, wanted to create a perfect race, with certain characteristics & had the ability and equipment to carry out genetic engineering, he could attempt to build a master race of ‘superhumans’, which could result in disastrous effects such as discrimination to “normal” people. Also, in regards to the slippery slope theory, social engineering designed to create ‘designer’ babies is seen as unacceptable by many religious people, because it is believed that God has designed us all with our imperfections to test us, and it is wrong to try and make the earth perfect because only heaven is perfect and if genetic engineering was allowed to save lives for example, then it could lead to it being used for more sinister acts like the ones mentioned before.
Some religious people, particularly Orthodox Jews and Muslims, view embryo research in the same way as abortion, and so firmly disapprove of genetic engineering using embryos. In Hinduism many people are opposed to any form of genetic engineering because it is believed to be breaking the law of karma. If a person is intended to suffer from a genetic disorder as a result of previous deeds, then it should not be avoided by through the use of genetic engineering.
So, in conclusion, I think that genetic engineering is wrong and doctors and scientists should not interfere with God’s will. I believe that God has a plan for everybody and only He should be able to alter or decide upon a person’s genetic make-up. I also think that genetic engineering is dangerous because we have a very small amount of information regarding the long-term consequences, and it places too much power in the hands of scientists. As a race we could easily get carried away in an attempt to design genetically perfect humans, which is exploiting the use of medical technology for social engineering. I believe we should spend more time focusing on challenges such as global warming, worldwide war, AIDS and poverty instead of continuing in the research of genetics.
Bibliography
Title – Religion and Life
Author – Victor Watton
Year of publication – 2001
Place of Printing – Italy
Printers name – Hodder & Stroughton