VERITAS
"Procreation in a Brave New World"
By Craig Branch
Mar-Apr 2003

Of course, this is not how the biblical story goes. Sarai (i.e., Sarah) did eventually conceive a child, but only through the miraculous intervention of God. However, if Abraham and Sarah had lived in our day, they could very well have gone to see an infertility specialist. In order for God to fulfill his purposes for redemptive history, though, he didn’t time things to make this possible. Today, medical science has come to the rescue of infertile couples, making it possible for women to conceive children in ways that our ancestors would surely have called miraculous. The procedure described above (in vitro fertilization) is one of many reproductive technologies that have become almost common medical practice. Others include artificial insemination, gamete intrafallopian transfer, surrogate motherhood, and (possibly) cloning. A few decades ago, Aldous Huxley prophesied this day in his famous book A Brave New World—a world in which children could be conceived and born by means far from the ordinary way we have known throughout human history. It is not science fiction any more. It is science fact.

The problem, however (and this was Huxley’s point, by the way), is that all these reproductive technologies raise a host of difficult ethical questions. In the last issue of Areopagus Journal, we addressed the ethical problems associated with genetic engineering and cloning. We continue the discussion of bioethics in this issue as well, describing and evaluating the moral issues connected with the use of these new reproductive technologies.

You, the reader, may want to know why we are addressing these bioethical issues. We are not doing it simply to satisfy anyone’s curiosity or to be provocative or controversial. We are dealing with bioethics because of the need for Christians and the Church to be salt and light in the world. As citizens of God’s kingdom, we have a cultural mandate (Gen 1:27-28; Matt. 5:13-15) to work for the moral and cultural improvement of human society (e.g., ecology, medical technology, civil government).

Never has human society needed the positive moral and cultural influence that can be provided by the Christian worldview as it does today. Our society is very unsalty. It is adrift on a sea of moral relativism without a rudder and without a compass. Which means that our society is quite unprepared to deal with the rise of these new technologies in a responsible way. But, Christians cannot provide any guidance on these issues unless we are intellectually engaged with the unbelievers in the world. And we cannot be intellectually engaged unless we can think “Christianly” about tough issues like reproductive technology. Being able to think Christianly, though, requires that we do our homework; that we study and think about these things. This is why we offer this issue of Areopagus Journal. It can get you started in learning about the difficult moral questions raised by reproductive technologies, and help you evaluate them from a Christian point of view. So equipped, you can then engage your unbelieving neighbors in a serious discussion of important ethical issues that effect us all.

By way of preview, let me remind you that ideas have consequences. One of the prevailing ideas in our society today is that human life is not sacred prior to birth. Because so many people in our nation believe this idea, Roe v. Wade is the law of the land. Pro-lifers have always warned that this momentous decision to permit abortion on demand is but the beginning of a slippery slope. Now we are already sliding toward wide-spread acceptance of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. Many scientists and legislators have been calling in recent months for approval of stem-cell research using aborted embryos. More recently, some are demanding the right to clone human embryos in order to conduct medical research. Think of it! Creating human beings for the sole purpose of conducting medical research on them—research which will, of course, result in the death of the human embryo!

The slippery slope also takes us to issues such as genetic engineering, reproductive cloning, and the use of other radical reproductive technologies. It actually goes without saying. If aborting the unborn is morally permissible, if using their stem cells for research is morally permissible, and if cloning embryos for research is also acceptable, then what could possibly prevent the acceptance of genetic “enhancement” and reproductive cloning? And who cares if in vitro fertilization leads to the abortion of “extra” babies implanted in the mother’s womb or the destruction of unwanted frozen embryos?

Issues and questions like these should concern every Christian. They should concern us enough to spend time reading and studying books and articles on bioethics. They should concern us enough to work hard at figuring out how best to respond to these challenges as well. Many Christians are motivated to fight against abortion and other ethical issues on the slippery slope, but they do not always fight in the right or best way. It is certainly appropriate to join organizations like the National Right to Life, to write our congressmen and plead with them to pass a ban on cloning, to seek to minister to the young women entering abortion clinics, and so on.

There are, however, some wrong ways of dealing with these issues, and some right ways that go untried. Wrong ways include the “in-your-face” protests that are little more than name-calling and little less than violence. This approach only shows that Christians, like most unbelievers, have lost confidence in the truth and its power to persuade. Which leads me to the other untried right ways: apologetics and evangelism. If we pass laws against abortion, cloning, and other bioethical wrongs, that will be well and good. But, there is an old saying that we should all take to heart: “Someone convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.”

The way to affect real, lasting change in our society with regard to these or any moral issue is not only political activism. Rather, it is the real change of hearts brought about by the gospel of Jesus Christ. The gospel will not change people’s hearts, however, unless God’s people preach it (evangelism) and defend it (apologetics). We must engage our culture intellectually with the superiority of our ideas, and challenge them with their need for the life-changing power of the gospel. This issue of Areopagus Journal, like other issues, is designed to help you accomplish these tasks.

Christian ethicist Scott Rae contributes our first article, “How Far Should We Go to Have a Baby?” In this article, he describes all of the new reproductive options available to infertile couples, and addresses the ethical concerns raised by each one. He shows that many of these technologies (e.g., artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization) may be morally used provided that certain safeguards are followed regarding the treatment of unborn embryos.

Mary Branch follows Rae with a case for looking to adoption as a legitimate and fulfilling alternative to the new reproductive technologies in “Imitating God: Adoption As an Alternative to Radical Reproductive Technology.” She also deals with many myths and obstacles associated with adoption.

Lastly, Steve Cowan has written an article entitled, “What About Birth Control?” Though birth control is a reproductive technology that has been around for a while and is widely accepted by most Christians, it does raise some ethical concerns. Steve argues biblically and philosophically that birth control is generally morally permissible, but there are some cases in which it is wrong. AJ

Craig Branch is the Director of the Apologetics Resource Center, Birmingham, Alabama.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS
altruistic surrogacy: A surrogacy arrangement without a fee usually occurring when a close friend or family member wishes to assist an infertile couple.

artificial insemination: A procedure whereby sperm is introduced into the woman’s uterus artificially, usually by use of a syringe, rather than by sexual intercourse. Also called intrauterine insemination.

commercial surrogacy: A surrogacy agreement that includes payment of a fee to a genetic or gestational surrogate mother.

donor insemination: Insemination with sperm from a donor (usually anonymous) other than the inseminated woman’s husband.

gamete intrafallopian transfer (GIFT): An infertility treatment in which a woman is given hormone treatments that enable her to release multiple eggs in a single cycle. The eggs are surgically removed and sperm is placed with the eggs in the woman’s fallopian tubes. With the sperm and eggs in close proximity the chances of conception are increased and fertilization occurs inside the woman’s body.

genetic surrogacy: A surrogate arrangement in which the surrogate uses her own egg together with sperm from the husband of the contracting couple. In such cases, the child that is born has a genetic relationship to the surrogate.

gestational surrogacy: A surrogate arrangement which utilizes the contracting couple’s own sperm and egg. In such cases, the child that is born has no genetic relationship to the surrogate.

in vitro fertilization (IVF): An infertility treatment in which a woman is given hormone treatments that enable her to release multiple eggs in a single cycle. The eggs are surgically removed and placed together with sperm in a petri dish for fertilization to occur outside the woman’s body. The fertilized eggs are then placed in the woman’s uterus in the hope one or more will successfully implant and the woman will become pregnant.

intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI): A procedure which injects a single sperm into an egg using highly technological and specialized instruments.

reproductive technology: Various medical procedures designed to alleviate infertility.

selective termination: The decision to abort one or more fetuses after multiple implantations result in more developing embryos than the mother can carry to term without risk to her health and life.

surrogate motherhood: A legal arrangement in which a woman agrees to conceive, carry, and give birth to a child on behalf of another couple, turning over her rights to the child to the contracting couple after the child is born.

(top)