How do you handle it....

[LinkH]

Really? "Now go make a baby"? Do you understand how offensive and hurtful that is to someone who cannot do that? Or do you think that because you typed those words, you healed him. OMW.

Rather than criticizing, why don't you believe God with me?

 

[Hetta]

Rather than criticizing, why don't you believe God with me?

I do believe God - just not "with you" - because I can and do believe God all on my own. But millions believe in God and pray to God. He still does not remove all diseases, all afflictions, all infertility. He does not prevent all accidents and deaths. Therefore, after people have prayed for a specific event and it does not happen, they may want to pray for guidance instead - and then follow what they hear as being God's will.

 

[Hetta]

If a wife's husband can't produce children, adoption makes more sense. Is the pain of childbirth appealing enough to opt for having another man's child? I can understand wanting to give birth to one's own child, but I don't quite get the appeal of doing so if it isn't with one's husband. Your husband will know that the child is another man's seed, and that's got to have an emotional impact.

one of the largest rifts it turns out is that we haven't been able to conceive. Part of the work that he is doing to be a better husband/man/human being is telling the truth and talking about things. It turns out that not being able to complete our family has been tearing him up in ways he wouldn't admit.

I think you need to read her post.

Part of what she is suggesting is IVF with her husband's sperm. That would make it their child.

I don't think you understand much about women or childbirth, LinkH. If I could not have conceived with my husband, I would definitely have considered IVF. It has nothing to do with the pain of childbirth: that's a given. But having a child is a desire placed there by God, and people shouldn't stand in the way of that God given desire.

 

[LinkH]

I think you need to read her post.

Part of what she is suggesting is IVF with her husband's sperm. That would make it their child.

She mentioned IVF and a donor as another option.

Is there a church that is opposed to IVF?

I don't think you understand much about women or childbirth, LinkH. If I could not have conceived with my husband, I would definitely have considered IVF. It has nothing to do with the pain of childbirth: that's a given. But having a child is a desire placed there by God, and people shouldn't stand in the way of that God given desire.

I don't know what it's like to be a woman. I am not necessarily opposed to using medical technology for them to conceive together. If there are health consequences for the child, that's a concern.

Would you say the desire to have a baby with someone you are not married to is a God-given desire? The desire to have babies may be, to some extent, hard-wired in from creation.

 

[LinkH]

I do believe God - just not "with you" - because I can and do believe God all on my own. But millions believe in God and pray to God. He still does not remove all diseases, all afflictions, all infertility.

When I read that, I thought of the Psalm that says that 'He forgives all our sins and heals all our diseases...."

If I'm sick, I plan to quote and believe that rather than what you said in your post.

 

[Hetta]

When I read that, I thought of the Psalm that says that 'He forgives all our sins and heals all our diseases...."

If I'm sick, I plan to quote and believe that rather than what you said in your post.

Prayer is the first recourse of every Christian. But taking medical advice is always wise. Even then, with both, people die every day, and people remain sterile, and people fight desperate battles with overwhelming diseases and still die. God has never promised that when we pray, He heals every malady and rights every wrong. If He did, this would be a heaven on earth.

So, either the Psalm is meant to be interpreted differently, or all of those sterile, diseased, dying and dead people weren't "real" Christians. Which is right?

Perhaps this topic should be taken off this thread. Sorry OP.

 

[Inkachu]

Cerulean, you really seem like a very sweet young woman with a heart that truly desires to do what's right. I don't agree with all of your thoughts, but that's OK, it's not for me to agree or disagree. I pray that God guides you and your husband into whatever HIS will is for you both

 

[sdmsanjose]

How do you handle it when following the laws of the church destroys your dreams?

You follow God’s word and His communication with you in prayer. In our church the Church’s law does not trump God’s word.

Your dream is to bear children
One of God’s blessings is for women to bear children


Where in the Bible does God say that a man cannot raise a child that is not from his seed? Joseph and Mary come to my mind. I know that the seed was the Holy Spirit but Joseph did raise Jesus and Jesus was not from Joseph's seed.

Adultery is when a person betrays their spouse, takes away affection from the spouse and puts their affection to another and adds sexual relations with the other person.
Butterfly will keep her affections for her husband and have the seed implanted with no contact or affection with the other man

One of the ways that is being considered is IVF
I know that the Bible does not talk about IVF but it does talk about child birth as a blessing from God and what adultery is.
Is it adultery if a woman has IVF when there is no contact or affection with the donor?


I know that it was mentioned that some men may have an negative emotional impact about having a child from another man’s seed but that is man’s thinking.
What biblical reference is cited for those that are against Butterfly having IVF?

 

[LinkH]

sdmsanjose,

As far as scripture goes, I don't know of any major church organization that would object to IVF if the husband is the father.

But the Bible does say that if a man will not provide for his own, he has denied the faith and is worse than an infidel. If not providing for one's own is worse than unbelief it's a sin. Typically, sperm donors donate sperm with no intention to provide for their own. Isn't accepting sperm from a donor to conceive being complicit with the sin?

It is also a wife taking sperm from another man, who is not her husband, into her body.

 

[Hetta]

But the Bible does say that if a man will not provide for his own, he has denied the faith and is worse than an infidel. If not providing for one's own is worse than unbelief it's a sin. Typically, sperm donors donate sperm with no intention to provide for their own. Isn't accepting sperm from a donor to conceive being complicit with the sin?

It is also a wife taking sperm from another man, who is not her husband, into her body.

That is a huge stretch, LinkH and you know it. The OP bears no responsibility for the act of another person who has donated sperm.

There is no sexual act in "taking sperm into her body". It is not adultery in any way, shape or form.

 

[ceruleanbutterfly]

sdmsanjose, thank you for that very well laid out answer!

 

[ValleyGal]

Link, have you ever given anyone a gift? A man who donates sperm is giving a gift to another man. It's not about his lack of intention to provide for his own. He is giving the gift of a potential baby to another couple. In fact, by your own reasoning (having no intention to provide for his own), you are essentially saying adoption is also wrong, since the intention there is that the mother does not intend to provide for her own. And you are saying abortion is right, by stating that they have no intention to provide for their own - so what, better to abort than to not provide? Your argument is so full of holes we can see through it.

 

[mkgal1]

Rather than criticizing, why don't you believe God with me?

Please don't use God (and His name) in that way.

 

[ceruleanbutterfly]

God has healed me in so many ways and I know He can heal. But He is not healing this affliction. Please understand I am just trying to find the way to go. I want to honor God but I am so torn.

 

[akmom]

It's hard to give advice when your beliefs differ. I personally don't feel like artificial insemination is wrong, so I'm inclined to say go for it. But if you were on here pleading for some other route that I considered wrong (like selective abortion), I would encourage you not to. So I'm not sure my input is valuable.

One thing to consider is that if you do become pregnant by artificial insemination, your priest will probably want an explanation. If you pass it off as a miracle, then he is probably going to want to announce it as a miracle... possibly even use you as an example for other couples facing the same dilemma. And you wouldn't want that. If you admit it was actually artificial insemination, well, then you will have that reprimand.

I don't suppose you would consider adoption? There are so many children in need of parents out there.

I have family members who took the long road to adoption and this simply isn't true. Yes, there are many children who need homes, but most are not available for adoption. They're tied up in foster care. The ones who are adoptable are usually older children, have significant medical or emotional problems, or live in foreign countries which make adoption difficult. It can take many years, and it's always expensive. So if you want a baby with a fair shot at health, adoption is probably not for you.

 

[ceruleanbutterfly]

akmom, thank you for understanding the struggles with adoption! It is not easy! It is very hard and we want a healthy baby which is on average a 10 year wait list. We will adopt too in the future.

I really don't have a problem with using a donor. It is the church that does. We are going to go through with the surgery to see if hubby can father a child but if not, I really think we will use a donor.

 

[Hetta]

I have family members who took the long road to adoption and this simply isn't true. Yes, there are many children who need homes, but most are not available for adoption. They're tied up in foster care. The ones who are adoptable are usually older children, have significant medical or emotional problems

Are they not adoptable children?

If everyone wants only the healthy babies, I guess that the non-healthy, non-babies get left in care. :/

 

[ValleyGal]

Are they not adoptable children?

If everyone wants only the healthy babies, I guess that the non-healthy, non-babies get left in care. :/

That's pretty much what happens. Very few adopt older children or those with issues like FAS, Autism, crack babies, etc. And from my short experience working in child welfare, kids in care get bounced from resource to resource - it's a spiraling cycle, since the foster family can't cope with the kids, a new resource is found, but bouncing the kids around reinforces that they are not loved, and reinforces attachment disorders, and exacerbates their personal issues.

 

[LinkH]

Link, have you ever given anyone a gift? A man who donates sperm is giving a gift to another man. It's not about his lack of intention to provide for his own. He is giving the gift of a potential baby to another couple.

I wouldn't want to stand before God on the day of judgment and say I passed along a big responsibility He gave me to someone else without His permission.

In fact, by your own reasoning (having no intention to provide for his own), you are essentially saying adoption is also wrong, since the intention there is that the mother does not intend to provide for her own.

I've got four kids. Let's suppose I took them all to an adoption agency tomorrow and told the kids I didn't want to provide for them or raise them. Would that be a sin? Wouldn't that be just plain wrong?

Children can be adopted for a number of reasons. Some of them are orphans. Some of them are abandoned by parents. I would have a problem with encouraging a pregnant woman to give up her baby and not raise it so I could have a little baby. But a lot of babies are abandoned or put up for adoption, not because the adoptive parents pushed the mother to do it. I can understand why some mothers would make the decision if they are really young or for whatever other reason don't think they can care for their own children.

And you are saying abortion is right, by stating that they have no intention to provide for their own - so what, better to abort than to not provide? Your argument is so full of holes we can see through it.

So in the hypothetical scenario I described of giving up my four kids for adoption, it would be equally moral to murder them, you think? Your argument is the one with holes in it.

 

[Hetta]

I wouldn't want to stand before God on the day of judgment and say I passed along a big responsibility He gave me to someone else without His permission.

That is the donor's responsibility. Not the OP's.

I've got four kids. Let's suppose I took them all to an adoption agency tomorrow and told the kids I didn't want to provide for them or raise them. Would that be a sin? Wouldn't that be just plain wrong?

Sperm =/= children.

Children can be adopted for a number of reasons. Some of them are orphans. Some of them are abandoned by parents. I would have a problem with encouraging a pregnant woman to give up her baby and not raise it so I could have a little baby. But a lot of babies are abandoned or put up for adoption, not because the adoptive parents pushed the mother to do it. I can understand why some mothers would make the decision if they are really young or for whatever other reason don't think they can care for their own children.

I don't see how this fits in. Who is giving up their babies?

So in the hypothetical scenario I described of giving up my four kids for adoption, it would be equally moral to murder them, you think? Your argument is the one with holes in it.

That is really off the page, Link. If a person cannot cope with their kids for whatever reason, giving them up for adoption is quite appropriate - not to mention legal - and may give the kids a better life. Killing them though, uh, yeah. Not the same thing.