Test on Ethical Arguments Against In Vitro Fertilization

Question 1: The text argues that IVF is a respectful way to bring children into the world through the production of persons.

A. Ano

B. Ne

Explanation: The text explicitly states that IVF is argued 'not ro beget but ro produce Persons, an act I irgue is always wrong' and describes it as an 'inapt rr'ay fo1 .b itr.grhe world.' It also contrasts this with 'sexual reproduction in the context of married love is not disrespecfrrl... and is,'on the conrrary, a uniqrrely respecful way to bring children into the world.'

Question 2: The desire for children can be understood as an extension of one's own continued existence, as children are thought to ensure a form of immortality.

A. Ano

B. Ne

Explanation: The text states, "As regards the first, the desire for children, many reasons are given by philosophers explaining why this desire has such a hold on us: children are thought by Aristotle, for example, to ensure a form of immortality; desire for children is thus an extension of the desire for one's own continued existence."

Question 3: According to the provided text, which of the following statements best highlights a key distinction between sexual reproduction within married love and In Vitro Fertilization (IVF)?

A. Sexual union in marriage is described as a completion of a comprehensive sharing of lives at the physical level, whereas IVF is characterized as an attempt to master gametic materials.

B. Both sexual reproduction and IVF are equally viewed as methods of 'making a child,' with no inherent moral difference.

C. IVF is preferred over sexual reproduction because it offers a higher success rate in conception, particularly for infertile couples.

D. Sexual reproduction is solely driven by the desire for immortality, while IVF is primarily a solution to infertility without intrinsic meaning.

Explanation: The text states that sexual union in marriage is a completion of a couple's comprehensive sharing of lives at the physical level, making them 'one flesh.' In contrast, IVF is described as 'an attempt to bring a kind of mastery' to gametic materials, with technicians attempting 'to exert as precise and exacting a form of control as possible over the materials.' This highlights the distinction between a natural act of union and a controlled production process. The text argues that IVF produces persons, which it considers wrong, and contrasts it with begetting. The other options misrepresent the author's arguments or are not supported by the text.

Question 4: According to the provided text, regarding the political questions surrounding In Vitro Fertilization (IVF), what position(s) does the author suggest the state should take or consider?

A. The state should actively promote IVF as a solution to infertility.

B. The state should avoid in any way promoting IVF.

C. The state could reasonably decide to ban IVF in an effort to witness respect owed to human life.

D. The state should promote adoption, including embryo adoption.

Explanation: The text states, 'the sate should avoid in any way promoting IVF' and 'the stete auld reasonably decide to ban the procedure in an effort to witness the' respect owed to human beings.' It also says, 'One thing thar I believe rhe state most definitely should do is co promote t6-i*siffici can be, as I suggested in Section I, one way for the lorte ofa married couple to go forth into the world in a creative capacity, for in adoption,.' Therefore, the state should avoid promoting IVF, could reasonably ban it, and should promote adoption.

Question 5: A human being always comes to be as the fruit of the love of two human beings for one another, even if sexual intercourse is engaged in precisely for the sake of an heir.

A. Ano

B. Ne

Explanation: While a human being coming to be as the fruit of the love of two human beings for one another is an especially apt way for existence, the text states that if sexual intercourse is engaged in precisely for the sake of bringing about an heir or for other parental ends, there appears to be a morally deficient attitude towards the child, treating them as a means or instrument for the parents' ends, rather than solely as a fruit of mutual love.