GOP Deems IVF Unromantic, Prefers Candlelit Conceptions
the base's official position, basically.
Yesterday was a circus.
In a whirlwind of legal drama that could rival a daytime soap opera, the Supreme Court gave a thumbs-up to abortion pills, sparking cheers from reproductive rights advocates nationwide. But hold onto your stirrups, because a few hours later, Senate Republicans RSVP'd with a resounding 'No' to a bill that would have guaranteed the right to vitro fertilization (IVF). It's like watching a rom-com where the leads keep missing each other by just a few minutes — except here, it's all of our reproductive healthcare at stake.
To add another twist, these two conflicting decisions come at the heels of the Southern Baptist Convention signaling its disapproval of IVF in a decisive vote earlier this week. During their annual two-day gathering, delegates not only elected a new president but also grappled with contentious issues like the eligibility of women for pastoral roles—another proposal that fell short of securing widespread support.
What decade even are we even living in?
What’s especially discombobulating is that the Southern Baptist Convention threw shade at IVF because it strips away the magic (and presumably the mood lighting) of the "sexual union" between couples. Their stance implies a preference for old-school conception methods, where the magic happens in the bedroom rather than in a lab. During their annual confab, they put their collective foot down, arguing that IVF sidelines the whole birds-and-bees spectacle and that procreation should stay hard or impossible for couples who desperately want kids, but are struggling to conceive.
At this point, being against IVF is like being against electric toothbrushes—resisting helpful technology just because it’s new. Sure, you can stick to the old-fashioned way, but why turn down a little extra science to improve things?
While the Southern Baptist Convention might see IVF as disrupting the sanctity of sex, for millions of couples it’s the only way to reach their dreams of parenthood. And in the end, isn't that what really matters? Couples navigating infertility are faced with tough decisions about their futures, decisions that go beyond the scope of church doctrine and into the realm of medical necessity. Because when it comes down to it, love and science aren't exactly oil and water—they're more like peanut butter and chocolate, a combination that, let's be honest, works pretty darn well together.
At this point, being against IVF is like being against electric toothbrushes—resisting helpful technology just because it’s new. Sure, you can stick to the old-fashioned way, but why turn down a little extra science to improve things?
And of course, this comedic conundrum highlights a peculiar clash within their doctrine, where on one hand, they champion extreme pro-birth principles, yet on the other, obstruct the very medical technology that could help increase birth rates.
The conservative position seems to be that people who don't want kids are forced to have them, while those who desperately want them can't access the help they need. It's like living in a world where the rules of irony are the only ones being strictly enforced.
The silver lining is that their stance, decrying IVF as unromantic or morally suspect, has sparked widespread debate and incredulity. The spotlight on Republicans' attempts to restrict IVF has underscored a stark divide between legislative actions and public sentiment. With a significant majority of Americans supporting IVF as a crucial healthcare option, these efforts may well backfire politically. And Joe Biden is already taking advantage of this vulnerability on the right to score some points ahead of the election. Here's to hoping voters remember this when election time rolls around.
P.S. If you want to take your mind off all of this ridiculous news and you’re in the mood for a fantastic read, don't miss my friend Glynnis MacNicol's new book, I'm Just Here to Enjoy Myself, a powerful manifesto about reclaiming female pleasure and living life on your own terms in a world that tries to cage us. It's a witty, insightful, and thoroughly enjoyable exploration of modern womanhood that's perfect for your summer reading list. Trust me, you won't want to put it down! Get your copy and join the conversation. Happy reading!
x
Liz
make it make sense
Here's how it makes sense: Republicans believe the only reason to have sex is to produce children. Therefore, if you have sex, you must do so only to produce children, and if you become pregnant, you must give birth.. If you want a child but can't get one through sex, you should just not have one, and you should also stop having sex, because what's the point? However, don't lose heart. You can still become a parent by adopting the baby they forced a raped 10-year-old to give birth to.