April 7, 2025 • 39 mins
Nate Williams and the team discuss the practice of IVF, Orchid's new genetic testing of embryos, and gene editing. What are your thoughts? Let us know!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to the Dangerous Faith Podcast.
My name is Nate Williams.
With me, we have a small crewtoday, but that's all right.
We're going to have a lot offun Chloe, justin and Spencer
and we are going to talk aboutIVF, a little bit of eugenics,
some of the developmentalscreenings that are happening in
(00:23):
a company called Orchid, mentalscreenings that are happening
in a company called Orchid, andI'll open it up to the group.
What are our thoughts on thesevarious things?
But Justin.
Speaker 3 (00:30):
So one thing I can say, just talking about eugenics
and stuff like that, as someonewho's had one handicapped
brother that's passed away fromDuchenne's muscular dystrophy
and another one that is stillcurrently alive with Duchenne's
muscular dystrophy this stuff,the eugenics talk, just makes me
really sick to my stomachbecause they, while they went
(00:52):
through hardship my olderbrother went through hardship
and stuff like that he deservedjust as much a chance at life as
everybody else did.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
Yes.
Speaker 3 (00:59):
So it is wrong, especially in the scenario of
what we're talking about, beforethey even get a chance to take
their first breath.
It's wrong to take that chanceaway completely, I think those
are good words and we're goingto dive into that.
Speaker 1 (01:13):
First off, what is IVF?
It's a common term.
You may or may not know aboutit, but it's called in vitro
fertilization and basically it'scalled in vitro fertilization
and basically mature eggs arecollected from ovaries and
fertilized by sperm in a lab.
Then a procedure is done toplace one or more of the
(01:44):
fertilized eggs, called embryos,in a uterus, which is where
babies develop, and so that'sagain from the wording from the
article.
I might change some of thephrasing a little bit there.
That's basically what it is,and oftentimes it's used under
various circumstances.
Let's say, a man and a womancan't have a child naturally,
for whatever reason, they mightconsider IVF.
Or maybe you might have some ofthese embryos and you might
(02:08):
freeze them or store them forlater if you don't want to have
a child right now.
I know that's a practice that'ssometimes out there, but
anyways, in comes a called ORCIDand what the startup does is
with IVF.
It tests the embryos and it canidentify a child's birth
(02:33):
defects.
I should probably put it thisway.
It uses statistics andprobability.
It can say, hey, this embryocould have such and such disease
or could have such and suchdefect.
It obviously doesn't know onthe spot because the baby is
still an embryo.
But anyways, the test from ORCIDcan identify a child's birth
(02:57):
defects, neurodevelopmentaldisorders, chromosomal
abnormalities, pediatric andadult-onset cancers before a
pregnancy begins.
And so then you go back to theparent or the parents of the
embryo, and then you can assistthem in which embryo to choose
(03:19):
for implantation.
And then oftentimes the rest ofthe embryos are discarded or
left frozen for who knows howlong.
Anyway, so you have IVF andthen you have orchids, genetic
testing, so that a mom and dad,a dad a mom, whatever scenario
(03:40):
they can pick the embryo theywant, based off of health
reasons or whatever.
So with that background inplace, do we have any initial
thoughts we want to share?
Speaker 2 (03:54):
Yeah, so I think the whole thing is just IVF included
is just immoral and wrong.
Speaker 1 (04:02):
So you would say even before you get to ORCID and
genetic testing the foundationof IVF itself is immoral.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
Yes, and I think that's kind of a hot-button
topic when it comes toChristians, because most
Christians that I know supportit because like surface level it
sounds great.
Like, say, even a Christiancouple is struggling to have
kids, um, and they try for yearsand years and years and they
can't have a kid.
Ivf seems like a great optionbecause they can have their
(04:34):
quote unquote own kid with theirown genes.
Cause I didn't change my mindon this until two years ago
maybe, like I was in completesupport of it and then I just I
found out more like about theprocess and just like the
details and it was.
it's totally inhumane like it'sjust the way that they throw out
all the babies that are notused.
It just breaks my heart.
Um, and now, like with thisadded um, orchid part, it just
(05:01):
like justin said, there are tonsof people who are out there
living with those kinds of youknow, conditions, diseases, that
are still living great lives,or even if they have passed,
like they lived a great life,and I don't think and, like you
said, it's a probability, so wedon't even know that it's going
to happen.
Like I was saying earlier,something that I've learned in
(05:22):
school is like only 20% of yourage-related conditions are only
determined 20% biologically and80% by your lifestyle.
So this child may have a reallysmall chance of getting cancer,
but if they go out and theysmoke and they drink and they do
all these terrible things totheir body, like they're going
(05:42):
to end up with cancer and thenat that point it's just a waste,
waste gotcha I think it createsa very scary future because
it'll, if you look at it, it'svery slippery slope because
right now it's open to prettymuch the elite, like the people
I can afford it.
Speaker 4 (05:59):
But what happens when the floodgates open?
The technology progresses andanybody can do it, all right, is
there going to be stigmasraised to the parents that chose
to have a natural child?
Speaker 1 (06:12):
that's a good, that's a good ethical issue.
So then are the parents whodon't do?
Speaker 2 (06:18):
this testing.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
Are they immoral?
That's a good point.
Speaker 4 (06:22):
It could be switched around and then those children
could be looked at as lesserthan it could turn into a whole
thing.
It fills me with dread becauseit's just so inhumane.
It's not how life is supposedto be, and one example in our
community brought up is a kid inColeman Hold on.
Speaker 1 (06:49):
Don't say that Do we?
Colman is fine I I prefer notto get more specific.
Speaker 4 (06:52):
okay, colman well okay, so one of the high school
bands in our area had a childthat had muscular dystrophy and
he, uh he.
He passed away at a young age,but he lived longer than he was
meant to and he brought so muchjoy to the kids and adults that
were around him.
(07:12):
You could never tell.
So it's like in the future.
Is that kid?
Is he going to be lesser than?
Speaker 1 (07:22):
Yeah, that's a great point.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
Something I'd like to ask y'all your personal
thoughts.
Say we throw out the ivf part.
Say we throw out the.
Obviously they're disposing ofcell meeting or egg meeting,
sperm, which is conception,which is a baby, no matter how
long it's been like that.
Let's just say they just takethe testing part so you can have
(07:50):
the statistics of your child.
Is statistically likely forthis.
Is that something that y'allhave a problem with, or do you
think it's better to let God'splan be God's plan?
Speaker 1 (08:01):
So, I don't mind testing for testing's sake,
because think about it this waywe get testing done now and
we're born.
Hey, you're at risk for this,you're at risk for that, you
might want to watch this, andyou might want to watch that and
change your diet, and so on andso forth.
So, testing for testing's sake,I don't mind.
(08:23):
The more information the betterfor that.
But what happens is, for thesekinds of issues, like we're
pointing out and I knowobviously you would agree with
this, justin it's the stepbeyond, and then action is taken
to choose some lives and notothers.
But yes, testing for itself I'mfine with.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
Yeah, I agree with what Nate said, Like obviously
we go through some extent oftesting when we're born in utero
.
But I want to go back onsomething I said earlier just to
kind of clear things up.
But it kind of goes with whatwe're talking about.
I'm only for IVF if it's oneembryo at a time, because, like
there's a way you can do that,which obviously that's not going
(09:05):
to be what people want becauseit lowers your chance of having
a child, but at least you're notthrowing out 20 plus embryos.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
There is a ministry and church side to this because,
chloe, you hit on somethingimportant.
If IVF just included one embryoat a time for implantation and
then see if that worked out, andthen you try again and again,
ivf would have no issues becausethat's your baby and you're
(09:39):
seeing if that will work out andit'll develop further, et
cetera, et cetera.
But for cost purposes theydon't do that right, and that's
what we're talking about.
They want you to get sixembryos, 10, 15, whatever, in
the hopes of the more you try,eventually a baby will fully,
(10:02):
fully develop and be birthed.
And so you're right, chloe, ifit was just one embryo at a time
, I don't think there's an issue.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Yeah, and I also want to highlight something you had
just said, how, like with thecost, you can't do just one, it
has to be many but the cost.
That to me just makes me cringea little bit, because it feels
like we're just buying andselling a bunch of babies and
that just does not seem ethicalto me at all.
Speaker 1 (10:32):
It does seem crass to mention money, but I do again
turning to ministry and churchfor a moment.
We do need to be careful,balancing ethics, which
obviously matters what is good,what is right, but also the fact
that all around us there willbe tons and tons of children
(10:53):
born through this IVF processand if we're not careful with
how we phrase things, it can I'mnot saying it should it can
come across as well that IVFchild should have never been
born.
We don't mean that for sure.
We don't mean that every childis a blessing from god.
However, we're talking moreabout the practice.
(11:15):
Any baby that is born from ivfpraise god.
We're thankful for them.
We're talking about the embryosthat are left over.
Speaker 3 (11:22):
Yeah, justin I think something that we can take time
to point out as well is, if youreally want to have a child and
let's just say that you'renormally not able to, or you're
like me I'm single.
I don't know what the futureholds, I may stay single, but I
still want children.
There's foster programs.
(11:42):
You can help take care ofchildren, and that's very sadly.
There are people as young asnewborn infants who get
abandoned.
There are older kids that needhomes, so we can also take this
time to maybe go away from theIVF and point more towards
adoption.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Adoption foster care for sure.
Thousands of kids in the fostercare system.
Speaker 2 (12:04):
Yeah, and talking more about adoption, because I
know I had said the cost partseems unethical, which obviously
with adoption there is a pricetag associated, so it can feel
like that at the same time.
But something that I reallylike that Allie Beth Stuckey
says.
She says that things like IVFand those kind of like Orchid,
(12:27):
whatever creates a brokensituation, but adoption redeems
a broken situation and I reallylike that a lot.
Speaker 1 (12:34):
That is well put.
I think that's a great quote.
Adoption and foster care.
One thing noted with price iswe have to do what we can to
lower the price of adoption,because sometimes that amount is
just astronomical and alsointernational adoptions can get
quite expensive as well.
So we want to encourage peopleto adopt.
Speaker 3 (12:57):
We also got to work on those prices um, something as
you talk about foster carespecifically and this is
something that I think that weas Christians need to step up on
Our foster care system inAmerica in general is terrible.
There are so many scenarioswhere kids get put in it, they
(13:18):
are mistreated, sometimesthey're sexually abused.
It's just we do not.
It's not even just a matter ofproper precautions.
We should take that and stufflike that, but we need to put
more funding into that stuff tohelp care for these kids that
don't have parents right now.
And also, as Christians, stepup and let's bring in some of
(13:38):
these children.
Even if you can't not planningon keeping them forever foster,
bring some children into yourhome, even for a temporary
amount.
You never know what that coulddo to a child.
Speaker 1 (13:48):
Yes, that's true.
I think foster care andadoption services need to be
near and dear to the church andour hearts, because that's the
example Paul always usesadoption.
Speaker 4 (14:01):
We are adopted into the family of God, so that
should definitely be a soft spotfor us, spencer I think that
with the foster care system asit is now, it can at least, and
then with adoption too, it putsso many things out of reach for
people because we aren't givenresources to actually go forward
(14:22):
like.
It would be so great if thechurch was able to fund adoption
, that we could go to ourpastors and that they had
something set in place to where,okay, you can take this money
that the church has been savingfor this moment and that we we
have programs in place where wetalk to people, we talk them
through the process of how it'sgoing to be once you get the
(14:43):
child, and them through theprocess of how it's going to be
once you get the child and justa whole training.
Speaker 3 (14:49):
Yes, that's a great like.
Speaker 4 (14:49):
Yeah, it's a whole different ministry that the
church could bring up, insteadof trying to get into ivf and
like all this crazy stuff.
That is just completely immoral.
We can take that, say we don'twant the world to look like this
in the future, we want it tolook like where we go, and we
take the least of these into ourhomes.
Speaker 1 (15:09):
I think that's very well put.
It's part of what we talk aboutbeing holistically pro-life.
Sometimes, with the pro-lifetopic, we focus on abortion, and
that is a big part of it.
We are against abortion, we arefor life.
However, to be pro-lifeinvolves every facet of the
(15:30):
family.
We believe in marriage betweenone man and one woman.
We think we need dads, fathers,to be present and active in the
home, so we're pro-marriage,we're pro-foster care and
adoption services, and so, likeyou said, there's different ways
for the church to help outthere.
We are for resources formothers who are scared when
(15:53):
they're pregnant.
They don't know what to do.
They don't know, maybe, how toraise a baby.
That's very intimidating.
And so, again, pregnancyclinics.
We're for all aspects of thefamily.
That's what it means to bepro-life.
But circling back to IVF andORCID and genetic testing, but
(16:13):
what about this?
Someone says, well, uh, when itcomes to cancer, when it comes
to autism and those things, uh,I'm trying to not raise up a
child who, let's say, downsyndrome.
That's very painful to gothrough.
That's very, a lot of sufferinginvolved with those things.
(16:37):
Let's say they might not livevery long after birth.
Wouldn't it be more loving tobring a child into the world who
would live longer?
That would be one of their mainarguments.
Speaker 3 (16:51):
So I can also speak on something like this.
Okay, maybe not necessarilyDown syndrome, but another part
on the kind of spectrum there.
I have a cousin who was bornwith high functioning autism.
They had to teach her how toswallow, they had to teach her
how to eat.
If you would have seen her whenshe was much younger you would
(17:13):
have never thought that shewould be able to be in just
normal society.
But if you look at her now youcould not even tell I'm very
proud of her.
You know she.
She has come a very, very longway and you couldn't even tell
now that very proud of her.
You know she, she has come avery, very long way and you
couldn't even tell now thatanything's wrong with her.
So this stuff is awful, butthere are ways to help people
(17:35):
through this stuff, to help themlive a more normal life,
whatever that looks like forthat person.
So just to give up on them likethat, you know.
I think that what if it withwith my mother, with my, my
second brother that was born alittle tiny fact.
It is a super duper high chanceif the mother has the a child
(17:58):
that has muscular dystrophy, thechances of the next one having
it, and even any after that ifthey're a boy.
Girls can have it, but it'sincredibly rare is incredibly
high.
I'm the only one of my mother'schildren that didn't have it.
And to think that if my motherknew that and then aborted me,
(18:19):
you know I wouldn't have had achance at life because of that
and then aborted my littlebrother, that's just that's sick
.
That's not right.
That is playing God, justbecause you think something's
going to be an inconveniencewhen it could be something
amazing for somebody else.
Speaker 1 (18:34):
Well said.
Speaker 4 (18:36):
I would just ask them is that person's life worthless
if they have issues, if theyhave complications?
What do you think is going tohappen to this world if there's
no pain and no suffering at all?
Speaker 1 (18:49):
there would be it, it just it can't happen like
there's nothing they're aimingfor some type of utopia, but
they're killing a lot of peopleto get there there's.
Speaker 4 (19:00):
It's like saying, okay, I'm going to get rid of
this entire country because theyproduce this amount of crime
yeah we can't, we can't play god, we aren't god and we we just
have so many issues in thisworld that bring us, that make
us stronger as people.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
So if we aren't strong people, then there's no
point in all this is yeah, and Ithink the phrase that both
y'all said is the key thing hereplaying god.
I think that's the main part inthis, um, but I think it's
actually more loving to give achild who has down syndrome, who
has, you know, whatever kind ofdisease condition.
(19:37):
I think it's more loving togive them a shot at life because
they're they're they're worthjust as much as we are.
You know, there's nothing,there's no value that's taken
away from them just because theyhave a condition and um, I, uh,
I could go on and on about this.
Just because, like, just beingin my field and working with
patients who have, you know,awful things ataxia, like a
(20:01):
stroke, paraplegic, like thesethings but the amount of times
that I've seen them work throughtheir issues and they might not
ever get to 100% again, butjust seeing the joy that most of
them have because they're aliveis just so beautiful it
literally makes me want to cry.
But yeah, they are not worthany less because they have brain
(20:27):
problems or they have heartproblems, like it's just yeah.
Speaker 1 (20:30):
I agree, and this is where, as Christianity fades in
the West, it's going to lookmore and more like it did in the
old Greek and Roman culture,where life was very cheap, the
babies were left out to die byexposure.
Girls, daughters, weren't veryvalued because people wanted
(20:52):
sons and it was a dark, cruelworld and Christianity,
obviously, because of what Jesushas done, loves all of us, for
God so loved the world, helpedto change that, and so, as
Christianity fades, some ofthose old moral standards are
going to come back.
Speaker 3 (21:13):
Something I wanted to add on to what Spencer was
saying of us trying to make thatutopia not only a replaying God
and that's wrong but it's kindof just fighting a losing battle
.
If you're trying to get rid ofevery single problem that will
ever happen, let's just sayyou're successful.
(21:34):
Something else will pop up.
We do not live in a perfectworld.
We live in a broken world.
From the second that Adam andEve bit into that apple, we, we
will, we will forever, untiljesus comes back, be in a flawed
world that will have problems.
There will be something elsethat causes sickness, there will
be something else that causesdeath.
(21:54):
So why fight this losing battle?
Speaker 4 (21:59):
and let's care for these people who need care it's
at the expense of other livestoo, because even if,
statistically, this baby'ssupposed to be perfectly fine,
what if, instead of picking anembryo that was going to have
cancer, you picked an embryothat had homicidal tendencies?
Speaker 3 (22:19):
that's a good point there's gonna be.
Speaker 4 (22:22):
You can't account for everything.
Yeah, yeah, you just can't, andit's at the expense of killing
off other life that could havecome through.
You're creating all these otherissues that are unforeseen and,
like you said, you're fightinga battle that cannot be won.
It can't be won.
Speaker 2 (22:44):
The whole thing is just bred out of pride, I think
it's.
It's complete pride that youcan just pick and choose the
qualities that you want in ababy, as if it was all genetic
and it's.
It's not like everything Ilearned every single condition I
learned at school.
Um, it's always like, yeah,genes plays a part, for sure,
but then it lists 10 otherfactors that are that are that
(23:04):
actually weigh so much more intoif they're going to get this
condition.
But also, just, we're likejustin said, we don't live in a
perfect world.
We never will, no matter howhard we try.
And there's something aboutsuffering that's so beautiful
because it just grows you as aperson, and without this person
suffering, I mean I don't.
We've all noticed the people inthis world who you can tell
(23:25):
they haven't been theresuffering.
They've been fed everything ona silver platter to them and
it's, it's so obvious and it'sthey're the most prideful people
you'll meet.
And then you meet people.
I mean I don't know about y'all, but every single person I've
met with Down syndrome has beenthe happiest, most fun people
I've ever met in my life.
The happiest, most fun peopleI've ever met in my life.
(23:49):
And so just, I mean, I'm not.
This might sound bad, but Iwould rather have that person
than the prideful person who isgiven everything.
Speaker 1 (23:56):
Yeah for sure.
Yeah, same observation, chloe,and it's wonderful to see All
right.
So I think we've been prettyclear our thoughts on IVF.
And then the genetic testing,which really would be something
like Hitler's dream, likeeugenics Get rid of those you
deem unworthy of life.
(24:16):
So, yes, not a fan of thegenetic testing either.
What about gene editing ingeneral?
This is a little bit of acurveball because I didn't tell
y'all we'd be talking about this.
There's something called CRISPR.
Have y'all heard about it?
C-r-i-s-p-r or whatever, if Ihave that correct.
(24:37):
Like gene editing.
Let's say it's removed from IVF.
You have a baby in the womb andwe get to the point where your
own baby who's living?
So again, the baby is going tobe born.
But you can start controllingeye color, you can start
(24:58):
controlling height, maybe youcan control for various things
intelligence, intelligence,athleticism, so on and so forth.
So the baby is going to live.
So it's not an issue ofabortion or not, but it's now.
You can modify your baby tohave some more desirable
characteristics a boy or a girl.
(25:19):
Thoughts there about geneediting from an existing baby.
Speaker 2 (25:25):
Yeah, I don't know much about this topic, but To me
it just sounds like a videogame or something where you're
just creating a character You'reliterally just creating a
character and to me, like I mean, I haven't had any kids but I
feel like there's just somethingso like nice about the surprise
of what your child's going tolook like and what features
(25:46):
they're going to have, and likewhich jeans you gave them, which
ones the father gave them.
Like it just takes away thatwhole thing and I'm not like
obviously that's not like amoral thing.
Speaker 1 (25:56):
But it takes away some of the wonder yeah Of
parents and children, justin.
Speaker 3 (26:03):
So I'm going to take a much probably harder stance on
this one.
I view that as a spit in God'sface, because that is ultimately
saying this creation you had inmind, I'm gonna change it.
You made it wrong, I'm gonnamake it right so, justin, I see
(26:24):
what you're saying.
Speaker 1 (26:25):
I'm gonna push back a little bit and y'all jump in to
answer me if you like.
All right, but let's say, ababy is born without an arm or a
baby's born without a leg, andso what you do is there are
prosthetics, right, there arethings you can give the child to
(26:45):
to kind of make up for that andand help to make the child
whole so you can get some typeof arm, some type of leg.
Someone could say, well, ifit's okay to do that, why would
it not be okay to do some of thegene editing which might
fulfill some of those samepurposes?
Speaker 3 (27:07):
Well, so here's something I would say to that
and this is something that I'vetalked about a lot because it's
affected me I would say to thatand this is something that I've
talked about a lot because it'saffected me Sometimes God puts
us in situations to go throughthings that are hard and
challenging, because it not onlystrengthens us as a person, it
strengthens your testimony, thepastor, the guy who does
(27:28):
emotional speaking, who has noarms or legs.
Speaker 2 (27:31):
If y'all know his name.
Please chime in Nick.
His last name is reallyconfusing Nick V Nick really
confusing.
Speaker 3 (27:41):
But no, his testimony is incredible.
It is so easy for you or I, whoeverybody's gone through
hardships, so don't think thatI'm trying to down anybody for
the hardship they've gonethrough.
But it is super easy for us tosay that we love Jesus when
we're on the other side ofthings, but these people will
still suffer through the stuffthat they suffer.
Maybe that prayer that theypray for that cure or whatever
(28:05):
will never come through.
But if you still praise Godthrough that big storm that is
constantly in your life, thattestimony is powerful.
It hits people much more thansay something like mine.
Speaker 4 (28:18):
Amen.
I think if we keep pushing theenvelope in this way, it's going
to turn into some situationwhere we're going to be creating
professional singers,professional players.
You just create the next nbateam you just create what your
version of life should be like,and like what where this person
should go because of where they,their genetics, are based off,
(28:42):
and that's that's terrifyinglike you could in the future you
, by the time we're in our 80swe look around and everybody
around us is just built for aspecific purpose so I agree with
y'all.
Speaker 1 (28:53):
I'm just giving subtle pushbacks to see where
the conversation goes.
But, spencer, okay, let's sayone day you have a kid and the
kid shows promise in sports orsinging.
Well, you then spend money andsay here are some lessons,
here's some training, go off tothis camp, take these classes,
(29:15):
whatever.
What if the argument could beall right, well, you're already
doing all that stuff whenthey're born.
What about giving them a littleboost from the genetic side of
things as well?
Speaker 4 (29:29):
Okay, if everybody's special, then is anybody really
special?
Speaker 1 (29:34):
They might say babies , babies, they could be
optimized I hate that word.
They could be optimized indifferent ways.
So you want, you know, maybe apower lifter, you know.
Speaker 3 (29:45):
And then maybe justin with his great acting skills,
want someone who can sing reallywell, and and so that your
children wouldn't be the same sowith kind of what you were
saying earlier, I I'm going tobe honest with you to to make a
kid go early to start saying I'mgoing to make you be this.
I don't necessarily agree withthat either.
(30:07):
I think that as a child grows,you can have them learn all
sorts of different skills right.
So there's nothing wrong withsay you have your child do
athletics right.
Just because you're having yourchild do athletics, it doesn't
mean like well, you're going togrow up and you're going to be a
big athlete.
No, you can have a child learndancing and acting.
You can have a child learncooking.
You diversify the things thatthey know, help them learn these
(30:31):
skills and maybe some of thatstuff blossoms into a career.
Instead of saying I want you todo this from the day that
you're born, so you're going togrow up and be this.
I don't think that's right andmaybe I misheard what you were
saying, but I thought that'swhat you were saying.
Speaker 1 (30:43):
I think y'all are thinking.
Well, it's a parent trying tocontrol the life of the child.
Yeah that's not's not.
That's not the parent'sbusiness.
Speaker 4 (30:53):
Where does it stop to the point where parents aren't
even involved?
What?
What is stopping it fromgetting to the point where
companies, governments, peoplewith ulterior motives can just
do this on their own?
Speaker 1 (31:11):
so you're saying a world where the decisions even
beyond the parents, thegovernment could be creating.
I imagine this could happen,like super soldiers.
Speaker 3 (31:22):
Yes, captain America.
Speaker 1 (31:24):
We're going to get him Justin's excited for Captain
America, where it's like nowit's not just parents, it's
companies, government.
Yeah, you can start a concern.
Speaker 4 (31:32):
Yeah, the government could just go into a sperm donor
place and then they could takeit to eggs and people aren't
even involved.
All the embryos and storage,it's just all science and
there's no human anatomyactually being involved in
childbirth.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
I think ultimately, y'all crush this from a
spiritual perspective.
It's what y'all said we want toplay God and we want to be God.
We want to build utopia.
We want to build humanity inour image.
We want to all the things thatwere God's responsibilities we
want to take upon ourselves, andwe've used science and
(32:14):
technology and gene editing andorchid genetic testing as our
way of playing God, and thatnever ends well.
Speaker 2 (32:23):
I also just wanted to ask.
I know you watched the video,but y'all remember why the woman
who started it started it?
Speaker 1 (32:31):
That is a phenomenal point.
Can you share?
Speaker 2 (32:33):
Yes, so the woman started it because her mom has a
phenomenal point can you share?
Yes, so the woman started itbecause her mom has a
degenerative eye condition andthat somehow inspired her to
start this company where you canpick and choose to not have
things like that.
So people are firing back ather and being like, well, if
they didn't have your mom, youwouldn't be here.
Speaker 1 (32:54):
Yes, because you would have seen an embryo like
your mother's with a potentialeye problem and you would have
discarded it.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
Yeah, sorry, I just thought about that.
Speaker 1 (33:04):
I forgot that that was a good point.
Speaker 2 (33:05):
Absolutely insane.
Speaker 3 (33:07):
Have you also thought about the fact that these
people who go through thesestruggles are oftentimes that
the people who make greatadvancements in helping people
with those same?
Speaker 1 (33:17):
Yes.
Speaker 3 (33:18):
God may have you in place to struggle with this, so
maybe that you can study, make ahuge medical breakthrough and
help solve these issues withouthaving to do things like IVF.
Speaker 1 (33:29):
The mother that Chloe's talking about, who had
the daughter who went on tofound Orchid.
You're exactly right that maybeher struggles with her vision
helped her to raise such anincredibly intelligent daughter
who, unfortunately, createdOrchid, but such an intelligent
daughter partly based off of herstruggle.
(33:51):
So you're right, you remove thestruggle, like y'all are saying
, and part of the beautifulgrowth of humanity also
disappears.
Speaker 2 (33:58):
So good, good points and something else dumb that
that girl said was likesomething along the lines of
like sex is for fun and babiesare for orchid, Like something
like that.
Speaker 1 (34:09):
Yes, she did say something like that, yeah.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
It's just so messed up 1984.
, 1984, george Orwell what abook.
Speaker 1 (34:18):
Yeah, great thoughts y'all.
Anything else y'all want totalk about?
Or do you think we these topics?
You could look into everyscenario and talk about for
hours.
So we just generally do bigtopic, big picture type things
with it.
But anything else y'all want tomention or you think we covered
broadly?
Speaker 2 (34:36):
the bases.
I have a question maybe for thegroup.
One of the comments I saw inthe video was like saying how
you're supposed to make babiesis going to be called old
fashioned in a few years, doy'all think?
Speaker 1 (34:49):
True.
Speaker 2 (34:50):
True.
Speaker 1 (34:51):
Yeah, think true, true, yeah, um, we're going to
get to the point where we havethe technology.
Speaker 3 (34:58):
in my opinion, from start to finish, as in from
conception until birth, it canbe done outside the womb
something I would like to sayfor maybe anyone listening who
maybe has some of thesestruggles that they're trying to
hand pick out with the iv IVFand what was gene editing was
the other one.
If you struggle with a physicaldisability, mental disability,
(35:24):
anything that you struggle with,know, at the end of the day,
you're loved by us in this room,of course, but also you're
loved by us in this room, ofcourse, but also you're loved by
god, and god has a purpose withyou, no matter how hard it is
yeah, well said justin goingback to chloe's question, what
(35:46):
she brought up, if making humanswith sex is considered old
fashioned, it's just the furtherunraveling of our society.
Speaker 4 (35:56):
And sex as it goes, because, like she said, like the
lady from work it said, sex isfor fun.
And so, if sex is for fun, whydoes it?
Why does marriage matter?
Why does relationships withanother person matter?
It's just, it's just sex.
There's no, there's no point.
And it's just I mean, we'vealready seen it over the past
(36:18):
century that the downhill spiralwe've gone, but it's just a
much deeper blow into sex andhuman relationship.
Speaker 2 (36:29):
Yeah, I think it's just society getting further and
further away from God's willand God's plan for the world.
Speaker 1 (36:36):
And that's where, regardless of our thoughts on
their theology, I think that isa strong area of the Catholic
Church the natural family andtheir views of procreation, and
so I think they do a good jobthere, where sometimes us
Protestants, we can be all overthe map when it comes to this
stuff.
So it's good for us to talkabout and I'd be open to knowing
(36:59):
your thoughts as a listener Ifyou have any pushback which this
topic can get hot and heated.
People disagree on differentaspects of it and, again, we do
want to be mindful of all thebabies being born in the church
through IVF.
We do need to keep that in mindhow to stand for truth, but
(37:20):
also to be gracious as well,because a lot of couples they
suffer through infertility.
It is a very real thing, so weneed to be gracious too as we
talk about all this.
If you have any pushback orfeedback, let us know.
We're on social media and wehave our website,
dangerousfaithnet.
You can go check that out.
You can send an email throughthat, but anyways, let us know
(37:43):
your thoughts.
I'm open to pushback, all right, y'all.
Anything else before we headoff?
Praise God, praise God.
I think that is a great endingY'all take care, praise God,
(38:18):
praise God.
I think that is a great ending.
Y'all take care.
Speaker 4 (38:23):
We typically have several episodes a month and
we'll keep doing that Until nexttime.
We'll talk with you later.
Thank you, the whole topic justfills me with dread.
Speaker 2 (38:48):
Fills me with anger.
Speaker 4 (38:49):
I mean, like I said, if you look at a future where
everybody's just built for aspecific purpose, built with a
specific ulterior motive in mind, you're going to look at the
people around you and you'regoing to be like Spencer is just
terrifying.
Speaker 2 (39:05):
Well, no, I guess this is exactly true.
I was going to say I wouldn'thave a job if this thing became
real.
Speaker 3 (39:10):
Wow, chloe, wow Chloe , that's not true.
Speaker 2 (39:14):
No, it's not, because injuries and Injuries and
surgeries and age.
Speaker 3 (39:17):
I know Now they make them bones so strong, then they
can break All right, so thatwill be our no osteoporosis, our
Chloe ethical stance.
You don't want everybody, oh,you got that on video Because we
need PT.
Speaker 4 (39:27):
White Did you.
Welcome to the Dangerous Faith Podcast.
My name is Nate Williams.
With me, we have a small crewtoday, but that's all right.
We're going to have a lot offun Chloe, justin and Spencer
and we are going to talk aboutIVF, a little bit of eugenics,
some of the developmentalscreenings that are happening in
(00:23):
a company called Orchid, mentalscreenings that are happening
in a company called Orchid, andI'll open it up to the group.
What are our thoughts on thesevarious things?
But Justin.
Speaker 3 (00:30):
So one thing I can say, just talking about eugenics
and stuff like that, as someonewho's had one handicapped
brother that's passed away fromDuchenne's muscular dystrophy
and another one that is stillcurrently alive with Duchenne's
muscular dystrophy this stuff,the eugenics talk, just makes me
really sick to my stomachbecause they, while they went
(00:52):
through hardship my olderbrother went through hardship
and stuff like that he deservedjust as much a chance at life as
everybody else did.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
Yes.
Speaker 3 (00:59):
So it is wrong, especially in the scenario of
what we're talking about, beforethey even get a chance to take
their first breath.
It's wrong to take that chanceaway completely, I think those
are good words and we're goingto dive into that.
Speaker 1 (01:13):
First off, what is IVF?
It's a common term.
You may or may not know aboutit, but it's called in vitro
fertilization and basically it'scalled in vitro fertilization
and basically mature eggs arecollected from ovaries and
fertilized by sperm in a lab.
Then a procedure is done toplace one or more of the
(01:44):
fertilized eggs, called embryos,in a uterus, which is where
babies develop, and so that'sagain from the wording from the
article.
I might change some of thephrasing a little bit there.
That's basically what it is,and oftentimes it's used under
various circumstances.
Let's say, a man and a womancan't have a child naturally,
for whatever reason, they mightconsider IVF.
Or maybe you might have some ofthese embryos and you might
(02:08):
freeze them or store them forlater if you don't want to have
a child right now.
I know that's a practice that'ssometimes out there, but
anyways, in comes a called ORCIDand what the startup does is
with IVF.
It tests the embryos and it canidentify a child's birth
(02:33):
defects.
I should probably put it thisway.
It uses statistics andprobability.
It can say, hey, this embryocould have such and such disease
or could have such and suchdefect.
It obviously doesn't know onthe spot because the baby is
still an embryo.
But anyways, the test from ORCIDcan identify a child's birth
(02:57):
defects, neurodevelopmentaldisorders, chromosomal
abnormalities, pediatric andadult-onset cancers before a
pregnancy begins.
And so then you go back to theparent or the parents of the
embryo, and then you can assistthem in which embryo to choose
(03:19):
for implantation.
And then oftentimes the rest ofthe embryos are discarded or
left frozen for who knows howlong.
Anyway, so you have IVF andthen you have orchids, genetic
testing, so that a mom and dad,a dad a mom, whatever scenario
(03:40):
they can pick the embryo theywant, based off of health
reasons or whatever.
So with that background inplace, do we have any initial
thoughts we want to share?
Speaker 2 (03:54):
Yeah, so I think the whole thing is just IVF included
is just immoral and wrong.
Speaker 1 (04:02):
So you would say even before you get to ORCID and
genetic testing the foundationof IVF itself is immoral.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
Yes, and I think that's kind of a hot-button
topic when it comes toChristians, because most
Christians that I know supportit because like surface level it
sounds great.
Like, say, even a Christiancouple is struggling to have
kids, um, and they try for yearsand years and years and they
can't have a kid.
Ivf seems like a great optionbecause they can have their
(04:34):
quote unquote own kid with theirown genes.
Cause I didn't change my mindon this until two years ago
maybe, like I was in completesupport of it and then I just I
found out more like about theprocess and just like the
details and it was.
it's totally inhumane like it'sjust the way that they throw out
all the babies that are notused.
It just breaks my heart.
Um, and now, like with thisadded um, orchid part, it just
(05:01):
like justin said, there are tonsof people who are out there
living with those kinds of youknow, conditions, diseases, that
are still living great lives,or even if they have passed,
like they lived a great life,and I don't think and, like you
said, it's a probability, so wedon't even know that it's going
to happen.
Like I was saying earlier,something that I've learned in
(05:22):
school is like only 20% of yourage-related conditions are only
determined 20% biologically and80% by your lifestyle.
So this child may have a reallysmall chance of getting cancer,
but if they go out and theysmoke and they drink and they do
all these terrible things totheir body, like they're going
(05:42):
to end up with cancer and thenat that point it's just a waste,
waste gotcha I think it createsa very scary future because
it'll, if you look at it, it'svery slippery slope because
right now it's open to prettymuch the elite, like the people
I can afford it.
Speaker 4 (05:59):
But what happens when the floodgates open?
The technology progresses andanybody can do it, all right, is
there going to be stigmasraised to the parents that chose
to have a natural child?
Speaker 1 (06:12):
that's a good, that's a good ethical issue.
So then are the parents whodon't do?
Speaker 2 (06:18):
this testing.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
Are they immoral?
That's a good point.
Speaker 4 (06:22):
It could be switched around and then those children
could be looked at as lesserthan it could turn into a whole
thing.
It fills me with dread becauseit's just so inhumane.
It's not how life is supposedto be, and one example in our
community brought up is a kid inColeman Hold on.
Speaker 1 (06:49):
Don't say that Do we?
Colman is fine I I prefer notto get more specific.
Speaker 4 (06:52):
okay, colman well okay, so one of the high school
bands in our area had a childthat had muscular dystrophy and
he, uh he.
He passed away at a young age,but he lived longer than he was
meant to and he brought so muchjoy to the kids and adults that
were around him.
(07:12):
You could never tell.
So it's like in the future.
Is that kid?
Is he going to be lesser than?
Speaker 1 (07:22):
Yeah, that's a great point.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
Something I'd like to ask y'all your personal
thoughts.
Say we throw out the ivf part.
Say we throw out the.
Obviously they're disposing ofcell meeting or egg meeting,
sperm, which is conception,which is a baby, no matter how
long it's been like that.
Let's just say they just takethe testing part so you can have
(07:50):
the statistics of your child.
Is statistically likely forthis.
Is that something that y'allhave a problem with, or do you
think it's better to let God'splan be God's plan?
Speaker 1 (08:01):
So, I don't mind testing for testing's sake,
because think about it this waywe get testing done now and
we're born.
Hey, you're at risk for this,you're at risk for that, you
might want to watch this, andyou might want to watch that and
change your diet, and so on andso forth.
So, testing for testing's sake,I don't mind.
(08:23):
The more information the betterfor that.
But what happens is, for thesekinds of issues, like we're
pointing out and I knowobviously you would agree with
this, justin it's the stepbeyond, and then action is taken
to choose some lives and notothers.
But yes, testing for itself I'mfine with.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
Yeah, I agree with what Nate said, Like obviously
we go through some extent oftesting when we're born in utero
.
But I want to go back onsomething I said earlier just to
kind of clear things up.
But it kind of goes with whatwe're talking about.
I'm only for IVF if it's oneembryo at a time, because, like
there's a way you can do that,which obviously that's not going
(09:05):
to be what people want becauseit lowers your chance of having
a child, but at least you're notthrowing out 20 plus embryos.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
There is a ministry and church side to this because,
chloe, you hit on somethingimportant.
If IVF just included one embryoat a time for implantation and
then see if that worked out, andthen you try again and again,
ivf would have no issues becausethat's your baby and you're
(09:39):
seeing if that will work out andit'll develop further, et
cetera, et cetera.
But for cost purposes theydon't do that right, and that's
what we're talking about.
They want you to get sixembryos, 10, 15, whatever, in
the hopes of the more you try,eventually a baby will fully,
(10:02):
fully develop and be birthed.
And so you're right, chloe, ifit was just one embryo at a time
, I don't think there's an issue.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Yeah, and I also want to highlight something you had
just said, how, like with thecost, you can't do just one, it
has to be many but the cost.
That to me just makes me cringea little bit, because it feels
like we're just buying andselling a bunch of babies and
that just does not seem ethicalto me at all.
Speaker 1 (10:32):
It does seem crass to mention money, but I do again
turning to ministry and churchfor a moment.
We do need to be careful,balancing ethics, which
obviously matters what is good,what is right, but also the fact
that all around us there willbe tons and tons of children
(10:53):
born through this IVF processand if we're not careful with
how we phrase things, it can I'mnot saying it should it can
come across as well that IVFchild should have never been
born.
We don't mean that for sure.
We don't mean that every childis a blessing from god.
However, we're talking moreabout the practice.
(11:15):
Any baby that is born from ivfpraise god.
We're thankful for them.
We're talking about the embryosthat are left over.
Speaker 3 (11:22):
Yeah, justin I think something that we can take time
to point out as well is, if youreally want to have a child and
let's just say that you'renormally not able to, or you're
like me I'm single.
I don't know what the futureholds, I may stay single, but I
still want children.
There's foster programs.
(11:42):
You can help take care ofchildren, and that's very sadly.
There are people as young asnewborn infants who get
abandoned.
There are older kids that needhomes, so we can also take this
time to maybe go away from theIVF and point more towards
adoption.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Adoption foster care for sure.
Thousands of kids in the fostercare system.
Speaker 2 (12:04):
Yeah, and talking more about adoption, because I
know I had said the cost partseems unethical, which obviously
with adoption there is a pricetag associated, so it can feel
like that at the same time.
But something that I reallylike that Allie Beth Stuckey
says.
She says that things like IVFand those kind of like Orchid,
(12:27):
whatever creates a brokensituation, but adoption redeems
a broken situation and I reallylike that a lot.
Speaker 1 (12:34):
That is well put.
I think that's a great quote.
Adoption and foster care.
One thing noted with price iswe have to do what we can to
lower the price of adoption,because sometimes that amount is
just astronomical and alsointernational adoptions can get
quite expensive as well.
So we want to encourage peopleto adopt.
Speaker 3 (12:57):
We also got to work on those prices um, something as
you talk about foster carespecifically and this is
something that I think that weas Christians need to step up on
Our foster care system inAmerica in general is terrible.
There are so many scenarioswhere kids get put in it, they
(13:18):
are mistreated, sometimesthey're sexually abused.
It's just we do not.
It's not even just a matter ofproper precautions.
We should take that and stufflike that, but we need to put
more funding into that stuff tohelp care for these kids that
don't have parents right now.
And also, as Christians, stepup and let's bring in some of
(13:38):
these children.
Even if you can't not planningon keeping them forever foster,
bring some children into yourhome, even for a temporary
amount.
You never know what that coulddo to a child.
Speaker 1 (13:48):
Yes, that's true.
I think foster care andadoption services need to be
near and dear to the church andour hearts, because that's the
example Paul always usesadoption.
Speaker 4 (14:01):
We are adopted into the family of God, so that
should definitely be a soft spotfor us, spencer I think that
with the foster care system asit is now, it can at least, and
then with adoption too, it putsso many things out of reach for
people because we aren't givenresources to actually go forward
(14:22):
like.
It would be so great if thechurch was able to fund adoption
, that we could go to ourpastors and that they had
something set in place to where,okay, you can take this money
that the church has been savingfor this moment and that we we
have programs in place where wetalk to people, we talk them
through the process of how it'sgoing to be once you get the
(14:43):
child, and them through theprocess of how it's going to be
once you get the child and justa whole training.
Speaker 3 (14:49):
Yes, that's a great like.
Speaker 4 (14:49):
Yeah, it's a whole different ministry that the
church could bring up, insteadof trying to get into ivf and
like all this crazy stuff.
That is just completely immoral.
We can take that, say we don'twant the world to look like this
in the future, we want it tolook like where we go, and we
take the least of these into ourhomes.
Speaker 1 (15:09):
I think that's very well put.
It's part of what we talk aboutbeing holistically pro-life.
Sometimes, with the pro-lifetopic, we focus on abortion, and
that is a big part of it.
We are against abortion, we arefor life.
However, to be pro-lifeinvolves every facet of the
(15:30):
family.
We believe in marriage betweenone man and one woman.
We think we need dads, fathers,to be present and active in the
home, so we're pro-marriage,we're pro-foster care and
adoption services, and so, likeyou said, there's different ways
for the church to help outthere.
We are for resources formothers who are scared when
(15:53):
they're pregnant.
They don't know what to do.
They don't know, maybe, how toraise a baby.
That's very intimidating.
And so, again, pregnancyclinics.
We're for all aspects of thefamily.
That's what it means to bepro-life.
But circling back to IVF andORCID and genetic testing, but
(16:13):
what about this?
Someone says, well, uh, when itcomes to cancer, when it comes
to autism and those things, uh,I'm trying to not raise up a
child who, let's say, downsyndrome.
That's very painful to gothrough.
That's very, a lot of sufferinginvolved with those things.
(16:37):
Let's say they might not livevery long after birth.
Wouldn't it be more loving tobring a child into the world who
would live longer?
That would be one of their mainarguments.
Speaker 3 (16:51):
So I can also speak on something like this.
Okay, maybe not necessarilyDown syndrome, but another part
on the kind of spectrum there.
I have a cousin who was bornwith high functioning autism.
They had to teach her how toswallow, they had to teach her
how to eat.
If you would have seen her whenshe was much younger you would
(17:13):
have never thought that shewould be able to be in just
normal society.
But if you look at her now youcould not even tell I'm very
proud of her.
You know she.
She has come a very, very longway and you couldn't even tell
now that very proud of her.
You know she, she has come avery, very long way and you
couldn't even tell now thatanything's wrong with her.
So this stuff is awful, butthere are ways to help people
(17:35):
through this stuff, to help themlive a more normal life,
whatever that looks like forthat person.
So just to give up on them likethat, you know.
I think that what if it withwith my mother, with my, my
second brother that was born alittle tiny fact.
It is a super duper high chanceif the mother has the a child
(17:58):
that has muscular dystrophy, thechances of the next one having
it, and even any after that ifthey're a boy.
Girls can have it, but it'sincredibly rare is incredibly
high.
I'm the only one of my mother'schildren that didn't have it.
And to think that if my motherknew that and then aborted me,
(18:19):
you know I wouldn't have had achance at life because of that
and then aborted my littlebrother, that's just that's sick
.
That's not right.
That is playing God, justbecause you think something's
going to be an inconveniencewhen it could be something
amazing for somebody else.
Speaker 1 (18:34):
Well said.
Speaker 4 (18:36):
I would just ask them is that person's life worthless
if they have issues, if theyhave complications?
What do you think is going tohappen to this world if there's
no pain and no suffering at all?
Speaker 1 (18:49):
there would be it, it just it can't happen like
there's nothing they're aimingfor some type of utopia, but
they're killing a lot of peopleto get there there's.
Speaker 4 (19:00):
It's like saying, okay, I'm going to get rid of
this entire country because theyproduce this amount of crime
yeah we can't, we can't play god, we aren't god and we we just
have so many issues in thisworld that bring us, that make
us stronger as people.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
So if we aren't strong people, then there's no
point in all this is yeah, and Ithink the phrase that both
y'all said is the key thing hereplaying god.
I think that's the main part inthis, um, but I think it's
actually more loving to give achild who has down syndrome, who
has, you know, whatever kind ofdisease condition.
(19:37):
I think it's more loving togive them a shot at life because
they're they're they're worthjust as much as we are.
You know, there's nothing,there's no value that's taken
away from them just because theyhave a condition and um, I, uh,
I could go on and on about this.
Just because, like, just beingin my field and working with
patients who have, you know,awful things ataxia, like a
(20:01):
stroke, paraplegic, like thesethings but the amount of times
that I've seen them work throughtheir issues and they might not
ever get to 100% again, butjust seeing the joy that most of
them have because they're aliveis just so beautiful it
literally makes me want to cry.
But yeah, they are not worthany less because they have brain
(20:27):
problems or they have heartproblems, like it's just yeah.
Speaker 1 (20:30):
I agree, and this is where, as Christianity fades in
the West, it's going to lookmore and more like it did in the
old Greek and Roman culture,where life was very cheap, the
babies were left out to die byexposure.
Girls, daughters, weren't veryvalued because people wanted
(20:52):
sons and it was a dark, cruelworld and Christianity,
obviously, because of what Jesushas done, loves all of us, for
God so loved the world, helpedto change that, and so, as
Christianity fades, some ofthose old moral standards are
going to come back.
Speaker 3 (21:13):
Something I wanted to add on to what Spencer was
saying of us trying to make thatutopia not only a replaying God
and that's wrong but it's kindof just fighting a losing battle
.
If you're trying to get rid ofevery single problem that will
ever happen, let's just sayyou're successful.
(21:34):
Something else will pop up.
We do not live in a perfectworld.
We live in a broken world.
From the second that Adam andEve bit into that apple, we, we
will, we will forever, untiljesus comes back, be in a flawed
world that will have problems.
There will be something elsethat causes sickness, there will
be something else that causesdeath.
(21:54):
So why fight this losing battle?
Speaker 4 (21:59):
and let's care for these people who need care it's
at the expense of other livestoo, because even if,
statistically, this baby'ssupposed to be perfectly fine,
what if, instead of picking anembryo that was going to have
cancer, you picked an embryothat had homicidal tendencies?
Speaker 3 (22:19):
that's a good point there's gonna be.
Speaker 4 (22:22):
You can't account for everything.
Yeah, yeah, you just can't, andit's at the expense of killing
off other life that could havecome through.
You're creating all these otherissues that are unforeseen and,
like you said, you're fightinga battle that cannot be won.
It can't be won.
Speaker 2 (22:44):
The whole thing is just bred out of pride, I think
it's.
It's complete pride that youcan just pick and choose the
qualities that you want in ababy, as if it was all genetic
and it's.
It's not like everything Ilearned every single condition I
learned at school.
Um, it's always like, yeah,genes plays a part, for sure,
but then it lists 10 otherfactors that are that are that
(23:04):
actually weigh so much more intoif they're going to get this
condition.
But also, just, we're likejustin said, we don't live in a
perfect world.
We never will, no matter howhard we try.
And there's something aboutsuffering that's so beautiful
because it just grows you as aperson, and without this person
suffering, I mean I don't.
We've all noticed the people inthis world who you can tell
(23:25):
they haven't been theresuffering.
They've been fed everything ona silver platter to them and
it's, it's so obvious and it'sthey're the most prideful people
you'll meet.
And then you meet people.
I mean I don't know about y'all, but every single person I've
met with Down syndrome has beenthe happiest, most fun people
I've ever met in my life.
The happiest, most fun peopleI've ever met in my life.
(23:49):
And so just, I mean, I'm not.
This might sound bad, but Iwould rather have that person
than the prideful person who isgiven everything.
Speaker 1 (23:56):
Yeah for sure.
Yeah, same observation, chloe,and it's wonderful to see All
right.
So I think we've been prettyclear our thoughts on IVF.
And then the genetic testing,which really would be something
like Hitler's dream, likeeugenics Get rid of those you
deem unworthy of life.
(24:16):
So, yes, not a fan of thegenetic testing either.
What about gene editing ingeneral?
This is a little bit of acurveball because I didn't tell
y'all we'd be talking about this.
There's something called CRISPR.
Have y'all heard about it?
C-r-i-s-p-r or whatever, if Ihave that correct.
(24:37):
Like gene editing.
Let's say it's removed from IVF.
You have a baby in the womb andwe get to the point where your
own baby who's living?
So again, the baby is going tobe born.
But you can start controllingeye color, you can start
(24:58):
controlling height, maybe youcan control for various things
intelligence, intelligence,athleticism, so on and so forth.
So the baby is going to live.
So it's not an issue ofabortion or not, but it's now.
You can modify your baby tohave some more desirable
characteristics a boy or a girl.
(25:19):
Thoughts there about geneediting from an existing baby.
Speaker 2 (25:25):
Yeah, I don't know much about this topic, but To me
it just sounds like a videogame or something where you're
just creating a character You'reliterally just creating a
character and to me, like I mean, I haven't had any kids but I
feel like there's just somethingso like nice about the surprise
of what your child's going tolook like and what features
(25:46):
they're going to have, and likewhich jeans you gave them, which
ones the father gave them.
Like it just takes away thatwhole thing and I'm not like
obviously that's not like amoral thing.
Speaker 1 (25:56):
But it takes away some of the wonder yeah Of
parents and children, justin.
Speaker 3 (26:03):
So I'm going to take a much probably harder stance on
this one.
I view that as a spit in God'sface, because that is ultimately
saying this creation you had inmind, I'm gonna change it.
You made it wrong, I'm gonnamake it right so, justin, I see
(26:24):
what you're saying.
Speaker 1 (26:25):
I'm gonna push back a little bit and y'all jump in to
answer me if you like.
All right, but let's say, ababy is born without an arm or a
baby's born without a leg, andso what you do is there are
prosthetics, right, there arethings you can give the child to
(26:45):
to kind of make up for that andand help to make the child
whole so you can get some typeof arm, some type of leg.
Someone could say, well, ifit's okay to do that, why would
it not be okay to do some of thegene editing which might
fulfill some of those samepurposes?
Speaker 3 (27:07):
Well, so here's something I would say to that
and this is something that I'vetalked about a lot because it's
affected me I would say to thatand this is something that I've
talked about a lot because it'saffected me Sometimes God puts
us in situations to go throughthings that are hard and
challenging, because it not onlystrengthens us as a person, it
strengthens your testimony, thepastor, the guy who does
(27:28):
emotional speaking, who has noarms or legs.
Speaker 2 (27:31):
If y'all know his name.
Please chime in Nick.
His last name is reallyconfusing Nick V Nick really
confusing.
Speaker 3 (27:41):
But no, his testimony is incredible.
It is so easy for you or I, whoeverybody's gone through
hardships, so don't think thatI'm trying to down anybody for
the hardship they've gonethrough.
But it is super easy for us tosay that we love Jesus when
we're on the other side ofthings, but these people will
still suffer through the stuffthat they suffer.
Maybe that prayer that theypray for that cure or whatever
(28:05):
will never come through.
But if you still praise Godthrough that big storm that is
constantly in your life, thattestimony is powerful.
It hits people much more thansay something like mine.
Speaker 4 (28:18):
Amen.
I think if we keep pushing theenvelope in this way, it's going
to turn into some situationwhere we're going to be creating
professional singers,professional players.
You just create the next nbateam you just create what your
version of life should be like,and like what where this person
should go because of where they,their genetics, are based off,
(28:42):
and that's that's terrifyinglike you could in the future you
, by the time we're in our 80swe look around and everybody
around us is just built for aspecific purpose so I agree with
y'all.
Speaker 1 (28:53):
I'm just giving subtle pushbacks to see where
the conversation goes.
But, spencer, okay, let's sayone day you have a kid and the
kid shows promise in sports orsinging.
Well, you then spend money andsay here are some lessons,
here's some training, go off tothis camp, take these classes,
(29:15):
whatever.
What if the argument could beall right, well, you're already
doing all that stuff whenthey're born.
What about giving them a littleboost from the genetic side of
things as well?
Speaker 4 (29:29):
Okay, if everybody's special, then is anybody really
special?
Speaker 1 (29:34):
They might say babies , babies, they could be
optimized I hate that word.
They could be optimized indifferent ways.
So you want, you know, maybe apower lifter, you know.
Speaker 3 (29:45):
And then maybe justin with his great acting skills,
want someone who can sing reallywell, and and so that your
children wouldn't be the same sowith kind of what you were
saying earlier, I I'm going tobe honest with you to to make a
kid go early to start saying I'mgoing to make you be this.
I don't necessarily agree withthat either.
(30:07):
I think that as a child grows,you can have them learn all
sorts of different skills right.
So there's nothing wrong withsay you have your child do
athletics right.
Just because you're having yourchild do athletics, it doesn't
mean like well, you're going togrow up and you're going to be a
big athlete.
No, you can have a child learndancing and acting.
You can have a child learncooking.
You diversify the things thatthey know, help them learn these
(30:31):
skills and maybe some of thatstuff blossoms into a career.
Instead of saying I want you todo this from the day that
you're born, so you're going togrow up and be this.
I don't think that's right andmaybe I misheard what you were
saying, but I thought that'swhat you were saying.
Speaker 1 (30:43):
I think y'all are thinking.
Well, it's a parent trying tocontrol the life of the child.
Yeah that's not's not.
That's not the parent'sbusiness.
Speaker 4 (30:53):
Where does it stop to the point where parents aren't
even involved?
What?
What is stopping it fromgetting to the point where
companies, governments, peoplewith ulterior motives can just
do this on their own?
Speaker 1 (31:11):
so you're saying a world where the decisions even
beyond the parents, thegovernment could be creating.
I imagine this could happen,like super soldiers.
Speaker 3 (31:22):
Yes, captain America.
Speaker 1 (31:24):
We're going to get him Justin's excited for Captain
America, where it's like nowit's not just parents, it's
companies, government.
Yeah, you can start a concern.
Speaker 4 (31:32):
Yeah, the government could just go into a sperm donor
place and then they could takeit to eggs and people aren't
even involved.
All the embryos and storage,it's just all science and
there's no human anatomyactually being involved in
childbirth.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
I think ultimately, y'all crush this from a
spiritual perspective.
It's what y'all said we want toplay God and we want to be God.
We want to build utopia.
We want to build humanity inour image.
We want to all the things thatwere God's responsibilities we
want to take upon ourselves, andwe've used science and
(32:14):
technology and gene editing andorchid genetic testing as our
way of playing God, and thatnever ends well.
Speaker 2 (32:23):
I also just wanted to ask.
I know you watched the video,but y'all remember why the woman
who started it started it?
Speaker 1 (32:31):
That is a phenomenal point.
Can you share?
Speaker 2 (32:33):
Yes, so the woman started it because her mom has a
phenomenal point can you share?
Yes, so the woman started itbecause her mom has a
degenerative eye condition andthat somehow inspired her to
start this company where you canpick and choose to not have
things like that.
So people are firing back ather and being like, well, if
they didn't have your mom, youwouldn't be here.
Speaker 1 (32:54):
Yes, because you would have seen an embryo like
your mother's with a potentialeye problem and you would have
discarded it.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
Yeah, sorry, I just thought about that.
Speaker 1 (33:04):
I forgot that that was a good point.
Speaker 2 (33:05):
Absolutely insane.
Speaker 3 (33:07):
Have you also thought about the fact that these
people who go through thesestruggles are oftentimes that
the people who make greatadvancements in helping people
with those same?
Speaker 1 (33:17):
Yes.
Speaker 3 (33:18):
God may have you in place to struggle with this, so
maybe that you can study, make ahuge medical breakthrough and
help solve these issues withouthaving to do things like IVF.
Speaker 1 (33:29):
The mother that Chloe's talking about, who had
the daughter who went on tofound Orchid.
You're exactly right that maybeher struggles with her vision
helped her to raise such anincredibly intelligent daughter
who, unfortunately, createdOrchid, but such an intelligent
daughter partly based off of herstruggle.
(33:51):
So you're right, you remove thestruggle, like y'all are saying
, and part of the beautifulgrowth of humanity also
disappears.
Speaker 2 (33:58):
So good, good points and something else dumb that
that girl said was likesomething along the lines of
like sex is for fun and babiesare for orchid, Like something
like that.
Speaker 1 (34:09):
Yes, she did say something like that, yeah.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
It's just so messed up 1984.
, 1984, george Orwell what abook.
Speaker 1 (34:18):
Yeah, great thoughts y'all.
Anything else y'all want totalk about?
Or do you think we these topics?
You could look into everyscenario and talk about for
hours.
So we just generally do bigtopic, big picture type things
with it.
But anything else y'all want tomention or you think we covered
broadly?
Speaker 2 (34:36):
the bases.
I have a question maybe for thegroup.
One of the comments I saw inthe video was like saying how
you're supposed to make babiesis going to be called old
fashioned in a few years, doy'all think?
Speaker 1 (34:49):
True.
Speaker 2 (34:50):
True.
Speaker 1 (34:51):
Yeah, think true, true, yeah, um, we're going to
get to the point where we havethe technology.
Speaker 3 (34:58):
in my opinion, from start to finish, as in from
conception until birth, it canbe done outside the womb
something I would like to sayfor maybe anyone listening who
maybe has some of thesestruggles that they're trying to
hand pick out with the iv IVFand what was gene editing was
the other one.
If you struggle with a physicaldisability, mental disability,
(35:24):
anything that you struggle with,know, at the end of the day,
you're loved by us in this room,of course, but also you're
loved by us in this room, ofcourse, but also you're loved by
god, and god has a purpose withyou, no matter how hard it is
yeah, well said justin goingback to chloe's question, what
(35:46):
she brought up, if making humanswith sex is considered old
fashioned, it's just the furtherunraveling of our society.
Speaker 4 (35:56):
And sex as it goes, because, like she said, like the
lady from work it said, sex isfor fun.
And so, if sex is for fun, whydoes it?
Why does marriage matter?
Why does relationships withanother person matter?
It's just, it's just sex.
There's no, there's no point.
And it's just I mean, we'vealready seen it over the past
(36:18):
century that the downhill spiralwe've gone, but it's just a
much deeper blow into sex andhuman relationship.
Speaker 2 (36:29):
Yeah, I think it's just society getting further and
further away from God's willand God's plan for the world.
Speaker 1 (36:36):
And that's where, regardless of our thoughts on
their theology, I think that isa strong area of the Catholic
Church the natural family andtheir views of procreation, and
so I think they do a good jobthere, where sometimes us
Protestants, we can be all overthe map when it comes to this
stuff.
So it's good for us to talkabout and I'd be open to knowing
(36:59):
your thoughts as a listener Ifyou have any pushback which this
topic can get hot and heated.
People disagree on differentaspects of it and, again, we do
want to be mindful of all thebabies being born in the church
through IVF.
We do need to keep that in mindhow to stand for truth, but
(37:20):
also to be gracious as well,because a lot of couples they
suffer through infertility.
It is a very real thing, so weneed to be gracious too as we
talk about all this.
If you have any pushback orfeedback, let us know.
We're on social media and wehave our website,
dangerousfaithnet.
You can go check that out.
You can send an email throughthat, but anyways, let us know
(37:43):
your thoughts.
I'm open to pushback, all right, y'all.
Anything else before we headoff?
Praise God, praise God.
I think that is a great endingY'all take care, praise God,
(38:18):
praise God.
I think that is a great ending.
Y'all take care.
Speaker 4 (38:23):
We typically have several episodes a month and
we'll keep doing that Until nexttime.
We'll talk with you later.
Thank you, the whole topic justfills me with dread.
Speaker 2 (38:48):
Fills me with anger.
Speaker 4 (38:49):
I mean, like I said, if you look at a future where
everybody's just built for aspecific purpose, built with a
specific ulterior motive in mind, you're going to look at the
people around you and you'regoing to be like Spencer is just
terrifying.
Speaker 2 (39:05):
Well, no, I guess this is exactly true.
I was going to say I wouldn'thave a job if this thing became
real.
Speaker 3 (39:10):
Wow, chloe, wow Chloe , that's not true.
Speaker 2 (39:14):
No, it's not, because injuries and Injuries and
surgeries and age.
Speaker 3 (39:17):
I know Now they make them bones so strong, then they
can break All right, so thatwill be our no osteoporosis, our
Chloe ethical stance.
You don't want everybody, oh,you got that on video Because we
need PT.
Speaker 4 (39:27):
White Did you.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!