by ThomasCovenant 6 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Hi
Are JW's allowed to try this to aid in getting pregnant? Not sure if it applies to the recent Canada sextuplets.
Forgive my ignorance but doesn't the husband have to masturbate to produce the sperm which is a no-no in JW land?
I know a 'sister' who is over the moon that her daughter (non JW) has finally conceived after trying for over 10 years. The daughter said to me how does her mother think the husband got the sperm.
Thanks
Thomas Covenant
w1984
8/15p.26 Insight on the NewsSurrogate
MothersA case of human artificial insemination was recorded as long ago as 1799. But in recent years this has come to be more widely practiced. According to TheNewYorkTimes, a woman who is artificially inseminated and bears a child for another woman, as a substitute for her, is called a surrogate mother. The infertile wife and her husband agree to this arrangement, and when the surrogate mother gives birth the baby is adopted by the couple. The sperm in this case could be from the husband of the couple or from another donor.
Although such an arrangement may be approved by many in the world, the Christian rightfully asks whether it is in harmony with God’s laws. The Bible, at Leviticus 18:20, is clear on this point when it says: "You must not give your emission as semen to the wife of your associate to become unclean by it." Artificial insemination of a woman by a donor other than her legal husband, makes her guilty of adultery, a sin against God. (Deuteronomy 5:18) The sperm donor and the surrogate woman have not been yoked together by God in matrimony.—Matthew 19:4-6
fokyc
You know what sad is that if a pioneer sister passes up the chance to get married, and then at 34 decides to have kids. since she is not married, she cannot get sperm doners either. It is considered fornication.
Artificial insemination by the husband is only bad by 2 reasons: semen collected by masturbation..... and usually the mother is impregnated by more than one fertilized egg (in the process there are quite a few more that are also fertilized in a pitri dish, and not used)
I know of a JW in Aust that was d/f for being AI'd. However, she was single, so possibly that had something to do with the punishment. Also it was 15 years ago. WTS rules change, slowly following mainstream behaviour, so it is quite likely that the rules on this will change over time.
To my knowledge they view that as "fornication" ...
well perhaps if there was a sperm bank with donors from GB that would be different then lol
Artificial insemination is not the same as in vitro fertilization (IVF).
Artificial insemination involves introducing donor semen (from the spouse or another male) into the woman's body.
IVF involves extracting eggs, and adding sperm to fertilize them outside the mother's body - the so-called test-tube baby. This is generally the method of choice for infertile couples. It can be accomplished using sperm from the husband and eggs from the wife, and/or donor sperm and eggs.
The last directive that I am aware of from the WTS is in the March 1993 WT on the topic of surrogate motherhood. They take the position that the woman's body belongs to her husband (or possible future husband) and if her body is impregnated by someone other than her husband, it is considered to be an act of fornication or adultery.
That was actually one of the articles that got me thinking about how stupid the WTS rules are. It occurred to me that Jesus never would have been born if Jehovah didn't use Mary's body (which technically "belonged" to Joseph by way of betrothal) - did that make Jehovah an adulterer? It's quite funny the reaction of JWs - when I brought up the contradiction, all of them claimed that Jehovah didn't have to follow his own rules and could basically do whatever he wanted.
As far as the process involving masturbation to procure a "donation", the issue was not addressed in the article, however the WTS has had a don't-ask-don't-tell policy for what goes on between married couples for quite some time. It's plausible that a couple could claim that ejaculation was the result of intimacy / foreplay between them, rather than masturbation.
I think this is the article "Scully" was referring to. So credit goes to her! Awake-1993-March-8-pp.26-27 http://m1.freeshare.us/view/?129fs2793052.jpg http://m1.freeshare.us/view/?129fs2793412.jpg Nevada-
