It is quite possible that U.S. Sen. Katie Britt, in a sincere effort to support the American family, has inadvertently become one of the leading advocates for abortion in the country. How? Because there seems to be no one more responsible for promoting in vitro fertilization (IVF) than Britt.
Is IVF abortion? Numerous moral and theological issues with IVF should concern anyone who takes seriously the Bible’s teachings on sex and marriage – such as the commodification of human life, the buying and selling of children and wombs, and the separation of baby making from its proper context in the marital act. For now, however, I want to focus on one concern in particular: the human cost.
It is a fact that most embryos created through IVF will never develop into born children. A 2024 study published in the “World Journal of Biology Pharmacy and Health Sciences” concluded that “if life is legally determined to begin at conception,” as it should be, IVF is “a leading cause of death in the US.” Even using the most conservative estimates, three to five embryos die for every child born, with the worst-case scenario reporting 10 deaths for every live birth.
Setting aside the very real pain of infertility, no outcome – no matter how good – justifies the loss of three, five, or 10 innocent human lives. Supporting IVF is akin to choosing to pull the lever in a trolley problem that kills 10 instead of one. The key difference? In the IVF scenario, you are the one who tied all 11 people to the tracks and started the train. No IVF? Then no train, no tracks, and no abortion.
Britt has passionately defended IVF because all children are precious, and she is right. However, resorting to evil to achieve good is never justified (Romans 3:8). A child conceived through assault is still made in the image and likeness of God, but the assault remains offensive to Him. There are many ways children can come into existence that are sinful and should be discouraged, yet this does not negate the truth that children are inherently good, nor does it mean Americans should have fewer kids. But we need to promote only family policies that respect human dignity.
For those with loved ones conceived through IVF, admitting the practice is immoral can be difficult. However, Christians should do so confidently. Our sins are many; God's mercy is more. Importantly, it is because Britt is right – ALL children are precious, even those conceived in a lab – pro-life advocates must strongly oppose IVF.
Many conservative Christians are starting to do just that. In June 2024, the Southern Baptist Convention passed a resolution stating:
The In Vitro Fertilization process routinely generates more embryos than can be safely implanted, thus resulting in the continued freezing, stockpiling, and ultimate destruction of human embryos, some of whom may also be subjected to medical experimentation; and
… In Vitro Fertilization most often participates in the destruction of embryonic human life and increasingly engages in dehumanizing methods for determining suitability for life and genetic sorting, based on notions of genetic fitness and parental preferences …
Estimates suggest that between 1 million and 1.5 million human beings are currently stored in cryogenic freezers in an embryonic state throughout the United States, with most unquestionably destined for eventual destruction….
Unfortunately, Britt continues to champion IVF, repeatedly stating that she wants to “protect both life and IVF.” From her interviews, “protecting life” seems to mean opposing Democrats’ efforts to insert other pro-abortion policies into IVF legislation. It is unclear whether she is even aware of the issues with IVF itself and the moral concerns highlighted by the Southern Baptist Convention or the Roman Catholic Church, the two largest Christian denominations in the country.
Last week, during a press conference announcing a public–private partnership between the Trump administration and companies covering IVF through insurance, a reporter asked President Trump about pro-life Christians who strongly oppose these policies. He replied that he hadn’t heard of them and that “you couldn’t get more pro-life” than IVF. This profound misunderstanding may stem from Britt, as Trump credits her with introducing him to the issue.
One must wonder how such an oversight occurred. The Alabama Supreme Court, after all, has recognized the personhood of embryos. As Chief Justice Tom Parker stated in his concurring opinion, "Human life cannot be wrongfully destroyed without incurring the wrath of a holy God … even before birth, all human beings bear the image of God, and their lives cannot be destroyed without effacing His glory."
It was this landmark ruling in Britt’s home state that first propelled this issue into the national spotlight, as it would’ve likely put an end to IVF in Alabama. Britt quickly stepped in to make sure that didn’t happen.
Those who openly support abortion have no hesitation in ending innocent lives to achieve their goals, whether winning Golden Globes or getting promoted at work. Tragically, Britt appears to be doing something similar, albeit unintentionally, by promoting abortion to associate herself with “pro-family” policies. This is deeply Orwellian.
We must pray and advocate that well-meaning politicians like Trump and Britt reconsider the expansion of IVF, promoting instead ways to help Americans start families that respect the dignity of all human beings, regardless of where and how they came into existence.
