


Will IVF really be the next frontier in America’s culture wars?
Banning it would be political suicide. But it could get harder to find in conservative states
Moral inconsistency is a pretty normal part of the human condition. Attitudes to in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) are a case in point. While the vast majority of Americans support access to the technology, which now accounts for over 90,000 births per year, many struggle with a key component of it: the destruction of embryos in the process. Indeed, whereas 82% of Americans believe IVF is morally acceptable, only 49% say the same about destroying excess embryos, according to recent polling by Gallup. This presents moral purists with a conundrum.
So far, Americans have mostly been able to hold such competing views. Even among those who believe that an embryo is a person with rights, only about one in ten say access to IVF is a “bad thing”, according to Pew Research Centre. Yet state courts, state legislatures and pressure from the Christian right are making the contradiction harder to sustain. In February Alabama’s Supreme Court ruled that embryos created through IVF counted as children under state law, causing the temporary closure of fertility clinics. In June the Southern Baptist Convention, which represents 13m Christian evangelicals, overwhelmingly voted to oppose IVF as currently practised, calling it “dehumanising”, and calling on the government to curtail it.
Explore more
This article appeared in the United States section of the print edition under the headline “Fertile ground”

What the Chevron ruling means for the next US president
The Supreme Court weakened regulators and created uncertainty, inviting a “tsunami of lawsuits”

The unsteady comeback of the California condor
The bird’s plight is a study in unintended consequences

The Supreme Court’s term ends with rash of divisive rulings
Big decisions arrived on guns, abortion, homelessness, presidential power—and more

What the Chevron ruling means for the next US president
The Supreme Court weakened regulators and created uncertainty, inviting a “tsunami of lawsuits”

The unsteady comeback of the California condor
The bird’s plight is a study in unintended consequences

The Supreme Court’s term ends with rash of divisive rulings
Big decisions arrived on guns, abortion, homelessness, presidential power—and more
Joe Biden is fooling only himself
A president who prides himself on the common touch is insulting everyone’s common sense
The meaning of Donald Trump’s Supreme Court victory
His lawyers’ attempt to delay the election-subversion case worked
Why Joe Biden won’t go
There is something Trumpian about the Democratic Party’s denial of reality