How can you go from
"Asking whether IVF is under threat is a silly question"
to
"Of course IVF is bad"
in the span of one comment?
You have some serious reading comprehension problems.
He asked if it was murder, not "if it was under legal threat". And I never said it was bad. It attempts to conceive children not kill children, that's why it's silly. Can you strawman any harder?
And yet fetuses created one way are entitled to protection and fetuses created the other way are not. Why do you feel this way?
Good. I think that laws that serve to protect defenseless children should be upheld. I do think that IVF should be reconsidered, but it appears that the intent of the law is to prevent children from dying, not to prevent couples who have trouble conceiving, from conceiving because of complications that may arise. I think those two are separate issues with different outcomes. I think a child that is failed to be conceived or dies during the process of being conceived is a fundamentally different issue to a procedure who's express and deliberate purpose is to end the life of the child.