CD25, 5DPO musings: would you choose IVF if it were cheap?

Something that's bubbling around in my head, and about which I'd welcome discussion: would you choose IVF if money weren't a factor? I've been idly toying with the idea ever since I got the letter from my insurance company that said that they'd pay for up to 3 cycles of IVF per live birth, with a $100K lifetime max.

For:
- At my age, a good bet. Success percentages probably range in the 40s. Our current method, IVI (intravaginal insemination), is probably only around 10-15%. Washing the sperm and having it put directly into the uterus (IUI) boosts it somewhat, but probably only by about 5%.
- Likely the shortest route to having a baby, short of a fast-track Ethiopian adoption. This is important because if we want more than one, the age at which I try to have the next one will be a factor.
- As long as I keep this job, it's covered. That blows my mind, and will likely not be true in my next employment situation. Even the 20% copay we'd be liable for could be paid for out of flexible spending. When else might I have the chance?

Against:
- Overkill. I've had exactly one monitored cycle. I'd feel sheepish telling people.
- FOMG they stick a NEEDLE through the WALL of your VAGINA ow ow ow owwwwww.
- Medicalization blah blah wimmin-power blah blah collaborating with the patriarchy. I think I can handle this one. I'm the first to admit that it's pretty damned unnatural, two women making a baby, so no surprise that we might need a sh*tload of technology to do it. I've never seen the connection between "unnatural" and "bad". Antibiotics, dentistry, I love our artificial world.
- Lacks the smug satisfaction of knowing that we made the baby at home on our bed with a (figurative) turkey baster.

So, anyone, thoughts? Is it crazy to even contemplate IVF as anything but the last best hope for mankind peace a baby?