Wednesday Open Thread: "Unwanted" Pregnancies
Posted by Roger on Wednesday, April 16th, 2008
If you've been reading this blog (or other pro-life/pro-choice blogs for that matter) , you may be under the impression that there is little "common ground" between "pro-life" people and "pro-choice" people. However, this is not true.
One thing that both sides can agree on (I believe) is that we both want to reduce "unwanted" pregnancies.
That leads to the question . . .
What makes a pregnancy "unwanted"?
Assuming we want to reduce the number of abortions (which both sides can also agree upon for the most part), if and when a woman becomes pregnant with an "unwanted" pregnancy, what can be done to help her no longer look upon her pregnancy as an "unwanted" pregnancy, but a "wanted" pregnancy?
Thanks and God Bless,
Roger
The term doesn't necessarily imply that the woman does not want her child in the world, but perhaps that she does not believe society can take her child in the world and that she cannot raise her child herself.
Instead of calling it an "unwanted" pregnancy, we could call it "unexpected."
Also, both pro-lifers and pro-choicers would agree and be satisfied when a woman willfully and freely chooses to put her unborn child up for adoption. Isn't this common ground?
April 16th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
StudentFL,
I believe your are 100% correct. Part of the problem in communication occurs when a PL automatically assumes that a PC person is a "pro-abort" when, in fact, they are proCHOICE. This creates hostility on both sides and the problem remains unsolved.
April 16th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Student,
Assumptions abound on both sides. Some PC people feel automatically judged by PL people just because they pray and offer help outside abortion clinics.
Less assumptions and judging all around would be highly beneficial.
God Bless,
Roger
April 16th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
The love I feel on this post brings a smile to my face
April 16th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
I asked this question of a Church group that recently met on this subject. There may be a grey area when it comes to emancipated individuals and abortion, can we agree that parental consent is something we agree on?
The moderator quickly told me I was getting ahead of the group and changed the subject.
So I will ask you the same question.
Also, don't you think if a Church like the Methodists holds the unborn life as sacred, that they would do more to mold responsibility in their congregations when it comes to "Free Love." JUST AN OPINION!!
April 17th, 2008 at 5:56 am
Amen, brother!
April 17th, 2008 at 7:28 am
A pregnancy is 'unwanted' when the woman carrying it does not want to be pregnant (simple enough). This may happen for a variety of reasons: not wanting children at all, not wanting children right now, not being in a situation where she feels comfortable having a child (abusive home, lack of money, other responsibilities,etc).
To change an 'unwanted pregnancy' to a 'wanted pregnancy' will depend on the specific situation. If someone never wants to have children and doesn't want to go through he stresses of pregnancy, there will be little way of convincing her otherwise. If someone doesn't want a child 'right now', changing her mind will depend on why: if she wants to get an education and start a career, a child can put a huge burden on her plans. It can make perfect sense to not want the burden of a pregnancy and a child (yes, a burden) in such situations.
Clearly, if she is in an abusive situation, the first goal is to remove her from that situation. But, it is common for the abuser to be the genetic father. In this case, she and the abuser will be tied together for life if she goes through with the pregnancy and keeps it. But even going through it can lead to more abuse from the abuser. Law enforcement has shown itself incapable of providing protection in thee situations. Terminating the pregnancy can be a way out of a very bad situation.
Financial and family responsibilities can be lessened by helpful outsiders, although one thread in our country is that we each should 'do it alone'. All to often, the PLers are concerned about the pregnancy but not the resulting child and family after delivery. Women in these situations are the most likely to change their mind if given proper resources.
April 17th, 2008 at 7:43 am
"..what can be done to help her no longer look upon her pregnancy as an "unwanted" pregnancy, but a "wanted" pregnancy? "
—————————————–
Lots of prayers and a change of heart…
April 17th, 2008 at 8:30 am
I think one thing we can work on is helping to change the perception of a child as "burden" into one of "gift". I don't know how we go about changing this perspective, but I think this change can be helpful.
Perhaps it is in seeing adoption as a good and wonderful thing to do. I know of too many couples who have gone overseas to adopt a child because it is more difficult in the US.
God Bless,
Roger
April 17th, 2008 at 8:43 am
Professor,
First off, I'm not talking about "abusive" situations. There will always be some of these situations, but they are not in the majority. I'm asking these questions in regard to the norm.
How does terminating the pregnancy become a "way out"? I would think it would all too often enable the situation to continue.
God Bless,
Roger
April 17th, 2008 at 8:46 am
It's unfortunate that there appears to be so little common ground between the PL and PC communities here in Illinois. It's too bad we don't have a Common Ground Network type organization locally. I think participation would be a good thing for everyone.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:47 am
Roger,
Having a child with an abuser keeps a woman tied to him for about 18 years. The family courts typically allow contact between the abuser and the children (assuming there is no history of abuse of the children). In many cases this has resulted in the death of the children when the abuser attempts to get back at a spouse/partner through the children. That said, I don't think an abortion in and of itself will solve the problem of a woman who is unwilling to get out of an abusive situation.
On another point, I agree with you that adoption is a good thing. However, the argument that people have to go overseas to adopt is only true because they want healthy infants. There are hundreds of thousands of children in this country available for adoption, but many are older and/or have physical/psychological problems. We pay far too little attention to those children. They seem to have value prior to birth, but afterward they don't seem to matter much.
April 17th, 2008 at 9:01 am
It seems to me that focusing on changing an unwanted pregnancy to a wanted pregnancy is putting the cart before the horse. I think the first step is to prevent unwanted pregnancies, and I think the best way to do that is education, education, education.
And before anyone jumps all over me, I'm in favor of comprehensive sex education, which, to me, includes discussion of abstinence and strategies for both boys and girls to employ to say no if they are not ready for sex. My "ideal" comprehensive sex education would also include discussion and analysis of the pressures that our culture puts on boys to be "studly" and for girls to be "sexy" and how it's important for both sexes to understand that those messages present a false picture of what men and women are supposed to be like, and how to resist those messages, which I think come mainly from corporate marketing schemes.
And of course, because some kids will decide that they are, in fact, ready for sex, comprehensive sex education should include frank discussion of birth control and disease prevention.
April 17th, 2008 at 9:10 am
Speaking as someone who does not want any more children, I and my partner would *certainly* see a pregnancy and child as a burden. As a gift, they are somewhat of a white elephant aren't they? Here, have a 'gift' that will take up all your free time, ruin your plans for the future, make it so you can't sleep, have no quiet time, no time to read, etc, etc, etc. Well, that's why I had a vasectomy…so I wouldn't get one of these 'gifts'.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Professor says:
Speaking as someone who does not want any more children, I and my partner would *certainly* see a pregnancy and child as a burden. As a gift, they are somewhat of a white elephant aren't they? Here, have a 'gift' that will take up all your free time, ruin your plans for the future, make it so you can't sleep, have no quiet time, no time to read, etc, etc, etc. Well, that's why I had a vasectomy…so I wouldn't get one of these 'gifts'
Sounds typical of the world today, "It's all about me, me me, me." "Me, myself and I." No wonder more than 1/2 of marriages end in divorce!! How very sad. Where are all the wonderful devoted, loving to the death, honorable men? Thank God their are still some but the lies that are poisening our culture are making them and woman a rare breed.The future of this country, and the world for that matter is looking pretty sad. Very Sad.
But there is hope.
April 17th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
I would like to reiterate Roger's point that adopting a child in this country is cheap and easy. Adopting a Caucasian infant is not. As the adoptive mother of an older child, I would invite anyone contemplating adoption to visit http://www.adoptuskids.org/ - one of many sites which lists some of the older children and sibling groups awaiting permanent families - and consider opening their heart to one (or more!) of these children.
The idea that there is a 'forever family' for the 1.2 million pregnancies which are terminated via elective abortion is absurd.
April 17th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Interesting that you see not wanting a kid as being 'all about me' when I see *wanting* to have a kid as being like that. Way, way too many people only have children for their own ego enhancement or to satisfy some desire of a parent to be a grandparent. THAT is sad. I'd much rather people enter into parenting knowing the full strength of the responsibility it entails. Knowing that *they* are the ones ultimately responsible for making sure that child grows into a responsible, thinking, caring adult: not the schools, not the government, THEM.
Like I said, my partner would not be happy if there was a 'gift' of a child either. So, in our loving, happy, devoted relationship, we, as loving, thinking, happy individuals decided that we don't want children. How is that any different than deciding we want to own a house or that we don't want to live in Alaska? How is that 'being all about me' if we also take care of parents, previous children, friends, etc?
April 17th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
Way, way too many people only have children for their own ego enhancement or to satisfy some desire of a parent to be a grandparent.
Posted by Professor April 17th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
How many is too many? I don't know any. How many do you know personally who did that Professor?
April 17th, 2008 at 10:54 pm
Way, way too many people only have children for their own ego enhancement or to satisfy some desire of a parent to be a grandparent.
Posted by Professor April 17th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
That desire is not bad. It is good to desire to love and be loved. You should want to be proud of your children. What parent has a child and says, "boy I hope this kid shames our family, and makes me look like a looser."
April 17th, 2008 at 11:56 pm
If my wife gets pregnant we consider the new life inside her to be a gift from God and we are very proud of them. Are there any pro-choice people who they would personally choose abortion?
Professor, anybody who would have a kid just to stroke their own ego is probably the same type of person who would be o.k. with aborting the baby cause he/she would cramp their style. Very anti-Christian. That is why I can't understand how Obama gets away with presenting himself to people as a Christian. He really has cast a spell on these people. There is NO such thing as a Christian who would commit abortion. What could a pregnant woman possibly say to Jesus to get His blessing on her killing her baby? I would love to hear it if any Christians out there who would like to give it a try? That is why there is no such thing as an unwanted baby in a Christian home.
April 18th, 2008 at 2:23 am
I don't consider my daughter's accomplishments to be my accomplishments. Yes, I'm proud of her: she's a smart, caring person who knows how to think for herself.
April 18th, 2008 at 6:30 am
One would be too many, but I know many people who had kids 'because that's what was done' and now regret it. I know many women who have lied about being on birth control *to their husbands* just to get pregnant. I know many situations where couples feel 'pressured' by family to have children they don't want. This non-thinking attitude to having children sickens me.
April 18th, 2008 at 6:35 am
Oh please, not the 'not a TRUE Christian' argument again. Your holy book can be interpreted to excuse almost anything from slavery to subjugation of women to genocide. Learn some *real* morality rather than simply re-arranging your prejudices using the Bible as an excuse.
April 18th, 2008 at 6:38 am
truthseeker:
"anybody who would have a kid just to stroke their own ego is probably the same type of person who would be o.k. with aborting the baby cause he/she would cramp their style. Very anti-Christian."
***I'm a Christian, and I consider the equation of a three-month pregnancy to a "baby" to be anti-Christian, as well as forcing women to remain pregnant against their will. True Christianity lies in humanitarian values, not in simplistic and short-sighted approaches to moral dilemmas.
"That is why I can't understand how Obama gets away with presenting himself to people as a Christian. He really has cast a spell on these people. There is NO such thing as a Christian who would commit abortion."
***You should really research some statistics on the families who choose abortion…
"What could a pregnant woman possibly say to Jesus to get His blessing on her killing her baby?"
***I don't know what "baby" is involved in the situation, other than the one which won't be forced into the world unwanted and resented, often to live a life in poverty. I'd say, though, that Jesus has tremendous respect for human life, not the QUANTITY of it, but the QUALITY, and would never condone forced pregnancy.
"That is why there is no such thing as an unwanted baby in a Christian home."
…Really? It's sad that you feel the need to bring your political views into your faith, and imply that by not agreeing with them, I and the millions of other pro-choice Americans are somehow NOT Christians. This is not the attitude of fellowship we should attempt to foster as fellower believers in Christ and people who both (I presume) want to reduce the number of unplanned pregnancies in the first place.
http://www.rcrc.org/
April 18th, 2008 at 6:58 am
Oh, please! If I believed in a god, which I don't, s/he is by far the biggest abortionist around. How many women have miscarriages and don't even know they're pregnant. Oh gee, thanks again God. Look at your holy book. It is replete with god destroying women and children.
April 18th, 2008 at 7:30 am
Hi christian4reason! A few comments:
You said:
The Church quite clearly teaches that a human person is a human person from the moment of conception all the way till they die. That human person has unique DNA and will be like no other person who ever existed before or will ever exist again. They are a unique creation of almighty God.
I fail to see how the Church's stand that we may not destroy this irrepeatable creation that God loves with all His heart is a "simplistic and short-sighted" approach. In fact, I fail to see why it's a moral dilemma.
You said:
What the previous commenter meant was not that no people who attend Church have ever procured abortions, but rather that it is inconsistent with Christian belief to do so.
You said:
The Pope, in his address to the US Bishops said the following:
"Is it consistent to profess our beliefs in church on Sunday, and then during the week to promote business practices or medical procedures contrary to those beliefs? Is it consistent for practicing Catholics to ignore or exploit the poor and the marginalized, to promote sexual behavior contrary to Catholic moral teaching, or to adopt positions that contradict the right to life of every human being from conception to natural death? Any tendency to treat religion as a private matter must be resisted. Only when their faith permeates every aspect of their lives do Christians become truly open to the transforming power of the Gospel."
To that I would simply add that this admonition applies to politicians and voters as well. We must not (nay, we cannot) leave our religious assumptions at the door when we discuss or act in politics. To do so is to declare our religion meaningless with our actions.
If God is God, He's God of everything, politics and abortion included.
April 18th, 2008 at 9:25 am
Then he sure has a lot of explaining to do!
April 18th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
KarenK,
I think a man who is willing to have a vasectomy (if both he and his partner do not want children — as was stated in his post) is a wonderful, devoted, loving to the death honorable man! You're the same one who would be screaming that he wasn't living up to his responsibilities if he got someone pregnant and didn't want to have a child. In this case, he does the right thing and you're still disparaging.
April 18th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Matt Yonke,
What "Church?" I think you mean YOUR church. There are quite a few churches that do not share your views.
April 18th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Dear Christian4reason,
You say you are Christian, that is good, so you will appreciate the following:
God knows the preborn child. "You knit me in my mother’s womb . . . nor was my frame unknown to you when I was made in secret" (Psalm 139:13,15). God also helps and calls the preborn child. "You have been my guide since I was first formed . . . from my mother’s womb you are my God" (Psalm 22:11-12). "God… from my mother’s womb had set me apart and called me through his grace" (St. Paul to the Galatians 1:15).
The Bible teaches that children are a blessing.
God commanded our first parents to "Be fertile and multiply" (Genesis 1:28). Why? God Himself is fertile. Love always overflows into life. When the first mother brought forth the first child, she exclaimed, "I have brought forth a man with the help of the Lord" (Genesis 4:1). The help of the Lord is essential, for He has dominion over human life and is its origin. Parents cooperate with God in bringing forth life. Because this whole process is under God’s dominion, it is sinful to interrupt it. The prophet Amos condemns the Ammonites "because they ripped open expectant mothers in Gilead" (Amos 1:13).
Scripture repeatedly condemns the killing of the innocent.
This flows from everything that has been seen so far. God’s own finger writes in stone the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" (Exodus 20:13, Deuteronomy 5:17) and Christ reaffirms it (Matthew 19:18 - notice that He mentions this commandment first). The Book of Revelation affirms that (unrepentant) murderers cannot enter the kingdom of heaven (Revelation 22:15).
The killing of children is especially condemned by God through the prophets. In the land God gave his people to occupy, foreign nations had the custom of sacrificing some of their children in fire. God told His people that they were not to share in this sin. They did, however, as Psalm 106 relates: "They mingled with the nations and learned their works…They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to demons, and they shed innocent blood, the blood of their sons and their daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, desecrating the land with bloodshed" (Psalm 106:35, 37-38).
This sin of child-sacrifice, in fact, is mentioned as one of the major reasons that the Kingdom of Israel was destroyed by the Assyrians and the people taken into exile. "They mutilated their sons and daughters by fire…till the Lord, in his great anger against Israel, put them away out of his sight" (2 Kings 17:17-18).
Notice that this practice was a religious ritual. Not even for "religious freedom" can the killing of children be tolerated.
God says through Isaiah, "Trample my courts no more! Bring no more worthless offerings…Your festivals I detest…When you spread out your hands, I close my eyes to you; though you pray the more, I will not listen. Your hands are full of blood! Wash yourselves clean…learn to do good. Make justice your aim: redress the wronged, hear the orphan’s plea, defend the widow" (Isaiah 1:13-17).
Indeed, those who worship God but promote abortion are falling into the same contradiction as God’s people of old, and need to hear the same message.
To be continued…
April 18th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
…….The question in abortion is not only, "When does life begin?" but more deeply, "What does life mean?"
What are the implications of being human? Is human life disposable when it is unwanted, or inconvenient, or not recognized by a government? Is there anything about human existence that cries out for recognition and protection apart from what a particular society decides to bestow? What is the truth about humanity? What is the human person destined for? Are we made for the grave or for the skies?
Abortion not only takes a life; it makes a statement about life, and not only about the life it takes, but about the lives of all of us. Abortion says we are disposable. Abortion says our value is determined by others. Abortion says there is no intrinsic dignity in human life that requires its absolute protection, and no destiny that reaches beyond this world or even beyond this Supreme Court.
Christ Undoes Satan’s Works
There are many ways to express the purpose of Christ’s mission in the world. St. John in his first letter sums it up by saying, "The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil" (I John 3:8). What "works of the devil" does Christ destroy? Christ Himself tells us that the devil "was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in truth, because there is no truth in him. When he tells a lie, he speaks in character, because he is a liar and the father of lies" (John 8:44). In one and the same breath, Our Lord calls the devil a liar and a murderer. Lies and murder go together. The only way abortion can continue on such a horrible scale is for it to be covered in lies, sugarcoated with denials and distortions of truth. Christ has come to destroy the works of the devil. "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life" (John 14:6). He is the way to salvation precisely because He is the Truth, shattering the devil’s lies, and because He is the Life, undoing the devil’s work of death
A Liar and Murderer From the Beginning
We see the devil act in in character with lies and murder from the first pages of the Bible. Adam and Eve had been told they could eat of any tree in the garden except "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." "In the day that you eat of it," God warned them, "you shall die" (Gen 2:17). What is wrong with knowing good from evil? Aren’t we supposed to know the difference between good and evil? Isn’t that part of our religious and moral education? Don’t so many problems come about when people do not know good from evil? Why, then, is this the one tree of which our first parents were not to eat?
The answer lies in the fact that the "knowledge of good and evil" here does not simply mean "knowing." It means that Adam and Eve would think they could decide the difference between good and evil, that they would be the ones to determine what was right and wrong, that they would be the norm of morality. This is the original temptation. "What’s right and wrong for me is up to me… What’s right and wrong for you is up to you… Do not impose your morality on me. . . I will create my own values… I am accountable to nobody but myself." In other words, it’s all up to my own personal choice. The original sin is to put choice above goodness and truth, to abuse freedom by trying to create what is right rather than submit to it. In his encyclical Veritatis Splendor (The Splendor of Truth, August 6, 1993), Pope John Paul II comments on Genesis 2:16-17. "With this image, revelation teaches that the power to decide what is good and what is evil does not belong to man, but to God alone. The man is certainly free… But his freedom is not unlimited: It must halt before the ‘tree of the knowledge of good and evil,’ for it is called to accept the moral law given by God" (VS #35).
By rebelling against the truth of the moral law, we die. God had warned Adam and Eve they would die if they disobeyed. The devil had to lie to them to introduce death into the world. So the original liar approached the original woman and offered the original lie: "You certainly will not die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil" (Gen. 3:4-5). Eve bought the lie, as did Adam, and they committed the original sin. Death then entered the world, on the heels of a lie.
April 18th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Babel Revisited in 1992
This lie continues in our day and, in fact, has become the official policy of America, according to the Supreme Court. In this decision on abortion, in which the error of Roe v. Wade was upheld, the Court stated, "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life." (Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 1992, [505 U.S.833, 851]) This line is incredible! We cannot even decide the weather, and yet we are expected to define existence itself! We live in a universe we did not create, and yet we are declared to be the creators of that universe’s meaning! We did not call ourselves into life, yet we have the liberty to define the meaning of life! Not only is this absurd, but it is frightfully familiar: "You shall be like God, knowing good and evil." "Let us make a name for ourselves." "The gate of the gods." Perhaps the Court’s decision should be re-named "Eden and Babel Revisited."
Abortion Cloaked in Lies
The original lie leads to the ongoing slaughter of babies by abortion. The mother is told, "It’s your choice. It’s your freedom. It’s your body. Nobody can impose their morality on you." It is the lie that choice prevails over life itself.
Abortion continues thanks to many other lies as well. Women are lied to about the nature of the developing baby and about the effects of the abortion procedure. Carol Everett, herself a victim of abortion and once an abortion provider, wrote, "Like many others, I bought the big lie: 'It is only a glob of tissue not a baby.' I was a victim of all the other lies: Abortion is all right. After all, I do them all the time. It will be so simple. It’s only a glob of tissue. There’s really nothing to the procedure; it will only take a little while and then everything will be fine. You can have the abortion on Friday morning and be back to work on Monday." (The Scarlet Lady, p.101 ). The workers at the abortion center were trained to give as little information as possible, so that women would not know the truth.
The Elliot Institute in Springfield, Illinois, does research on the effects of abortion on women, and collects case studies in which women describe what led them to abortion and what consequences followed. Case after case shows how they were victimized by lies and half-truths. The efforts made to initiate wide-spread abortion in America were marked by lies, as Dr. Bernard Nathanson, former abortionist and co-founder of the National Abortion Rights Action League, readily admits. Now a strong advocate for the right to life, he writes, "How many deaths were we talking about when abortion was illegal?… It was always ‘5,000 to 10,000 a year.’ I confess that I knew the figures were totally false" (Aborting America, p.193). A growing number of former abortion providers in our country are coming forward to tell how they lied to women before abortions and covered up the tracks of botched abortions by falsifying medical records.
The lies continue and murder continues.
by:
Priests for Life
PO Box 141172
Staten Island, NY 10314
Tel. 888-PFL-3448, (718) 980-4400
Fax 718-980-6515
Email mail@priestsforlife.org
April 18th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
***I don't know what "baby" is involved in the situation, other than the one which won't be forced into the world unwanted and resented, often to live a life in poverty. I'd say, though, that Jesus has tremendous respect for human life, not the QUANTITY of it, but the QUALITY, and would never condone forced pregnancy.
posted by christian4reason April 18th, 2008 at 6:58 am
Jesus was ALL about giving of yourself for others. Jesus was all about Life
The words Jesus spoke were from his Father and they are eternal life.
If you are Christian4Real the day is coming when you will repent for the grief you caused to the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life.
April 18th, 2008 at 11:29 pm
If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple.
Luke 14-16
April 19th, 2008 at 9:29 am
LIFE ISSUES FORUM April 18, 2008
For Immediate Release
A Child’s Hope, A Parent’s Mission
By Theresa Notare
Eleven-year-old Andrew is an only child. He comes from a loving family and lives in a nice middle-class neighborhood. He goes to Catholic school, serves at Mass, plays baseball and videogames, and has neighborhood friends. What could be missing from this happy childhood? Andrew will tell you—a brother or sister!
Andrew has been hounding his parents lately for a sibling. He recently discussed his problems with me because I’m his aunt who happens to work for the Church. He explained that he needs a sibling not just to play with now, but to be with “when we’re old.” He reasoned: “What would my parents do if I become a priest and they don’t have any grandchildren? They need back-up!” I remarked that having children wasn’t only for the parents and kids–“it’s also for the world.” His eyes lit up as he exclaimed: “T, that’s right, that’s the circle of life! Don’t they know that?”
Andrew’s hopes for a sibling are worth reflecting on. They reveal what we all want in our families—to love and be loved—and also point to a central aspect of the mission of married couples—to have and care for children. Society places economic and psychological burdens on husbands and wives. So it is critical to remind married couples that their generosity to life is key to the future happiness of all.
The family is the best environment for nurturing children. It’s the building block of society, where children can learn how to love and give. And the family is the “little church”–the place where children learn about God and salvation. A healthy, holy family contributes to the well-being of its members and the nation.
Today many married couples are convinced they should limit the size of their families to one or two children at most. People who study population have begun to raise alarms about disastrous consequences from married couples choosing not to have any children. Humanity’s future is endangered when the numbers of retired elderly people greatly exceeds those in the work force.
The fortieth anniversary of Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae vitae (Of Human Life) will be celebrated on July 25, 2008. That encyclical addresses the Church’s teaching on married love and the gift of life, illuminating God’s plan for spouses, especially with regard to procreation.
Catholics, especially the engaged and married, should prayerfully reflect on Humanae vitae. This prophetic document beautifully and insightfully presents Christian teachings on married love and its unitive and procreative nature. It describes the “total vision” of men and women that is not man-made, but “Divinely designed.” “Children,” the encyclical states, “are the supreme gift of marriage and contribute very substantially to the welfare of their parents.” As my nephew Andrew says: “They provide back-up!”
In the fortieth-anniversary year of Humanae vitae, do yourself and your family a favor—read Humanae vitae and pray. Pray that the Holy Spirit helps you understand and embrace God’s design for life and love. Pray that more couples will realize that God is calling them to open their homes to another child. Children, after all, are our hope for the future!
April 19th, 2008 at 11:33 am
Thank you Karen K. I will read Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae vitae (Of Human Life. And I will keep Andrew in my thoughts and prayers while reading.
April 19th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple. Luke 14-16 (note this is actually 14:26
Student, that passage is actually Luke 14:26. Student, that was a beautiful post. In fact I can say unequivocably the best post you have put on this board yet. Keep the scripture quotations coming, they will not return to you empty handed. I know you were trying to twist the meaning though. For your benefit I will tell you that what Christ is saying here is that anyone following Him, making a commitment to the Christian way of life, must love Him more than family and friends, and even life itself.
April 19th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
When did the term "unwanted pregnancy" become a part of the vernacular? What does it mean? It is not a medical term, so what is it? The answer to these questions reveal a lot about the times we live in.
The meaning of "unwanted pregnancy" for one person is entirely different for another. There could be a thousand different scenarios. The point is that it is entirely subjective. It could be as simple as having a blue day.
Even though many pro-choicers would disagree that a woman should have an abortion for a flippant reason, nonetheless they will fight to the end to maintain the right of the woman to do so. Why is that?
It is because "choice" is the only thing that really matters. It trumps any and all moral precepts handed down through the generations. The "right" to do as they wish with "their own bodies" is the ultimate right. The moral guideposts of yesteryear are trash. That is why secularists, wiccans, and atheists dominate their ranks. They share a common bond of antipathy for the holy things of Christendom, the greatest of which is to love God above all things and then to love our neighbors as ourselves. To them this is folly. The overarching philosophy is that without chemical birth control and access to abortion, women are slaves, second class citizens at best. The ideal of living virtuous, chaste lives is seen by them as just more forms of subjection.
So these are the myths that dominate the pro-abortion sub-culture. These myths have consequences far beyond the act of one mother aborting one child, though terrible that is in itself. Taken together these acts have resulted in the violent destruction of nearly 50 million babies in the U.S. alone, and some say one billion world-wide. These babies, our sons and daughters who would bring richness and joy to a troubled world, are cast aside in the name of "choice." In the destruction of 50 million babies, our future is now more uncertain than it has ever been. Who will build our economy and keep us safe and build our schools and maintain our infrastructure? Who will sit at our sides when we are ill or are too old to fend for ourselves?
There are none more acquainted with the depth of these matters than the thousands of women who deeply regret their abortions. They were led by the promise of emancipation only to find the bitter slavery of a lifetime of regret. They would give anything to once again have that "unwanted pregnancy," although this time it would be cherished and nourished. Will the abortion sub-culture listen to them? Of course not. They are shunned and ignored among their pro-abort sisters because their testimony challenges the myth that abortion is the answer.
Matt, your post 26 is well said. There will always be churches that teach otherwise, but that does not matter. What does matter is the truth behind the teachings, for as we know there have always been and will always be false teachers until the end of the world. Our loving God has written into our hearts an innate ability to discern truth, but only if we open ourselves to His grace. Also, thanks to Karen K. for all the time and effort put into the last several posts.
April 19th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Jerry N. says:
Not so. Why is it that most everyone here seem to think that PCers want abortion on demand — all the time — for any reason. That's simply not the case at all.
Wrong again. There are many religious people who are PC.
So why is chemical birth control a problem? It seems that any form of birth control (other than NFP which my gynecologist says is hit or miss at best) is a no-no with most of you. Why should I live a "chaste" life if I'm in a committed relationship? Because I don't want children I should never have sex again? Get real.
Let's not start on myths unless you want yours looked at as well.
Having children to take care of you in your old age is a really poor reason to have them in the first place. I suggest long-term care insurance.
If thousands regret them that would leave millions that do not.
Is there just the tiniest of chances that you have been led by a false teacher (and/or false ideas)?
April 20th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
Student,
Thanks for your response. I stand by my comments in their entirety.
There is one important point with regards to your very last comment. We should choose our teachers carefully. If we open our hearts to the Holy Spirit in total sincerity and honesty, He will lead us to the truth.
April 22nd, 2008 at 9:44 am
JerryN,
On this we agree.
April 22nd, 2008 at 12:10 pm
regles officielles du poker…
Geben poker broker gioco d azzardo poker telecharger streap poker le jeu vidéo poker poker en virtuel…
July 15th, 2008 at 9:45 am