Does Modern Society Unfairly Portray the 1950s?

[PetraG]

And giving them grounds for the later declaration of nullity.

That’s another way of saying it robs them of the opportunity to give valid consent.
Pressuring a couple to marry is not the way to get to a valid and fruitful marriage. There is no way that the desire to keep up the appearance of propriety should excuse undue pressure where free consent is a right and a necessity.

 

[JimG]

That’s true, although I’ve known several couples who married when a pregnancy occurred. It doen’t mean that a valid consent is impossible. And the ones I knew stayed married. Apparently they meant their vows. Couples in arranged marriages could also exchange valid consent. In fact, the consent exchanged in these cases may be even more firm than in some marriages seemingly freely entered into but without giving much thought to the vows.

 

[edwest211]

As this thread comes to a close, a bit of checkable history.

1960 The FDA approves The Pill. It is available by prescription only.

1967 Pope Paul VI has to deal with those in the Church who question priestly celibacy. He issues: SACERDOTALIS CAELIBATUS

ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PAUL VI
ON THE CELIBACY OF THE PRIEST

JUNE 24, 1967

In 1968, to remind Catholics and all men of good will about artificial contraception, he issues Humanae Vitae. Within 24 hours, in an event unprecedented in the history of the Church, some Catholic theologians take out a full page ad in the New York Times correcting the Pope. They claim artificial contraception is OK in some cases. This in the midst of the so-called Sexual Revolution.

 

[edwest211]

Oh please. The guy gets the girl pregnant and marries her. At the time, the idea of a one night stand was the furthest thing from most people’s minds (yes, it did happen). If they agree to have sex then for the sake of the child, they should get married. Put more crudely, if the girl allowed the guy to have sex with her then becoming pregnant is the normal result even if condoms were used.

 

[edwest211]

THAT IS MY ENTIRE POINT. Freedom means I get to do anything. I don’t have to think about consequences much. And I get to do all kinds of stupid things. Responsibility only applies at work because I have to follow the rules so I can get paid. And marriage? Why bother. Lots of sex. Lots of drugs. Throw in some booze…

Self-discipline, responsible behavior and a strong work ethic that goes beyond the bare minimum. I have personal experience with the current generation that shows every sign of being the exact opposite. That’s modern? I can’t do anything with such people.

 

[PetraG]

Oh please. The guy gets the girl pregnant and marries her. At the time, the idea of a one night stand was the furthest thing from most people’s minds (yes, it did happen). If they agree to have sex then for the sake of the child, they should get married. Put more crudely, if the girl allowed the guy to have sex with her then becoming pregnant is the normal result even if condoms were used.

Yes, people fully intending to marry got pregnant before they did in fact get married.

Others, however, fell in with their passions with a very bad match whom they happened to like a lot or just were very attracted to at the time. No, it is not “for the sake of the child” to let yourself be forced to agree to a ill-advised marriage. The ill-advised sex was bad enough.

If she allowed it? Let’s give the women credit for some agency, too. Yes, sometimes women are pressured into sex. I’m not of the opinion that the girls never put their own shovelsful of coals on these fires, though. Both sexes are fully capable of seducing members of the other; that is not a gender-specific thing. No, figuring out how to seduce a fellow or a girl into sex and then getting pregnant should not automatically be taken as the equivalent of elicting real sacramental marital consent. You don’t get that by accident or by giving into your passions or by social pressure. This is why priests do not want couples rushing into a marriage they weren’t even contemplating prior to pregnancy. It is a recipe for disaster.

There once was more pressure in that way than the Church approves of, just as there is now permissiveness and even social pressure to separate sex and parenthood entirely (which yes, is even worse).

 

[SadPotato]

If they agree to have sex then for the sake of the child, they should get married.

Not necessarily. What if they’re incompatible in other regards? What if there are issues that weren’t divulged prior to the sex-having? There are too many what-ifs to sort through to make blanket statements about what people in this situation should do.

 

[Zach]

Back to the thread title: Does Modern Society Unfairly portray the 1950s?

Yes it does and yes the majority of people posting here have been inculcated with the unfair portrayal.

 

[PetraG]

THAT IS MY ENTIRE POINT. Freedom means I get to do anything. I don’t have to think about consequences much. And I get to do all kinds of stupid things. Responsibility only applies at work because I have to follow the rules so I can get paid. And marriage? Why bother. Lots of sex. Lots of drugs. Throw in some booze…

Self-discipline, responsible behavior and a strong work ethic that goes beyond the bare minimum. I have personal experience with the current generation that shows every sign of being the exact opposite. That’s modern? I can’t do anything with such people.

But you and I know that freedom is and always has been the faculty to do good, to become the image of God we were created to be. Yes, I think that was at least the intention at that time, even if there were some unfortunate cover-ups when that wasn’t the reality. Yes, now I would agree that coverups are more likely to be an attempt to conceal the real consequences of that false freedom that is sold with a glamour straight from the Father of Lies.

You’d be happy to know that high school students seem as if they are actually less likely to believe these lies. The rate of sex outside of marriage, the use of alcohol, and so on are actually going down. Maybe we have another “greatest generation” coming, who knows. Just being one doesn’t guarantee you’ll raise one, though. I think the tree already had its disease in the 1950s, though.