Issues with Catholic teaching on procreation

  • Thread starter Thread starter PJH_74
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You’re not objectifying your wife. Wanting to have sex with your wife, who agrees to it, isn’t objectifying her. Objectifying someone is using them to make yourself feel good no matter what,
Sure it is. You are staying that you want to use her vagina, but you don’t want HER, only parts of her. And the parts that you don’t want, like her natural fertility, you are going to cover up or destroy.

That is objectification. It is wanting the parts, not the whole person, with all the person’s aspects.

If a man said to their spouse, I want to have sex with you, but I don’t like your face. If they only way he consented to have sex with her was if she covered her face, we would not call that a loving act. We would consider it to be objectification, and would consider the man to be a complete jerk, even if she consents. But that is no different that rejecting the woman’s natural fertility, asking her to cover it up.
 
Sure it is. You are staying that you want to use her vagina, but you don’t want HER, only parts of her. And the parts that you don’t want, like her natural fertility, you are going to cover up or destroy.

That is objectification. It is wanting the parts, not the whole person, with all the person’s aspects.

If a man said to their spouse, I want to have sex with you, but I don’t like your face. If they only way he consented to have sex with her was if she covered her face, we would not call that a loving act. We would consider it to be objectification, and would consider the man to be a complete jerk, even if she consents. But that is no different that rejecting the woman’s natural fertility, asking her to cover it up.
Sex involves more than just the use of reproductive organs to copulate Brendan. There is a lot of kissing and touching of each other’s ENTIRE body. Sex and touch also release bonding hormones, so theirs its effect on the mind.

Fertility isn’t always a blessing, too some it’s a curse, a nuisance. Something they don’t want. Better to just remove it from the equation. Omitting fertility, which is literally only one aspect out of everything involved in sex, especially when a baby isn’t desired by the couple at that time is not a huge deal and to “reject” it doesn’t mean a couple loves their husband/wife any less! Also, their is a big difference between having sex and saying “I love you but I don’t want a baby at this time” vs “I find you ugly so put a bag on your head so I don’t have too look at you”. One is prudent, the other is rude and inconsiderate of the other person feelings.
 
Sex involves more than just the use of reproductive organs to copulate Brendan. There is a lot of kissing and touching of each other’s ENTIRE body. Sex and touch also release bonding hormones, so theirs its effect on the mind.

Fertility isn’t always a blessing, too some it’s a curse, a nuisance. Something they don’t want. Better to just remove it from the equation. Omitting fertility, which is literally only one aspect out of everything involved in sex, especially when a baby isn’t desired by the couple at that time is not a huge deal and to “reject” it doesn’t mean a couple loves their husband/wife any less! Also, their is a big difference between having sex and saying “I love you but I don’t want a baby at this time” vs “I find you ugly so put a bag on your head so I don’t have too look at you”. One is prudent, the other is rude and inconsiderate of the other person feelings.
Sex with contraception is NOT saying a spouse saying “I love YOU”, only saying that you love those parts, as you so eloquently put it, that the other spouse find to be convenient to them. That is objectification.

The spouse includes their fertility. It is part of them. To reject it is not love the full person, only the parts found to be useful.

You actually proved my point pretty well.

Saying “I love you”, by definition means all of the other person. Rejecting any part of them, their face OR their fertility is rude and inconsiderate.

Sure the woman might agree, in much the same way that the woman might despise her face too and desire the bag. That does not mean that rejection, of any type, is a part of a healthy relationship.

And yes, it is possible to love them, and not have a baby at that time. Sometimes love is best expressed by waiting and the use of self control.
 
Sex with contraception is NOT saying a spouse saying “I love YOU”, only saying that you love those parts, as you so eloquently put it, that the other spouse find to be convenient to them. That is objectification…

Saying “I love you”, by definition means all of the other person. Rejecting any part of them, their face OR their fertility is rude and inconsiderate.

Sure the woman might agree, in much the same way that the woman might despise her face too and desire the bag. That does not mean that rejection, of any type, is a part of a healthy relationship.

And yes, it is possible to love them, and not have a baby at that time. Sometimes love is best expressed by waiting and the use of self control.
To be honest, I’ve always found this to be a weak argument. The couple desiring but choosing to omit sexual relations because the time is not good to conceive makes no statement at all about their love for each other - certainly they do not repudiate it.

What they do is make a statement about what they believe God intends for the use of the sexual faculty. That its aspects are not meant to be disaggregated as Aiyana proposes.
 
Sex with contraception is NOT saying a spouse saying “I love YOU”, only saying that you love those parts, as you so eloquently put it, that the other spouse find to be convenient to them. That is objectification.

The spouse includes their fertility. It is part of them. To reject it is not love the full person, only the parts found to be useful.

You actually proved my point pretty well.

Saying “I love you”, by definition means all of the other person. Rejecting any part of them, their face OR their fertility is rude and inconsiderate.

Sure the woman might agree, in much the same way that the woman might despise her face too and desire the bag. That does not mean that rejection, of any type, is a part of a healthy relationship.

And yes, it is possible to love them, and not have a baby at that time. Sometimes love is best expressed by waiting and the use of self control.
Brendan, not everyone has the luxury of planning out pregnancy and using self control and waiting. Some of us have rare genetic diseases that we find would be a great disservice to future children, if we risk bringing them into the world with said condition. Some women, have bodies that can’t handle pregnancy for what ever reason. Some women are absolutely terrified of getting pregnant for the reasons I cited above as well as many other reasons. So no, rejecting fertility isn’t rude or inconsiderate, not everyone likes or wants their fertility. Some women even wish they were born sterile!

Fertility is NOT useful to a couple that doesn’t want kids for whatever reason. For these people it is a detriment and a nuisance and for some, their greatest fear.

You can love someone and not want to get pregnant. Everyone has their reasons, some more serious than others. If both parties don’t want a baby and have sex, while taking the appropriate steps to avoid pregnancy, they’re not objectifying their spouse, it’s called being smart. To reject fertility is not the end of the world. And like a said before, removing fertility only removes one aspect from sex.

Also, I “reject” my boyfriend’s attempt to kiss me when he has morning breath. I “reject” his attempt to hug me when he hasn’t showered after working outside. I refuse to have sex with him until after marriage. Man, he and I have such an unhealthy relationship, look at all the rejecting I do :rolleyes: Just like, when I get married, I plan to get sterilized so my body “rejects” the possibility of pregnancy. I have my reasons, which are serious reasons. Adoption is always an option. Biological children unfortunately cannot be one of those options.
That its aspects are not meant to be disaggregated as Aiyana proposes.
The Catholic Church can have its own interpretation of sex. Myself and many others certainly don’t agree with the Churches interpretation and we don’t have too. I know for certain that I won’t let the paralyzing fear I experienced when I was a practicing Catholic control my life and torment me anymore like it did unrelentingly for years. And no, I’m not just referring to the Catholic idea for sex, plenty of other issues I don’t agree with as well.
 
Au contraire, blood pressure and cholesterol certainly seem to be boringly common “malfunctions” that most of us encounter with some level of predictability with age and diet. One could vigorously argue that they’re mostly natural consequences of the way we live. If you’re overweight by a substantial amount, you’re probably going to have BP problems, 10 to 1. Treating BP with a pill is a frustration of your body’s natural attempt to successfully push blood to all the corners of your over-fat body.

I appreciate the reality of your perspective. Thanks for the chat.
I’ve never smoked. I’ve never been overweight. I’ve been exercising several days a week, year round since I was 18 years old and I’m now over 50. I eat well. I rarely drink alcohol.

Ive had borderline high blood pressure since childhood and when it went too high about 15 years ago I started taking medication for it.

I’d rather frustrate my body’s natural function than be dead.

Back to the topic. I’m not against contraception. And in my case it certainly hasn’t led to abortions. Im not going to leave the Church over my disobedience.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top