NFP and people getting state aid

[Flavius_Aetius]

So out of curiosity, do you blame Catholic and other religious organizations that are against ABC and similar contreceptives for these welfare abusers? I just feel this spite out of these posts toward these groups, none to similar from others who hate the Catholic Church and believe them to be a backwards harmful organization for not bowing down to the might of the Secular world such as the use of chemical contreceptives.

 

[MrsStephanieH]

You can use NFP to avoid pregnancy without causing harm to your body or causing you to fall into mortal sin.

LaSainte, it sounds like you are saying that a person who needs help would have to commit mortal sin in order to receive the help that they need.

I agree with Flavius_Aetius, that is eugenics. That would be targeting a particular population and telling them that they are not good enough to have children.

 

[josephback]

So…in conversation with a fellow Catholic who is pro contraception, she says that God doesn’t want us to have 10 children and then rely on the state for health insurance, WIC, and such. I have to say that I see this day after day in my job and it is frustrating. So my question is the following. Are you all ok with a Catholic NFP couple being open to more children when they already have several children supported by state aid?

Well my brother and his wife only have TWO kids and they get WIC:stickouttongue: What’s all the fuss about There are far worse uses for state money.

This world is so anti-child Big families are a good thing

 

[mark_a]

We don’t have state income tax or anything like that where I live. I just know my husband’s salary and what we take home and that’s what it adds up to, so I’m guessing Federal. We actually USED to get a better deal because we were putting the max into our 401k, but a year ago we stopped putting anything into it because we can’t afford it anymore.

So basically, we are hugely delaying our retirement and may have nothing to live on then, Social Security will be bankrupt, and we are beig forced to pay welfare to people who refuse to do the responsible thing and stop having kids while we spiral into debt to help them raise heir children. God bless America.

Thank you for the thoughtful reply.

 

[LaSainte]

And how would they prove that they are actively trying to not have more children?

Prove they are dumping chemicals in their body? Show that they have mutilated their body? What?

That would do it.

 

[LaSainte]

So out of curiosity, do you blame Catholic and other religious organizations that are against ABC and similar contreceptives for these welfare abusers? I just feel this spite out of these posts toward these groups, none to similar from others who hate the Catholic Church and believe them to be a backwards harmful organization for not bowing down to the might of the Secular world such as the use of chemical contreceptives.

No I don’t “blame” the Church, but I think that if they are going to tell you not to use ABC or burn in hell, that they should be ready to pick up the tab when those people have kids they absolutely cannot afford. The government (a.k.a. the American taxpayer), should not be forced to pay because of someone’s religious beliefs.

If someone wants to practice Santeria and go around killing chickens but can’t afford them, I don’t want to subsidize that either.

I also don’t want to pay for a Mormon man, “married” in the Mormon church, to support 5 different wives and their 5 kids each and heir 5 separate households.

Let their churches pay for them to live lives in accordance with their faith.

 

[joclucsylv]

While I have little tolerance to those who abuse the welfare system, do you two-three that are against welfare to large families honestly believe that the government should Sterilize people with large families? If so that is Eugenics pure and simple.

Should a woman with 4 kids with 4 different fathers with her kids pulled out of the home due to abuse be allowed to have more children? Those are scenerios I see way to often.

 

[mark_a]

Should a woman with 4 kids with 4 different fathers with her kids pulled out of the home due to abuse be allowed to have more children? Those are scenerios I see way to often.

More good points, although the bible does tell us to help orphans and widows… Back in the day, orphans were children without a father, even if their mother was alive.

If all these questions had easy answers or if people felt differently about it back then, the writers of the bible probably would not have needed to mention it.

 

[Corki]

Should a woman with 4 kids with 4 different fathers with her kids pulled out of the home due to abuse **be allowed **to have more children? Those are scenerios I see way to often.

Fortunately, there is no entity in this country that would assume to “allow” or “not allow” a person to have a child. Sure, there are some bad cases, but the implications of such a policy are too scary to contempate. As they say, hard cases make bad law.

 

[Sullibe]

That would do it.

So much for being Catholic.

 

[Sullibe]

Should a woman with 4 kids with 4 different fathers with her kids pulled out of the home due to abuse be allowed to have more children? Those are scenerios I see way to often.

Money or no money, Not you, not even the state has the right to allow anyone to have a child. You and the State are NOT God.

And for the record, we pay nearly $200 A WEEK for health insurance. Why is that any point what so ever.

I understand with the cases that you see, which by your own admission is 1% of those receiving state aid.

Seriously, do you actually believe that if those 1% who are receiving state aid and yet keep having children were to suddenly NOT be receiving aid (for whatever reason), that our taxes will suddenly drop. Are you kidding me? Of course not. 1% wouldn’t even make a dent in the pocket change of that budget.

 

[1ke]

No I don’t “blame” the Church, but I think that if they are going to tell you not to use ABC or burn in hell, that they should be ready to pick up the tab when those people have kids they absolutely cannot afford.

Rejecting contraception does not mean a person must have children the “cannot afford.”

The government (a.k.a. the American taxpayer), should not be forced to pay because of someone’s religious beliefs.

Nor should we be “forced” to subsidize non-religious people who are irresponsible. Take it up with your Senator, not this forum.

Let their churches pay for them to live lives in accordance with their faith.

You keep saying this, but the Church doesn’t teach this. The Church teaches responsible parenthood in Humanae Vitae.

 

[1ke]

Should a woman with 4 kids with 4 different fathers with her kids pulled out of the home due to abuse be allowed to have more children?

Fertility is an absolute right. So, no, you have no right to take it away from them. It is a shame if they abuse their fertility, but only God has authority over their fertility, life or death.

 

[LaSainte]

So much for being Catholic.

Like I said, nobody’s forcing them. If they want state aid, they should be on birth control. If they want to practice NFP, they can appeal to a Catholic charity for help. Why exactly should he government be rewarding people for having children they cannot afford? They shouldn’t. Stop having kids or stop asking for the tax payers to pay for them. It’s simple.

 

[LaSainte]

Rejecting contraception does not mean a person must have children the “cannot afford.”

Nor should we be “forced” to subsidize non-religious people who are irresponsible. Take it up with your Senator, not this forum.

You keep saying this, but the Church doesn’t teach this. The Church teaches responsible parenthood in Humanae Vitae.

Oh responsible parenthood. So if you use NFP to avoid pregnancyhen you are guaranteed never to have more kids than you can afford to have or more than you can emotionally handle. Whew! What have I been so worried about then?

 

[Corki]

Oh responsible parenthood. So if you use NFP to avoid pregnancyhen you are guaranteed never to have more kids than you can afford to have or more than you can emotionally handle. Whew! What have I been so worried about then?

If you use NFP very conservatively, you are just as guaranteed as you would be if you were using ABC. And there is always to alternative to NFP which is 100% effective and endorsed by the Church.

 

[Warrior1979]

While I have little tolerance to those who abuse the welfare system, do you two-three that are against welfare to large families honestly believe that the government should Sterilize people with large families? If so that is Eugenics pure and simple.

When dealing with a secular government, one will get secular solutions. It’s preposterous to think that a secular government simply cede their policy to a particular religious group.

 

[1ke]

Oh responsible parenthood. So if you use NFP to avoid pregnancyhen you are guaranteed never to have more kids than you can afford to have or more than you can emotionally handle. Whew! What have I been so worried about then?

Certainly one can space, even indefinitely, via NFP.

 

[Brendan]

Should a woman with 4 kids with 4 different fathers with her kids pulled out of the home due to abuse be allowed to have more children? Those are scenerios I see way to often.

By definition, a child is created by God. A man and a woman cannot create a new child without having God actively deciding that a child is to be created and that it would be a GOOD THING for a child to be created.

We do not make souls, only God does that. It is not something that He simply allows to happen, it is something that God chooses to do, and God can only do good.

So how can any of us say who can and cannot be allowed to be a recepticle for a new creation of God.

Does the State have the authority to attempt to overrule what God has deemed to be good and that God Himself chooses to do.

 

[LaSainte]

Certainly one can space, even indefinitely, via NFP.

And certainly one can play Russian Roulette without ever having the gun go off. It’s nothing to count on.