P
Personanongrata
Guest
There are women who do not want children, and would not feel “forced” to have a tubal ligation. Probably more than you think. The OP may have to look harder to find one, but they are out there.
- Status
L
Lou2U
Guest
Yes, but I took it as the OP would not truly listen to what his wife wanted.He said: “if I do get married I would insist not only on a vasectomy for myself, but a tubal ligation for my wife.” Insisting on a tubal ligation sounds to me like his wife’s opinion would be pushed to one side.
Lou
G
gracepoole
Guest
Okay, your description of children is wholly negative. Unrealistically, unfairly, and unreasonably so. Many children *are *pleasant to be around – you have to actually raise them to be pleasant if you desire them to be this way. They do get sick though my kids get sick less often than I do – sorry to burst your bubble but a wife also gets sick and you’d have to “handle” that. 
That’s sort of what people do when they genuinely love one another. You’re correct in noting that your description “comes off as selfish.” It clarifies that you are far too selfish to have children – and it also clarifies that you’re too selfish to be married. From someone who is celebrating her 18th wedding anniversary today, I am simply being honest when noting that you are in no way disposed to place another human’s needs and wants above your own. Marriage requires this.As for your grandfather, I have had relatives who received priest permission to practice ABC (sorry, fellow Catholics – it does happen). But this is in no way permission for you to do the same.
Please acknowledge what you’re only partly acknowledging so far: you’re not up to being a parent AND you’re not up for marriage.
A
Allegra
Guest
You do realize that kids are only babies for two years right? If you put even the most minimal effort into raising your child, they will probably have considerable things in common with you. For example, if you are fond of music and you play music around the house and hire someone to teach your child to play the piano, they will most likely enjoy music. If you like going out to eat and you take your child to restaurants and teach them how to behave properly, they will probably enjoy the experience of going out to eat and trying new foods. On the other hand, if your wife becomes ill or injured, you could be “dealing with” her difficulties for the rest of your adult life. I don’t think you have thought this through properly.
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
That is an exaggeration. One is not “perpetually pregnant” Most women have natural infertile periods while breastfeeding. There are exceptions but perpetually pregnant is stretching reality. While many families were larger back then. More than 12 would have been quite the anomaly. 12x9=108. Figuring a marriage at 20ish and fertility declining at 40 ish, that is 20X12= 240. Somehow before the advent of widespread mutilation and ABC, most people were not the Duggars…
The other exaggeration is that you say the only option is total abstinence. This would have been true with only a minuscule percentage of the population. Those who could not be intimate during menstruation. But, lets say that a person is indeed in a situation that calls for total abstinence. Like a car wreck that disables the person’s gentiles. Surely you are not saying that then prostitution would be ok, or that the marriage does not exist? Some people may indeed be called to total abstinence by God because of circumstances. people seem to forget that NFP is not a right, or a norm. But rather a Merciful concession by God and his Church.
It was more the wording than anything. There were some pretty anti child vibes coming from the way it was worded. I could be wrong though.
Weird that you think I don’t believe it. But the “what about the life of the mother” is a way over used anti life tactic. So, yes, I could be a little gun shy about that.
Why did the rates drop in the 40s I wonder…?
I am not sure what that means. It might mean that he wanted to protect his wife and so therefore mutliated himself because he knew his willpower and lust would not permit him to protect her if indeed her life was in danger. That would be the most charitable view. In my opinion, he did it for the same selfish reasons people do it today. He wanted to have sex as much as he wanted without a consequence. Even if the consequence was to his soul.
Personally I think it is not an act of love but a sin against love. Regardless of motive.
B
Book_Worm
Guest
Hoosier Daddy, your math is impressive. Your logic is not.
When I got married in 1976 and told my Catholic ob/gyn that I intended to use the rhythm method to delay pregnancy, he said to me, “Do you know what they call people who use that? Parents. It is NOT reliable.”
If not getting pregnant were a life-or-death matter in the sixties, you would have had to be pretty cavalier to relay on the rhythm method.
When I got married in 1976 and told my Catholic ob/gyn that I intended to use the rhythm method to delay pregnancy, he said to me, “Do you know what they call people who use that? Parents. It is NOT reliable.”
If not getting pregnant were a life-or-death matter in the sixties, you would have had to be pretty cavalier to relay on the rhythm method.
L
Lookingforjoy
Guest
That is an exaggeration. One is not “perpetually pregnant” Most women have natural infertile periods while breastfeeding. There are exceptions but perpetually pregnant is stretching reality. While many families were larger back then. More than 12 would have been quite the anomaly. 12x9=108. Figuring a marriage at 20ish and fertility declining at 40 ish, that is 20X12= 240. Somehow before the advent of widespread mutilation and ABC, most people were not the Duggars…
Historically women did not get their period monthly. Malnutrition, stress, sickness, and other factors interrupted cycles. That makes using the rhythm method harder and less reliable. I just say that because I feel for the couple in this story, and they probably felt that they were out of options, whether or not that was really true. That’s also why I said total abstinence…with cycles that are difficult to track and her life possibly at stake why would you take the chance?
Why did the rates drop in the 40s I wonder…?
Better drugs to fight postpartum infection, followed by improved childbirth practices.
I am not sure what that means. It might mean that he wanted to protect his wife and so therefore mutliated himself because he knew his willpower and lust would not permit him to protect her if indeed her life was in danger. That would be the most charitable view. In my opinion, he did it for the same selfish reasons people do it today. He wanted to have sex as much as he wanted without a consequence. Even if the consequence was to his soul.
Come on now, why not take an even more charitable view here. A doctor said his wife might die, he was probably scared. I think that fear played into it more than lust. What I meant was that he was motivated by the right things (a desire to protect his wife) but chose the wrong route to do that (choosing a vasectomy instead of abstaining).
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
There needs to be a broader and more in depth view of history in general.
I am not sure what people are trying to get at here, points are. This thread is about the mortal sin of vasectomy. It was a mortal sin 2000 years ago and still is. There is a false idea in the modern world that if one bends circumstances enough that will change the morality of a situation.
No matter the situation of the grandpa and grandma here. Vasectomy is not a Holy option, it is in fact a intrinsically EVIL option. All this noise about trying to do the right thing is bunk. The Church has always been crystal clear here. Not only that, but she has been quite vocal about it. That some sin, cannot be exused by you, me or joe down the street. it is up to a just and merciful God who has given us the Church to guide our decisions and Sacraments to forgive sins and help us to receive the grace we need to remain Holy when our libido says otherwise.
I would argue that it is the modern mentality of sex as a right and something as necessary is food that is illogical. Not the Church, never the Church. If someone wishes the Logical view, the TheoLOGICAL view of the Church is the most Logical of all.
I am not sure what people are trying to get at here, points are. This thread is about the mortal sin of vasectomy. It was a mortal sin 2000 years ago and still is. There is a false idea in the modern world that if one bends circumstances enough that will change the morality of a situation.
No matter the situation of the grandpa and grandma here. Vasectomy is not a Holy option, it is in fact a intrinsically EVIL option. All this noise about trying to do the right thing is bunk. The Church has always been crystal clear here. Not only that, but she has been quite vocal about it. That some sin, cannot be exused by you, me or joe down the street. it is up to a just and merciful God who has given us the Church to guide our decisions and Sacraments to forgive sins and help us to receive the grace we need to remain Holy when our libido says otherwise.
I would argue that it is the modern mentality of sex as a right and something as necessary is food that is illogical. Not the Church, never the Church. If someone wishes the Logical view, the TheoLOGICAL view of the Church is the most Logical of all.
M
Mongol
Guest
Thanks for the support. “Forcing” has nothing to do with it. Lots of people don’t want kids.
M
Mongol
Guest
Ouch! What if your daughter didn’t want kids?
I’m not, but I appreciate that. Thank you.
But I love women so much! I want to have a wife that I can live a happy and child-free life with. And on that note…
I’m not sure that follows. I know lots of happily married people who have no kids and no desire for kids.
Maybe. Lust is a big struggle.
I’m sure sorry to hear about your husband. I know even from the start that I’d be a terrible father, but I think I’d be a pretty great husband. I’m not sure one necessarily precludes the other.
Let me ask you this. If I can’t get married because I dislike kids, and I am too interested in women to live chastely as a lay brother, what should I do?
M
Mongol
Guest
Yeah. I’ve only met, I think, one or two kids in my adult life I could actually say I enjoyed being around.
Not sure about that. My parents did a great job raising me but that didn’t make me less of an awful little monster.
Good point, but women know to cover their mouths when they cough.They do get sick though my kids get sick less often than I do – sorry to burst your bubble but a wife also gets sick and you’d have to “handle” that.
Have you ever considered that it could be construed as selfish to have children? Obsession with carrying on the family name, making other people be around your kids, etc. Not of course to imply that you yourself are a selfish person!
That’s fantastic, congratulations!
Why, just because I don’t like kids??
Well said. I’m not sure I agree with your position that I’m not up for marriage. You seem to be suggesting that if one isn’t up to being a parent, one can’t place another’s needs before his own at all, which doesn’t really follow. All it means is that I don’t like kids, in the same way that some people don’t like dogs or cats.* If I said I didn’t want a dog or cat, would that mean I wasn’t cut out for marriage? Certainly not. I’ll admit it’s kind of an imperfect analogy, but you see my point.
*I love both dogs and cats. In fact I live alone with my dog, I love her to death. Maybe in light of this I can’t be called an entirely selfish dude.
M
Mongol
Guest
I guess, but parenting isn’t something you should put minimal effort into. You need to throw your entire life away for it.
I see where you’re coming from, and I’ve actually thought this through. You see, I’m a professional linguist, and if I do make the mistake of having a child we would be speaking an endangered language at home without a question–probably the Ket language of central Siberia, or Mom’s language. The child would be brought up with a rigorous background not only in his/her first language, but in Classical languages as well–Latin, Greek, Hebrew, maybe Classical Chinese for good measure.
The kid would hate me, and probably grow up to be as distant from a linguist as you could possibly be.
On the other hand, I would be honored to care for an ill or injured wife, I assure you. An intelligent adult woman who loves me is a completely different matter from a child who doesn’t know left from right and will probably grow up to despise me anyway.
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
Yeah. I’ve only met, I think, one or two kids in my adult life I could actually say I enjoyed being around.
Have you ever considered the unholiness of that statement. Imagine saying that about any other age or race of people.
Not sure about that. My parents did a great job raising me but that didn’t make me less of an awful little monster.
I think the jury is still out on that whole statement.
Good point, but women know to cover their mouths when they cough.
That does not matter, when you share a life with someone and a household, covering ones mouth is not even a factor in the sharing of bacteria and germs. It sounds like you do not have an accurate picture of what marriage is. And why God created it.
Have you ever considered that it could be construed as selfish to have children? Obsession with carrying on the family name, making other people be around your kids, etc. Not of course to imply that you yourself are a selfish person!
That is a weird view you have. I suppose you could have someone who has a child for a selfish reason. Maybe even a lot of people do. But that does not change the morality of your decision or want to get married without being open to life.
That’s fantastic, congratulations!
Why, just because I don’t like kids??
Your aversion to kids smacks of either an physiological condition or an immature understanding of love, marriage and the purpose thereof.
Well said. I’m not sure I agree with your position that I’m not up for marriage. You seem to be suggesting that if one isn’t up to being a parent, one can’t place another’s needs before his own at all, which doesn’t really follow. All it means is that I don’t like kids, in the same way that some people don’t like dogs or cats.* If I said I didn’t want a dog or cat, would that mean I wasn’t cut out for marriage? Certainly not. I’ll admit it’s kind of an imperfect analogy, but you see my point.Your point is not clear
*I love both dogs and cats. In fact I live alone with my dog, I love her to death. Maybe in light of this I can’t be called an entirely selfish dude.
M
MJJean
Guest
A woman would be foolish to permanently sterilize herself for you. No offense intended,but men leave and men die. If you divorced her or you passed away she may want to remarry and the dating pool is reduced when children are off the table, so…
However, you have the option of marrying a woman who is already sterilized or who is naturally infertile.
I understand wanting to double up on birth control methods. I have a Pill baby and a condom baby. My ex and my friend both have vasectomy babies and a female friend got pregnant twice after her tubal. Sterilization is not 100%.
G
gracepoole
Guest
My husband has witnessed me vomiting many times – he’s held my hair or a bucket for me. He’s seen me wake with drool on the pillow, heard me snore, seen me at my absolute physical worst. I’ve given him many colds over the years (even when one covers her mouth while coughing, a family lives in close quarters). Of course, all of the reverse is true, as well. A wife and husband must be prepared to see one another at one’s ugliest and grossest.
No. Why? Because I’m Catholic. The Church most definitely does not view the desire for children as selfish. I have to ask why you want to commit to Catholicism while considering a marriage that is not open to life. ?? That’s not a Catholic marriage. Children are how the Church, human tradition, the world continues. If you feel that parents like me “make people be around your kids,” you’re viewing the world from an extremely modernist perspective that seeks to separate children and the continuation of human life from the frivolity and amusements of child-free adult lives.
:tiphat: Thank you!
No, because of the reasons you’ve given for not wanting kids. A wife brings many of the same “problems.”
I’ve got to ask… You keep mentioning that you “love women.” What does that mean, exactly? What do you mean by love?
G
GraceUnderFire
Guest
OP you hasve a contraceptive mentality which goes right along with the modern culture of death. If you intend to marry in a Catholic church, you promise to be open to life and the fruits of marriage, which are children. Essentially, when you are closed to children, your wife becomes an objectt, as you reject an important aspect of who she is–her fertility.
I recommend you discern carefully whether you are truly called to marriage. Also try reading the Theology of the Body.
I recommend you discern carefully whether you are truly called to marriage. Also try reading the Theology of the Body.
G
gracepoole
Guest
:ehh: My children are being raised by two professors: one in English literature and the other in philosophy. They are regularly “subjected” to classical and biblical Latin, Koine Greek, Hebrew, Yiddish, German, French… Why would you assume that kids would hate this or hate you for it? That’s most definitely how it’s played out in our family. (And of course, all Catholics are dealing with an extinct language – “traditional” Catholics take their children to the Latin Mass weekly and their kids don’t hate them for it.)
A
Allegra
Guest
Again, a child is only completly clueless for a few years. Before long, it is amazing how quickly they grasp knowledge from the world around them. After an investment of 15-20 years or so, your child will be capable of all manner of intelligent conversations with you about all sorts of interests. Many, many homes are bilingual and children don’t normally resent learning more than one language. Unless you have already decided that you must forcibly require most cruelly rigerous form of language education you can possibly imagine, it is highly unlikely that your child will hate you. Young children especially are sponges when it comes to learning languages. Their brains are biologically wired for aquiring language at a fantastic rate until they are 8 to 10 years old. From ages 3-6, it is believed that they absord as many as 10 new words a day, just from listening and observing the world around them. As a linguist, I’m surprised you didn’t know that.
Meanwhile, your wife could get early-onset dementia and not be able to have any conversation with you at all for decades. I think you’re missing the point. Love is about sacrificing yourself for others, regardless of whether it’s for a child or an adult. If you don’t think you can do it for your child, it is unlikely you would be able to do it for a wife.
B
bitterhope
Guest
The rhythm method can and does work for some women. It’s no different than any other form of birth control. No method works for every woman. The various forms of modern day NFP do not work for every woman. Many people have had pill babies, IUD babies, babies after sterilizations, and even abortions have failed. Nothing is 100% except for abstinence. But you know, no matter what, a couple is not going to have any more kids than God intends for them to have. For some couples like my parents that is a lot of kids (16), for others like one of my aunts it is none at all. Even couples that do not use anything at all to avoid babies–not even NFP or the rhythm method-- usually don’t have monstrously large families like my parents. They may have 4-6 kids over a 20 year time period. Most women are not super fertile like me, many need a great deal of luck to achieve pregnancy even when using fertility aids and charting and only having sex during fertile times. I’ve heard if takes many couples 6-12 months to achieve pregnancy once they begin trying. Fertility is truly a gift and children are a blessing. It seems even most Catholics have lost sight of that fact. And to the OP, you have a lot of growing up to do before you even consider any vocation. Work on chastity. Even married men must be chaste.
K
KCT
Guest
Some people see it as throwing themselves into it, not throwing their life away for it.
- Status