Quality of Life vs. Quantity

[SpiritMeadow]

I now understand why people on this forum dislike population control.

I think I do as well, though I confess it sounds terribly sad that people envision God in this way. It’s logic gone totally awry IMO.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

I don’t get the “just one soul in heavn for eternity”. Why couldn’t they both spend eternity in heaven?

If you only have one child, there aren’t two of them to spend eternity in heaven.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

I guess that you won’t care that you starved to death once in heaven. ??? So you think that is what God means for us? Interesting.

Do you think that once you’re in heaven, you will consider your mode of death something important? If you get to heaven by starving to death, will that make heaven any less eternal or joyous?

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Do you think that once you’re in heaven, you will consider your mode of death something important? If you get to heaven by starving to death, will that make heaven any less eternal or joyous?

You have totally missed the point. It has nothing to do with what the individual thinks. It has everything to do with how you envision God. I see God as being deeply and sadly disappointed that anyone would conceive that deliberately bringing children into a world wherein you cannot adequately care for them would be pleasing to Him. It suggests IMO someone who has completely and utterly misunderstood who and what God is. But of course, it is my opinion. It is perhaps why some atheists point to a certain degree of abstract illogic to the believers model. This would be that to me. Obviously you see God and the world a good deal differently.

 

[Joe_5859]

I think that the question necessitates a calculated method of family planning that doesn’t necessarily work well in practice. Obviously, participating with God in the creation of another human being who may one day spend eternity in heaven is a great, great honor. But that doesn’t mean every person is called to have as many children as physically possible.

I don’t think God is calling us to base our decisions on calculations for the highest possible number of future human beings (weighing how many children we can possibly have against how many will survive long enough to maximize the number of granchildren and great-grandchildren, etc.).

The reason being, there are many factors that are completely out of our control and.or completely unknown to us. We don’t know how many children our children will choose to have (or be capable of having). We don’t know whether or not they will make it to heaven before they are born.

People ask my wife and I how many children we’re going to have and I just tell them “We’re taking it one child at a time.” All we can do is try our best to answer the question: Does God want us to have another child right now?

 

[Neil_Anthony]

You have totally missed the point. It has nothing to do with what the individual thinks. It has everything to do with how you envision God. I see God as being deeply and sadly disappointed that anyone would conceive that deliberately bringing children into a world wherein you cannot adequately care for them would be pleasing to Him. It suggests IMO someone who has completely and utterly misunderstood who and what God is. But of course, it is my opinion. It is perhaps why some atheists point to a certain degree of abstract illogic to the believers model. This would be that to me. Obviously you see God and the world a good deal differently.

Oh I see what you’re saying.

I asked the question exactly for that reason: logic seemed to be bumping up against common sense and not making sense. My common sense tells me not to bring a child into the world if you can’t afford to take care of him/her. But thinking about it logically gives me the answer that we should act so as to maximize the number of souls who can spend eternity in heaven. I asked the question so I could see how other people deal with what seems to be a conflict between logic and common sense.

 

[Spirithound]

Option 5: Irrelevant. God knows the perfect number of people to be in Heaven, and that’s what will happen, regardless of whether I have 5, 2, or 1 children, or remain celibate.

 

[jman507]

I don’t think the question would actually be appropriate. One never knows the resources that will be available in the future. One probably shouldn’t be having children though, if they think it will mean they will all starve to death. That wouldn’t be prudent. One never really knows if they will even concieve either, granted though there is a way people could rule that out. In the end one should focus more on God’s will be done. Also one must keep in mind to avoid trying to isolate one good thing, then take it to the level where you exclude other good things.

 

[BlaineTog]

You have totally missed the point. It has nothing to do with what the individual thinks. It has everything to do with how you envision God. I see God as being deeply and sadly disappointed that anyone would conceive that deliberately bringing children into a world wherein you cannot adequately care for them would be pleasing to Him.

I think that God’s thoughts are capable of far greater complexity than a binary “Weep/Laugh.” I think there is reason to be both happy and sad for the birth of a child when that child will have a poor life.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

I think that God’s thoughts are capable of far greater complexity than a binary “Weep/Laugh.” I think there is reason to be both happy and sad for the birth of a child when that child will have a poor life.

I attached an emotional response by God as a means of making a point. There are plenty of folks who would argue that God is above “emotions” in any real sense. Some even argue that God being perfect goodness is incapable of “seeing” the evil we perpetrate. We speak in human language as the only means to inadequately discuss a supernatural being that we call GOD.

 

[BlaineTog]

I attached an emotional response by God as a means of making a point.

Yes, and as a point, it doesn’t show the total truth. Every birth is a good thing in itself, even if the results aren’t so good. If we run with the logical implications of what you’re saying, then it would be licit to kill a child if you thought he was going to have a poor life, even after birth, even after he gains a higher degree of sentience, even, really, whenever.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Yes, and as a point, it doesn’t show the total truth. Every birth is a good thing in itself, even if the results aren’t so good. If we run with the logical implications of what you’re saying, then it would be licit to kill a child if you thought he was going to have a poor life, even after birth, even after he gains a higher degree of sentience, even, really, whenever.

I was unaware that in making a particular point one was required to “show the total truth.” As to the rest of what you said, I haven’t a clue what you are driving at. I was agreeing with your previous post if you didn’t notice. I have no idea what you mean by it would be licit to kill a child, etc…that is patently ridiculous.

 

[richardwy]

It is right to discriminate sacred from profane.

 

[BlaineTog]

I was unaware that in making a particular point one was required to “show the total truth.”

They are required not to distort it, which is what “not showing the whole truth” means when used as I used it, particularly when the point forces a false dichotomy.

 

[drafdog]

You have just received a grade of A- in “Writing of Pointless Threads.” Congratulations.

Matthew

 

[Bill_Samuel]

If you think that the choice is ours to make, then that is the faulty premise.

Robert has hit the key point here. Our lives belong to God. By putting this as our choice, one is committing the blasphemy of playing God.

 

[peary]

Your poll is redundant. Both will eventually die.

 

[BlaiseR]

I believe the first point of reference should be trust in God.
When I am able to trust God completely I will be able to be open to His will. And being open to His will in my life means being open to life (as our God is a God of live (“God of the living not of the dead”).
So first I need to be open to life - to Gods will.
Of course God has made us co-partners to creation in giving us control over our physical bodies and the right to make choices.
However, at the same time we need to continue to remain open ti life - hence the Catholic Church promulgates the following NFP (and not contraceptives or artificial means to prevent pregnancy).
If we want to avoid pregnancy there has also to be an element of sacrifice on our part in restraining our sexual urges.
In NFP we still leave ample room for the Lord to work and hence still remain open to life.
And if the Lord provides a new life will He also not provide the means to take care of that life to those who have placed their trust in Him?
Remember the scripture “Ere I formed you in your mothers womb, I called you by name”.
So it seems that even before a child is concieved the Lord has already planned for his/her birth and even named him / her!

Lets just praise God for His abundance and His blessings and continue to trust Him…