Question about Catechism 2376

  • Thread starter Thread starter Loud-living-dogma
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Loud-living-dogma

Guest
I was having a discussion with another person here on CAF, and the topic of children and adoption came up. Here is the point from the Catechism that I brought up:

Catechism 2376
Techniques that entail the dissociation of husband and wife, by the intrusion of a person other than the couple (donation of sperm or ovum, surrogate uterus), are gravely immoral. These techniques (heterologous artificial insemination and fertilization) infringe the child’s right to be born of a father and mother known to him and bound to each other by marriage. They betray the spouses’ "right to become a father and a mother only through each other.

Does this state that a child has the right to be born to a father and mother known to him, and bound to each other by marriage? It explicitly states that, does it not? I think this is a common sense kind of statement that was a no-brainer for our (great) grandparents, but now is an idea lost in the mists of time. Ditto for the “right to become a father and a mother only through each other”.
Or am I reading this wrong?
 
Umm. yeah… that’s pretty much exactly what it says. Any method of conception which violates the mother/father dynamic is intrinsically immoral.

What does that have to do with adoption?
 
The person I was discussing this with thought the statement about the rights of the child somehow might make an adopted person feel bad, I think. She thinks this passage only relates to reproductive technology, and that these rights of the child / parent only exist in terms of reproductive technology. ?!
 
This passage is explicitly discussion the mean of conception. Adoption is a positive thing as it (ideally) gives a child who was denied their natural rights a chance to still grow up in a loving household where those rights are expressed. Unfortunately, modern society has lost sight of that reality of adoption and treats it more like child shopping than anything else…
 
It was taken for granted for several thousand years of Judaism and Christianity that the marriage of one man and one woman was the only licit place for procreation of children. It didn’t need to be restated.

The adopted person who was conceived and born outside marriage need not “feel bad.” Their parents’ poor decisions were not their fault. Christians should not and cannot normalize procreation outside marriage.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top