57thDimension;11222309:
Like other Church documents, this one seems to ignore biological realities like differential fecundity. Yes, a woman can pursue whatever education she wishes, but she must also live with the fact that there are consequences (in the correct sense of the word) for that (e.g. delay). According to the 2000-2012 GSS, fertility is highly dysgenic by more education for** conservative women**
(that is, it effectively inhibits reproduction). Now, it may be the case that those people never wanted to have more children than they had, but as it turns out, a person’s ideal number of children is higher on average than the number of children they end up having (e.g.
blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/12/dont-wait-to-have-older-children/#.UjsDZcakq1Z). That effect increases with the amount of education that they attain. Discrepancy between expectations and outcomes will only increase for younger cohorts of women, especially those who feel it is important to have their children within wedlock. Each new cohort of women continues to delay marriage further, and there are limits on how far out childbirth can be delayed (e.g.: OECD Family Database. SF2.3: mean age of mothers at first childbirth. OECD – social policy division – directorate of employment, labour and social affairs.
oecd.org/els/social/family/database; 2012). Women declare that they are pursuing lengthy educations, assuming that can just begin to have families later in life (late 20s and 30s) but fail to realize how much their fertility falls with time (90% of a woman’s egg cells are typically already gone by age 30 - see: Wallace, W. Hamish B., and Thomas W. Kelsey. “Human ovarian reserve from conception to the menopause.” PloS one 5.1 (2010): e8772., etc). Conservative women more often eschew education and opt for marriage and family (GSS), but not necessarily because they aren’t as smart (education is linked to reduced fertility, IQ isn’t [neutral actually, and it would be a mediator…], e.g.: Meisenberg, Gerhard. “Wealth, intelligence, politics and global fertility differentials.” Journal of biosocial science 41.4 (2009): 519).
Even beyond that, greater levels of education are associated with switching to mainline Protestant denominations, especially for Catholics (Schwadel, Philip. “The effects of education on Americans’ religious practices, beliefs, and affiliations.” Review of religious research 53.2 (2011): 161-182). Catholic students in particular show an increase in liberalization and rejection of Church doctrine in post-secondary education - the effect only becomes more apparent with higher levels of education (e.g.: Guest, Mathew, et al. Christianity and the University Experience: Understanding Student Faith. A&C Black, 2013., etc).
Sorry,
the word catholic means the respect of the natural moral law, of the natural right, of the revealed anthropology, of the Canon Law, of teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, not more, not less. The term conservative is not quite theological. A conservative woman, what is it??? We are catholic, we are not conservative, theologically speaking??? Nevertheless, I understand your thought, what you want to say.
I repeat it:
Per se, the fact of being a housewife **is not a moral obligation for the catholic wife / mother: morally speaking, the catholic wife / mother can work outside the house, if she wants and if she needs; **
Per se, the fact of having a large family is not a moral obligation for the catholic couple; the fact of having a large family is not a dogma or a moral obligation (a end of marriage that has to be attempted), per se; t
he fact of having a large family is not, per se, a sign of the holiness of couple; the fact of having a large family is not, per se, a sign of the unholiness of couple;
the fact of wanting a baby and of trying to have a new baby can be irrresponsable in special cases, and that is not morally okay; the fact of having a small family is not, per se, a sign of the unholiness of couple; the fact of having a small family is not, per se, a sign of the holiness of couple;
the irresponsible paternity is morally wrong, the irresponsible maternity is morally wrong, the irresponsible procreation is morally wrong; The fact of not wanting a new baby can be selfish under conditions, and that is not morally okay;* the absolute natalism and the absolute procreationism are so morally wrong;*
Per se, the fact of choosing the home-schooling is not a moral obligation for the catholic couple;
Per se, the fact of not choosing the home-schooling is not immoral.
**
Per se, the discrimination about the education, in function of gender of children done by catholic parents, is morally wrong.**
Per se, the marriage is morally okay for adults (youngs or old). The catholic church does not require young marriage. A marriage for woman at 30 year or 25 or 18 or 60 is not sinful, is not morally wrong.
** Liberty to choose the age of marriage for woman is the rule.**
Their moral view is full of wrong intellectual approaches. They do not respect the natural moral, balanced, fair and moderated methods **given by the Roman Catholic Church. **They have a reaction, very offensive, very strong, very extremist, very fundamentalist, very simplist that can be absurd.
The isolation bubble of family, of the children and of daughters is a risk. Family is not a convent, is not a seminary and is not a monastery.
**
Their wrong reactionism is the great issue!!!**
)