A stronger argument against deliberately chosen childlessness is the intrinsically evil nature of artificial birth control. ABC is fundamentally unnatural, since its object is the nullification of the natural end of the reproductive system.
The timeless natural law argument against ABC was made very well in Humanae Vitae.
For this reason, the deliberate choice to exclude children from marriage is one of the grounds for declaring a marriage null in the Catholic Church.
I've already shot down the various fallacies in your argument. It is dishonest of you to pretend that it can simply rise again intact, like the phoenix.
"For this reason, the deliberate choice to exclude children from marriage is one of the grounds for declaring a marriage null in the Catholic Church."
Wow! I'm sure glad my wife and I aren't Catholics then. When is the RCC going to make anullment mandatory for childless couples? I hadn't heard that they were.
Further, all those priests, there. They are all childless. The nuns, too. I guess they're a waste of air, too.
Thomas Aquinas would be ashamed of your logical processes.
Fine, so my marriage is not a true one. Big deal we lived together for 6 years before we got married anyway. It is my choice not to become pregnant.
"For this reason, the deliberate choice to exclude children from marriage is one of the grounds for declaring a marriage null in the Catholic Church."
I agree, but newsflash...not everyboy is Catholic.
For this reason, the deliberate choice to exclude children from marriage is one of the grounds for declaring a marriage null in the Catholic Church.
Of the big categories that have moved civilization which two caused the most bloodshed and which two created the most prosperity and least bloodshed .
Politics and religion cause the most blood shed.
Business and science created the most prosperity and least blood shed.
It is beyond reason why people chose to have government and religion recognize a man and a woman's devoted love for each other. Talk about upside down!
That's the same thinking as the Bible's exhortation that sex only be used for procreation, isn't it?
Shouldn't married couples who have 3 children be limited to having sex just those three "succesful" times? After that, shouldn't they revert to celibacy? That's my take on it. LOL.
A nation/culture that does not reproduce will destroy itself. Having children forces one to look not just to the immediate future but to contemplate how society will be 20, 40, 60 years in the future. This makes for better citizenry.
I can't stand kids. I can put up and occasionally enjoy other peoples kids, but to put up with the whining, clinging incessant demands of a miserable, puling child? I'll throw it against a wall.
Would you prefer that?
Knowing that, I'm not STUPID enough to have children.
And with your frame of mind, there is this myopic 'go forth and have babies babies babies, even if you cannot support them.
One reason why they have 'throw aways' on the streets of some south american cities. The parents do just that within the dictates of the church. Reproduce reproduce, reproduce...and when they cannot afford or feed them? Throw them out on the street. Average life span: 18 years at most.
I do NOT think God is going to be impressed with fecundity without personal responsibility. You wanna build a tower? Make sure you have enough funds to do it. Wanna kid? Either a) make sure you have enough money to do so and have a 'nest' for it
b) be willing to do WITHOUT for yourself so the kid can be raised decently.
I do NOT see funding stupid little girls who dispense with all the traditional prerequisites and decide to play house with real live dollies at the taxpayers expense. Their progeny live in poverty, are more likely to be molested, abused, killed by the mothers successive shack up studs. The progeny may live to provide the fodder for gangs, prisons, and are nothing but cattle for industries that make their living off of self-same stupid little girls.
phooey.
My duty to sprogg? I THINK NOT