Women have a duty to reproduce...

[Wind Song]

Not true. The RCC has no problem with women not getting married.

]
The RCC considers it the duty of married men and women to procreate.

[Wind Song]

So...you think the role of a mother is useless?

This is a logical fallacy. I never said any such thing.

[jimnyc]

So...you think the role of a mother is useless?

Probably a lot more 'useless' when you're a lesbian. Becoming a Mom is a little more difficult when you make such life decisions.

[Dilloduck]

was buddha opposed to families ?

[Wind Song]

Of course you don't. You are trying to deminish the mens role in relationships. The idea behind the churches views on reproduction and sex would stregthen the bond of men and women as a unit. Can't have that.

The RCC considers it a duty for married couples to reproduce. You seem to agree. Yes or no?

[Shadow]

This is a logical fallacy. I never said any such thing.

Sure you did. You don't like it that "the church" (ie men) place too much value on the woman's "uterus".

[Kathianne]

]
The RCC considers it the duty of married men and women to procreate.

Quite different than your chosen title, no? The church does not advocate divorce when one partner cannot procreate. Quite the contrary.

Church indeed supports orphans and adoptions. Has centuries of experience on just this thing.

[Shadow]

Probably a lot more 'useless' when you're a lesbian. Becoming a Mom is a little more difficult when you make such life decisions.

Which would be why people like WS try to deminish that role also...as they spew their "breeder" labels at them.

[Wind Song]

Sure you did. You don't like it that "the church" (ie men) place too much value on the woman's "uterus".

I don't care if Catholics want to breed like bunnies. I'm more interested in seeing women ordain as priests. I'm more interested in seeing the RCC take responsibility for the many decades of policy that allowed Catholic children to be victims of child sexual abuse by priests.

Those two issues are much closer to my heart.

I have a different view of what it means that a woman has a womb, than the obvious. I'm more interested in the spiritual significance of a womb.

[Kathianne]

I don't care if Catholics want to breed like bunnies. I'm more interested in seeing women ordain as priests. I'm more interested in seeing the RCC take responsibility for the many decades of policy that allowed Catholic children to be victims of child sexual abuse by priests.

Those two issues are much closer to my heart.

I have a different view of what it means that a woman has a womb, than the obvious. I'm more interested in the spiritual significance of a womb.

I'm going to be blunt here, Sky, you're not nearly as deep as you imagine. You may be damaged, but seriously that isn't clear. What is clear, you have an over inflated image of yourself as both victim and savior of others.

[Wind Song]

Which would be why people like WS try to deminish that role also...as they spew their "breeder" labels at them.

"people like WS". What kind of people would those be?

I appreciate mothers completely. All beings have once been our kind mothers.

I am raising a question about whether it is the duty of a woman to have children.

[Dilloduck]

I don't care if Catholics want to breed like bunnies. I'm more interested in seeing women ordain as priests. I'm more interested in seeing the RCC take responsibility for the many decades of policy that allowed Catholic children to be victims of child sexual abuse by priests.

Those two issues are much closer to my heart.

I have a different view of what it means that a woman has a womb, than the obvious. I'm more interested in the spiritual significance of a womb.

I think you should rewrite the Bible.

[Wind Song]

I'm going to be blunt here, Sky, you're not nearly as deep as you imagine. You may be damaged, but seriously that isn't clear. What is clear, you have an over inflated image of yourself as both victim and savior of others.

I won't comment on this because it's off topic.

[DragonStryk72]

If you examine Catholic doctrine on marriage, it does appear that having children is considered the reason to marry. Consider the Churches position on birth control.


Contraception is wrong because it’s a deliberate violation of the design God built into the human race, often referred to as "natural law." The natural law purpose of sex is procreation. The pleasure that sexual intercourse provides is an additional blessing from God, intended to offer the possibility of new life while strengthening the bond of intimacy, respect, and love between husband and wife. The loving environment this bond creates is the perfect setting for nurturing children.

But sexual pleasure within marriage becomes unnatural, and even harmful to the spouses, when it is used in a way that deliberately excludes the basic purpose of sex, which is procreation.
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/birth-control

And this has to do what with the Republican party? They also say tattoos are bad (Leviticus 19:28), but it doesn't mean you're going to hell for it, and I've known a few priests who have ink on them.

The view, in actuality, is that procreation is the natural point of sex, and that getting caught up in sex for pleasure is unnatural, and thus, denying God's gift. This is as true for males as it is for females, from the church's perspective, so again, this is not an admonition against women. Course, no one actually follows that view in the real world, so it's kinda become a moot point.

[DragonStryk72]

OK that's at least two of you who think it's a woman's duty to reproduce. Does a woman's life have value other than her uterus?

Actually, that's two people who said women have a biological imperative to have children, and that if all women stopped having kids, then we would die out. That's actually scientific fact. You are twisting what they say to mean something it doesn't.