Has UK vasectomy decline led to more abortions for older women?
Men are turning their backs on “the snip” as a form of contraception, according to the latest figures. The number of vasectomies has dropped by more than half in ten years, while abortions among older women have risen, say experts.
They claim men could be concerned about having a permanent form of contraception when the breakdown of relationships is common and they may want to start a second family….
Experts at the British Pregnancy Advisory Service say the decline may be a factor behind a 10 percent rise in abortions among women in their 30s and early 40s….
The link is also seen in France, where relatively few vasectomies – legal only since 1999 – are done but abortions for older women are more common.
England has historically had a high vasectomy rate, with around 16 percent of the male population under 70 having undergone the procedure, and a lower abortion rate among older women.
NHS cutbacks may have contributed to the fall, with some areas rationing “non-essential” operations.
~ Jenny Hope, Daily Mail, November 12
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Makes sense they would be connected. More men definitely should get vasectomies if they don’t want kids. I know to many guys who don’t want more kids who won’t get them because they are afraid or whatever. I think that’s silly.
I”m sure like the pill and other birth control, vasectomies are not without their risks to men’s health. It is not a normal state for a man’s body.
Anything to have sex without responsibility. Anything. :(
I disagree Angel.
Pumping women’s bodies full of chemicals is like a one time out patient procedure for a man?
I suggest you do some more research.
Carla, there are continued problems for men who have had vasectomies. And men who have a reversal and then conceive a child immediately afterwards see their child have the risk of birth defects.
The consequences of a vasectomy may not be on the same level as oral bc but they are still there.
How timely.
My husband and I have four children. We will not be having anymore. He does not want me to have the more invasive surgery of having my tubes tied or a hysterectomy(or pills, creams, patches, shots etc.) so he is doing the responsible thing and making the appointment for himself.
Do you have a link I could read Angel on the continued problems for men who have vasectomies? So far our dr. hasn’t mentioned any.
ok Carla. Sorry I have offended you. I am out of here.
I have read that some men have auto immune disorders as a result of their vasectomies.
Have a nice day.
one last thing: a question for you Carla.
If you consider the pill/IUD/abortion to be not only harmful but also tampering with the natural state of your body as a woman why would you not also consider having your tubes tied or tying off a man’s reproductive system to also be harmful?
I am glad you have a doctor you can trust but if doctors lie or are misinformed about abortion and birth control, why not vasectomies and tubal ligations? Most doctors seek the easiest solution for their patients and a vasectomy is certainly on the surface, an easy quick fix.
I encourage you to check out a natural family planning method – which does work even for couples where the woman is perimenopausal. It is natural. It is effective. Many many of my friends have used this method during this time in their marriages and it has been good for the woman and their marriage relationship. The man has appreciated knowing more about his wife’s physiology and her state of mind (usually bordering on crazy some days!). It deepens and re-establishes their bond at a time when the children are growing up and beginning to leave home.
I am strongly encouraging a friend of mine to get a vasectomy. He’s told me that if he impregnates he would “make her life so miserable she would have to abort just to get some peace.”
I know some people will think this is anti-feminist or anti-woman but I think it should usually be the woman who is sterilized when a family is complete. Her husband’s vasectomy doesn’t protect her from pregnancy through rape.
Denise, how is that a correct attitude for your friend?
So he mutilates his body (and as a practicing Catholic I do consider sterilization a mutilation of a very special part of our bodies) because he has a wrong attitude towards women, pregnancy and children?
Something seems amiss here?
I am not offended Angel. Thought we were discussing.
As two mature married adults I think my husband and I can make the right decision for us.
Carla, men with vasectomies tend to have problems with high cholesterol. My healthy young 30’s brother-in-law had one after their fourth child because my sister had health problems and pregnancy was not advised. He is physically fit and healthy and yet within months of his “snip” his cholesterol (bad kind) went sky high. My father-in-law was snipped after my husband was born because my mother-in-law almost died during the c-section (priest came in to give her last rites and everything. My husband almost died too) and he struggles with high cholesterol and he is not overweight or unhealthy.
So there is that to consider. Just go in with eyes wide open I say.
I am definitely not calling into question your ability to make decisions as a married couple Carla. And you came across to me as somewhat offended and defensive in your comments which may or may not have been the case. And I meant no offense either.
I am just saying that for me as a Catholic (and I know you are not but that you and your husband are deeply committed Christians) I view my sexuality as a great gift from God that must not be tampered with. Our sexuality is not a disease, yet we treat it as such in almost every aspect and throughout our lives.
Vasectomy is taking a perfectly healthy male and treating his sexuality as a disease and switching it off. It is the same approach in my mind, as the use of the pill towards a woman’s fertility, or as the use of abortion to treat pregnancy. Pregnancy is not a disease and neither is a woman’s fertility. It is the same approach that was taken towards women in perimenopause by placing them on HRT. Menopause is a natural progression of aging for women.
If you are in your 40’s, then you have only a few years left of possible fertility and your fertility will be almost nonexistant after the age of 45. For that short time your husband is willing to have something done to himself that maybe harmful and is definitely (as I see it) disrespectful of his body and his sexuality and not properly ordered towards your marital relationship. (I wish I could express this differently and in a better way but this is what I’ve come up with.)
I hope you won’t be offended by my saying this. :)
angel says:
November 20, 2012 at 8:40 am
Denise, how is that a correct attitude for your friend?So he mutilates his body (and as a practicing Catholic I do consider sterilization a mutilation of a very special part of our bodies) because he has a wrong attitude towards women, pregnancy and children?Something seems amiss here?
(Denise) I very much want him to get a vasectomy because I want to ensure against his impregnating. He’s a very selfish person and admits it. He’s told me he would hassle a woman into aborting so it’s important to ensure he doesn’t impregnate.
I know the woman might resist his pressure or hassling to abort but if she had the baby, that baby would have a very poor excuse for a “Dad.” This man’s own Dad wasn’t much and once severely injured my friend.
Thank you for your concern Angel and Sydney. Have yet to hear about high cholesterol from our dr.!!!!
We will absolutely do our homework.
I apologize if I seemed defensive Angel. That is not how I meant to come across. I understand where you are coming from now.
Wow. I can’t wait to live in a country with more abortions because “non-essential surgery” like TL and vasectomies can’t be obtained!! Flippin’ sweet, you guys.
I am strongly encouraging a friend of mine to get a vasectomy. He’s told me that if he impregnates he would “make her life so miserable she would have to abort just to get some peace.”
If I knew a guy like that, I would “strongly encourage” self-castration with a rusty butter knife.
xalisae — It’s not that vasectomies are “unobtainable.” Any British guy can have this done. It’s just that he has to pay for it himself, because Britain’s socialized medical program is rationing elective services due to budget concerns.
All — My uncle got a vasectomy shortly after their second child was born. 14 years later, my aunt became pregnant. There were some uncomfortable accusations. It turns out that the vasectomy had partially healed itself, enough to restore a low sperm count.
No birth control is perfectly safe and effective.
(P.S. – My cousin is a happy and beautiful woman now.)
Sad that “older” women have abortions. It’s a MIRACLE that women can even GET pregnant in their 40’s…*personal experience here*.
I know…older women can have more complications with their pregnancies..blah, blah, blah.
I just don’t think, when you’re given a MIRACLE, you should “throw it away”. :(
(By ‘it’, I mean the opportunity…not the BABY)
like contraception, sterilization is an attack on the institution of marriage… it just makes it easier so people outside of marriage can have sex.. It is not needed in a marriage, and society should not want it available. If you don’t like adultery, don’t make it easier for people to be adulterers!
opps… just read the thread… my post is not directed at any person or couple in particular. I was responding to the current legal environment that views all technological contraceptives as an advancement in freedom and sexual liberty, and completely disregards their impact on other social institutions such as marriage and the family.
Does sexual liberty trump the state’s duty to promote and support marriage?
Doesn’t the British healthcare system sill cover abortions? If so, their priorities when it comes to rationing care are really messed up.
I have heard there is really a push by some women to encourage their husbands, especially cheating husbands, to get sterilized. In this way, the wife’s family financial resources are protected from possible children being fathered by the cheating husband outside the marriage. A better solution to a cheating husband is to help him stop cheating.
Regarding “cheating” and sterilization: this reminds me of an audio drama I heard set in the post WWII period. The husband came home from the war and saw that his wife had already had a baby. He never mentioned it to her but he assumed she had gotten pregnant by another man.
Later a blood test is done. As he expected, he wasn’t genetically related to his son (Yes, Carla, “his son” even sans genetic relationship). But he was surprised to learn his wife was also not related to their son!
She had stolen the baby from another woman.
Sometimes technological contraception is seen as a way to prove the trust in a relationship – when trust should not have to be proven, trust only has to be earned – there is a difference.
xalisae says:
November 20, 2012 at 9:17 am
I am strongly encouraging a friend of mine to get a vasectomy. He’s told me that if he impregnates he would “make her life so miserable she would have to abort just to get some peace.”
If I knew a guy like that, I would “strongly encourage” self-castration with a rusty butter knife.
(Denise) Maybe I should have asked him HOW he would have made her life miserable. I just didn’t feel up to it.
He would not care about the question of whether or not the unborn are human beings nor would he care about the possibility of psychological damage to the woman he impregnated from being hassled into an abortion.
He told me he’s unlikely to impregnate due to damage to his groin area when his own Dad beat him and injured the testicles.
Carla. my dh and I decided to have him get the vasectomy after our 3rd child was born. It was easy and there have been so side effects. Dh and I are covenantally married, and as we are both 45, future kids are not planned. It was a good decision for us. I wish you well.
PS-Dh’s doctor gave DH 2 valium to take “on the way” to the procedure, so as to calm frazzled nerves. I had to laugh…just thinking about all I could get done in my life if I had 2 valium to take “on the way.”
So a man gets snipped, but his body continues to produce sperm. Where does the sperm supply go?
It seems easy, like a tubal ligation. But people don’t seem to ask questions beyond a cursory “what are the risks?”. The same docs who don’t give the complete picture about (fake) hormonal contraceptives and abortion are somehow supposed to be all up front about vasectomy? It doesn’t usually work that way.
Personally, I would not ask my husband to do this to his body. We have four children and likely won’t be having anymore due to me having severe asthma. :( We are using NFP to avoid pregnancy. We love life and trust God and won’t shut the door via chemical or surgical means when we feel there is a better way that respects God’s design for life and our own bodies.
Mary Ann, the sperm is absorbed by the body like unejaculated sperm was before the vasectomy. Men produce sperm all day long but (hopefully!) do not ejaculate all day long, or even every day, though obviously this varies from man to man – the unused sperm just gets reabsorbed.
It’s good to be skeptical of the medical industry, IMO – heck, it took me two miserable years of a chronic sinus infection (causing pneumonia at times, etc) before I finally felt comfortable having surgery – and it’s good to know what is best for your own relationship. But it is also important to trust that people have considered these things themselves, without unsolicited reminders or advice.
Tyler, first of all, I totally disagree that it’s the “state’s duty to support and protect marriage.” No, sorry, that’s the churches duty.
And I’m just not seeing how a vasectomy is as horrible as some are making it out to be. I mean, sure, it can be obtained for all the wrong reasons, but that shouldn’t mean no one should have it. And also, just because some get one to ensure sexual liberty (and I take issue with that term as well – I have full sexual liberty within in my marriage – my marriage bed isn’t chained or oppressive in any way), does not mean that some married couples don’t get it for perfectly good reasons.
For me, I’m grateful we live in a time when we have medical advancements to save us from situations that would be death sentences in times past. For women who might die from having another child, well, they could either abstain in marriage or have a baby and die. Now, there are ways around that. I don’t see how that’s bad, or desecrates the marriage. Yes, be aware of the risks of medical procedures, yes ask questions about ethics. But don’t just dismiss medicine out of hand as desecrating or dishonoring marriage or sexuality because it somehow alters or deals with reproductive system.
Do people really believe that the previous restrictions on contraception use by married couples were simply arbitrary and unjust laws? Don’t people see that there was a reason to have such laws, it was to demonstrate a profound respect for the institution of marriage and God’s or nature’s providence. Banning contraception and sterilization was a way for society to emphasize the importance of and strengthen the institution of marriage. It helped to protect the institution of marriage from adultery, and society from rampant unfettered sexual promisicuity. Why has everyone lost their good sense?
There’s always something that we must cling to–we’re against abortion, but OK with birth control; we’re against birth control, but OK with vasectomies; we’re against stem-cell research, but OK with IVF which supplies it. Don’t you see? We are never going to rid ourselves of the scourge of abortion until we embrace sexuality and it’s natural outcome as God intended. Sexuality is optional for the individual and results in conception. Go head and monkey with that.
On another note, the problem of abortion in a society is not about who’s getting snipped or who’s using BC, the problem is how people view life in the womb. If people had more respect for that life, they’d be more careful about who they potentially procreated with. And things happen all the time – babies are unintentionally created. The problem with abortion is that people just think they can kill the baby to fix the problem. That mentality is what drives abortion rates up – not who’s getting “fixed” or using condoms or what have you.
Libertybelle, why isn’t societies duty to protect marriage? Who benefits from marriages? Society does and the couple does. The Church simply recognizes the God and natural right of marriage and therefore supports it. But it is society’s obligation to do the same – this is obvious example of where the Church’s and Society’s goals are sympatico. Without the institution of marriage where are children going to be raised? Is not having the bond between mother-father-child protected important for society to support?
Single unmarried women are the highest users of abortion services. Contraception is prolife issue to the extent it impacts the institution of marriage.
Vasectomies are like condoms to me. They don’t have chemicals, they don’t hurt anyone, there is zero reason to oppose them in my mind. I’m never going to get why anyone cares!!
Jack,
contraception/sterilization leads to mistrust which leads to adultery which leads to marriage breakdown… which leads to less people wanting to get married….which leads to people having sex outside of marriage… which leads to more “unwanted” pregnancies…which leads to abortion.
And none of the above was a stretch or unreasonable.
One does not have to make the connection between the lack of legal marriage support and abortion in order to see that marriage has instrinsic value.
Lol. Condoms totally mean I don’t trust you.. I don’t buy it and never have.
Tyler, with all due respect, you have no idea what you are talking about. Contraception in no way has led to an adultery or marriage breakdown in my family. There’s no way it could.
Are you married?
Seriously, dude.
Jack, I don’t get it either lol. I’m probably not going to ask my husband to get one, for various personal reasons, but I’m not against others getting one.
Tyler, right, I totally agree that marriage is good for society. I just don’t think it’s the state’s role to be messing with that. As soon as you have the state dictating what’s “good for society,” you have these ridiculously hair-brained ideas and freedom-crushing mandates, a la the NYC soda ban, raw milk raids on Amish farms, etc.
The fact is, people are imperfect. People don’t follow God’s law. I think that God’s law is best for society BUT – and this is a big but, (and I like big buts and I cannot lie) – we cannot get the state involved!! The state is run by imperfect people, and as soon as you give imperfect people that much power, they become corrupted and abuse that power. I think a better way to promote marriage is by the church’s good example (which, frankly, it’s failed miserably at). Example is a far more effective agent of change than some heavy-handed laws.
Also, per the single mom comment, yeah I get that. But again, that’s a bigger problem than the STATE being involved in protecting marriage.
And Jamie – not everyone here is Catholic. We are here as *pro-lifers*, first and foremost. We can all agree that killing a baby in the womb is evil and bad and should be outlawed. Do that, then come talk to us about the evils of vasectomies and bc and all that.
“(and I like big buts and I cannot lie)”
I wish I could like your comment 100 times just because of this. :)
I took it from someone at another website I frequent. It bears repeating, though, doesn’t it??!
lol same JDC.
Humor is a great deflector of wrath. And as we’re wading into yet another warzone of contraception, I’m trying deflect it as much as possible….
Call in the comedians!
Unfortunately Courtnay your family is not indicative of every family.
It is very difficult to prove a definitive link between any social phenomena because people can always try to point to other causes. However, I think a person would have to seriously be putting on blinders not to see a link between the societal trends of increasing contraception use and marital breakdowns.
Courtnay why couldn’t contraceptive use lead to marital breakdown or adultery in your family? You have me really curious. What is the secret recipe?
Here is an article about the side effects of vasectomies: http://www.pop.org/content/problems-with-quick-fix-1684
Be informed before you consent.
Libertybelle are you an anarchist or libertarian?
By the way what is the difference between a libertarian and an anarchist?
The more I read about libertarianism the less difference I see between it and anarchism. My attraction to/hope for libertarianism is waning the more I read about it.
Tyler, and you’re barking up the wrong tree to say that contraception leads to marital breakdowns. there’s a lot more than contraception, let me tell you.
I can’t speak for Courtnay, but the secret recipe, Tyler, is Christ. If I’m using contraceptives or not, I know that my husband and I will remain faithful to one another because we not only respect each other, but importantly our marriage and Christ. Our faith keeps us faithful. Our love keeps us strong. All that has nothing to do if we use a condom or whatever.
I’m pretty sure that not using contraceptives and having even more kids would have kept me and my wife together, lol. It’s true, it’s totally all contraceptions fault. Everything was perfect until then lol.
Alexandra, some people may have not considered the “unsolicited advice”. And if people don’t want unsolicited advice, might be best not to post personal things on here.
i don’t have a moral problem with vasectomies. But I do think there are health consequences that people considering them may not be aware of. Indeed Carla admitted she was not aware of the cholesterol factor. At the end of the day it is a decision between her husband and herself. But I feel it is my duty as her friend to say “Have you heard that vasectomies can do this…”
Just like I am against vaccinations. People think I’m nuts. Some thank me for the information and some do not. Whatever. I feel it is my duty to say “hey, here are some risks your doctor might not tell you” and then they weigh the pros and cons and make the decision that is right for their family.
If someone’s position is so weak they cannot handle “unsolicited advice” then they should rethink their position. But I think Carla is a big girl and can handle it.
I generally stick my nose where it is uninvited. Which is why I speak out against abortion even when told not to. Our society says a lot of things are safe when in reality they are not.
Tyler, I’m a pro-life libertarian.
Anarchists believe in no government. Libertarians believe in a limited government, more localized, and with lots of checks and balances.
Libertarians believe that essentially government exists for the protection of the people and the enforcement of laws and contracts.
Libertarians recognize human nature, they recognize that power ultimately corrupts, and they seek to protect people from that corruption. As soon as you give messed up people in organization more power, the more they’ll seek and the more they will abuse it. It happens in government and crony capitalism alike.
Libertybelle, before you go celebrating your humour. Just think for a moment, if your promotion of liberty and contraception use does impact the number of abortions, your support for liberty could be tantamount to support killing more children. I think you should consider the possible implications of your position before you breezily brush aside all of the possible consequences. It would be highly irresponsible if you were to support contraception and sterilization simply because you liked them and not because they were factually helpful.
Absolutely, Sydney – I don’t think you said anything rude or out of place and I’m sorry if I implied that in any way.
From I can tell every libertarian (indeed all people) have a different notion of what constitutes a limited government. So your argument that the State doesn’t have a role in supporting marriage is not so much a support for a limited government but for the limited government you want.
At what point do you note the government’s right to promote institutions that help the majority of people (including children), and that do not create a society that is so fractured that all of its citizens live in self-imposed cubicles. Liberty that isolates us from one another is not true liberty. Liberty that puts us into sanitized latex world is not freedom, it is a prison, it isolates people from true communion.
So what is your solution to the marriage crisis Libertybelle?
Tyler, are you really trying to reprimand me for having humor in my post? these boards can get really harsh at times, sorry for trying lighten up the world a little bit.
And by the way, I did not breezily arrive at my position on liberty. I have reasoned, and thought and prayed about my positions. And I’m not giving up my position on liberty. Do you know what the definition of liberty even is?
I’m not brushing aside all possible consequences. I’m against most contraception – they are harmful to women and babies. Besides, I’m not supporting them per se, I’m just saying that I don’t think there is a direct link to abortion and adultery. And where did you get that I like contraception and sterilization? I don’t necessarily like them, I’m just pointing out that you can’t just dismiss them out of hand.
And, if you would care to know, I think that the right to life is the primary right of humans, and government should protect the life of all citizens, even the tiniest ones. The abortion debate is bigger than contraception. It’s a heart issue, not a “what do do I do during sex” issue.
And furthermore, I hate to break it to you, but this world is not perfect. This world is brimming with horrible situations, evil people, confused people, stupid people, deadly natural disasters, accidents, etc. and no amount of legislating is going to stop it. We should seek to protect human life, and allow people to come to their own conclusions on other matters.
As I said before, I don’t think it’s going to be laws that are going to change people’s attitudes about abortion, but rather a change of heart, more active nonprofits and ministries – which we would have more of if we could just cut the friggin red tape.
Marriage protects people (especially young children) and it is a contract that needs to be protected by making sure that adultery is not easliy done.
Actually He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named has a point. Libertarian philosophy does have it’s roots in anarchistic philosophy (specifically minarchism came out of this, which is what the Libertarian party in the US most closely resembles I believe). I more subscribe to left libertarianism, which does see a positive effect for the government to support social programs in some instances.
?? I’m confused. Where did I advocate liberty isolating us from one another?
I believe that people would be just as capable of living meaningful, fulfilling lives without the level of government intrusion we have now – and probably more so. I would be free to buy raw milk openly, as I believe that is the healthiest option for my family. YOu seem to underestimate people, tyler. The government doesn’t need to promote institutions – beneficial institutions will rise on their own! It’s called a free market, and it works wonders for the human condition. People can be twisted, yes, but they can also be incredible, smart, intuitive, ingenius, productive. It happens. Life happens. No one is advocating we be put in bubbles.
I’m not the only one who says that the state shouldn’t have a role in marriage. I have no clue where you’re reading about libertarianism from. But don’t even Catholics have different opinions about certain things? Does that mean you all abandon your attempts at making the world a better place?
We don’t all agree on how a more limited government will look, but we can keep pushing for incremental changes, can’t we? I can still try to free up the world a little more, can’t I?
What is my solution to the marriage problem. Tyler, tyler. If you’d read my posts above, you’d see. I think the responsibility lies with not only individuals, but the church. If the church claims to support the best model for marriage, why don’t they promote it? Why don’t they work on marriage classes for their congregation? Why don’t they encourage their married friends to open their homes and lives to those who don’t share their views to show them how beneficial marriage is? Wouldn’t this work? Isn’t it better to convince people of the benefits of marriage by showing them said benefits?
Tyler, and you’re barking up the wrong tree to say that contraception leads to marital breakdowns. there’s a lot more than contraception, let me tell you.
Please do..
As far as I am aware the number 1 and 2 causes of marital breakdown are finances and infidelity.
Contraception most definitely contributes to an increase in infidelity. Sure a lack of faith does as well, but since we are all prone to temptation the availability of contraception makes infidelity appear less risky and more tempting. Why give the Devil some more tools?
Liberty, I’ll save you some time since him and I have had this exact same argument like ten million times. He thinks everything that he is personally opposed to should be criminalized or discouraged by the government, and everything that he is personally advocating should be encouraged and supported by the government. He doesn’t seem to have a concept of letting people and society make these decisions, instead of the government. It’s maddening to have any libertarian sensibilities and argue with him, it will make you punch your monitor.
Tyler, in what universe does contraception = infidelity?
Jack, I wonder who that is?
And Jack you are for legalizing everything you like and makes you feel good…hence your support of legalizing marijuna use.
That personal attack can be thrown both ways.
Lol thanks Jack. I’ll just peace out then. I’ve got way more important things to do anyway.
There are obviously different tenets of libertarianism, but I think of us out there can agree that people are imperfect and just want to be governed by the golden rule. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Do I want someone killing me in the womb? No, sir. Do I want someone arresting the idiot who lied to me about our business contract? Yes. Simple.
It’s just super annoying that He Who Must Not Be Named is constantly trying to compare condoms to cheating!
Tyler, I don’t use marijuana and I doubt I ever will. But I’m for legalizing it for recreational purposes.
Mary Ann says:
So a man gets snipped, but his body continues to produce sperm. Where does the sperm supply go?
I heard a program on the radio about this very thing about a week ago. Seems that after vasectomy the sperm get into the blood stream, which apparently never happens normally. This can cause auto immune disorders. Sorry I don’t recall more detail, but I’m sure the info is out there for whomever wants to do more research.
Edited to add this link, not sure how reliable this source is but it has detail about what I heard:
http://nfpdoctors.org/2010/01/vasectomy/
“And Jack you are for legalizing everything you like and makes you feel good…hence your support of legalizing marijuna use”
Nope. I have already explained my position and I am not going over it again. You, however, have told me multiple times you want Catholic morality legally enforced. Which is your right to believe and advocate for, but it leaves us literally nothing to discuss if that’s your position.
Sydney,
I did get a little personal on here didn’t I? DOH! :)
Jack,
WHUTT?? You mean you honestly don’t care about the discussion that my husband and I are having right now about this V procedure??? ::pouts::
Lol Carla, I totally want to hear every detail. Um, no. ;)
Tyler, I love that your dig at me totally failed. If I thought there was anything bad about wanting to smoke a joint now and then it might have, but there isn’t!
Jack, you have deduced that I want Catholic morality legally enforced which is not accurate. Like you, and everyone else, there are certain things I think should be illegal. They do happen to be same things that the Catholic Church believes to be immoral but they these things are not Catholic. Making contraception illegal is not a Catholic teaching, but Catholic church teaches contraception is immoral.
My earlier point was that you want your personal morality legally enforced. The fact that you have not disclosed which Church, if any, your morality is in alignment with is irrelevant to the fact that you want your personal morality legally enforced.
I am for personal liberties and freedoms as well. For example, I think it is ok for people to drink alcohol. I know some Christian denominations don’t think drinking should be legal and I support them in the right to think this way. Their argument is not without merits for society. Drinking does promote many ills. And thanks to common sense we restrict the use of alcohol while driving.
I don’t want all of Catholic theology legally enforced. I am not asking that everyone be requried to go to Mass on Sundays, or to go to confession at least once a year, or to be baptized Catholics.
“…and I cannot lie..” Ok thanks a lot, now that song is stuck in my head!
Contraception doesn’t cause marital trouble in a direct cause-and-effect manner, BUT, it does make it easier for people to THINK they can engage in sex with an individual with whom they would not consider parenting a child. When I was young in a small community, we didn’t have condoms at the nurse’s office or birth control pills in 6th grade. We gals knew that if you fooled around with a cute guy, you might get pregnant, and then, you’d be stuck connected to his possibly crazy family for the rest of your life. Best to get to know him and find out if the risk was worth it. Knowing how serious pregnancy is made us pause a bit. I saw a lot of recklessness in college among my peer group because the availability of birth control gave people the illusion they could sleep with someone without the risk of future entanglement.
However, in a trusting, monogamous relationship, it is possible to be using contraception but not take the opportunity to cheat. Some people just have more ethics and/or self-control.
So, you’re both right.
Jack, my dig did expose the fact that your love of liberty does have its limits.
It is my understanding that after vasectomy a mans body reabsorbs sperm through his blood stream. Perhaps this is a factor in the claim that men who’ve had vasectomies often have much higher cholesterol levels.
The regular way a mans body gets rid of excess sperm buildup (for men who aren’t masturbating or having sex) is through wet dreams. After the snip, there is no such outlet, and so excess amounts are reabsorbed into the body. To say that things work pre surgery the same way they will post surgery when the whole point of the surgery was to change a process doesn’t make sense to me. They may be similar, but how could they be the same? An honest question, not snarky.
Whatever ones position on contraception and sterilization, it doesn’t make much
sense to think that there are no side effects to surgically altering a natural and healthy process. People for years said the same thing about altering women’s cycles. Now we know better.
Tyler, when did Jack say his love of liberty didn’t have limits?
Jack, since I rarely drink I would support a law banning alcohol.
LibertyBelle, the point is that everyone’s concept of liberty has limits unless they are an anarchist. The question is where do we draw the line, where are the limits to personal freedom?
”
Jack, my dig did expose the fact that your love of liberty does have its limits.”
Yes you exposed something that I freely admit to all the time. Of course my sense of freedom has limits. You know what they are, I have told you eleventy billion times.
I don’t want to criminalize something that I rarely or never use, otherwise I would have meat illegal in like two seconds because I am extremely morally and health-wise opposed to eating meat. That’s where we differ, as always. I also will never touch heroin again, but I don’t think that criminalization of heroin has helped anyone, least of all heroin addicts.
“Jack, since I rarely drink I would support a law banning alcohol”
I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if you did.
Thanks Jack. It is now crystal clear how you would like to pigeon hole my viewpoint. Thanks.
I would appreciate that you only refer to Catholicism when you have something positive to say about it. Otherwise, who knows all the negative things I can drum up about secular agnostic left leaning libertarians.
Just returning the favor. :D
Jack your anti-Catholicism is not pretty.
I agree. So then what’s your point? I’m really confused.
Oh don’t be silly, I haven’t specifically said anything about Catholicism besides I don’t agree with their contraception rules. I don’t dislike Catholicism as a whole. I resent the way you wish to enforce your viewpoint.
Say whatever you want about secularists, you will anyway.
Tyler,
As a fellow Catholic I agree with you about many things, but I’m not seeing Jack being anti-Catholic at all. I haven’t read everything on this thread, but all I see is him disagreeing about how law should reflect morality. Unless by anti-Catholic you simply mean in disagreement with or not Catholic, I can’t see how Jack is anti-Catholic.
Tyler, Jack isn’t anti-Catholic. He just doesn’t believe in God. It’s not his fault. It’s not a character flaw. He’s the same as everyone else, just trying to find his own way. I want him to believe, you want him to believe. But he doesn’t. Faith is a gift. He’ll get it. Just let him be.
LibertyBelle, it means don’t accuse me of imposing my personal morality on society when you are doing the exact same thing… your sense of morality merely includes different laws than mine and not even necessarily less laws. This point goes for Jack as well.
Separating your morality for what you desire to be illegal means either you are not logically, or you don’t really believe whatever it is is really immoral. Liberty or tolerance is not only the absence of laws, but laws that support human nature. For example, Jack saying he is personally finds eating meat immoral but will allow it to be legal for everyone else is the same argument that Joe Biden used about abortion – “personally opposed, but publicly supports.” It sounds good, but it makes no sense.
Coincidently Jack you share the same initials with Joe Biden. I think I will call you JB from now on if that is ok?
Otherwise, who knows all the negative things I can drum up about secular agnostic left leaning libertarians.
I am pretty sure we all know by now.
Thank you Bobby and Courtnay.
“Separating your morality for what you desire to be illegal means either you are not logically, or you don’t really believe whatever it is is really immoral. ”
Completely disingenuous to say. You think it’s immoral to have sex outside of marriage, but do you really want it to be illegal and carry criminal penalties if I went and picked someone up at the bar or something? Maybe you do, I don’t know. I would love to hear how you would enforce something like that though.
Do you want fornication illegal or not? If you don’t, then you must not really believe it’s immoral. You are “personally opposed to fornication”.
“Coincidently Jack you share the same initials with Joe Biden. I think I will call you JB from now on if that is ok?”
Lol go ahead. I’ll call you Pastor Ken because that’s who you remind me of. I should tell you about him someday.
Tyler, your petulance is showing. … and it ain’t pretty!
Look, you’re being the one that’s illogical. I’m *not* imposing my personal morality!! My personal morality is that cheating on my husband is wrong, that I don’t want to get drunk, that I don’t want to do heroin, but I’m not forcing those on others. You are desperately confused about the nature of law. There are preferences, like Jack’s not wanting to eat meat, and there’s crimes against humanity, like a baby being killed in abortion. Meat shouldn’t be illegal, because it doesn’t hurt other people and is a total preference thing, even if it’s not good for some people. Abortion is wrong because it kills babies. Abortion should be illegal. Some think drinking should be illegal, but drinking itself isn’t immoral for everyone, only some.
gah. I’m going to stop. I”m sick and it takes too much energy chasing your round the mulberry bush and everywhere else your crazy logic takes you. All Jack and I are saying is that there’s a difference between imposing one’s *moral preferences* and making sure there are laws that protect others’ rights and allows people to decide what those moral preferences are.
PS Jack isn’t anti-Catholic. He’s against the mandate against contraception as much as I am, and I’m a Christian. Leave him be about that. I second what Bobby and COurtnay said.
PS If you can’t take questions about your beliefs, you aren’t making a very good case for those beliefs.
Jack, something does not have to be enforcible for it to be made illegal. If abortion became illegal, it would be technically impossible to police pregnant women.
There should be a law against fornication. The marriage contract already supposes that there will be fidelity, so in a sense fornication is illegal for married couples. Jack, if fornication was not illegal polyamory will be legal as well as polygamy would be the law of the land. You just don’t see that fornication is illegal and so many people act as if it isn’t. In lieu of that, we should try to make fornication as impractical and as difficult as possible. Society should also do its utmost to protect marriage.
You are probably referring to fornicating by two unmarried individuals. As far as I know there is no law forbidding this but there probably was at one time. There was a law against sodomy. There are however age-of-consent laws with respect to sex. Jack, should we remove these laws?
Jack, the question of penalties is also a separate issue as to whether something should be legal. You can have something illegal without having an overly tough penalty.
“Jack, if fornication was not illegal polyamory will be legal as well as polygamy would be the law of the land. You just don’t see that fornication is illegal and so many people act as if it isn’t. In lieu of that, we should try to make fornication as impractical and as difficult as possible. Society should also do its utmost to protect marriage. ”
Lol well if you are talking about polyamory as in just having sex with several people at once I hate to inform you that is legal.
How do you propose we make fornication impractical and difficult? I’m honestly curious.
“You are probably referring to fornicating by two unmarried individuals. As far as I know there is no law forbidding this but there probably was at one time. There was a law against sodomy. There are however age-of-consent laws with respect to sex. Jack, should we remove these laws? ”
You deliberately try to make me mad don’t you? Of course I don’t want age of consent laws removed, and you know why because I have told you before. It’s not my fault that you can’t understand what “consenting adult sexual behavior” is, but you know that is what I support not being restricted legally.
Libertybelle, you raised some good questions for Jack to answer about the difference between eating meat and abortion. I will let the two of you debate that one out. Jack probably agrees with you.
Jack is the person who said he doesn’t want Catholic morality legislated. If it makes anyone feel better I will qualify my statement so that I am saying that Jack’s point of view is anti-legalization of Catholic morality. However, as a Catholic we don’t believe our morality is merely a matter of our faith. We believe our morality is based on the natural law of human nature and applicable to everyone. Catholics simply believe there is morality – period, not a “Catholic” morality.
Here’s a thought, Tyler, your society that you seem to advocate would just be a society ruled by fear. What I’m saying is people should want to be moral because of it’s own merits, not because they’re afraid the cops will break down their door and drag them to prison, or because they’ll incur penalizing fines. There should be law, but also grace. Adults need to be able to make these decisions on their own. As a Catholic, you believe anyway that in the end they will face the consequences of decisions anyway. Why make this world more miserable for everyone in the process?
I didn’t raise questions for Jack…. O_o
I don’t want Catholic morality legislated either. And I know you guys believe it’s morality for everyone, and I would agree with most of what Catholics say (fornication is immoral, lying is immoral, whatever), but Catholics *do* hold unique positions I don’t agree with (ie bc is a sin). And anyway, there’s a lot of morality in my Protestant church that I wouldn’t want legislated either. Anti-legislating catholic doctrines/morality is not even close to being the same thing as anti-Catholic, just like contraception is not the same thing as infidelity.
“However, as a Catholic we don’t believe our morality is merely a matter of our faith. We believe our morality is based on the natural law of human nature and applicable to everyone. Catholics simply believe there is morality – period, not a “Catholic” morality”
Still doesn’t mean I am anti-Catholic or anti-Christianity in general to disagree with this viewpoint. That’s ultra-sensitive of you to think so. There are actually things I really like about Christianity. This wanting to force me to live the way you do is not one of them, though I think that’s way more of a Tyler thing than a Christian thing.
Jack polyamory is legal in the sense I said – it was an oversight of marital law. Societies believed that stress the legality of monogamous nature of marriage, plus the Christian teaching against pre-marital sex effectively made polyamory a non-issue with respect to the law. Unfortunately, the deviancy that is now apparent in our society suggests scoieties should have a law against such behaviour.
“Unfortunately, the deviancy that is now apparent in our society suggests scoieties should have a law against such behaviour.”
Can I ask you what you think making it illegal will actually do? The kinda people who really have a thing for sleeping around, or want three girlfriends and a boyfriend rather than one wife, I don’t see them being like “oh yeah, it’s illegal, that’s too bad I would totally do that if it weren’t”. All you do with suppression laws like you are describing is push consenting behavior to be more hidden. Which if that is what you want I guess that’s cool but I don’t see what good that does.
And I am not going to even touch the fact that this “deviancy” has been present in humanity since forever. I think it’s funny people act like two hundred or so years ago no one did this and no one even thought to legislate against it.
Jack banning contraception and sterilizations would be a good way to make fornication less practical and desirable.
Jack Catholicism is not about forcing anyone to live in certain way. We will follow our morality no matter if it is the law of the land of not. We see our morality as liberating the person.
The concern for legalizing the Catholic perspective on morality is not only a Tyler thing, it comes from the Church’s teaching to love our neighbours, and a desire to see everyone called reach Heaven.
Is fornication good for the human person Jack? Is polyamory good for the human person? Since we have already established that you agree with some restrictions on liberty I ask you to consider these further restrictions.
LibertyBelle, I too believe grace is important.
Jack your suppression argument can be equally applied to support the proabortion argument. We shouldn’t make abortion illegal because it will only force those who really want an abortion to go underground. They are going to have the abortion anyway and there is nothing you can do to stop them.
Jack making it illegal will act as deterent for some.
The difference, Tyler, is that abortion is murder. Fornication is not. Doing drugs is not.
Libertybelle, stealing is also not murder.
“Jack banning contraception and sterilizations would be a good way to make fornication less practical and desirable.”
It would also be a good way to create a black market. As someone who was involved in the drug trade I think that’s a very poor plan. You can’t put the genie back in the bottle that way buddy. It’s just not a good idea in my opinion.
“Jack Catholicism is not about forcing anyone to live in certain way. We will follow our morality no matter if it is the law of the land of not. We see our morality as liberating the person. ”
Well maybe Catholicism isn’t about that, but you certainly are. It’s cool that you follow your morality and see it liberating. I see some parts of your morality as good and some not so good.
“The concern for legalizing the Catholic perspective on morality is not only a Tyler thing, it comes from the Church’s teaching to love our neighbours, and a desire to see everyone called reach Heaven.”
Lol. You think that’s loving. I will tell you, the best way to insure that I never become a Christian is make it illegal for me to live my life. I am under the impression that Christianity is about making a willing choice to believe and follow Christ and live your life the way he wants. How is legally deciding for me that I must live your morality me making a willing choice?
“Is fornication good for the human person Jack? Is polyamory good for the human person? Since we have already established that you agree with some restrictions on liberty I ask you to consider these further restrictions.”
Meh, I don’t think slutting around ever caused me much damage but it’s different for everyone. If it’s your opinion that it’s damaging for everyone then that’s cool, but I ask you to legally stay out of my bedroom choices where everyone is a willing participant.
“LibertyBelle, I too believe grace is important.”
Lol! The way you treat non-religious people really, really shows your grace Tyler. So shows it.
But stealing does hurt someone else’s property.
“Jack your suppression argument can be equally applied to support the proabortion argument. We shouldn’t make abortion illegal because it will only force those who really want an abortion to go underground. They are going to have the abortion anyway and there is nothing you can do to stop them. ”
I don’t know how many times I have to say that behavior that harms non-consenting parties should be restricted. Abortion and stealing both fall under this category. Rape falls under this category. So does deliberately having unprotected sex when you are aware you are HIV positive and do not inform your partner. Those things I don’t have a problem criminalizing.
“I am under the impression that Christianity is about making a willing choice to believe and follow Christ and live your life the way he wants”
This. Yes. It’s not about government, Tyler. Jesus doesn’t care about government. Christianity thrives under some of the most evil, oppressive governments out there (namely China). Jesus said to render unto Ceaser’s what is Ceaser’s. He was more concerned about winning people to him, to bringing them to grace, to saving them from sins. He had harsher words for Pharisees who were trying to impose their understanding of the law onto others. Jesus himself dined with sinners, prostitutes, tax collectors, those cast out by society. There’s a reason he didn’t come through the government. He could have been born a king. He wasn’t.
I don’t want to start acting like an expert in this area nor just throw random links at people, yet here we go: I don’t know very much about how the natural law should be reflected in civil law, but this short article makes some sense to me. It is based on Aquinas’ writings, and I think one can never go wrong by holding to his position.
http://www.aquinasonline.com/Topics/tolernce.html
I am also under the impression (though admittedly not very knowledgeable) that Pope Leo XIII embraced many of Aquinas’ ideas in his encyclical Libertas. I will have to try and read it this week, but I think at least Aquinas (again, from all the expertise I gained by reading one article) would not have such a “hradlined” view of how law should reflect the natural law as Tyler does. I just want to throw this out there for some more discussion. I don’t know much so probably will go back to stalking now.
I liked that link Bobby right up until the end, where Aquinas apparently kinda went off the rails a bit (in my opinion) with talking about executing people.
“If, however, we examine the Thomistic doctrine on the death penalty in general, we can see that he only favors it when the common good is in immediate danger:
Therefore, if a man be dangerous and infectious to the community, on account of some sin, it is praiseworthy and advantageous that he be killed in order to safeguard the common good…. ”
Like wow. Especially since he seems to think heresy is an offense that could be worthy of death in some instances. I don’t think I would be considered a heretic but an apostate, which I think is even worse lol. That’s some scary stuff.
Boy, scanning this thread makes me feel like Baby Oliver (shameless plug).
Apostate certainly would not be worse because the problem with heretic, I believe, that Aquinas had in mind was that a heretic would corrupt people’s minds and “bring them to hell” so to speak. So I’m under the impression that in that case, the death penalty wasn’t so much punitive as it was to safeguard other people from being corrupted by the heretic, the idea being taht those who were corrupted by the heretic would run a greater risk of going to hell. So in a strange sense it makes sense, but I agree that it really isn’t something that is appropriate for this day and age… possibly never. I think the author also talks about how there was much more integration between the Church and state, and so the fact that the state had a vested interest in Church matters may have given reason for Aquinas to say that the state would have the right to execute heretics… I don’t know, I”m making things up, but the truth is that if Aquinas is teaching something that I don’t agree with, I tend to think the problem is on my end- either I am misunderstanding him or I don’t have all teh information or other background that is necessary to understand his point. Whenever I finally “get” him, he makes just perfect sense to me, so my guess is that I am missing something.
LibertyBelle fornication hurts the fornicator and the fornicatee! If either party to the fornication has a family or children it can possibly hurt them as well. Fornication does not happen in a vacuum (however,,,,,,I want go there).
LibertyBelle I agree the government is not the answer for humankind’s soul. However, Jesus did clearly give us two commandments. Jesus didn’t abolish the law, he fulfilled it. The 10 commandments still stand. The pharisees are those who believe government laws are what makes things moral and right. I have not argued that. I want laws to reflect morality, not the other way around. Many secular thinkers view laws as the ultimate determination of right and wrong – in my book this thinking like a pharisee. If our laws aren’t based on morality why have them at all (not taking about regulations, and safety rules, etc…)?
What exactly is a sin in your book LibertyBelle? Isn’t fornication a sin? Isn’t adultery a sin?
Hans that was one cute kid. His facial expressions were funny.
Bobby I will read the piece tonight. Gotta run everybody. Have a good night.
Carla, lol. You know I’ve done it too. I invited all sorts of discussion on the fact that my husband and I use condoms.
Alexandra, no offense was taken, really! :-)
This thread sure got interesting while I was gone.
Hi Bobby,
I am not sure how hardline my view is if we consider the present form of Western society’s current human laws. Western societies have embraced abortion something that violates natural law and something St. Thomas says should never happen:
The natural and Divine laws proceed from the Divine will, as stated above. Wherefore they cannot be changed by a custom proceeding from the will of man, but only by Divine authority. Hence it is that no custom can prevail over the Divine or natural laws: for Isidore says (Synon. ii, 16): “Let custom yield to authority: evil customs should be eradicated by law and reason.” (ST I- II, q. 97, a. 3, ad 1)
Sodomy, fornication and adultery are also against the natural law, as is contraception and sterilization. I would contend these acts do harm others and therefore warrant being prohibited by human laws. I do not think such laws are too burdensome for the unvirtuous.
However, this does not mean I think all vices or that all acts contrary to the natural law should be prohibited by human law. This goes to LibertyBelle’s statement at November 20, 2012 at 4:21 pm which was very good and contained some important insights. Even though a government may not prohibit all vices or acts contrary to the natural law and thereby leaves venegence for these acts to our Lord (as St. Paul says we ought to do [Romans 12:19]) this omission by the government does not alleviate the need for all human beings, including those who would commit these vices, to act virtuously and obey both the natural and divine law. Human law, inevitably, promotes the lowest standard of virtuous action.
Bobby I have been avoiding St. Thomas but perhaps it is time that I start reading him. He makes some wonderful distinctions. His ability to make distinctions is like spotting angels dancing on the head of a pin – truly amazing!!
Tyler being against a vasectomy COMPLETLEY validates my decision to get one. Good god man you are out there.
Yep. I upvoted a comment by Jake. The Mayans were right.
Jake was it really necessary for you to get one?
If the church claims to support the best model for marriage, why don’t they promote it?
The Church does promote marriage. Why don’t people follow this model?
Why don’t they work on marriage classes for their congregation?
The Church does have marriage classes for engaged couples as well as retreats/classes for married couples. The Church also has support groups for divorcees and widows/widowers. Why don’t people attend?
Why don’t they encourage their married friends to open their homes and lives to those who don’t share their views to show them how beneficial marriage is?
The Church does encourage us to share our homes, lives and beliefs with others. This thread is an example of how our Catholic beliefs are met in our off-line lives as well. Why don’t people listen?
^ Prax I agree that the church does that -Maybe the reason people aren’t attending is a miscommunication? A failure to catch the vision of marriage? I don’t know. In my church, the marriage classes and retreats are always full. All I’m saying is that the state isn’t the answer.
And Tyler, I’m exhausted by this. I’ve told you time and again what my views are and where I stand. Good day to you.
LibertyBelle, good day to you. Thank-you for sharing your views with me, I have appreciated hearing. I hope that you appreciated hearing mine. Hopefully, neither one of us crawls into a protective shell and refuses to listen to the other simply because we have disagreed on some points.
Praxedes, those were very shrewd and intelligent responses. They contained concrete facts and appropriately pointed rhetorical questions.
The problem with marriage is that society, and not the Church, no longer promotes the best model of marriage. We get Hollywood’s version of marriage: 2 minutes of Honeymoon footage stuck at the end of a sickeningly syrupy romantic film – think of any John Cusack or Meg Ryan film. (However, I must confess I have watched these films.)
Yes, tyler, I have. As I mentioned yesterday, I’m sick, so I’m a little exhausted to keep battling it out. I’m not trying to ignore the points, it’s just my body is screaming at me to take a chill pill (now where did I put those?). :)
Perhaps the problem is that the church is promoting marriage in the church only, and not doing a good enough job of putting great marriage out there, so to speak.
Though Hollywood doesn’t always fail in that regard. My all-time favorite movie, Cinderella Man, is a beautiful picture of marriage. :)
I have heard there is really a push by some women to encourage their husbands, especially cheating husbands, to get sterilized. In this way, the wife’s family financial resources are protected from possible children being fathered by the cheating husband outside the marriage. A better solution to a cheating husband is to help him stop cheating.
I confess and am embarrassed to say I did this to my ex-husband. I now know what a terrible sin this was. He and his mistress were trying to have a baby together and I wanted him to take care of the children he already had so I pushed for him to have a vasectomy. This was not my place and was out of line.
As far as helping a cheating spouse stop cheating, you can only support them if they call off the affair(s). They have to want to stop. If they continue cheating, I believe separation is best because they may be passing on diseases to their spouse. The separation may then, unfortunately, lead to divorce.
Maybe the reason people aren’t attending is a miscommunication?
Or maybe they are like I was. I knew better than the Church what was best for me and others.
In my church, the marriage classes and retreats are always full.
The strip joint a few towns over from me is too.
xalisae, i even voted up Jake’s response!
LibertyBelle–If possible go to another parish. (I don’t know where you live, so I don’t know if that’s an option).
One parish I’m familair with has about 3 different types of marriage prep available: Enganged Encounter, Sponsor Couple, and a 6-week (once a week) marriage course. Other parishes also offer pre-cana classes and such. There’s also NFP offered (and in some parishes, REQUIRED).
The Catholic Church has been trying to tell people for YEARS where we’re heade with vastecomies, abortions, pornography, and the like (and no, I’m not pointing fingers at any one person). I’m NOT saying people won’t do bad things (because we all have free will) but I am saying people should NOT be surprised where we are based on what we have allowed. God didn’t abandon us. We, (as a society) threw Him out. What the Catholic Church has been trying to do is to bring back the beautiful model of what marriage is supposed to be. But, it appears as a whole (and in general) we reject the model.
It’s so much easier to call the Church oppressive than to take a look and investigate deeper as to what is really the cause of problems.
As to vastecomies, why should anyone go through surgery when there’s other options? Try out Natural Family Planning first. There’s many different methods available. It’s usually cheaper than surgery.
Yeah, I upvoted Jake too. It was an odd experience for me lol.
Well, I’m on the verge of upvoting Jake, but it just feels so wrong. But then again if I could upvote CC once or twice such as I did, I suppose I can do anything.
Ok, I did it.
Nope. Not gonna do it. Here I stand.
Now isn’t that ironic?
(A little Catholic vs. Martin Luther humor there.)
Lol Hans.
I apologize to everyone for liking Jake’s comment. It was immature. I even apologize to Jake for being sarcastic. Jake, sincerely, you should rethink whether sterilizing yourself was a good idea.
After my divorce, I went to the doctor who delivered two of my children and told him I wanted my tubes tied. Yes, for selfish and sinful reasons. This doctor refused and told me to go elsewhere. He told me too many women come back upset stating they have met someone who they want to have a child with later on and he wanted no part of it. I argued that this was not me and that I would have no regrets.
A few years down the road, enter the kind man who became my fiancee and then my husband. By then I had decided to take my faith more seriously and learn more about the whys behind the ‘rules’ of the Church. My new husband and I did become pregnant with his only child. I went back to my doctor, told him he was right and thanked him. We were so excited about our baby! I started to miscarry the day after we saw our baby’s heartbeat.
Some of the heartache I have over losing our baby is channeled into attempts to bring others to the truths I searched for and found.
I’m sorry for your loss Praxedes.
Thanks, Jack.
I’m hoping my stories may give pause to other people considering sterilization, especially young folks like yourself (I was over 35 when I thought I told my doctor I wanted this done).
None of us knows what the future holds and many times our feelings change depending on our life circumstances.
I think often of you and your family and I am thankful that I have gotten to know prolifers like yourself here at Jill’s. Happy Thanksgiving.
When a family is complete, it seems to me that it makes more sense for the female to be sterilized. A husband’s sterilization does nothing to protect her from a pregnancy through rape.
Thank you for your thoughts and prayers Prax. Happy thanksgiving to you too.