Sex educator writes children’s book about “what makes a baby”
What Makes a Baby is a 36-page picture book, lovingly produced in full colour and illustrated by the award-winning Canadian artist, Fiona Smyth. What makes it new is that it’s a book about where babies come from that actually works for every kind of family and every kind of kid….
Most books tell one kind of story. And that’s a story about a man with sperm, a woman with eggs, and a bed with intercourse….
What Makes a Baby will help parents single or partnered, LGB or straight, trans or cis-gendered, biological, adoptive, or otherwise answer their kids’ questions.
~ Sex educator and author Corey Silverberg introducing his new children’s book, What Makes a Baby, via Radical Doula, June 11
Jun.12, 2013 6:00 am |
GLBT |
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.
Wrong book–the “parents” (guardians?) need to read a What Makes a Family. Here’s a title I have: Jay Adams’ Christian Living in the Home.
So that I’m not misunderstood, I do believe that a husband and wife who adopt are indeed parents, and I do believe that a stepfather or stepmother is indeed a parent. I do believe that biological parents are indeed parents, at least biologically (in the event that a mother has given up her baby for adoption, then she has released her claim to the child). And while I do believe that a single mother or father is indeed a parent, the situation is obviously not ideal for the child. I’m pro-marriage and anti-perversion.
There are lots of perversions. And I think surrogate motherhood (gestation in another woman’s womb) is one of them. But I’m not as sure about it as I am about human cloning, another example of perversion.
I think that “what makes a baby” is not synonymous with “what makes a family,” and parents do best by their kids when they answer the questions actually asked. Kids that age are rarely asking about the social construction and fabric of a family, how that family came to be and why. They’re asking how babies are made. Answer the question they ask. It doesn’t put down non-traditional families at all, to say that babies come from sperm and an egg, a man and a woman.
They will ask the other questions when they’re up to it. I field questions about divorce right alongside questions about sex, but I don’t answer one with the other.
I like the book It’s Not The Stork by Robie Harris, for this topic. It’s the first, and youngest, of three books he has dealing with the topic.
I wasn’t dealing with what the children need or want. I was pointing out that the supposed “parents”–and most of all, the “sex educator,” Corey Silverberg–need some education themselves. If the blind leads the blind, both fall into the pit.
Sorry, Jon, I was talking about the topic in general, not responding to anything you’d said. Apologies if I was unclear!
Well, I see from the video on Corey’s site that he got one thing right: Where do babies come from and where did I come from are two different questions. I can tell from the cover art that he couldn’t avoid simple biology in answering the question what makes a baby. Babies still require sperm and egg. I don’t know if the book touches on the reproductive technologies he mentioned in the video, but this is not a book I would introduce to my young children. I waited until they were teens before letting them know how much of the world has reduced children to commodities that can be engineered and purchased.
This is standard fare for those of us living in Canada:
A few things:
1) for an alternative perspective – namely from the perspective of children (adopted, created through IVF using insemination or surrogacy, etc…):
http://englishmanif.blogspot.ca/2013/01/mind-blowing-speech-from-adopted-asian.html
2) for a morning laugh look up what it means to be cisgendered, if you don’t already know what it means. I know there can be and are serious issues for some individuals but this term has to be the most useless words in the English language – redundancy captured in one word! (PS, for the easily offended I am not making fun of cisgendered persons, indeed I am one myself – I think?, rather I am just laughing at the word.)
I haven’t read the book, but I don’t think this is a bad concept at all. Why not have a book that just lays out the basics? The parents can add whatever details are relevant to the particular child. Besides, even if the kid came into existence in the traditional way, they’re bound to encounter other children who were adopted (either post-birth or as embryos, both awesome pro-life options), who are being raised by a single mom, and so on. They’re going to have questions about themselves and their friends. A book should just be a starting point; the real education comes from conversations between parent and child.
I used “The Story of Me” and “Before You Were Born” to talk about where babies come from when I was pregnant with my second son early last year. My oldest was 5 and asked a lot of questions. It does talk about sex but from a God-centered approach.
What is cis-gendered??? Good grief…
One “kind” of story? It will always take a sperm and an egg to “make” a baby. The sperm will always come from a man, and the eggs from a woman. And there will never, ever, ever, ever, be any substitute for MOM and DAD. Children need and deserve MOM and DAD in their lives. Shame on our selfish and warped society for thinking the adults’ sexual wants supersede the kids’ genuine needs.
comment moderated
As many people as possible should read this article:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/homosexuality/
It clearly shows that many who support the new sex ed don’t believe sexuality is innate but rather a social construct.
Modern day reading comprehension:
Dating your daughter – creepy.
Manufacturing children – A-Okay.
I’m pretty sure the book completely overlooks all the lawyers, doctors, clinicians, technicians, shareholders and all the others involved in mono-sex couples.
The most overlooked involvment: God.
Does anyone think the following idea is true:
“The progressives learned that if they put programs like “Sex Ed” in place through the government it will slowly push Churches and parents out of the “Sex Ed” business.”
What do people think of the following proposal:
“The solution for more conservative folk is *not* to get the Churches back into the “Sex-Ed” business but to take over the government programs and redesign them. This solution, however, is very antithetical to conservatives because they generally want fewer government programs. But nonetheless this solution is probably the most achievable and realistic in my opinion.”
“Dating your dauDating your daughter – creepy.
Manufacturing children – A-Okay. “
Couldn’t they both be considered creepy?
The full text of the book is included in the Reader’s Guide. Here it is:
“This is a story about how babies are made. The first thing you need to know is that you can’t make a baby out of nothing. You have to start with something.
This is an egg. Not all bodies have eggs in them. Some do, and some do not.
Inside the egg are so many stories all about the body the egg came from.
This is a sperm. Not all bodies have sperm in them. Some do, and some do not.
Inside the sperm, just like inside the egg, there are so many stories about the body the sperm came from.
When grown-ups want to make a baby they get an egg from one body and a sperm from another body. They also need a place where the baby can grow.
This is a uterus. It is a place where a baby can grow. You might think that everyone has a uterus, since it has the words YOU and US in it. But not everyone has a uterus.
Just like eggs, and just like sperm, some bodies have a uterus and some bodies do not. Every body that has a uterus always has it in the same place, just below the belly button, in the squishy middle part.
When an egg and a sperm meet, they swirl together in a special kind of dance. As they dance, they talk to each other. The egg tells the sperm all the stories it has to tell about the body it came from. And the sperm tells the egg all the stories it has to tell about the body it came from.
When their dance is done they are not two things any more. They danced around and shared so much that they became one brand new thing.
At first it is just a tiny thing. Sometimes this tiny thing does not grow. And sometimes it grows into a baby (like you did).
Who helped bring together the sperm and the egg that made you?
Who was happy that it was you who grew?
Everything that grows, grows differently. Each of us grows in our own way. How a baby grows depends on the stores that the egg and sperm share and on the uterus that the baby is growing inside of.
But before a baby can be born it has to get bigger, and bigger, and BIGGER. This usually takes about forty weeks.
Sometimes the baby is ready to come out on its own. Sometimes a midwife or doctor will be the one to say it is time for the baby to be born. No matter who decides, the baby does not just hop out by itself.
Some babies are born by coming out through a part of the body that most people call the vagina.
And other times doctors will make a special opening below the belly button, take the baby out, and then close up the hole.
Whichever way the baby comes out, it is a pretty big deal for the baby. It is also a pretty big deal for the people who waited and waited and waited for the baby to be born. Sometimes it takes a long time, sometimes it is quick, sometimes it hurts a little, and sometimes it hurts a lot. But usually everyone needs a lot of rest afterwards.
Who was waiting for you to be born?”
JDC – unfortunately for some the answer is yes.
So Kelsey what do you think about it now that you have read it?
Sydney,
We have the same books.
:)
“Shame on our selfish and warped society for thinking the adults’ sexual wants supersede the kids’ genuine needs.”
Touché Jen.
After folks read that book, they should spend an hour or two perusing these sad stories of donor-concieved persons (and unlike adoption, which is a restoration of what has been lost to a child, anonymous donor manufacture of children deprives a child of a biological parent on purpose):
http://www.AnonymousUs.org
That text is absurd. It is confusing!
– “Some bodies have eggs”? Which ones? “some.” “Mine?” “Yes.” “How can you tell?” “…”
– ”How does the egg meet the sperm so they can dance?” it just does?
– “Sometimes this tiny thing doesn’t grow”? Why not? What is this “thing”? Why is it so important to mention that it dies sometimes, before you even mention that if it does not die, it “becomes” a baby? (I bet I know the answer to this one.)
– “A part of the body that most people call the vagina”? What do the other people call it?? (That’s a question directly from me. I mean…what else would you call it? A vajayjay? For pity’s sake.)
Good grief. And this from people who claim that THEY are the ones who support giving children all the facts rather than withholding some for ideological reasons. These are some pretty basic facts being withheld for entirely ideological reasons. This book only grudgingly admits that most people use the word vagina, but WE are the anti-sex ones. The irony.
What a bizarre book. Seriously. It raises more questions than it answers.
One thing that comes to my mind is the old saw, “Man and woman can make love, but only God can make a baby.”
The problem in the LGBT community is that the T community views sexuality as a social construct while the political LGB community swear that their sexuality is innate/essential and that they were “born this way.” Is there a conflict here?
Which is it – is sexuality essential or a social construct? Or perhaps it is just temporarily essential for political purposes/arguments?
Corey is a “sex educator”. Scary. Just reading the section of the readers guide about gender tells me all I need to know about this book.
That books is seriously absurd and uninformative. I pretty much laughed because it’s so vague. “Some people might have eggs and some might have sperm and somehow they get together”… My son would never be satisfied with non-answers like that .
Tyler, the trans community believes gender is a social construct, not sexuality. Gender =/= sexuality.
The problem in the LGBT community is that the T community views sexuality as a social construct while the political LGB community swear that their sexuality is innate/essential and that they were “born this way.” Is there a conflict here? – See more at: http://www.jillstanek.com/2013/06/sex-educator-writes-childrens-book-about-what-makes-a-baby/#comments
The best spiritual antidote for this is The Theology of the Body. The best secular antidote is ordinary biology.
Male and female are biological facts. Only protozoa have no distinction. How we behave after we’re old enough to dress ourselves is a social construct. What the LGA..Z crowd wants to deny is biology. They think you can socialize your own DNA out of existence. What a terrible and deadly disconnect they are fostering among our young people! It’s anti-science and deplorable.
Hmm don’t know what happened to my last comment, I meant to quote Tyler then reply to his quote, it got turned around somehow
Jack read the following link:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/homosexuality/
I forgot that there are gay and straight transgendered people. Perhaps transgendered people do believe sexuality is innate – but not gender. Or perhaps gender is innate but just in the brain and we are wrong to say gender is a social construct but then the uber-feminists will be upset. Perhaps you can clarify all this Jack.
Here is Congressman Dr. Fleming explaining abstinence education as a sexual risk avoidance strategy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9GsOh_nO9QI
ninek says: “Male and female are biological facts.”
Silly ninek. According to Corey (and probably many others), gender is not biological. That’s why he can’t say the sperm comes from a man and the egg comes from a woman in this book. Because sometimes men have eggs and women have sperm. Yup, he’s a “sex educator”. Scary.
D’oh! it seems I did not quote Tyler properely. Not sure what happened there.
What I learned by reading this book:
We has lost our grasp on reality, and children are now a commodity (a thing to be purchased when desired and discarded when not desired).
Yes we has, Del! :)
We has totally, hasn’t we? ;-)
Tyler I don’t know what’s wrong with the comment box on this blog or what’s wrong with my computer but it won’t let me quote you for some reason.
Anyway, in answer to your question, in general (not all trans people believe this), the trans community believes that biological sex is a different thing than gender. They believe that in trans people their biological sex doesn’t match their gender (a biological male may identify as a woman, or vice versa). “Cisgendered” people have a biological sex that matches their gender (in their view), like the vast majority of humans. Many of them view transgender as a medical condition needing of treatment (in their opinion, sex change operations are the treatment, others may have different views). That’s basically the view on biological sex and gender as I understand it, in the trans community. This idea has nothing to do with sexual orientation, being gay, straight or bi doesn’t depend on what gender you are or if you are trans or cis, and most people view sexual orientation as innate.
ninek @ 12:56pm they generally don’t deny biology. They simply see a distinction between biological sex and gender. There would be no need to be “trans” if they didn’t understand that their biological sex didn’t match what they feel they are.
Yup, gender is based on feelings, not biology. And gender isn’t the same as sex anymore. In other words, a word has been completely redefined to account for the fact that feelings are never wrong and feeling like your body doesn’t match your mind isn’t mental illness, it’s a situation that requires radical surgery.
Well I have seen some studies that note that FTM transgender people have brains that look more male then female, apparently. There’s some evidence that this condition has a biological cause and isn’t just “mental illness”.
Jack, for the life of me I don’t know how you can sort through all this stuff, think it all makes perfect sense, and yet still find religion hard to understand. I guess that is another mystery I am not going to know.
By the way, what did you make of the part of the article that said sexuality (not gender) was a social construct. It kind of throws a wrench in your whole innate argument doesn’t it?
I don’t think it all makes perfect sense. I think it’s lacking in logic and science in some areas, especially with refusing to name body parts what they are (even if it’s on a trans person, a vagina doesn’t magically become something else, it’s just an organ). Just because I understand a certain point of view doesn’t mean I automatically agree with it. But yeah, I do understand why these types of groups believe what they do, far more than I understand why people are religious.
Tyler some people may think that sexuality is a social construct (actually, I think most of you on this blog believe anything but heterosexuality is a social construct). I don’t believe that it is socially constructed in most cases though, and neither do pretty much every gay person or lesbian woman I have talked to.
With all due respect, (and I’ll still get called “INTOLERANT!!”):
We are living in our own bodies, not in anyone else’s. Nobody on the planet or in the universe was “born in the wrong body.” Nobody was “born with the wrong nose” either because it looks like your funny granddad and not some cute little button nose. Socially, people have decided to decide otherwise. If you have a Y chromosome and you don’t want to play football or wear a tie, then simply don’t. If you want someone to chop up your body, guess what? Your problem is in your HEAD not your DNA and not in your trousers. The surgeon who performs “sexual reassignment” is in fact mutilating a healthy functioning body.
I know a person who has decided to call himself a female. He’s wearing clothes and wigs, but he has no desire whatsoever to take shots of hormones or to pay a stranger to cut him up. The result? Total denial from the transgendered community that he thought would accept him. Cross dressing is apparently not good enough, and they deny him their companionship because he’s just not trans enough to fit in. And THAT’s sick.
Jack, would it be accurate to say that the LGB and T communities, for the most, believe that sexuality is a social construct? This would explain why they seek to redefine what the word “sex” means while creating create new meanings for words like ”gender”. Isn’t theory that sexuality is a social construct the historical justification for the existence of the various sexualities?
How can gender be a social construct while simultaneously inside the brain of a transgendered person? Does the reality of transgendered persons destroy the argument put forth by Freidan in The Feminine Mystique?
No, it wouldn’t be accurate Tyler imo. Most gays and lesbians I’ve talked to or read things from at least believe that their sexuality is a “born that way” thing. Some may have different views, and I myself suspect that sexual abuse or things like that can kinda “rewire” people in some cases, but in general I think most people think it’s innate.
Who in the world is redefining “sex”? Are you talking about how most people don’t agree with Catholics that the only thing that is really “sex” is vaginal intercourse? Then, sorry to burst your bubble but gays aren’t the only ones who don’t agree with and don’t define sex that way.
I suppose the theory that sexuality is a social construct might be the historical justification for why various sexualities exist (I’ll take you at your word because I really haven’t studied this at all), but I don’t think a lot of people in the gay community believe that today, and I don’t think history is particularly relevant in the way that gays view themselves now.
For the gender as a social construct thing, it seems to me that you’re thinking of gender roles. The way that men and women differ in behavior and expressing themselves are socially constructed for the most part in this view. I personally don’t think that’s true, there’s evidence that there are general brain differences and obviously there are hormonal and anatomical differences, I think that probably has some trends for behavior, I just don’t think people should be socially censured if they don’t fit that.
I think that the whole gender thing with trans isn’t so much social construct as how they “feel”. The ones I have spoken to about it have a lot of dysphoria about their bodies, they feel wrong, that they were supposed to be in the body of the opposite gender. They identified with the opposite gender role from a young age, etc. It’s not a new condition, it’s been documented in several different cultures over the centuries, so I don’t see how it could be socially constructed. Some biological issue in utero or early in life, seems most likely to me (that’s my personal opinion, I don’t think the science backs me up yet).
Oh and Tyler the radical queer theorists don’t really represent the average lgbt person. You can’t extend their claims to the entirety of gays and lesbians and others and expect that people will agree.
Jack, I can’t speak for everyone, but it is my understanding of Catholicism that it considers all desires innate. The difference between the Church’s view and your own seems to be that only the Church believes that our desires should be ordered to God and his moral law. You, on the other hand, don’t believe in the Church’s moral law (but perhaps a different moral law) so you think all these desires are properly ordered and can be acted upon as long as they don’t cause the person to break the human law of the USA. Is this a fair summary?
Jack have you read JJ Rousseau?
—
“Sex” as it refers to male and female, not as it relates to intercourse. But the LGBT community is redefining sex to include acts that are not biologically reproductive.
It is hard to know who is and isn’t a queer theorist – the queer theory lingo is so prevalent today, so you will have to extend some latitude to me, Jack.
Jack, so another further distinction between gender and gender roles? Again, what exactly is in the brain of a transgendered person when they are thinking about gender if not the gender role? Why do they need a sex change then, and why do they need to cross dress?
On a separate note, does it make sense to even introduce this stuff to kids if we don’t even understand it Jack? And you’re a fairly liberal person.
No, it’s not a fair summary of my position, because the US law isn’t perfectly just in my humble opinion (I have huge problems with the legal system here). You know, because I’ve told you countless times, that I don’t see sex acts as particularly “wrong” or “right” unless they cause harm to non-consenting parties. I have my own personal opinions on whether some particular acts are positive or not, but that’s my personal opinion and I’m not really worried about what adults get up to in their free time as long as everyone’s consenting.
Like, an example that isn’t sexual is smoking pot. Now, smoking pot might have it’s drawbacks for the person who chooses to do that, but I think it’s their personal choice. Bring a kid living in a home where people are blowing pot smoke around, I think that’s wrong. The kids isn’t consenting to have their lungs be damaged like that. Same with cigarettes.
No I haven’t read JJ Rousseau. I don’t think I even know who that is.
Jack, I tried to communicate your anything goes as long as it is consented to by adults and no harm is done.
At least we agree the desires are innate.
Perhaps, on another occasion you can explain what you mean by “harm” because it may be that some consensual acts are harmful. And that your definition of harm may be too narrow.
The sex change seems to be an attempt to have them feel comfortable in their bodies, I think. The crossdressing seems to be because certain people feel more comfortable presenting the opposite gender’s role.
Actually I do agree that explaining transgenders to kids is a good idea until they are old enough to critically think about it (unless it’s in the context of explaining that we shouldn’t treat trans people badly because they feel different). My son did ask me about the man we saw wearing a dress once, I told him that sometimes guys want to wear dresses because they feel more comfortable that way. He seemed satisfied with that answer. I saw no need to go into the whole issue at his age. Other parents might have different ideas.
*isn’t a good idea.
Jack, I know some non-religious people have thought that religious people are brainwashed. Do you ever feel that you have been brainwashed by all this queer theory and homosexual activism?
I don’t think religious people are brainwashed in general.
I don’t feel like I have been brainwashed. If anything I was brainwashed into much different and much more hateful views when I was small, and get rid of that programming by using the magic of logic and the golden rule.
Sometimes the gay community is a ready-made community for those individuals feeling lost and lonely and outside. A shoulder to cry on, so to speak.
Seek the Church.
Tyler, let me ask you honestly. Do you think that people never come to conclusions that disagree with your interpretation of morality because of introspection and their own opinion, or do you think that all people who disagree with you are lost souls being unduly influenced? The latter view is one that seems to come across in some of your comments to me.
If they tell me they have reflected on their morality, then yes I take them at their word. Is that what you are telling me Jack? If that is the case, then I would expect a more thorough and honest answer about religion.
We weren’t even discussing religion!
We have in the past. I was answering your question.
Perhaps, one time you will let us know how large of a factor the Church’s view of homosexuality is in fostering your decision not to be a Christian?
Not that big of a factor at all. If I could find the rest of the religion palatable, I’d just find a gay-friendly church to go to.
I’ve attempted to talk to you about religion in the past and be as thorough as possible, I have no idea why you’re claiming that I haven’t.
Oh yeah….these are the people on the side of science and facts. That book is inexcusable and indefensible. I would never let children be exposed to something like that.
Jen…..A-freaking-men.
Jack – I think it’s something w/ the site. I can’t copy anything to the comment box either.
*Ok I just edited my comment. Apparently the text DID copy but I just couldn’t see it? I’m not tech savvy enough to speculate on this.
Jack, your usual refrain is that you find religion too difficult to understand – that kind of statement is a conversation ender and perhaps even a little bit of a not-so-polite send-off.
It did the same thing to me, apparently it copied Tyler’s comment but I couldn’t see it, so I ended up with his comment below mine lol. Something’s up with the site.
I more mean “I don’t understand” as “I think this is very contradictory and doesn’t make logical sense, and I don’t see how you people believe it”. That’s usually how I’m using the phrase Tyler. No matter how you explain it, I can’t seem to grasp certain concepts or how they make sense at all. I also don’t get why people would choose to abide by certain moral codes, but whatever it’s a personal choice.
It’s kinda beside the point of the thread, though.
What is illogical about it?
It’s besides the point of the thread, Tyler. If you wanna talk about it, you can ask Carla for my email.
Another time then.
Lol.
Why do you like derailing threads to talk to me about my personal beliefs but you wouldn’t want to do it over email? It makes me suspicious that concern for my soul’s state is not the reason behind it.
“You know, because I’ve told you countless times, that I don’t see sex acts as particularly “wrong” or “right” unless they cause harm to non-consenting parties.”
I just finished reading Out From Under and the author talks about the impact of her father’s sexual behaviors on the family. Children are non-consenting parties to their parent’s sexual behaviors but are still impacted by their parents’ choices.
Oh and the Catholic Church is people friendly.
Paraphrase of Jack, because I can’t cut & paste: “adults can harm themselves all they want, they just can’t harm anyone that doesn’t consent to it”
That is one very big difference between you and those that have faith in God. You think your position is more loving. I disagree. Those that have faith in God and recognize that we humans are body and soul, recognize that people are harming their souls and we love them enough to want them to stop it. So we speak out and appear judgmental to everyone that doesn’t understand what we see. I know you’ve expressed difficulty with the “love the sinner, hate the sin” concept, Jack. I though of you when I read this article yesterday. I hope you’ll read it.
http://www.crisismagazine.com/2013/love-the-sinner
“most people don’t agree with Catholics that the only thing that is really “sex” is vaginal intercourse?”
Thanks to Bill Clinton lots more people know about oral sex.
Explain that kind of sex to a child that does not want to eat foods that touch each other. Keep my peas away from the mashed potatoes!!! Is that a “YUCK!” or a LOL?
Based on the description Kelsey left about the story, it’s way too vague. On one hand it doesn’t say anything that’s entirely untrue (not everyone has a uterus, not everyone has sperm or eggs, and yes, C-section births aren’t vaginal) however, the information it’s too vague. It allows for the society problems to perpetuate at a much younger level.
“most people don’t agree with Catholics that the only thing that is really “sex” is vaginal intercourse?”
I could so totally get technical about the mis-statement of this statement, but I’ll just figure people are using the slang term for sexual intercourse. Also, the Catholic Church says 1 man and 1 woman who are married to each other.
Okay…I’m getting off my soap box LOL. (I am the product of an engineer and a English Major, plus I am a practicing Catholic, so I’m getting a little OCD here).
@Prax, I don’t disagree that parents’ sexual choices affect the children, if the kids are aware of it. That’s why I brought up the smoking pot analogy. Indulge on your own if you wish, but having it around kids or other non-consenting people who are affected by it is wrong.
I would disagree that the most churches are friendly towards all people, including the CC.
@Lrrning I read your link, and I get that you guys think that you’re loving the sinner by condemning the sin that you think is damaging their soul. I do get that concept, I just don’t believe it. Not with the intrinsically disordered stuff, I don’t see how you can love someone you think is just wrong on the inside. And I would argue that considering how much absolute vitriol and hate I’ve seen towards gays as people (not so much on this blog, but just go on Lifesitenews or others and see what people REALLY think of gay people), not towards their sin, that many people claim your “love the sinner, hate the sin” but in practice it isn’t true. I don’t “love” people I think are perverted and disgusting, I don’t really think most humans can even when they claim to.
And to be honest, it’s more just of a disagreement of mine other than a misunderstanding, but I think some of the things the church considers inherently evil and a mortal sin is absolutely ridiculous. Masturbation is one I think the church is stupid about.
@Patty, I’m pretty sure most adults knew what oral sex was before the Clinton stuff. It’s not like this generation invented it. And no I wouldn’t teach a small child about oral sex. The only thing I think my kids need to know about sex until they are about middle school is basics about how it makes babies and anatomy. If they ask other questions I would explain as I see it in an age-appropriate way. I disagree with the CC and others in that I’ll never teach my kids it’s wrong to masturbate, I won’t teach them that gays are intrinsically disordered or that their relationships are perverted, and I won’t teach them that ‘sex that leads to pregnancy’ (to quote another commenter here lol) is the only form of sex that they are allowed to have without being “evil”.
“I disagree. Those that have faith in God and recognize that we humans are body and soul, recognize that people are harming their souls and we love them enough to want them to stop it.”
There’s your problem. Since not everyone agrees that a “soul” exists, until it is substantiated, you’re basically imagining that someone is harming an aspect of themselves, so you wanting them to stop doing something that they’re perfectly comfortable with or even more so is really just you wanting them to live your way because you say so, under a spoken pretense of love on your part.
Heck, there are even people who would agree with you that souls exist, yet disagree with you on what it is exactly that harms a soul!
Jack is it possible to love a person with only one arm?
I would agree that we don’t “have” a soul, but that’s a whole theological discussion. But it can’t be denied that we all have a “psyche” or an “id”. Garbage in, garbage out.
Just because a child doesn’t know a parent is cheating on the other parent doesn’t mean there won’t be subtle ripples in their lives that will eventually worsen. Liying has consequences.
Whatever goes for “consenting adults”? Well this assumes that S & M or beating your head against a brick wall only affects you. We’re forgetting that what affects us will eventually affect those around us.
xalisae, I can have you prove to yourself that you have a soul.
Jack says: “I don’t love people I think are perverted and disgusting. I don’t think most humans can even when they claim to.”
If you believe that love is simply an emotion, this is probably true. But Catholics (and probably many others) believe that love is primarily a choice, an action, a way of treating others. This is why we don’t think Jesus was asking us to do the impossible when he told us to love our enemies. I bet if you passed by a perverted and disgusting man that was lying injured on the ground, you would help him. That is love. And that is why we can love those that we think are “wrong on the inside”. And we also recognize that every single person, including ourselves, is wrong on the inside.
” If you believe that love is simply an emotion, this is probably true. But Catholics (and probably many others) believe that love is primarily a choice, an action, a way of treating others. This is why we don’t think Jesus was asking us to do the impossible when he told us to love our enemies. I bet if you passed by a perverted and disgusting man that was lying injured on the ground, you would help him. That is love. And that is why we can love those that we think are “wrong on the inside”. And we also recognize that every single person, including ourselves, is wrong on the inside.”
So you guys don’t actually feel any positive towards gay people, or others that are “sinners”, you just think that you should treat them okay (the way you all define as the proper way to treat others)? All right, I can dig it. It still doesn’t mean I would feel comfortable going to church or anything.
” Whatever goes for “consenting adults”? Well this assumes that S & M or beating your head against a brick wall only affects you. We’re forgetting that what affects us will eventually affect those around us.”
Well everything effects someone in some manner. I just think the standard for condemning others in their personal choices needs to be pretty high, I think personal liberty is pretty important. The average Christian opinion on gays and the way they promote it affects me negatively and makes my life less livable, but I don’t think they should be prevented from sharing it.
“Jack is it possible to love a person with only one arm”
I don’t know Tyler, do you think that person is disgusting and wrong? Weirdest analogy ever, perhaps you should explain.
I would disagree that the most churches are friendly towards all people, including the CC.
I agree to disagree with your disagreement. (:
Here Lrning, just one of the many, many evidences I have that show me that there’s not much “love” of either the feeling kind or the action kind in general in the Christian philosophy towards LGBT people, even if individual Christians might like or love gay people.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/russia-will-deport-foreigners-for-homosexual-propaganda-duma-passes-bill-43
Comments on that article are a special kind of awful. I love the American Christians praising the restrictions of free speech for groups they don’t like. Can you imagine the Christian outcry in the US if Russia passed a law saying that Christian “propaganda” was disallowed and made prayer rallies illegal?
Jack, the question wasn’t whether you think they are disgusting or wrong but whether you could love them despite the absence of one of their arms? If you don’t mind, I would like you to answer the question first before I try to explain.
Of course I could love someone despite the absence of their arm, Tyler. Again, weirdest question ever. If one of my children were in an accident and lost their arm it wouldn’t change how I feel about them.
I might be too late with this analogy because it appears now that you acknowledge the Christians and Catholics can love homosexuals despite the absence of their heterosexual desires.
I acknowledge that the way you define loving someone I guess it’s possible. Think they’re disgusting but think you should outwardly treat them the way you’ve defined as kindly, I guess that makes sense.
I don’t think all that many people actual put it into practice though, it’s just something they like to believe about themselves while praising the restriction of freedoms against LGBT people and discrimination against them.
Jack, Catholics don’t think homosexuals are disgusting…please stop saying that. You know about the act/person distinction and the word they use is disordered and not disgusting. And disordered has a technical meaning, and wider application than just homosexuality. All sins are disordered and all sins are innate.
I don’t know what this following sentence of yours means:
“Think they’re disgusting but think you should outwardly trat them the way you’ve defined as kindly, I guess that makes sense.”
Perhaps you can explain it.
Finally, since this thread is already off topic would you like to explain what else you think is illogical with the Church’s teaching, so far you have just noted its teaching on homosexuality and masturbation.
Yeah. Just put on a happy face and hate that one thing about them. That’s *totally* “love”. Riiight.
Jack says: So you guys don’t actually feel any positive towards gay people, or others that are “sinners”, you just think that you should treat them okay (the way you all define as the proper way to treat others)?
1) Everyone is a sinner. I feel lots of “positive” towards lots of sinners, including gay people.
2) “Treat them okay” is your term. That’s not the Christian goal, but I think you knew that already. You can look to the various Christian ministries to see what we mean by love. Ministries like schools, hospitals, maternity homes, homes for runaway teens, prison ministries, crisis pregnancy centers, soup kitchens, homeless shelters, counseling offices, food pantries, subsidized housing, visits to the homebound, and on and on. When we love others with these ministries, we are well aware that we are loving sinners. Sinners loving sinners. It works miracles.
3) No thanks, I’ll pass on reading the comments at that other site. Most comment sections send me right into depression bordering on despair. Even the comments at Jill’s leave me feeling that way sometimes.
Jack says: “I don’t think all that many people actual put it into practice though, it’s just something they like to believe about themselves while praising the restriction of freedoms against LGBT people and discrimination against them.”
Then you are blind. The Catholic Church is perhaps the largest provider of charitable services in the world. Who receives all those services? Who do you think does all the work of providing the services? Who pays for it? You’re full of it.
And btw, the word charity means love.
Sorry Lrning, I’m just exceedingly bitter and don’t really know why. I realize the CC provides a lot of charity.
xalisae says:
Yeah. Just put on a happy face and hate that one thing about them. That’s *totally* “love”. Riiight.
You have no idea.
Love is:
* providing homes and life-changing services to runaway/abused teens (Covenant House, Mercy Home for Boys & Girls, Boys Town…)
* working in 91 countries to help the world’s poorest people with poverty, hunger, drought, disease, & emergencies (Catholic Relief Services)
* helping just about every conceivable person that needs help (google Catholic Charities and take a look at the enormity of the help provided)
* driving the children of imprisoned mothers to the jail for a monthly visit with mom (my parish does this)
* feeding the hungry (too many parishes and faith organizations to name)
You’re full of it too.
Jack,
We’ve been praying for peace in your life. I hope that this turmoil eases somewhat for you.
While I disagree with many of your opinions, know that I and most of us here respect you as a person and want your human dignity elevated, not denied. This does not mean an overall acceptance of all opinions and decisions, which can be hard to understand and accept, but we (I can particularly speak for myself, of course, but I am confident that there are many here who feel the same) do want to offer you love, true Christian love which elevates and offers Truth. I understand that this is hard to accept, and I don’t ask you to accept it, but it is the fact and I hope that you are able to see it in time.
As an agnostic I have a pretty warm view of the Catholic Church compared to most other “socially conservative” denominations (scare quotes because I think that label is debatable regarding the church, in some regards). I think that they provide a lot of charity, and probably the most unbiased charity of all the various organizations. If you need something, and they have it to give, it’s yours. If you WANT something and they have it to give, well, then you may need to meet a certain standard (ie adoption, etc). But I don’t know that I’ve ever heard of a Catholic organization turning away someone in NEED because they were gay or a prostitute or whatever. Catholic people, yeah, definitely – people are imperfect and biased. But the institution as a whole presents as pretty consistent on helping people. I can respect that.
I don’t really struggle to understand the concept of “love the sinner, hate the sin.” I don’t know why. But it’s become more clear than ever since my father went off the rails, mentally. I believe he is suffering from early onset dementia – I’m not saying dementia is a sin, btw, but rather, his actions are so abhorrent, abusive, and deplorable that I cannot allow them in my life. They hurt me and they hurt him, and I cannot let them go, or just ignore them or let them slide as though they are not harmful. There are honestly no words strong enough to convey how hurtful and hateful I find some of the things he has done, and how much I HATE – truly HATE – these things. But I love him. Dearly. I will love him until he dies and all I can do is hope he one day accepts the help that so many people have offered to him. I want him to come back. I want, so desperately, to be able to forgive him for the awful things he has done to me, if only he’d ask me to. I live in hope of that day. It is not complicated at all – I love my father so much that I cannot describe it, but I hate the horrible things he has done. He views these things as an intrinsic part of himself – he told my mother, recently, “Fine, I’m a scumbag, but I’m tired of being treated like dirt just for being a scumbag” – but I know that these things are not him. They are things he does – however consciously or unconsciously, depending on his mental state – but they are not him. He is pure love, to me, and always will be, no matter what hateful things he does.
Thank you MaryRose but it’s probably wasted.
Alexandra you’re a much more forgiving person than I am. I’m really sorry about your dad and I hope that he gets better, for your and the family’s sake if nothing else.
“Yeah. Just put on a happy face and hate that one thing about them. That’s *totally* “love”. Riiight.”
No…we don’t hate that one thing about them because we like the person, the sinner. However, the sin, all sin is a deprivation of good so homosexuality and bisexuality is the lack of sufficient heterosexual desires. We want what is good for the sinner: the restoration of heterosexual desires and a desire to love God and to obey his commandments, a happy fulfilling life.
“the restoration of heterosexual desires ”
And that’s impossible for some people, so they hate themselves for years because they can’t just be a normal heterosexual, at least desire-wise, unless you’re severely mentally ill you have control over your behavior.
Hi Alexandra, one of my uncle’s is experiencing dementia (please no cracks xalisae) so I can partially understand how difficult this must be for you right now. I must say that your attitude towards your family impressed me in the past, so I think your father is lucky to have you as a daughter.
Yes, Jack, homosexuality can be quite the Cross to bear – none like it.
Thanks, Tyler.
I don’t think I’m more forgiving than you, Jack. I know your relationship with your parents was/is different than mine, so it’s harder to imagine, but it still comes down to love. If one of your kids did something awful, I feel certain you would still love them just as much as you do today. It doesn’t go away. No matter how much you hate what they did.
Jack you, no homosexual person, can restore heterosexual desires on their own. Indeed, it may never happen. But if it does happen it will be through the grace of God. But perhaps God has given you these desires and this trial for a reason. He usually tests the people he loves the most. His sense of humour is not like ours. Look what he did to his own Son.
Nah you’re definitely more forgiving than me Alexandra, lol, you have no idea how quickly I can write people off. But you’re right about my kids, if how you feel about your dad is like that I guess I can get the “love the sinner, hate the sin” thing in that context.
Tyler, I have nothing to say to that last comment that wouldn’t just be blasphemous and really unproductive.
Is it more blasphemous than saying that God sent his only begotten Son to die on a Cross?
Christianity – the very person of Jesus Christ is blasphemous! God became a man, for Pete’s sake.
I meant that any response I would have to the lovely comment at 11:51 you made would be blasphemous against Christianity.
Jack,
Is that meant to express that the prayers, or the love, are wasted? Either way, I cannot believe it, and I’m sorry that you feel that way. I also feel that you deserve to hear some kindness in the midst of all this explanation and defense of faith. We have wonderful apologists on Jill’s blog, and I respect the wonderful things they have to say, but sometimes it is easy to get caught up in the discussion, especially online, and lose sight of the person just a little.
Well I do appreciate the kindness and I’m sorry I get riled up and rude.
MaryRose thank you for your post to Jack. Jack I do wish you and your children the very best.
Alexandria I think your post about the Catholic church was profound and what you wrote about still loving your dad was also. I will pray for you and your dad (even if you are agnostic, it can’t hurt right?).
Leila, thank you for giving the link for the anonymouslyus.org blog. It brings out many of the points made by Robert Oscar Lopez who was raised by a lesbian mother in the gay community in his American Thinker article about the upcoming human rights crisis that is being caused by the LGBT movement demanding “same sex marriage” because of what it is doing to children, not because people “hate” gays. It is not about who adults love but the devastating effects it can have on children who are intentionally conceived and/or raised without one of their parents, either their father or their mother. He knows first hand what this means based on personal experience and he also says that he receives thousands of emails from children of “gays” who are the products of IVF, adoptive, surrogates, designer-babies, “gayborhood” families who are apart of this social engineering experiment to redefine marriage and families. He has a lot to say on this topic but you won’t see him being interviewed on MSM, nor will you see ex-lesbians and ex-homosexuals being interviewed. They call them ”liars”. Hmmm. Wonder why. What happened to “tolerance” by the LGBT community for those who have “came out of” or left the LGBT lifestyle or adult children of gays who have been hurt. I recently heard an ex-lesbian (who had previously testified before the Illinois legislature against SSM) say she was interviewed for over an hour by a major Chicago newspaper before the SSM bill was voted on by the state senate on Valentines Day giving reasons why she disagreed with SSM. Anyone care to guess how many times they quoted her in their page long article on SSM? NOT EVEN ONCE!! There is no “tolerance” unless you happen to agree with them.
I guess I should just give my kids to some deserving straight strangers then. I’ll let my sis know that she can’t raise her daughter either.
Well, then who will teach them the wonders of vegetarianism? Your “community” is first and foremost you and your kids, Jack. Don’t ever forget that.
Jack says:
I guess I should just give my kids to some deserving straight strangers then.
This strikes me as incredibly disingenuous. Are you purposefully not understanding what Prolifer L was talking about? Your children have both a mother and a father.
Thanks, ProliferL. I don’t get annoyed when people say they will pray for me, and I always appreciate it (unless it has a condescending tone). I have had religious people bristle when I say that they are in my thoughts etc – one time someone asked me what good my thoughts do if they are not directed to a higher power – and it doesn’t feel good to have something that is, realistically, the most you can offer, just be flat-out rejected like that. Whatever else is out there, having people care and think of me is always appreciated and respected. :)
Your children have both a mother and a father.
This is something I need to be reminded of every so often as well.
In spite of the choices my children’s father has made, he is still my children’s father. Yes, he was a terrible husband and is a terrible father but I picked him, made children with him and stayed with him for years. Had I been healthier i.e. less sinful, I would not have sought out and stayed with an abusive alcoholic. To be fair to myself, I was also dealing with the devastating affects of someone else’s sin of rape when I started dating my ex as well as coming out of a childhood with an alcoholic/workaholic dad and co-dependent mom.
My ex has only seen our children a handful of times in two years. He is going through another nasty divorce, his dad died and now his family is fighting over land and material stuff. I noticed our daughter was down in the dumps recently and she confided in me that her dad has been calling her and badmouthing her grandma and her grandma has been calling her and badmouthing her dad. After she told me about their talks, I could see how she was being used as a pawn but she was too close to the situation to see this.
Our daughter broke down and told me that she wished they could all just make up and be nice to each other. I told her to tell dad she loves grandma and to tell grandma she loves dad and to not allow them to put her in the middle. Sometimes I think, “Why isn’t her stepdad enough? She was so young when we divorced. Her stepdad is a better parent than most biological parents so why doesn’t she just write off the chaos of them?”
But then I come back to reality and realize how much she and her brothers love, and have the right to love, the other side of their family as well.
Alexandra, your post about your dad was so touching and sad and it sounds like my children could have written something very similar about their dad. I don’t believe their dad has dementia but years of alcohol abuse has taken a toll on his mind. I believe that my ex’s sins have led to more sin and spiritual help is what is most needed in some cases.
I think my own father (who stopped drinking when I was a teen) is coming to grips with how he was not emotionally there when we were growing up. I visited him the other day and he wrote down a song he wanted me to go home and look up on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=NEY4LxORCeo
My sins have affected my children and I’ve apologized and have asked them to learn from my and their dad’s past. Sometimes I think that is the best I can do.
Oh, and to try my best to warn the young and the restless that cross my path of the devastating effects of my sins on myself and others. (:
Praxedes, thanks for that post. I found your comments on your kids and their dad interesting, since I’m on the other side of the situation – I’m the one in a step-parent role. The boys are extremely lucky to have two loving, involved, parents who work hard to maintain an amicable relationship, and they split their time 60/40 between their mom and dad, but it is VERY hard all around nonetheless. I can’t imagine how difficult it would be if there were further complications like alcohol abuse etc. I can’t imagine having dealt with the stuff I’m going through with my dad now, back in my childhood instead.
I liked that song. This is one that has come to make me think of my dad, though I don’t really know why. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcbRMzH27GM
I really liked the song you posted too. It makes me think of times I have both run to and away from life’s situations.
I have friends who are in the step-parent role and I have heard some horror stories of how they have been treated by the ex and/or the children and sometimes taken for granted by the bio-parent. I think it can oftentimes be a thankless job.
I can’t say enough good about the hard role people like yourself and my husband have taken on. I try to do my best to thank him and point out to the kids how much he loves us all and does for us. Your boys are so lucky to have you in their life.
I liken a dedicated step-parent’s role in a family to that of the role post-abortive prolife women plays in the prolife movement. The glue and the backbone in difficult times.
” This strikes me as incredibly disingenuous. Are you purposefully not understanding what Prolifer L was talking about? Your children have both a mother and a father. ”
Yeah I was just mad. I don’t like Lopez at all, I’ve never seen him actually cite anything to back of his viewpoints. And correct me if I’m wrong but I think he was conceived naturally even if he was raised by lesbians. Seems to me he is mad at Dad for abandoning him and directing his anger at his moms, even though by all accounts they treated him well and he wasn’t abused or unloved. Of course that’s all my personal opinion.
I think if people want to bash on LGBT parents all the time they should at the very least consider the fact that they often have very little support outside of the gay community, which isn’t very large. Maybe they need help rather than condemnation, and maybe any poorer outcomes (if there even are any, the research goes either way depending on who you’re talking to) are somewhat due to this. Sometimes people need HELP, not their kids taken from them or told that they can’t be good parents.
Also, Lopez was raised in the seventies, where there was much more stigma, violence, and hate towards gays. I wouldn’t doubt he was around some mentally unhealthy people and had some tough times at school. That is what happens when you stigmatize a population the way that they did the gay community.
“Yes, he was a terrible husband and is a terrible father but I picked him, made children with him and stayed with him for years. Had I been healthier i.e. less sinful, I would not have sought out and stayed with an abusive alcoholic. To be fair to myself, I was also dealing with the devastating affects of someone else’s sin of rape when I started dating my ex as well as coming out of a childhood with an alcoholic/workaholic dad and co-dependent mom.”
Yeah, you should definitely be fair to yourself, I don’t think that you were sinful because you picked a bad guy and stayed there for years. All the research I’ve seen on abusive marriages (with female victims, I don’t know if the same holds true if the husband is the abused one) has commonalities like a difficult childhood, prior trauma with men, and “learned helplessness” or sometimes Battered Wife Syndrome. I also remember you telling me that you didn’t receive help when you asked for it from others? I personally don’t think it sounds like it was your sins. I am glad that you found such a good guy after you were able to leave, and hope that your kids can eventually have a healthy relationship with their dad and he learns to stop his emotionally abusive behavior towards them.
I also remember you telling me that you didn’t receive help when you asked for it from others? I personally don’t think it sounds like it was your sins.
I didn’t get the help I needed when I first asked but it was eventually others who did help me. I know I’ve also pointed out that had I not slept with my ex before marriage he would have never stuck around but would have left me for someone who would sleep with him. I drank too much and even tried drugs with him. It was these sins that I was alluding to. I knew sex outside of marriage and drunkenness is a sin but chose that route anyway. Innocent people have paid the price for my sins. It wasn’t about finding the right person, it was about being the right person and I was not right for anyone, including myself. Now I talk to young people about the importance and success of families started on a firm foundation which includes chastity during courtship. On the whole, the best outcome for children will always be a married bio mom and dad raising the children together.
and hope that your kids can eventually have a healthy relationship with their dad and he learns to stop his emotionally abusive behavior towards them.
I hope your children will someday have a healthy relationship with their mom, too; it is in their best interest.
” I didn’t get the help I needed when I first asked but it was eventually others who did help me. I know I’ve also pointed out that had I not slept with my ex before marriage he would have never stuck around but would have left me for someone who would sleep with him. I drank too much and even tried drugs with him. It was these sins that I was alluding to. I knew sex outside of marriage and drunkenness is a sin but chose that route anyway. Innocent people have paid the price for my sins. It wasn’t about finding the right person, it was about being the right person and I was not right for anyone, including myself. Now I talk to young people about the importance and success of families started on a firm foundation which includes chastity during courtship. On the whole, the best outcome for children will always be a married bio mom and dad raising the children together.”
Oh I get what you mean, I thought you were saying you were sinful for him being abusive and that made me sad. I get what you’re saying, my ex was a virgin until we were married but I knew getting married was stupid anyway, there were some issues and I was too stupid to put a stop to things.
Thank you, Praxedes, that was a very kind thing to say. I view my primary responsibility to the boys to be nurturing and helping maintain a positive relationship with their parents, to the extent that that is possible (in this case, very possible; in other situations it might be less possible). I help them maintain a good relationship with their dad by being a good teammate to him, easing some of the burden, backing him up always, etc. With their mom, it’s obviously more just about showing a healthy and enthusiastically respectful attitude towards her. I put pictures of her near their beds, and I talk about moms a lot – how I miss my mom (when she goes away), my favorite things about my mom, etc, and they reciprocate, telling me stuff about their mom. One time their grandmother made a sort of snide comment about their mom within earshot of them and that was awkward, because I actually technically agreed with what she was saying but still ultimately felt it was my role to stick up for the kids and always advocate for them, and part of that is insisting that people respect their mom (at least around them). I felt like, if they heard me just let something like that slide, how could they really trust that I AM on their side, and caring for them, unconditionally?
It is not always the easiest role to fill, I won’t lie. Sometimes it is very lonely. Sometimes it feels like I get all the unconditional work with none of the unconditional love. They do love me, but it’s not unconditional in the same way and it wouldn’t be natural if it were, so I don’t take that personally. My father can literally help send a 200-page Word document about how horrible and irresponsible I am, to my BOSSES, I mean talk about horrifying and humiliating all at once, and I will still love him; that’s unconditional love, just like your daughter has for her dad. But with the boys, every time I hold firm on the house rules, or something, some part of me wonders if I only get so many “chances,” so many “times” to be “mean” (ie not a total pushover) before they just stop loving me. I have to assume no, for my own sanity, but it is still a lurking suspicion that I bet many parents don’t really ever truly struggle with.
“I help them maintain a good relationship with their dad by being a good teammate to him, easing some of the burden, backing him up always, etc. With their mom, it’s obviously more just about showing a healthy and enthusiastically respectful attitude towards her. I put pictures of her near their beds, and I talk about moms a lot – how I miss my mom (when she goes away), my favorite things about my mom, etc, and they reciprocate, telling me stuff about their mom. ”
Well this is pretty amazing for a stepparent to do for the kids. The boys are really lucky their dad found you.
Jack says:
June 13, 2013 at 11:25 pm
Thank you MaryRose but it’s probably wasted.
Jack,
Nah prayer is never wasted. There’s graces from prayers, no matter if a body doesn’t see it.
I don’t believe prayer is wasted, mostly because it seems to make you guys happy and peaceful and that’s good. I do believe love is sometimes wasted on people who are for whatever reason unable to accept it.
I’m sorry that you feel that love can be wasted. Not only do I disagree that *anyone* is truly unable to accept it, although they may not be prepared to accept it at a given time, but I also feel that love is beneficial, not only to the receiver, but to the giver. God knew what He was doing when He told us to love Him and to love our neighbor.
Well I guess I can see that it’s beneficial to the giver.