Proposed bill on IVF regulations

Dear ladies, just take a look at how these Catholic fundamentalists view the issue of female infertility and the whole topic of medically assisted reproduction.

slyscout192 said:Oh, please, stop talking such nonsense! I am completely in line with the law. I personally live with systemic lupus; I'm 27, and there’s an 80% chance I’ll never get pregnant. Even if I do, the odds of a healthy baby are slim, and it would never cross my mind to try and play God with my life. If God doesn't grant me a child, there's a reason for it. Besides, there are far too many abandoned children in foster care who are just waiting for someone to even look at them, let alone adopt them. I feel for what you all are going through, but I can't agree with any of you. By your logic, we should probably allow gay couples to raise kids too, so children could grow up thinking having two dads or two moms is perfectly normal. Right now, I view that similarly to cohabitation outside of marriage; a child should grow up in a marriage with the love of a man and a woman, serving as their greatest foundation in life. And as for how many abortions our Secretary Miller facilitated—if he actually did—everyone will answer for their own sins, including him.

Dear Daisy, your opinion is yours. Mine is not.
Do I really need to explain anything else to you?

Oh, and do let us know when you decide to start trying for a baby. I'm dying to hear how your perspective shifts then. When you eventually opt for IVF, I wonder what you'll think about the absolute torture of egg retrieval, and how many times you'll be willing to endure that process.

Regarding your definition of "normal"—to me, you seem completely abnormal. So, what am I supposed to do 🤷? Start a petition to ban people like you from having opinions?

And don't even get me started on religious morality... I work for a non-profit for people with terminal illnesses. Most of these patients are believers. Yet, I have never once seen a "pastor" show up just to hold the hand of a dying person. Instead of dealing with real problems, they spend their time nitpicking and moralizing about dogma, right and wrong. Not one of them has ever called our association to ask if we need help. Our headquarters is practically 50 meters away from the church. Honestly, they act like they're following Christian-Catholic values only when it comes to witnessing for the Lord through actions.
So, there you have it—that's how much they actually believe in what they preach. Go ahead, believe them and kiss those altars; just know that when you actually need them, they’ll leave you out in the cold.

silentmarlin51 said:Ladies, take a look at how these Catholic primitives view female infertility and the whole issue of IVF.

http://www.vaticanpress.com/articles/...?id=16995

Who gives a damn? Short and sweet.☕

Fair enough—everyone’s entitled to their own take. You don't agree with this legislation, and I'm standing there with a million other people who feel the same way, but let's be honest, does anyone actually ask us?
As for those comments about trying to conceive... look, honey, I'm already living that reality. I've been married for two years now and we haven't had any luck with a pregnancy yet. Since I've been diagnosed with SLE, it's looking more and more likely that I'll never be able to carry a child—so, frankly, IVF hasn't even crossed my mind. If anything, I’d choose adoption over artificial insemination any day of the week. And just as you're sensitive to this specific law, I'm just as sensitive to all the red tape and legal hurdles involved in trying to bring a child into a home. It seems like whether we're talking about adoption or IVF, the rules in this country are the same: you basically have to be wealthy, young, and perfectly healthy just to get a glance from the system. And out of all those requirements? The only one I actually meet is being young...

Personally, I would never opt for IVF, and my stance isn't rooted in religion since I’m not a believer.
I simply don't consider artificial insemination to be "treating infertility." If I can't conceive naturally—and my own health issues suggest I might struggle there—I would just accept that it wasn't meant to be.
Some people face obstacles to having children for various reasons.
It's hard to put my perspective into words, but it doesn't really matter.

What I am trying to say is that despite my personal distaste for IVF, I am revolted by this law because it is blatantly discriminatory and hypocritical.
As far as I know, couples undergoing fertility treatments pay a massive price—mentally, physically, and yes, financially. They deserve access to procedures that maximize their chances of pregnancy, regardless of whether they are married.
I understand the need to prevent the manipulation of reproductive cells and embryos, but what does a marriage license have to do with that?
Or restricting the process so severely that the attempt itself loses its purpose?

This just fuels my resentment toward the Church, as I am certain they have their hands in this.
Even though I am fundamentally opposed to IVF, I recognize that many people don't share my view, and I have nothing but empathy for them.
Ultimately, I don't even have a strong desire for children myself, so I have no business lecturing couples who are suffering because they cannot conceive.

To all you people who would never dream of trying IVF—not naming names, obviously—first off, let's get one thing straight: it’s not "artificial," it's medically assisted fertility. And just like someone else said here, I'll see you when you're struggling to conceive. There's nothing unnatural about it; it's just a little help from doctors to make sure everything falls into place. But honestly, I don't really care what you think. I have relatives who had kids through assisted reproduction, and there is seriously no better feeling in the world than having a child, no matter how it happens. Plus, they're all perfectly healthy, so that whole argument about sick babies is just total nonsense (and not just because I say so)...
And if you think this is playing God, then why don't you feel that way about treating any other illness, from the flu to something much more serious? If God intended for you to be sick, then don't seek treatment. The same logic applies here. But I won't go too far off topic...

Regarding unmarried couples, someone mentioned them and tried to compare them to same-sex unions. Honestly, that person needs to rethink the nonsense they're posting. Is having a mom and a dad really the same as having two moms (or two dads)? Some people aren't religious, or for other reasons, they just don't believe in marriage. That doesn't mean a child will grow up without love! You can't equate those things. Whether a couple is married or not has absolutely nothing to do with how much love is in that home.
There are just so many primitive people out there...

The law is a disaster and definitely needs to be overturned!! We want children in America!

Angela Wright said:Look, Daisy, you’re entitled to your opinion—it's your choice to make. I’ve made mine.
Do I really need to spell this out for you?

Oh, sure—definitely let us know when you finally decide to start trying for kids. I’m genuinely curious to see how your perspective shifts then. Once you actually commit to IVF, what am I going to hear about the whole "torture" of egg retrieval process? And honestly, how many times will you be willing to go through that cycle before you've had enough?

When it comes to what you consider "normal," you’re pretty much the definition of abnormal to me. So, what am I supposed to do about that? 🤷So, what—am I supposed to launch some grand initiative just to get people like you banned? Is that really where we're headed?

I won't even get started on religious morality... honestly. I work for a non-profit that supports people battling terminal illnesses, and most of them are believers. Yet, in all my time doing this, I haven't seen a single "shepherd" step up to hold the hand of someone who is actually dying. Instead of tending to those kinds of real-world struggles, they’re too busy lecturing everyone about dogma and playing judge over what's right or wrong. Not once has anyone from the church reached out to ask if our association needs any support. Their building is barely fifty yards from our headquarters—just a stone's throw away—and yet, there's nothing. It feels like they have this very specific way of practicing their faith where they talk a big game about following the Lord, but when it comes down to actual deeds? Nothing.
So, that’s the whole story—how much they actually believe the very things they preach. You can go ahead and play along, bowing down at their altars if you really want to, but just wait. When you actually need them to step up? They’ll leave you hanging out in the cold without a second thought.

Daisy's husband is here.
I consider myself a spiritual person—not necessarily religious, per se—but I still find myself deeply respecting the guidance of the Catholic Church. To be honest, I follow their lead quite closely, even though I tend to stumble and miss the mark more often than I’d like to admit. It's just that, over time, I've been proven right more times than I can count; they usually turn out to be spot on. Besides, my own heart tells me they're right, too. It isn't a matter of being arrogant or feeling the need to defend my ego by attacking them—that’s just not how I operate.
Look, I’m well aware that no religion out there actually demands perfection from its followers. It’s a bit of a paradox, isn't it? Despite my own flaws—and let's face it, we all have them—I still choose to walk alongside these institutions, and somehow, they manage to accept me just as I am.

I honestly don’t get it—why do so many women still view childlessness as some kind of personal failure or a mark against their worth? It’s like there's this unspoken rule that you haven't truly "arrived" until you've completed that specific milestone. Is it just social conditioning at this point? Or maybe just a deep-seated fear of being left behind by the crowd? I really can't wrap my head around why not having kids is framed as a negative trait instead of just... a different way to live.
Marriage isn't about having kids—at least, that’s not the core of it. Sure, children can be the crowning achievement, the ultimate payoff after all that hard work, but they aren't the actual purpose. Why do we act like they are? They're a beautiful addition to a life already being lived, not the reason the life was started in the first place.
Look, I have absolutely no intention of forcing my wife into anything—nor am I about to push myself into some manufactured situation where we’re trying to force a pregnancy to happen. Why would anyone do that? It just isn't how life works.
I didn't get married just to check a box and have kids—that was never the point. I did it because of the love I have for my wife. Is that really too much to ask?
And if the kids end up being great? Well, that’s just the icing on the cake.

That last response was a perfect example of what happens when a woman actually uses her head instead of letting her emotions run the show—it was pure, unadulterated logic.

We all know exactly what IVF entails—it’s not just a medical procedure; it’s a gauntlet of physical and emotional trauma that leaves deep scars on a woman. For me, forcing that kind of process isn't an option, nor do I believe it’s something that should be pushed as some kind of universal standard. Why should anyone feel pressured into such an exhausting ordeal?

I honestly don't see the point in all this constant bickering over the whole church versus atheism debate—it feels like a massive waste of energy. At the end of the day, most of the flaws we're dealing with aren't actually rooted in religion; they're failures of our state institutions and social systems. Why do we keep blaming faith for problems that are clearly just systemic breakdowns in how the country is run?
I honestly think we should be aiming the artillery in that direction.

When it comes to the whole debate over gay couples adopting—I honestly think it’s a good thing. At the end of the day, there is no way for them to change the sexual orientation of the child they are raising. Is it even possible to "program" someone like that? I don't think so.
Honestly, I’d much rather see kids growing up with two dads or two moms than being left to be raised by aunts. It just seems like a more stable way to go about things—if you follow me. Is there really any other way to look at it?

I’m also of the mind that it’s fundamentally right for people to have access to all their rights—nothing more, nothing less. Why should anyone be denied?
It honestly feels like a complete waste of energy when two decent people end up at each other's throats—all because of one dishonest individual who’s just sitting there, playing it smart by staying silent. They say silence is golden, don't they? But usually, that's just something the shady types say to get away with it.
Someone who actually wants to get things done—well, they don't really care about the obstacles in their way, do they?
Honestly, watching people fight over this is just exhausting—especially when the ones doing all the arguing are the very people who didn't actually do it, don't want to do it, or simply have no reason to. It’s completely pointless, isn't it?

Once you strip away a person's right to choose—once that fundamental agency is taken off the table—you’re looking at a fast track toward authoritarianism. It doesn't end anywhere else, does it? There isn't some hidden path where things suddenly turn out for the better. When the power to decide is removed, you aren't just losing a vote; you're losing the very thing that keeps a society from sliding into a regime. It's a downward spiral, plain and simple.

I can say without hesitation that I learned those lessons directly from the Catholic Church and its priests—mostly because I spent so much time working alongside them and assisting with their pastoral outreach.
Even so, my own failings don't exactly bridge the gap between me and them—or their version of religious science.

Deep down, I know what they preach is an ideal—but they don't actually demand perfection from people; instead, they keep offering second chances through confession.

Now, those believers who don't hang out with the priests or get involved in parish activities... they can't really convey that truth authentically.

Being part of a church doesn't necessarily mean someone is honest or reliable.
Who knows that better than those actually working on the ground within the parish?

There’s a beautiful testimony in the Gospel where Jesus preaches:
The crowd responds with harsh words. Jesus was speaking about the resurrection.
But despite the fact that the whole crowd walks away, Jesus turns to Peter and asks:
"Do you want to leave too, Peter?"

Ultimately, the essence of being human is giving others the freedom to choose.
As we’ve noted, when that choice is removed, you get a regime—something born entirely out of fear for one's own survival.
Jesus didn't need Peter to fulfill his purpose or his mission.

Because of that, a person moves through this world as an individual—in a world designed such that one person cannot save another; you simply have to find your own path, even if it doesn't promise much.

So, how do you avoid collapsing on that path while still remaining human?
Without succumbing to anyone's arrogance or humiliation.
How do you stay phlegmatic—how do you remain certain of a course of action that everyone else judges so harshly? Look at Jesus again.
Every individual has to figure that out for themselves. Understanding isn't something you can just receive. All that's left is to keep working, and working.
To literally become nourishment for others.

Jesus recognized this; he was that nourishment. "Eat my body, drink my blood."
Of course, not literally—but in a spiritual sense.

Anyway, I salute the atheists; I am truly glad they are who they are, but I sincerely wish them the strength to forgive those who hurt them and shattered their trust.

Love comes from the heart—after all, that's where the body's warmth is hidden and where the soul wells up. So, I wish you an abundance of confidence in your own actions.

And I highly recommend finding a good friend—someone who isn't judgmental and who forgives readily. Every person needs to wake up from that animalistic way of thinking and stop viewing everything through the lens of past traumas. Unhook yourself from your history and focus on the present moment. Become a spiritual being with awakened consciousness.

For me, I can testify that Jesus is that friend.

That's why I warmly suggest logotherapy.
It is the perfection of peace and justice.

Everyone has their own meaning, and everyone is unique. That is something no one can take from you, nor can anyone give it to you. We are born with it; it's nature's gift to this world.

Every child has their own purpose and timing. Every child is shaped in their mother's womb. For nine months, they prepare and are formed specifically for the reason they were created.
I agree that having a sense of purpose is one of the most vital drivers in life.

So, I'm not in favor of forcing conception, but I also think it's wrong to prevent it.
Because every child brings something new that we have never seen before.
If we view children as beings sent to teach us, then we are on the right path; otherwise, we are rushing toward ruin...

Unless you become like children, you won't enter the Kingdom of God.
Children are our way of being repaired and helped.
How beautifully this world was designed. Everything has such a wonderful purpose. If our purpose is God, then even the worst things aren't a problem.

analogskipper11 said:To all of you who would never dream of undergoing IVF—not that I’m pointing fingers specifically—first off, let's get the terminology right; it isn't "artificial" fertility, it’s medically assisted reproduction. And I’ll say what was said before: I’ll be sure to check in on you if you find yourselves unable to conceive naturally. There’s nothing "unnatural" about it; it’s just a little help from doctors to ensure everything falls into place. But honestly, I don't really care what you think. I have relatives who had children through assisted reproduction, and there is no greater feeling in the world than having a child, regardless of how they arrived. And they are all healthy—so that whole theory about "sick children" is absolute nonsense (and not just because I'm saying it).
And if you think this is playing God, then why don't you apply that same logic to treating any illness, from a common flu to something much more serious? If God intended for you to be sick, then why seek treatment? The same applies here. But I won't drift too far off-topic...

As for unmarried unions, someone mentioned them earlier and compared them to same-sex unions. That person really needs to ask themselves what kind of nonsense they're spewing. Is having a mom and a dad really the same thing as having two moms (or two dads)? Some people aren't religious, or they simply don't believe in marriage for various reasons. That doesn't mean a child will grow up without love! You can't equate those things. Whether a union is legal or not has zero impact on how much love is inside it.
There are just some primitive people out there...

The law is a disaster and definitely needs to be torn down!! We want children in America!

Before you start labeling others as primitive and dismissing their views as such, maybe consider that your own view regarding their opinion might be the primitive one...

To take something someone else hasn't even said and replay it like a movie in your head—that's a form of mental servitude. It only leads to misunderstanding and pointless arguing.

How do you expect others to accept you when you refuse to accept them?

I don't want to argue, but everything eventually boils down to relativity. One moment you're up, the next you're down...
people and nature are just built that way.

Humanity is in a constant search for the right path and the right actions...

Personally, I would much rather adopt a child first than turn to medically assisted reproduction.

There are plenty of couples who couldn't conceive at first, so they adopted. And then, later on, they actually managed to conceive on their own.

So, why are so many people pushing so hard for conception?
It's almost as if they have an inferiority complex if they don't have their own biological child.
As if it grants them some sort of social standing they couldn't achieve without that child, despite how desperately they wanted it.

Much like many women do when they're obsessed with having a wedding...

Besides, we call it medically assisted reproduction...

I see it as running away from a problem.
"Quick, let's get this started so people stop asking me about it..." or "So I don't look different from everyone else..."
That's about as much as I can say regarding "freedom."

How ready are we to carry our differences within society?
And to actually be different from everyone else?
We need to say quite a bit to those who try to classify us by anything at all.

It’s inevitable, but the only true classification happens in God.
But not by man, but by God Himself.

analogskipper11 said:Regarding cohabitation—someone brought up the comparison to same-sex unions. Honestly, that person should take a moment to ask themselves what kind of nonsense they're spewing. Is having a mom and a dad really the same thing as having two moms (or two dads)? Some people just aren't religious, or they have their own reasons for not believing in marriage. That doesn't mean a child is going to grow up without love! You simply can't equate the two. Whether a union is legal marriage or just living together has absolutely nothing to do with how much love is inside it.
There are just some primitive people out there...

The current law is a total disaster and definitely needs to be torn down!! We want children in America!

As for cohabitation...

Most of those murders involving men and women in relationships that we see all over the news involve people who are living together in a non-marital union, or perhaps a second or third domestic partnership...

But the media won't report it that way; it’s always easier for them to just label them "husband and wife" or "a couple."
They conveniently avoid the most important details.

Here in America, professionalism is practically non-existent.
Which is exactly why we're sinking so deep into the red.

rustybison19 said:I’m Catholic too, and I honestly don't get this whole mixing Church doctrine with law... I mean, is everyone in America Catholic or something?
What about Orthodox Christians, Muslims, atheists, and so on—do they not have a right to IVF just because God "forbade" it for us?
People have lost their minds.

I don't quite grasp what bothers you people so much.
The Church expresses its opinion on matters...
And its doctrine.

As far as I'm concerned, everyone should be free to do whatever they want. But then again, if we follow that logic, pedophiles and rapists will also have the right to do whatever they want.

All this nonsense is truly just nonsense...
We can never seem to reach an agreement or find common ground...

But how is it that a non-Catholic's hand holds more weight than a Catholic's?
So, it isn't the laws themselves that bother me...
It's just my secular observation of the situation...

They say the greatest danger in a democracy is when a minority rules over the majority.
Yet, it seems as though one non-Catholic vote carries the weight of a hundred Catholic ones...
Now, where is the logic in that? And what kind of democracy—what kind of voting system—is that supposed to be?

slyscout192 said:Personally, I’d much rather adopt a child than go through IVF.

So, why is everyone pushing for conception so hard?
It feels like people have this insecurity if they don't have their own biological kid.
Like it gives them some kind of social status they couldn't get otherwise...
Kind of like how many women act when they want a huge wedding...
To me, it just looks like running away from reality.
Just "hurry up and conceive" so people stop asking questions... Or so they don't feel different from the crowd...

I’m not here to argue about why one person thinks one way and another thinks differently, but you can't tell me a child in a domestic partnership won't be surrounded by just as much love as one in a marriage. Just like everything else, it's individual and every situation is unique. Sometimes one is better, sometimes the other... Who am I to judge a bad relationship or a marriage? But you shouldn't judge a domestic partnership either.

I'm not judging why you'd prefer adoption over medical assistance... that's your call. And that's exactly what we're talking about here—choice. Everyone has a right to choose, and that's why there's so much noise surrounding this law.

For me, having a child means everything... it gives my life purpose. Teaching them, loving them, learning from them... it's soul-filling. You're wrong if you think having a biological child is about prestige or image. If that's how you view people, then you're definitely being judgmental. And again, there are all kinds of people out there, but I truly believe people want kids because they want to share love and goodness with the world, not for social standing.

Getting back to the point of this topic, which is the right to choose for couples struggling to conceive. That choice needs to exist.

I don't want to get too deep into the weeds here, but here’s my take on the situation:
Miller👎👎
the church👎👎
the law👎👎👎

I really wanted to use those flashing emojis to make a point, but they aren't working for me right now, so you'll just have to settle for this slightly more understated assessment than what I actually intended.

slyscout192 said:But how is it that non-Catholics end up with more rights than Catholics?
So, the laws don't bother me...
I'm just looking at this from a layman's perspective...

I really have to weigh in on this. I’m Catholic, sure, but I don't see what religion has to do with any of this. This law applies to everyone. And honestly, not even all Catholics think alike—some might try to start families this way while others might "give up" on having kids because they think that's God's will.

And that whole line about pedophiles and rapists is just an exaggeration, totally unnecessary...

I'm signing off from these kinds of debates, I've already shared my thoughts on this law

analogskipper11 said:I’m not really looking to get into a debate about why I believe what I do versus why someone else might see things differently—that’s a rabbit hole I’d rather avoid. But honestly, you can't seriously argue that a child raised in a cohabiting household is going to grow up with any less love than one raised in a traditional marriage. It’s just not how it works. Like almost everything else in life, it’s entirely subjective; every situation is its own unique universe. In some cases, one setup works better, and in others, the opposite is true. At the end of the day, who am I to sit here and pass judgment on someone else's struggling relationship or a bad marriage? And by that same token, please don't go around judging people for choosing to live together without a marriage license.

Look, I’m not here to judge why some people would rather go the adoption route instead of turning to medical assistance for fertility—that’s entirely your call. That’s really the whole point of this discussion, isn't it? We're talking about the right to choose. Everyone deserves that agency, which is exactly why this legislation is causing such a massive uproar in the first place.

For me, having a child means everything—it’s what actually gives my life a sense of purpose. There is something about teaching a child, pouring love into them, and then, in turn, learning from them... it is true soul fulfillment. If you think having a biological child is just some way to chase prestige or polish your social image, then you're dead wrong. If that’s how you judge people, honestly, you're missing the point entirely—you’re just letting bias cloud your vision. And look, I’ll say it again: of course, there will always be all sorts of people and all kinds of motivations out there, but I truly believe most people want children because they want to pass on love and fill the world with a little more kindness through them—not to climb some arbitrary social ladder.

Let’s get back to the actual point of this thread—which is the fundamental right to choose. When you have a couple struggling with fertility issues, that choice needs to be there. It really should.

You've gone and broken a few pots there...

Milinović and the legal statutes didn't actually say that people in "unmarried partnerships" aren't allowed to conceive... Nor did they claim that any woman without a husband is barred from having children...

Whether a kid turns out to be a good person or a total nightmare has absolutely nothing to do with whether their parents were married—I’m with you there on that point. A child's character isn't dictated by a marriage certificate. But, if we're being realistic—and let's face it, life usually is—there is an undeniable advantage for the parents themselves when they are in a committed marriage. It just provides a different kind of stability, doesn't it?

Look, if some people are just fundamentally ill-equipped to handle the weight of a marriage—or the sheer chaos of raising kids—then they really ought to step up and find a professional to talk to. It’s not rocket science, is it? If you lack the emotional stamina for those kinds of commitments, why stumble through them blindly? Just go see a therapist or a specialist and deal with it.

So, regarding social standing and image—you mentioned earlier that you simply couldn't function without them, whereas I argued that I could. It just goes to show... one of us is definitely running an addiction here.
Look, I’m genuinely happy for you—really, I am—that you’re a woman and that you have those maternal instincts kicking in. But for me? Personally? I just can't bring myself to apply different sets of criteria to two different children. It feels fundamentally wrong. If I did that, wouldn't it just be an admission of my own weakness? A total failure to remain objective? Whether it's my own kid or someone else's, it's all the same to me.

To me, every child is just like my own. And honestly—I don't see any reason to draw a line in the sand here...
Look, I don't need to be constantly drawing love from him—it’s not like he’s my personal Energizer battery or anything.

So many parents today are getting it fundamentally wrong—it’s almost painful to watch. It’s no wonder we see so many kids drifting aimlessly through life without a compass, lost in the shuffle. The root of the problem? They aren't actually raising independent human beings; they’re just embedding themselves so deeply into their children's lives that the lines blur entirely. It becomes this suffocating cycle where the parents are just as dependent on the kids as the kids are on them. How can you expect a child to find their own footing when their parents have already planted their fingers so deep into every aspect of their existence? It's a messy, codependent loop that leaves everyone involved searching for a sense of purpose that was never truly allowed to grow.
If they aren't around, their entire lives just fall apart—it's a complete mess. So where exactly is the freedom in that? And yet, people today won't shut up about it; they talk about "freedom" incessantly, as if it were some magical constant rather than something that seemingly vanishes the moment things get difficult.

It would be a lot more functional if we flipped the script—if children weren't constantly expected to act as emotional reservoirs for their parents, rather than the other way around. Wouldn't it be simpler if parents actually provided the love they expect to receive?
The only real source of love that kids ever truly soak up is that specific moment when they see their mom and dad actually getting along—when they see genuine affection between them. It’s only then... and only in those instances, that they really start to understand what it means.

So, why marriage? Why the whole "mom and dad" routine? It’s one of those questions that feels like it should have a simple answer, but once you actually start digging, everything gets complicated—fast. Is it about stability? Tradition? Or just some lingering social pressure we all collectively agreed to ignore until it was too late? I honestly don't know. Maybe it's just the way things have always been done, a script we follow without really checking if we like the lines. But then again, isn't everything just a series of scripts we perform for each other?
So, here we are—finally in a position where we can try to save whatever little is left to be saved. Is that even possible at this stage? Maybe. But that’s the reality we're facing.
Of course, a new generation is coming—another wave of people ready to inherit this mess. What exactly we’re going to instill in them? Honestly, nobody knows. There's no roadmap for this.

It’s just one of those things—one minute you’re riding high, feeling like you’ve finally figured it all out, and the next, you’re hitting rock bottom. It's a constant cycle, isn't it? Up one moment, down the next... just a relentless, exhausting pendulum swing.
You spend your entire life breaking cycles—exhausting yourself trying to give your kids the stability, the warmth, or the opportunities your own parents failed to provide—only for that same child to turn around and do the exact opposite to you. And then? We just keep spinning in this endless, weary loop. Is it ever actually possible to win, or are we all just doomed to repeat the same mistakes across generations?
And so it goes, on and on and on...

The world seems designed to be in a state of constant correction—just a perpetual loop of swinging back toward some semblance of normalcy. It’s like a single sine wave, really. Everything moves at a specific frequency, oscillating between chaos and order, over and over again. Isn't that just how it works?

It’s honestly one of the most exhausting ways to live—when you find yourself constantly looking over your shoulder, terrified for your own skin and your own little slice of happiness. You start believing, almost desperately, that your only hope for survival in this mess is to escape from certain people or circumstances... as if there's some kind of sanctuary waiting somewhere else. But is there? Or are we just running in circles?
He’s gripping onto that idea with everything he’s got—to the point where he’d be willing to kill for it. Whether he was an atheist, a believer, or just some third category entirely... it doesn't seem to matter anymore, does it?

analogskipper11 said:I feel the need to weigh in here. Look, I’m Catholic, but honestly—what does religion even have to do with this? This law affects everyone, regardless of what they believe. And let’s be real, not all Catholics are on the same page anyway—some might jump into this thinking it aligns with God's will, while others might "give up" on having kids because they think that's what He wants.

And that whole line about pedophiles and rapists? It’s just an exaggeration—completely unnecessary...

I'm signing off from these kinds of debates; I've already made my stance on this law clear.

Your argument is pretty much built on empty platitudes.

I’m not actually advocating for this to be implemented—I’m simply pointing out the absurdities playing out in real-time.

We were discussing rights... weren't we? I was doing the same.
Should we, for instance, be granting pedophiles the right to adopt children?

My point wasn't to draw a direct comparison between the two; it was about the nature of rights—how, for some people, "rights" and "justice" are two very different things.

Besides, you haven't actually read my previous posts; you've just cherry-picked bits and pieces to react to. You've conveniently left out so much context.
That's how it works with people who care more about proving themselves than finding any kind of peace.

slyscout192...looking at all your posts through the lens of a Catholic, I honestly see nothing but Protestant traits... qualities that are slowly but surely creeping into the Catholic Church... but hey, this isn't really a debate about faith...
And then there’s that gentleman puffing out his chest, acting like he’s the one delivering this law based on his own worldview. This guy, who presents himself as a devout Catholic, stood before cameras for the whole nation to see and declared... "If they can't make babies themselves, they should just come to us and we'll make them for them". He was laughing hysterically alongside a bunch of his morally superior party colleagues—I bet even Bozanić gave him that advice...
...Look, medically assisted reproduction is a way to treat infertility. Period. Everyone has the right to view it however they choose; it’s an individual choice...
..Tell me, slyscout192, have you actually sat down and read this law?
The bottom line is that this legislation disparages women in every single one of its sections...
And since you’re busy posturing as such a massive Catholic, tell me honestly here: do you actually live your faith?
Have you slept with your wife, or a girlfriend before marriage, or someone else entirely before coming home to your wife?
Why don't you take your little crusade to the streets? Go march against the couples struggling with infertility, instead of ignoring the ones who undergo an abortion every two months—which is perfectly LEGAL in this supposedly great Catholic nation....

slyscout192, slyscout192.... you absolute little insect 🙂🙂 if only we had some kind of time machine so I could send people like you back to the Dark Ages 😁.

...and please, stop mocking gay people and pedophiles. It’s pretty obvious you’re lumping them all into the same bucket.

Nicole Rivera10 said:slyscout192... looking at all your posts through the lens of a Catholic, I see nothing but Protestant traits... which are slowly but surely creeping into the Catholic Church... though, let's be clear, this isn't actually a debate about faith...
And that gentleman who was puffing out his chest, claiming he brought this law in according to his worldview—presenting himself as a devout Catholic while standing before cameras for all of America to see—he actually said, '' if they can't make babies, they can just come to us and we'll make them for them'' and he laughed mockingly alongside his crowd of political "moral" colleagues; I suppose Bozanić himself gave him that advice....
...In Vitro Fertilization is a medical treatment for infertility, and everyone has the right to view it however they please; it's an individual choice...
...Tell me, slyscout192, have you actually read this law?
The point is, this legislation disparages women in every single one of its sections...
And since you’re also busy puffing out your chest as a big-shot Catholic, tell me honestly here: do you actually live your faith?
Have you slept with your wife, or perhaps a girlfriend before marriage, or someone else entirely before coming to your wife?
Why don't you go out into the streets and support the couples struggling with infertility, instead of targeting those who, every two months, undergo an abortion which remains perfectly LEGAL in this supposedly great Catholic nation....

I don't know if you've read it, but I am not a Protestant, nor are any of the qualities I mentioned considered Protestantian. Those are simply human qualities.
Those rights aren't exclusive to Protestants...

As for Milinović and his statement, that certainly isn't in the law, nor did Bozanić advise him to say it.

And if you consider him a Catholic, then you really ought to re-examine your own faith.
I mean, if someone calls themselves a Catholic and they happen to be a bad person, does that mean the Catholic faith itself is flawed?

People look for reasons to justify their own faith just as much as they look for reasons to justify their lack of it.
And they do so in alignment with their own "moral" behaviors.

Except, of course, for those poisoned by media unprofessionalism, easy conclusions, and sheer incompetence.

Personally, I haven't read the law, but neither am I an advocate for it...
You misunderstood me...

Everyone perceives the disparagement of women differently...
Some people get offended by the mere word "kitchen," and so on...
Every job is perfect in its own role...
So, I don't know, we probably aren't talking about the same thing, because it seems you haven't understood me at all...

Regarding my "puffing out my chest," I mentioned earlier that being a believer isn't about being perfect; it's about having the strength to accept things and to forgive oneself and others in the process...
A saint isn't someone who never sins, but rather someone who strives through mercy and an awareness of their own smallness before the Creator...

As for relationships, my wife comes first... and I come to her.
Dating was a struggle to remain pure...
No touching, no cuddling, no kissing—just long, gentle conversations. We didn't always succeed, but the essence was that we were trying and we truly wanted to...

And I could also say that we practiced purity... but that doesn't mean anyone is less of a slut or more of a saint...

I don't target couples who can't conceive; rather, I want to offer them support, because I know firsthand the trauma women endure during IVF, and I want to encourage them against the judgment of others regarding their inability to have children...

But it always gets taken the wrong way...

P.S. I am neither Milinović nor Bozanić; maybe try reading something better than a sensationalist tabloid like the New York Post...
Just read what I am actually writing...

And honestly, we draw all that strength from one another—her from me, and me from her. It really comes down to those long, quiet conversations we had before we ever even thought about marriage. Instead of just rushing into things physically, we actually talked; we encouraged each other through every single aspect of life. That’s where the foundation was built.

feralwolf30 said:Oh, look at you... our little precious little dragonfly 🙂. 🙂If only we had a time machine so we could send people like you back to the Dark Ages 😁.

...and please, stop mocking homosexuals and pedophiles. It’s getting pretty clear you're lumping them all into the same category.

When we talk about rights, there really isn't a distinction between one person and another—or their inclinations...
And as for the Middle Ages, why are you trying to drag us back into the past?
Are you hinting at something specific here?

If America had been Nazi Germany, would that make you a collaborator? Or if Mexico was the aggressor, does that mean every single Mexican is bad or a Chetnik?

What does the past have to do with the present?

slyscout192 said:When we're talking about rights, there’s absolutely no distinction between one person and another, or between different orientations...
And as for the Middle Ages, why on earth are you dragging us back into the dark ages?
Are you implying something specific here?

If America had been under Nazi Germany rule, does that make you a fascist? Or if a neighboring country was an aggressor, does that mean every single person from there is evil or a war criminal?

What does the past have to do with what's happening right now?

Hahahaha, I love how you try to twist people's words.
There is some serious malice hiding behind all that heavy-handed moralizing and preaching you're doing.
There is a massive difference between individuals and their orientations—there is a huge, fundamental distinction between pedophilia and homosexuality!
Maybe try actually reading your own posts more carefully instead of rambling on with this incoherent nonsense.
Where are you getting fascists and war criminals from? WTF??? Stick to the topic.