Friday, April 12, 2013

Thank you and a rebuttal

I'm very happy my letter to Archbishop Cordileone sparked so much interest and thought.  We have a lot of smart, articulate women in our community.  Thank you for taking the time to comment.

First off if anyone wants to use the letter, go right ahead.  No need to credit me by name just as a sympathetic sister in Christ.  Just please don't edit or change the content.

How do I go about addressing all the salient arguments in the comment from the last post?  It'll be random.

I completely disagree that the Archbishop didn't devalue the marriage of infertiles.  By calling infertility, "a challenge and a disappointment that some husbands and wives have to go through" means he doesn't understand infertility at all.  And nothing I've read from Leila lets me know she understands it either.

It's hard to express profound grief and trauma in a letter and I probably failed in that regard.  To call the most significant event that is continually happening to you, a disappointment is profoundly insulting.  When anti gay marriage advocates both secular and religious choose to rest their argument against gay marriage on procreation, they failed to consider how they would address infertility.  I cannot properly format all the sections of the Supreme Court transcript on the gay marriage case (Hollingsworth v. Perry) that I want to refer to but, Justice Kagan asked: 
In reading the briefs, it seems as though your principal argument is that same-sex and opposite -- opposite-sex couples are not similarly situated because opposite-sex couples can procreate, same-sex couples cannot, and the State's principal interest in marriage is in regulating procreation.  Is that basically correct?
Cooper, the lawyer advocate for Proposition 8 said, "I -- Your Honor, that's the essential thrust of our -- our position, yes."

The Church, despite saying in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that 'homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered'. They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
They've got to pair up with the secular argument because the Supreme Court won't listen to biblical reasoning.  The Church, instead of emphasizing the 'grave depravity' of homosexuality and it not being genuinely affective and sexually complementary, they rest their argument of procreation.

And because of USA Today and several Supreme Court Justices, anti gay marriage advocates forced themselves into addressing this little inconvenient problem called infertility.

I've got a big problem with that.

Why?  Because Cooper thought infertility is "very rare."  Cordileone called it "a challenge and a disappointment" and implied that the only people that are infertile are old.  That's why I made a point to tell him I am only 35.

If the most traumatic experience of your life was called very rare and only affected old people wouldn't you be upset?

And on Leila's blog she took the time to say that infertility was due to "the Fall."  And that meant that I was defective, diseased, old, decayed.  I'm not sure any of these adjectives are mutually compatible or exclusive because she didn't use 'and' or 'or'.  Sarah (and I'm sorry, I can't remember where she said this) said that cancer was the result of the Fall.  Skin cancer runs in my family.  And that's because of sun exposure.  My very good friend Renuka Sharma died of non-smokers lung cancer.  I wasn't a Catholic when she was dying but if I were I suppose it would have been faithful of me to tell her she had terminal cancer because of the Fall.  I'm sure that would have been helpful and comforting to her.

I don't need bloggers to regurgitate what the Church teaches.  I can look that stuff up myself.  If the reason you write is to cut down debate and women exercising their brain, I don't see any value in that.

And Sarah, I don't write to get the reaction I want.  I'm not insecure.  I don't care if the Archbishop doesn't respond to me.  My parish pastor didn't respond to me when I took Made for Another World's brilliant letter about Mother's Day and not asking mothers to stand up and leaving out the childless.  And that guy knows me.  I'm not bothered.  It makes me work harder.

I live in a place that has three Catholic churches for 600,000 people.  And it's not urban.  I worship where my in-laws were married, where I was confirmed, and where we were married.  I'm not moving churches.  I've accepted that I worship in a place where people are deathly worried that it took them three months of trying to get pregnant.

I agree with the Misfit that I feel a deep connection now with gay Catholics.  Ah, the irony.

Did I say, "that it is wrong to emphasize the role of procreation in marriage?"  No I didn't.  I said that argument is "half-baked" and that the argument against gay marriage shouldn't "hinge" on procreation.  If the validity of opposite sex marriage hinged on procreation, I'm not married.  

I sometimes wonder why Catholic superstar Leila got involved in the infertile blogs.  I hate to judge knowing what I know but since she loves to, I'll go ahead.  Until you know what it's like to love a man and take the very serious step of marrying him and work very hard to make your marriage a good one in a society that loves to tell you to get a divorce if you're unhappy when everybody is unhappy sometimes, and make love with that man during the time of the month that almost everybody seems to get pregnant and still get your period two weeks later month after month, and face a life knowing you will not know the joy and sorrow of raising and loving your husband's children, you will never understand what drives me.  

I am a faithful Roman Catholic.  However, I will not be a mouthpiece for the Church and I will not stifle debate.  I won't let bullies bring me down.

I didn't muddle anything.  I stand by my letter.  


  1. You don't think infertility is a disease/disorder of the reproductive system(s)? What is it, then?

    I think you misunderstood the bishop. He wasn't saying that only only old people are infertile, but rather that elderly people are infertile *due to* their age (as opposed to a young couple who are infertile due to disease or defect).

  2. You aren't misunderstanding me, you are misunderstanding Augustine. Augustine (not Leila, not me) came up with the idea that cancer and infertility are the result of the Fall; maybe you should take the time to understand what he meant before concluding that it's offensive to say that. There are lots of Catholic theologians who also issue with Augustine's account of the origin of natural evil, but they have taken the time to understand him.

    For the record, I am no fan of Leila's blog or the inhabitants of "the Bubble." I disagree with them on almost every political issue I can think of, but there is value in understanding the arguments of people you disagree with, even if you come to different conclusions.

    And if you think that asking critical questions and pointing out confusing arguments is "bullying," then I am done. I spend all day trying to get resistant students to think more critically, and doing that for free on my off hours does not appeal.

    1. ATC and I misunderstood one another. I now understand that the bullying comment wasn't directed at me. Thanks, ATC, for your patience with me for flying off the handle.

  3. I am not sure what all the hoopla of needing to state the Church's teaching on marriage was I am pretty sure we all know that if we are reading each other's blogs and writing letters to archbishops. I am not one to chime in on a debate because frankly you Internet debaters scare me a little!

    I did want to point out something that Leila said in her comment, it went something like "the fundamental reason why gay marriage is wrong is because their sexual act can not lead to procreation" it is not a direct quote but I am too lazy this morning to look back at the comment and it is hard to do when on the iPad. I usually agree with Leila on a lot of things but I have to disagree on this one. Why is the fundamental reason why gay marriage is wrong is because their sexual act is one of "grave depravity"(CCC 2357)? I am not saying it is wrong to bring up the fact that it is closed to new life because I think that it can be part of the debate but just to focus on that is missing the point!

    Also, what is so wrong with calling out a Church leader and letting him know you think he missed the mark or was insensitive to a particular group in the Church. I was at a church discussion group last week, we were suppose to be talking about the papal conclave and it somehow turned to gay marriage. I am at a super pro-life big family parish so at times I fell alienated. Anyway during the discussion the "gay marriage is closed to new life" aspect came up. Instead of wanting to focus on biblical basis for why gay marriage is wrong they all wanted to focus on the procreation aspect. I had to sit there and here things like "marriage is better with children" and "married people should be having children or else why are they married"

    I sat there in humiliation and understood why some couples have chosen IVF because they might be hearing this stuff at their church and are willing to do anything to get a child. I went home and cried thinking that these people were judging me because there was no baby bump or new born attached to me boobs. They saw that my husband and I were in our late 20s early 30s and some of them knew how long we have been married maybe they thought we were contracepting, who knows. This happens time after time to infertile couples and it is painful. Ironically I was talking to a priest earlier that day and he told me to remember that "marriage starts without children and ends without children" meaning that my husband and I are what make our marriage a marriage not children. Children are a "supreme gift of marriage" but they are not the marriage itself.

    Joanna, some women are infertile not due to a disease that is diagnosed. I am infertile/subfertile because of a disease I have and there is no cure for it. There are ways it can be managed but even that is no guarantee. Some women have no visible signs or diseases of why they are infertile, they just are they were "born that way" excuse the pun. I don't know about calling it a defect if you were born infertile that would almost be like calling it a handicap to me. The things is that we don't know enough of the nature of infertility to call it a defect, I think. Anyway there is my long 2 cents excuse any typos or misspellings it is early.

    1. "I did want to point out something that Leila said in her comment, it went something like "the fundamental reason why gay marriage is wrong is because their sexual act can not lead to procreation" it is not a direct quote…"

      Kat, this is where a direct quote and context would really be helpful, or else it does get muddy, and things do get misrepresented. I have said things like this: "A gay couple cannot consummate a marriage" and "A gay couple is not capable of completing the marital act or having a 'one-flesh union" and "Gay sex acts can never be ordered toward procreation" (and I often emphasis the "ordered toward", because of course there are many cases of one-flesh union that do not lead to procreation).

      Non-conjugal unions cannot be the basis of marriage, whether they be homosexual acts or not. Only the conjugal act can be the basis for marriage, and infertile couples have the fullness of marriage because their union is conjugal! That is just a fact, and the fact that gay people cannot be "conjugal" (and yes, all conjugal acts are "ordered toward" procreation, even with infertile couples, even if they don't lead to procreation).

      I guess this whole conversation has left me totally confused, because I'm not sure what part of that is something you would disagree with? It's factual and that's all it's meant to be.

      And I apologize for using the word "conjugal" so much! That was way too many times, but I'm too tired to go back and edit.

    2. Leila, thank you for clearing that up! After I commented I went back and read your original quote and I do not disagree with what you just said. The problem I am having is the use of the word "fundamental." Why can't we emphasize that there is more than one "fundamental" reason why gay marriage is wrong? I am not trying to debate y'all about gay marriage and whether it is right or wrong, on that issue we agree. Why are Church leader emphasizing only the procreation aspect and not all of what the Church teaches about it? I am also simply trying to state that there is a HUGE lack of compassion and hope for couples/women who are dealing with infertility/miscarriage in the Church. The frustrating part of this gay marriage debate is referring it IF couples as having "a challenge and disappointment" it is MUCH more than that. I think what I am trying to point out here is that our Church leaders have a lack of compassion or knowledge when it come to IF couples and I think that is what ATC's letter is trying to do is make Archbishop Cordileone aware, that's all. Side note: I have heard Archbishop Cordileone speak before and I admire and respect the man very much, especially now that he is in my state.

  4. ATC - I just wanted to chime in and say that I did read your letter before the s**t hit the fan yesterday with our devastating news but I didn't get a chance to comment on it. So, first of all - I really like the letter. I thought it was professional and well done. And I respect the Archbishop and I think he is a big boy and will receive it in the way you intend. I could be wrong - but you are a member of his flock (diocese) right and even if you are not, I think he will receive it graciously.

    Now, about all of the other comments from Leila, JoAnna, Misfit, Rebecca, etc. I feel as I know you all personally and count you all as good friends. (Not Sarah - but you sound wonderful too.) That being said - friends don't always agree on everything and so yes, articulate woman will disagree on things every now and then and that actually doesn't bother me. So I don't have much to add to that discussion as I think there are valid points by all of you - Sarah included.

    But as someone who has had cancer AND experienced struggles to get pregnant (the 2 examples brought up here) and then when we finally do get pregnant have 4 out of 5 times the pregnancy has ended in miscarriage (the most recent being one I found out about yesterday)...yeah the explanation that these are a result of the "fall" - while true and I don't deny it, it is not helpful to one's emotional state to hear that repeated over and over as some rational explanation. Because gee whiz aren't we all impacted by the fall - every singe one of us? And that doesn't explain why crack addicts conceive and bear children while I have difficulty doing so.

    And for the record we have gone about trying to build our family in accordance with church teaching. No IVF, no IUI, virgins on our wedding day, never used contraception, nada, nothing. But TO BE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR - I don't believe for one second that any of that matters and that we deserve children. God is NOT waiting to make sure "we did it all right" before he blesses us with children. Otherwise, there would be a LOT less "oops" babies in the world.

    I know I went on a huge tangent and it is not relavent to the topic at hand, but I guess this whole business about IF and everything being part of the "fall" while yes true, doesn't excuse anyone from exercising the grace of compassion and refrain from referring to someone else's deep and abiding pain "as a challenge and a disappointment that some husbands and wives have to go through". ATC - you are absolutely right - no one would say that about a child that has passed away. It is definitely more than a dissapointment.

    If you don't think any of this makes sense, then it probably doesn't. I am probably too emotional right now to being writing this. I have a surgery to get ready for anyway. But just so you know...I do love you all.

  5. Kat, I'm sorry, I don't understand. If an apparently healthy couple is timing intercourse correctly and are unable to conceive, then there IS a disease/defect - it just hasn't been diagnosed, or simply isn't detectable by modern medicine. (Or, possibly, there is an outside factor in play - environmental, for example - that is affecting fertility.)

    JBTC, so sorry for you loss. The effects if the Fall don't affect everyone in the same way. Addiction is also an effect if the fall, so the crack addict is affected in that regard even if her fertility isn't. But in a perfect world, without the effects of the Fall, no one would be infertile and no one would make sinful choices that lead to "unwanted" children.

  6. Joanna, I agree that modern medicine does not know enough to detect a possible disease or defect in all cases of infertility. I guess what I am trying to say is that we can not say for sure that all infertile couples suffer from a disease or defect. I guess I have an issue with the word "defect" because it reminds me of an object like a recalled automobile part. Also, what if an apparently fertile couple have intercourse during a fertile time and do not conceive would we say that it is due to a defect?

    JBTC, you are in my prayers! I don't like when people refer to my subfertility is an effect of the Fall because so is my pride, stubbornness and sinfulness. My subfertility is NOT a result of my sin, I think that is a distinction I am trying to make.

  7. JoAnna - I know. I completely agree with you. The Fall affects everyone differently. Just as we all have different crosses to bear. I guess my overarching point (and I completely know that I am not a very eloquent writer) is that while something is true - in that the Fall is responsible for infertility, crack addiction, pornography, you name the sin - using that explanation to explain why people suffer from infertility just seems hollow by ITSELF. What hope does that provide? I am not saying you did this or Leila or anyone else. But the veiled assertion is out there in Catholic circles, all the while I know it is true. Does that make sense? You are very much more rational and logical than I am and WAY smarter :) - so maybe this is just my emotional response to something that I can find no rational explanation for. That is why I said on my blog that I don't even ask "why" because it is pointless.

    And saying things like what the Archbishop did beg the question - okay what now? I know the point of his article wasn't to deal with infertility - it was something far different. But maybe he will take the opportunity in the future to address what Misfit brought up before about "what now?". Don't just tell me what I can't do, tell me what I should do with this "a challenge and a disappointment" that my husband and I are going through. To me a challenge is learning how to play the piano and a disappointment is not being able to lose weight as easily as some others can. It seems a very shallow way to describe the immense and soul-shattering effects of infertility/miscarriage, etc.

    I guess that is what I am reacting to more than anything.

  8. Oh and JoAnna thank you for your prayers. I do appreciate them. We have been so blessed to have such supportive friends and family during our time of grieving.

  9. Kat, I would disagree. A healthy female and a healthy male can and will procreate eventually if they time intercourse accordingly and all systems are working as they should. If they do not conceive within a year, then there is an unexplained disease or defect (nutritional deficiency, etc.) that is preventing one or both of their reproductive systems from functioning as intended (biologically).

    JBTC, I guess I don't see that explanation as intending to be a comfort, but simply what it is -- an explanation of why life sometimes sucks. Like C.S. Lewis says, "If we find ourselves with a desire that nothing in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that we were made for another world." In the the world we SHOULD have had, there is no disease or defects or sin, and that's why we have this inward feeling that life SHOULD be fair and are so frustrated when it isn't.

    When I had my first miscarriage, the comment that rubbed me the wrong way the most was "It was God's will." That made me so angry because, IMO, child death is NOT the will of God, but a consequence of the sin and death that entered the world at the Fall. God may allow the consequences of our free will, but He doesn't actively will them or rejoice over them.

  10. JoAnna - you are right (again), the Fall explanation isn't meant to be a comfort. I just wish people wouldn't stop there. That is my point. Offer some hope. The Fall wasn't the last word as you know...Christ came and redeemed us. Yes, the effects are still there, but we are not the sum of the effects of the Fall on our lives, correct? Right now I feel (read - my emotions) - I feel like the effect of the Fall on my life is that I am doomed to have multiple miscarriages. Honestly, it makes me want to abstain from sex forever because I don't want to conceive only to miscarry. It just seems cruel and setting myself up for failure. I am not even talking about fairness. I gave up hoping life would be fair 13 years ago when I was diagnosed with Non-hodgkins lymphoma and almost died at 22 years old and then was left with a crappy thyroid, heart damage from the radiation, and damaged ovaries. But I do have my life, an amazing husband, and the best little girl on the face of the earth. So yes, I am very blessed in the midst of my suffering. I will be the first to say that.

    But we could go around and round on this topic and I just don't have the wherewithal to continue.

    Let's just agree to disagree. And yet, I don't even know what we are disagreeing about. I just know that I can't out argue you or out discuss you and no matter what I say you will have a rebuttal. And that is fine. You are an amazing apologist for the Faith and what you and Leila do day in day out is so very much needed in our secular world. I thank you for that. I really do. I do not have that talent you and so many other apologists do.

    I am just tired of losing hope over and over again. And I am just asking for a little compassion so that when people bring up the Fall - which again, I agree with everything you have said, they include some compassion with it. Even great quotes about C.S. Lewis says above leave me where exactly - longing to die because Heaven is so much better? Well, how does that serve my husband and daughter here on earth? These are rhetorical questions, from a momma who has had her heart broken over and over and I have more children in heaven than on earth and I don't have the luxury of knowing if tomorrow will be better, it probably won't be and so I am just left here waiting for who knows what. I am looking for any glimmer of hope and just hearing about the "Fall this, the Fall that"...without any attachment of hope to it - is hard. I have said too much already. God Bless you all, you are all in my prayers.

  11. Thanks for the clarification Joanna, I understand your point more clearly. I guess I wonder if an infertile couple who were never able to conceive would be deemed to have a defect for their entire life. I think I am confusing the word "defect" with "not normal" and that phrase of not being normal for my entire life rubs me the wrong way. I am living the life that was given to me and for me this is normal whether we are ever able to conceive again( we conceived once in the 4+years we have been TTC and that ended in an early miscarriage). Also, why is it that we can not state the sucky facts of life as in disease, infertility, etc. being an effect of the fall without also being compassionate or at least following it up with a compassionate statement? The phrase "that's life" doesn't sound like there is any compassion in it. I am not specifically speaking of you, Joanna but of what I have heard from others and in the general public.

    1. I think there are (at least) two modes of discourse surrounding infertility. One is the mode of pastoral discourse: What do you say to someone who is suffering? The other is intellectual/theological discourse: Why, theologically, do bad things happen to good people? I hope that everyone participating in this thread would know that if a friend was diagnosed with cancer, the best response is "I'm sorry. I'm here for you. Let me know when chemo starts so that I can bring you dinner/baby-sit the kids/clean your house." NOT "Did you know that cancer is a result of original sin?"

      But on-line, it's harder to tell what discourse is appropriate, especially when the conversation itself mixes these two modes of discourse. (Not that there's a problem with mixing the two concerns.) Also, context matters, and I find that I need a specific sort of understanding from fertile women that I don't need from infertiles: namely, the understanding that we are all vulnerable, that life often sucks, and that she is there for me.

      I actually find the idea that infertility is a result of the Fall comforting. It's what I throw at anyone who dares to suggest that God will reward my relentless prayers with a baby. But maybe it's just obvious to me that I'm defective because my entire reproductive system has been rebelling against me for decades.

    2. Sarah, what you've said here… I agree with every word. You've pointed out the distinctions, and the problems with our communication here. Thank you.

    3. Sarah, yes! Thank you for separating the two! I could not put my finger on why we are all getting everything jumbled. I am trying to emphasize the first, pastoral discourse. I want us as a Church to have more of a pastoral support for this going through IF, I have heard the theological/intellectual part and as a woman who is intellect, will and emotion I need more than theology; I need compassionate care from my Church.

    4. Love what Sarah said here. I completely agree, and I think that's what ATC was focusing on in the bishop's message: than you for making (some of) the theology (not very) clear, but since you're apparently aware of this whole infertility thing, don't you have anything useful to say about it? I know I'd like to hear something useful from somebody eventually.

      Well, actually, I should be fair. I haven't had an appointment with him in way too long, but I have/had a wonderful spiritual director. The first time I talked to him, he told me - before I had said much of everything, and he repeated it I don't know how many times - that the fact that I had children was NOT OK, would NEVER be OK, might become manageable with time but would not become OK with time, was not part of God's plan, not a punishment, not willed for me, but allowed, the way a lot of evil things are allowed (not planned). He didn't mention the Fall, but of course that's the theological reference (I know it and I think he assumed that. I don't find it insulting, by the way). What he did mention was the death of his mom a few years back. Her kids were grown, but she died relatively young. And he said that the pain would lessen over time, but it would NEVER BE OK that she was gone. Death is an evil and that's that.

      That's the reference I use to reach out to people on all sorts of topics when they are searching for answers - "Why would God want my grandmother to die?" and "Why would God allow these people to lose their baby?" (God help me, I don't know. I never will.) When what they're searching for is understanding, I try to offer them the theological facts - God doesn't will this, doesn't want this. This isn't the beautiful plan he wrote for all our lives. But because of the general role of sin in the world, wood rots, germs are passed on, cancers develop, our bodies decay with time, coyotes eat joggers, and things generally decompose. That's the passive effect of sin in the world - let's not even talk about specific sins, like rape and murder and muggings and cruelty and even malign neglect. Which we've never felt from any of the fertile folks we're surrounded by, right? But because of the blessing of my spiritual director's example, I have tried to remember that after a few words of explanation that put these sufferings in some reasoned context, I need to say the only words that mean anything: This is not OK and it will never be OK. I don't have an answer or a solution or a band-aid and I won't disrespect you by pretending I have. You're suffering because this is bad. Your heart rebels because this situation is evil. You're not crazy. How you feel is valid and sensible and it would not be sensible to feel any other way. And I'm sorry.

    5. Misfit, your comments are helping me to make sense of something that I read long ago: the concept of original sin and the Fall aren't supposed to be soothing or comforting. They aren't supposed to help us sleep better at night, because, as you so eloquently put it, we are angry and in pain precisely because the world isn't supposed to be this way. In fact, the worst possibility is we'll say, "Oh, the Fall," and stop being angry on behalf of others.

      The only thing that comforts or soothes is Christ himself--not the theological concept of the second person of the Trinity, but the actual presence of Christ. So suffering calls us to be Christ to another and love as Christ did, precisely because there is nothing else to do in the face of suffering.

  12. After having read all of this, I go back to my comment on the original post - and I think it is what JBTC is getting at (please correct me and accept my apology if I am wrong, M) - that we must always speak the Truth - but we MUST do it in LOVE! Kat said it as well "at least following it up witha compassionate statement?"
    We must must must be servants to one another first and foremost. Jesus' commandment was not to defend doctrine, but to love one another. Yes, we do this through our doctrine, but to read over and over again that my infertility is a defect - well, let's just say there have been more tears shed while sobbing and barely getting out the phrase "I am broken" than I care to admit. Yes, it is true - there is something defective about how my body works, that is objectively obvious - yet, to read it over and over again all the while hearing from my Church that it is "a challenge and disappointment" really makes me want to run screaming as far away from the Catholic Church and her people as I can get.

    Generally, I know where Leila and Joanna are coming from and especially Leila, the goal of her blog is to teach and defend doctrine. She is also the first to offer prayers to those of us IFers. So, while sometimes the words sting (hey, the Truth can hurt, right) I also know Leila well enough to know her intent. And while I know the Archbishop was speaking to a specific point, as ATC said, we (infertiles) have been made pawns from both sides of this and if our Church, our shepherds, don't start being shepherds the doctrine will be reduced to a list of rules rather than a series of Truths that resonate within our very souls.

  13. ATC, this is so uncalled for:

    "I sometimes wonder why Catholic superstar Leila got involved in the infertile blogs. I hate to judge knowing what I know but since she loves to, I'll go ahead."

    What the heck? I am sorry for your pain, but does that give you a license to be so rude to someone you do not know? As I've said, if you have something personal against me, please bring it to me privately and we will work it out. I don't even know your name, so why don't you email and we will get to know each other?

    I never implied this at all:

    "And on Leila's blog she took the time to say that infertility was due to 'the Fall.' And that meant that I was defective, diseased, old, decayed."

    If you put a direct quote up, and in context, you would see that I never said that and never "meant" that. I am very careful about the words I use (although in comments, they can be rushed). Never would I say that an infertile woman was "defective, diseased, old and decayed"! Just never.

    I am sorry for your pain, and JBTC knows how much I love her and care about her feelings, so please stop the accusations of judgement, etc. My blog has a purpose, and if you don't care for it, you do not have to continue reading it, nor creating blog posts about it. My blog is based in doctrinal and logical truths, and that's the tenor over there. My personal relationships with other bloggers and readers are just that… personal. And we love each other a lot and have very cherished friendships. Why you are so antagonistic to me, I do not know, but all I ask is that you please, please stop misrepresenting my words and opinions, and stop getting personal (and insulting) with me, when you won't even come to me personally.

    Many thanks in advance.