Pope Scolds Couples Who Choose Pets Over Kids - The New York Times
By: Elisabetta Povoledo (nytimes)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Expressing concern about global birthrates, Francis said such couples were acting in a selfish way that diminished humanity.
Pope Francis at the Vatican on Wednesday.Credit...Angelo Carconi/EPA, via Shutterstock
By Elisabetta Povoledo
Jan. 6, 2022, 7:50 a.m. ET
ROME — Pope Francis has not been reluctant to offer his views on polarizing subjects, but on Wednesday, he waded into an issue involving two subjects on which consensus is almost impossible to find.
Pets and kids.
Speaking on parenthood during a general audience at the Vatican on Wednesday, Francis bemoaned the global decline in birthrates — what he described as a "demographic winter" — and was bluntly critical of couples who prefer to have pets rather than children.
People who have pets instead of children, the pope said, were being selfish, exhibiting a "denial of fatherhood or motherhood" that "diminishes us, it takes away our humanity."
"Yes, dogs and cats take the place of children," Francis said, laying out the harsh consequences of a childless future, including the inevitable drying up of pension plans. "Yes, it's funny, I understand, but it is the reality."
The reaction was heated.
Several people pointed out that the pope had made a deliberate decision not to have children and should have little say on the matter. "Is the Vatican gonna pay daycare?" asked one man.
Others noted that Francis was failing to live up to his namesake, Francis of Assisi, patron saint of animals.
The pope had already signaled his kids-over-kibbles stance in a 2014 interview with the Rome daily Il Messaggero. When asked whether some in society valued pets more than children, he said that it was a reality that reflected a "sign of cultural degeneration."
"That's because an emotional relationship with animals is easier, more programmable," he said at the time. "An animal is not free, while having a child is something complex."
On Wednesday, Francis said the world was experiencing "an age of notorious orphanhood," that could be countered, in part, by caring for children, either through adoption, or naturally. "It is riskier not to have them," Francis said. "Think about this, please."
One animal rights group said it wasn't an either/or situation.
"It is strange to think that the pope considers love in our lives to be limited in quantity, and that giving it to someone takes it away from others," said Massimo Comparotto, the president of the Italian branch of the International Organization for the Protection of Animals.
"Perhaps the pontiff is unaware of the enormous sacrifices that volunteers endure" to help save animals, he said in a statement. "Anyone who thinks that life is sacred loves life beyond species," he said.
Continue reading the main story
Tags
Who is online
462 visitors
trolling, taunting, and off topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. NT members that vote up their own comments or continue to disrupt the conversation risk having all of their comments deleted. please remember to quote the person(s) to whom you are replying to preserve continuity of this seed.
I like Pope Francis. He's a refreshing change from that Nazi war criminal Pope Benedict. But on this he's wrong. I know the RCC's stance on birth control but it's not a very modern view especially in America. We have over population and with that comes problems like over use of resources, extinction of species, and climate change. Then there are the wars and civil strife.
Pope Frank probably needs to just sit down and color on this one. He's a priest and really doesn't know anything about raising children
Or about marriage.
that, too
I understand the problems children go thru if living in an orphanage or living in a group home but I would rather that people who actually want the child be the ones who might adopt. If someone does not what to raise children they should not be shamed into the action as the child will not be in a better place than an orphanage IMO.
Totally agree. All children should be wanted
Indeed. Why should any individual or couple be expected or required to have children, especially if they do not want kids? A person's value is not determined by whether they have children or not.
I consider my Boston Terrier, Sasha, as my child. In fact, she needs a spanking because just this morning she stole the treats intended for my Auntie's cat, Casper. I've raised her better than that.
My granddog Lily eats my cats' food
Wally is my fur baby who brings me endless joy, and my daughters are the heartburn that I love.
Children are not for everyone. Funny how a childless guy is judging others.
Why someone who does not play the game think he gets to make the rules?
How could he possibly think we need more people on this planet? This is not the time of Genesis. We no longer need to be fruitful and multiply.
Interesting. That’s not what Jesus thought. He taught his disciples that marriage was not for everyone.
If that’s not clear, here is a translation from The Message. For the uninitiated, The Message is a Bible translation that dispenses with any attempt to translate scripture word-for-word and instead focuses on the meaning of scripture.
So, for example, the Pope is not married “for kingdom reasons.”
I think they are more likely being responsible. The planet does not need more people. The trouble though is actually related to evolution. We are engineering a population that will lean more to the irresponsible if the responsible do not reproduce as much.