So, let's give it a try!
#31
(10-19-2010, 07:42 PM)Walty Wrote:
(10-19-2010, 07:04 PM)Iolanthe Wrote: Thankfully neither of you will ever have a daughter. Just sayin.'  :tiphat:

How could you possibly know that?  And isn't Vetus' faith more important than whatever sort of money or career he brings to the table?


When I have a daughter, if she wants to marry a pauper then she can do so.  So long as her husband is a devout pauper who will get her to heaven, what do I care?

Dude, give it up.  Rose's dad isn't on Fisheaters.
Reply
#32
(10-19-2010, 07:40 PM)Walty Wrote:
(10-19-2010, 12:59 PM)piabee Wrote:
(10-19-2010, 12:56 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: A husband can support his wife and family if he gets money and estates from the marriage dowry.

No father in his right mind would hand his daughter over to a man who had nothing to offer in exchange. I assume your negotiations are with the father, yes?

Yeah, the only noble thing is for a father to exchange his daughter for something valuable.

I was being facetious.
Reply
#33
(10-19-2010, 07:48 PM)WhollyRoaminCatholic Wrote:
(10-19-2010, 07:42 PM)Walty Wrote:
(10-19-2010, 07:04 PM)Iolanthe Wrote: Thankfully neither of you will ever have a daughter. Just sayin.'  :tiphat:

How could you possibly know that?  And isn't Vetus' faith more important than whatever sort of money or career he brings to the table?


When I have a daughter, if she wants to marry a pauper then she can do so.  So long as her husband is a devout pauper who will get her to heaven, what do I care?

Dude, give it up.  Rose's dad isn't on Fisheaters.

I already talked to him.  I just figured it's been too long since I've argued with IoIanthe.
Reply
#34
(10-19-2010, 07:50 PM)piabee Wrote:
(10-19-2010, 07:40 PM)Walty Wrote:
(10-19-2010, 12:59 PM)piabee Wrote:
(10-19-2010, 12:56 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: A husband can support his wife and family if he gets money and estates from the marriage dowry.

No father in his right mind would hand his daughter over to a man who had nothing to offer in exchange. I assume your negotiations are with the father, yes?

Yeah, the only noble thing is for a father to exchange his daughter for something valuable.

I was being facetious.

My bad, Pia.  :tiphat:
Reply
#35
(10-19-2010, 07:42 PM)Walty Wrote:
(10-19-2010, 07:04 PM)Iolanthe Wrote: Thankfully neither of you will ever have a daughter. Just sayin.'  :tiphat:

How could you possibly know that?  And isn't Vetus' faith more important than whatever sort of money or career he brings to the table?


When I have a daughter, if she wants to marry a pauper then she can do so.  So long as her husband is a devout pauper who will get her to heaven, what do I care?

Are you being serious? The Church takes the husband's duty of providing for his wife very seriously--so much so that the wife is allowed to refuse the "marital debt" if the husband neglects his duty in being the financial provider. In no way is being "devout" enough. It's the man's duty to be the bread winner. I thought that was obvious.  ???
Reply
#36
(10-19-2010, 08:11 PM)Iolanthe Wrote:
(10-19-2010, 07:42 PM)Walty Wrote:
(10-19-2010, 07:04 PM)Iolanthe Wrote: Thankfully neither of you will ever have a daughter. Just sayin.'  :tiphat:

How could you possibly know that?  And isn't Vetus' faith more important than whatever sort of money or career he brings to the table?


When I have a daughter, if she wants to marry a pauper then she can do so.  So long as her husband is a devout pauper who will get her to heaven, what do I care?

Are you being serious? The Church takes the husband's duty of providing for his wife very seriously--so much so that the wife is allowed to refuse the "marital debt" if the husband neglects his duty in being the financial provider. In no way is being "devout" enough. It's the man's duty to be the bread winner. I thought that was obvious.  ???

That is the man's job, but it's not his primary job, as if the Church endorsed some kind of utilitarianism or functionalism.  His primary job is to be a spiritual leader of the family.

And I am serious that I would allow my daughter to marry a poor man so long as it wasn't going to endanger her health or anything extreme like that.  There's a difference between laziness and poverty.  One is a vice, the other blessed by the Lord.
Reply
#37
(10-19-2010, 08:17 PM)Walty Wrote: There's a difference between laziness and poverty. One is a vice, the other blessed by the Lord.

The only thing blessed by Our Lord is to be poor in spirit.

There's no blessing in being materially poor. In fact, it can be as much as an issue as material wealth.
Reply
#38
(10-19-2010, 08:17 PM)Walty Wrote: That is the man's job, but it's not his primary job, as if the Church endorsed some kind of utilitarianism or functionalism.  His primary job is to be a spiritual leader of the family.

And I am serious that I would allow my daughter to marry a poor man so long as it wasn't going to endanger her health or anything extreme like that.  There's a difference between laziness and being poor.  One is a vice, the other blessed by the Lord.

It's not his primary job? So he can just disregard it? I think you're wrong. If a man can't provide for a family, he shouldn't get married. This is how it always was. Marriage comes with responsibility.

I suppose you mean endangering her health as in not having health insurance when a baby is born....or, like in the case of a friend of a mine, parents who don't take their kids to the doctor for a check-up so one of them grows up with scoliosis without anyone knowing until it's too late to do anything about it. She'll have a crooked back for the rest of her life, but hey, she'll still get to heaven (possibly) so who cares?

When the father of a family neglects his duties to provide, it hurts those whom it is his primary duty to protect and care for. This is not something minor or optional. You should check your facts.
Reply
#39
(10-19-2010, 08:26 PM)Iolanthe Wrote: I suppose you mean endangering her health as in not having health insurance when a baby is born....or, like in the case of a friend of a mine, parents who don't take their kids to the doctor for a check-up so one of them grows up with scoliosis without anyone knowing until it's too late to do anything about it. She'll have a crooked back for the rest of her life, but hey, she'll still get to heaven (possibly) so who cares?

While I understand where you're coming from, you seem to be neglecting the supernatural end of life. Perhaps physical ailments are necessary for some souls to do their penance, you can never presume to know better.
Reply
#40
(10-19-2010, 08:28 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(10-19-2010, 08:26 PM)Iolanthe Wrote: I suppose you mean endangering her health as in not having health insurance when a baby is born....or, like in the case of a friend of a mine, parents who don't take their kids to the doctor for a check-up so one of them grows up with scoliosis without anyone knowing until it's too late to do anything about it. She'll have a crooked back for the rest of her life, but hey, she'll still get to heaven (possibly) so who cares?

While I understand where you're coming from, you seem to be neglecting the supernatural end of life. Perhaps some physical ailments are necessary for some souls to do their penance, you can never presume to know better.

I'm not neglecting anything. You are. I never said the husband shouldn't be the spiritual leader.

If you really think neglecting your family will help them get to heaven, you are insane and delusional.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)