The Way

As I watched The Way, I was inspired by the various stories each person told, and despite their differences, they were all able to take a journey of discovery. Each individual had a goal, and although some of their goals changed along the way, each of them strived to achieve what they had set out for. The film also inspired me to be open to others no matter what, because you never truly know another person's story just by looking at them. The characters were all able to connect and understand each other, despite their differing backgrounds, cultures, and interests. As I move on to college, I think it will be important to keep an open mind as I meet other people from all over the world. I would love to go on a pilgrimage like this movie because experiences similar to this allow you to learn more about yourself, discover new places, meet new people, and get out of your comfort zone. I think that as the movie progressed, Tom realized that the trip was not just for his son but for himself to. Through the trip Tom was able to get a better understanding of his son and of himself.

Mixed Messages

       I think that the church sends positive messages to young women by encouraging them to take part in community service and Church activities. Such events allow young women to experience first-hand the change they can bring about in the world. Attending an all-girls Catholic school has taught me to take part in activities like these and to be a leader and an advocate for myself and others. Being in such an all-female environment has helped me to see the potential I have to impact my community. The Mount encourages its students to be anything and anyone they want to be by reminding us to be women of being women of courage, conviction, and faith. However, I have received some mixed messages. Much of the Bible is focused on men and their contribution to the Catholic tradition; although, I am taught everyday that men and women should be viewed as equals. It is apparent that Church figures in the past did not believe that women could have a great impact on our world. The only female, historical religious figure that really stands out is Mary, the Mother of Jesus. It is difficult to think that women are just as important as men when men are the center of the Catholic faith. 

Abortion

       In Bryan Cones's article "Higher rates of abortion and unsafe abortion in the developing world: How should the pro-life movement respond?," he reports statistics that show abortion becoming increasingly common and unsafe in foreign countries. I have found that throughout high school, abortion was really only discussed in terms of its morality and its relationship to Catholic Church beliefs. We have spoken even less about the presence of illegal operations and specific abortion rates outside of the United States in developing countries. I had no idea that 86% of all abortions are performed in developing countries. Similarly to the U.S., abortions that take place without medical training are much riskier than those performed by licensed doctors. 
       I agree with Cones's argument that the difference in the abortion rates between the United States and developing countries can be attributed to the availability of contraceptives. In the U.S., condoms and the pill are readily available to prevent unintended pregnancies. However, contraceptives in developing countries can be difficult to track down. Although these contraception methods are against Catholic Church teachings, as they prevent the possibility of having children, Cones says that contraception is “the lesser of two evils.” If women in developing nations had access to contraceptives that prevent unwanted pregnancies, fewer women would seek illegal means to abort their pregnancy.

IVF

       I believe that the main pro of in vitro fertilization (IVF) is that parents who are originally unable to conceive have the opportunity to experience parenthood and bring new life into the world. However a major con of this process, is that unused embryos are typically disposed. Catholic teaching states that human life begins at the moment of conception, when the egg and sperm unite to form an embryo. In IVF that union occurs in a petri dish. When doctors create these unions, several embryos are formed, but the ones that go unused are either frozen or destroyed. For the Church, the destruction or demise of an embryo during the IVF process is the unnatural ending of a human life, similar to an abortion. Additionally, treatments such as IVF can be extremely expensive. In the article, the Burnetts went through IVF 11 times at a total cost of more than $100,000, with no success. They spent so much of their money on a procedure that did not even reward them with a child.
       I think the Church makes several valid points in their teachings on IVF. Dignitas Personae, particularly, explains that all IVF procedures threaten or actually end the life of an embryo. However, I cannot help but put myself in the shoes of the infertile parents. If I were ever in such a predicament, I think that IVF may be a viable option for myself and my spouse. God put men and women on this Earth to spread His message of unconditional love through procreation. If I was biologically unable to have a child of my own, I would want to use the science available to fulfill God's vision. After all, He must have created the men and women who invented the science behind IVF.
       The cost of IVF somewhat impacts my opinion on the morality of the practice. Because the procedure is so expensive, only very wealthy couples can afford to create a child of their own through medical means. Middle-class and poorer couples cannot pay for such an exorbitant process. Does this mean that only wealthy infertile couples should be able to have children of their own? If a couple wants to have a baby that is biologically their own, they should have access to every means available, regardless of their financial status.

He's Just Not That Into You...

       In the movie He's Just Not That Into You, a variety of individuals deal with a multitude of romantic issues. Two couples in the movie particularly caught my attention, because many of the problems they dealt with are related to our course material. The relationship between Gigi and Alex, as well as the problems suffered by Beth and Neil are quite relevant. 

       Gigi is a single woman who repeatedly misreads "signals" from her dates. She perceives every kind gesture from a man as an indication that he is romantically interested in her. She befriends Alex when she stalks another man, Connor, to a bar. There, Alex reveals to Gigi that there are several strategies men use to avoid a woman. He explains that if a man is interested in a woman, he will find a way to see her again. Neither Alex nor Gigi exhibit healthy dating skills at the start of the movie. Gigi constantly seeks out men to make her happy, because deep down, she is insecure. Because of this, the overanalyzes every move a guy makes and is absolutely desperate for affirmation. It is not until Alex gives her a reality check that she begins to gain confidence and security in herself. I do not think Alex's approach to dating is necessarily good either. He sees women as "disposable," because he believes that there are plenty more women out there just like them. He fears commitment, and is very hesitant to put himself out there. He is unwilling to be vulnerable, because he has seen vulnerability take a negative toll on the people around him. Although being vulnerable may lead to pain, a lack of vulnerability will never lead to love and intimacy.
      
       Beth and Neil are another couple in the movie who can be related to course material. After seven years together, Beth wants to get married, but Neil does not believe in marriage. Although they live together, Beth believes marriage is necessary to consecrate their union. But, when she confronts Neil about this, he is insistent upon not marrying, and they break up. I think this situation highlights the dangers of cohabitation. Beth had always thought Neil would want to marry her, so she stuck around until her impatience got the best of her. However, as the movie progressed, Beth saw that Neil had been a better husband to her than her sisters' real husbands. She finally recognizes that the relationship they share is everything she could ever hope for from a marriage, built on trust, respect, and loyalty. An important message that I took away from this couple was that a marriage licence is not the only thing that can consecrate a bond between two people. Everyday acts of kindness, support, and love are essential to an affectionate and committed relationship.

The Changing Face of Marriage

       I think that the "domestic church" has been the main source of my knowledge of God and Catholicism. Growing up, my parents took me to Church regularly, but as time passed and my other siblings were born, our attendance began to wain. However, my mom had grown up with strong, strict Catholic ideals, so she did her best to instill a sense of God within each of us. She was the preacher of faith through word and example for each one of my siblings and I. She taught us how to understand and apply the teachings of the Church that she found most vital to living a happy, healthy life. My mom always reminded me to be a "Jesus person" and live the way Jesus would.
       Based on the clip from "He's Just Not That Into You," it is apparent that the structures and compositions of families and marriages are changing. Some of the pros of this morphing structure may be that people do not feel restricted by past ideals, and they are more open to express their love in the ways that they see fit. However, I believe that the cons outweigh the pros. Because the composition of families and marriages are changing, people don't feel as pressured to supply their loved ones with the support and foundation that is encouraged by the traditional marriage and family structures. Children who grow up with a single parent may not be as socially or emotionally well-rounded, because they only had one parent to teach them how to interact with society. Also, couples who are not bound by marriage may see their 'unofficial' relationship status as a way out.
       I think that the article had good intentions, however, I do not believe that the author provided enough evidence to back up their claims. They made promising conclusions that sounded accurate, but the material presented was not necessarily fact-based. For me, I am hopeful that the energy an individual puts into education will make him/her more future-oriented, and he/she will have greater self-control and hope for an upward mobility. However, this may not always be the case. I have always thought that better education allowed individuals to be more financially stable; but even with this stability, couples can still deconstruct over pressing issues that are money-related.
       I have always felt compelled to establish the domestic church in my future home, because I think the Church was spot-on when they realized that the family is where much of a child's knowledge is learned. There are many principles that are taught in the church that I would want my children to know and believe. I think it is my responsibility to make sure that my future children experience love, forgiveness and trust within their own home.

Dating and 'hooking up'

      In my personal opinion, I do not believe that dating is 'essentially practice for divorce' as many 'anti-daters' argue. Despite negative messages from media and entertainment industry, I believe dating is a practical element in preparation for marriage. Without dating, it may be difficult to decide if someone is a proper lifelong partner. However, the 'anti-daters' did make a valid argument by claiming that much of the dating world has taken an "on to the next one" mentality, in which people have multiple partners with no real lasting relationships. This may lead to an increase in divorce rates; yet, I am still not convinced that we need to revert back to traditional manners of dating. I agree with Freitas and King's assertion that dating can teach people how to love and take responsibility. But, this would not be very effective against recreational dating.
      I have definitely noticed a change in the dating culture as I have moved through high school. Freshman and sophomore year, dating was not very serious, but as I reached Junior and Senior year, I noticed that more people were interested in long-term relationships. But after graduation.... then what? Typically couples that were once so dedicated to one another will break apart due to long-distance issues. Additionally, there is a certain freedom that accompanies your first year in college. You are exposed to a completely new set of people, and it is natural to want to experiment and not be tied down. Although, this sense of "freedom" is typically abused and college students take things way too far. The term "hooking-up" becomes blurry, and serious forms of sexual expression become casual.