Another thread inspired me to start this one.

If you found out tomorrow that heaven and hell did not exist (I know, impossible and ridiculous, but bear with me!), would you do anything different in your life?

Would the DINKs (Double-Income-No-Kids) be the blessed ones, who only have to take care of themselves and pursue pleasure, ease, travel, etc.?

Or is it true that after Original Sin, man NEEDS a certain amount of labor and suffering to give his life meaning?

But is anyone here naive enough to believe that the DINKs are really that unhappy? As one man famously said, "If money brought unhappiness, rich folk would simply have to give it away and be happy. So the charge that money doesn't buy happiness is a bit of sour grapes by the poor."

Isn't our REAL consolation that we'll be happy in HEAVEN? Aren't we going a bit too far to say that they're not happy on earth either? Maybe in a few cases or sometimes, but not always.

There is a debate in the world about children. Worldlings say that we religious folk delude ourselves into thinking our children will support us, give us more happiness than grief, etc. but who is right? Maybe we ARE deluding ourselves if we think that children are profitable on a worldly level.

Kind of like the famous quote, "I only believe the Bible because the Catholic Church tells me to."

On the one hand, having children is part of the natural law.  But the RAISING of them to be upstanding Catholics, with self-control, etc. takes a LOT of work and it's mostly the thought of one's personal judgment that motivates you to keep at it, even when it gets difficult.

It's a very complex and interesting philosophical topic.

I mean, let's be honest -- if this world were all there is, would I REALLY have one child after the other, with no breaks?  Even if I was convinced that children bring happiness, etc. I still might be tempted to want a bit of a break here and there -- especially in the beginning when kids are pretty helpless. Those who have raised 4 children 5 and under can relate.

It's not being a DINK or anti-child to want a bit of a break. Heck, anyone born in the 50's usually had only 3-5 kids. How did they manage that? I often wonder -- I hope they just used NFP or something. But having 5 or 6 kids doesn't seem "unnatural" to me, or anti-child.

Nevertheless, I can't justify "planning" my family size, since we have enough resources to support them, and I figure I can handle them if God sends them.

But my point in all this: It's for supernatural motives -- not natural ones.

Nature says "have children". Supernature says: "have all the children God wants to send you. They will be future citizens of heaven."

Practicing natural virtue will be more conducive to happiness than vice, without any doubt.

Then why do so many pagans wallow in vice?  If it makes you happier to follow God's law, why can't every skeptic and athiest be convinced to follow Catholic moral law, just for the natural, practical benefits it provides?

After all, EVERYONE understands "happy". Not everyone believes in heaven.

To be completely honest, I would want a very large family, and the thought of limiting the size of my family is simply abhorrent to me.  That would be true if I had no Faith at all. I am one of four children, and I think my parents made a mistake in practicing NFP (and in continuing to teach courses on it)

If nature stayed the same as we know it, then alot of the natural consequences effecting the individual, let alone society, remain the same. A murderer, for example, will still face death, not because he's breaking the law, but because he has the potential to deprive me/us of life and enjoying it to it's fullest.

I think what Im trying to say is that the natural law would have to be lived out to it's fullest to enjoy a peaceful existence on earth without God, but not just by yourself alone. The violation of the law may bring temporary of "happiness"/pleasure, but in the long run it leads to suffering and ruin because it often conflicts with everyone else's "hapiness".

An embezzler enjoys his ill gotten gains for a time, but it is at the expense of others. We don't prosecute embezzlers today because they are violating God's law, but because they are a menace to the rest of society unhindered.

  I would be a catholic even if there were no eternity!
Otherwise I would get depressed as an atheist or have to worship gods of false religions (which is very hard).

True happiness lies in a clear conscience. It is in built in man to know that there is a greater being than ourselves and a sense of right and wrong and so I would say that worldings experience physical happiness though not so much of the true happiness that comes from knowing that objectivity exists and not everything is relative.

It is a great consolation to me that I know for sure that Truth exists. Other wise how could we be happy. We would be like a reed in the wind, never knowing and that would lead to despair.

True happiness and true peace go hand in hand and true peace is only experienced by those in union with God and this is why the worldly notion of peace is bogus.

I heard a Priest say once that how can we be at peace with another man that is not at peace with God. True peace can only be experienced between those who are at peace with God.

I know plenty of happy well to do worldlings that are quite happy with their lives and wouldn't change anything about them.