Should CathInfo allow members to discuss, philosophically, the ideal age of marriage, modern marriage trends (marrying later and later, fewer and fewer children, etc.)

Or is even discussing "marriage" and "under 18s" in the same sentence automatically lewd and obscene?

Is the topic of "marriage" automatically lewd? I disagree. Unless you're going into graphic physiological detail -- THAT would be lewd. But marriage is a sacrament created by God. And that is what we're talking about here: honorable, sacramental Catholic marriage.

Is saying "teen girls are attractive" lewd? I would think it common sense. As long as you're talking about young women (after puberty) I don't see any problem.

I MUST POINT OUT that I have not seen a single post targeting anyone's specific daughter (NOTE: I have 7 daughters, ages 4 - 17, so I am as qualified as any of you to be offended or not!), but rather a philosophical discussion on the broad topic of ideal marriage age. I haven't taken any of the discussion personally, nor have I been offended by any of it.

Modern Americans (including myself) would look askance (thinking it imprudent) at any woman under 18 getting married. Just a reality of the modern world maturity levels. Again, we're talking about honorable sacramental (lifelong) marriage here, nothing else. Promotion of anything else wouldn't be allowed on the forum.

That having been said, the canonical age for marriage, and the "age of consent" in most CHRISTIAN (formerly Christian) countries is often much lower than 18. Even in most states in the USA. So we can't deny that. It might be ourselves that are the problem (being raised in the modern world), rather than those laws and statutes. So let's stay objective.

Make your case.

Those who have already left in a huff -- I guess won't have a voice in this debate.

This is already a heated topic, requiring common civility will go a long way to make this discussion a productive one.  

Can we make a rule, no name calling? Just for this one thread.😬 I know you have a more hands off approach to moderating and I can respect that, but this topic brings out the worst in people on both sides. 

And yes, I usually give a wide leash on the forum. But I've already censored many posts (including on this thread). REMINDER: Don't QUOTE BAD POSTS or they will stay forever. They are YOUR POSTS if they are posted under your username. You make the jerk's content YOURS when you do that.

If you have posts to report, please report them. The Moderator is on duty as always.

It reminds me of Acts chapter 19:

 36 For as much therefore as these things cannot be contradicted, you ought to be quiet, and to do nothing rashly.  37 For you have brought hither these men, who are neither guilty of sacrilege, nor of blasphemy against your goddess.  38 But if Demetrius and the craftsmen that are with him, have a matter against any man, the courts of justice are open, and there are proconsuls: let them accuse one another  [Acts Of Apostles 19:38]  39 And if you inquire after any other matter, it may be decided in a lawful assembly. 

Men:  When you posted in those threads, what did you see as the woman's role in this particular discussion?  What were you looking to get from them?  Were you looking to get anything from them?  Did you think they could provide you with advice?  life experiences?  I'm trying to figure out what women could say that would be helpful to you.  And if you weren't looking for any advice/help, etc from them, then why discuss it in the co-ed room at all?

Good question.

I was asking this question myself this morning, as I spent way too much time on this today.
But for an answer to that question, go back to the OP. It had nothing to do with the current topic. In short, the thread was derailed. So it kind of snuck up, flew under the radar, etc.

The member (I don't know who) that brought up the topic of marriage age had no ability to move the thread at that point. He simply replied to an existing thread, and thereby derailed it.

I'm trying to figure out what women could say that would be helpful to you.  And if you weren't looking for any advice/help, etc from them, then why discuss it in the co-ed room at all?

  That thread was specifically directed at males.  No one asked for any female advice.

OK, if that was in fact the OP's intent in the thread I linked above (which we really don't know unless you were the OP), why not post it among the men only? 

Because there's no 'anonymous' forum in the men/women only?

Should CathInfo allow members to discuss, philosophically, the ideal age of marriage, modern marriage trends (marrying later and later, fewer and fewer children, etc.)

Or is even discussing "marriage" and "under 18s" in the same sentence automatically lewd and obscene?

Is the topic of "marriage" automatically lewd? I disagree. Unless you're going into graphic physiological detail -- THAT would be lewd. But marriage is a sacrament created by God. And that is what we're talking about here: honorable, sacramental Catholic marriage.

Is saying "teen girls are attractive" lewd? I would think it common sense. As long as you're talking about young women (after puberty) I don't see any problem.

I MUST POINT OUT that I have not seen a single post targeting anyone's specific daughter (NOTE: I have 7 daughters, ages 4 - 17, so I am as qualified as any of you to be offended or not!), but rather a philosophical discussion on the broad topic of ideal marriage age. I haven't taken any of the discussion personally, nor have I been offended by any of it.

Modern Americans (including myself) would look askance (thinking it imprudent) at any woman under 18 getting married. Just a reality of the modern world maturity levels. Again, we're talking about honorable sacramental (lifelong) marriage here, nothing else. Promotion of anything else wouldn't be allowed on the forum.

That having been said, the canonical age for marriage, and the "age of consent" in most CHRISTIAN (formerly Christian) countries is often much lower than 18. Even in most states in the USA. So we can't deny that. It might be ourselves that are the problem (being raised in the modern world), rather than those laws and statutes. So let's stay objective.

Make your case.

Those who have already left in a huff -- I guess won't have a voice in this debate.

14 should be the minimum female marriage age. If you disagree then you disagree with the Church. 16 should be the minimum male marriage age. If you disagree then you disagree with the Church. Forcing people to wait until eighteen will lead people to hell. That’s 11 years of waiting since the age of reason is attained. Many will die in sɛҳuąƖ sins without the means to quench the flames of concupiscence. To these people I ask - do you want people to go to hell? Is that your goal? Dammnation of souls?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lewd

lewd
adjective
ˈlüd

Synonyms of lewd

1

a
: obscene, vulgar
lewd remarks


b
: sɛҳuąƖly unchaste or licentious (see licentious sense 1)
lewd behavior



So the holy Sacrament of Matrimony is automatically "lewd" now, just because it implicitly includes the begetting of children? That's news to me. In fact, I firmly and strongly disagree.

Discussing the mechanics of the marital embrace? Lewd.
Discussing whether 14 year olds should enter the holy state of Matrimony? A philosophical discussion.

Going against the habits, thinking, or mores of the current culture, WHILE NOT OPPOSING CATHOLIC DOCTRINE OR SENSIBILITIES, might indeed trigger "pearl clutching".

But triggering or giving an occasion for "pearl clutching" does NOT equal "lewd", nor will I ever pretend that it does.

To have a LEGITIMATE MORAL OBJECTION rather than mere "pearl clutching", you have to point to Catholic doctrine, not just American habits/culture of the 2020's. Our culture is literally dead. It won't survive; it is not going to pass on to the next generation. Figuring out an alternative or the "ideal", with no preconceived notions, is not only allowed or a good idea, but downright required.

Discussing whether 14 year old should enter into the holy state of matrimony is not only philosophical. It is a matter of obedience to holy mother church. If you are calling this lewd you are calling church canon law lewd.