The Law of Reproduction

686. Is the reproduction of living beings a law of nature?

686. Is reproduction among living beings a law of nature?

"Evidently it is; without reproduction the corporeal world would perish."

"Clearly, it is. Without reproduction, the physical world would die out."

687. If the population of the globe goes on increasing as it has hitherto done, will it, in course of time, become too numerous?

687. If the world's population continues to grow as it has so far, will it eventually become too large?

"No; the Divine overruling always provides for, and maintains, equilibrium. God permits nothing useless. Man sees but a corner of the panorama of the universe, and is therefore unable to perceive the harmony of its various departments."

"No. Divine guidance always provides for and maintains balance. God allows nothing useless. People see only a small part of the universe, so they cannot see the harmony among its various parts."

688. There are at this moment upon the earth races of men who are evidently and rapidly diminishing. Will they eventually disappear from it?

688. Some human races on earth are clearly declining rapidly. Will they eventually disappear from the earth?

"Yes; but it is because others will have taken their place, as your place will some day be taken by others."

"Yes, but that is because others will have taken their place, just as others will someday take your place."

689. Are the men now upon the earth a new creation, or the improved descendants of the primitive human beings?

689. Are people on earth today a new creation, or are they the improved descendants of early human beings?

"They are the same spirits come back to improve themselves with the aid of new bodies, but who are still very far from having reached perfection. Thus the present human race, which, by its increase, tends to invade the whole earth and to replace the races that are dying out, will have its period of decrease and disappearance. It will be replaced by other and more perfect races, that will descend from the present race, as the civilised men of the present day are descended from the rough-hewn savages of the primitive periods."

"They are the same spirits, come back to improve themselves with the help of new bodies. But they are still far from reaching perfection. The present human race is growing and tends to spread across the whole earth, replacing races that are dying out. So it too will have a period of decline and disappearance. Other, more perfect races will replace it. They will descend from the present race, just as civilized people today are descended from the rough savages of early times."

690. Regarded from a purely physical point of view, are the bodies of the present race of men a special creation, or have they proceeded from the bodies of the primitive races by reproduction?

690. From a purely physical point of view, were the bodies of present-day humans specially created, or did they descend through reproduction from the bodies of primitive peoples?

"The origin of races is hidden in the night of time; but as they all belong to the great human family, whatever may have been the primitive root of each, they have been able to form alliances with one another, and thus to produce new types."

"The origins of races are lost in the distant past. But they all belong to the great human family. Whatever their original roots may have been, they have been able to unite with one another and produce new types."

691. What, from a physical point of view, is the distinctive and dominant characteristic of primitive races?

691. What is the main distinguishing physical characteristic of primitive races?

"The development of brute force at the expense of intellectual power. The contrary takes place at the present day; for man now acts rather through his intelligence than through his bodily strength, and yet he accomplishes a hundred-fold more than he formerly did, because he has learned to avail himself of the forces of nature, which the animals cannot do."

"The development of physical strength at the expense of intellectual ability. The opposite happens today. People now rely more on intelligence than physical strength, yet they accomplish a hundred times more than before. This is because they have learned to use the forces of nature, which animals cannot do."

692. Is the improvement of the vegetable and animal races, through the applications of science, contrary to the law of nature? Would it be more conformable with that law to leave them to follow their normal course?

692. Is using science to improve plant and animal breeds contrary to the law of nature? Would it be more in keeping with that law to let them develop naturally?

"It is the duty of all beings to concur, in every way, in helping forward the general progress; and man himself is employed by God as an instrument for the accomplishment of His ends. Perfection being the aim towards which everything in nature is tending, to help forward this process of improvement is to assist in working out the Divine intentions."

"All beings have a duty to help advance the progress of all in every way. God uses humans as instruments to achieve his purposes. Everything in nature is moving toward perfection. By helping this process of improvement, we help carry out God's intentions."

—But man, in his efforts to ameliorate the races of the lower reigns, is generally moved by self-interest, and has no other aim than the increase of his personal enjoyments; does not this diminish the merit of his action?

But people generally try to improve animal and plant breeds out of self-interest. Their only aim is to increase their own enjoyment. Doesn't this lessen the merit of their actions?

"What matters it that his merit should be null, provided the work of progress be accomplished? It is for him to render his labour meritorious by inspiring himself with a nobler motive. Besides, in effecting these ameliorations, he develops his intelligence; and it is in this way that he derives the greatest benefit from his labour."

“What does it matter if he deserves no credit, as long as progress is made? He can make his work worthy of credit by acting from a nobler motive. Besides, by making these improvements, he develops his intelligence. This is how he gains the greatest benefit from his work.”

693. Are the human laws and customs that have been established for the purpose of placing obstacles in the way of reproduction contrary to the laws of nature?

693. Are human laws and customs intended to prevent reproduction contrary to the laws of nature?

"Whatever hinders the operations of nature is contrary to the general law."

"Anything that hinders nature's processes goes against the general law."

—But there are many species of living beings, animal and vegetable, the unlimited reproduction of which would be hurtful to other species, and would soon be destructive of the human race. Is it wrong for man to arrest their reproduction?

But many species of animals and plants would harm other species if they reproduced without limit. They would also soon destroy the human race. Is it wrong for humans to stop them from reproducing?

"God has given to man, over all the other living beings of his globe, a power which he ought to use for the general good, but not to abuse. He may regulate reproduction according to his needs; but he ought not to hinder it unnecessarily. The intelligent action of mankind is a counterpoise established by God for restoring the equilibrium of the forces of nature; and herein, again, man is distinguished from the animals, because he does this understandingly, while the animals, that also concur in maintaining this equilibrium, do so unconsciously, through the instinct of destruction which has been given to them, and which causes them, while providing for their own preservation only, to arrest the excessive development of the animal and vegetable species on which they feed, and which would otherwise become a source of danger."

"God has given human beings power over all other living beings on earth. They should use this power for the general good, but not abuse it. They may regulate reproduction according to their needs, but they should not prevent it unnecessarily. God established human intelligence as a counterbalance to restore the balance of nature's forces. Here again, humans differ from animals because they act with understanding. Animals also help maintain this balance, but they do so unconsciously. They do it through the instinct to destroy that God has given them. In providing only for their own survival, they prevent excessive growth among the animal and plant species they eat. Otherwise, those species would become a source of danger."

694. What is to be thought of usages intended to arrest reproduction in the interest of sensuality?

694. What should we think of practices meant to prevent reproduction for the sake of sensual pleasure?

"They prove the predominance of the body over the soul, and show how deeply man has plunged himself in matter."

"They prove that the body dominates the soul and show how deeply people have immersed themselves in matter."

695. Is marriage, that is to say, the permanent union of two beings, contrary to the law of nature?

695. Is marriage, meaning the permanent union of two beings, against the law of nature?

"It is a progress arrived at by the human race."

"It is progress made by the human race."

696. What would be the effect, upon human society, of the abolition of marriage?

696. What effect would abolishing marriage have on human society?

"A return to the life of the beasts."

"A return to the life of animals."

The free and fortuitous union of the sexes is the state of nature. Marriage is one of the first results of progress in the constitution of human society, because it establishes fraternal solidarity, being found among every people, though under different conditions. The abolition of marriage would therefore be a return to the infancy of the human race, and would place man even below certain animals that give him the example of constant unions.

Free and chance unions between the sexes are the natural state. Marriage is one of the first results of progress in human society because it establishes bonds of brotherhood. It is found among all peoples, though under different conditions. Abolishing marriage would therefore be a return to humanity’s infancy. It would place humans even below certain animals that set an example of lasting unions.

697. Is the absolute indissolubility of marriage in the law of nature, or only an ordination of human law?

697. Is marriage absolutely unbreakable by natural law, or only by human law?

"It is a human law, altogether contrary to the law of nature. But men may change their laws; those of nature are alone unchangeable."

"It is a human law that goes completely against the law of nature. But people can change their laws. Only the laws of nature cannot be changed."

698. Is voluntary celibacy meritorious in the sight of God?

698. Does God see voluntary celibacy as virtuous?

"No; those who live single from selfish motives are displeasing to God, for they fail to perform their share of social duties."

"No. Those who stay single for selfish reasons displease God because they do not fulfill their share of social duties."

699. Is not celibacy, on the part of some persons, a sacrifice made by them for the sake of devoting themselves more entirely to the service of humanity?

699. Don't some people choose celibacy as a sacrifice so they can devote themselves more fully to serving humanity?

"That is a very different thing; I said 'from selfish motives.' Every sort of personal sacrifice is meritorious when it is made for a good end; and the greater the sacrifice, the greater the merit."

"That is very different. I said 'from selfish motives.' Every personal sacrifice made for a good purpose deserves credit. And the greater the sacrifice, the more credit it deserves."

God cannot contradict Himself, nor regard as evil what He himself has made, and therefore He cannot regard the violation of His law as meritorious. But although celibacy, in itself, is not meritorious, it may become such when the renunciation of family-joys is a sacrifice accomplished in the interests of humanity. Every sacrifice of personal interests, when made for the good of others and without any reference to self, raises him who makes it above the level of his material condition.

God cannot contradict himself or regard what he has made as evil. Therefore, he cannot regard breaking his law as virtuous. But although celibacy is not virtuous in itself, it may become so when someone sacrifices family joys for humanity’s sake. Any sacrifice of personal interests for the good of others, made without regard for oneself, raises a person above their material condition.

700. Is polygamy or monogamy most in conformity with the law of nature?

700. Which is more in keeping with the law of nature, polygamy or monogamy?

"Polygamy is a human institution, the abolition of which marks an era of social progress. Marriage, according to the intentions of God, should be founded on the affection of the beings who enter into it. In polygamy there is no real affection; there is only sensuality."

"Polygamy is a human institution. Ending it marks a period of social progress. God intends marriage to be based on affection between the people who marry. In polygamy, there is no real affection, only sensuality."

701. Is the almost exact numerical equality existing between the sexes an indication of the proportions according to which they ought to be united?

701. Do the nearly equal numbers of men and women indicate the proportions in which they should be united?

"Yes; for every arrangement of nature has a specific purpose."

"Yes, because everything in nature is arranged for a specific purpose."

If polygamy were in accordance with the law of nature, it ought to be possible to establish it everywhere; but it would be physically impossible to do so, owing to the numerical equality of the sexes.

If polygamy followed the law of nature, it should be possible to establish it everywhere. But that would be physically impossible because men and women are equal in number.

Polygamy must therefore be regarded as a mere custom, adapted to the present state of certain peoples, and that will gradually disappear with the progress of their social improvement.

Polygamy should therefore be seen as merely a custom suited to the present state of certain peoples. It will gradually disappear as their societies improve.