Requiring a simple "yes or no" answer is very often used as a way to bypass the critical step of defining terms. As an attorney, if I had a client being asked that question in a deposition, I would at this point insist on some clarifications before proceeding.
For example, how is "mother" being used here? Strictly in a biological sense? To which I would expect a response of "No," because Jesus acquires more than human biology through Mary, but human nature, albeit with no inclination to sin.
But the divine nature never had a time when it didn't exist. It is this essence of Godhead that cannot have a mother in the genetic sense. Else we are talking about something less than true deity.
This is why Jesus tells us His true family, in any sense in which it might be beneficial to be related to Him, is conformity to the will of God, which is independent of biology, and transcendent of human nature, but requires the new birth, which is possible only through the work of God's own Holy Spirit. That is the only "genetic" connection that matters to Jesus, the likeness of our spirit to that of our Heavenly Father, Who is spirit.
Peace,
SR
But the steps of Roman reasoning justifies concluding that Mary being the mother of the Lord Jesus warrants her not only being called the Mother of God, inferring ontological oneness, but having hundreds of other titles along with attributes ascribed to her, which parallel Christ and only befit God.
Moreover, in this thread the steps of Roman reasoning is also exampled in concluding that affirming Mary is an example to be followed, yet Paul was given more press as an example of one who followed Christ, means that you hold Mary in contempt. Such is the result of cultic devotion to a holy instrument of God above that which is written.
As well, didn’t Jesus say, as he was dying, to someone who wasn’t her son, “Behold your son” and the same thing to him about beholding his mother, which could mean that Christ’s sonship was meant for us all. It could be interpreted by the Marionists, however, to mean that she is the mother of us all, but in what sense is indeed the question. I still don’t see, in scripture, the fact that Mary was different from any of us. In fact, IMO the choosing of Mary was because she was a normal, religious, humble servant, not a super goddess or something. Is the implication that she became sinless and holy merely by carrying Jesus in her womb? Her entire being changed? Fine but where’s the scriptural reference for that? But I begrudge no one their beliefs, I just don’t get them myself.