Quiverfulls: In a new movement, Christians 'open their wombs to God.'

[BurtWorm]

Preparing for the permanent Republic majority:



Web Exclusive
By Eileen Finan
Newsweek
Updated: 1:39 p.m. ET Nov 13, 2006

Nov. 13, 2006 - It’s hardly a typical scene from the suburbs. The Bortel home outside San Antonio, Tex., counts 12 members—parents David and Suzanne and their 10 children, ranging from 13 months to 15 (the 20-year-old married and moved away)—all crammed into a four-bedroom house that trembles constantly with activity. Everything revolves around the home: Dad works there, the kids are schooled there, the youngest three were born there. The family uses a 15-passenger van to get around, and at night, the kids climb into multiple sets of bunk beds. David and Suzanne hear the same questions repeatedly. So for the record: No, they’re not Catholic. Yes, they’ve heard of birth control. And no, they’re not crazy. In fact, they’d happily welcome a twelfth child. “It’s about obedience to God,” says David, 38. “The Bible says that God is the only opener and closer of the womb.”

The Bortels form part of the “quiverfull” movement, a small but growing conservative Protestant group that eschews all forms of birth control and believes that family planning is exclusively God’s domain. The term derives from Psalm 127:

Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord,
The fruit of the womb is a reward.
Like arrows in the hand of a warrior,
So are the children of one’s youth.
Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them.

Back in 1995, when the quiverfull.com Web site was founded, it had only 12 subscribers; today, the site, which is administered by the Bortels, has more than 2,600. Many followers have abandoned mainstream churches in favor of smaller nondenominational congregations of like-minded families. A cottage industry has sprung up in support of them. There are books like “A Full Quiver,” by Rick and Jan Hess; Web sites like blessedarrows.com, which raises funds for couples to have reverse vasectomies or reverse tubal ligations; and scholarly treatises like “The Natural Family: A Manifesto,” put out by the Rockford, Ill.,-based Howard Center for Family, Religion & Society and the Sutherland Institute, a Mormon think tank. “We’re still on the fringes,” says Jan Hess. “But it is much more embraced than it was before.”

Quiverfull beliefs are absolutist. Purists don’t permit even natural family planning methods, such as tracking fertility cycles (the only form of birth control condoned by the Roman Catholic Church). Also taboo: any form of artificial fertility treatment. “The point is to have a welcoming heart,” says Mary Pride, a mother of nine whose 1985 book, “The Way Home,” celebrated a return to traditional gender roles. It has sold about 80,000 copies and has inspired many quiverfull families. “You shouldn’t be unnatural in going to a fertility clinic or in trying to avoid having children by regulating when to have sex with your husband,” says Pride.

<So I guess they just fuck all the time?>

[Bluebear]

1. “The Bible says that God is the only opener and closer of the womb.”

Okley dokley!

:crazy:

[Erika]

2. With that number of tax exemptions, he pays no taxes

Our country giving him a free ride.

[BurtWorm]

4. You mean they're the new welfare kings and queens?

Can we maybe put them to work for the state to earn their tax-free ride? :wtf:

[Common Sense Party]

3. I can't actually find such a verse in MY Bible.

I guess all those C-sectioning obstetricians are going to burn in hell.

I have NOTHING against those who want to have large families--if they can support them--but I don't think they should be inventing non-existent scriptures to justify themselves.

[lapfog_1]

6. I *have* a problem...

we now have over 6.5 Billion people on this planet. The population has almost doubled since 1970. If it wasn't for inexpensive energy, a moderate climate, and petrochemical based pesticides and fertilizers, there would be widespread starvation and drastic population decrease. And we will not always have the moderate climate OR cheap oil.

We are racing toward the cliff like lemmings. And people like these nutjobs are just a small part of an overwhelming problem. China has done a good job in stabilizing population, but other societies where either religion or social traditions such as the desire to have many male babies... things are bleak. There may be only 3000 or 4000 of these people here with their quiverfull weirdness, but it will be hard for us to ask India or Mexico to impose child bearing restrictions so long as we have no restrictions ourselves. It's a touchy subject, nobody wants such restrictions imposed from a government, but the consequences of NOT addressing this are far more troublesome.

[YellingTuna]

11. I dont know

I have a problem with the government telling me how many children I can have... Just sounds like the ultimate stripping of my rights. As for these people, well maybe we would be better off...lol

[Bucky]

38. The reality is that pocketbook economics is driving birthrates down. These people are anomalies.

I don't see this movement going too far. Native born Americans are, as a group, only reproducing at replacement levels. A couple thousand families like this won't dent the overall shape of that line graph.

[BurtWorm]

44. The irony is they think they're being godly human beings

but when you get right down to it, they're just rutting like animals.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

93. Well, now, Burt

I doubt that they rut any more than the rest of us. They just have more to show for their rutting.

[BurtWorm]

101. I have nothing against rutting.

But it's hard to take seriously some people's claim that their rutting is holier than others', especially when their own thoughtlessly steals resources from the rest of us. It makes me want to point out that it is what it is.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

108. Maybe they sing hymns while they rut?

[kiahzero]

110. Kinky. (n/t)

[BurtWorm]

111. I do and I'm not even religious.

:crazy:

[Pithlet]

54. I agree.

It's a fringe movement driven by extremists, and it will stay that way. Having so many babies is way too taxing physically, emotionally and financially for this to become widespread or even significant enough to have broad social consequences.

[Canuckistanian]

52. We may get to that point in the future

We can't keep growing and multiplying like rabbits. The earth doesn't have enough resources to support that many people, especially energy and food hogging North Americans.

[Ishoutandscream2]

26. Totally agree.

More mouths to feed. I know that may sound cold, but the world is getting awfully crowded. Birth control needs to be encouraged around the world.

[Zebedeo]

83. I swear to God

that when I first read:

China has done a good job in stabilizing population

I read it as:

China has done a good job in sterilizing population

Scared me to read that.

[Zebedeo]

84. You know how China has done this, don't you?

Hint: It starts with "I" and ends with "nfanticide."

[Goblinmonger]

92. I think

that is the funniest thing I have ever seen you post. Sad, but funny.

[Zebedeo]

116. Thank you n/t

[TallahasseeGrannie]

94. Is that really true?

I know they have a high abortion rate..or is that what you are referring to?

Got any links?

[Zebedeo]

104. linky

gendercide

CNN

[charlie]

105. No, that's not how they "did it"

Female infanticide has been going on in China for centuries and never slowed the growth of their population. The 1 child rule did. That the backwoods troglodytes are still killing their girls is no surprise.

Edit: Guess I'd better clarify, before I get pounced on. I'm not calling Chinese troglodytes. I'm talking about the rural folk who kill because girls aren't desirable as laborers, don't preserve the family lineage, incur dowery expenses, and after marriage, aren't available to care for the parents in their dotage.

[Zebedeo]

115. The one child rule exacerbates the problem

for obvious reasons. It means that if Ma and Pa have a child, and the child turns out to be a girl, they just lost all chance of ever having a son to carry on the family name, a male laborer to help out on the farm, etc. . . . . . unless they smother her to death and just try again until they get a bouncing baby boy!

So government restrictions really do incentivize infanticide. There's no getting around it.

[charlie]

118. Still doesn't bolster your claim

Again, girls have been killed for hundreds of years and the population rate rose. Since the introduction of the 1-per rule it has slowed. 1-per is well below the replacement rate of 2.1, so the major cause is obvious. China did not reduce growth by killing girls like you claimed, China has always killed girls.

As to whether the rule exacerbates the problem, that's speculative. If there were no rule and a couple decides a brood of 3 sons is necessary to preserve (or better) their economic situation and ensure at least 1 surviving heir, how many girls would they kill to achieve it? 1? 2? 5? None? Who knows?

[AspenRose]

14. The closest to a LITERAL verse

you will find regards Hannah and her son Samuel in the OT

1 Samuel 1: 5-6, 19

5 but to Hannah he (her husband Elkanah) would give a double portion, for he loved Hannah, but the LORD had closed her womb.

6 Her rival, however, would provoke her bitterly to irritate her, because the LORD had closed her womb.

Samuel Is Born to Hannah

19 Then they arose early in the morning and worshiped before the LORD, and returned again to their house in Ramah. And Elkanah had relations with Hannah his wife, and the LORD remembered her.


I'm exhausted just looking at them. It's still a free country, though....:shrug:

[BurtWorm]

17. It's a great country if you don't have to pay taxes

just because you fuck your brains out without birth control. :wtf:

[Perky]

78. It is a loose translation of Psalm 127

3 Behold, children are a heritage from the LORD,
The fruit of the womb is a reward.
4 Like arrows in the hand of a warrior,
So are the children of one’s youth.
5 Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them;
They shall not be ashamed,
But shall speak with their enemies in the gate.

[POAS]

32. Seems God has been getting a little help from Daddy.

[Sapphocrat]

34. That must hurt! n/t

[Chulanowa]

87. Strangely enough...

according to biblical scripture, he's also the leading cause of infertility, stillbirths, and SIDS.

[madrchsod]

5. oh no the howard institute!

these are the same people behind the school board in rockford automatically passing black kids thru the grades no matter if they could read or write and it took the feds years to change the policy. the people associated with the howard institute live in a world of their own...unfortunately they still have power in that city.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

95. Are the Howard Institute folks white?

We did that (social promotion) in Tallahassee for years. Very controversial.

On the other hand, an 13-year old fourth grader is difficult to teach.

[lvx35]

7. Damn.

When I saw the headline I thought they had finally figured out fetus transplants, and the fundies were going to start carrying the unwanted ones to term.

[HuffleClaw]

8. brrrrrrrrrrrr

a horrorshow if i ever heard of one. and HERE's the kicker...

"conservatives are reacting to revolutionary changes in women's social roles and seeking to re-impose a more traditional order."

so... ...its REALLY about the oppression of women. 'nuff said.

[shanti]

9. same as it ever was...

:(

[BurtWorm]

15. That's what "pro-life" is all about.

Control of ovaries.

[wtmusic]

10. From their eyes, it looks like no one gets much sleep in the Bortel home

Hopefully there are Christians who know enough about global warming and the population explosion who can help portray this behavior in all of its true irresponsibility.

[Crim_n al]

12. What a conceited and irresponsible couple.

The daughter behind them looks as if she's the one doing the worrying about her siblings while her idiot parents enjoy their notoriety and tax-breaks.

Hearing people like these talk about what god wants makes me quite forget I'm not an atheist.
It sounds a kinky, dominating god who would open and close a woman's womb for her.
So does she have to let Him open and close her legs too?

[TallahasseeGrannie]

96. I respect their right to have as many kids as they want

but you know, the whole concept of the open and closed womb just plain gives me cramps.

What an awful expression.

[cap]

13. hopefully... they wont be applying for welfare, foodstamps

and can fund this life ALL by themselves...

Oh yeah... don't these folks vote for politicians who wont fund CHIPS?

[Bassic]

16. That's a lot of kids,

So you think the dude helps his wife take care of them and the house? :eyes:

[Jed Dilligan]

18. Statistically, at least one of those kids is gay.

[Phillycat]

31. I know, isn't that wonderful?

:D

[Jed Dilligan]

50. Genetic diversity IS wonderful,

however, being born into the wrong family with the wrong genes can be a lifelong struggle. I hope he or she doesn't end up like Haggard or Foley, a self-hating closeted anti-gay demagogue.

[BlooInBloo]

19. I love the DU religionists who are all "no, no... we don't take the bible literally"...

ROFLMAO!!!


I love religionism.

[Kelly Rupert]

22. Yes, because all religious people are the same

:eyes:

[BlooInBloo]

23. It's true. Pointing out differences between religionists is hairsplitting...

... Like pointing out the difference between someone who's 5'2", and someone who's 5'4". Whatever - they're both short.

[Kelly Rupert]

25. Ah, of course.

Barack Obama is exactly the same as Alan Keyes, who is exactly the same as Muqtada al-Sadr, who is exactly the same as these people, who are exactly the same as the Dalai Lama, who is exactly the same as a Catholic bishop. Because they have the exact same world-view, and will react in the exact same way to all events.

Grouping non-like things because you're too far removed to see a difference is stupid.

[BlooInBloo]

27. You're right - that WOULD be stupid. Thankfully, I'm not doing that...

... I'm grouping *like* things - namely religionists.


EDIT: Sure, there are further distinctions that could be drawn. They're only of interest to religionists. Just like there are further distinctions that could be drawn from "short people". But only short people care about those further distinctions.

[nemo137]

30. Do you realize how ridiculous that is?

I can see - just maybe - grouping all the Abrahamic religions together in a big clump, and all the Dharmic ones, and so on, but saying that all religionists are the same is amazing. Do you also argue, say, that all Asians are the same? After all, they're like things, right? Or all Europeans? That would be ridiculous. One particular branch of the "religionists," for better or worse, providing a good chunk of the substrate for the culture in which (I'm assuming, since you're typing in English on a website mostly devoted to American politics) you live. Another provided the background for a culture which, for a variety of reasons, has been baffling the first group for centuries. How are those "like" things?

[BlooInBloo]

70. What's ridiculous is claiming that being anti-religion is like being racist.

THAT'S ridiculous.

[kiahzero]

90. But I thought...

Sure, there are further distinctions that could be drawn. They're only of interest to bigots. Just like there are further distinctions that could be drawn from "religionists." But only "religionists" care about those further distinctions.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

98. So, we're all the same

huh? Everyone who believes in a god, goddess, spirt? Almost 90 percent of the world population. All the same. No differences. Just a bunch of jerks, huh?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm


Say, isn't that called...what's that word....stereotyping? Bigotry? That's what I teach my kids at school to call it.

[LanternWaste]

56. whatever, they're both humans

Or pointing out that one human is a male and the other female... whatever, they're both humans and everyone knows that ONLY guys look at the differences in other guys. Whatever, right? They're both guys.

[kiahzero]

43. I love irony.

Pot. Kettle.

[spoony]

60. I love how every day

the same handful of sad individuals seek out anything they can conflate into a damnation of all religious people because of a deeply held personal bias against large portions of their fellow humans.

[Left Is Write]

67. Why is that funny? I don't take a literal view of the Bible.

Fundamentalists generally do.

Is there some particular reason this difference in beliefs is funny?

[BlooInBloo]

71. It's not the difference (relational notion) that's funny. It's the belief in magic (non-relational).

[Left Is Write]

75. Then why did you bring up the non-literal view of the Bible?

And then "LYAO" about it?

[BlooInBloo]

85. Sigh. Slow religionists - what a surprise. Because that's how they try...

... to put lipstick on the pig.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

97. What the hell are you talking about?

You are comparing these folks to DU believers?

Amazing.

[Danger Mouse]

103. There are a few problems...

A.) Now THIS is a broad-brush attack on ALL people of faith. Not to mention a rather stupid one. As another poster pointed out, it IS the vast majority of people in the world. And these faiths have many different forms. Honestly, the diversity of religions and beliefs is incredible, and for you to insult ALL of them and clump them ALL into one (insulting) group is pretty wrong. And I'm pretty sure it's against forum rules.
B.) I don't know what you're trying to accomplish by insulting everyone in the world (and on DU) that has any sort of faith...but I don't like it. Honestly, I'm quite offended. I sympathize with those that have issues with religion, and especially organized religion...and I have been in the past too quick to jump to conclusions about when I perceive an attack. But this post, and the following posts, are definitely an attack.
C.) Your remarks are insulting to the many DUers who are religious. Not to mention rude. Grow up. Thanks.

[kiahzero]

20. They're right... they're not crazy.

They're completely insane.

[treestar]

21. So dumb. They cannot create a Repuke majority this way

They can't come close to having enough babies. But what really kills me is they don't get that each child will have a mind of his or her own and some of them will be Dems in reaction to the way they grew up.

[Buzz Clik]

24. my thoughts exactly

[noonwitch]

28. Odds are, not all those kids are going to be fundies when they grow up

Sooner or later, they will be exposed to the general culture.
Unfortunately, they probably won't all be going to public colleges, or they'd get indoctrinated by all of us "secular progressives" there. That's what we do, after all, corrupt college students with our liberal agenda. (I'm kidding).
There's no fighting Disney and Mattel, and if the parents actually win those battles, they will eventually lose to rap music and playstation.

[POAS]

33. Odds are that at least one will be gay.

[RexDart]

29. Normally, I'm live and let live, but...

these people are cree-pee.

Slightly off topic, my second favorite website, http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com has a couple of threads about the Duggars, another "quiverfull" family. Jimbob ran for Senate once, and ofJimbob has cranked out 16.

Hopefully I don't chunk the formatting...


14 Children And Pregnant Again
http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/index.php?showtopic=3120234

16 Children And Moving In
http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/index.php?showtopic=3136377

Total is about 500 pages of 100% pure snark.

[Bucky]

37. In another ten years he should run for Senate again. By then his brood may have its own district.

[TheCentepedeShoes]

69. A little reference

to The Handmaid's Tale there.

[MUSTANG_2004]

35. Not my cup of tea

But large families are hardly insane. We have just two kids, but two of my grandparents came from large families (nine children in each). Some people have no kids, some have "regular" sized families of 2-4, and others have more.

The Biblical ideas are kind of odd, but I think all religious beliefs are against common sense. This one doesn't look any sillier than the rest of them.

[BurtWorm]

36. Large families made sense in a time before antibiotics

when you didn't know how many would survive. They make much less sense now. Not that I would want to legislate family size, but there should be cultural pressure of some kind against encouraging this wreckless resource hogging.

[Retrograde]

41. and before birth control there wasn't much choice

Reliable contraception only goes back a generation or two. Reliable and readily available birth control is even more recent.

[LanternWaste]

59. Those mores do exist

There are indeed cultural mores that while not strictly prohibiting large families, certainly don't encourage it in any way.

The fact that we are treating this family as a circus freak-show is highly indicative that those mores do exist and are ingrained in our society. If we simply paid this story no mind and dismissed families of greater than (insert precise number of children a couple can have before getting ridiculed here), or thought them non-relevant to our culture-- then I'd say that the mores either do not exist or are not very strong.

[dogday]

39. This is America and they are free to practice their own

brand of religion... Who am I to judge?

[kiahzero]

40. That's two different questions.

Yes, they're free to practice their religion; however, we are equally free to speak about their religion.

[dogday]

42. I don't think I said that you could not

I said I would not speak of it, not that you could not, only that I would not....

Thanks anyway :shrug:

[kiahzero]

45. I guess I don't understand the relevance of saying they're free to do it. (n/t)

[dogday]

46. The relevance is that is what makes this country

great is we are all free to do anything (within limits of course) that we want and it is great, is it not? No matter how outlandish or weird others may find things, it is ok, cause we are a free society...

[Bluebear]

48. All I will question is how "free" she was to become a baby machine

How did religion influence her to act so outside of what most would say is healthy for her? Did her parents introduce her to this way of life? Does her religion consider her nothing but a womb, subservient to her husband? Did she think she had any other choice in life?

[dogday]

49. You are free to question, I just said I would not do so

myself.....

[TallahasseeGrannie]

99. Your post made me think

If I had had enough money and been physically able, I would have loved to have had a houseful of kids. I would have been good at it. But I am a teacher married to a teacher, and by the time I had the second I was showing signs of wear. I do think there ARE women who just love to have babies, love to parent, to be a mommy and that it satisifes something in them. I personally went to work kicking and screaming. I so wanted to be home with my kids, but I couldn't.

So while I see your point, that like the woman who wears the burqua, we just don't know how she really feels...but I would have enjoyed being home and having more kids. Maybe because as a teacher I see parenting done well, and done dreadfully.

[deadparrot]

47. No wonder the 20-year-old got hitched and moved away.

Honestly, if a family can support itself with that many children, then I'm not one to argue. However, given the amount of time and energy (physical and emotional) it takes to raise ONE child, it seems like it would be extremely difficult to devote enough individual time and attention to each individual kid.

[BurtWorm]

51. The philosophy seems to be not to think, just fuck and pray.

No family planning involved.

But who am I to judge. :shrug:

[TallahasseeGrannie]

113. Hmmm

Interesting concept.

[StraightDope]

53. Nice try, fundies...

Hmmm... let me see... What percentage of kids raised by evangelicals retain the religious fervor when they grow up? 10%? 20%? No matter, because I'd bet anything and everything that a greater portion of those kids grow up HATING Christianity. I'd say that the more kids these nutjobs have, the more Democrats there will be a generation down the road.

[stepnw1f]

57. Yup.....

I happen to have seen this. In fact many liberals come from such brainwashing backgrounds only to reject it as soon as complex issues raise their awerness of the World around them.

When I think of Fundies, I picture a person trying to roll a rather large boulder up a hill only to have it roll back down upon them.

[madmusic]

55. That doesn't bother me at all.

Freedom of religion and pro-choice, even if the choice is to have an army of babies.

[slestak]

58. For pete's sake QUIT FUCKING!! n/t

[BeHereNow]

61. Unforgivable-bringing children into a world doomed by global warming.

Idiots.
I only have one child, and I am terrified for her
in light of the global warming predictions.
Guess they think the Bushes will invite them
to their dynasty in Paraguay some day?
Fresh water and crop producing soil and climate
will be hard to find one day- guess this family
doesn't care about their children and the future they will
live in...Maybe they can eat their bibles?

BHN

[MUSTANG_2004]

62. Do you care about your child?

It's ok for you to have one child because you're only dooming one person to misery and they're dooming 10?

[BeHereNow]

64. My Child is nearly twenty; she was born long before I knew about global warming.

Now that I know, there is NO WAY I would consider
having another.
Not a chance.
These morons have a child as young as 15 months
and intend on having more- I repeat: IDIOTS.
BHN

[MUSTANG_2004]

65. Why do the numbers matter?

On one hand you say it is wrong to bring children into a world doomed by global wamring. On the other, you keep focusing on numbers. The admin (Skinner) is about to become a father. Is he an idiot because he's dooming his child? What about if he decides to have two children?

Is everyone who chooses to become a parent now an idiot? Or is there some number where dooming your children is ok, but after you doom X children, you're an idiot.

Sorry for harping on this, but your logic just makes no sense to me.

[BeHereNow]

73. The logic is this:

If you KNOW going down a certain road will lead
you to a certain destination, most likely a destination
characterized by suffering, do you take that road?
Do you insist on taking others, who have no voice in the matter
with you?

Given the facts on what the future holds for children
being born today, I, personally could not sleep at night if
I were pregant, knowing what I know about the future.

Perhaps the quiver folks and others are more optimistic
that I am.

I am constantly haunted by a woman I met in Switzerland
25 years ago while on my honeymoon.
She was quite elderly and had a very special way about her.
My husband and I were walking along a scenic path together when
we encountered her. We introduced ourselves and began chatting
with her. Upon learning we were newly wed, she casually asked if we
planned to have children. We replied that we hoped to.
We expected a grandmotherly reply along the lines of
good wishes for our future famiy, however she instead turned
rigid and with steel blue eyes she told us that bringing
children into THIS world was the most selfish thing we could ever do-
she then went into a tirade about how we would see the
end of the world as we knew it in our lifetimes and why would
we want to bring a child into a world destined for such chaos...

That was 25 years ago...BEFORE all the global warming statistics.
As it is, I ache for the thought of my daughter living through
the extinction of so many creatures because she was always
LOVED wildlife. she is very distraught over the drowning of the polar bears
who swim for shores that no longer exist and drown from exhaustion.
It will only get worse in her lifetime.
Not to mention the food, water and energy shortages
children being born today will face.

As far as Skinner is concerned, no, I do not think he is a fool.
I think he is very informed and has most likely made plans
to optimize the likelyhood of his family's survival.



BHN

[TRYPHO]

91. hold on a second..

What makes you think we can all sit here in absolute certainty that there is/not a god, was/wasnt a bloke called Jesus, should/shouldn't possess firearms, and yet you ALL seem not only certain that global warming is true, but that its IMMINENT, that its SO IMMINENT your children are going to suffer by it.

I can't believe you.

We are FAR more likely to be on the recieving end of the next cycle of ice-ages (or a elliptical orbit mega-asteroid does a fly by), than the likelihood of global warming actually affecting your kids.

I have 3 amazingly wonderful kids, and although I worry plenty for them (don't smoke, don't do drugs, don't even cross the road if you don't have to) I have not one cell in my body giving time to the fear of the effects of global warming.

Somebody needs to share some facts with you lot.

I'm off to smack some kids...

TRYPHO

[TallahasseeGrannie]

100. When we stop having children

we are doomed as a species...both emotionally and literally.

The future has always been uncertain. A century ago your daughter would have had an enormous chance of dying in childbirth, if she made it past diptheria and the measles. A thousand years ago, three out of four people died of plague. And inbetween there have been a few thousand wars. Global warming is but one more challenge. Bringing forth new life is an act of faith..of trust.

I'm sorry you worry so about it. It's really no worse than it ever has been. Take heart.

[Shakespeare]

63. The Nation also has a story on them this week.

It's a little more in-depth than the Newsweek piece, too.

[Jim__]

88. Here's a link to The Nation story ...

Here

[Left Is Write]

66. I do have a welcoming heart. But I also know my own limitations.

I would not be able to be a good - or even adequate - mother to such a large brood.

I wonder if the opposition to things "unnatural" extends to medical care for the sick.

[WindRavenX]

68. Jesus Freaks terrify me

Jesus, save me from your followers :scared:

[StraightDope]

72. Well, it helps to think of them...

As "Jesusians", not "Christians". Or vice versa. I just like the term "Jesusian". :)

[Perky]

74. Boo

:)

[Cleita]

76. I've got nothing against big families as long as the parents are

both on the same page and can afford them. However, I do have a problem with societies that insist on setting up rules for a woman's fertility. A woman should always be in charge of her body and her fertility.

[Perky]

77. Excelllent points

[Perky]

79. UMMM excuse me.. I thought Dems were the Pro-choice party?

I am not endorsing anyone having many kids, but if one of the arguments against the pro-lifers from the pro-choice crowd is that they are not "totally pro-life" (ware, death penalty, etc) ...don't you think it a tad hypocritical when the Pro-choice crowd is not at the same time "totally pro-choice", including the choice to have as many kids as you can afford.


Oh by the way, les there be any mistake. I am pro-choice.

[kiahzero]

80. Problem is the article indicates that they can't afford them.

Also, there's the issue of specifically raising them to overthrow democracy and install a theocracy.

[BurtWorm]

82. Being pro-choice doesn't mean you're disallowed from being critical of others' choices.

Does it? I think it's a bizarre "choice" to leave up to the gods the consequences of unprotected sex, regardless of the consequences to yourself, your partner, other mouths in the family you have to feed, and the community at large that may have to pay for your right to be willful idiots about your bodies. Would I want to outlaw it? No. But I wouldn't want anyone to outlaw my right to call it as I see it either.

[minerva50]

81. I feel sorry for the kids.

I grew up in a family of ten (Catholic). I would never reproach my parents, they loved us all dearly and did the best they could. I can't say we ever lacked for anything we really needed except parental attention. But that's a big lack. My dad was under a great strain to provide for such a large family, which led to frequent explosions of temper. He worried all the time. He would have been a much better dad to 2-4 kids. My mom was always busy, childcare, cooking, cleaning, later teaching and grad school classes. I seldom had her full attention. I think children need more.

[bedazzled]

86. my brother's got 4 kids and they're all starved for attention

i have but one, and he gets too much attention (just
a joke -- i will spend time with my son as long as
he wants me to. he's only eight - soon he'll have
many other interests!)

[TallahasseeGrannie]

89. This really isn't new

When I was growing up all my Catholic friends had more than five or six siblings...some in double digits. I lived in a very Polish/Italian area. We didn't have any Mormons in NJ that I knew.

I have no problem with folks having more than their 2.5 or whatever, if they are good at it. (raising them, not making them.) So many people are opting not to have kids today. One young dearheart right here on DU told me once that all the "englightened people" that she knows are not going to have kids. So we centralize it.

And don't worry that they will all grow up to be Republicans. If you know teenagers and strict parents, you know there is a HUGE attrition rate!

[Danger Mouse]

102. Oh great...

More of THESE kinds of people. They just HAVE to breed en masse. What a fine looking brood of future abortion clinic bombers and 700 Club watchers.

[NMMNG]

106. So they just have sex whenever and let nature....er, God...take its course?

Well damn, any dog can do that. Humans are supposed to have more common sense. :eyes:

[Goblinmonger]

107. OK, if an atheist comes in here

and even suggests that Chrisitanity might be a little contradictory or somehow not the cat's pajamas (an homage to my dad), there are a large number of people (not all) that will fly of the handle and tell that atheist not to bash religion. God forbid someone come in here and say the Catholics need to actually do something about their pedophile problem. The cries of "Catholic bashing" will start go fly.

BUT, everyone is free to just let fly that these people are insane. Does anyone notice that the atheists are the only ones consistant in this whole thing? We think the whole lot of them are just myths. The theists commenting in here about how silly this particular mythology is are, in essence, saying "My interpretation of a supernatural god for which there is not proof and no scientific verification of what they want is so much better than these fucking idiot's interpretation."

I just ask one favor. Remember this thread the next time you want to bitch at an atheist for saying that your brand of mythology is not perfect. Of course, I imagine I will be around to remind you all about this thread, too.

[kiahzero]

109. Perfection isn't required

However, I don't feel it casts aspersions on religion generally to point out when people make stupid arguments from their own scripture, such as: "God told a guy to get a girl pregnant, he didn't, and God's upset. Therefore, God must hate birth control!"

What the hell. At least it makes more sense than "God told a guy to get a girl pregnant, he didn't, and God's upset. Therefore, God must hate masturbation!"

[Finder]

112. It is a sin to spill the seed.lol n/t

[Danger Mouse]

117. I don't believe that..

Christianity is 'the cat's pajamas'...because of all the evil and death that has been caused by people acting in its name. I don't think my faith is perfect. Far from it.
And whether or not I get offended by what someone says about religion depends on their attitude. Being outright insulting towards anyone of faith, I find to be immature and uncalled for. And I will call someone on that.
And I will do the same if I see someone insulting atheists. I chose to believe, you chose not to. And we both made these choices of our own free will.
That being said, when people use faith to be hateful, vengeful, bloodthirsty, or just plain crazy...I don't have much respect for that. I don't care how you justify hate...hiding behind God doesn't make it right or acceptable.
I guess for me, religion is all about love, understanding, compassion, and outreach. Feels like I'm in the minority, though.

[HockeyMom]

114. Very dangerous

Just look at the other threads and the headlines. Go on any "Christian Family" website. If they were content to live their own lives according to their religion, that would be fine. But the aren't. They believe their religion and subsequent way of life, is the ONLY WAY for EVERYBODY. The "Culture of Life" is not content to just proselytize. They will LEGISLATE to get the religious culture they want.

As one Fundie Freeper put it, "If you have sex with your spouse using contraceptives, it is the same as having sex with a harlot. It is a sin against God to prevent life".

Very dangerous people.

[jgraz]

119. Holy fuck -- that's not reproduction, it's littering