After gays, abortion, Christian right to target: Deliberate Childlessness

[HamdenRice]

I heard a brief mention of this on Morning Sedition and I could not believe my ears. I thought I was still half asleep. But after a little googling, here it is. The Christian right has successfully targeted gay marriage. We know from all their litigation and propoganda that next in its sights is the elimination of abortion.

Fewer of you may be aware that they want to eliminate "no fault" divorce, forcing people to stay together who are not happy. Then, they want to go after "cohabitation" -- that is living together without being married, which was scandalous in the 1950s.

But I had never heard that on of their targets in "deliberate childlessness" among married couples. Yes the Christian fundamentalists believe they have the right to force you as a married couple to have children!

http://www.christianpost.com/dbase/editorial/173/section/1.htm

Deliberate Childlessness: Moral Rebellion With a New Face

Monday, Jun. 28, 2004 Posted: 6:12:53PM EST

According to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Joe and Deb Schum of Atlanta aren't worried about baby proofing their house or buying a car seat. As a matter of fact, the couple doesn't ever intend to have children and they are proud of their childlessness. According to the newspaper's report, "the Schums are part of a growing number of couples across the country for whom kids don't factor in the marriage equation."

<snip>

Christians must recognize that this rebellion against parenthood represents nothing less than an absolute revolt against God's design. The Scripture points to barrenness as a great curse and children as a divine gift. The Psalmist declared: "Behold, children are a gift of 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. How blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them; they will not be ashamed when they speak with their enemies in the gate."

Morally speaking, the epidemic in this regard has nothing to do with those married couples who desire children but are for any reason unable to have them, but in those who are fully capable of having children but reject this intrusion in their lifestyle.

The motto of this new movement of chosen childlessness could be encapsulated by the bumper sticker put out by the Zero Population Growth group in the 1970s: "MAKE LOVE, NOT BABIES." This is the precise worldview the Scripture rejects. Marriage, sex, and children are part of one package. To deny any part of this wholeness is to reject God's intention in creation--and His mandate revealed in the Bible.

...

Couples are not given the option of chosen childlessness in the biblical revelation. To the contrary, we are commanded to receive children with joy as God's gifts, and to raise them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. We are to find many of our deepest joys and satisfactions in the raising of children within the context of the family. Those who reject children want to have the joys of sex and marital companionship without the responsibilities of parenthood. They rely on others to produce and sustain the generations to come.

This epidemic of chosen childlessness will not be corrected by secular rethinking. In an effort to separate the pleasure of sex from the power of procreation, modern Americans think that sex totally free from constraint or conception is their right. Children, of course, do represent a serious constraint on the life of parents. Parenthood is not a hobby, but represents one of the most crucial opportunities for the making of saints found in this life.

[Bluebear]

1. "God said that sex should repulse, unless it leads to RESULTS!"

--Mass, Leonard Bernstein

[AllegroRondo]

5. "So lets fill the world with consenting adults"

"And it was good
and it was good
and it was god damn good!"

I LOVE that musical!

[Bluebear]

8. OMG someone who knows it!

:toast:

[AllegroRondo]

45. Have you heard his musical of "Candide" ?

Also very good.

Best of all possible worlds:

"What about War?"

"Though war may seem a bitter curse
it is a blessing in reverse
when cannons roar
both rich and poor
through danger are united

till every wrong is righted."

[SPQR]

96. Philosophers make evident

the point that I have cited.
'Tis war makes equal, as it were,
The noble and the commoner:
Thus War improves relations!

Now on to conjugations.

[The Doctor.]

2. "We're gonna force you to accept God's gift... whether you like it or not,

-can afford it or not, ruins your career or not.
(But that's ok- women are supposed to stay home)"

:wtf:

:puke:

[SemperEadem]

42. force-why that would be rape, and rape is a felony

so, now they're saying that it would be ok to rape a childless married woman because god wants her genes to keep going into future generations--AGAINST HER WILL. He supposedly gave us all free will, so why are extremists trying to steal one gift in exchange for another?

These people are truly sick.

[HamdenRice]

43. That would be a different sin

I don't think they are saying that single women must be raped or that infertile couples must be punished. They are saying that it is wrong for married couples to choose not to have children.

Raping single women, after all, would be the sin of fornication.

But even limited to married couples, the arrogance of them to presume to decide a couple's family planning is breathtaking and horrifying!

[SemperEadem]

46. my post did not mention single women,

so the fornication angle is non sequitur.

and since we're not talking about in vitro fertilization here, we're talking about forcing a married, childfree-by-choice woman to have sex in order for her to conceieve a child, seeing that one has to conceive in order to carry a fetus to term.

Forced sex is rape.

[HamdenRice]

48. It certainly is forced childbearing

I'm not defending this morons -- after all, I started the thread. But I think what they are getting at is preventing married people from being able to have sex without the consequence of having children. They assume that married people will not be able to help having sex, and that all that married sex must result in children. They are talking really about taking away all forms of birth control.

Also part of their agenda must be that if married people risk pregnancy every time they have sex, married people are going to have a lot less sex, to avoid having massive numbers of children.

In that way, maybe you are correct on the rape analogy, because in the old days before birth control, typically the husband wanted sex and the wife tried to avoid it -- not because she didn't want sex, but because she didn't want to keep getting pregnant. The system they envision would create a lot of tension in the marriage and undoubtedly lead to marital rape by frustrated husbands. Again, that would probably suit them fine, because a wife is supposed to be slave, including a sex slave, to her husband in the demented right wing Christo-fascist imagination.

[natrat]

93. "they" want chaos in every sphere of life

really mean sick people

[politicat]

135. So what are they going to do to me? How will I be punished for not bearing

a child?

Is it my fault that my husband had his wires snipped before we married? Am I supposed to now go out, find a donor, get pregnant and present my infertile husband with a child he's supposed to raise and support against his wishes?

#^&* that.

What can they do to me? Take away our marriage? We are in a common law state. Imprison us? Under what crime?

Pcat

[HamdenRice]

154. They can't make you but ...

I think the idea is to take away birth control from fertile married couples so that when sex inevitably happens, babies will be born. It's back to the pre birth control era when couples had a stark choice of either having sex and lots of kids or abstaining. Really, their idea, I think, is anti-sex as much as it is pro forced childbearing. These folks have always had a hard time dealing with the reality of sex.

[SoCalDem]

3. Birth control..buh-byeee

and welcome to the 50's.. So good the first time, we're going back:(

[Mad_Dem_X]

29. "Every sperm is sacred...!"

:puke:

[jdj]

50. WTF is a "quiver". Is this biblical slang or something? n/t

[LeftyMom]

52. It's a metaphor for kids in this case.

see http://www.quiverfull.com/

[HamdenRice]

53. This is a particularly appalling bible quote:

"Behold, children are a gift of 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. How blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them; they will not be ashamed when they speak with their enemies in the gate."


A quiver is basically the cylindrical box that a person carries his arrows in. So the passage makes an analogy between having many children and having many arrows in your quiver.

When you think of how a bowman uses arrows, it's like saying, "it is great to have children in a violent, tribal society, because you have a lot of canon fodder (sons) to throw at your enemies."

It is weirdly appropriate for the Christian right, given our militaristic times.

[jdj]

58. a violent tribal society like the good ol' USA?

good brainwashing for freeper dads to send their kids off to slaughter.

[HamdenRice]

73. forced childbearing =

More marines, I guess. Yes, it's the same idea.

[FizzFuzz]

80. Biblical injunction to produce canon fodder--My thoughts exactly. n/t

[InvisibleTouch]

4. Screw 'em. Er, no pun intended.

I know myself well enough to know that having a baby would indeed be "an intrusion into my lifestyle" that would be unspeakably unfair to me and the child. Besides, these brain-dead representatives of human detritus wouldn't like the kids that I would raise. Guaranteed. If they think they have a relentless enemy in me, who had to find my way to this viewpoint through my own experience, imagine what enemies they'd have in someone raised from their first breath to fight these bastards....

[eleny]

6. Their "House of Hypocrisy" needs to be cleaned up first

Meantime, they can keep their noses out of my womb.

[Zookeeper]

7. E-mail this to everyone you know!

This is the kind of thing that will totally alienate average apathetic Americans who don't think all of this political "stuff" really affects them.

The fundies are WAY over-reaching with this crusade and the backlash will slap them squarely in the face. :evilgrin:

Edited for typo.

[HamdenRice]

9. Here is the article Mark Meron was talking about ...

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/world/10240201.htm?1c

Conservatives Urge Closer Look at Marriage

DAVID CRARY

Associated Press

NEW YORK - "Protection of marriage" is now the watchword for many activists fighting to prevent gays and lesbians from marrying. Some conservatives, however, say marriage in America began unraveling long before the latest gay-rights push and are pleading for a fresh, soul-searching look at the institution.

"When you talk about protecting marriage, you need to talk about divorce," said Bryce Christensen, a Southern Utah University professor who writes frequently about family issues.

While Christensen doesn't oppose the campaign to enact state and federal bans on gay marriage, he worries it's distracting from immediate threats to marriage's place in society.

"If those initiatives are part of a broader effort to reaffirm lifetime fidelity in marriage, they're worthwhile," he said. "If they're isolated - if we don't address cohabitation and casual divorce and deliberate childlessness - then I think they're futile and will be brushed aside."

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

10. Guilty! Guilty! Guilty!

There, now I feel much better. My wife and I decided not to have kids. Actually enjoy sex, gloat as we watch our neighbors struggle with their complaining, greedy, ungrateful brats who are lavished with bribes.

So, throw the cuffs on us. But, our cats love us, and they're a helluva lot cheaper and easier to herd.

[2sheds]

60. Yes, me too, guilty as sin!

Mmmmm... sin.

[buckettgirl]

82. Amen to that!

That is the reason I don't want kids. Other people's misbehaving brats make me sick. And, yes, I do understand that they are not ALL that way.
My 4 cockatiels are my kids, and sometimes it is like having one screaming brat running around the house. The difference is, they don't know any better. But they love unconditionally and don't demand anything but love in return. It is also very nice to be able to close up the cage and leave when we please.
I think that because of this, we may not have any kids just to piss off people like that!:evilgrin:

[yankeeinlouisiana]

11. How many children did Christ have?

The Bible doesn't speak to any that I know of. How many children did Mother Theresa have? Or any priest or any of the saints? Oh, that's right, I forgot, Catholics are not Christians.

I'm not Catholic, but I do believe the saints, et al, were very special, even holy people. I don't think their lack of children diminish their works and teachings.

:eyes:

[Ducks In A Row]

12. they should be careful, I know married childfree couples who...

will be violent toward anyone trying that shit with them.

you should look at some of the people who frequent the childfree boards on the internet.

they don't take that shit lightly.

hell, let's just directly them to alt.support.childfree. that will give them second thoughts quickly.

if that doesn't work we can sic the people who frequent:
http://www.livejournal.com/community/childfree/
http://www.livejournal.com/community/cf_hardcore/
http://www.fred.net/turtle/kids/kidrants.shtml

(warning, if you have kids, just lurk)

[Zookeeper]

17. I'll take your warning seriously, Ducks In a Row...

and will skip going to those sites. But, as a parent of three, I must say that (although my children are not brats who need to be bribed, as an above poster described his neighbors), being a responsible parent is a tremendously challenging job. There are great rewards, but on some days they don't come close to balancing out the stress. Forcing couples to have children out of some sense of biblical duty is a recipe for child and spousal abuse. I can't imagine trying to parent if it isn't something you want to do!

'Just a comment for the anti-breeders: I would encourage a certain amount of tolerance for children. They are the people who will be paying taxes, managing your mutual funds and probably changing your diapers when you're old. O8)

[Ducks In A Row]

34. ah, that's a good idea you don't go there. :)

because they would be crying "BREEDER BINGO" all over your tushie!

:>

[Quill Pen]

39. I already have.

Sure, raising kids is a challenge -- one that parents willingly choose. No one chooses childrearing because of any selfless or altruistic needs to provide us with a workforce that will manage our portfolios and wipe our wrinkled asses when we're old. They have children because they want children, and they consult no one else in this decision. It's a personal lifestyle choice, not a grand or generous favor (especially considering world population stats), pure and simple.

Moreover, if their children do turn out to be productive and hardworking, and assuming that Social Security still exists, and the kids are contributing part of their incomes to it on our behalf, it will only be because we're paying them for their services. They're not giving us Social Security for free. ;)

[Ducks In A Row]

104. Since the childfree don't plan on relying on SS in the future...

(remember it's only supplemental), that whole "they pay for your SS in the future" doesn't mean much. Esp. since, as you say, SS probably won't exist for much longer.

Also those "productive" kids get balanced out (in the minds of many childfree) by the car-jackers, rapists, purse-snatchers, etc. And no one really knows how a kid will turn out, so the childfree will still call BREEDER BINGO on any one using that line of reasoning.

Really. cliches are not a good way to win against a childfree person. It's all been said hundreds of times, yet the the one using the cliche insists on thinking it's original thought.

In fact, there are pages of BREEDER BINGO responses.

http://www.overopinionated.com/childfree/bingo.htm
http://www.cfpersonals.com/bingo/index.php
http://www.luckytrout.com/childfree/cfbingo.php (javascript, i think)

Reading them is an education on what not to say in a debate.

Not that I think you're a breeder, but it's easy to fall into patterns of thought. Hell, it's easy to do with anything.

Think of pet owners. There are patterns of thoughts it's easy to fall into there too. Pet owners vs non-pet owners. It can be as ugly as these wars between parents/breeders vs childfree.

All my humble opinion of course.

But again, the fundies that were the focus of this thread really need to think if they want to get into a full out war with the childfree. Because the childfree do not take prisoners these days.

:)

[Zookeeper]

109. Obviously it's a very sensitive topic for some...

Really, my main point was that no one should be forced (or coerced) into being a parent, since parenting is challenging even when you carefully and happily choose to have a child.

Also, I have never felt obligated or pressured to have children. During my early 20's, living in S.F. (a very adult-oriented city), I had a very snotty attitude toward "breeders." So, I'm pretty familiar with the anti-child arguments.

I had my children later in life because I decided it would be a profound experience for me to have (especially since I had virtually no family growing up) and I did hope to raise people who would contribute something positive to the world. I feel blessed to have this opportunity. However, no one is obligated to be enthusiastic about my choice to have children, no one should feel pressured to have children themselves, it's not a duty. I do find the intolerance quite irritating (especially the assumption that all children are impolite brats), though, since I've never met anyone who wasn't once a child themselves.

On edit after reading one of the Child-Free links: Child-Free people are not the only ones who are bothered when kids are left screaming and running around in restaurants. Try explaining to your child who is required to sit quietly and say "please" and "thank you" to the waiter, why they aren't allowed to behave like that unsupervised child. This is a question of manners and consideration, not whether or not one has children. I've also had the experience of being in public with my kids when they were pre-schoolers and having them exposed to rude behavior and foul-language from young, apparently child-free, adults. However, I viewed them as being boorish, not child-free.

[Quill Pen]

115. Huh?

>>>Not that I think you're a breeder, but it's easy to fall into patterns of thought. Hell, it's easy to do with anything.<<<

Actually, I'm militantly childfree, and I think my post made clear that parents aren't actually doing anyone any favors. That was my point. I apologize if that was unclear.

[Djinn]

69. sheesh

There is nothing so insane that someone wont advocate it!

"Christians must recognize that this rebellion against parenthood represents nothing less than an absolute revolt against God's design."

that's fine - your God can punish me when I die, till then it'd be nice if this crazy bunch of fundies could mind their own business.

"Just a comment for the anti-breeders: I would encourage a certain amount of tolerance for children. They are the people who will be paying taxes, managing your mutual funds and probably changing your diapers when you're old."

Wouldn’t say I’m an “anti-breeder” as such just not planning on doing it myself but my response to that comment would be “Yep just as I and other childless folks paid taxes for them to go to school to learn and enable them to become tax payers" – works both ways. The childfree don’t get supported by the children of others any more than the children of others get supported by OUR taxes.

[ellie]

24. Thanks for the links!

They are great!

[HamdenRice]

13. What are they really up to??? Discipline, discipline, discipline

If they really want to force people to have children, I want to know what is underlying their agenda.

Clearly, part of it is just to deligitimize sex as self-expression and enjoyment.

But I think another part of it is that when people are tied down with children, and in marriage, they have to work -- which means they have to work for some corporation or business or a rich person. I think it is part of the overall push toward social discipline.

The origin of the word "husband" is a man who has become "house bound" and therefore easily counted, taxed, regulated and kept out of trouble. Same in Spanish, in which to marry, "casar" is related to being in a house, a casa.

[LisaLynne]

22. I think that's part of it, but ...

something that has always struck me about these forced childbearing people (how's that for a frame??) is that they are mostly the white Fundamentalists. You see, they are all scared that people of color and non-whites are going to (gasp) outnumber them in the US very soon. Which is true. So, their solution? Get the white women poppin' them out! Ok, sorry if that sounded crude, but I do think there is an element of racism in this, that despite my facetious tone, needs to be taken seriously.

[Zookeeper]

117. Yes, I was thinking the same thing...

there are people having larger families, but they are usually non-white fairly recent immigrants.

I just can't imagine this new "crusade" going very far, though. As I said above, if this nonsense hits the mainstream media, there will be a backlash. No one except the most die hard talibornigan is going to even entertain the notion of giving up birth control or sex!

This is the kind of stuff that could work to our advantage in turning the tide of tolerance for religious extremism.

[amazona]

148. no doubt about it

I'm convinced it's racism and for just the reason you state.

[madrchsod]

14. remember ladies and gentlemen

orwell`s other theme of 1984 was sexual....

[bloom]

15. It is another example

of the threat to Lakoff's "Strict Father" role as the desired model for Republicans. How can men be ""Strict Fathers" without kids. It throw everything up in the air and we can't have THAT. :eyes:


http://www.wwcd.org/issues/Lakoff.html

Metaphor, Morality, and Politics,
Or, Why Conservatives Have Left Liberals In the Dust

by George Lakoff

"The Strict Father Model. A traditional nuclear family with the father having primary responsibility for the well-being of the household. The mother has day-to-day responsibility for the care of the house and details of raising the children. But the father has primary responsibility for setting overall family policy, and the mother's job is to be supportive of the father and to help carry out the father's views on what should be done....."

---

The problem with "The Nation-as-Family Metaphor" - is some people basically reject families (so the metphor does not work). If the liberals had families more or less along the same model as conservatives - only more nurturing that would be one thing. ( I guess you just can't expect that liberals - or anyone- have a family as traditionally defined).

I"ve been thinking about why this (non-traditional families) is a threat to people and I think that people are (probably) subconsiously concerned that they will not have future generations. That their children or grandchildren, or great grandchildren will all choose some alternative lifestyle - gay marriage or childless marriage or single forever,etc. And it would mean the end of them.

I can't see why they would care what other people were doing otherwise.

[InvisibleTouch]

20. There are too many humans in the world already.

Cutting back on the indiscriminate propagation would be a huge benefit to everyone.

[bloom]

yes - with some predicting the extinction of humans in 100 years...

any worries that some may have about not having future generations are pretty silly.


People who worry about people not having children would likely not believe those predictions. (Like my sister with 6 children...)

[Quill Pen]

25. Totally agree.

6.3 billion humans is several times the sustainable number of a creature that consumes as much as we do.

We're seeing the beginnings of wars over dwindling natural resources. We've seen our first oil wars. I don't think it's extreme to speculate that we'll see wars (or at the very least, some intense saber-rattling) over potable water, fishing, etc.

If you think these are extremist, militant "tree-hugging environmentalist" opinions, you should consider that respectable, non-tree-hugging, well-educated scientists in suits and dress pumps file into the United Nations building every day to discuss what can be done to mitigate these concerns.

Population control isn't the freak-fringe issue it's dismissed as by our politicians and press. Over 100 years of environmental science support reductions in world population and consumption levels.

Incidentally, the Bible also says we are to be vigilant stewards of the Earth for God's sake. Seems to me that indiscriminate reproduction violates that covenant:

"Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. Never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all life. Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures of every kind on the earth." -- Genesis 9:14-16

"The God of heaven has given you dominion and power and might and glory; in your hands he has placed mankind and the beasts of the field and the birds of the air. Wherever they live, he has made you ruler over them all. You are that head of gold." -- Daniel 2:37-38

Also Psalms 8, 104, 148.

[InvisibleTouch]

36. Malthus is being proven right as we watch.

When the population exceeds the environment's carrying capacity, it's going to be thinned by one or all of these factors:

Starvation
Disease
War/Violence

Starvation can be expanded to include running out of resources of any kind, though food and water are of course the most basic. And with regards to violence, it's long been shown that when rats are overcrowded in a cage, they begin to kill and eat their own young. Or each others'. We're seeing that, too. Humans in their arrogance aren't immune from the forces that shape the natural world.

And then these so-called "Christians" are doing their damndest to perpetuate starvation, disease, and war? Yeah, it kinda fits....

[AlienGirl]

16. I'm glad I got my tubes tied...

I am so glad I got my tubes tied before birth control became illegal.

In fact, one of my reasons for opting for permanent sterilization was the fear that someday this *would* be coming down the pike.

Tucker

[EstimatedProphet]

19. Well, if you can't have children...

The mindset that came up with childlessness being immoral will undoubtedly ban people who can't have children from marriage rights.
This is such a fun society now...

[Quill Pen]

40. No doubt, that will easily include infertile couples

With little difficulty, religious extremists can certainly paint those afflicted with infertility as the wages of God's displeasure.

[SeattleDem]

142. Must now prove your fertility before getting marriage license

I was thinking about this a few days ago, about how far our society could take this argument.

I read LTE's about how gays shouldn't marry because they can't procreate. So, with that logic, the following should also not be allowed to marry:

Postmenopausal women
Women who have had a hysterectomy and/or oopherectomy (ovaries removed)
Men with low sperm counts
Infertile couples

From now on, one must submit "proof" of reproductive capability to get a marriage license. Women must demonstrate effective ovulation and men must give sperm specimens. Women will be tested for the presence of contraceptive hormones in their bloodstream. Pharmacy records will be obtained and reviewed. If someone comes forward who can swear on a Bible that they've heard the couple say they don't want children, then the license will be denied.

oh, yeah, and society will suddenly take a great interest in children's issues, like poverty, healthcare, and education. Because it's all about the children....

[Scout]

65. exactly

I got mine tied almost three years ago. Husband wasn't crazy about vasectomy, so I decided that I would take care of things myself since I'm the one who'd be screwed, literally, if there were an accidental pregnancy.

I'd been considering doing it for years anyway, but when election fiasco 2000 happened, and I married in 2001, I thought I'd better not take any chances on contraception and/or abortion being outlawed.

Now I don't have to worry about being forced to be a Handmaid!

Women and men, if you've been considering sterilazation already, now might be a good time to make up your mind one way or the other....

[buckettgirl]

89. The cost of sterilization???

I don't know how much it would cost. My husband would be more than happy to have a vasectomy because he doesn't want to produce anymore deformed children who will die.
But I don't know how much that costs. I'd be fairly certain that it isn't something insurance would cover because it isn't a medical necessity... so then what?

[Zookeeper]

121. I think most health insurance will cover the cost...

of a vasectomy. It's a lot cheaper for them than covering the costs of a pregnancy, childbirth and possible complications.

[Scout]

133. my tubal was covered by insurance, I was lucky.

I'm pretty sure they covered vasectomy too.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

108. Birth control is not currently illegal.

[kayell]

18. Reproductive age females - please don your red robes.

[demigoddess]

27. that book should be everywhere these days.

Maybe we should send them out as Xmas gifts this year.

[kayell]

30. Good idea. *adds to Christmas list*

before you can only get it in Canada.

[Mad_Dem_X]

28. Exactly what I was thinking

One of the scariest books I've ever read.

I've been married for 7 years, and my husband and I never wanted to have kids. He went and got a vasectomy. No one is going to tell us we HAVE to have kids!! :mad:

[A Simple Game]

57. Exactly.

and when their saggy old wife can't reproduce anymore, they get to select a nice young fertile substitute! It's only fair since they won't be able to divorce anymore either.

[catmandu57]

21. I had such a wonderful childhood

broken home, physical and mental abuse, that children were the absolute last thing I ever wanted in life. My wife had her two boys, had her tubes chopped into little pieces, and we're just as happy as two bugs in a rug.
I'm high on the list anyway, an unemployable cripple who thinks. I'm sure that if their agenda is played out I won't be part of the equasion.

[DuaneBidoux]

23. You see, we joke about the Dark Ages...but it IS what they have in mind

As the ultimate agenda.

[demigoddess]

26. You will notice that this guy did not mention

anything about feeding or clothing these children or sending them to school. And he also did not mention cuts in tax money to schools etc. I honor those people who have chosen not to have children. It leaves more room for mine. And I believe in Zero Population Growth something that hasn't been mentioned since the seventies.

[jdj]

51. the more deprived they are, the better soldiers they will make

intelligent design, indeed.

it's all part of the master plan.

the right wants people to have kids for one reason, because it limits choices, and the earlier in life these kids are had (hence the resistance to abortion and contraception) the earlier the wage slaved is trapped into a life of drudgery.

[AspenRose]

31. This Christian is appalled

"In an effort to separate the pleasure of sex from the power of procreation, modern Americans think that sex totally free from constraint or conception is their right."


Um, well, YES, it IS their right. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and all that.

Clearly these people haven't read the Song of Solomon. Very sexual in content (also viewed by some as allegorical), and procreation as a means to an end (to the best I can recall) isn't mentioned once.

STAY OUT OF OUR BEDROOMS!!!!

[FlaGranny]

92. That statement

"In an effort to separate the pleasure of sex from the power of procreation, modern Americans think that sex totally free from constraint or conception is their right." reveals the glaring disregard for every human on the planet who is not "them." It's a glaring disregard of their God giving humans "free will."

[One_Life_To_Give]

32. Good news, Bad News

I guess the "Sexless Marriage" will be outlawed as well. Which would be good news for me, but Mrs. OLTG might have a different opinion.

[hatrack]

33. So, if a couple is infertile, or having problems, what then?

Will they be allowed to accept their status, since God has obviously decreed that they Shall Not Reproduce?

Or will they be required to spend whatever it takes in terms of fertility clinics, surgical or medical procedures, in vitro fertilization or what have you in order to reproduce?

For that matter, if they're thinking about buying a house, shouldn't they be required to put the money they're saving for a downpayment into fertility treatments? After all, a house is just a selfish investment in lumber and bricks, and these kinds of selfish desires must not interfere with God's Ordained Purpose!!

And as far as that goes, any married couple in America that wants to buy a new car, go on a vacation or purchase a new washer/dryer must first put every possible penny into costs associated with conception/childbirth/childrearing before being allowed to indulge themselves in such selfish, self-centered whims!!

[Retrograde]

138. the Bible has an answer for that

see Genesis 16 (in my Douai translation) for the story of Hagar and Ismail. See also Genesis 21 for why this did not turn out well for them. (This is the basis for the theocracy in The Handmaid's Tale)

My (former) church is opposed to in vitro fertilization, and historically hasn't had too many problems with married couples living in chastity. In fact, they think chastity and celibacy are pretty good things overall.

So what will the fundies do about women who don't want to marry and have childred - or should I be afraid to ask?

[Lorien]

35. "The making of Saints"???!!

(snip)
Parenthood is not a hobby, but represents one of the most crucial opportunities for the making of saints found in this life.
(snip)

OK, the author is simply insane.

[skippysmom]

37. Now you're scaring me

I guess I was under the mistaken perception that I could choose to have kids or not have kids.

What next? Will they be going after those who choose to only have one kid?

[mondo joe]

38. After all, the state needs more worker bees

The nightmare mix of unmoderated capitalism and fundamentalist christianity continues...

[Quill Pen]

41. More cannon fodder, if things keep up as they are [nt]

[SemperEadem]

44. this sounds more and more like communist China to me

[LibertyLover]

47. Rejecting Children

This ties in neatly with the extreme Christian Right's desire to not only outlaw abortion, but also all forms of birth control. The "reasoning" outlined in this article provides the underpinning for such a move. I'm glad I don't need to worry about birth control, but I fear for my daughter. I really wish that the God these people worship would take them away.

[Triana]

49. WELL thank GOD I'll never....

...get married again AND that I had my plumbing disengaged 'cause these sick bastards otherwise would be controlling my life!

As is, they can keep their sick noses out of my .... bodily cavities and out of my damn business. Whacko Control Freaks!

Next, they'll state that women are not allowed to work outside the home, not allowed to get an education past elementary school, and that women have to wear burkas. IT'S THE GODDAMNED AMERIKKKAN TALIBAN!

[superconnected]

54. and someone here asked what would happen if the nazis won

See, they would persecute EVERYONE.

[disillusioned1]

55. I was 25, single and childless

when I decided to get a tubal. My Catholic gyno wouldn't do it, but Planned Parenthood had me sign one piece of paper and it was done.

Older women will become even less important than they are now once past childbearing age.

[jdj]

59. I'm telling you what, if the climate gets much worse I'll have

one in case of rape. I don't forsee children ahead, and I'm 36.

[Triana]

64. That reminds me...I need to send $$ to Planned Parenthood...

...GOD BLESS THEM!

;)

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

113. They do tubals at planned parenthood!? How about Essure?

I did not know this. What is the cost?
How was the recovery from the tubal ligation?

I have one child, but did not get tubal ligation when my son was born because we weren't sure if we wanted to have more kids.

Has anyone here had the Essure procedure for sterilization?
http://www.essure.com/consumer/c_homepage.aspx
It's fairly new. I'm kind of interested in it since it doesn't require surgery and only takes 30 minutes. I'm not fond of the idea of surgery. I've never had surgery before.

I probably couldn't afford a sterilization procedure right now, but maybe next year. I'm currently don't have health insurance. My husband, however, currently has good health insurance. Maybe he could get a vasectomy. He's not terribly excited about the idea of a vasectomy, but he would probably do it. I guess they are painful. Any guys out there had a vasectomy? How was it?

[Deja Q]

56. More biblical convenience. Let's make a decent world FOR the children

instead of forcing people to breed children who'll grow up in hell.

Our parents thought our generation would have it good. Dec 12, 2000 was the first day they realized they may have been wrong.

I will not father a child under any circumstances. Not until I can make the world a better place for my theoretical children or anybody elses' REAL children to live in.

[BiggJawn]

61. And while the Fundies are cooking up this stuff.....

..I'm getting my ass ripped in another thread for suggesting that religious people are "Insane"...

THIS kind of crazy shit, this "rebellion against parenthood represents nothing less than an absolute revolt against God's design." and "The Scripture points to barrenness as a great curse and children as a divine gift." craziness, this is NOT INSANE?????

What if I want to get married again someday? Are the Fundies telling me I have to marry someone who's still ovulating? I HAVE to have more kids?

What if I don't want to get married? what if I just want to "Cohabitate"? We're not gonna be popping out any little bastards, modern medicine and father time have taken care of that possibility. but that's immoral.

And a "curse", too: "The Scripture points to barrenness as a great curse ..."


I'm getting a headache. The Dominionists are taking their 51% "Mandate" and they're not biding their time anymore. The "Handmaiden's Tale" is coming.

Yet *I'M* the one who's a "religious bigot"....

[LoZoccolo]

67. Well, you probably completely missed the point they were making...

...that not everyone believes this (even in this thread), and even if they do, it's their business.

[BiggJawn]

72. No, YOU missed the point.

The point is that those people who believe this want to impose it on the REST of us.

In your next post, you infer that I'm too lazy or stupid to do "a simple Google search". Well, two can play that debating "technique".
Here's a search for you.
Search the terms "Dominionist" and "Christian Reconstructionist"

Then come back and tell me if that unsettles you any. These people are already getting themselves elected to our school boards and town councils. How long before they're in the Senate and White House?

[LoZoccolo]

85. Yeah, you probably missed the point.

I can tell by how you changed the subject. And you sent me somewhere else rather than the thread where you were broad-brushing and ticking people off (and probably breaking the rules). I know about Christian reconstructionists and dominionists, just like I know about Maoists and Stalinists. And I would never accuse you of wanting to put ten million people in the ground simply on the basis that you might be an atheist.

If we want to create a culture where we don't continue to be victimized by the nuance-impaired, we might look into doing it for ourselves.

[BiggJawn]

97. Sorry, not enough coffee...

I misunderstood.
Here, go to THIS thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2735604&mesg_id=2735604&page=

I've been thinking long and hard since I threw out my original "contribution" to that thread, and you know what? While I'm not willing to admit I'm wrong, I think it's PAST time that I took some of my own advice, to whit:

"When you find yourself in a hole, put down the shovel..."

Oh, well.

And as the flame under the pot of water we frogs are in SLOWWWWWWLY increases...

[LoZoccolo]

70. Here, a dissenting opinion.

But I see how even a simple Google search would be more difficult than broad-brushing behind a keyboard.

http://www.livejournal.com/users/brianjb/26771.html

[BiggJawn]

99. THAT took a LONG time to load!

Even on a 10-Mb backbone, but I finally got it.

I'm not worried about the brianjb's of the world, who seem to remember that they still have "Free Will". Who I'm worried about are the "Doctor" Mohlers, whom I think would have NO problem enacting and enforcing the Dominionist Theocracy upon the rest of us.

THAT is what I get my hackles up aboput, this thing of when someone decides to take what they do in their church and turn it into Law and public policy. Then I get pissed.

[arwalden]

102. :-) Right On!

[politicat]

136. You're not insane and not a bigot.

Religion of this sort IS delusional. It refuses to look at real world issues and instead deals only with pre-determined sub-routines. If it was anything other than the great sky-father, we'd have them cozy and warm in jackets with extra long sleeves.

Pcat

[sangh0]

62. Hey, I've got an idea

How about we stop letting the repukes decide our agenda

[minerva50]

63. Opposition to Gay marriage also involves gender roles in marriage.

If two men or two women can be married, it implies a union of equals. They want to define marriage as a union of a man and a woman, but they mean a dominant man and a subservient woman. It's not just homophobia behind the defense of marriage bills, it's a fear and hatred of feminism.

[Ilsa]

66. All the problems in the world, and this is their focus?

How fucked up is that?

All I can figure is that they are worried about white Christians being a minority eventually so they are pushing for massive reproduction to attempt to even the stats. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

[buckettgirl]

84. they would still be a minority

Even if they could force me to have 10 kids, I would still teach them Pagan ways (even if I had to do so secretly). I would teach them that those fundies are bad, evil people.
Unless they are going toward communal living, I don't think they could stop me.
I think anyone else forced to have children would teach them the same things to, they would become an even bigger minority

[LoZoccolo]

68. Anyone remember /her/?

[China_cat]

100. Or the one who stoned her kids?

Or the latest? The woman who hacked off her baby's arms while gospel music played in the background?

But don't worry, it doesn't count because (all together now) THEY WEREN'T TRUE CHRISTIANS.

[LoZoccolo]

145. Yeah the Christian DUers are just as much of a danger.

No they aren't.

(I wasn't making that type of an argument, but I should have known someone would have springboarded off of it with something like that. What's the point anyways? Either openly endorse an eliminationist solution, or don't hint at it.)

Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, and Castro don't count because (all together now) THEY WEREN'T TRUE LEFTISTS.

[leesa]

71. The bible was written by Jewish scribes in a time when it was critical to

have as many children as possible to perpetuate the survival of the tribe or the species. Quit living in the past assholes. We are grossly overpopulated.

[Zookeeper]

123. Maybe they are trying to perpetuate the survival...

of THEIR tribe: Right-wing, fundamentalist and white.

[nonconformist]

74. Wow, they can STILL shock me!

That, in itself, is shocking.

[ChipperbackDemocrat]

76. Once again, the extremists are taking the microphone.

I read this article and I was laughing uncontrollably. These fake Pharisees are going to force me to have kids? Yeah right. This isn't the "Handmaid's Tale" not yet anyway. I've read the book, and its scary how art has prophsied life.
Some of these fundie folks make a Christian like me wonder why the hell I haven't turned Wiccan? ;)

These people are crazy.

I visited those "childfree" boards, those people are crazy, too.

Call me old-fashioned and maybe "fundie", but to me children are a gift from God. It is a shame that we as a society on both sides either devalue children (the anti-breeders), or see children as some bargaining chip to curry a amoral political agenda (the fundies).

That is not what the Good Lord intended for us.

Personally, I doubt I will have children. The world's going straight to hell and it'll only get worse. We are entering an age where war will be a constant, violence will be a constant (hell, look at that Detriot-Indiana game this weekend. We are a society that thrives on senseless violence.). Its not going to get any better, so why bring new precious life into a world like this.

Everybody should have free choice whether to parent or not and nobody should condemn them for it, especially if they are doing that job.

To the fundies: God gave us free will, and the intelligence to use it. Stop using my faith as an opiate of judgement!

To the antibreeder: Remember, you too were once a "brat".

[raggedcompany]

75. Frightening

maybe I'll get that assault weapon afterall...

[RebelOne]

77. Well, what if you don't like kids?

Me, I prefer puppies to babies.

[Southpaw Bookworm]

79. Tough shit

Gawd says you need to procreate, so who cares if the child isn't wanted and as a result is neglected or abused. We've got either more white babies or more brown babies to die overseas so that the ruling class can continue to do so.

I grew up around these types and they :scared: me witless.

[flvegan]

78. The author scares the $#@ outta me. Read

some of his work from his (R. Albert Mohler, Jr.) website:
http://www.albertmohler.com/

like this:
"From Genesis to Revelation, the Bible assumes that marriage is normative for human beings. The responsibilities, duties, and joys of marriage are presented as matters of spiritual significance. From a Christian perspective, marriage must never be seen as a mere human invention--an option for those who choose such a high level of commitment--for it is an arena in which God's glory is displayed in the right ordering of the man and the woman, and their glad reception of all that marriage means, gives, and requires.

Clearly, something has gone badly wrong in our understanding of marriage. This is not only reflected in much of the conversation and literature about marriage found in the secular world, but in many Christian circles as well. The undermining of marriage--or at least its reduction to something less than the biblical concept--is also evident in the way many Christians marry, and in the way others fail to marry."

[buckettgirl]

86. I bet people like him

would be REALLY PISSED OFF to find out that my husband and I are LEGALLY HANDFASTED! That's right, our marriage is legal and was blessed with divine love from the GODDESS AND GOD!
And we are still undecided about children! If we don't want any, my husband is going to have a vasectomy.
People like him sure do HATE people like me!

[CatBoreal]

107. Same here....

that'd probably really twist their knickers.

Either that, or they'll start negating marriages that take place in churches other than the ones that are 'approved'.

This could get scary.

Cam

[buckettgirl]

111. I don't know if they could go that far

But, of course, nothing should surprise me. The High Priestess who performed our ceremony is registered (or whatever it is that ministers are) as a non-demoninational minister in Carroll County Arkansas. So it was legal...no doubt.
I don't think they could nullify all marriages that weren't of their liking - that would be ALL other religions/non-demoninational marriages/ and even some christian marriages that weren't too their liking. So probably most of the country couldn't be married...
That would be a pretty tough goal for them and I don't forsee that happening....but, no it wouldn't surprise me either.

[buckettgirl]

81. Children are far from divine.

I don't hate children, but I don't know if I want children.
I see other people's children and they are EVIL! Well, not really, but sometimes it seems that way.
It is just another way for them to intrude on my body. I am capable of having kids (as far as I know), and so is my husband - but he has had 2 children (1 died and 1 adopted by foster parents), and has severe genetic issues in his family.
I like life like it is now. I like not having to be tied down and an free to go out on the weekends or whenever without worrying about childcare. I am still in college and I do not want children now. I don't know if I will want children later, and the fact that there are genetic problems will figure into that. I would most definitely consider adoption, but it is so damn expensive!
Who the hell are they to tell me that I have to have kids or else?
Or else what? Bastards can go to hell and take their scriptures with em.

[Iris]

83. St. Augustine said

something like, "The innocence of children is due less from their purity of spirit and more to the weakness of their limbs" - or something like that!

[JerseygirlCT]

87. This bothers me in an infinite number of ways -

most prominently the idea that women are first and foremost baby-making machines. (And what happens to those who are infertile? Do we get rid of them?)

But what about the kids? Now, I'm someone who very much wanted children. And I always find those who do not hard to understand. No judgement, it's just a state of being so far from my own. HOWEVER those are exactly the people I don't want having kids, you know?

To use a terrible example: I'm not an animal person. Absolutely, positively no desire to have any pets or critters of any sort around me. Never have been, never will be. Would you want to force a puppy on me? Knowing I simply don't care about having it? Far better for the family down the block to have the puppy -- they love them and will take wonderful care of the dog.

Forcing people to have children is so totally counterproductive... And I do believe it's more women-hate coming through from our friendly misogynists of the religious right.

[lukasahero]

114. Actually

my husband and I are childless by choice and my parents have told me countless times that we ARE the people who should be having children. They watch us with my nephews and see that we are patient and involved, they know that we have the financial means to support them and are big supporters of the value of education. We listen when they talk, we don't talk down to them, we will discipline them if the situation warrants it. Their point is that too many people who have children have little business doing so. I have tremendous respect for those that really want them and really give their time and attention to them but not all who have them do this.

You might, as a result, be making a rather broad generalization about people who choose not to have children as being the type of people "you don't want having them". Child abuse happens primarily in homes where people have children, not in the homes that don't. Take your analogy for example. Lots of people have pets and abuse and neglect them. I would assume that just because you don't want a puppy that you would not abuse it were you to find yourself in the position of having to care for one. Please feel free to make the same assumption about me regarding children.

All that said, I agree, like the abortion issue, this isn't about children, it's about women and the religious right's fear of them.

[JerseygirlCT]

124. No offense intended at all -

but I was talking about people who want to be childfree but are then forced into it. Is this really going to make for great parents?

I've no doubt that many of the people w/o kids that I know would make terrific parents -- but if they wanted to do that. I have friends who make the world's greatest aunties and uncles (and not just b/c they're permissive) but I don't know if that would carry over toward f/t parenting if they were forced to have kids. Does that make more sense?

I also know people who were quite sure they didn't want children, had them for one reason or another (usually a spouse desiring children) and had their opinions completely changed. It does happen.

I think the decision to be a parent should be made consciously as much as possible, and carefully. I don't think any outside entity ought to be making that decision for you. No one should be forced to become a parent. Every child a wanted child and all that.

I hope that makes a bit more sense... I really didn't want to offend!

[lukasahero]

130. You didn't offend, really

(My skin's a little thicker than that ;-) )

I just think that there really is a prevailing attitude out there that folks who don't want kids are "selfish" among other not so nice things and took advantage of your post to make a point. I also did not mean to offend and tried to be polite. :-]

In fact, I guess my real point is less about the potential of childless by choice people to be good parents than it is about people who give no thought whatsoever to what it really means to "raise" children (as opposed to just "having" them). I gave more thought and attention to the arrival of my puppy than I've seen people give their arriving newborns.

We really are in agreement here: "Every child a wanted child". We who don't have them are a lot less of the problem than many of the people who do. Quoting Keanu Reeves from "Parenthood": "You need a license to have a dog but they'll let any b'f'in moron have a kid."

Just in case this isn't absolutely, perfectly clear, I am NOT directing this at you. You sound like the just the kind of person I think should be raising children - one who REALLY wants them. :)

[JerseygirlCT]

151. Thanks

I've been thinking about this all afternoon and worrying!

[politicat]

139. Makes perfect sense - I'm one of them.

I'm a GREAT auntie. But full time, I'd be a screaming, raging harridan who would teach my child nasty words just to spite others and would use sarcasm and all sorts of other not-good things. (Like teaching the kid to call her teachers Herr and Frau and salute with an arm at 45 degrees from chest... If I was forced to be a parent, I'd raise my child to think the country was run by Nazis.)

Pcat

[JerseygirlCT]

150. LOL

Don't worry -- even some of us who desperately wanted our kids also want to run screaming from the house at times! I've had my own screaming raging harridan days!

[politicat]

137. We're in the same place...

Smart, capable, good with kids and patient... but not having them. I have a niece and nephew and we'll contribute to their lives. It would be nice if I could have a child that would fit well within our lives, but the probability is poor.

It's about control, and I think some racism. After all, what's going to happen when the (white) people stop having children or having lots of them?

I grew up around Mormons of this stripe. Closet racists, every one. (Not that ALL Mormons are racists, but the ones in this area tend to be by a large degree.) Bigoted against everyone who wasn't "just like them". You'd think that all of that travel and all of those missions would make them more humanist and cosmopolitan and urbane, but it does just the opposite. The more they travel, the less open-minded they seem to be. This guy is at SUU, which is pretty dang close to the Fundie Mormons that practice polygamy and marry their daughters off to their brothers when the girls are 14. I've heard his name before mentioned in some of the more scary tracts.

Alert away.... I don't hate Mormons and I don't believe all Mormons are this way, but there is a culture of hate and fear and oppression, especially in Southern Utah and Northern Arizona.

Pcat

[renaissanceguy]

88. I don't see how there could NOT be a backlash

against this bullshit. People won't let these Jesus freaks tell them what to do.

[Brewman_Jax]

90. No kids for me

Those kid-chasing years are behind me. Besides, the cats are allergic to them. :silly:

[FlaGranny]

91. I wonder about the 70 and 80 year olds

in Florida who cohabitate. Will they go after them too? Cohabitation among old people in Florida is RAMPANT. They have to do it to survive comfortably. Marriage for these old people is usually not opted for because of estate problems when they die. I imagine it is prevalent in other parts of the country, too.

[yellowcanine]

119. It's official. No screwing after menopause, you deviant.

[FlaGranny]

128. LOL. n/t

[animuscitizen]

94. This is a call for a return to the "feminine mystique"...

The Christian extremists dream of the days when women were barefoot, pregnant, submissive, uneducated, powerless, with lives focused upon the husband, housework, and childrearing. They are misogynists. Thankfully, this delusional thinking only infects the brains of a small, wacko segment of society.

"While some media, ads, and movies may still try to define women only or mainly as sex objects, its no longer considered chic or even acceptable by much of America." Anna Quindlen

[buckettgirl]

95. This is what I don't understand

If that is the Christian extremists dream, then how can ANY WOMAN be affiliated with these extremists. I don't care what political party they are, don't these women who follow these extremists have any self-respect???

But of course, I'm also of the mindset that I don't understand how any woman could ever vote republican either.... something to ponder I guess

[HamdenRice]

98. Security

By that, I don't mean economic of physical security. Some people get security out of playing a well defined roll in society and in the family. When I see some of these fundie christian women with their litter of children, oddly the emotion that seems to come across on their faces is smug self satisfaction -- but of a peculiarly unreflective kind.

[Quill Pen]

122. Being good at the game

I went to a conservative Christian college, and many of the women I shared a dorm with are now married with young children (one has four). And although we exchange Xmas cards and long-distance phone calls now and then, sometimes it shocks me how little I recognize them anymore.

One of them told me, with enormous pride in herself, how she refused to give a local friend a baby shower (refused to her face) because the friend had become pregnant out of wedlock. "No way! I'm not giving any knocked-up baby showers! Not me!" Even her own mother was scandalized by my friend's ultraconservative streak, and hissed at her, saying, "That's not the way I raised you; I didn't raise you to judge others like that." And even her own mother's reproof made her more proud of herself; inflated her sense of moral superiority. I pointed out that the single woman would probably have even greater need of baby clothes and accessories than a married mother, but her response was, "Then she can marry the father, and then she won't have that problem!" She then went on to bitch that the pregnant friend is going back to work soon after having the baby, instead of becoming a SAHM. (One wonders how a single woman would support a child otherwise, but...forget it Jake, we're in Chinatown.)She gets these rules from Dr. Laura, of whom she's a diehard fan.

For Christmas one year, I sent my friend with the four kids a video of "The Lion King." I thought the kids would enjoy it, because they love animal stories. The next time I visited, my friend told me that they'd had to donate the video to someone else, because "that particular movie promotes ancestor worship, and we can't allow that in a Christian home." Sooo, now they just get Xmas cards; I can't guess what the Toy Dept. Anti-Family Evil of the Year is going to be, and I frankly don't care.

I think that a lot of religious conservatives make a game out of righteous living; a keep-away game of boycotting things with even the most tenuous connections to impropriety. The more intelligent ones are especially at risk, because they waste their otherwise valuable educations and reasoning on constructing elaborate rationales for their asceticism. It's an easy game, because the rules, strategy and all the thinking required are done by others (James Dobson, Ralph Reed, Pat Robertson, Dr. Laura, etc.). But it provides vast amounts of satisfaction and artificial purpose, I've no doubt, because all of us would like to think we're the "good guys," fighting the good fight. I'm sure I'd end my friendships with my college dormmates if I pointed out to them that shunning the world isn't much of a fight, and doesn't leave much of a legacy.

[animuscitizen]

103. Hi Buckettgirl,

I agree-- it is very troubling that some women fall into this trap. It is a problem that is as old as the hills. You are probably right--many of these women have no true self respect. They sacrifice self respect, with a focus upon the wellbeing and interests of the father, the boyfriend, the husband.

Some women remain isolated in a world of extremist ideology, mixed with Dark Ages ideas about the female role. This is usually due to experiences in their family of origin, marriage, church, and/or community. It is sometimes hard to break free of sex role stereotypes, especially when the individual has not been raised with diversity. These women are programmed through their personal experiences (ie: She thinks, "My husband is always right: That is what I learned in church, what my father always said, etc."). Sometimes these women feel too disempowered to become independent thinkers. These are the types of problems that also contribute to a woman's involvement in an abusive relationship.

This is sad stuff.

[buckettgirl]

106. The bad thing is

That really sounds like the mindset of women in abusive relationships.

Is it like there is some need to be controlled, maybe?
Is it fear that makes them stay? I would think that living in America, these women would have seen others who live vastly different lives than they and wonder about it. And I mean actually critically evaluate their own situation and see that there is a better life out there and that women's lib. wasn't all for nothing. Just because they are taught to follow and obey can't mean all the fundie women never manage to think for themselves, does it?

[animuscitizen]

116. Yes, it is a bit sadomasochistic...

You are right. Fear makes some women stay in abusive relationships. And fear prevents some women from acting in an independent way.

All in all, these women have bought into sexist ideas, such as: a man knows best; a woman needs to stand by her man no matter what; life would suck without a husband, a house in the suburbs, an SUV in the driveway, etc. Many of these women become so emotionally and financially dependent upon men for survival that their choices feel limited.

Women in these situations often believe they do not have a voice. They feel trapped in their marriage and this way of life. It takes great courage to break free of these chains. Unfortunately, many women and children are forced to live in poverty and risk their lives when they leave these misogynist pricks. Keep in mind, many of the Bible literalists/Christian extremists believe that it is ok to hit the wife, as a "woman needs to be put in her place." In a domestic violence situation, a woman is most at risk when she leaves the relationship. Leaving the relationship, speaking up, acting in an independent manner are all risky pursuits. Sexism is a game of power and related manipulation.

[buckettgirl]

120. Yeah, they really WOULD hate people like me.

That is such a sad way to live. I would like to know what sects of christianity do these people mainly come from or at least claim to be affiliated with?

These people hate people like me, no doubt about it. My husband works and supports us and I am a housewife - while i'm in college. He makes the money, but I run the household. Life would suck without him, but only because I love him so much. I guess my mom did a good job to raise a independent, open-minded gal like me, LOL :) Then to top it off, we're both Pagan and are undecided about kids! We are like the antithesis of them.

[arwalden]

101. Those Fucking Christian Idiots... THEY MUST BE STOPPED!!!

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

105. My husband's aunt and uncle chose to no have kids.

The are VERY baptist. They go to church every week and teach Sunday school. I don't believe anyone at their church has ever criticized them for choosing to not have kids. Where is is this stuff coming from?


"Parenthood is not a hobby, but represents one of the most crucial opportunities for the making of saints found in this life."

Having a child because that child might some day become a saint is an absolutely absurd reason to have a child.

[seaj11]

110. WTF?!

"Behold, children are a gift of 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. How blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them; they will not be ashamed when they speak with their enemies in the gate."

Yes, children are a joy, but not a requirement. And they're not a joy if you don't want them! These people are so simple-minded it's frightening. :scared:

I wish they would go away. They're flushing our country down the toilet.

[MsAnthropy]

112. My childlessness was totally accidental--I FORGOT!

I just got busy and FORGOT! Does that mean I am going to be incarcerated with the rest of you godless moral rebels, just because something slipped my mind? Will they make me adopt? I loathe kids!

[JerseygirlCT]

125. LOL

That actually made me laugh out loud.

Yup. Off to the baby farm with you. PRODUCE!

[yellowcanine]

118. "You don't want kids? What are you, gay or sumptin?"

These fundy folks have distorted the scriptures beyond recognition.

[Behind the Aegis]

126. I am glad this is happening!

I, for one, am glad that this is coming out and that "childless couples" will be attacked. I feel bad for them, but it will demonstrate to those people that the Xtian Reich will not stop with gays...they will try to legislate morality, their morality, to everyone! Perhaps this will light a fire under some people who think that securing EQUAL rights for gays is a waste of time!

[buckettgirl]

127. Why should we have to suffer??

WE see that they are bad, ruthless people and will stop at nothing until they have obliterated the Earth!
They seem to have a substantial base of people who believe they are right to do this and we can't change them!!
Why should all those people who are the antithesis of the fundies carry the burden of their wrath when it may only help a few to see to light??
Sorry I don't think the ends justify the means here...

[Behind the Aegis]

129. a kick in the pants

I wish no one had to suffer. I made my post to sound like there was "glee" in it. In actuality, I don't want anyone to have to become a victim to these lunatics! However, sometimes a kick in the pants (or a threat to one's own rights) motivates people to protect others who do not have the power to protect themselves. I certainly didn't mean to "attack" you personally. But, within that large group of "childless" people, I know there are a few who are soft on gay equality and women's right to chose. Perhaps this assault on THEIR rights will motivate them to realize that this group is like a plague of locusts, they will NOT stop with one "crop!"

I understand there are already "childless" supporters out there and I love that they stick up for women's rights and gay rights. To them I say, I know how you feel, and together, we can forge a powerful group against this plague!

No hard feelings. I apologize if I was too harsh!

Brightest Blessings!

[buckettgirl]

132. Not at all...

No I did not take this personally... I mean, if the fundies are gonna hate me personally, there isn't anything I can do at this point to prevent that.
I don't think that this issue would unify us or really get people to understand. They would still go against their own interests, bitching and moaning all the way...
I see what you are saying, but I'm not sure that I can agree.
I mean, look at the women's lib movement. You'd think that would have united women, maybe it did then (I don't know cuz I wasn't alive then). But now, women - even educated women - routinely go against their own interests,even when there are issues that are personally affecting them...
I just don't think it will make a dent.

(I have to say this is odd for me, usuall I am pretty optimistic and sometimes naive about the good in people and believe that they will change if give the proper motivation. But now, I don't know...maybe its the gloomy weather affecting my mood today)

[Behind the Aegis]

143. I am glad I didn't offend you

That is not my intention. I agree with what you said about the women's lib movement. Same could be said of the gay rights movement. I guess I hoping that if people see these wackos coming after their rights, they may decide it is important to protect the rights of others. I guess it is a little simplistic on my part, but I can always have hope! :)

[lukasahero]

131. Being one of the CbC

(I'm now abbreviating "childless by choice" because it's a pain to type out), I will volunteer to withstand the attacks. Let's face it, most childless by choice folks are educated and financially secure. We have a voice and we have more power than many of the "other" folks under attack. Come after me you fascist f*cks, I dare ya'.

I also agree with BtA in that this is an issue that will not go down well with moderates so let the Fundies attack - it will show the country their real agenda.

It is not about abortion, it is about control.
It is not about gay marriage, it is about fear.
It is not about civil rights, it is about power.

[Quill Pen]

149. The same can also be said of parents

Your posts on this subject imply that childless/childfree people are somehow so self-involved that they would not crusade for human rights unless a threat to their own rights gave them a wake-up call.

I'm a childfree who's spent the last four years fighting side-by-side with my childfree friends: for voter enfranchisement, gay marriages/civil unions, ending the Iraq war, universal healthcare, labor rights and reductions in job offshoring. First we fought for Dean, then we fought for Kerry.

All of us have jobs (except one). All of us have healthcare coverage. None of us are gay. All of us were already registered to vote and were regular voters. None of us are in the military. We're all economically just fine.

So why would we stick our necks out for disenfranchised groups of people to which we don't belong? I guess it's fair to say that there's no strong correlation between childlessness and crippling self-absorption. Care to revise?

[Behind the Aegis]

153. I made an error

I guess I was trying to be a little sarcastic. I am also childless by choice. I do not think that all child free people are selfish with their time, money, or support of various causes. I guess for me I was trying to express so residual anger/disappointment about recent postings that blamed gays and abortion issues as the reason the election was lost(?). I would have posted something similar had the post been about the loonies going after divorced people. In my mind, the fact these nuts would go after people making the choice to remain without children is just the height of lunacy! But, I also see that some people may be "shaken awake" by something like this. Their thinking is "I am not gay, so who cares," but when they see these loons going after people making a choice to be without children, they go "holy shit, where will they stop!?" I guess I am hoping that ALL people, with or without children, will look at this attempt from the Xtian Reich to insert their beliefs into another's life as serious and perk up to the impending disaster. Does this make any sense?!

I apologize at the implications. I should have been more articulate and not so flippant. Truth be known, I don't wish for any one to suffer, not even the fundies!

Please accept my apologies for a poorly worded post! :)

Brightest Blessings!

[Cat Atomic]

134. That's exactly correct. If they overturn Roe v. Wade, they'll just

push the battlelines even further back. They won't stop shouting until all the heretics are dead.

[killbotfactory]

140. Then they'll target non-christians

Because this is a Judeo-Christian country and the constitution was lifted directly from the Bible, don't you know. Freedom of religion means you can choose which way you want to worship the God of Abraham... unless you're a filthy muslim.

[blindpig]

141. methinks these assholes are overreaching

hubris, hubris, hubris! They are taking full credit for the election and they think they own bu$h. Good! Let them run with this puppy, right off a cliff! And if fate is so cruel and stupid as to let them prevail then we know for sure that it's time to bail.

Blindpig, living in sin and childfree for 20+ years. Fuck those people.

[fishwax]

144. Banning birth control has long been part of their agenda

and this is just a philosophical tremor away from that.

I've never understood why people think they'll stop at preventing/rolling back gay rights. Why would they stop there? They had bogeymen long before that came an issue, and I don't think they'll be satisfied until they've rolled the clock back a loooooong way.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

146. OMFG!!!! "modern Americans think that sex totally free from constraint or

conception is their right."

It's now official. We are seeing a coup.

[robertpaulsen]

147. Can I feed R. Albert Mohler Jr. to the lions?

I'm halfway serious. I'm just afraid if he was crucified, he would get a hard-on hanging naked on a cross. As a married man, childless by choice, I find this blaspheming creep more disgusting than Reed, Robertson or Wildmon.

[AlFrankenFan]

152. You can't force me to have children in marriage!

:grr::grr:

I know I'm only 14 but holy shit! What if you'd be an irresponsible parent, or like me, hate children? God damn!