Eight is enough

View
links

Submitted by James Protzman on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 10:17am.

I'm intrigued by large families. In having raised only two kids, I know I've missed something. My parents raised three children. My brother and his wife, four. Sarah Palin, five. Leslie Fields, six.

For the Befuddled

Given the rise of the Childfree and One Child Only movements and my nearly weekly public encounters, I feel moved to post a reply—a moral, biblical, and political defense of the larger family, or at least some insights for those who are genuinely befuddled or even fearful. I can do this because I understand the concern and befuddlement. It took ten years of marriage before I ventured nervously into motherhood. Before that, high on education and world travel, I scanned the sidewalks and the public horizon searching for news and interest, visually bleeping over mothers with baby backpacks pushing strollers. Either I did not see mothers with children at all, or, if I did, I would count the children out of curiosity; as the numbers climbed, my estimation of the mothers usually sank. I had an impressive list of prejudices and stereotypes, many of which I now see on the Childfree websites.

In giving this defense of why people have children, or why they have 2 or 6 or 16, I don't want to go overboard. In Reclaiming the Body: Christians and the Faithful Use of Modern Medicine, authors Brian Volck and Joel Shuman confront the question in a chapter entitled, "What Are Children For?" After tracing the effect of an increasingly intrusive medical technology that reduces conception and the building of a family to a consumer choice, they warn, too, against a nearly opposite trend—the temptation to worship children and life as uniquely sacred. "Only God, who gives each of us life, is sacred. Christians must therefore respect life, but not worship it."In giving this defense of why people have children, or why they have 2 or 6 or 16, I don't want to go overboard. In Reclaiming the Body: Christians and the Faithful Use of Modern Medicine, authors Brian Volck and Joel Shuman confront the question in a chapter entitled, "What Are Children For?"

The question ... may be best answered personally, as it is lived out in my own family, not anyone else's. I must begin with an essential piece of information: Most families are larger than intended. The National Institutes of Health says that 60 percent of pregnancies in the U.S. are "mistimed, unplanned, or unwanted altogether." It was not my plan to have six children—it was God's. Though the last pregnancies were difficult, life was the only possible choice. What else could I say but, like Mary, Yes, I am your servant.

I expect this will become a topic of considerable interest over the next two months. I have it on good authority that God told John McCain to pick Sarah Palin to ride shotgun on the way to the White House, just in case He decides John's time is up.

James Protzman's blog
Login or register to post comments

I"m one of five children

Submitted by Linda on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 10:34am.

I love all my siblings - and loved growing up in a big family. Fortunately, my father could afford to support all of us.

I chose to have one child - and I loved that!

Choice. It's a good thing. :)

Overpopulation

Submitted by NCDem Amy on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 10:53am.

There is the overpopulation argument of course but generally, what I see is that the Christian dogma of "be fruitful and multiply" dominates Americans' beliefs on this issue. Thus, it's still very socially acceptable to bear many children.

I chose to have one and adopt one. Countless children in this world need homes and parents. It would be good to see more parents take in a child rather than having five, six of their own.

NCDem Amy on YouTube

ZPG

Submitted by James Protzman on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 12:04pm.

Early in my political activism, I was deep into population issues. It's highly charged stuff, especially when you go global. Poor agrarian cultures. Chinese family planning. Social security funding. Aging workforces. You name it, population is a fundamental piece of the puzzle.

_____________________________________

Jesus Swept, so you can come clean.

Excellent points

Submitted by NCDem Amy on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 12:12pm.

Highly charged indeed. With religious beliefs, attempting to put controls on how many children people in poverty have in the mix, it can get very sticky.

But, I think any rational mind can agree that providing better access to birth control here and around the globe is critical. Family planning is key.

Not to mention, providing condoms also prevents the spread of AIDS. Yet another reason why this VP choice is dangerous.

Move On sent out an email today, that offered a good summary on McCain's dangerous choice:

Yesterday was John McCain's 72nd birthday. If elected, he'd be the oldest president ever inaugurated. And after months of slamming Barack Obama for "inexperience," here's who John McCain has chosen to be one heartbeat away from the presidency: a right-wing religious conservative with no foreign policy experience, who until recently was mayor of a town of 9,000 people.

Huh?

Who is Sarah Palin? Here's some basic background:

She was elected Alaska's governor a little over a year and a half ago. Her previous office was mayor of Wasilla, a small town outside Anchorage. She has no foreign policy experience.1

Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.2

She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000. 3

Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.4

She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.5

She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species—she was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.6
How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.7
This is information the American people need to see. Please take a moment to forward this email to your friends and family.

We also asked Alaska MoveOn members what the rest of us should know about their governor. The response was striking. Here's a sample:

She is really just a mayor from a small town outside Anchorage who has been a governor for only 1.5 years, and has ZERO national and international experience. I shudder to think that she could be the person taking that 3AM call on the White House hotline, and the one who could potentially be charged with leading the US in the volatile international scene that exists today. —Rose M., Fairbanks, AK

She is VERY, VERY conservative, and far from perfect. She's a hunter and fisherwoman, but votes against the environment again and again. She ran on ethics reform, but is currently under investigation for several charges involving hiring and firing of state officials. She has NO experience beyond Alaska. —Christine B., Denali Park, AK

As an Alaskan and a feminist, I am beyond words at this announcement. Palin is not a feminist, and she is not the reformer she claims to be. —Karen L., Anchorage, AK

Alaskans, collectively, are just as stunned as the rest of the nation. She is doing well running our State, but is totally inexperienced on the national level, and very much unequipped to run the nation, if it came to that. She is as far right as one can get, which has already been communicated on the news. In our office of thirty employees (dems, republicans, and nonpartisans), not one person feels she is ready for the V.P. position.—Sherry C., Anchorage, AK

She's vehemently anti-choice and doesn't care about protecting our natural resources, even though she has worked as a fisherman. McCain chose her to pick up the Hillary voters, but Palin is no Hillary. —Marina L., Juneau, AK

I think she's far too inexperienced to be in this position. I'm all for a woman in the White House, but not one who hasn't done anything to deserve it. There are far many other women who have worked their way up and have much more experience that would have been better choices. This is a patronizing decision on John McCain's part- and insulting to females everywhere that he would assume he'll get our vote by putting "A Woman" in that position.—Jennifer M., Anchorage, AK

So Governor Palin is a staunch anti-choice religious conservative. She's a global warming denier who shares John McCain's commitment to Big Oil. And she's dramatically inexperienced.

In picking Sarah Palin, John McCain has made the religious right very happy. And he's made a very dangerous decision for our country.

In the next few days, many Americans will be wondering what McCain's vice-presidential choice means. Please pass this information along to your friends and family.

NCDem Amy on YouTube

My dad 13 siblings and my mom 7 siblings

Submitted by C. Dancy II - TPA on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 9:52pm.

It was my dad and 6 more boys, 6 sisters total 13. It was my mother and 4 sisters and 2 brothers total of 7. Both families grew up on farms and never had to go on welfare because they worked. All of the children on both sides of my family went on to get real jobs and none of them ever got on welfare. I can't think of any of their children going on welfare.

I have 3 children and I used to want more however it is too expensive and the world has changed since the time I was growing up.

"I swore never to be silent whenever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." - Elie Weisel

The perfect number of kids for my husband and me

Submitted by angry grrl on Mon, 09/01/2008 - 10:11am.

... is zero. I have known since an early age that I didn't want kids, and that feeling has never wavered. At 40 years old, I have to assume that I was never given a biological clock; any maternal feelings I may have are geared solely toward my sister's two delightful offspring. So we are choosing to be, and remain, childfree.

Here's a "nice" article all about how my husband and I and our childfree peers are amoral libertines:

The church should insist that the biblical formula calls for adulthood to mean marriage and marriage to mean children. This reminds us of our responsibility to raise boys to be husbands and fathers and girls to be wives and mothers. God's glory is seen in this, for the family is a critical arena where the glory of God is either displayed or denied. It is just as simple as that. The church must help this society regain its sanity on the gift of children. Willful barrenness and chosen childlessness must be named as moral rebellion.

Daddy always said I was a rebel. ;)

My husband and I don't feel that we're missing out on anything -- I'm not "denying" him children, for example. We had "the talk" early in our relationship, and if it turned out that he felt as strongly about having kids as I felt about not having them, well, we wouldn't be celebrating our ninth wedding anniversary later this week, that's for sure.

The only unintended expansion of our family was when we had to adopt my grandma's cat when she couldn't take him with her to the assisted living home. We are careful with our use of birth control, but if the unthinkable happens, we are committed to remaining childfree.