The DINK Delusion: Why the Childless Dream Is a Dead End

This has been developing for years. It began with feminism and though a rightful issue that women were being descriminated against. Like most world ideologies it evolves into an all encompassing worldview in how humans and the world is ordered.

This has coincided with the gradual rejection of God and the natural laws order.

So it is understandable that once God is rejected that a new moral and worldview meaning will fill the void. A human made one but every bit a religious type belief.

In some ways the worlds idea of what is the key to a happy and a good life is self destructive. Because its not about what is best but who is best. So long as its not God and Christs truth.

Which is rejecting what is the true way to the best life as Christ said He was the way, truth and life that we all seek.

It depends on how the children are brought up.

And, by the way, there are couples who do not have children and they are devoted to the Lord. Among other possibilitities, I suppose, the couple could have professions essential to supporting ministry and for the infrastructure of a society, and in order to fulfill their labor they would not be able to give ample time and attention to their children. And so they do the responsible thing.

Meanwhile, there are parents who do not give ample time and attention to their children. And they leave their kids in the hands of people who are out to make money caring for kids. And so, such children can grow up to not have feeling for caring for an unborn child and born children > their parents have not inspired them.

So - - in case a couple is self-serving . . . either by having children they hope to use in their lives, or by not having children . . . whether they do or don't have children is not the main concern. But how they got to where they are is the concern > how is it that they have the character to be self-serving?

The number of children is not the truly meaningful measure, then, but what matters is the quality of people's character.

We have predators in pulpits . . . by the way. Often enough, those psychopaths were brought up in households having the religion in which the predator became a pulpit person. The person grew up learning the acting of that religion's culture!! Those parents who brought up predators possibly help to produce those people, with the help of copy-cat culture which a predator could learn to use as camouflage.

So we need, then, to deal with the quality of character of the children who are brought up.

By the way, also > if whole groups can ordain and trust a predator . . . how is it that they can't tell the difference between a person of such Satanic stuff, versus a person who ministers in God's own love?? I will offer > Satan is not the same as Jesus!! So, if people can bring up predators, plus not be able to tell the difference . . . this needs attention.

Because Jesus Christ's sheep hear His voice. Jesus makes His sheep able to tell the difference > John 10:1-30, Philippians 1:9, Hebrews 4:15. But I have been told that various religious groups have been discovering that predators have made it through their seminaries and past ones responsible to evaluate them, and into pulpits. To me, this means a certain number of people can not tell the difference between a person of God's love and someone who is Satanic.

And how does the foolery work? I will offer > in selfish and worldly culture, people have their "you can use me" act that they put on with each other > if you talk smart, this shows you are smart enough to understand what someone else wants; and act charming so others will believe you will be nice about doing what they want. And this can work in order to get into the pulpits of some number of churches > put on the talk show that people are looking for, and in you can go.

**Self-congratulating** groups are looking for ones who talk their talk and put on their show. So, if you can put on the theological intellectual gymnastics demonstration that they are looking for . . . this can tweak their pride very well.

Some number of people are evaluating whom they marry and whom they trust to be pastors, going by their outward acting. But Jesus is clear >

"'Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.'" (John 7:24)

Make sure with God. Our Father personally guides us while we obey how He takes care of us. He will guide us according to what He knows is really true about people.

And children can tell. They see how their parents are religious but it isn't working for them. They can see how there is acting. And this does not inspire children to want to get married and to bring up children. Instead, a number of kids gang with peers and they go after different sorts of pleasures and excitement. They are with others like themselves, not with mature adults who help to show them how to relate in love. And so they do not grow up appreciating marriage and tenderly cherishing unborn children and appreciating being trusted with children whom they can help to bring up.

I note how there is a lot of leaving kids with other kids . . . so they can learn how to relate with each other. But they do not spend at least as much time sharing with mature role models who are examples of how to relate in a close relationship. And so they are inspired by each other, and they do not grow up hearing the voice and feeding on the example of mature parenting. And then parents wonder why their kids don't listen to them > their kids have been hearing other voices!!

> the voices of TV and smart phones and the voices of musicians who have problems, often enough, and who are not fit to be voices in anyone's life . . . the voices of peers . . .

A child can bond with the one who gives the child attention; that person's voice can be the one that gets heard. However, I would say . . . be prayerful and humble about if you really are ready to be someone a child is hearing. God does use example, also, and prayer. Example can speak louder than words.

"nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock." (1 Peter 5:3)

Only God is able to change our character so we really are tuned to His voice. And with Him we can discover what to do.

linux.poet said:

A reduction in the human population is nothing to cry over.

Click to expand...

The issue isn't a reduction in the human population so much as the shift toward self-centered living and a loss of understanding of marriage and family life. If people were just choosing to remain single, there wouldn't be an issue. The fact that most people don't bat an eye at unmarried couples living together and see children as a tragic burden instead of a blessing speaks to serious moral decay.

I hadn't come across the acronym "DINK" before. I looked it up on Google, and apparently it means "Double (or Dual) Income, No Kids." I thought I'd post that in case others were puzzled by it, as I was.

linux.poet said:

I can't afford to have children, which is the case for many couples today. The selfishness spoken of here is outdated, replaced by want and poverty. The economy cannot afford to house and support the current population comfortably.

Click to expand...

The median household income for DINKs is $193,900. Let's not pretend that the overwhelming majority of these couples couldn't afford to have even one child.

David Lamb said:

I hadn't come across the acronym "DINK" before. I looked it up on Google, and apparently it means "Double (or Dual) Income, No Kids." I thought I'd post that in case others were puzzled by it, as I was.

Click to expand...

We had ten living children, and now have eleven grandchildren.

We refer to ourselves as SILKs: