What do you think?

[.Hecuba.]

Okay, hi! I'm new. I was going to be called Hecate, but...Yeah anyway...
(I didn't think being called "queen of the greek underworld" was a good idea here teehee )

So, I recently discovered this Quiverfull movement by watching Secret Lives Of Women on WE, and it got me to think....

Don't you think that if every christian family decided to have like 12 or 14 children that it would put major stress on the environment?
Overpopulation is already a problem, but adding to it and hyperpopulating with families of over 10 or so?

I'm sorry if it sounds somewhat insensitive, I really didn't mean it to be, but I suppose theres no other way of saying it.
Anyway, I'd really like to hear what you guys have to say.

 

[Sabertooth]

That is certainly a commonly stated objection among those who oppose QF, but it needs to be asked in a different forum because this is a QF support forum, not for debate.

 

[b.hopeful]

Has it occurred to anyone that asking about the thought process and issues surrounding QF is NOT the same as being opposed to QF? Or that within the QF movement there are various feelings about what it means and one's mans debate is another man's thought process?

 

[b.hopeful]

Oh...to answer the OP...I think that there are many many things we can do and sacrifices we can make to be better stewards of the environment. Before we start picking on people with larger than the norm families, we should look at ourselves and look at the far bigger abusers.

We have a friend from our pre-kid years that has made statements about how it's irresponsible to have more than 2 kids(2 kids to replace you and your spouse). They are personally having none because the earth is too full. Yes...very "noble", ahem. But yet he drives a rather large gas guzzler and he's usually alone.(of course he needs it for camping and the dog) The eat convenience food more frequently because it's just the two of them and they both work long hours. They travel a lot. They have every latest toy and gadget. They both eat meat. I point out that we drove the smallest car possible...always...and only consented to a minivan when we had 5 children(fosters). I buy bulk...I recycle everything...we reuse things...our old clothes become rag rugs, dog bedding or reuseable shopping bags. We fix before we replace, we try to buy used when we need to replace something...we aren't flying in planes very often...we are a vegetarian household. I use natural cleaners. Many large families(I don't necessarily include myself in that title) are aware of their footprint and out of good stewardship and necessity they do all they can to offset that. I dare say the average self absorbed singleton or dink(dual income,no kids) is a greater environmental strain. I don't find it a valid argument at all.

 

[Sabertooth]

Has it occurred to anyone that asking about the thought process and issues surrounding QF is NOT the same as being opposed to QF? Or that within the QF movement there are various feelings about what it means and one's mans debate is another man's thought process?

The OP's premise of overpopulation is in direct contention with QF, casting doubt on its validity. That is why it belongs in a debate-oriented forum, not here. QF rejects the concept of human overpopulation. Trying to make it a foregone conclusion is [debatin'] words... (As I'm sure you know.)

 

[Sabertooth]

Hecuba,

If you are honestly looking for these answers, post this question at the Christian Apologetics forum and PM me when it is posted.

 

[jgonz]

Just being open to being QF doesn't mean that the couple will have a huge family. My cousin is an example of that: She & her DH never ever used any form of birth control, believing that God was telling them not to. They only ever had 3 children. The pastor of a church DH and I used to attend and his wife had similar circumstances~ although they Never had any children. So it's not a forgone conclusion that being QF is going to result in a huge family.

 

[twob4me]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~MOD HAT ON!!!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This thread is being moved to Ethics & Morality as the threads intentions is to discuss why to have less children and not more which is not the intention of the Quiverfulls forum.

Report documentation of the move



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~MOD HAT OFF!!!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[chingchang]

Okay, hi! I'm new. I was going to be called Hecate, but...Yeah anyway...
(I didn't think being called "queen of the greek underworld" was a good idea here teehee )

So, I recently discovered this Quiverfull movement by watching Secret Lives Of Women on WE, and it got me to think....

Don't you think that if every christian family decided to have like 12 or 14 children that it would put major stress on the environment?
Overpopulation is already a problem, but adding to it and hyperpopulating with families of over 10 or so?

I'm sorry if it sounds somewhat insensitive, I really didn't mean it to be, but I suppose theres no other way of saying it.
Anyway, I'd really like to hear what you guys have to say.

In the current world system...yes it would put more stress on the environment due to our consumerism. However...what if all of those "Christian" families decided to live on self-sustaining farms like back-in-the-day? That would destress (relatively) the environment.

CC

 

[Sabertooth]

...

Don't you think that if every christian family decided to have like 12 or 14 children that it would put major stress on the environment?
Overpopulation is already a problem, but adding to it and hyperpopulating with families of over 10 or so...?

From a Biblical perspective, particularly QF, human overpopulation is an impossibility. If God intentionally handcrafts each and every human individual, as implied in Ps. 139:13-16, the notion that He would intentionally create too many is an unreconcilable dilemma. Can one mismanage their children? Yes. Can one mismanage a nation's resources? Yes, but THAT is where the correction needs to occur (in the QF point of view).

 

[Autumnleaf]

No, it teaches families to do more with less and not expect to have everything. That is what having many children does. They learn to be less selfish.

A consequence is less demand for material objects.

Another thing. As long as the government runs a ponzi scheme for retirement there will never be a serious effort to reduce population because population is the tax base which supports the ponzi scheme.

 

[Sabertooth]

No, it teaches families to do more with less and not expect to have everything. That is what having many children does. They learn to be less selfish.

A consequence is less demand for material objects...

It certainly teaches that (if God gives a larger than usual family), but are you proposing that God would make too many people, if we didn't somehow keep Him in check...?

 

[Autumnleaf]

It certainly teaches that (if God gives a larger than usual family), but are you proposing that God would make too many people, if we didn't somehow keep Him in check...?

God only provides what is necessary and needed. People who lack faith in both humanity and God would propose what you suggest.

 

[Sabertooth]

God only provides what is necessary and needed. People who lack faith in both humanity and God would propose what you suggest.

I agree (I think). That is why I said human overpopulation is a myth. Given that Man is fallen, I'm not sure how much faith you can put in humanity, though.

 

[jwu]

God only provides what is necessary and needed. People who lack faith in both humanity and God would propose what you suggest.

Then how come that millions of people starve every year?

 

[jwu]

Just being open to being QF doesn't mean that the couple will have a huge family. My cousin is an example of that: She & her DH never ever used any form of birth control, believing that God was telling them not to. They only ever had 3 children. The pastor of a church DH and I used to attend and his wife had similar circumstances~ although they Never had any children. So it's not a forgone conclusion that being QF is going to result in a huge family.

Well, there quite certainly is not a 100% correlaton between the two - but it is much more likely to result in a huge family than not, isn't it?

 

[Sabertooth]

Then how come that millions of people starve every year?

Mismanagement of resources, ultimately. Some is deliberate oppression. Charitable organizations have sent some relief only to have it intercepted (and withheld) by the government in question. God still raises people up in those settings.

 

[jwu]

Mismanagement of resources, ultimately. Some is deliberate oppression. Charitable organizations have sent some relief only to have it intercepted (and withheld) by the government in question.

Why isn't God preventing that mismanagement of resources then? And isn't there some absolute upper limit set by the availability of resources even when they are perfectly managed?

God still raises people up in those settings.

In what way?

 

[Sarniaroses]

God only provides what is necessary and needed. People who lack faith in both humanity and God would propose what you suggest.

He isn't doing a very good job of it, and should hand over to someone who could do it better!

 

[Autumnleaf]

God only provides what is necessary and needed. People who lack faith in both humanity and God would propose what you suggest.

He isn't doing a very good job of it, and should hand over to someone who could do it better!

People can't have free will without having to live with the consequences of their actions.