Christian Couple Kept Their 13 Children ‘Starving’ and Shackled in Chains Inside House of Horror, Police Say

Christian Couple Kept Their 13 Children ‘Starving’ and Shackled in Chains Inside House of Horror, Police Say

You can see once more how The Nuclear Family, Parenthood, and Marriage does not save society or make things safer for children.

I’m conservative, but a lot of other conservatives (both Christian and secular) will try to argue that society has fallen apart because of feminism or due to liberals and they further suggest that society  would not be such a cess pool only if every one would marry by the age of 25 and have ten kids apiece and become a Christian.

This couple being married, having kids, and reading the Bible, being into traditional gender roles and being Christian did not make them better people, nor did it make our culture a better place.

I’m sure there are probably some atheist parents out there who treat their kids better than this Christian couple treated their kids.

I fail to see how liberalism or secular feminism is to blame for this Christian couple shackling their kids to beds for years and refusing to feed them.

(Link):  Christian Couple Kept Their 13 Children ‘Starving’ and Shackled in Chains Inside House of Horror, Police Say

Jan 16, 2018

The home of a California couple known in their community as a good Christian family was revealed to be a house of horror Sunday morning when local police rescued their 13 children, some of whom were found “shackled to their beds with chains and padlocks in dark and foul-smelling surroundings.”

Continue reading “Christian Couple Kept Their 13 Children ‘Starving’ and Shackled in Chains Inside House of Horror, Police Say”

Advertisements

Dad from TLC’s Conservative Christian ‘Willis Family’ TV Series Arrested for Child Rape

Dad from TLC’s Conservative Christian ‘Willis Family’ TV Series Arrested for Child Rape

The guy in this story, Willis, is a married father who was on a “family values” type TV show, where he was passing himself off as being a good, Christian guy. He has been arrested for having raped a child years ago.

As someone who can be pretty critical of lots of Christians and “family values” rhetoric, I do think I should periodically mention when blogging about these news stories I do realize that not all Christians (or people who have traditional values) are scum bags.

However, these sorts of stories are common enough – stories about guys who claim to be Christ-followers or who are big advocates of “Family Values” who do end up being child molesters or wife beaters – that maybe Christians who are heavily vested in the culture wars might want to take a step back.

I will also remind readers how this story about a married man who is father to numerous biological children who raped a person shows that the Christian propaganda and stereotype that being married and a parent is necessary to being a good, godly, mature, or ethical person is a bunch of nonsense.

(Link):  Father-of-12 Toby Willis from TLC’s The Willis Family is charged with raping an underage girl after attempting to flee from police

(Link):  Dad from TLC’s Conservative Christian ‘Willis Family’ TV Series Arrested for Child Rape by D. Ferguson

Excerpts:

Toby Willis — patriarch of the conservative Christian family featured on TLC’s reality show The Willis Family — has been arrested and charged with the rape of an underage girl.

(Link): The New York Daily News reported Saturday that Toby Willis, 46, was arrested and charged by the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI) for raping an underage girl 12 years ago.

TBI agents carried out a days-long investigation of the charges against Willis, who is the father of 12 children, all of whose names begin with the letter J. The Duggar-like musical family were the stars of their own reality show about traveling the country spreading the Christian gospel and performing country music. However, due to poor ratings, TLC canceled the show in April.

Willis was apprehended in Kentucky where he fled in an attempt to evade arrest. He will be extradited to Tennessee’s Cheatham County Jail, where he will be held without bond.

Willis and his wife Brenda — like Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar — are (Link) Quiverfull parents, adherents to a Christian dominionist sect that encourages married couples to produce as many offspring as possible in order to raise an army of believers.

Continue reading “Dad from TLC’s Conservative Christian ‘Willis Family’ TV Series Arrested for Child Rape”

Nobody Cares About Your Stick Figure Nuclear Traditional Family

Nobody Cares About Your Stick Figure Nuclear Traditional Family

Dinosaur Eats Stick Figure Family
Dinosaur Eats Stick Figure Family
Nobody Cares About Your Stick Figure Family
Nobody Cares About Your Stick Figure Family
Nobody Cares About Your Stick Figure Family
Nobody Cares About Your Stick Figure Family

Nobody Cares About Your Stick Figure Family
Nobody Cares About Your Stick Figure Family

———————-
Related posts:

(Link): 12 Classic Love Scenes Improved By A Chipotle Burrito

(Link): Church Postcards That Would Keep Me Away From Church (Re Marriage and Family Vs Singles and Childless / Childfree )

(Link): Christian Tingle – The Christian dating site for those saving hand-holding for marriage (parody)

(Link): Ignatius the Ultimate Youth Pastor & Teaching Christian Singles About Sex (parody – video)

(Link): Video: Dating Advice for Single Christian Guys (satire)

(Link): Westboro Mingle Dating Site (video – parody)

(Link): Singles Humor – World of Warcraft and More

(Link): Husband’s celibacy gift disrupts marriage (Satire / Humor)

(Link): Weird Ass Farmer’s Dating Site Commercial

(Link): Funny Photos for Christian Singles Never Married – Humor / Funny (from Dec 2012)

(Link): Singles Humor (from July 2013)

(Link): Dating Jesus / Oh No I’m Single! (videos) – for single unmarried Christians (videos)

(Link): Christian couple maintains abstinence through first two years of marriage (Satire)

(Link): Why all the articles about being Child Free? On Being Childfree or Childless – as a Conservative / Right Wing / Christian

(Link): Do You Rate Your Family Too High? (Christians Who Idolize the Family) (article)

(Link): The Isolating Power of Family-Centered Language (How churches exclude singles and the childless) by E A Dause

(Link): How to Poo on a Date wins odd book title prize

(Link): Chinese Singles Buy Movie Tickets So Couples Can’t Sit Together on Valentine’s Day

(Link): Single Woman Photographer Opposes Societal Marital Pressure with Mannequin Family

(Link): Weird Dating / Marriage Advice by Joel Osteen

(Link): Illustrated Blog About Lonely Bachelor Meals – Blog by Some Single Guy

(Link): This Unsuspecting Model Unknowingly Became the Face of Sex With ‘Old, Obese Men’

(Link): London firefighters: Don’t put your penis in a toaster

Duggar Family Visits Fertility Specialist To Have Another Baby

Duggar Family Visits Fertility Specialist To Have Another Baby

The mind boggles. I do believe this is nuclear family and baby worship taken to an insane degree.

The Duggars, if I remember correctly, are part of the “Quiverfull” movement. They already have 19, or 20 kids.

(Link): Duggars visit fertility doctor to explore having 20th kid

(Link): ‘Am I ready to catch another baby?’ Mother-of-19 Michelle Duggar visits ‘high-risk’ fertility doctor in hopes of having MORE children aged 47

    Her chances of conceiving are less than five per cent and her odds of having a child with down syndrome are ‘one in four or five’

    This marks the longest time in 27 years that Mrs Duggar has not been pregnant

    The strictly Christian family does not believe in birth control
    By ANNABEL FENWICK ELLIOTT

    PUBLISHED: 10:34 EST, 20 May 2014 | UPDATED: 12:07 EST, 20 May 2014

    Michelle and Jim Bob Duggar, parents to 19 children already, have visited a fertility doctor in a bid to see whether they are ‘ready’ for another baby.

    ‘We would love more children if God saw fit to give us more, I just want to make sure that I am ready to catch a baby if that would happen’, explains Mrs Duggar, 47, star of 19 Kids and Counting, in a clip on Today.com from tonight’s episode of the TLC show.

    ‘My goal is to find out where I am in my life, hormonally speaking,’ she says of visiting Dr Paul Wendel, an OB-GYN specializing in high-risk pregnancies.

    Michelle and Jim Bob Duggar, parents to 19 children already, have visited a fertility doctor in a bid to see whether they are ‘ready’ for another baby.

    ‘We would love more children if God saw fit to give us more, I just want to make sure that I am ready to catch a baby if that would happen’, explains Mrs Duggar, 47, star of 19 Kids and Counting, in a clip on Today.com from tonight’s episode of the TLC show.

    ‘My goal is to find out where I am in my life, hormonally speaking,’ she says of visiting Dr Paul Wendel, an OB-GYN specializing in high-risk pregnancies.

    Michelle and Jim Bob Duggar, parents to 19 children already, have visited a fertility doctor in a bid to see whether they are ‘ready’ for another baby.

    ‘We would love more children if God saw fit to give us more, I just want to make sure that I am ready to catch a baby if that would happen’, explains Mrs Duggar, 47, star of 19 Kids and Counting, in a clip on Today.com from tonight’s episode of the TLC show.

    ‘My goal is to find out where I am in my life, hormonally speaking,’ she says of visiting Dr Paul Wendel, an OB-GYN specializing in high-risk pregnancies.

—————–
Related posts:

(Link): Population Decline and Bay-bee Obsession – Patriarchy, Quiverfull, Traditional Family, Christian Gender Complementarian Nuts

(Link): Otherhood – An overlooked demographic – the Childless and Childfree Women and Singles Especially Women Who Had Hoped to Marry and Have Kids But Never Met Mr. Right (links)

(Link): Parenthood Does Not Make People More Loving Mature Godly Ethical Caring or Responsible (One Stop Thread)

(Link): Loving the child-free people in your church by S. Burden

(Link): Study: Couples Without Children Have Happier Marriages / Study: Having Kids Ruins Your Life

(Link): Widows and Childless and Childfree Have Better Well Being Than Married Couples and Parents says new study

(Link): Cultural Discrimination Against Childless and Childfree Women – and link to an editorial by a Childless Woman

(Link): Study: Couples Without Children Have Happier Marriages / Study: Having Kids Ruins Your Life

(Link): Christian Patriarchy Group: God Demands You Marry and Have Babies to Defeat Paganism and Satan. Singles and the Childless Worthless (in this worldview).

(Link): Lies The Church Tells Single Women (by Sue Bohlin)

(Link): The Isolating Power of Family-Centered Language (How churches exclude singles and the childless) by E A Dause

(Link): Never Married Christians Over Age 35 who are childless Are More Ignored Than Divorced or Infertile People or Single Parents

(Link): If the Family Is Central, Christ Isn’t

(Link): Misapplication of Biblical Verses About Fertility (also mentions early marriage) – a paper by J. McKeown

(Link): Christian Patriarchy Group: God Demands You Marry and Have Babies to Defeat Paganism and Satan. Singles and the Childless Worthless (in this worldview).

(Link): Married Preacher, Father of Eight Kids (and promoter of “Family Values” and Leader of wacko Quiverfull- and- Patriarchy type groups that promotes idolatry of “the family” and Marriage and of Having Lots of Children), Used Nanny as Sex Object – update on Phillips story

(Link): The Irrelevancy To Single or Childless or Childfree Christian Women of Biblical Gender Complementarian Roles / Biblical Womanhood Teachings

Kook Christian Groups / Individuals and Their Nutty Beliefs on Pro Creation and What Constitutes Being Unequally Yoked

Kook Christian Groups/Individuals and Their Nutty Beliefs on ProCreation and What Constitutes Being Unequally Yoked

Here is another post or two with more quotes by people who claim to be Christian but who teach the thoroughly un-biblical view that God’s kingdom is to be spread by married couples pro-creating (making babies).

The Bible in fact teaches that the kingdom is to be spread and enlarged by Christians- whether married, single, divorced, with children or childless – telling the un-saved about Jesus Christ, not by marrying and having children.

As to this first link. I tend to lump all these categories together myself – patriarchy, quiverfull, complementarianism – because to me, they are all just a bunch of men teaching that men should control females.

The author of this piece below might kind of disagree with me, because he (or she?) seems very keen on people following very specific definitions of each term.

I do not agree with some of the sharp criticisms of this piece. I for one don’t see the problem with someone proclaiming that “Christian patriarchy is two steps away from making women wear a burka.”

Because you know what? It is. Some of the rhetoric and reasoning is very similar in “Christian modesty ” teachings as it is in Islamic teaching on how they feel women should cover their bodies and faces.

I actually think that comment is pretty dang accurate, in that many of these groups do advocate “modesty” teaching, which frowns on Christian women showing so much as an ankle.

Both groups – Muslims and pro-modesty Christians – tell women that they should cover their bodies because men are incapable of controlling their sexual urges and that men get instantly turned on beyond their control at the site of an attractive female. So, responsibility is placed upon women in both schools of thought to “dress modestly.”

Regardless of those issues, note the quote below about how this person believes that Christian women should “out breed” their opponents:

From the page, (Link): WHAT “CHRISTIAN PATRIARCHY” IS NOT , by R.L. Stollar

      Quiverfull is, more or less, a specifically Christian form of natalism — the idea of employing procreation as a tool of sociopolitical dominion and categorizing birth control as rebellion against God.

Michael Pearl gave us a perfect embodiment of Quiverfull’s dominionist streak, when (Link): he recently stated,

“If you can’t out-vote them today, out-breed them for tomorrow.”

That is Quiverfull (albeit a distilled, intense version of it).

… Yes, there are many advocates of Christian Patriarchy who are Quiverfull.

And by all means, speak out against the dehumanizing and toxic idea that your children are your weapons, and a woman’s vagina is a weapons-building factory.

But remember these are distinct, especially considering there are many advocates of Christian Patriarchy who are not Quiverfull.

Take Doug Wilson, for example.

Doug Wilson is considered one of the pillars of Christian Patriarchy but believes birth control can be useful to ensure you’re actually taking care of your current children. That’s outright heresy to the Quiverfull crowd.

From this site:
(Link): Not On Your Side, Debi

Excerpts (emphasis added by me):

    …. Several of the Pearl children’s spouses were raised in Gothard’s ATI program. (I say “spouses”, but Michael Pearl made it clear years ago that his children do not need any such thing as marriage licenses. A ceremony and their parents’ blessing is apparently good enough.*)

… Besides being given to racist and homophobic remarks, the Pearls are somewhat obsessed with sex. It gives Michael [Pearl] hope to envision homeschoolers “outbreeding” progressives.

He counsels the wife of an angry man to “make love” to improve her husband’s mood.

Debi often suggests that being sexually available is a wife’s primary responsibility.

Michael even wrote a book on erotic pleasure for fundamentalist Christian couples.

I can’t remember where I saw it – if on one of the pages above, but some page I read earlier today referenced quotes by Debi Pearl about being “equally yoked.”

Perhaps these comments can be found on her and her husband’s site, No Greater Joy, I am not sure.

Someone on another site quoted Pearl as having said that if you are a Christian, and you marry another Christian in a state that permits homosexual marriage, that your marriage – yes YOUR marriage to another Christian – is “unequally yoked.”

The argument seems to be that if you, a Christian, marry an opposite gender to yourself Christian in a state that also has legalized homosexual marriage, that a marriage performed in such a state taints yours, or makes yours invalid.

To put it yet another way (according to the Pearls): your marriage to another Christian is “unequally yoked” all because your next door neighbors, Fred and Stan the homosexual couple, are legally married by the same state too.

Please let that sink in and roll around in your brain for several moments: two Christians, one a man, one a woman, married to each other in a state where homosexual marriage is legal are said by the Pearls to be “unequally yoked”.

I’ve thought on it for awhile and still cannot make sense of it. What nuts these people are.

I ventured on over to the Pearl NGJ (No Greater Joy) site and see they have a page for singles ((Link): NGJ: Singles), and with pages on advice on how to find a mate, LOL, no thanks, won’t take advice from crackpots like them. The Pearls advise in their books on parenting that parents should beat their infant children with pipes.

There is much more nuttiness by them, but I don’t want to make this a huge post about the Pearls and every crazy thing they’ve ever taught.

On the main page for NGJ Singles is this:

      PreparingToBeAHelpMeet.com
      Shalom (Pearl) Brand
    This is from the Preparing blog site. The girls are discussing Shalom’s article in the Sept/Oct 2012 NGJ magazine, “Where A

This page at NGJ Singles actually recommends that parents allow a brother to pick out husbands for their sisters:

(Link): NGJ site: Need a Spouse…ANYONE? By Debi Pearl

I’m in my 40s now and still not married.

My one brother is married to an atheist heroin addict. Yeah, I don’t think I’ll be going to my big brother for martial partner selection or input, thanks but no, Debi.

By the way, does it never occur to these Christian parents that their daughter may choose to stay single, a choice which God respects (see 1 Corinthians 7)?

Excerpt from Debi’s page:

    Scores of young men asked for Shalom [one of Debi’s daughters].

She was gentle, cute, hard-working, and always cheerful, in addition to being the most compliant girl you have ever met.

But before they ever made it to our door to talk to Daddy Mike, most of them were already discounted as possibilities. Gabe or Nathan had seen to that with their reports.

Big brothers were watching out for their sisters, especially the sweet one.

How skin crawling is that, for so many reasons.

I have said it before, and I will say it again, but some Christian views on gender roles – whether we are talking patriarchy, gender complementarianims, or using the term “biblical womanhood” – is nothing but CODEPENDENCY under religious terminology, and is, therefore, un-biblical.

Codependent women are sweet, gentle, shy, compliant, soft spoken – they have poor- to- no- boundaries. Codependents are afraid or reluctant to be assertive, say no to people, and express anger.

Note too, that these are the same exact characteristics that are held up by Christians as being marks of biblical womanhood, or desirable for a Christian man to look for in a Christian wife: sweet, shy, gentle, compliant, soft spoken, little- to- no- boundaries.

Further note in books by experts on spousal abuse the sorts of traits abusive men intentionally look for in a mate:
sweet, shy, gentle, compliant, soft spoken, little- to- no- boundaries.

Seeing a pattern yet?

Yeah, Debi Pearl is (and I find this sad and chilling) totally thrilled that her daughter is prime pickings for an abusive man.

More excerpts from the page (advice to older brothers with younger single sisters):

      Talk to your guy friends. Say something like this,
    “Hey, you looking for a bride? I got four sisters and would consider it a privilege for you to drop in and take your pick. My parents trust my judgment and I’m giving you high marks. Of course, my sisters are picky, and they have the last word, but I’ll throw in a good word for you with them, too.

Now, the oldest sister is kinda bossy, but she always gives in after a little persuasion. She’s the smartest. So if you think you would enjoy a little challenge but get a good mate for the extra effort…she’s your gal.

My next sister is not so cute, but she is the nicest of the bunch.

…So how about it…wanta check out the fam? I got four other guys coming Sunday for brunch, so you better hurry if you want the pick of the litter.”

That whole excerpt is so horrifying and sexist, I hardly know where to begin.

I would not want my brother approaching his male friends and blurting out, “So, you lookin’ for a bride?” My god, that would scare away every man on the planet.

Not that I object to friends and family setting me up with eligible guys my age, but what Pearl is suggesting sounds almost more like arranged marriage, where the woman is playing a very passive role.

Pearl also makes it sound like the brother is supposed to “market” the sister to men, as though she is not a human being, but a brand of shampoo, a car, or a tube of toothpaste.

She is kind of asking the brother to play the role of a pimp.

This remark: “My next sister is not so cute”

If your own mother is basically advising your brother to tell his pals you are ugly, that is pretty damn insensitive.

At any rate, here we see above yet more examples fringe, wacko groups, or persons, passing themselves off as Christian, but who are teaching some bizarre, un-biblical things about marriage, having children, and re-defining what “equally yoked” means (or has been traditionally understood by most Christians to mean).

It’s bad enough when Christians are telling Christian singles to only marry other Christian singles

    (there are not as many single adult Christian males as therer are females, so you are in effect asking single females to die alone and single)

but the Pearl family is basically telling Christian singles not to even marry another Christian single if they live in a state where homosexual marriage is permitted, as that would make their marriage “unequally yoked” (sorry I do not have a source for that, it is a quote someone pasted in at another blog without a link, I have no reason to believe he or she was lying about it).

I am really creeped out and appalled by these views of marrying, what constitutes being un-equally yoked, and pro-creation these groups are advocating. Their views are totally un-biblical. They have given themselves over to the worship of marriage, parenthood, and family.

Instead of worshipping the God of the Bible, they are worshipping their own peculiar ideas of culture, family, and marriage.

If Moses came down from the mountain today, he’d see most of the contemporary, American “Christian” people bowing down before a statue made of gold, of a figure of a man, woman, and child holding hands (a statue of “nuclear family”), with a “Focus on the Family” broadcast playing on a radio in the background, with a mountain of books with titles such as, “Ten Steps to a Great Marriage” and “How to Raise Godly Children.”
——————————————–
Related posts:

(Link): If the Family Is Central, Christ Isn’t

(Link): Hetero Couple Forced to Divorce Because They Say Homosexuals Are Ruining Their Marriage

(Link): Conservatives and Christians Fretting About U.S. Population Decline – We Must “Out-breed” Opponents Christian Host Says

(Link): Christian Stereotypes About Female Sexuality : All Unmarried Women Are Supposedly Hyper Sexed Harlots – But All Married Ones are Supposedly Frigid or Totally Uninterested in Sex

(Link): Christian Patriarchy Group: God Demands You Marry and Have Babies to Defeat Paganism and Satan. Singles and the Childless Worthless (in this worldview).

(Link): Gender Complementarian Advice to Single Women Who Desire Marriage Will Keep Them Single Forever / Re: Choosing A Spiritual Leader

(Link): Family as “The” Backbone of Society? – It’s Not In The Bible

(Link): Decent Secular Relationship Advice: How to Pick Your Life Partner

(Link): Being Unequally Yoked – should Christians marry Non Christians or only marry Christians

(Link): Married Female Christian Blogger Whose Mate Hunting Criteria is Guaranteed to Keep Marriage Minded Single Christian Men Single Perpetually

(Link): On Christians Marrying Non Christians -and- Unrealistic, Too Rigid Spouse Selection Lists by Christians

(Link): Are Fundamentalists Aiming to Out-Breed Secular America?

(Link): Misapplication of Biblical Verses About Fertility (also mentions early marriage) – a paper by J. McKeown

(Link): Cultural Discrimination Against Childless and Childfree Women – and link to an editorial by a Childless Woman

(Link): The Irrelevancy To Single or Childless or Childfree Christian Women of Biblical Gender Complementarian Roles / Biblical Womanhood Teachings

(Link): Why Unmarried and Childless or Childfree – Single Christians Should Be Concerned about the Gender Role Controversy

(Link): Why all the articles about being Child Free? On Being Childfree or Childless – as a Conservative / Right Wing / Christian

(Link): Males and Females Raped at Christian College, College Doesn’t Care – Equally Yoked is a Joke

(Link): Pastor charged in wife’s murder was headed to Europe to marry boyfriend, prosecutor says – Single Xtian Ladies: Kick that Be Equally Yoked Teaching to the Curb! Also: Marriage and Parenthood do not make people more godly or mature or loving or ethical

(Link): Christian Single Women: Another Example of Why You Should Abandon the “Be Equally Yoked” Teaching: 21-Y-O Christianity Student, Children’s Minister Charged With Murdering Fiancée He Was to Wed in August; Made It Look Like Suicide

(Link): Study: Couples Without Children Have Happier Marriages / Study: Having Kids Ruins Your Life

(Link): Leader of Hyper Family Focused, Fertility Cult (Vision Forum Ministries) Steps Down After Admitting to Having an “Emotional Affair”

(Link): Bay-Bees – Have them, have lots of them and NOW, no matter what say some Christians

(Link): Motherhood Does Not Make Women More Godly or Mature (Mother Suffocates New Born and Shoves It In Toilet)

Sorry, but being a mother is not the most important job in the world by Catherine Deveny

Sorry, but being a mother is not the most important job in the world, by Catherine Deveny

Christians are guilty of, as this writer below says, “The deification of mothers.”

Trust me on that one, as the voice of experience.

Try being over 40, still a virgin – never married, no children – and you feel very excluded in many conservative churches.

The exclusion against childless and older single women is not always deliberate in Christian culture, sometimes it is.

Some churches and preachers intentionally “bash” singlehood and adults who are childless or childfree (such as Southern Baptist (Link) Al Mohler, or (Link): this church in Raleigh).

However, the un-intentional put downs and un-intended insults can be almost as hurtful. Most often, married Christian mothers, the instant they learn you are over 30, never married and have no children, lose all interest in getting to know you further.

Some of these married mothers act instantly uncomfortable and awkward around you once they find out you are still single and childless… you are treated like an alien from Mars, rather than a fellow human being. It’s hurtful, awkward, and is one reason of many I no longer attend church.

Churches constantly host Mother’s Day ceremonies or do things like monthly invite all new mothers foreward to pray for their newborns, but when is the last time you saw a preacher call all never-married women forward to pray for them, or to cheer on their accomplishments, such as buying a house alone, getting a work promotion, getting a college degree? Yeah, never. Only motherhood is viewed as a significant “accomplishment” for women in churches.

(By the way, I do not hate motherhood, and I am not opposed to women being mothers: I am only opposed to how adult single women, the infertile, childless, and child free are excluded, insulted or marginalized by so many Christian churches, denominations, and media.)

Here’s the article:

(Link): Sorry, but being a mother is not the most important job in the world

    18 November 2013

It’s time to drop the slogan. It encourages mothers to stay socially and financially hobbled, it alienates fathers and discourages other significant relationships between children and adults

Being a mother is not the most important job in the world. There, I said it. Nor is it the toughest job, despite what the 92% of people polled in Parents Magazine reckon.

For any woman who uses that line, consider this: if this is meant to exalt motherhood, then why is the line always used to sell toilet cleaner? And if being a mother is that important, why aren’t all the highly paid men with stellar careers not devoting their lives to raising children? After all, I never hear “being a father is the most important job in the world”.

The deification of mothers not only delegitimises the relationship fathers, neighbours, friends, grandparents, teachers and carers have with children, it also diminishes the immense worth and value of these relationships. How do gay dads feel about this line, I wonder? Or the single dads, stepdads or granddads? No matter how devoted and hard working you are, fellas, you’ll always be second best.

I’m also confused as to what makes you a mother. Is it the actual birth? Or is a “mother” simply a term to describe an expectation to care for children without payment? Is this empty slogan used to compensate women for gouging holes from potential careers by spending years out of the workplace without recognition?

Enabling this dogma devalues the unpaid labor of rearing children as much as it strategically devalues women’s worth at work. If being a mother were a job there’d be a selection process, pay, holidays, a superior to report to, performance assessments, Friday drinks, and you could resign from your job and get another one because you didn’t like the people you were working with. It’s not a vocation either – being a mother is a relationship.

Even if it were a job, there is no way being a professional mother could be the hardest when compared to working 16 hours a day in a clothing factory in Bangladesh, making bricks in an Indian kiln, or being a Chinese miner. Nor could it ever be considered the most important job in comparison with a surgeon who saves lives, anyone running a nation, or a judge deciding on people’s destiny.

~ Read the rest here ~
———————–
Related posts this blog

(Link): Parenthood Does Not Make People More Loving Mature Godly Ethical Caring or Responsible (One Stop Thread)

(Link):  Motherhood Is Not A Woman’s Most Important Job by J. Wright

(Link): Never Married Christians Over Age 35 who are childless Are More Ignored Than Divorced or Infertile People or Single Parents

(Link):  Facebook’s motherhood challenge makes me want to punch my computer screen by F. Everett

(Link): Family as “The” Backbone of Society? – It’s Not In The Bible

(Link): The Irrelevancy To Single or Childless or Childfree Christian Women of Biblical Gender Complementarian Roles / Biblical Womanhood Teachings

(Link): Mother’s Day Ain’t A Happy Holiday For Some

(Link): Why all the articles about being Child Free? On Being Childfree or Childless – as a Conservative / Right Wing / Christian

(Link): Widows and Childless and Childfree Have Better Well Being Than Married Couples and Parents says new study

(Link): Bearden: Staying childless right decision for many women

(Link):  Facebook’s motherhood challenge makes me want to punch my computer screen by F. Everett

(Link): Christian Patriarchy Group: God Demands You Marry and Have Babies to Defeat Paganism and Satan. Singles and the Childless Worthless (in this worldview).

(Link): Don’t Judge Me, I’m Childless (from Today’s Christian Woman)

(Link): Southern Baptist’s New Sexist “Biblical Woman” Site – Attitudes in Total Face Palm of a Site One Reason Among Many This Unmarried and Childless Woman Is Saying Toodle-Oo to Christianity

(Link): Is The Church Failing Childless Women? by Diane Paddison

(Link): 26, Unmarried, and Childless – by A. Mast

(Link): Idiot Author Thinks Childless and Childfree Should Pay Higher Taxes to Subsidize Parents

Quivering Family Duggar Girls Write Dating Book

Quivering Family Duggar Girls Write Dating Book

I’m sure these are nice girls, but they’ve had the wool pulled over their eyes with naive, twisted ideas about dating, sex, and marriage by their gender complementarian- to- partriarchal upbringing, so I don’t think young ladies should necessarily take their dating advice.

I am obviously not opposed to them wanting to remain celibate until their wedding nights, but I believe I saw a blurb here or there where they said they don’t believe in kissing until marriage.

That is certainly their right, if that is their free choice, but I feel such teachings and beliefs are drastic and can lead to sexual or relational hang ups and issues in a marriage.

I just know that when or if news of this starts getting posted on atheist, ex Christian, liberal Christian, emergent, and post evangelical blogs, these young ladies will be mocked or ruthlessly insulted for wanting to stay virgins until marriage.

The guy who wrote the page “Jessa Duggar Is 21, Never Been Kissed, And Avoids ‘Sensual Thoughts’” wrote,

    The Duggars are the archetypal Conservative Christian family.

What makes him think that? Quiverfull is not archetypal of conservative Christians.

I’m still sympathetic towards conservative Christians on some matters, and during all the years I was one myself, I never would’ve agreed with some of the Quiverfull teachings.

There are some evangelicals and Baptists who regard Quivering as lunacy (eg, having boatloads of kids, the quasi Old Testament patriarchy practiced, no kissing before marriage, etc), an aberration, unbiblical, and a distortion or misapplication of biblical teachings and topics.

At least the Duggar girls are trying to dispel the Christian and secular misunderstanding that celibate adults are asexual, uninterested in sex, and don’t want sex (see (Link): this previous post for more on that).

Concerning: Where the one Duggar girl says in some of these interviews she still has desire for male companionship, though being celibate, and she thanks God for “being normal.”

I’m not entirely clear on how she meant that comment, but I can imagine in the hours and days to follow, as the ex Christian, atheist, post evangelical, secular feminist, and liberal Christian blogs get ahold of that comment, they will assume she meant that as some kind of insult against asexuals or homosexuals – though I doubt that is how the girl meant it.

That won’t stop her from getting flamed on such blogs, though. Sometimes some atheists, secular feminists, post evangelicals, liberal Christians, and the other groups invent things to get pissed at or offended by.

They will choose to read her remark in the worst possible way and drag her over the coals for it. I will be surprised if that does not happen.

I am also expecting the post evangelical, secular feminist, and other such blogs to get into (Link): Celibate and Virgin Shaming mode, tell us how it’s so ignorant for these young ladies to remain virgins until marriage, since they need to make sure their boyfriends are “sexually compatible” with them.

One of the Duggar girls says she and her sisters avoid sexual temptation by staying away from men entirely, which is not a good solution. I have blogged on that many times before.

For Christians to teach other Christians to avoid one gender entirely sets individuals up for sexual hang ups and relationship problems later in life, and it also keeps gender stereotypes afloat (such as, all men are horny horn dog potential rapists, all married women are frigid, all single women are horny Jezebels who screw around).

These stereotypes actually keep single men and women apart, hinders them from marrying, and has other negative ramifications.

Though I find it interesting you have a group of females here advocating that women should stay away from men. Usually, Christian males teach in their literature, blogs, or sermons, that single and married men say away from women to avoid sexual temptation.

(Link): Jessa Duggar and her sisters unveil Christian dating rules in new book

    The Duggar sisters say in their new book that in spite of their Christian upbringing they still have “have a natural physical desire toward men.”

    March. 11 (UPI) — The Duggar sisters opened up about their home’s Christian rules when it comes to dating in their new book Growing Up Duggar: It’s All About Relationships.

    “It’s easy to put yourself into physical and moral danger and give into those emotions or sensual thoughts that promise pleasant, but only temporary, fulfillment,” the women reportedly say in the book, according to the Daily Mail.

    They add that avoiding men altogether is the easiest way to avoid sin.

    “By censoring our thoughts through the filter of God’s word, we will be able to recant any wrong thoughts or temptations that try to sneak in,” they say.

    In spite of their Christian upbringing the sisters explained that they still “have a natural physical desire toward men” and that they “thank God for making us normal.”

    The third Duggar daughter, Jessa, announced in September 2013 that she was dating fellow churchgoer Ben Seewald. Michelle Duggar said at the time that Jessa was allowed to “side hug” her boyfriend after they “were officially courting.”

(Link): Jessa Duggar Is 21, Never Been Kissed, And Avoids ‘Sensual Thoughts’

    Jessa Duggar has co-authored a new book, together with three of her sisters, which explains their somewhat unusual outlook on life in general — and sex in particular.

    Perhaps it would be more accurate to say “lack of sex,” since they reveal in the book Growing up Duggar that they avoid spending time with men in case they sin and have sex before marriage.

    Continue reading “Quivering Family Duggar Girls Write Dating Book”

Fewer women seek help for infertility, data show

Fewer women seek help for infertility, data show

I didn’t care too much if I had children or not, but I blog about this topic on occasion because if you are a Christian female, you get the message from Christian culture constantly that you are not worth anything unless you marry and have children.

Some lunatic Christians, even the ones more mainstream, and despite the total lack of biblical support (sorry, but the Bible comparing kids to a ‘quiverfull of arrows’ is really not suggesting that believers should breed like rabbits for theological, or socio-political-cultural, reasons) are teaching that to win ‘Murica back to Christ, that Christian couples need to pop out oodles of rug rats, out breed the heathen.

That is why I occasionally post infertility articles, unwed mother birth rate articles, etc. etc.

(Link): Fewer women seek help for infertility, data show

    7:47 AM, January 22, 2014

    Increased awareness about the options hasn’t resulted in increased use of infertility services, according to new federal data. Instead, the numbers show declines for those seeking medical help to get pregnant or to prevent miscarriage.

    “There’s always been this perception these things are on the rise when the data have never supported that,” says Anjani Chandra, lead author of the report, out Wednesday from the National Center for Health Statistics.

    Findings are based on a survey of 22,682 men and women, ages 15-44, conducted from 2006 to 2010, but much of the focus is on ages 25-44, because that’s when the report says “infertility service use may be more prevalent.”

    … Kurt Barnhart, president of the Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, says the report confirms what he already knows.

    “Fertility services are underutilized and not reaching everybody,” says Barnhart, an OB-GYN at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.

    Still, findings show that women ages 25-44 with current fertility problems were “five times more likely to have ever used any infertility services and six times more likely to have used medical help to get pregnant” than those without current problems.

    … Still, high costs for some procedures (that can reach thousands of dollars) as well as the fact that not all procedures are covered by insurance means that some may not take that first step, Barnhart says.

    “Not everyone needs expensive or high-tech treatment,” he says. “Maybe simple treatments and advice is all they need. When people don’t come in to get the consult, they don’t know if simple solutions would have helped them.”

    Barnhart suggests one reason for the declines could be that the survey was conducted largely during tough economic times.

—————
Related posts:

(Link): Response to the Hemingway Editorial ‘Fecundophobia’ – conservatives and Christians continue to idolize children, marriage – which is unbiblical

(Link): Misapplication of Biblical Verses About Fertility (also mentions early marriage) – a paper by J. McKeown

(Link): Christian Patriarchy Group: God Demands You Marry and Have Babies to Defeat Paganism and Satan. Singles and the Childless Worthless (in this worldview).

(Link): Conservatives and Christians Fretting About U.S. Population Decline – We Must “Out-breed” Opponents Christian Host Says

Christian Patriarchy Group: God Demands You Marry and Have Babies to Defeat Paganism and Satan. Singles and the Childless Worthless (in this worldview).

Christian Patriarchy Group: God Demands You Marry and Have Babies to Defeat Paganism and Satan. Singles and the Childless Worthless.

Though it is primarily a blog about spiritual abuse, the following blog occasionally covers the very troubling, odd views some self professing Christian groups have about marriage, dating, and having children:
(Link): Spiritual Sounding Board

I usually devote my attention to marriage and child worship by evangelicals, Baptists and one or two other main stream groups, but there are other Christian groups who are actually far, far worse.

These groups include Reconstuctionists, Quiverfull, some homeschooling groups, and Dominionists. Some of these “Christian” groups want the USA to revert back to using Old Testament Laws. They place far more emphasis on having children and being married than even the average Baptist, Reformed, or evangelicals do.

These fringe groups, somewhat like Independent Fundamentalist Baptists, have a lot of weird, unbiblical ideas about inter-gender relations; they seem to frown upon men and women merely spending time alone together, even if it is just in friendship, to chat.

They assume any and all male-female interaction will always end in sex. When the genders are taught this way and are not encouraged to spend time with each other (one on one) it can and does stunt a person’s growth, and leaves them unsure how to approach or deal with the opposite gender… which in turn means, such people lack the courage or skills necessary to date, which also means they cannot marry, or it will be a long, long time before they do..

I realize that some of these groups don’t even permit dating and are into courtship, but the courtship model pushes kids who are not right for each other into marriage far too young. And it too causes them to have all sorts of strange ideas about the genders and how men and women ought to relate.

Here’s one post about it from the Spiritual Sounding Board blog.

(Link): Doug Phillips & Vision Forum: Multi-Generational Faithfulness and Video of Young Boy Explaining the Importance of Having Many Children for 10 Generations

Here are excerpts (please click the link above to visit the page):

    Over at Bluebehemoth.com, one of Vision Forum’s websites, I found an audio series available called: The 200 Year Plan: A Practicum on Multi-Generational Faithfulness. I have discovered a certain lingo that is popping out while reading a lot of Vision Forum material…

    The speakers in the audio are Doug Phillips and Geoff Botkin. Here is the introduction to the series:

    [— start quote from patriarchy group —]

    Our age is defined by warfare against the Christian family, and one of the casualties experienced by many families is the death of multi-generational victory. Psalm 128 teaches that it is the hope of the righteous man to see the generations that come after him persevere in Christ

    Only God’s grace can produce such a blessed result, but the Bible teaches that parents can make strategic choices which either impede or bless generational faithfulness.

    …. In the battle between pagan culture and the Christian family culture, paganism often wins.

    …We believe more is needed. Our message is this: To achieve victory, first you must seek it. In the battle for the family, this means making God-honoring and strategic choices …

[— end quote from patriarchy group —]

If you click the link above and read the entire post, you will see the word “family” (as in nuclear family, NOT the spiritual family of God) mentioned over and over. These people have made an idol out of the traditional family.

Continue reading “Christian Patriarchy Group: God Demands You Marry and Have Babies to Defeat Paganism and Satan. Singles and the Childless Worthless (in this worldview).”

Christians Who Sexualize Female Infants and Who Have Wacko, Weird, Unbiblical Gender Role Views They Actually Believe are Biblical / Re Botkins

Christians Who Sexualize Female Infants and Who Have Wacko, Weird, Unbiblical Gender Role Views They Actually Believe are Biblical / Re Botkins

I knew something seemed familiar about this previous post, where I quoted excerpts by a David E. Prince guy:
(Link): Astonishing: Evangelical Baptist Marriage Idolater David E. Prince Wants to Know Why Evangelical Baptists Are Not Worshipping Marriage More

Here is how Prince opened that editorial:

    LOUISVILLE, Ky. (BP) –
    “Lord, thank You for the life of this beautiful little girl… Lord, give her a future husband who loves You and serves You and will protect, provide and love her as Christ loves the church. In Jesus’ name, Amen.”

    As I lifted my head in that hospital room after praying for the family and their newborn baby, I carefully gave the child back to her mother.

Prince’s views about sexualizing a female infant and being so heavily into unbiblical, narrow gender roles, are creepily similar to this creepfest (which I actually read many months ago but kind of forgot about):

(Link): Breakpoint on the Botkins

    Some time ago, someone sent me a link to a reference to the Botkin Daughters on Chuck Colson’s Breakpoint/Prison Fellowship website, and I wanted to share it with readers here.

    Even they think “Botkin Syndrome” is overkill! The author for (Link): Breakpoint, Gina Dalfonzo, also hit on the idea that these extreme religious groups lack trust in God.

    They essentially “work the program” in a way that almost orders God around like the “cosmic bellhop,” just because they worked the formula that was supposed to yield perfection.

    If Daddy Botkin was that concerned that he had to lay his hand on his infant daughter’s abdomen, concerned about the billions and billions of offspring held within those eggs, why are his daughters not yet married?

    Those eggs are getting older by the minute, and so are their chances of lowering their risk of breast cancer by carrying a pregnancy to term and breastfeeding by age thirty.

    … From Victory Through Daughters by Kathryn Joyce [(Link): Source]:

      So as Botkin held his newborn daughter perfectly still in his cupped hands, he prayed to God for guidance: after having raised two older sons, how should he raise a daughter?

      He felt God move him to a specific prayer for the infant sleeping in his hands, a prayer for her body. He remembered baby girls are born with two ovaries and a finite number of eggs that will last them a lifetime. He placed his hand over his new daughter’s abdomen and prayed for Anna Sofia to be the “future mother of tens of millions.”

      He prayed that the Lord would order everything in his daughter’s life: “What You will do with every single egg here. How many children will this young lady have? Who will be her husband? With what other legacy will these little eggs be joined to produce the next generation for the glory of God?”

      He explained to a room full of about six hundred fathers and daughters gathered for the annual Vision Forum Father and Daughter Retreat that he had prayed that his new daughter might marry young.

😯 😯 😯 😯
——————————
Related posts this blog

(Link): The Sexualization of God and Jesus

(Link): Topics: Friendship is Possible / Sexualization By Culture Of All Relationships

(Link): Misapplication of Biblical Verses About Fertility (also mentions early marriage) – a paper by J. McKeown

(Link): How the Sexual Revolution Ruined Friendship – Also: If Christians Truly Believed in Celibacy and Virginity, they would stop adhering to certain sexual and gender stereotypes that work against both

(Link): Rush to early marriage feeds Utah’s higher-than-average divorce rate (article)

(Link): A Case Against Early Marriage by Ashley Moore (editorial)

Leader of Hyper Family Focused, Fertility Cult (Vision Forum Ministries) Steps Down After Admitting to Having an “Emotional Affair”

Leader of Hyper Family Focused, Fertility Cult (Vision Forum Ministries) Steps Down After Admitting to Having an “Emotional Affair”

You can read this guy’s resignation letter here:
(Link): Statement of Resignation by Douglas Phillips

Excerpt:

    There has been serious sin in my life for which God has graciously brought me to repentance. I have confessed my sin to my wife and family, my local church, and the board of Vision Forum Ministries. I engaged in a lengthy, inappropriate relationship with a woman. While we did not “know” each other in a Biblical sense, it was nevertheless inappropriately romantic and affectionate.

I am not an expert on all things Vision Forums Ministries, and I tend to lump all these groups together, but like Quiverfulls and Reconstructionsts, if I am not mistaken, VFM (Vision Forum Ministries) is one of thoes groups who teach very, very strict gender roles to the point they may advocate that girls should NOT receive an education, that they should only be brought up to be wives and mothers.

From what I recall, VFM is like Dobon’s “Focus on the Family,” but on steroids. They place far, far too much stock on marriage, having children, and strict gender roles.

Groups such as VFM tend to elevate marriage to the point that singles and singlehood is denigrated. The unmarried are viewed as not being wholly in God’s image, that they are only “one half” until they marry.

If I recall correctly they may be one of the Christian cultic groups that idolize marriage and childrearing/ bearing even more than main stream conservative Christians do.

They probably adhere to the standard stereotypes of the unmarried that mainstream Christians do: that, supposedly, all singles are sleazy, over sexed harlots who are highly promiscuous and who are selfish and immature. So I find it funny that one of their own admits to being involved in an “inappropriate relationship” with another woman.

These hyper family-, hyper traditional marriage- obsessed Christian groups that keep screaming and ranting about things such as single-mother homes, women having more babies out of wedlock, etc, who assume that married people are as sexually pure as the freshly driven snow and that married are superior to singles, need to ‘walk the walk’ that they preach to the rest of us, but they often do not.

I am tired of married Christians acting as though they are more godly or pure than single adult and childless Christians, or they think by virtue of being married and/ or a parent they are “more of a Christian,” but you have long time Christians such as myself, who is age 40+, who is still a virgin (I remained true to biblical sexual teachings).

I am actually living out sexual purity (for three plus decades), but these hyper- pro- family, pro traditional gender roles, sexist, pro patriarchy cretins sleep around (or, in this case, have “emotional affairs.”)

These are the same backwards idiots who have “purity balls,” where they teach their little daughters that their sexuality belongs to their fathers and then later, if they marry, to their husbands.

Novel concept: teach your daughters that their sexuality belongs to them and them alone. You can teach them to believe that sex is for marriage only -that is all well and good- but let them know they can make their own choices in life. Their sexuality is theirs – it’s not even “God’s.”

Quote at me all day about, “you are not your own – bought at a price,” and just no.

How I cringe when Christian pro-celibacy books tell singles, “Your body/sexuality is not yours, it belongs to God/ the community.” Er no, it’s mine, not God’s, not the church’s.

I can see how feeling that one’s sexuality is an individualistic matter can lead to societal problems, but not if you have excellent self control, such as me (virgin at age 40+ here). My sexuality is mine, not God’s, not the church’s, not my “future husband’s” (should I marry).

Anyway, these uber- family obsessed cultic Christian groups cannot even practice what they preach to the rest of us.

(Link): Doug Phillips Resigns from Vision Forum, Cites Affair

(Link): Doug Phillips, Vision Forum Family Man Sabotages Marriage

Excerpt (please click the link above to visit their blog and read the rest):

    Best known for his Vision Forum catalog — a colorful collection of apparently innocuous family friendly products mailed to more than a million people each autumn — Doug Phillips uses the wealth generated by his for-profit sales, as well as donations from the public, to promote his vision on controversial issues including education (home education is the only Biblical method), birth control (wrong in all circumstances), politics (a vote for either Kerry or Bush was a sin), and the roles of husbands and wives (hyper-Patriarchy at home and at church).

    Doug Phillips first came to the attention of those of us at Ministry Watchman when he publicly defended his buddy, R.C. Sproul, Jr., who was defrocked after confessing to ecclesiastical tyranny and the theft and illegal use of a church denomination’s tax-ID number.

    … The first, an exposé of how Doug Phillips’ family practices have not matched his family preaching, begins below. — MW

    Officially, not-for-profit Vision Forum Ministries exists “to encourage and equip the biblical family and to train and facilitate fathers leading their families….” Doug Phillips’ focus on fathers is not an accident; he is perhaps the most prominent leader in the Patriarchy movement, a growing trend of returning to the biblical role models for men leading their families and submissive women helping their husbands or fathers.

    Although the inspiration for this movement is understandable — a reaction to the all-too-common problem today of men abdicating their leadership over their families in deference to a radical feminist movement that has pervaded even the church — the danger of reaction is that it can be a pendulum that swings too far to the opposite extreme. While much of Doug Phillips’ teachings on the biblical roles of men and women seems to be sound, some of the applications of those teachings have proven to be very troubling.

(Link): Doug Phillips: The Big Scandal You Didn’t Hear About and Why It Matters

    Posted: 11/06/2013 1:29 pm
    by Julie Ingersoll

    Doug Phillips, the Home School Movement’s leading Quiverful Patriarch resigned from Vision Forum Ministries, admitting a “lengthy inappropriate relationship” with a woman. It appears that while as he has been fighting homosexuality and feminism as threats to marriage, he has actually been the threat.

    His supporters are lauding his resignation letter as appropriately contrite repentance and arguing that this has no bearing on the validity of Biblical Patriarchy. But actually it does, making this more important than another hypocritical cheating scandal.

    Phillips is a key figure bringing Christian Reconstruction into the larger home school world. Building upon R.J. Rushdoony’s postmillennialism and “Biblical Philosophy of History,” he teaches home-schooling families to “exercise dominion” through 200-year plans, “multi-generational faithfulness” and “Biblical Patriarchy.”

    His influence is hard to overstate; there is barely a part of the home-school movement his empire has not touched.

    … Phillips was a founder of the patriarchal Family Integrated Church Movement. He has close partnerships with Henry Morris at Institute for Creation Research, the Duggar family of 19 Kids and Counting and actor-turned-Christian activist Kirk Cameron.

    … Phillips’ infidelity is more than a private matter because, by design, his Biblical Patriarchy makes women vulnerable such that even with a husband repeatedly violating his marriage vows, practically speaking, a wife has no options.

    The Family, in Biblical Patriarchy, is the primary institution through which God has delegated authority entirely to men. Women are to be “in submission in all things,” first to their fathers and then to husbands, chosen by fathers. The purpose of the family is the exercise of the patriarch’s dominion, especially through procreation. Women are to bear as many children as is possible. Anything short of that is deemed selfishness, accommodation with the “culture of death” and rebellion against God’s will.

    ….Education for girls within Biblical Patriarchy is focused on training them for domestic duties. Vision Forum’s catalogs, Beautiful Girlhood Collection and the All American Boy’s Adventure Catalog, stated purpose is to teach “Biblical” gender norms: meekness, submissiveness and dependency for girls; chivalry, curiosity and adventurousness for boys. There are strategies for boys to obtain college degrees without actually attending college but college education for girls is often seen as unnecessary and even destructive.

    …For girls they offer a “Father Daughter Retreat” (noted for its creepiness), in which fathers “lead,” “woo” and “win” their daughters to become “industrious, family-affirming, children-loving, women of God.”

    Phillips’ scandal calls attention to the dangers of the world he wants to build: A woman raised in Biblical Patriarchy is carefully sheltered, most especially to opportunities to develop any kind of self-sufficiency. If she finds herself with a houseful of children and a husband forced to admit publicly to unfaithfulness that extends over a long period of time, she has no options.

    The cheated wife is not likely to be supported by the patriarchal community. The leaders (all male) are likely to be sympathetic the husband’s “temptation” and should she discuss the situation outside of the sanctioned forums controlled by men she will be denounced as a gossip. Sometimes the women are blamed: the “other woman” as Satan’s temptress and even the completely innocent wife for having “let herself go” or being inadequately submissive.

(Link): Patriarchy proponent Doug Phillips resigns after extramarital relationship

You can read even more about VFM here (I am not necessarily in total agreement with all views of all blogs/ sites/ articles I link to):

(Link): Rethinking Vision Forum

(Link): Cult-Watch Ministry Publishes Article Exposing Doug Phillips

(Link): Vision Forum Heresy – from Under Much Grace

(Link): Ignorance, Stupid Error, and Willful Intent: Vision Forum is still guilty of objectifying women and children

Here is an April 2014 update to this post:
(Link): Married Preacher, Father of Eight Kids (and promoter of “Family Values” and Leader of wacko Quiverfull- and- Patriarchy type groups that promotes idolatry of “the family” and Marriage and of Having Lots of Children), Used Nanny as Sex Object – update on Phillips story
===================
Related posts this blog:

(Link): Focus on the Family Members Practice Infidelity or Homosexuality and Get Divorced and Remarry – links to exposes

(Link): Married Preacher and Father of Five (Geronimo Aguilar) In Trouble Over Multiple Affairs and Sex with Kids

(Link): Pastor Busted in Prostitution Sting – If Married Sex So Great Why Do So Many Married Christian Men Have Affairs

(Link): Prejudiced Writer Stupidly Blames Slutty Halloween Costumes and Societal Ills on Childless the Childfree, and Unmarried Adults – but Married people and parents are not perfect either

(Link): More Married Couples Admit to Sexless Marriages (various articles) / Christians promise you great frequent sex if you wait until marriage, but the propaganda is not true

(Link): Wife of Kinda Famous TV Preacher Guy Committed Multiple Affairs – He tells congregation at church service

Response to the Hemingway Editorial ‘Fecundophobia’ – conservatives and Christians continue to idolize children, marriage – which is unbiblical

A Response to the Hemingway Editorial ‘Fecundophobia’ – conservatives and Christians continue to idolize children, marriage – which is unbiblical

Ms. Hemingway must be out to lunch.

Other than the secular, hyper-militant Child Free persons (and yes, they do exist, I’ve encountered them on forums or blogs for Child Free, and they are usually self professing pagans or atheists, and they are almost always very liberal and hostile towards Christians, pro lifers, and Republicans), I don’t know of many people who are pushing for, or embracing, “low fertility rates.”

Nor do I know many people among the childless or CF (childfree) who are “afraid” or pregnant women or children.

Here is a link (well, it’s a tiny bit farther below) to the editorial by the woman, Hemingway, who has a misunderstanding about the childless and childfree. Not all childless or childfree are alike in personality, political or religious views, or in their reasons as to why they remain without children.

I’ll only be writing from my particular vantage as a childless woman, I will not be attempting to defend or explain the differing views of or for every single childless or childfree person.

I have additional commentary below these excerpts; there are points where I agree with this author, and points where I do not:

(Link): Fecundophobia: The Growing Fear Of Children And Fertile Women, By Mollie Hemingway

The author, Hemingway, begins by quoting an article by a sportswriter about a football player who is about to have child number seven, and she seems to feel that the author is implying that it is “weird” for the footballer to have so many children.

Here is the section Hemingway quoted:

    And he’s [the football player] also about to have his seventh kid. There are going to be eight people with Rivers DNA running around this world.

If you visit the page in question, however, (Link): the page in question, you can see that the page’s writer is primarily riffing on this point:

    This is the only GIF necessary from this game [showing the footballer’s odd habit of making weird facial distortions and pumping his fists in the air on the sidelines during a game].

    Nick Novak hit a 50-yard field goal just inside the two-minute warning to give the Chargers a two-possession lead. This was Philip Rivers’s reaction. He’s like a sad movie character who pumps himself up in front of a mirror.

The primary point of the page is not fertility at all, but rather, the player’s strange body language and facial expressions he makes during games.

The part about him having six or seven kids is a minor thought that appears at the bottom of that page. It is not the focal point.

Hemingway then goes on to criticize several papers for not criticizing the choices of other football players who asked their girlfriends to get abortions.

Note that Hemingway quotes this by Philips, when asked how he handles being father to six children:

    It’s a two-year rotation: Once the diapers come off of one, we usually have a newborn. And we have another one on the way, due in October. I help when I can, but my wife, Tiffany, is the key.

This is actually one of several reasons I am somewhat opposed to the acceptance of, or pushing of, hyper fertility – the burden is always put primarily on the woman to look after the rug rats, while hubby gets the easier task of shuffling off to the 9 to 5 job daily.

Mom never gets a break; she stays with the children 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

But women like Hemingway think this lop-sided and unfair burden of child care foisted on the woman only is a good thing, I would suppose.

Read about Andrea Yates and how she murdered several of her children after being expected to be a full time mommy with little to no help from anyone, not even her spouse ((Link): Yates information).

Hemingway responds to the perfectly natural, “how the hey do you manage with six children?!” question by asking incredulously,

    — but what kind of question is that? Seriously. Who asks a question like that?

Why, it’s the kind of perfectly normal, natural reaction of someone, of any sane, rational, and logical person, who thinks having more than two or three children is strange, expensive, and very time consuming – that is the sort of person who.

Even people who are currently parents to two or three children might wonder in awe at, or in bewilderment at, why anyone would want to have more than three children, or how they handle more than three, without going broke or being physically exhausted all the time.

It is not only the liberals, childless, or childfree who get puzzled by this sort of thing.

Hemingway writes,

    It may be impolitic to suggest that men and women are in any way different, science be damned, but many women have a particular specialty in cultivating relationships and family. To denigrate women who acknowledge and accept this as a good thing rather than fight against it is not exactly life-affirming.

Christian gender egalitarians note that there are some differences between men and women ((Link): visit CBE – Christians for Biblical Equality), but it does not follow that while women may be better at relationship, or more drawn to building them, that they therefore should all have at least one child, or up to ten of them.

Women can just as easily use their interest in, and talent at, relationships for volunteering to help lonely seniors at senior citizen retirement homes, or volunteering to feed homeless people at soup kitchens, or, helping take care of homeless puppies and cats at the ASPCA.

Hemingway’s argument shortly before that, which gets into how we are all interdependent, actually shoots down her other points which argue in favor of each person having ten children: you can go through life childless but depend on brothers, sisters, uncles, neighbors, friends, and if you are a church goer, fellow church members.

One does not have to have children in order to have someone to depend on, or to be “interdependent.”

Just because a larger percentage of people in contemporary society are choosing not to have children (and remember, some who want to are unable to – from lack of partner to infertility), does not mean all people will make this same choice.

As a matter of fact, the number of babies among unmarried women have been skyrocketing, which is angering, or worrying, a lot of Christians:

Nor does a decrease in people interested in pro-creating necessarily mean all of society will grind to a halt. There will always be someone, somewhere, who will keep getting pregnant and giving birth. (It’s just not going to be me specifically. And that is okay.)

Then there’s this information, which would appear to refute some of Ms. Hemingway’s views:

What Jesus Christ and Paul Taught About Family/ Having Children / Being Married

As a matter of fact, that is the pattern that Jesus Christ sought to establish, that people be freed from the ancient over-dependence on family, because Jesus recognized that such a society ignored those without one, such as orphans, spinsters, and widows:

    While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him.

    Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.”

    He replied to him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?”

    Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”
    [source: Matthew 12]

And further, from Matthew 10, Jesus speaking:

    “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.

    For I have come to turn
    “‘a man against his father,
    a daughter against her mother,
    a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
    a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’

    “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.”

No where in the Bible does Jesus teach that one must have children in order to have someone to “depend upon.”

Having children, in the New Testament, is not listed as a rule or commandment.

Your spiritual brothers and sisters in Christ (that is, other Christians) are to be your primary family; you are not to seek family out in husband, children, mother, or brother.

The Bible does not condemn marriage or having children, but it remains that singlehood, as stated by Paul the Apostle under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, is stated as being preferable for believers – not marriage and procreating.

Quoting Paul:

    Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. [source]

Paul again,

    25 Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy.

    26 Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for a man to remain as he is.
    27 Are you pledged to a woman? Do not seek to be released. Are you free from such a commitment? Do not look for a wife.

    28 But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned.

    But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this.

    32 I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs—how he can please the Lord.

    33 But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— 34 and his interests are divided.

    An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband.

    35 I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.
    [source: 1 Corinthians 7]

Culture Still Puts Pressure on Women to Have Children, Contrary to What Hemingway Says

Hemingway states,

    And keeping the womb empty at all costs during all, or nearly all, of one’s fertile years is the sine qua non of modern American womanhood. Woe to the woman who “chooses” otherwise.

I am a right winger, I am a social conservative, and yes, I realize that a lot of the media -which is tilted left- rabidly supports abortion.

I do not support abortion myself.

I am not opposed to women having babies, if that is their informed choice.

However. It remains a fact in American society that outside of left wing media, there is still a tremendous pressure, and expectation, placed upon people, especially women, to crank out babies.

The cultural landscape is the direct opposite of what Hemingway states in her editorial.

Outside of fringe, far left, kook, militant Child Free type groups or individuals, or rabidly militant, secular feminists, there is still a huge expectation from larger culture that women should have babies, and if they do not have children, for whatever reason, they are hounded for it, put down, and insulted, or scolded, or treated as though they are freaks.

Women are attacked for remaining childless not only by commentators such as Hemingway in newspapers and blogs, but also by their baby-obsessed mothers, sisters, aunts, and grandmothers, and female co-workers.

It is a very real perception and stereotype by the child-loving population, which is in the majority, that you are thought weird, baby-hating, evil, incredibly selfish, etc, if you cannot have children, or, if you deliberately choose not to have children.

I have never liked children myself, so I never cared if I had a baby or not.

But please note: I do not “hate” children, I do not fear them, I do not condone child abuse or abortion. I am simply not comfortable around babies and children: they are typically loud, messy, distracting. I prefer not being around them.

At one point in her editorial, Hemingway talks about walking around a city, an area very liberal in flavor. She mentions seeing signs hanging up around that part of town reading, “Thank you for not breeding.”

I suggest to her, I posit, that conservative and Christian culture does the same exact thing as that liberal section of the city she visited, only they are mirror opposites: rather than hanging up signs that say “thank you for not breeding!,” conservatives and Christians hang up signs screaming at women TO marry and TO “breed.”

Continue reading “Response to the Hemingway Editorial ‘Fecundophobia’ – conservatives and Christians continue to idolize children, marriage – which is unbiblical”

Utah: Homosexuals Shouldn’t Be Able to Marry Because They “Cannot Procreate”

Utah: Homosexuals Shouldn’t Be Able to Marry Because They “Cannot Procreate”

I do not support homosexuality, so by extension, I do not support homosexual marriage, but, I do not believe I fully agree with the argument by Christians, social conservatives, Republicans and religious people (eg, Mormons and other groups) that such marriages should be disallowed because homosexuals do not procreate with one another.

The fact of the matter is that some hetero-sexual couples due not pro-create either, whether by choice (use of birth control or surgical sterilization) or due to medical problems (ie, infertility).

The New Testament, in a comment by Apostle Paul, says it is better for a person not to marry.

Marriage is taught in the New Testament to be a life choice, left up to each person; it is not a commandment of God.

By extension, because children come after marriage in Christian sexual ethics, having children is also a choice, not a commandment.

The comment from Genesis about being fruitful and multiplying therefore no longer is applicable under the New Covenant.

Christ’s kingdom is to be grown by teaching pagans about the Gospel, and not by Christians having babies.

Continue reading “Utah: Homosexuals Shouldn’t Be Able to Marry Because They “Cannot Procreate””

Catholic Group Warns College Is Not For Women: ‘She Will Not Learn To Be a Wife And Mother’ (article)

Catholic Group Warns College Is Not For Women: ‘She Will Not Learn To Be a Wife And Mother’

As much as I take Baptists, conservative evangelicals, Fundamentalists, and Protestants to task for ignoring singles and worshipping the nuclear family, it looks like the Roman Catholic Church is just as sexist and backwards.

Apparently, Roman Catholics have their own idiotic family-centric marketing or concern group, akin to that of the Protestant “Focus on the Family,” and theirs is called “Fix the Family.” 🙄
(Links to news stories about this group, or to their blog itself, appear father below on this page)

If we go by Fix the Family’s definition of “family,” which I would assume is the nauseating, narrow one of a guy and woman married with a kid, with almost half the American population SINGLE, there aren’t too many “traditional families” for them to fix.

Most singles cannot even marry to start with, and many of us who are traditional or Christian, want to marry before having a kid. We cannot even form a family.

Do these types of family obsessed groups care about this, are they doing anything to help single women who want to marry (such as me) land a husband and make families of our own? Nope, they sure do not. They only pant, whine, and complain about current families who are supposedly under attack.

Continue reading “Catholic Group Warns College Is Not For Women: ‘She Will Not Learn To Be a Wife And Mother’ (article)”

Christian Culture and Daddy Daughter Dates

Christian Culture and Daddy Daughter Dates

Conservative American Christians do have a lot of messed up, weird ideas about gender, gender roles, dating, relationships, and so forth, which I feel contributes to creating hang ups in Christian singles and is one reason many of us have found ourselves single still into our mid 30s and older, despite wanting to get married.

I’ve read that Christian Reconstructionists and Quiverfull groups tend to have “Daddy Daughter” balls and the like, where fathers are supposed to “date” their daughters and ask them to pledge their virginity to them, or weird, troubling things like that.

People should not be sexualizing father-daughter relationships, not even in the guise of being concerned about a girl’s virginity…

By the way, why no concern over a male losing his virginity, why no “Mommy Son” balls, where sons have to promise sexual purity to their mothers? Not that I think there should be such pledges or balls, I mention it only to point out how it’s a troubling, strange double standard among religious groups to freak out over a girl’s sexuality but not a guy’s.

Steph at “Stuff Christian Culture Likes” blog did this post not too long ago:
(Link): #234 Daddy-Daughter Dates

The concept of “Daddy Daughter” dates was also mentioned in a CBE review of the Christian produced film “Courageous,” and the Christian reviewer found the “Daddy Daughter” dating scene a bit creepy, and degrading to the female. You can read that review here: (Link): Sherwood Church movie Courageous, a review (their site is currently down)

Here is the first part of Stephanie Drury’s post; please (Link): visit her blog to read the rest:

    Christian culture is way into daddy-daughter dates. Yes. They’re exactly what they sound like. To their credit, evangelicals have recognized that absentee dads are more or less a societal menace and they appear be taking steps to rectify this within their frame of influence. But the emphasis they place on the daddy-daughter relationship is wildly disproportionate to all other parent-child interaction, to say nothing of creepy.

    Part of the discrepancy can be seen by the quantity of ink devoted to this concept. There are pages upon internet pages about daddy-daughter dates, while the number of pages on mother-son dates that I could find are under a dozen. I found even fewer on daddy-son and mother-daughter dates, but no shortage on the daddy-daughter front. These articles lay out details for how and why and when and where to “date your daughter” (that is really what they call it). This appears to come from a lovely sentiment and honest desire to help shape girls into women who know their worth and won’t settle for dodgy men when they’re adults. And yet an equivalent amount of emphasis is not placed on the mother-son / mother-daughter / father-son relationship, and the tone of fatherly ownership of daughters is remarkable. Christian culture does not appear to have a problem with this.

    Not surprisingly, the chatter surrounding daddy-daughter dates is directly in line with Christian culture’s M.O. of Doing Things and Avoiding Relationship. Rather than learn about why your relationship with your daughter or son is important, rather than seek to understand why vulnerability is crucial to emotional health and that bearing each other’s burdens is where relationship truly takes place, lists are given and dads check them off.

—————
Related posts this blog

(Link): Christian Teachings on Relationships: One Reason Singles Are Remaining Single (even if they want to get married)

(Link): How Christians Keep Christians Single (part 3) – Restrictive Gender Roles Taught as Biblical

(Link): Example of How Christian Teaching About Sex, Marriage, and Gender Creates Hang Ups and Entitlements Among Christians

(Link): Sterling Example of How Christians are Keeping Single Christians Single Forever (Re Very Long Courtship List)

(Link): Misogynistic Christian Single Guy Blog – Keeping Singles Single Re Frank Swift of Geek in the Wilderness

(Link): Christian Males Blaming their Unwanted Protracted Singleness on Feminism – They have the wrong target

Are Fundamentalists Aiming to Out-Breed Secular America?

Are Fundamentalists Aiming to Out-Breed Secular America?

This discusses Christians:

(Link): Are Fundamentalists Aiming to Out-Breed Secular America?

(Link): Interview with Eric Kaufmann, Author of Shall the Religious Inherit the Earth?
– discusses how some Christians believe it is their duty to pop out as many children as possible

(Link): London: A Rising Island of Religion in a Secular Sea by E. Kaufmann

(Link): Battle of the Babies – A new book argues that liberal secularism and high birth rates are fuelling a revival of religious fundamentalism. Caspar Melville speaks to its author Eric Kaufmann

(Link): Are Fundamentalists Aiming to Out-Breed Secular America? (FULL VIDEO, on Fora)


—————————
Related posts this blog:

(Link): Conservatives and Christians Fretting About U.S. Population Decline – We Must “Out-breed” Opponents Christian Host Says

(Link): Misapplication of Biblical Verses About Fertility (also mentions early marriage) – a paper by J. McKeown

(Link): Bay-Bees – Have Lots of Them (Addendum)

(Link): Bay-Bees – Have them, have lots of them and NOW, no matter what say some Christians

(Link): Tell the Baby-Obsessed To Back Off (Letter)

(Link): Why all the articles about being Child Free? On Being Childfree or Childless – as a Conservative / Right Wing / Christian

(Link): I’m Childless, Not Child-Incompetent (editorial by G. Dalfonzo) – The Christian Tendency to Worship Family, Motherhood, and Children

(Link): Cultural Discrimination Against Childless and Childfree Women – and link to an editorial by a Childless Woman

(Link): The Child Free City

(Link): Childfree Christians / Childfree childless

(Link): Do You Rate Your Family Too High? (Christians Who Idolize the Family) (article)

(Link): The Decline in Male Fertility (article)

(Link): Salvation By Marriage Alone – The Over Emphasis Upon Marriage (and “family”) by Conservative Christians Evangelicals Southern Baptists

(Link): Family as “The” Backbone of Society? – It’s Not In The Bible

(Link): A Critique of the Family-Integrated Church Movement by Brian Borgman – Christians turning the family into an idol

(Link): If the Family Is Central, Christ Isn’t

(Link): Refreshing: Christian Researcher Disputes that Youths Are Leaving Churches in Droves, Disagrees that Churches Should Be Family Focused

(Link): Fatherhood Not Quite the Producer of Manly, Mature, Godly Men Some Conservative Christians Make It Out To Be

Misapplication of Biblical Verses About Fertility (also mentions early marriage) – a paper by J. McKeown

Thanks to a recent blog visitor, Mr. John McKeown, I was made aware of this paper (PDF) – I just realized he is also the author!

(Link): US Protestant Natalist Reception of Old Testament “Fruitful Verses”: A Critique – from The University of Liverpool

Above link no longer works, please try this one: 

(Link): Title: US Protestant natalist reception of Old Testament “fruitful verses”: A critique (PDF)

Thank you, Mr. McKeown, for the information. I’ve so far read only about one fourth of the paper – it’s long (and I will be reading the rest eventually) – but one thing I’ve noticed so far is that the paper makes the case that people in Jewish culture of the Old Testament era did not have children so much because they’re considered a blessing in and of themselves, or that God considers parenting a person’s highest calling in life or some other lofty, sentimental, or religious reasoning, but due to practical purposes.

Child mortality was higher back in those days, is one factor discussed. In yet another section, the paper quotes from scribes or kings in the Old Testament who said how wonderful it was to rule numerous peoples, and the reason they felt a higher population was better is that it made a king seem more kingly and impressive, and more subjects in a land meant more tax – in other words, more people meant more wealth for the king.

A desire for increased fertility was also due in part because the more citizens a nation had, the larger their army, which made it easier to defend one’s territory.

Continue reading “Misapplication of Biblical Verses About Fertility (also mentions early marriage) – a paper by J. McKeown”

Odd For a Christian Culture That Worships Kids

Odd For a Christian Culture That Worships Kids / Parenting/ Nuclear Family

(Link): Why Fewer Churches Offer Vacation Bible School

American Christians, especially the fundamentalists, Baptists, and evangelicals, have spent the last few decades opining about the great importance of the traditional family and the value of children.

Some very aberrant, cultic groups (such as Reconstructionists and Quiverfull) have sprung up in Christianity. They feel a woman should never use birth control but that married Christian women should have as many children as possible, and they even maintain a pregnancy that may cause the mother’s death should not be ended – at least some of these groups feel this way in regards to Christian women within their own cults (I may edit this post later to add some links about that).

(Link): Is Wilson Pro-Abortion or Just Following Multi-Generational Faithfulness? – page about men who claim to be Christian but who support the deaths of Non Christian babies and Non Christian children. Excerpt:

    So all that to say, Doug Wilson is not “technically” pro-abortion. He’s just pro-death for anyone outside the covenant community.

Your more mainstream groups, though, such as Southern Baptists, and run of the mill evangelicals, while not going quite as far as the cultic groups, still place family and children on a pedestal.

Sometimes they do this in the midst of speaking out in alarm, hatred, or fear of a secular culture that no longer idealizes the 1950s nuclear family, but also in part because they seem to honestly feel that the Bible upholds that ideal.

When I saw this story on Christianity Today, (Link): Why Fewer Churches Offer Vacation Bible School, I found it strange.

Most churches in the United States worship family, marriage, and children, or at least offer constant rhetoric that indicates they do, such as preachers and conservative Christian groups frequenlty saying children are a blessing from God, abortion is terrible, etc.

But here we have a decades-old, child-centric practice, VBS (Vacation Bible School, usually held during summer months), that is getting cut from church programs.

Birth rates have been on the decline for I don’t know how many years now. Maybe part of the reason VBS is not being offered as much is that there aren’t enough children to justify it – this article though says one reason is lack of funding, but after skimming it some more, it does note lack of children being another reason.

Maybe Christians who bray tirelessly about being committed to children and what a blessing they are, really don’t mean it, just like a lot of conservative Christians claim to support sexual purity / virginity but in practice actually do not (see this link for more on that subject: No, Christians and Churches Do Not Idolize Virginity and Sexual Purity).

Here are excerpts from (Link): Why Fewer Churches Offer Vacation Bible School:

    VBS began in a beer hall more than 100 years ago. Here’s what it looks like today.
    Abby Stocker [ posted 7/31/2013 07:31AM ]

    If you attend a church that has more than 250 Sunday worshipers, or an annual budget of $500,000 (or more), or a pastor between 30 and 48 years of age, odds are good that your congregation offers Vacation Bible School (VBS) during the summer months.

    Your church, however, would be in an increasingly selective group, according to a (Link): recent Barna Group study. VBS programs have declined 16 percent in the last 15 years, from 81 percent of American churches in 1997 to 68 percent in 2012.

    Summer church education “isn’t going away anytime soon,” notes Barna, given that the current two-thirds of churches hosting VBS has been stable in recent years. But what has changed is the reasons why churches choose to drop such programs.

    The biggest change: busyness. “In 2001, only 5% of churches who did not offer VBS stated their reason as not having enough time, or wanting to devote such time to more pressing needs,” writes Barna. “In 2005, this number of time-pressed churches more than doubled (13%), and nearly quadrupled just last summer (19%).”

    Overall, the biggest reasons why former VBS churches have skipped out in recent years are: lack of volunteers (cited by 3 in 10 pastors), lack of children (cited by 1 in 4), and lack of time (1 in 5).

    …On balance, the larger a church (and its budget), the more likely it is to offer VBS. More than 90 percent of churches with budgets of $500,000 or more offer VBS, as well as 86% of churches with more than 250 adult worship attenders.

    Regionally, churches in the South (nearly 3 out of 4) are most likely to offer VBS, whereas churches in the West (nearly 1 out of 2) are least likely.

——————–
Related links this blog

(Link): Why all the articles about being Child Free? On Being Childfree or Childless – as a Conservative / Right Wing / Christian

(Link): I’m Childless, Not Child-Incompetent (editorial by G. Dalfonzo) – The Christian Tendency to Worship Family, Motherhood, and Children

(Link): Jesus’ Family Values by Deirdre Good challenges conservative Christan emphasis on “family” (copy)

(Link): Cultural Discrimination Against Childless and Childfree Women – and link to an editorial by a Childless Woman

(Link): The Child Free City

(Link): Childfree Christians / Childfree childless

(Link): Do You Rate Your Family Too High? (Christians Who Idolize the Family) (article)

The Trend of Older People Becoming First Time Parents

The Trend of Older People Becoming First Time Parents

The person who wrote this page doesn’t seem too keen on the idea that people are becoming parents later in life:

(Link): How Older Parenthood Will Upend American Society The scary consequences of the grayest generation. by Judith Shulevitz

Two reasons I am linking to that page (which is very, very long), is…

1. It points out that older males produce deformed kids. Often, there is sexism involved, where people assume only older motherhood is dangerous, but older males produce defective sperm.

In that way, Shulevitz’s article is similar to this one:
(Link): The Ticking Male Biological Clock – WSJ.com

2. The mere fact the page is discussing the situation at all shows it’s becoming more and more common in American society.

Typical of Christians and conservatives (and I am a conservative myself, but one who disagrees with other conservatives in how they handle or behave about some cultural issues), but in this otherwise left-leaning publication, the author (who I would assume is liberal) chooses to bitch and gripe about the situation, rather than just acknowledge that things change in culture. She sounds like a typical conservative.

Here are excerpts from the very long article:

    by Shulevitz

    Over the past half century, parenthood has undergone a change so simple yet so profound we are only beginning to grasp the enormity of its implications. It is that we have our children much later than we used to.

    This has come to seem perfectly unremarkable; indeed, we take note of it only when celebrities push it to extremes— when Tony Randall has his first child at 77; Larry King, his fifth child by his seventh wife at 66; Elizabeth Edwards, her last child at 50.

    This new gerontological voyeurism— I think of it as doddering-parent porn— was at its maximally gratifying in 2008, when, in almost simultaneous and near-Biblical acts of belated fertility, two 70-year-old women in India gave birth, thanks to donor eggs and disturbingly enthusiastic doctors. One woman’s husband was 72; the other’s was 77.

    These, though, are the headlines. The real story is less titillating, but it tells us a great deal more about how we’ll be living in the coming years: what our families and our workforce will look like, how healthy we’ll be, and also—not to be too eugenicist about it—the future well-being of the human race.

    That women become mothers later than they used to will surprise no one. All you have to do is study the faces of the women pushing baby strollers, especially on the streets of coastal cities or their suburban counterparts.

    American first-time mothers have aged about four years since 1970—as of 2010, they were 25.4 as opposed to 21.5. That average, of course, obscures a lot of regional, ethnic, and educational variation.

    The average new mother from Massachusetts, for instance, was 28; the Mississippian was 22.9. The Asian American first-time mother was 29.1; the African American 23.1. A college-educated woman had a better than one-in-three chance of having her first child at 30 or older; the odds that a woman with less education would wait that long were no better than one in ten.

    It badly misstates the phenomenon to associate it only with women: Fathers have been getting older at the same rate as mothers. First-time fathers have been about three years older than first-time mothers for several decades, and they still are.

    The average American man is between 27 and 28 when he becomes a father. Meanwhile, as the U.S. birth rate slumps due to the recession, only men and women over 40 have kept having more babies than they did in the past.

    In short, the growth spurt in American parenthood is not among rich septuagenarians or famous political wives approaching or past menopause, but among roughly middle-aged couples with moderate age gaps between them, like my husband and me.

    OK, I’ll admit it. We’re on the outer edge of the demographic bulge. My husband was in his mid-forties and I was 37—two years past the age when doctors start scribbling AMA, Advanced Maternal Age, on the charts of mothers-to-be—before we called a fertility doctor.

    … Soon, I learned that medical researchers, sociologists, and demographers were more worried about the proliferation of older parents than my friends and I were.

    They talked to me at length about a vicious cycle of declining fertility, especially in the industrialized world, and also about the damage caused by assisted-reproductive technologies (ART) that are commonly used on people past their peak childbearing years.

    This past May, an article in the New England Journal of Medicine found that 8.3 percent of children born with the help of ART had defects, whereas, of those born without it, only 5.8 percent had defects.

    … What science tells us about the aging parental body should alarm us more than it does. Age diminishes a woman’s fertility; every woman knows that, although several surveys have shown that women—and men—consistently underestimate how sharp the drop-off can be for women after age 35.

    The effects of maternal age on children aren’t as well-understood. As that age creeps upward, so do the chances that children will carry a chromosomal abnormality, such as a trisomy.

    In a trisomy, a third chromosome inserts itself into one of the 23 pairs that most of us carry, so that a child’s cells carry 47 instead of 46 chromosomes. The most notorious trisomy is Down syndrome.

    We have been conditioned to think of reproductive age as a female-only concern, but it isn’t. For decades, neonatologists have known about birth defects linked to older fathers: dwarfism, Apert syndrome (a bone disorder that may result in an elongated head), Marfan syndrome (a disorder of the connective tissue that results in weirdly tall, skinny bodies), and cleft palates.

    Continue reading “The Trend of Older People Becoming First Time Parents”

I’m Childless, Not Child-Incompetent (editorial by G. Dalfonzo) – The Christian Tendency to Worship Family, Motherhood, and Children

I’m Childless, Not Child-Incompetent (editorial by G. Dalfonzo)

A preface before I give the link to the Dalfonzo editorial:

I’ve never had any children either, which, coupled with the “never married” status, means I do not exist in most churches, or, when I do, I get treated like a freak or failure.

Because, you know, there are a lot of so-called Christians who still believe a woman’s only, or highest calling in life, is to be a wife n’ Mom, despite the fact the Bible does not teach this.

By the way, people who know they do not want to have children usually refer to themselves as “Child free,” or “CF.”

Those who want to have a baby but cannot due to infertility or whatever reason, go under the term “Childless.”

I am somewhere between CF and Childless.

Jesus Christ said that believers should not place any sort of relationship above him – not motherhood, fatherhood, marriage, kids, uncles, grandmas – but Christians continue to disobey Christ on these points.

To refresh your memory, here are Christ’s words (this is from (Link): Matthew 10):

    “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to turn

    “‘a man against his father,
    a daughter against her mother,
    a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
    36 a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’
    37 “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

Here’s an editorial by a Christian woman who discusses how culture and churches mistreat women who have never had children – and she is a woman who wanted to have children of her own but was unable to:

(Link): (Link): I’m Childless, Not Child-Incompetent

Quotes from the page:

    by Gina Dalfonzo

    … We hear a lot about the Mommy Wars. But there’s another cultural throwdown going on in the parenting sphere, and that’s the back-and-forth between parents and non-parents.

    This increasingly acrimonious debate gets summed-up in lists of ill-informed assumptions and casually dished-out stereotypes. Both sides fall back increasingly on the old “You just don’t know what it’s like to be us!,” with blog posts like:

    -(Link): 5 Things Parents Need to Stop Saying to Non-Parents
    -(Link): 17 Untruths People Believe About Non-Parents
    -What Is the Deal With the Child-Free Group Hating Children?
    -STFU, Childless People
    -Smug Parents

    The assumptions we throw at each other are unfair and often hurtful.
    Some parents, dealing with the grueling 24/7 reality of raising children, dwell on how the childless just can’t understand them. That sense of belonging to a special, misunderstood group can make anyone who’s struggling feel a little better. Most of us fall prey to that kind of temptation now and then.

    Yet, speaking as one of the childless, the non-parents, the “non-breeders,” the truth is: Just because some of us really don’t know what it’s like to be parents, that doesn’t make us completely ignorant. Or inferior.

    Continue reading “I’m Childless, Not Child-Incompetent (editorial by G. Dalfonzo) – The Christian Tendency to Worship Family, Motherhood, and Children”