Are you familiar with the Quiver Movement.

[Kerrytravelers]

At this thread http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x30977 the "Quiver" movement was mentioned.

The word "Quiver" stood out to me because in the extended (but much ignored) part of the family, we have some of these nuts. I followed a provided link and check this out.

http://www.quiverfull.com/


A hard-hitting, scriptually based expose on the emotional, physical, and spritual damage caused by the secular idea of birth control.

If you click on "MORE", you get this:
Birthing God's Mighty Warriors
Rachel Scott

A hard-hitting, scriptually based expose on the emotional, physical, and spritual damage caused by the secular idea of birth control.

We are living in the last days. An anointed generation must come to earth to help prepare the way of the Lord. Many in this generation will be children. Will these chosen children be allowed to come? Satan is trying hard to prevent their conceptions and births. Birthing God’s Mighty Warriors exposes how Satan has used the secular idea of choice and modern medical advances to convince God’s people to limit their family size through birth control and sterilization. Sadly, thousands of couples are suffering emotionally, physically, and spiritually because they have chosen their own path. This book exposes how the enemy is using human reasoning, deception in the media, ideas in pop culture, and lack of knowledge of God’s Word to keep God’s people bound to a worldly mindset. Birthing God’s Mighty Warriors offers hope for restoration through God’s forgiveness. By revealing truth, it challenges young couples to learn from the mistakes of the past so they can be open to bring forth this anointed generation of children.


At the resources page, there are plenty of other nut-filled ideas: http://www.quiverfull.com/resources.php#r15

The Birth Dearth
What Happens When People in Free Countries Don't Have Enough Babies
Ben J. Wattenberg



The Way Home
Beyond Feminism, Back to Reality
Mary Pride


Children: Blessing or Burden
Exploding the Myth of the Small Family
Max Heine


Letting God Plan Your Family
Samuel A. Owen, Jr.



Does the Birth Control Pill Cause Abortions?
5th Edition Randy Alcorn

"The Pill is used by about fourteen million American women each year and sixty million women internationally. Thus, even an infinitesimally low portion (say one-hundredth of one percent) of 780 million Pill cycles per year globally could represent tens of thousands of unborn children lost to this form of chemical abortion annually. How many young lives have to be jeopardized for prolife believers to question the ethics of using the Pill? This is an issue with profound moral implications for those believing we are called to protect the lives of children."

Randy Alcorn's booklet, Does the Birth Control Pill Cause Abortions? is the 5th Edition, revised in 2000, complete with endorsements from ten physicians. You can download this from our website free. The published booklet is more suitable as a permanent reference or to give away.



And then there is the discussion board:
http://www.quiverfull.com/clips.php/id24/

Help! Doctor says c-section!
Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 20:34:37 EDT
From:
Subject: help..doctor says c-section.

Hello, my name is . I have posted a few times before. My husband and
I have a dd who is 13 months old and a son that is due on June 8 (so they
say). My post is for advice and prayer. I am currently 38 weeks and am very
big. The baby is measuring 43! My cervix is "unfavorable" meaning that it
is still completely closed and thick. I had a c-section with my first child
because she was measuring big. Her final ultrasound said she was a little
over 10 lb. well, she was only 8.2 at birth. Now, my doctor is concerned
that this baby will be too big for delivery too. I really don't want another
unnecessary c-section. I am scheduled to have an ultrasound Tuesday and then
I am supposed to see the doctor again. I believe that our God is one who
loves impossible obstacles so our prayer is that I'd be in labor before they
even have a chance to do the ultrasound. I am feeling very discouraged and
anxious about this situation because I know that if I do have a second
c-section I will most likely never be allowed to try a VBAC if God blesses us
again. I would love to hear from anyone who has any advice for my husband
and me. If not, please pray that our son would make his appearance feel free
to email me privately if you like.

->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->

Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 22:30:42 -0400
From: Roger & JaneAnn
Subject: Why can't women deliver their babies?

,

I know this isn't your doing at all, but why would they tell you that you can't deliver your babies? If I understood your post, you weren't even allowed to try to deliver your first and now they don't want to even let you try to deliver your second? I was so close to this situation and am thankful that things in my situation worked out the way they did. My first was premature, born at 5 pounds and 9 ounces. The doctor told me that it was a good thing that she was premature because I am "too small down there to deliver anything bigger myself" and had I gone to term I would have had a c-section. My second, 6 years later was born after a swift start to labor in the driveway of my grandma's house....he was 7 pounds and 9 ounces and I didn't even tear!! My third and fourth have gotten a little bigger each, although not all the way to 8 pounds without even tearing.

What criteria do these doctors use to figure out if we are 'too small' and unable to deliver our babies, especially the first? A lady at church, pregnant with #4 is already scheduled for her fourth c-section because she 'can't' deliver vaginally. She hasn't even ever gone into labor because of her 'big' babies (8 pounders).

Also, when I went into premature labor with #1, the ultrasound said that she would be lucky to come out at 4 pounds. I have heard that they can be off by as much as 2 pounds, especially in the later weeks of pregnancy.

Take care and prayers to you and your baby!

Jane Ann

->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->

Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 22:33:19 -0500
From: "David Crank"
Subject: Response to: help..doctor says c-section.

First let me say - I am NOT a doctor. I am just a husband and father whose
wife experienced 4 c-sections before having 2 home VBACs, and who has read a
lot about cesareans, VBACs, home births, etc. Hopefully Doctor John can
respond to your question with his professional opinion. I can't speak to
issue of how concerning your present uterine measurement is or the
assessment of the present condition of your cervix. I will confine my
comments to the issue of having another C-section because the "baby is too
large."

I think many doctors are overly concerned about large babies in general, and
even more so with VBACs. Do babies truly grow too big for delivery? I
suppose if a woman truly has a seriously malformed pelvis for some reason
(i.e. a previous injury), then there truly may be a problem where the baby
cannot pass through. Absent a clear indication that this is the case, our
bias (Mine & Lori's) would be to wait for the baby to come naturally, in its
own time, however big - unless there was strong indication of distress or
danger to the baby.

I've read many times about the inability of doctors to accurately judge that
a baby is too big. Even X-rays do not tell the true story because of the
impact of pregnancy hormones in loosening up connective tissue and how the
pelvis can spread wider during delivery in a squatting position (recently
learned that a woman's pelvis can even separate a bit sometimes when
required).Our first doctor "proved" to us by X-Ray that our first baby was
too large for my wife's pelvis. His conclusion was later proven to be
totally false.

With VBAC's, some doctors are very concerned about uterine rupture. There is
a risk of catastrophic uterine rupture even without prior cesareans. Though
the risk is believed to be higher with VBACs, it has still proved to be very
small. Will a larger baby increase the risk? Maybe a little, but is it
really a significant amount? I don't think so. I read of one 12 lb + baby
born by VBAC as well as numerous others well above 10 lbs. Is a large baby
truly a legitimate contra-indicator for a VBAC? I think most midwives with
extensive VBAC experience would say "NO"!

Research VBACs on the Web for yourself. Perhaps you should get another
doctor's opinion. Don't be pushed into another cesarean unnecessarily. After
the first four c-sections, our approach has been not to willingly accept
another section until it is a proven necessity (in our view - circumstances
like being very late, large baby, extremely long and slow labor, etc., did
not meet this criteria -- things like:a baby stuck in the transverse lie
position, evidence of true fetal distress best addressed by c-section, or a
true inability to deliver the baby - would meet our criteria).

In Christ,
David Crank
www.UnlessTheLordMagazine.com

->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->

Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 23:57:10 EDT
From:
Subject: Re:Subject: help..doctor says c-section.

Hi, I am new to the post and just became Quiver full minded but felt I should
respond. I was told on the last 3 of my 4 pregnancies that I would have a
c-section. Well 4 pregnancies later I have not had one. If you are going to
the hospital to deliver, stick to your guns. There will be tons of equipment
to monitor you and you DO have God on your side. I told the Dr. I wanted to
do everything possible to have a natural birth, I would only do the c-section
if it looked as if the baby or my life was at risk. The Dr. respected that
and we proceeded. On the last birth the Dr. kept insisting that I was
probably going to have the c-section(while I was in labor) because there was
meconium in the waters (baby stool) and he was afraid the baby was at risk
for breathing complications etc. Needless to say she was born with
absolutely no complications and the Dr. was not able to get into the room in
time because she came so fast. I hope this helps and encourages you. I know I
did not have any previous c-sections, but I will share this one last bit of
encouragement.... With my third child at 4 1/2 months pregnant they had to
cut me open because I had a mass on the outside of my uterus that they
thought was cancer, it just turned out to be a fibroid. They said because the
incision was so big(about 6 inches across my abdomen) I would almost
definently have to have a c-section because my muscles would not be strong
enough to go through labor. They went ahead and scheduled me for the
c-section because he had also turned breech. I went in the morning of January
2nd with strong convictions that this baby was to be born naturally. I said
please do one last sonogram because I really want to still go for a vaginal
birth, the Dr. agreed and right before our eyes on the sonogram screen he
turned into the correct postion! Yes, they did have to break my waters, but,
he was born 7 hrs later and was just beautiful! The icing on the cake was
they told me that I would have to have part of my uterus removed because of
the fibroid. I went in 6 weeks later and it was still about 8 sonometers, I
knew in my heart God wanted me to have more children and as I said earlier I
have 4... the rest is HIStory as He is still writing it. I will be praying
for you. God Bless you so much, and I really hope this helps.

Michelle Hanna....mommy to 4


Ot, how about this little gem

What about Natural Family Planning?
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 09:57:14 -0500
From: William
Subject: Natural Family Planning

I thought I saw on the QF web page that members are against "Natural Family
Planning" or timing cycles and testing other bodily changes. Is this so? I
am in opposition to contraceptives (or at least God has been dealing with me
on this one) but I want further information about the opposition to "Natural
Family Planning".

William
Father of 3 "Glory Babies" and Christopher(5), Emily(21 months), Mason (6
months)

->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->

Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 22:49:05 -0500
From: "David Crank"
Subject: QF & Natural Family Planning

To William (& others who may have a similar question),

Yes, I would say that most of us on this list are not in favor of "natural
family planning". Our convictions relate to much more that just opposing
contraceptives. I'll try to briefly explain...

There are many different reasons for leaving conception in God's hands. Just
to briefly touch on some of the major ones:

1) God is far better at planning our families than we are. He knows what the
future holds (when or if you will actually be able to conceive, how things
will change over the 9 months of pregnancy, and the whole future of the
child to be born). He alone knows the perfect time and the "perfect" number.
We are to trust God to provide for us in the necessities of life, can we not
trust Him with this part of our lives as well?

2) God commanded us to be fruitful and multiply. No where did He withdraw
this command or give any indication that we should try to limit our number
of children or "time" them. His commands concerning marriage (i.e. 1 Cor 7)
tend to come in conflict even with "natural" family planning methods. God's
commands to the Israelites concerning when a husband and wife were not to
come together, appear designed to maximize the opportunities for conception.

3) The Christian church and its leaders universally condemned birth control
prior to the 20th century (and many well into the 1st half of the 20th
century). Read some of the writings of Luther, Calvin and many others,
besides the Catholic Popes - ALL were in agreement on this matter. Their
reasons for opposition to birth control were not just due to "artificial"
methods. They were opposed to the idea of Christians trying to limit their
families and taking this matter out of God's hands! The modern acceptance of
birth control is the direct result of women's rights activists, especially
Margaret Sanger, who were very ungodly, opposed to Christian morality, and
advocated abortion as just another acceptable method of birth control.

4) Notice what the Bible says about conception - how often we read of God
opening and closing the womb. Look at what the Old Testament saints
believed - that conception was a matter under God's control. Conception was
not seen as just a matter of chance and when a man and woman came together.

5) If children are truly great blessings, as God's word says they are, why
would we WANT to limit our blessings? Even attempting to delay "blessings"
for a couple of years may sometimes result in preventing any future
blessings (we do not know how long fertility will last). When we see
children a bit more as God sees them - new precious lives to love and to
love us, that can be raised to be bring glory to God - we want as many as He
will give us, even if that means having a child at a very difficult time or
having one that requires a lot of extra care. Look at the attitudes towards
children portrayed by the Old Testament saints (Sarah, Rebekah, Leah &
Rachel, Hannah, ...). Look at the folks singled out for mention in the Bible
for how God had blessed them with a very large family.

Well, this topic could fill a number of books (and has filled a number of
good books - A Full Quiver, by Rick and Jan Hess, is one of the best in my
opinion). Hopefully the above is enough to at least give you a good start on
further considering this issue. You can also read more, in an article
focused primarily on point 5 above, at the following link:
http://unlessthelordmagazine.com/articles/valueof.htm.


In Christ,
David Crank
www.UnlessTheLordMagazine.com

->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->

Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 09:33:34 -0700
From: "Shoucair"
Subject: Natural Family Planning

William,

I guess that my opposition to Natural Family Planning is that it is still a way for me to
think that I can better plan my life than God can. I am now expecting my 8th child and I am
wondering how many I would have if each had been planned by me with all of my worldly
requirements for an appropriate time. I may not have had more than one, yet God's timing is
perfect. I don't have any regrets. He hasn't made any mistakes yet. Just remember that God
is not trying to curse you. He blesses you with children. Also remember that, although He
gives us wisdom, we don't have the wisdom He has.

Peggy

->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->

Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 07:06:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike Southerland
Subject: Re: NFP

There was a question about "What's wrong with Natural Family Planning?" My answer is that I was just where you are as recently as last year in wondering about this. What the Lord has shown me through reading, and on this list, is that we should welcome all the blessings that the Lord will give us. It is absolutely true that if you are determined to prevent pregnancy, the only moral way to do it would be to prevent the sperm and the egg from coming together. NFP handles this nicely, without the danger of abortion typically caused by the pill and other chemical or mechanical methods. However, we must examine our hearts to see why we would want to prevent the Lord from blessing us again. To use any method to prevent pregnancy is to state implicitly or explicitly that you don't "want" a child. I'm finding that the road from BC to NFP to QF is a logical sequence that the Lord tends to bring many of us down. It was the physical hazards of BC that led most of us to NFP. It is mostly spiritual (for me anyway) reasons that have led me and my wife from NFP to QF.

Mike Southerland
husband to Sheri, Daddy to Brittney (8), Michael III (6), Brianna (4), and Justin (8 months)

->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->

Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 19:54:03 -0600
From: "Kim Dasen" <
Subject: natural family planning

Hi,

My issue with natural family planning is that in the scriptures we are told not to withold
our bodies from one another (man and wife obviously), except by agreement for times of
prayer. So, my issue I guess is that there is a scripture concerning "planned abstinence",
and it says ONLY for times of prayer. God created women to be most, um, sexually interested
during their fertile time, so to plan every month to abstain, is, well, it would seem,
non-scriptural...... So, on top of trying to refuse God's blessings, we would be
intentionally going against a very direct scripture verse.....
Any input from anybody else on this is welcome...... I'm not very good at expressing myself
sometimes....

In Him,
Kim





Quiver Articles, which are too scary to be funny

http://www.quiverfull.com/articles.php/id20/
Children Add Up To Asset For Challenger
(A Quiver-full family has the husband running for political office. They are a loony bunch.)

<snip>

She had a desperate, blunt conversation with God one day while standing amid piles of laundry--and this is back when she only had seven children.

"I love 'em, but I think I'm going to go crazy!" she cried to the Lord.

"It was a sacrifice to praise God at that point," Michelle says. But she did. She started singing a song to honor him. Within a week, the children's piano teacher, Ruth Anita Anderson, whom they've come to call Nana, made an offer to help with the laundry.

<snip>

The Duggars consider the Bible something of an owner's manual, a how-to for life. They sometimes employ "time outs" to discipline their children, but they also think the Bible teaches parents to spank and even instructs on how to do it.

The children and Michelle recite a new Bible passage each morning, and they have actions to go with the words. For instance, when reciting Exodus 20, verses 1-17, the children run a finger along their necks in a quick swipe, as if killing themselves, as they read the passage, "Thou shall not kill."





In addition, there is plenty of inaccuracies and downright lies about birth control at this link
http://www.quiverfull.com/birthcontrol.php


The links page is more sites full of crazy shit for crazy people.
http://www.quiverfull.com/links.php

Above Rubies
http://www.aboverubies.org/frameset.asp?w=1024
A magazine to encourage women in their high calling as wives, mothers, and homemakers. Its purpose is to uphold and strengthen family life and to raise the standard of God's truth in the nation.


Open Arms Magazine
http://www.openarmsmagazine.com/
Open Arms Magazine is dedicated to serving and encouraging mothers in the many facets of staying at home and raising a family.


The Patriarch's Path
http://www.patriarchspath.org/
A site published by James and Stacy McDonald, giving insight on issues such as courtship, marriage, modesty, what it means to be a keeper at home, patriarchal issues, the blessing of children, child training, and homeschooling


The Case Against Birth Control
http://home.att.net/~nathan.wilson/brthcntl.htm
by Nate Wilson
From the amount of flame mail I've gotten since posting this article, I'm quite aware that most Christians today disagree with the position of this paper. I'm not out to condemn anybody, I'm not wanting to get involved in a controversy, and I don't want to unnecessarily make a big issue of birth control. This paper is merely intended to be a summary of several books on the subject, and my intent is to provide a balance to the many articles on the Internet offered in favor of birth control. My concern is that too many Christian couples hear the arguments in favor of birth control and make their decision without ever having heard that there might be reasons not to practice birth control. I offer the following arguments so that Christian couples can make more intelligent, informed decisions concerning birth control (hereafter "B.C."). Once a couple makes an informed decision - whether for or against B.C. - this paper has served its purpose in providing part of the information needed to make that decision. Whether or not you practice birth control is YOUR decision, not mine for you, so please don't worry about what I think. What matters is that you can stand before God with a clear conscience on this issue.

God is Sovereign in birth. He opens & shuts the womb; He blesses with children.
The Bible nowhere encourages B.C., but everywhere condones fertility!
Having children is part of the whole picture of a family:
All forms of B.C. increase abortion.
Biblical support is missing:
It's inconvenient
Health problems
OBJECTIONS HOLD NO WATER
Overpopulation
Multiplying like rabbits The average number of children borne by monogamous couples not practicing birth control is only five!
Cost basically, God will provide :crazy:
The myth that children of large families are less intelligent is sheer bunk
Stewardship
Technology is good.
What if I have health problems?
Bible only for Agrarian community
Sex only for Procreation?
A sovereign God can override B.C

CONCLUSION
Given the Bible's pro-children stance and its anti-infertility stance, given the fact that Christians have historically not practiced birth control, given the problems caused by birth control, and given the fact that most reasons for using birth control are not valid, it is a reasonable and good conclusion for a Christian to not practice birth control.






So? This kind of nonsense only pertains to the Crazy 20% who always side right, no matter what the question. Well, those Crazy 20% are working hard to increase the population. We have a few of the Crazy 20% in the family, and let me tell you, they are serious about this and are constantly recruiting new craxkpots into their covens of insanity.

[Missy Vixen]

1. This kind of stuff makes me want to lie down and take a red

Unbelievable. I suppose, in the long run, it's not my problem. At the same time, I will be dealing with the progeny of these for many years in the future.

I worry about the future.

Julie

[Kerrytravelers]

3. If they were minding their own business, I believe their life is their

choice. But they are activity recruiting vulnerable people and they are moving into politics. If we can knock these idiots out politically, after a few attempts, they're hopefully give up and crawl back into their hole. If they are even minimally successful, there is no telling what they will do legislatively. This is how this shit gets started. They get into office and slowly chip away at what we have and carefully slip in a few unnoticed provisions that eventually affect us all in a very bad way.

[Arkansas Granny]

7. This is the very issue that gets to me too. If this is the life-style

they choose for themselves that is most definitely their business and although I think they are misguided, I will not criticize them for it. However, when they try to make their religious beliefs the law of the land, they have gone too far. Freedom of religion is a wonderful thing, but freedom from religion is also necessary.

[Raksha]

31. But fundies NEVER mind their own business!

What they are advocating for themselves today, they will be trying to cram down *OUR* throats tomorrow. That's their M.O.--always has been and always will be.

[Ezlivin]

2. If you can't outwit, outplay or outsmart them, outpopulate them.

Jeez, they sure know how to turn sex into a chore.

[Kerrytravelers]

4. And an expensive chore. My God, we can barely care for our cat...

and we're college educated professional people with solid jobs!

[Ezlivin]

9. Looks like our "girls" - sister Russian Blues

We're childless by choice, but we've had cats for the 28 years of our marriage. Damn, I don't know how people can afford kids. Our "girls" eat Paul Newman's Organic cat food, but we don't have to put them through college!

[ulysses]

5. we've got some extended family like that.

Yikes.

[Kerrytravelers]

6. So do we. And we pretty much have them on ignore.

But when these idiots get into public office, we may all suffer once they get more power- unless we stop them before they get too much of a foothold.

[ulysses]

14. getting this kind of crap plenty of mainstream air time

would go a long way, I think, towards reeling in any big ambitions they might have.

[Kerrytravelers]

20. We can only hope. I would love to see this on ABC or MSNBC or some such

channel. Let those who have been too asleep to see what is going on finally view these sideshow freaks for the danger they possibly pose.

I don't think we'll wake up and overnight, everything will be different. But they've wanted this for decades now and with * and the likes, they finally have bee, enabled and emboldened to make their desperate power grab. Catching them and stopping them early is much easier than dealing with these types when they actually have power. :scared:

[MissB]

8. Ah, yes, a full Quiver.

My opinion of such people is very low.

[muntrv]

10. But if you're a Republican,

we can make an exception for you on birth control and abortion.

These twenty percenters think that we shouldn't have planned parenthood. Does that mean we should wing it?

[LostinVA]

11. Yup... Rusty Yates, the Duggars....

Wonderful poster people, here...

[TNDemo]

12. If God is all powerful and wants you to make a baby,

what difference would a little latex or extra hormones make? Why would you really even need to have sex?? He could just plant it there.

[Kerrytravelers]

13. LOL!

He could just plant it there.

:rofl:

[MissB]

15. Indeed!

:rofl:

He could plant an entire army of His Godly Warriors!

[ulysses]

18. .

:D

[Kerrytravelers]

21. Since fundies also hate sex ed, most probably do think they hatched from

an egg! :crazy:

[TNDemo]

24. Did Eve have a landing strip??

Kinda looks that way...

[ulysses]

36. that's Leda.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leda_and_the_Swan

:)

[TNDemo]

37. Well, I just learned something.

Leda has a landing strip. But I also learned who Leda is. I didn't know!

[Raksha]

32. I can tell you from personal experience that a little latex

is no problem at all for God or (more likely in my case) the Goddess. My goddess-in-training, now finishing her second masters' degree in feminist spirituality, came right through one of those things! Take THAT, you fundie morans!!!

[Blue_Tires]

16. ugh...my snip cannot come fast enough

and yes, i had heard of them before

[MissB]

17. Every Sperm Is Sacred....

[Blue_Tires]

19. ......God gets quite irate!

[0007]

33. ....make His liver quiver

[Tsiyu]

22. These people are psycho

I love the Crank dude and other men who "know all about pregnancy" because their wives gave birth. These bozos have no clue what all those births are doing to their wives.

I personally gave birth to six - but not one after the other - and I can only imagine the physical weariness of women expected to bear babies over and over and over.

When God told Eve she would suffer in childbirth, he also told Adam he would earn his living by the sweat of his brow. Funny how few fundy men actually earn a living from the earth, toiling and sweating. Most of the ones I see are fatasses in business suits or wholesome looking wuss-boys who wouldn't dare get their pretty hands and hairdos messy.

So why the fuck do these sorry ass guys presume to put the burden on their wives when they refuse to follow God's command to Adam??

And why do they presume to tell the rest of the world how to live, or what is "godly?" A man who forces his wife to endure multiple pregnancies without a break is a cruel, heartless piece of scum. You're supposed to be merciful, not a hard-hearted dickhead like these freaks.

The good news is, I used to know some couples like these. Whn their kids grow up, it gets very interesting. Let's just say they don't ALL remain fundies!

In fact, when they have authoritarian, patriarchal asses for fathers and mincing submissive women for mothers they tend to get a bit angry in those teenage years and abandon the bullshit. After all, they get to live it. These people's kids will mostly grow up to be liberals. Watch and see!

[Kerrytravelers]

23. Mr. kt grew up in a fundy house (not as bad as these morans, but... yuck.)

And now, he is to the left of moonbat- just like me! It does happen. We still hold hope for our two nieces and one nephew who is raised in a home of pure insanity.

Let's hope the idea of populating the earth with fundies backfires on them.

[Tsiyu]

34. It has to

the people I know who live like this - with this rigid patriarchal crap dominating every breath they take - are in a fantasy land where everyone is white, dresses like it's the fifties and you don't teach your kids about their own bodies.

The most glaring example is a couple with a son and daughter. (She was unable to have more.) The son, who took his Promise ring and vowed to be abstinent has recently become a father at 17. The mother of his child is 15. So much for abstinence education!

Their daughter, raised in the most rigid, fundy way, is literally dying of anorexia. A silent scream for help....

I feel so sorry for those kids, but they simply point out the danger in raising your kids in fantasy land.

[niyad]

25. one wonders how many of these righteous human pez dispensers are

going to end up on public assistance for which WE will have to pay?

[bobbieinok]

26. more from this mind-set

http://www.visionforumministries.org/sections/hotcon/ht/family/wordofgod.asp

Jennie Chancey Responds
to Titus 2 Cynics

Mrs. M.L. Chancey
Posted: December 10, 2003

....

How does a woman blaspheme the Word of God? This isn’t something we can just brush aside or take lightly as a “cultural thing.” St. Paul evidently believed it would be obvious enough to his readers that he didn’t need to say, “Leaving the home and going out into the workforce is sin,” as Rev. Sandlin seems to think is necessary in order for us to avoid Phariseeism. But do we need such bald statements in order to understand St. Paul? Apparently, blaspheming God’s Word involves doing the opposite of what St. Paul has just exhorted women to do: be “reverent in behavior, not slanderers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things — that they admonish the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands.” Going to the Greek again, the word for “homemaker” used here is oikouros, which literally means “guard or watcher of the house.” Thayer’s Lexicon renders the meaning “keeping at home and taking care of household affairs.” A woman cannot both “keep at home” (or “guard the house”) and “keep” in a separate workplace. She cannot both “obey her own husband” (emphasis mine) and obey another boss (even if it is one for whom her husband has asked her to work).

....

Regardless of whether or not she has an empty nest or is childless, this woman is busy! She is, first and foremost, her husband’s helper — not her children’s helper or her servants’ mistress. The man who is blessed with such a wife can truly find the Dominion Mandate an enjoyable challenge, because he has a serious partner on the home front. What is a second income when you do not have a ruler at home to manage and oversee the affairs immediately under her purview? But a “sin” to leave it and work elsewhere? Them’s hard words! People will get offended if we say a wife working outside of the home is a sin. Poor women who have to work will feel they are second-class Christians or looked down upon by their stay-at-home sisters in Christ. What about women whose husbands have abandoned them? But let’s try to look at this without knee-jerking if we can. We are living under a cursed economy. We are not living under God’s blessing. When the Church abandons “hard” teachings for soft words, the salt loses its savor and is trampled underfoot. When we follow pell-mell in the path of the “working world,” straining after the “American Dream” income, we’re going to fall into the same trap the rest of our culture is in: wives forced to work to make up a “shortfall,” debt, divorce, children handed over to government schools, etcetera. And we’re in it — knee-deep. Where are the older women who are supposed to teach the younger ones how to be sober keepers at home? Oh, their children are all grown, and they have “nothing” to do, so they’ve gotten “real” jobs. What about the women who are to be “washing the feet of the saints” and “ministering to the poor.” Ummm... too busy earning that second income.

The Body of Christ needs its women! It needs singles, newlyweds, mothers, grandmothers, aunts, “spinsters” — every last one of them. And it needs them to embrace the role God has given them without looking back. We have so much to do, and we have so little time to accomplish it all. God has given us a great gift in calling us to the home. Our role is not inferior because it is “unpaid.” Our role is not of lesser importance because it isn’t out in the public sphere. When God created mankind “male and female,” He showed us that it takes both “halves” to make up the whole of humanity. That our roles differ is a cause for rejoicing and glory — not a cause for shame or depression. When both roles complement each other beautifully, we demonstrate to the world a picture of God’s divine image that is breathtaking to behold. We demonstrate the union of Christ and His Bride, the Church. Rejecting our roles or revising them to suit our individual tastes and plans is blasphemy. I didn’t say it; St. Paul did. Is it difficult for every woman to obey the clear command to be a keeper at home? Indeed it is, but, again, it is because we are living under God’s curse (He doesn’t bless an economy built upon fiat money, consumerism, and debt). Instead of seeking to extend the curse even further, we need to be lovingly helping our brothers and sisters in Christ so that those women in tough financial situations can stay at home. After all, when St. Paul writes about widows, does he say they just need to suck it up and get out in the workforce to fend for themselves? Far from it. He calls those who will not provide for widows and orphans “infidels” who have “denied the faith” (1 Tim. 5:7). When a woman has to work outside of the home, it is not an indication of some special blessing; it is a poor reflection on her provider (if she is married) or upon the Church (if she is widowed and has no family). The Body of Christ is to take care of its own.

As co-editor of the BeautifulWomanhood.org site, I receive dozens upon dozens of letters from readers each month. I’ve yet to hear from one woman (aside from the militant feminists) stuck in a “real” job who doesn’t long to return home.

more....

(edit to add)

I found visionforumministries from an article about religious right conferences posted at

http://www.talk2action.com

There are many articles at visionforumministries about how to form a partiarchal society, especially how to raise children (esp girls, so that they will 'love' to be led), etc.

[bobbieinok]

30. this mind-set is NECESSARY for the DOMINIONIST movement

She says it quite clearly

"She is, first and foremost, her husband’s helper — not her children’s helper or her servants’ mistress. The man who is blessed with such a wife can truly find the Dominion Mandate an enjoyable challenge, because he has a serious partner on the home front."

[Tsiyu]

35. Well I guess the woman who was "Far above rubies"

is actually lower than a snake.

Proverbs

Proverbs Chapter 31:10-31

10. A wife of noble character who can find? She is worth far more than rubies.
11. Her husband has full confidence in her and lacks nothing of value.
12. She brings him good, not harm, all the days of her life.
13. She selects wool and flax and works with eager hands.
14. She is like the merchant ships, bringing her food from afar.
15. She gets up while it is still dark; she provides food for her family and portions for her servant girls.
16. She considers a field and buys it; out of her earnings she plants a vineyard.
17. She sets about her work vigorously; her arms are strong for her tasks.
18. She sees that her trading is profitable, and her lamp does not go out at night.
19. In her hand she holds the distaff and grasps the spindle with her fingers.
20. She opens her arms to the poor and extends her hands to the needy.
21. When it snows, she has no fear for her household; for all of them are clothed in scarlet.
22. She makes coverings for her bed; she is clothed in fine linen and purple.
23. Her husband is respected at the city gate, where he takes his seat among the elders of the land.
24. She makes linen garments and sells them, and supplies the merchants with sashes.
25. She is clothed with strength and dignity; she can laugh at the days to come.
26. She speaks with wisdom, and faithful instruction is on her tongue.
27. She watches over the affairs of her household and does not eat the bread of idleness.
28. Her children arise and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praises her:
29. “Many women do noble things, but you surpass them all.”
30. Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised.
31. Give her the reward she has earned, and let her works bring her praise at the city gate.



So I guess we went from a noble woman making her own decisions - running a business, buying property all on her own, making her own money - to a mindless, barefoot pregnant cow?

These freaks have a bible all their own. They don't read the whole thing - only the parts that reinforce their rigid stereotypes.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

27. C-sections in the U.S.

I agree 100% that these are whackos. It's a great post.

I think the reasons the Quiverites reject C-sections are invalid. There's no doubt that (and this has been borne out in the media countless times, as it's now an issue) American obstetricians cannot be trusted, and that they perform needless C-sections for reasons of profit and convenience. No doubt that they perform them on people who definitely do not need them at all (something I consider criminal). However, the Quiver movement is probably ignorant of all of this, and wish to avoid C-sections even when they're vitally necessary for their own religious whacko ideas.

There's definitely no shortage of these whackos in the U.S., and now we have the Quiverites. (sigh)

[kestrel91316]

38. Go ahead and LET the Quiverites reject C-sections...................

if it results in death of the child and/or death of the mother, or permanent infertility, or a retarded child, well then they will simply have to accept it as God's will.

They can hand out lots of Darwin awards for these women, too.

[Batgirl]

28. Please tell me these writings were translated from scrawled pictographs

on the wall of some ancient cave.

The fact that a certain number of our kind believe they owe it to a supernatural being to reproduce as many offspring as possible regardless of their ability to support them financially, physically or emotionally makes me think what a very strange species we belong to. How self-flattering is it to believe that what takes place in one's genital/reproductive region is of enormous and abiding interest to a supreme being. When you've got an actual, all-powerful deity tracking everything that goes into and comes out of your womanly privates, those privates must be pretty damn special.

Maybe fundie-wackos have to denounce even natural family planning in order to be able to reserve the privilege of having sex for married heteros. Sex for enjoyment and without the possibility of conception can be a slippery slope. God only approves of sex that could result in a baby, which is why he hates them gays and other dark-sided fornicators.

[ljm2002]

29. A "quiverfull" indeed...

...it's a quiverfull of unadulterated crap.

Their belief sustains them. But like the Cargo Cultists, their belief is not grounded in reality and it will destroy them. Problem is, it will damage the rest of us too.

If there every is a Rapture, boy, are they gonna be surprised at who gets called...

Hint: not them.

[Kerrytravelers]

39. Giving myself a little kick for the evening crowd.

:kick: