Clarification......
Nov. 14th, 2006 12:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
patgundThe rant I posted earlier regarding the "Quiverful"??
It's *NOT* to be taken as a rant against big families, as some people seem to have taken it as, both publically and privately.
I have no problems with large families, provided that
1) The parents can provide for them
2) The children are properly cared for, and
3) All children are treated equally
My problems with the article was more for the reasons this group gave for having the children, the "quantity is better than quality" attitude, the idea that the more children one has the more of an "in" they have with God, some of the scorn that was cited towards women that can no longer have children.
Add to that the political overtones, the sexism, and "we must try to match the breeding rates of non-whites" alluded to in the article, and *that's* the reason for my discomfort on this subject.
If anyone took this as a rant against big families, my apologizes, such was not meant.
It's *NOT* to be taken as a rant against big families, as some people seem to have taken it as, both publically and privately.
I have no problems with large families, provided that
1) The parents can provide for them
2) The children are properly cared for, and
3) All children are treated equally
My problems with the article was more for the reasons this group gave for having the children, the "quantity is better than quality" attitude, the idea that the more children one has the more of an "in" they have with God, some of the scorn that was cited towards women that can no longer have children.
Add to that the political overtones, the sexism, and "we must try to match the breeding rates of non-whites" alluded to in the article, and *that's* the reason for my discomfort on this subject.
If anyone took this as a rant against big families, my apologizes, such was not meant.
