Another Great Family Example.

[Fiannan]

http://www.kxtv.com/storyfull2.aspx?storyid=14826

Hey, they even have the family I linked to a couple of months ago beat. I was just in Russia -- it would be great if people there (and in the Ukraine) followed this family's example -- the birthrate there is way too low, as it is in the USA, Europe, Japan and Australia. Putin is doing his best to institute pro-natalist policies and the birthrate is finally rising. More power to Russia at success at this goal!

[Winnie G]

I saw them on the news this morning they look very happy.

It’s funny when we were posted to Ontario from Alberta the size of our family was commanded on all the time. were we had just moved from we were a small family of four children and one foster son.

Now as the children have grown and the grandchildren come you can never know what happiness truly is.

Becoming a grandparent opened a part of my hart that I did not know was there.

My husband says I am a fierce mother loin he hate to see anyone who hurt my grandchildren. Roarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!

[shanstress70]

Yep - another example of what NOT to do!

There's no way those kids can get the individual attention that they need from their parents.

I would also think it's next to impossible that the guy can provide necessities for them with a security guard's wages. I could be wrong, but the family is probably on welfare. And if so, I think that is VERY unfair to taxpayers.

Fiannan, why are you so caught up in the number of children a family has? My husband and I are happy with our one wonderful son! I'm sure you're happy with your 12, or however many you have.

Different strokes!

[Fiannan]

Never said you should have 17. All I said was this is a remarkable family and that the birthrate might rise if people saw such families as examples of what can be done.

Why be so defensive? Also, this is an LDS oriented forum and I believe the position of the LDS Church is such that large families are a blessing (just the same position as the Bible).

[Maureen]

Fiannan, why are you so caught up in the number of children a family has? My husband and I are happy with our one wonderful son! I'm sure you're happy with your 12, or however many you have.

Originally posted by Fiannan@Dec 16 2005, 01:59 PM

Never said you should have 17.  All I said was this is a remarkable family and that the birthrate might rise if people saw such families as examples of what can be done. 

Why be so defensive?  Also, this is an LDS oriented forum and I believe the position of the LDS Church is such that large families are a blessing (just the same position as the Bible).

But Fiannan, you always find a family with a crazy amount of children. How come you never say a family of 4 is a great example?

M.

[Fiannan]

Because if a family can make it with 17 it is an inspiration to those who question being able to make it with 4 or 5 or even more.

I do not have 17 kids, but I respect this family for doing so.

[shanstress70]

Originally posted by Fiannan@Dec 16 2005, 03:59 PM

All I said was this is a remarkable family and that the birthrate might rise if people saw such families as examples of what can be done.

Some of us do not see the birthrate rising as a good thing.

And I'm not defensive... I just wonder why you get so hung up on this subject.

I would never call them an inspiration. In fact, I feel sympathy for their kids.

We see things so differently, but that's what makes the world go 'round!

[Fiannan]

Leaders of Russia, Sweden, Spain, Italy, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Germany, Australia, Estonia, and even former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan have warned of dangerous consequences if birthrates don't rise.

[prisonchaplain]

Originally posted by Fiannan@Dec 16 2005, 01:59 PM

Also, this is an LDS oriented forum and I believe the position of the LDS Church is such that large families are a blessing (just the same position as the Bible).

←

There is an Old Testament blessing that says "May you're quiver be full." I found out that a quiver was used to hold arrows, and traditionally had five slots. So, I guess that family had three full blessings, and was working towards the fourth.

I checked on the Mosaic law concerning fulfilling God's command to be fruitful and multiply. He claims that the Jews understand this to mean you're supposed to have one of each--a son and a daughter. I've got three girls...but then again, I'm not Jewish.

Big families are usually a blessing. Hey, even marriages are. However, I had a single friend in his forties who said, "Better to be single and alone, than to be married and wish you were alone." Another story--my seminary roommate married for the first time at age 43. His bride was also 43, never married. They won't have natural children, but I believe they are united as God intended them to be.

[Fiannan]

My understanding is that traditional Jewish thought on the commandment to be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth meant just that -- one son and one daughter is not even replacement in real terms, much less multiplication.

Here's some sites that might show what traditional Jewish life patterns were like (and are like for the orthodox believers):

http://www.somethingjewish.co.uk/articles/...ul_and_mult.htm

http://www.birthsource.com/scripts/article.asp?articleid=60

http://www.angelfire.com/ca2/NipponDawn/torah.html

Strange, Protestant Christian thought was pretty much in concensus on the desirability to raise large families and avoid birth control until the general secularization of Protestantism in the mid 20th. Century.

[Winnie G]

I have seen large one family in the church were they worked together to support the family.

The younger ones had paper routs the middle ones work at Mc Donald’s and the oldest worked with their parents in a small family business.

Their child tax credit (once a month check from the government) was over a 1000 + so it all added up, but heaven forbid a child got sick and could not do their paper route.

Every year church members would get gifts and pull together a Christmas hamper for them.

They kept popping them out and even the ward turned on the father.

He left the church and his wife and all 13 children. The wife is 50 +

Oddly enough she pulls it together with out welfare but for heath and drug coverage.

[prisonchaplain]

Originally posted by Fiannan@Dec 17 2005, 09:25 AM

My understanding is that traditional Jewish thought on the commandment to be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth meant just that -- one son and one daughter is not even replacement in real terms, much less multiplication.

I'm sure you are right about Jewish "thought and practice"--at least for the Orthodox. The source I was referring was an Orthodox rabbi, and the "one boy one girl" definition, only fulfilled the REQUIREMENT of the law. The result would be more than replacement, because while the average birthrate may be 50/50, many families do not have both a boy and girl by their second child. In my family, if we were under the Mosaic Law, we would have had to try for a fourth child, with no guarantees. There was a rabbi in this area who had a big party, because his eighth child was his first son!

Strange, Protestant Christian thought was pretty much in concensus on the desirability to raise large families and avoid birth control until the general secularization of Protestantism in the mid 20th. Century.

←

There has been a revival of support for stay-at-home moms and larger families within conservative Christianity. Birth control remains a personal decision, but whenever we see a large family in our churches we tend to smile and compliment them. We joke that whenever a family has a new child they are "promoting church growth the old-fashioned way." We say it with admiration, though.

[glindakc]

shanstress, it is delight and wonder - bringing children into the world. they all have so much potential and can do so much good in the world. i have a very good friend who is 30 with 6 boys under the age of 11, and she is very often publicly ridiculed, but she has so much joy with these boys! they are all such treasures. i agree, a parent shouldn't bring into the world more than they can handle, but the joy of motherhood is just so wonderful and amazing - i honestly think there is no earthly love stronger than a mother's love for her children. and i have seen this with this woman. if you could step into these peoples' shoes for one day and experience all that they experience, you would be amazed.

[sgallan]

i honestly think there is no earthly love stronger than a mother's love for her children.

I only wish this were always the case.

[Fiannan]

The family I illustrated in the beginning of this thread must have a mother who loves and sacrifices for them.

[Guest ToasterOfen]

Originally posted by shanstress70@Dec 16 2005, 12:48 PM

Yep - another example of what NOT to do!

There's no way those kids can get the individual attention that they need from their parents.

I would also think it's next to impossible that the guy can provide necessities for them with a security guard's wages.  I could be wrong, but the family is probably on welfare.  And if so, I think that is VERY unfair to taxpayers.

←

I take issue with Shanstress's comment. My husband is the 11th of 13 children...and they are one of the most loving, supportive close-knit families I know. Their mother was extremely dedicated to them, and still is. And every single one of her children is glad to have come from such a large family. All of the kids have a great relationship with their mother (and father), and always had plenty of attention from them.

Although my father-in-law never made a lot of money, they were NEVER on welfare and never recieved any help...there were some sacrifices to be made, they didn't always get everything they wanted, but that was a good thing because they learned to appreciate each other, and learned to be grateful and take care of what they had. They learned that "stuff" wasn't important; human relationships are important.

And, since my husband came from a large family, he knows the value of work, and he helps willingly and without being asked around the house. A lot of men (and women), especially those from smaller families, never learned or had to take care of themselves or others because mommy always did it for them. I am very grateful for my mom-in-law and what she did for her children, and that my husband is a better man because he came from such a large family. He loves children because he was always around them, and is very involved in raising ours.

I, on the other hand, am the oldest of 2 children. I had almost anything and everything a child could want...I had a billion toys, participated in almost every sport and activity...but we had little to no interaction from our mother (other than her yelling at us all the time). She was too busy with other things and providing "worldly" support. So for Shanstress to say that children in large families don't get the individual attention they need is a bunch of hogwash.

Fiannan Posted Today, 11:39 AM

  The family I illustrated in the beginning of this thread must have a mother who loves and sacrifices for them.

I agree with Fiannan, this mother really loved her children. You have to love them and want them in order to have that many.

Large families tend to appreciate each other more, and learn to work together better than small families because they have to. And that is a very great real-world life skill to have. Most (I said most, not all...) kids that are single children struggle in the world because they never learned to get along and work with other people.

I was Christmas shopping the other day, and only had 3 of my 5 children with me. As I got up to the register, the girl there asked me if they were all mine...I said yes, and that I had 2 more. She then said, "Why do you have so many kids?" I just smiled at the poor thing, so she realized she had stuck her foot in her mouth, so then she said, "I mean, it must be hard." I said "it can be, but I love them all very much and they make my life worthwhile".

Kids are a blessing, and I think it is sad that our world views them as an inconvenience. If they can have and want that many kids, then let them be. If you read the article, they are all happy, including the kids. They know their mother loves them, and they have 16 best friends surrounding them all the time.

[Jason]

Hey Fianan,

Sure the Bible commands large families, that was back when the earth only had a few million inhabitants.

We're looking at a global crisis. We can either kill off the population through war and disease, or starvation.

OR

We can impliment a birth control program and save everyone the hassle.

[Fiannan]

Again, not one single country in Europe (except Muslim Albania) has a birthrate even close to replacement -- nor does New Zealand, Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea or the United States.

Many nations are desperately trying to get their birthrate to climb -- ironic since LDS people are commanded to strive for large families yet some seem to want to ignore that particular commandment (I guess focus on the horrendous sin of getting your navel pierced is a much more pressing issue nowadays). Same with Christian fundamentalists -- the issue of same sex marriage is much more important that commandments in the Bible to raise large families and to oppose divorce.

[Justlooking]

This is awesome. I saw this family on television too. I wonder tho, how do they afford this? I would love a huge family as well.

[Fiannan]

Well, no taxes I suppose after all the deductions.

Also, as the saying goes "cheaper by the dozen". I also doubt they eat much expensive junk food -- I rarely notice too many porkers from large working class and middle class families.

[prisonchaplain]

Originally posted by Jason@Dec 19 2005, 03:45 PM

We're looking at a global crisis.  We can either kill off the population through war and disease, or starvation. 

OR

We can impliment a birth control program and save everyone the hassle.

←

Except...except that westernized countries are now facing a depopulation crisis. We're not going to have enough young workers to support retirees, nor to keep our industries running. Europe and Japan are even worse off than the U.S.--only because of our healthy immigration rates.

The cure to overpopulation is wealth. Countries that experience increasing standards of living also experience decreasing birthrates. As getting "daily bread" becomes certain, parents no longer have many children as a form of insurance for old age. As infant mortality rates lower, people feel less need to just keep having babies so a few will survive.

[shanstress70]

Originally posted by glindakc@Dec 18 2005, 06:15 PM

shanstress, it is delight and wonder - bringing children into the world. they all have so much potential and can do so much good in the world. i have a very good friend who is 30 with 6 boys under the age of 11, and she is very often publicly ridiculed, but she has so much joy with these boys! they are all such treasures. i agree, a parent shouldn't bring into the world more than they can handle, but the joy of motherhood is just so wonderful and amazing - i honestly think there is no earthly love stronger than a mother's love for her children. and i have seen this with this woman. if you could step into these peoples' shoes for one day and experience all that they experience, you would be amazed.

←

Glinda, I know very well the joy of being a mother. I have never received so much joy from anything else in life. I don't know what I would do without my son and my husband.

No one should be ridiculed for having a large number of children... I totally think that is wrong. But I stand by my opinion that 17 kids is way too many. It would be extremely difficult for each child to get the attention that he/she needs from the parents.

And I'm not talking about the latest GameBoy here, because things like that are SO unnecessary. But unless someone is extremely wealthy or on welfare, it would be next to impossible to provide that many kids with the necessities of life.

[shanstress70]

Originally posted by ToasterOfen+Dec 19 2005, 05:27 PM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-shanstress70@Dec 16 2005, 12:48 PM

Yep - another example of what NOT to do!

There's no way those kids can get the individual attention that they need from their parents.

I would also think it's next to impossible that the guy can provide necessities for them with a security guard's wages.  I could be wrong, but the family is probably on welfare.  And if so, I think that is VERY unfair to taxpayers.

←

I take issue with Shanstress's comment. My husband is the 11th of 13 children...and they are one of the most loving, supportive close-knit families I know. Their mother was extremely dedicated to them, and still is. And every single one of her children is glad to have come from such a large family. All of the kids have a great relationship with their mother (and father), and always had plenty of attention from them.

Although my father-in-law never made a lot of money, they were NEVER on welfare and never recieved any help...there were some sacrifices to be made, they didn't always get everything they wanted, but that was a good thing because they learned to appreciate each other, and learned to be grateful and take care of what they had. They learned that "stuff" wasn't important; human relationships are important.

And, since my husband came from a large family, he knows the value of work, and he helps willingly and without being asked around the house. A lot of men (and women), especially those from smaller families, never learned or had to take care of themselves or others because mommy always did it for them. I am very grateful for my mom-in-law and what she did for her children, and that my husband is a better man because he came from such a large family. He loves children because he was always around them, and is very involved in raising ours.

I, on the other hand, am the oldest of 2 children. I had almost anything and everything a child could want...I had a billion toys, participated in almost every sport and activity...but we had little to no interaction from our mother (other than her yelling at us all the time). She was too busy with other things and providing "worldly" support. So for Shanstress to say that children in large families don't get the individual attention they need is a bunch of hogwash.

Fiannan Posted Today, 11:39 AM

  The family I illustrated in the beginning of this thread must have a mother who loves and sacrifices for them.

I agree with Fiannan, this mother really loved her children. You have to love them and want them in order to have that many.

Large families tend to appreciate each other more, and learn to work together better than small families because they have to. And that is a very great real-world life skill to have. Most (I said most, not all...) kids that are single children struggle in the world because they never learned to get along and work with other people.

I was Christmas shopping the other day, and only had 3 of my 5 children with me. As I got up to the register, the girl there asked me if they were all mine...I said yes, and that I had 2 more. She then said, "Why do you have so many kids?" I just smiled at the poor thing, so she realized she had stuck her foot in her mouth, so then she said, "I mean, it must be hard." I said "it can be, but I love them all very much and they make my life worthwhile".

Kids are a blessing, and I think it is sad that our world views them as an inconvenience. If they can have and want that many kids, then let them be. If you read the article, they are all happy, including the kids. They know their mother loves them, and they have 16 best friends surrounding them all the time.

←

Sorry to offend you Toaster, but that is my opinion. I know that extreme circumstances do occur and I'm sure your husband's family was out of the ordinary. But I stick to my opinion that it isn't the best idea to have 17 kids. But hey, if you think that's a good idea, more power to ya! I judge not!

[Guest sugarbay]

IMHO, in these last days there are many souls still waiting to be born. Father will bless those who abide by the precept of "multiply and replenish the earth." Granted it was given to Adam and Eve, but we are told that we are to love one another. That includes those who have gone and those yet to be. How loving is that to provide our brothers or sisters with a body. If someone wants to have 17 children, more power to them. They may have a hard time in mortality but throughout the eternities how blessed they will be if they are righteous, because of their posterity.

[lovely]

Originally posted by Fiannan@Dec 19 2005, 12:39 PM

The family I illustrated in the beginning of this thread must have a mother who loves and sacrifices for them.

←

Regarding the family at the top . . . my husband is one of 9 kids. They are not LDS, just people who preferred to have kids! They were blessed,and being the youngest, my hub did not suffer in the love department. On the contrary. His mother died when he was 17, nothing to do with birthing so many kids, and he has some wonderful memories of his mother! And for that matter, his father. Now, the father did work full time and was not as available for the older 6, but honestly this is more due to the culture not any time constraint, he was home by 4 each day.

I think people like to make generalizations about large families as if it is wrong. To each their own. The ZPG people have a right to have no children, while the rest of us make a very personal and private decision as to how many we'd like to have! I would love to have many and am having trouble. I have only 2. THey are 8 years apart. No birth control.

Nature has a way of monitoring the numbers. We, as believers, need to trust that the Lord will take care of his own. That His earth will produce all we need, as it does now! We are just wasteful humans who shamefully throw away left overs and allow food to rot without sharing with those who have none.

I see how complicated it must have been for that one family with 13 kids. I think it is commendable that the church gathered around them and gave. I LOVE to hear that. My neighbors have 8 kids. They are pastors. They get tons of goodies. On the other hand, the other neighbor has no church family and are having their fist child. NO one has brought them food (I plan to when it is born) and no one has had a shower for them.THey are good people. The shower is not the issue. What is bothersome to me is how someone who can afford to buy a $400 vacuum and has 8 kids wearing Ralph Lauren gets more given to them than someone who humbly lives out their existence and are also good and DESERVING people. Hero worship of ministers is sickening in my book. SO I'm very glad to hear that the church stepped up and did what the Lord commanded, to bear each others burdens! People too often give to pastors to earn brownie points or favor, while not even smiling at the average Joe Smoe at church or in the community. I don't like everyone, but I try to be kind and give out of my insecurity to do damage to the kingdom of hell. I would rather do that than think that I am above anyone or earning any earthly reward.

Here is to 4 more kids in my house!!!!!!!!!!!