Guest curvette Posted May 6, 2004 Report Posted May 6, 2004 It always amazes me to hear the differing accounts of womens' labor experiences. My mom was never nauseous, never gained more than 18 lbs during her pregnancies, then just popped us out with very little pain. I was sicker than a dog, gained 55-90 lbs progressively with five children, and had mostly very painful births. I always had to work my butt off (literally) for a year after birth to get back in shape, only to get pregnant again. Some women, the weight just falls off. We're all SO different physically that it's only logical that our emotional and mental capacity to mother large families varies dramatically as well. That's one of the reasons I feel strongly that this is a personal issue and cannot be governed by a blanket rule.
srm Posted May 6, 2004 Report Posted May 6, 2004 is this your LINK? It might be easier to just post it.
srm Posted May 6, 2004 Report Posted May 6, 2004 Originally posted by juliejalago+May 2 2004, 07:01 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (juliejalago @ May 2 2004, 07:01 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Faerie@May 2 2004, 05:59 PM...I would have a nice counseling session w/ your bishop and then pray about all you've read and learned.The problem with that is either I am going to get one man's opinion -- which could very well differ from the opinions of all the other bishops out there -- or else he is going to play it by the book and give me the standard answer that is SRM's favorite quip, "It's between you and the Lord." If everything is between us and the Lord, what do we need prophets for? But aside from that, I do appreciate your advice, Faerie. I know I need to include prayer with my study. My favorite quip? come on...I only say that when it really is between you and the Lord.
srm Posted May 6, 2004 Report Posted May 6, 2004 Originally posted by juliejalago+May 2 2004, 07:01 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (juliejalago @ May 2 2004, 07:01 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Faerie@May 2 2004, 05:59 PM...I would have a nice counseling session w/ your bishop and then pray about all you've read and learned.The problem with that is either I am going to get one man's opinion -- which could very well differ from the opinions of all the other bishops out there -- or else he is going to play it by the book and give me the standard answer that is SRM's favorite quip, "It's between you and the Lord." If everything is between us and the Lord, what do we need prophets for? But aside from that, I do appreciate your advice, Faerie. I know I need to include prayer with my study. We need prophets so that we know when it is between you and the Lord. There are somethings that are not. How do we know? The prophet has told us and we have received an verifcation for the Lord. You are on safe ground if you follow the current instuctions from the GHI. Which DOES state that it is a decision that needs to come from you, your spouse confirmed through prayer. Ergo; (according to the Church) is really is between you and the Lord.
srm Posted May 6, 2004 Report Posted May 6, 2004 It also cost so much more and there is so much more expected from the parents today than just a few decades ago.A great point. There was a time when financially a lot of children was an asset...today it is a financial liability.
juliejalago Posted May 6, 2004 Author Report Posted May 6, 2004 Originally posted by srm@May 6 2004, 11:02 AM is this your LINK? It might be easier to just post it. I could have done that, but I wanted to highlight particular quotes. I didn't post them all, you know.
juliejalago Posted May 6, 2004 Author Report Posted May 6, 2004 Originally posted by srm+May 6 2004, 11:03 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (srm @ May 6 2004, 11:03 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by -juliejalago@May 2 2004, 07:01 PM <!--QuoteBegin--Faerie@May 2 2004, 05:59 PM...I would have a nice counseling session w/ your bishop and then pray about all you've read and learned.The problem with that is either I am going to get one man's opinion -- which could very well differ from the opinions of all the other bishops out there -- or else he is going to play it by the book and give me the standard answer that is SRM's favorite quip, "It's between you and the Lord." If everything is between us and the Lord, what do we need prophets for? But aside from that, I do appreciate your advice, Faerie. I know I need to include prayer with my study. My favorite quip? come on...I only say that when it really is between you and the Lord.ROFLOL! You're making my sides hurt.Originally posted by srmYou are on safe ground if you follow the current instuctions from the GHI.I keep waiting for the Church to make the GHI part of our official canon of scripture so that the members can actually have unbridled access to it. Seriously though, if the GHI is our standard of doctrine, why isn't it available to order through the distribution center so members can use it for personal study? Instead, it [the complete version] is given only to bishoprics and stake presidencies, with instructions not to allow it out of their hands, like it is top secret or something. I guess only the privileged few can be sure what "safe ground" is, according to that theory.
Guest estump Posted May 6, 2004 Report Posted May 6, 2004 Curvette, I could NOT agree more. After three cesarian sections...Father let me know I had done my fair share of giving of my body to give other's a body! I needed to get healthy and having more children no longer became an option after Carolina passed. When doctors could not give us enough assurance that we wouldn't have another child w/ a CHD, DH got fixed. It has been made known to us that I would likely not survive another pregnancy...or rather just not live as long as I might have otherwise. I want to live as long as I can thankyouverymuch!I am just now making the trek to get the weight off and we think now a blood clot formed in my leg...why, because of those silly pregnancies and having children 10 pounds and over. So yeah....my almost 27-year-old body is betraying my very child-like will. I am not happy about it...so it's off to the doctors/hospital tomorrow for tests. I am not happy, because I have been working so hard to get healthy again...eeeeeerg!My SIL is like your mom was...she is back into her size 7/8 clothes a week after she gives birth. eeeeeerg!I only pray my daughter has an easier time than I did.
Guest curvette Posted May 6, 2004 Report Posted May 6, 2004 Originally posted by estump@May 6 2004, 04:32 PM I am just now making the trek to get the weight off and we think now a blood clot formed in my leg...why, because of those silly pregnancies and having children 10 pounds and over. So yeah....my almost 27-year-old body is betraying my very child-like will. I am not happy about it...so it's off to the doctors/hospital tomorrow for tests. I am not happy, because I have been working so hard to get healthy again...eeeeeerg! Hang in there Erin! There's plenty of time to get your figure back. It sounds like you need to continue focusing on getting healthy first. It seems like forever, but you'll get there!
Guest curvette Posted May 6, 2004 Report Posted May 6, 2004 Originally posted by srm@May 6 2004, 10:22 AM You are on safe ground if you follow the current instuctions from the GHI. Do you mean the CHI? (Church Handbook of Instructions?)
Faerie Posted May 7, 2004 Report Posted May 7, 2004 we've decided that if i'm unable to have a lot of children, we're going to adopt
Cal Posted May 7, 2004 Report Posted May 7, 2004 Originally posted by estump@May 6 2004, 04:32 PM Curvette, I could NOT agree more. After three cesarian sections...Father let me know I had done my fair share of giving of my body to give other's a body! I needed to get healthy and having more children no longer became an option after Carolina passed. When doctors could not give us enough assurance that we wouldn't have another child w/ a CHD, DH got fixed. It has been made known to us that I would likely not survive another pregnancy...or rather just not live as long as I might have otherwise. I want to live as long as I can thankyouverymuch!I am just now making the trek to get the weight off and we think now a blood clot formed in my leg...why, because of those silly pregnancies and having children 10 pounds and over. So yeah....my almost 27-year-old body is betraying my very child-like will. I am not happy about it...so it's off to the doctors/hospital tomorrow for tests. I am not happy, because I have been working so hard to get healthy again...eeeeeerg!My SIL is like your mom was...she is back into her size 7/8 clothes a week after she gives birth. eeeeeerg!I only pray my daughter has an easier time than I did. Your post is a perfect example about how wrong it is to make hard fast rules about human behavior. Not everyone is cut out to have 10 kids, 5 kids, 1 kid, or even ANY kids. It is all a matter of personal choice and individual decision.I don't really take ANYTHING in Genesis literally, as it is full of alegory and symbolism. Therefore, to refer to "be fruitful and multiply" as some sort of literal edict for every man and woman in the 21st century, is silly.
Luzia Posted May 7, 2004 Report Posted May 7, 2004 Originally posted by Faerie@May 6 2004, 06:18 PM we've decided that if i'm unable to have a lot of children, we're going to adopt I used/still think that I might adopt instead of having my own children.*shrugs*Too afraid of giving birth.Heh.
Guest curvette Posted May 7, 2004 Report Posted May 7, 2004 Originally posted by Cal@May 6 2004, 05:27 PM I don't really take ANYTHING in Genesis literally, as it is full of alegory and symbolism. Therefore, to refer to "be fruitful and multiply" as some sort of literal edict for every man and woman in the 21st century, is silly. I agree that much of Genesis is symbolic. Also, Adam and Eve (if they were literal people) had a whole planet to begin populating, of course the Lord would command them to do so. Our situation is a wee bit different.
Guest curvette Posted May 7, 2004 Report Posted May 7, 2004 Originally posted by Faerie@May 6 2004, 05:18 PM we've decided that if i'm unable to have a lot of children, we're going to adopt A wonderful choice! I just wish the adoption process was easier. Private adoption is terribly expensive (upwards of $40,000.00 per child!)
Tr2 Posted May 7, 2004 Report Posted May 7, 2004 we've decided that if i'm unable to have a lot of children, we're going to adoptDo you have any children now?
Faerie Posted May 9, 2004 Report Posted May 9, 2004 i'm finally pregnant w/ baby #1..but i had a very hard time getting here, so adoption may still be in our future... and the church subsidizes a HUGE portion of adoption costs..the maximum the church charges for a newborn adoption is 10K...starts at 4K and it's based on 10% of your income... and i agree w/ whomever pointed out the proc on the family where our current prophet upholds the "multiply and replenish the earth" commandment...
Guest bizabra Posted May 9, 2004 Report Posted May 9, 2004 Originally posted by Faerie@May 8 2004, 06:09 PM i'm finally pregnant w/ baby #1..but i had a very hard time getting here, so adoption may still be in our future...and the church subsidizes a HUGE portion of adoption costs..the maximum the church charges for a newborn adoption is 10K...starts at 4K and it's based on 10% of your income...and i agree w/ whomever pointed out the proc on the family where our current prophet upholds the "multiply and replenish the earth" commandment... Why should THE CHURCH charge ANYTHING for sell, er, I mean, adopting out all those poor unfortunate illegitimate babies born to mormon teens? Why not just GIVE THEM AWAY? Eh?Sorry, I WAS a pregnant mormon teenager and I WAS involved in the LDS Social Services program for pregnant teens, so I have a different take on the whole matter. Out of the 8 girls who met in the weekly "support" group, I was the ONLY ONE living at home who was keeping her baby. The rest had been shipped out and were giving up their babies so they could spare their families the shame and embarrasment, so "no-one would have to know"!!!!!!!Only one was older than 18 and she was the only one who truly wanted to give her baby up, the rest were all jealous of me and were FORCED to do it. Thank god I have supportive parents who would rather face the "shame" of it all than give their grandchild away. That grandchild is now 27 years old and has given ME 3 well-loved and beautiful grandchildren! THANK the goddesses (LOL) that my parents would not budge and supported what I wanted, which was to keep my baby. It wasn't easy, but it was worth it, even IF all the RM young men never looked at me twice, except for the one who had an agreement with his folks to take out every single young woman in the STAKE (that was a high school grad, I should add) before he would choose one to marry. How humiliating is THAT!Anyway, THE CHURCH could easily cover all the costs involved, even mormon lawyers could do the legal work pro bono. It reeks of baby selling to me.
Tr2 Posted May 9, 2004 Report Posted May 9, 2004 Why should THE CHURCH charge ANYTHING for sell, er, I mean, adopting out all those poor unfortunate illegitimate babies born to mormon teens? Why not just GIVE THEM AWAY? Eh?Because the LDS church is more of a business than a church.
srm Posted May 10, 2004 Report Posted May 10, 2004 Originally posted by curvette+May 6 2004, 08:24 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (curvette @ May 6 2004, 08:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Faerie@May 6 2004, 05:18 PM we've decided that if i'm unable to have a lot of children, we're going to adopt A wonderful choice! I just wish the adoption process was easier. Private adoption is terribly expensive (upwards of $40,000.00 per child!) AND...It is soooo cheap to make your own!
Snow Posted May 10, 2004 Report Posted May 10, 2004 Originally posted by Tr2@May 9 2004, 04:19 PM Because the LDS church is more of a business than a church. What a buffoonish and idiotic thing to say. I am surprized. It is so unlike you.
Guest TheProudDuck Posted May 10, 2004 Report Posted May 10, 2004 I don't agree with the Church's earlier stance effectively banning all birth control, but on reflection, I can see at least some point to it. Birth control isn't foolproof. If a couple intends to prevent the birth of additional children, and an accident happens, the couple may be tempted to resent the child for the inconvenience and expense, and overlook the joy his birth is supposed to bring. Not that all parents of "accidents" resent them, but ultimately, either you view a child's birth as a blessing or a hassle. To people on the edge of goodness (which includes all of us in some area or another), it may not take much to push them into ugly territory. So I do have some sympathy for the earlier Church leaders' stance against birth control. It is even more understandable, given their backgrounds in an agricultural society where additional children meant additional farm help, and whose costs (mostly food and clothing) could be taken care of by economizing and self-sufficient home production. Now, the costs of additional children are fixed cash expenses (health insurance, college, etc.), so the calculus is changed a bit. People are not meant to run faster than they have strength. If the earlier Church members, in their more large-family-friendly society, were running as fast as humanly possible in this area, then I would think that raising an equivalently-sized family, in today's economic environment, involves a faster run, which may be beyond the speed that is possible and therefore required.
Faerie Posted May 11, 2004 Report Posted May 11, 2004 The quotes that got me going:"Because the LDS church is more of a business than a church." TR2"AND...It is soooo cheap to make your own!" SRM"Anyway, THE CHURCH could easily cover all the costs involved, even mormon lawyers could do the legal work pro bono. It reeks of baby selling to me. " BizabraThe "fees" that the church does not cover are neccessary. It's not "baby selling" and how disgusting for ANYONE to dare suggest that. Biz: I'm sorry you had such a "terrible" experience, but get over it. Not all babies in the adoption program come from pregnant teenagers and not all pregnant teenagers should keep their children. Think of the thousands of infertile couples who have been blessed through the miracle of adoption. Don't like it? Should have kept your pants on IMHOI thought about this more last night and realized how mean this was. yes, hormonal, forgive. Mind's thought processes aren't going too smoothly right now. The "don't like it" part is more aimed at all pregnant teenagers whining because someone who knows better thinks they should do what's best for that child and give it to a home where it can be raised in an eternal family. I've heard this "criticism" of the church in the past and always thought it was laughable. I think it's silly to talk so harshly about the church just because you don't agree w/ how they handle teenage pregnancy. Again, forgive.Yes, the church is SO evil and SO business-like in making someone PAY for a child, cuz you know...getting pregnant and birthing a child yourself is free too!! Oh wait!! The church should pay for my maternity bills!!! I DEMAND A FREE BIRTH!!! Heaven forbid you actually help out the woman who's sacrificing a large chunk of her life!! Heaven forbid YOU help pay her medical bills and lawyer fees. Get real. First you complain that adoption is so expensive, but then you chastize and condemn the church for subsidizing 75% of the cost!!!and SRM...it's not always "cheaper" to "make one." Grow a sensitivity center in your brain while you think about that one.Disgusting...
Guest bizabra Posted May 11, 2004 Report Posted May 11, 2004 Originally posted by Faerie@May 10 2004, 09:13 PM The "fees" that the church does not cover are neccessary. It's not "baby selling" and how disgusting for ANYONE to dare suggest that. I'm sorry you had such a "terrible" experience, but get over it. Not all babies in the adoption program come from pregnant teenagers and not all pregnant teenagers should keep their children. Think of the thousands of infertile couples who have been blessed through the miracle of adoption. Don't like it? Should have kept your pants on IMHOYes, the church is SO evil and SO business-like in making someone PAY for a child, cuz you know...getting pregnant and birthing a child yourself is free too!! Oh wait!! The church should pay for my maternity bills!!! I DEMAND A FREE BIRTH!!! Heaven forbid you actually help out the woman who's sacrificing a large chunk of her life!! Heaven forbid YOU help pay her medical bills and lawyer fees. Get real. First you complain that adoption is so expensive, but then you chastize and condemn the church for subsidizing 75% of the cost!!!and SRM...it's not always "cheaper" to "make one." Grow a sensitivity center in your brain while you think about that one.Disgusting... I didn't complain that the cost of adoption is so expensive, and I also did not "chastize or condemn" THE CHURCH for paying a portion of the cost. I did not claim that THE CHURCH is "evil" or "business-like". I also did not say that THE CHURCH ought to have paid for the birth of my own child, my parents did that! Please keep your various posters straight in your mind before you start screaming at them, thank you very much.What I DID say is that I think THE CHURCH ought to pay the entire cost of adoption through their Social Services network, as THE CHURCH could easily afford it and/or ask attorneys to cover the costs pro bono (perhaps in lieu of tithing payments).I do not think that "all pregnant teens" should keep their babies. The point of my post was that my experience with LDS Social Services (and it was NOT a "terrible" one for me, either) indicated to me that THE CHURCH (or at least the members) are anxious for unmarried teens to give their babies up, there seemed to be little choice for the girls involved, they were made to feel deep shame for putting their families in this "situation" and were sent away to hide what they had done. They were counseled to forget about it and not tell anyone, not even their future husbands! but to put it behind them and move on. "No-one would ever have to know"!I think adoption is a wonderful thing, IF it is what the mother wishes, NOT if it is what her parents or her church wishes. Since THE CHURCH and the parents want the babies adopted out, then I think THE CHURCH ought to fund it!Please don't come out swinging if you are not clear what your target is, honey.BTW, I have LIVED the consequences of my lifes actions, both the good and the bad, I don't need your condescension or condemnation. So just stuff a sock in it, willya? I'll keep my pants on or take 'em off as I wish! LOL
Guest curvette Posted May 11, 2004 Report Posted May 11, 2004 Originally posted by Faerie@May 10 2004, 09:13 PM Don't like it? Should have kept your pants on IMHO I think you are a wee bit hormonal. Maybe you could get a grip before you continue posting.
Recommended Posts