Escape From Duggarville

[Slartibartfast]

It seems to me that some are more invested in attacking Christianity than many Christians are in worrying about any criticism.  

 

Christianity is the majority faith so it is easy to see why one might feel the need to constantly attack the status quo but sometimes it does come across as bigoted rather than just trying to convey their own beliefs in a respectful manner.

 

I have some atheist friends on FB and I did unfriend one who felt the need to constantly post, "Christians are dumb blah blah blah" type articles. I have another friend who does post atheist content but it is about what she feels rather than just attacking someone else.

 

It might be the majority faith but that doesn't mean that people who hold that faith don't have legitimate opinions worthy of mutual respect rather than just constantly being the biggest dodge-ball target. Maybe sometimes it isn't, "Christians should be less butthurt" than, "maybe sometimes people could calm down a little rather than wanting to spend so much time making sure Christians know they are wrong."

 

If the only relationship with Jesus someone is capable of having is from an extreme legalistic cult then that is their problem, it isn't my problem and it doesn't mean that my beliefs are dumb. I do think it is terribly sad to see someone so damaged, so harmed by what is, IMO, a message of love and peace but not everyone gets the same message, unfortunately. Many people often have messed up relationships with their families as well. This is why God invented psychology. (which is a joke)

 

I am not remotely QF and have no investment whatsoever, if someone wants to accuse me of some sort of investment in QF then I will lay on the floor, under a blanket, and pretend none of this exists. I don't care what people do, I just believe in personal freedom as long as it isn't hurting anyone (I am not a Libertarian) and I don't have to hear about it if it is icky.

[GoodGrief]

I seem to recall that there were some serious questions about the honesty of the NLQ founder and her site, but am not coming up with links right now.  Stories that were fabricated, conversations deleted (online fights between V and her daughter, that seemed to indicate that V was as much abuser as abused.)  I am not at all a Quiverful adherent, but I'm not entirely sure the NLQ stories are on the up and up.  I'll continue to look and see what I can find.

[Audrey]

I rather think the point some were trying to make is that having children close in age is no guarantee of friendship between the children. Nor is being separated by X years a guarantee thT siblings won't be friends.

 

 

Exactly.  (and now I'm taking off on a wee tangent...)

 

There are no guarantees of anything at all when you have kids, no matter how much you think you are planning and "doing it right."

 

There are no guarantees that you can even get pregnant, or carry a baby to term, or that the baby will be born alive or born a boy or a girl or both, or that the baby will be healthy.

 

There are no guarantees as to the personality of any child, or whether they will have intellectual or mental or emotional challenges, or whether they will like or dislike their siblings, or whether they will like or dislike you, the parents.

 

There are no guarantees.  Period.  So you can sit there and say "this is how to make a child xyz" and you're still full of it, even if it seemed to have worked for your particular child.  Until each child is delivered with a customized handbook specifically for that child, then everyone is just speculating what is the "best way" to parent that child.  It can be a fun kind of crapshoot sometimes, but for some, it just isn't, and telling them how they're supposed to "fix" that child is a bit a$$hole-ish, AFAIC.

[countrygal]

I believe that quiverful and patriarchy culture to be abusive, limiting, women hating, and full of dysfunction.

 

I will speak about that whenever it comes up.

 

I have been around and worked with such families , and the related theology of conservative Christian culture, for years and I care about and worry about those families daily

 

And the Duggars *invite* discussion by making their living based on fame and ratings.

 

 I agree with what you are saying, but I have an honest question (not just to you, Joanne) that I think of when these type of threads come up: Do all non-Christians view all conservative Christians in this light - as dysfunctional patriarchal cults?  I just get the sense on this forum that non-Christians group ALL Christians in this way. When these threads come up I feel as though the OPs are stereotyping or have a narrow minded view of Christians. That's what is insulting to the Christians on this board. I know people who have never used BC and have many children yet have no problems when others use it, their husbands aren't tyrants, the wives and daughters have freedom to pursue educations and careers. I've also heard of tyrant, abusive, controlling patriarchal husbands who aren't Christian. It's important to talk about abuse in all forms and advocate for victims, but I'm not sure why it's acceptable to throw a whole category of people into it. I consider myself a conservative Christian, but I have used bc, have a college education, worked until I had my 4th child, and have a husband who could care less what I do (as long as I'm not running around or spending ourselves into financial ruin!) ;) Maybe I'm not 'conservative' enough to fall into other's perceptions of 'conservative Christian.' Again, I just perceive stereotyping in the form of these posts. It's not the actual article that gets posted, just the feeling of the judgmental mindset behind it. I'm not trying to attack anyone including the OP. Just trying to explain why Christians get upset about posts like this. Hope it makes sense.

 

[AMJ]

Alright, I'll tackle this one. But I want to make very clear up front that I am not criticising anyone personally, I am not claiming that anyone doesn't love their kids, I am just trying to explain why people who believe 'children are a blessing' might make different choices. I am friends with many many people who choose to limit the number of children they have, it's a non-issue for me. So there is no offence meant, ok? 

 

You love your children, they cannot be more of a blessing to you than they are now. What can be a blessing is another child. That other child does not in any way effect your previous children and how much they bless you, having another child is a new, added blessing. If children are a blessing then don't we want as many blessings as we can? That doesn't value or devalue previous blessings, it just adds more. A new child would bring new personality, new joys the other 4 do not, it multiplies. So no one is saying you don't love your children, just that another child would, in their opinion, add to that even more. 

 

Again with your friend, the issue of another child bears no relevance to the amount of blessing the first is. It feels strange to talk about it in a mathematical way but that's the only way I can think to explain it. It's also a misconception that quiverfull is about having as many kids as possible, it is about trusting God with the number. In your friends case, God obviously did not plan for her to have 10 kids, and that's ok, that is Gods plan for her and he knows what he's doing. Maybe this child needs the single child enviroment for what she will do in the future, maybe God has a purpose for the mother that requires her to have less commitments on her time than a mum of 8 would. 

 

Your nephew, in the minds of QF families, is valuing his ministry above children. In their minds, if he truly believed children were a blessing he would want his own children, and he is choosing not to have them for the sake of something else. To QF people there is nothing, not even ministry, that is more important than the children God blesses us with. If a ministry cannot be done with children then it should be left for the young, the older, or the infertile, who, in their minds, God chooses for those roles. (even the infertile have a role in quiverfull beliefs, and it's not that they did something wrong to deserve not having kids as some extremists claim). Whatever he may say, your nephew sees his ministry as being of higher value than children because he has chosen one over the other. To a QF person, that is wrong, though to him in his own beliefs that may be perfectly ok. 

 

I wonder if that helps to explain it any

 

I think part of the issue here, and part of the misunderstandings on all sides, is that people are trying to quantify the unquantifiable.  Blessings are not quantifiable, they cannot be counted and cannot be measured.  Sources of blessings can be counted, and so the temptation is to count them and think of it as counting blessings.  However many or few sources of blessings one might have (or might recognize that one has) has nothing to do with the depth of blessing encountered in one's life.  Therefore, it matters not how many children (or any other sources of blessing) may come one's way -- the overall depth of blessing is determined only by the effect each has on one's life.

 

[Audrey]

It seems like she's still focusing a lot of her time and energy on this movement since escaping from it, though I understand that she wants to give others in a similar position a voice and is passionate about helping them get out too. I think this "former minor celebrity in the Quiverfull Movement" (i.e., big fish in a pretty small pond) would be more persuasive if she weren't still riding on the Duggars' coattails to get a platform. I think it detracts from her message.

 

 

I agree with the bolded.  To the first sentence, though... I think she is still processing her anger and pain.  People in that stage of recovery/independence tend to fixate the anger back onto their oppressor.  While some people can process that in a relatively short time, it takes some others a very, very long time to process through all of that pain.  The length of time one needs to process those emotions is not necessarily relative to the time spent in the oppressive situation either. 

[Guest]

2009 doesn't sound right to me. I deconverted in 2004, was posting regularly on the Women's Space/Gentle Spirit  boards until the DDoS attack, and ds was finally conceived in 2007 when I had already moved on, other than to pop in to show off the newborn and try to figure out what was going on with the whole Carri Chim-whateverhernamewas kerfuffle.

 

NLQ looks very different than it did the first time I saw it and has undoubtedly changed webhosts since then.

 

I hope this half remembered TMI is useful for your research, Gr8lander. I kind of remember hearing the same thing but couldn't begin to substantiate it with actual links and would probably need blood pressure and anti-anxiety meds if I tried. ;)

 

ETA: She used to spell it "No longer qivering" with the explanation "There is no 'you' in Quiver" if that helps. I didn't even notice she'd changed that until now.

[Hyacinth]

I think part of the issue here, and part of the misunderstandings on all sides, is that people are trying to quantify the unquantifiable.  Blessings are not quantifiable, they cannot be counted and cannot be measured.  Sources of blessings can be counted, and so the temptation is to count them and think of it as counting blessings.  However many or few sources of blessings one might have (or might recognize that one has) has nothing to do with the depth of blessing encountered in one's life.  Therefore, it matters not how many children (or any other sources of blessing) may come one's way -- the overall depth of blessing is determined only by the effect each has on one's life.

 

 

Yuh-huh they can! There's even a song about it. Count your blessings.Name them one by one. Count your many blessings. See what God has done.

 

 

(Sorry. I couldn't resist. That Sunday School song has been running through my head since much earlier in the thread.)

 

 

[MFG]

I think part of the issue here, and part of the misunderstandings on all sides, is that people are trying to quantify the unquantifiable. Blessings are not quantifiable, they cannot be counted and cannot be measured. Sources of blessings can be counted, and so the temptation is to count them and think of it as counting blessings. However many or few sources of blessings one might have (or might recognize that one has) has nothing to do with the depth of blessing encountered in one's life. Therefore, it matters not how many children (or any other sources of blessing) may come one's way -- the overall depth of blessing is determined only by the effect each has on one's life.

 

What do you mean, we can't count our blessings? I seem to remember a song about that...

ETA: Ha! Hyacinth beat me to it!

[AMJ]

Yuh-huh they can! There's even a song about it. Count your blessings.Name them one by one. Count your many blessings. See what God has done.

 

 

(Sorry. I couldn't resist. That Sunday School song has been running through my head since much earlier in the thread.)

 

Nope!  To do so would still be counting sources of blessings!  See how pervasive it is?

 

If you doubt what I say tell me this, please:  how large is a blessing (actual measurements, please!)?

 

:D   (Just trying for some fun, to see how far we can take the debate within the boundaries of logic)

[SKL]

I tend to agree that some people paint Christians with too broad a brush.

 

I would consider the church I attend to be conservative (LCMS).  However, the majority of moms there are educated and they go to work at all sorts of jobs once they feel their kids are ready to be in group care / school.  You can hear some wives talk about bowing to the men etc., but it is a personal view and certainly not mandatory.  The girls are given the same opportunities as the boys as they grow.  I've never heard anyone say a word about wanting their girls to be limited in their choices as adults.

 

The American Heritage Girls troop my kids are in was founded by the pastor of another conservative church.  Why?  Because he wanted his daughters to have the same opportunities as his son had been given, and Girl Scouts didn't offer that.

 

I also think there are some people on this board who see misogyny everywhere they look.  I find that view concerning and limiting.  Every opinion that doesn't view women identical to men is not misogyny.  Viewing lots of babies as a good thing is not misogyny.  Viewing childbirth as an important ability that only women have is not misogyny; if anything, it is the opposite IMO.

[GailV]

The continued focus bis part of the PTSD and experience.

 

Doesn't her story and her speaking out pre-date Duggar fame?

I had heard of her long before I heard of the Duggars, but it could be that I live under a rock insofar as pop culture is concerned. I've never watched the Duggars.

[AMJ]

 I agree with what you are saying, but I have an honest question (not just to you, Joanne) that I think of when these type of threads come up: Do all non-Christians view all conservative Christians in this light - as dysfunctional patriarchal cults?  I just get the sense on this forum that non-Christians group ALL Christians in this way. When these threads come up I feel as though the OPs are stereotyping or have a narrow minded view of Christians. That's what is insulting to the Christians on this board. I know people who have never used BC and have many children yet have no problems when others use it, their husbands aren't tyrants, the wives and daughters have freedom to pursue educations and careers. I've also heard of tyrant, abusive, controlling patriarchal husbands who aren't Christian. It's important to talk about abuse in all forms and advocate for victims, but I'm not sure why it's acceptable to throw a whole category of people into it. I consider myself a conservative Christian, but I have used bc, have a college education, worked until I had my 4th child, and have a husband who could care less what I do (as long as I'm not running around or spending ourselves into financial ruin!)  ;) Maybe I'm not 'conservative' enough to fall into other's perceptions of 'conservative Christian.' Again, I just perceive stereotyping in the form of these posts. It's not the actual article that gets posted, just the feeling of the judgmental mindset behind it. I'm not trying to attack anyone including the OP. Just trying to explain why Christians get upset about posts like this. Hope it makes sense.

 

Regarding your question above, which I have bolded:  No. 

 

It's like any other mindset, you will have your vocal minority who speak their views loudly and clearly, and who often take no pains to make sure their audience knows they are only speaking for themselves (some might even claim to speak for a larger group, though that doesn't make it actually so).  Meanwhile, the vast majority of the actual population in question are too busy getting on with their lives and minding their own business, and might go largely unnoticed.

 

It's like stupid (judging by what they do, no judgement of mental capacity here) drivers on the roadway.  They are just a minority of the vehicle operators on the road, but they are much more noticeable, and tend to stir up traffic trouble suddenly and without much (if any) warning. 

[Slartibartfast]

Regarding your question above, which I have bolded:  No. 

 

It's like any other mindset, you will have your vocal minority who speak their views loudly and clearly, and who often take no pains to make sure their audience knows they are only speaking for themselves (some might even claim to speak for a larger group, though that doesn't make it actually so).  Meanwhile, the vast majority of the actual population in question are too busy getting on with their lives and minding their own business, and might go largely unnoticed.

 

It's like stupid (judging by what they do, no judgement of mental capacity here) drivers on the roadway.  They are just a minority of the vehicle operators on the road, but they are much more noticeable, and tend to stir up traffic trouble suddenly and without much (if any) warning. 

 

 

We should just lock them in a room and let them duke it out while the rest of us talk about cupcakes or something.

[Joanne]

I seem to recall that there were some serious questions about the honesty of the NLQ founder and her site, but am not coming up with links right now.  Stories that were fabricated, conversations deleted (online fights between V and her daughter, that seemed to indicate that V was as much abuser as abused.)  I am not at all a Quiverful adherent, but I'm not entirely sure the NLQ stories are on the up and up.  I'll continue to look and see what I can find.

 

There was a great deal of controversy and lies regarding Razing Ruth, who was associated with the NLQ crowd for a while but ultimately outed to have been a troll/fake/internet Munchhausen by proxy.

 

And, as far as how the extreme quiverful mentality plays out in an already unwell system (family), it would not suprise me at all that someone like Vyckie would have also been an aggressor OR that the children in the system protect the system in some form.

[Joanne]

2009 doesn't sound right to me. I deconverted in 2004, was posting regularly on the Women's Space/Gentle Spirit  boards until the DDoS attack, and ds was finally conceived in 2007 when I had already moved on, other than to pop in to show off the newborn and try to figure out what was going on with the whole Carri Chim-whateverhernamewas kerfuffle.

 

NLQ looks very different than it did the first time I saw it and has undoubtedly changed webhosts since then.

 

I hope this half remembered TMI is useful for your research, Gr8lander. I kind of remember hearing the same thing but couldn't begin to substantiate it with actual links and would probably need blood pressure and anti-anxiety meds if I tried. ;)

 

ETA: She used to spell it "No longer qivering" with the explanation "There is no 'you' in Quiver" if that helps. I didn't even notice she'd changed that until now.

 

Gentle Spirit boards! I was there - until the NCP tone got creepy and pervasive.

 

I wonder what Cheryl is up to?

 

[AMJ]

We should just lock them in a room and let them duke it out while the rest of us talk about cupcakes or something.

 

Then we can go in afterward to bandage their wounds using a compilation of every medical practice devised by humankind since we started keeping records!  Key elements of the treatment to include massive doses of kilts, cupcakes, and CHAI (yes, the beverage, not the euphemism-for-an-activity some-of-us-really-do-drink-the-stuff-you-know).

[Slartibartfast]

Then we can go in afterward to bandage their wounds using a compilation of every medical practice devised by humankind since we started keeping records!  Key elements of the treatment to include massive doses of kilts, cupcakes, and CHAI (yes, the beverage, not the euphemism-for-an-activity some-of-us-really-do-drink-the-stuff-you-know).

 

Teavana just opened here, I do have some CHAI.

[Guest]

Gentle Spirit boards! I was there - until the NCP tone got creepy and pervasive.

 

I wonder what Cheryl is up to?

 

 

Sol and Maggie are is in PS, but doing well. Sol graduated from ps and Omi from college last June. She's active on Facebook and why I deactivate instead of deleting that stupid thing. ;)

 

 

I'll be honest and say that Vyckie and Homeschoolers Anonymous totally lost me when they attacked Shay and Heart. Too triggery. I'm trying to get back into little kid mode and MYOB, but obviously not doing that well or expressing myself very well on this thread.

 

:laugh:

[Halftime Hope]

Nope!  To do so would still be counting sources of blessings!  See how pervasive it is?

 

If you doubt what I say tell me this, please:  how large is a blessing (actual measurements, please!)?

 

:D   (Just trying for some fun, to see how far we can take the debate within the boundaries of logic)

 

Well...my blessings ranged from 7# 4oz to 9# 10oz.      

 

 

 

(Sorry, I just couldn't resist.)  :smilielol5:

 

 

 

 

[AMJ]

Well...my blessings ranged from 7# 4oz to 9# 10oz.      

 

 

 

(Sorry, I just couldn't resist.)  :smilielol5:

 

LIKETY LIKE LIKE LIKE!!!!

[HS Mom in NC]

The term "Irish Twins" is not offensive or an ethnic slur in Modern America.  I'm an Irish Twin (my older biological brother is 11 months and 3 days older than me.  We were each a full term pregnancy) and our step-brothers that we were raised with are Irish Twins.  They're 10 months apart-both full term pregnancies. None of our 4 biological parents/step-parents are quiverfulls.

[Word Nerd]

2009 doesn't sound right to me. I deconverted in 2004, was posting regularly on the Women's Space/Gentle Spirit  boards until the DDoS attack, and ds was finally conceived in 2007 when I had already moved on, other than to pop in to show off the newborn and try to figure out what was going on with the whole Carri Chim-whateverhernamewas kerfuffle.

 

NLQ looks very different than it did the first time I saw it and has undoubtedly changed webhosts since then.

 

I hope this half remembered TMI is useful for your research, Gr8lander. I kind of remember hearing the same thing but couldn't begin to substantiate it with actual links and would probably need blood pressure and anti-anxiety meds if I tried. ;)

 

ETA: She used to spell it "No longer qivering" with the explanation "There is no 'you' in Quiver" if that helps. I didn't even notice she'd changed that until now.

 

Well, the blog as it currently exists started that year. I didn't just make it up or guess. This Salon article from March 2009 says, "Until last year, Garrison (then Vyckie Bennett), a 43-year-old single mother of seven living in Norfolk, Neb., followed a fundamentalist pronatalist theology known as Quiverfull."

 

[gardenmom5]

Yuh-huh they can! There's even a song about it. Count your blessings.Name them one by one. Count your many blessings. See what God has done.

 

 

(Sorry. I couldn't resist. That Sunday School song has been running through my head since much earlier in the thread.)

first thing that popped into my head.  

 

 

And, as far as how the extreme quiverful mentality plays out in an already unwell system (family), it would not suprise me at all that someone like Vyckie would have also been an aggressor OR that the children in the system protect the system in some form.

isn't that pretty typical of emotional/pscyhological abuse dynamics? whatever the methodology?

 

at least that was my experience.  those who break away and call out perpetrators are themselves attacked by those still in the dynamic.  it can be such a discombobulating feeling to reject everything you thought you knew - and have to reorient yourself when you don't even know what is rightside up.

[Cricket]

But, at her deathbed, were her children. All 11 stopped what they were doing so they could be there for the three final days. They sang to her the silly songs of their childhood. Some of them drove Grandpa back and forth so he could get sleep and stay with him. Some of them ran for food. Some stayed with Grandma. Some went back to the house and slept so they could switch shifts.

 

That brings tears to my eyes. This is what I think about when I meet couples who have chosen not to have children or meet older men who left their families years ago. We manage a 55+ community and meet these people frequently. I sat at the bedside of a dying man because he had no contact with his children for years and there was no one to sit with him. No one in the world cared if he lived or died--except my family. It is heart-breaking. I have older men who need help and want me to go with them to the doctor, help them with their medication, pick up groceries, change their bandages, just visit with them. All the things their children should be doing. I see what happens in the last stage of life to people who have no children or no relationship with their children. It's quite ugly and sad.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

The term "Irish Twins" is not offensive or an ethnic slur in Modern America.  I'm an Irish Twin (my older biological brother is 11 months and 3 days older than me.  We were each a full term pregnancy) and our step-brothers that we were raised with are Irish Twins.  They're 10 months apart-both full term pregnancies. None of our 4 biological parents/step-parents are quiverfulls.

My brother and I are slightly less than 11 months apart. We just call each other siblings, or brother or sister.

 

Whether or not the term is offensive in Modern America is of course a matter of opinion, and not unoffensive to persons of Irish descent simply because you declare it to be unoffensive.

[G5052]

I followed Vyckie's blog for quite awhile. Her story and those told by others on her bog engaged me at a time when I was trying to work out my own beliefs on homeschooling and motherhood. I landed there because I just didn't like some of what I was hearing in my homeschool circles at the time. The full story that I read has been taken down now, but it was quite harrowing, more so than the article linked by OP. I wept after reading some installments of it. Periodically I still read the blog, but it doesn't draw me in the way that it did when Vyckie was posting and editing.

 

I like to think that despite some of the concerns about the accuracy of what was posted there, they helped me see that ultimately I have to work things out for myself.  We never had both feet in that way, but reading their thoughts helped me see the logic behind what I felt wasn't quite right.  That and Recovering Grace, which I found when it first started and have followed through the downfall of Bill Gothard.

 

I still have acquaintances who lean toward's the depth of belief that Vyckie had and the Duggars still have.  The level of fear they exhibit is sometimes disturbing -- "If my daughter works outside the home, she'll be a terrible wife when she gets married," "Dad ultimately has to have the say in who our children marry because young people don't have the maturity to choose well," and "if my husband tells me not to do X, he must be right."  I also don't like that it is a works-based belief system, which is what Vyckie got tangled in.  If I stay home with my children, they will turn out well.  If I homeschool my children, they will turn out well.  If I submit to my husband, we will have a happy marriage. None of those are givens because they involve sinners. You can do everything "right" and end up with a kid or two who are a mess, and a husband who leaves you for a young thing. Ultimately people are going to go the way that they want to go.

 

Anyway, I wish Vyckie well.  She's had a very tough road for many, many years.

[VeritasMama]

I understand this, but I don't think it answers my question unless you mean the crime of selfishness is being committed against potential.

I don't understand what you are saying. For a Christian sin is committed against God, but also against other people. The sin of selfishness is committed against whomever your selfish actions will have a negative impact on, that can also include yourself.

 

But, it is also a sin to unjustly judge other people, and I'm not privy to the circumstances surrounding most other people's family decisions, so I couldn't judge them even if I was tempted to. I really don't care or think about how many kids people have, and honestly it's none of my business.

[VeritasMama]

The people who I know who are actual Irish by nationality find it offensive.

I'm part Irish, my grandmother is 100 percent Irish and the first of her family born outside of Ireland. We don't find it offensive, but most of the people I know have better things in life to worry about.

[JenniferB]

I followed Vyckie's story reading her blog, addicted to reading her blog, when it was still pretty new.  She only had a few stories on there back then.  It fascinated me because I was starting to question many ideas in Evangelical Christianity.  At the time I was reading her blog, I believe she was still calling herself a Christian, and was fond of her days in the Salvation Army church of her earlier years.  Anyway, her story as well as the other stories kind of knocked me off my socks.  I saw the spiritual abuse for what it was, whereas years earlier I saw the leaders of this movement as "ideal Christians."  Her blog prompted me to question, search, and eventually find the Orthodox Church, original Christianity.  I thank her for that.  Sharing her story resulted in a light in my life.  I do think the problem with this movement as well as other religious movements with "pressure to perform" involved is summed up very well in this statement from Elder Paisios of the Holy Mt. Athos, "We must not compel others to follow the spiritual struggle. You can not compel him if he does not have the disposition. It is like what happens with food. If one is not disposed to eat and we give him food under compulsion, he will vomit it up."

I believe this is what happened to Mrs. Garrison.

[Slartibartfast]

I'm part Irish, my grandmother is 100 percent Irish and the first of her family born outside of Ireland. We don't find it offensive, but most of the people I know have better things in life to worry about.

 

They have vigorously complained about it. They seem to have a fulfilling life despite not liking the phrase.

 

My family has been here too long for me to have much of an opinion about what other nationalities might find offensive. They were also not amused that I enjoyed drinking "carbombs" (which does seem problematic)

[Rosie_0801]

I don't understand what you are saying. For a Christian sin is committed against God, but also against other people. The sin of selfishness is committed against whomever your selfish actions will have a negative impact on, that can also include yourself.

 

But, it is also a sin to unjustly judge other people, and I'm not privy to the circumstances surrounding most other people's family decisions, so I couldn't judge them even if I was tempted to. I really don't care or think about how many kids people have, and honestly it's none of my business.

 

If someone is not having children due to selfishness, who is the crime of selfishness against? It can't be against unborn children because there are uncountable potential people who will never be born and non-existent people don't have rights. It can't be against oneself because if one doesn't want children and doesn't have them, there is no crime being committed. I don't suppose it can be against an omnipotent god either since omnipotent gods can do more or less as they please.

 

This is not about whether or not you judge anyone. This is about your earlier statement that some people's choice not to have children, or more children can be due to selfishness. I can't work out who this sin of selfishness is begin committed against. If there is no victim, there isn't a crime, is there?  :confused1:

[Lang Syne Boardie]

I'm part Irish, my grandmother is 100 percent Irish and the first of her family born outside of Ireland. We don't find it offensive, but most of the people I know have better things in life to worry about.

 

I actually do have better things to worry about. If I shared them on here I think people would be very shocked at what my family has been through in the past month, but I'm not ready to talk about it here on the forums. I am killing a little time hanging out here to get my mind off those bigger issues, I noticed this topic again, so I made my little moan. So what? If people are enduring serious trials they can't have any thoughts about other issues or they're betraying their sick children or whatever? Nonsense.

 

The really weird thing is how people can be sitting with a child unexpectedly in the ICU, the snot scared out of them and surrounded by clergy and counselors, having cried themselves sick and collapsed from fear earlier in the day, and still find themselves chatting briefly with a nurse about a literal hangnail. The human mind is a really strange and wonderful thing.

 

In other words, this little jab sucks. It's never true that people don't have other things to worry about, just because they don't like something that doesn't bother you at all.

[GailV]

The people who I know who are actual Irish by nationality find it offensive. 

 

On the other hand, the first time I heard the term was when an Irish couple used it to describe 2 of their children.  They thought it was quite amusing.  I remember just looking sort of perplexed at them since it seemed like it could/should be offensive, but they assured me that it was quite alright.  

 

I haven't quizzed more of my Irish-descent friends since, frankly, it's never come up again.  (My kids were in Irish dance for years, so we've met an assortment of  people who claim they speak for the entire country about various and sundry issues.)

[Slartibartfast]

On the other hand, the first time I heard the term was when an Irish couple used it to describe 2 of their children.  They thought it was quite amusing.  I remember just looking sort of perplexed at them since it seemed like it could/should be offensive, but they assured me that it was quite alright.  

 

I haven't quizzed more of my Irish-descent friends since, frankly, it's never come up again.  (My kids were in Irish dance for years, so we've met an assortment of  people who claim they speak for the entire country about various and sundry issues.)

 

 

I dunno maybe only half the country thinks it is funny, there seems to be a history of half the Irish not agreeing with the other half and then fighting ensuing. I am making a joke but  it was also probably offensive.

 

 

[Joanne]

It seems to me that it does not hurt anyone to avoid the phrase whereas it can be offensive to use it.

 

I feel similarly about "broken home" and "gypsy."

[Caroline]

I actually do have better things to worry about. If I shared them on here I think people would be very shocked at what my family has been through in the past month, but I'm not ready to talk about it here on the forums. I am killing a little time hanging out here to get my mind off those bigger issues, I noticed this topic again, so I made my little moan. So what? If people are enduring serious trials they can't have any thoughts about other issues or they're betraying their sick children or whatever? Nonsense.

 

The really weird thing is how people can be sitting with a child unexpectedly in the ICU, the snot scared out of them and surrounded by clergy and counselors, having cried themselves sick and collapsed from fear earlier in the day, and still find themselves chatting briefly with a nurse about a literal hangnail. The human mind is a really strange and wonderful thing.

 

In other words, this little jab sucks. It's never true that people don't have other things to worry about, just because they don't like something that doesn't bother you at all.

 

I liked this post because I agree with what you said, not because I like that you are going through a really rough time. Just wanted to put that out there. 

[unsinkable]

I actually do have better things to worry about. If I shared them on here I think people would be very shocked at what my family has been through in the past month, but I'm not ready to talk about it here on the forums. I am killing a little time hanging out here to get my mind off those bigger issues, I noticed this topic again, so I made my little moan. So what? If people are enduring serious trials they can't have any thoughts about other issues or they're betraying their sick children or whatever? Nonsense.

 

The really weird thing is how people can be sitting with a child unexpectedly in the ICU, the snot scared out of them and surrounded by clergy and counselors, having cried themselves sick and collapsed from fear earlier in the day, and still find themselves chatting briefly with a nurse about a literal hangnail. The human mind is a really strange and wonderful thing.

 

In other words, this little jab sucks. It's never true that people don't have other things to worry about, just because they don't like something that doesn't bother you at all.

I'm sorry about your hard times, Tibbie.

 

I hope things are improving.

 

:grouphug:

[Slartibartfast]

I actually do have better things to worry about. If I shared them on here I think people would be very shocked at what my family has been through in the past month, but I'm not ready to talk about it here on the forums. I am killing a little time hanging out here to get my mind off those bigger issues, I noticed this topic again, so I made my little moan. So what? If people are enduring serious trials they can't have any thoughts about other issues or they're betraying their sick children or whatever? Nonsense.

 

The really weird thing is how people can be sitting with a child unexpectedly in the ICU, the snot scared out of them and surrounded by clergy and counselors, having cried themselves sick and collapsed from fear earlier in the day, and still find themselves chatting briefly with a nurse about a literal hangnail. The human mind is a really strange and wonderful thing.

 

In other words, this little jab sucks. It's never true that people don't have other things to worry about, just because they don't like something that doesn't bother you at all.

 

Sometimes it is nice to fight about the little things, it is distracting from the big ones.  :grouphug:

[LMV]

I seem to recall that there were some serious questions about the honesty of the NLQ founder and her site, but am not coming up with links right now.  Stories that were fabricated, conversations deleted (online fights between V and her daughter, that seemed to indicate that V was as much abuser as abused.)  I am not at all a Quiverful adherent, but I'm not entirely sure the NLQ stories are on the up and up.  I'll continue to look and see what I can find.

 

Her relationship with her oldest daughter was certainly contentious for awhile and I believe that they did air a lot of their differences on various blogs and message boards.  Currently she is fundraising online because her house is in danger of being foreclosed.

[LMV]

I actually do have better things to worry about. If I shared them on here I think people would be very shocked at what my family has been through in the past month, but I'm not ready to talk about it here on the forums. I am killing a little time hanging out here to get my mind off those bigger issues, I noticed this topic again, so I made my little moan. So what? If people are enduring serious trials they can't have any thoughts about other issues or they're betraying their sick children or whatever? Nonsense.

 

The really weird thing is how people can be sitting with a child unexpectedly in the ICU, the snot scared out of them and surrounded by clergy and counselors, having cried themselves sick and collapsed from fear earlier in the day, and still find themselves chatting briefly with a nurse about a literal hangnail. The human mind is a really strange and wonderful thing.

 

In other words, this little jab sucks. It's never true that people don't have other things to worry about, just because they don't like something that doesn't bother you at all.

:grouphug:  Hugs!

[Mrs Mungo]

They were also not amused that I enjoyed drinking "carbombs" (which does seem problematic)

Irish car bomb cupcakes are really delicious. Did they offer an alternative name?

 

http://www.browneyedbaker.com/irish-car-bomb-cupcakes/

 

Eta: I guess we could call them Irish boilermakers?

[albeto.]

How does the constant pot-stirring over religion make this BBS a better place? There are all sorts of other venues where you can go on your rants about how awful you think Christianity is- why do you feel the need to constantly harp on it here?

 

 

Joanne summarized her opinion of "quiverful and patriarchy culture to be abusive, limiting, women hating, and full of dysfunction." I tend to agree. I get the impression from your frequent replies to my posts that I'm touching a raw nerve in general here. It's why I mentioned how difficult it can be to see criticism of a belief that seems from our own perspective to be decent, moral, and safe. To be confronted with negative imagery or examples of the practical application of these beliefs can be emotionally distressing. From your posting trend towards me, I interpret this kind of discomfort from you, and from others, but mostly I remember feeling it myself. It can be a really difficult thing to process, intellectually, emotionally, morally. No doubt. It can turn make a pleasant day unpleasant, or it can turn someone's world in its head.

 

My intent is never to make someone feel uncomfortable just for kicks, or at all, honestly. I suspect from comments, some more cleverly subtle than others, that people assume this about me: albeto hates religion and so is trolling the forums in hopes of jumping on anything that has a positive spin on religion. How can I assure you this is never on my mind? As much as I'd like to, I don't think I can. I think for some people I will be seen simply as someone who tries to battle religion, a thing believed to be good and moral, for whatever misguided, warped reasons I must have. I suspect however, not everyone interprets my posts here like that. I've had enough private correspondences with people to know that there is a great variety of opinions, beliefs, and stages of religious growth and skepticism represented. For everyone who thinks I post just for giggles and grins to make good people uncomfortable, there's the chance someone reads my post as articulating something they will have been wondering themselves but either never thought of it that way, or couldn't say it, sometimes even to themselves and certainly not to people they love. The kind of backlash one generally faces for criticizing religion is no insignificant thing, but it can be insidious and unrelenting  when that backlash comes in the form of guilt and self-imposed punishment. 

 

Here's the thing, CM, and I hope when you read this you don't read a tone of anger or mockery from me. If I were a skilled writer, I might be able to show you that from my perspective you and I fight a common enemy - abuse and unjustified pain and suffering unleashed on an innocent person. Sometimes this kind of pain comes from an angry community outside, oppressing and denying well-being to others for whatever perceived, imaginary crimes against morality they are guilty of committing. But sometimes this kind of pain comes in the form of an attack on a person's self-esteem, self-identity, sense of personal value and beauty, and the beautiful part they innately play in the greater tapestry of life in general. To take that away, to try and convince someone they are not valued, that they are part of some nefarious danger, that's so wrong to me. Ultimately, by identifying "them" as the enemy, we are in reality, killing "us." And that's not just a shame, CM, that's not just a tragedy, that's a horror. That's something that can, and should be fought against whenever possible. I'm not talking about becoming a Susan B. Anthony or anything, but being one less example of silence that lends the impression of consent.  

 

My daughter discovered the musical Hair this summer. One of my favorite songs is called, "How dare they try to end this beauty?" A few songs later, this idea is referenced again in the song, "What a Piece of Work is Man" (quoting Hamlet here):

 

What a piece of work is man

How noble in reason

How infinite in faculties

In form and moving

How express and admirable

In action how like an angel

In apprehension how like a god

The beauty of the world

The paragon of animals

 

You see CM, I see things like the QM and Patriarchy in general to be working against this inherent beauty that is human life. I see it as identifying beauty and value of a person despite, and only after some perceived, culturally identified danger has been squashed. Until they are restrained for good, these dangers are perceived as threats to inherent beauty and value. I have reason to accuse religion, or at least the Abrahamic religions, of trying to squash what is not objectively dangerous, but only dangerous to itself, including its privilege of being able to avoid accountability. Religious ideologies are held above reproach, at least depending on who values those ideologies. If that were all it was about, then I could see your point about me being a troll, here just to stir the pot for my amusement. But I don't think it is all there is to it. Instead, women, children, men, LGBTQ, minority races, those challenged by inconvenient and painful mental health issues, and so many more are caught in the cross hairs of religion's targeting of unjustified objects of danger, or at least the Abrahamic religions. Innocent people stand accused, and punished, for crimes that are not actually committed against anyone. What's worse is that people are encouraged to accuse themselves, to punish themselves. I'm sure Joanne can explain the kind of pressure it causes for so many people to do what they are encouraged to do, to do the "right thing" even when it goes against their very base - and otherwise morally neutral - needs and desires. I speak up because my heart goes out to those who hurt, and because I can. The worst backlash I face here is people continually accusing me of being a one trick pony. I speak up because life is short, pain is deep, but for the truly frightening and uncontrollable variable we must face in life, people shouldn't be afraid to be who they are.

 

The song "What a Piece of Work is Man" ends with a partial reprisal of an earlier song "Walking in Space" which always reminds me of Carl Sagan's Pale Blue Dot, a beautiful and profound illumination of the beauty of life, the privilege we have to not only be a part of it, but to be aware of our part. Because we have inherent empathy, because we do register pain of our loved ones as pain to our own selves, because we do extend this knowledge to people we don't know, you and I have the same goal I think - help relieve a hurting person of their pain, and help prevent this pain if possible. You believe religion can do that, and I believe religion helps only after it has first administered an unnecessary, unjustified wound. As Dan Barker explains, religion is being thankful to the person who cut you with a knife in order to sell you a bandage. I see QM as that bandage, and Patriarchy, too, and in one way or another, different aspects of religion that come through conversations here presented as a wonderful bandage. So I speak up. I want my voice to be heard saying one doesn't have to accept that cut in the first place. I want my voice to be heard because I appreciate the voices that came before me, showing me that the comfort I found in the bandage was no comfort after all, but a learned response that only worked when I agreed to silence myself in some way, for some noble cause that was not noble at all but convenient for others at my own expense. 

 

I do understand your appeal to encourage me to be silent. I don't mean to cause you any distress, but I won't be silent when I see innocent people hurting more than you. Life is too short, too precious, to valuable to ignore the distress of others, especially distress that can be avoided.

[Slartibartfast]

Irish car bomb cupcakes are really delicious. Did they offer an alternative name?

 

http://www.browneyedbaker.com/irish-car-bomb-cupcakes/

 

Eta: I guess we could call them Irish boilermakers?

 

It would be a Boilermaker but the Irish Pubs in the US don't call them that.

[HS Mom in NC]

My brother and I are slightly less than 11 months apart. We just call each other siblings, or brother or sister.

 

Whether or not the term is offensive in Modern America is of course a matter of opinion, and not unoffensive to persons of Irish descent simply because you declare it to be unoffensive.

 

It's only offensive to slur someone and I have never witnessed it used that way.  Please describe in detail the times you have, I'd love to hear about it. Who said this in your hearing and what tone of voice were they using.  What wrong were they accusing the Irish or or what lesser state of value were they implying in using it.   In modern America it means two full term deliveries within 365 days.  It's isn't actually attributed to bad behavior by Irish people in particular or undesirable behavior in any way.  Just like the term "Mongolian Spots" isn't about people from Mongolia or used as a derogatory term.  It's an accepted medical term and it's perfectly neutral. I've met plenty of people who are "Irish Twins" who identify as such and I've never heard anyone use it in a derogatory way.

 

Being "gypped" is offensive because it means to have been treated cheated like Gypsies were accused of doing as group, not as individuals.  Cheating people is bad and associating a whole group of people with bad behavior is derogatory.  Being close together in age is not bad behavior on anyone's part.  There's a HUGE difference between the two.

[Slartibartfast]

 

 

You see CM, I see things like the QM and Patriarchy in general to be working against this inherent beauty that is human life. I see it as identifying beauty and value of a person despite, and only after some perceived, culturally identified danger has been squashed. Until they are restrained for good, these dangers are perceived as threats to inherent beauty and value. I have reason to accuse religion, or at least the Abrahamic religions, of trying to squash what is not objectively dangerous, but only dangerous to itself, including its privilege of being able to avoid accountability. Religious ideologies are held above reproach, at least depending on who values those ideologies. If that were all it was about, then I could see your point about me being a troll, here just to stir the pot for my amusement. But I don't think it is all there is to it. Instead, women, children, men, LGBTQ, minority races, those challenged by inconvenient and painful mental health issues, and so many more are caught in the cross hairs of religion's targeting of unjustified objects of danger, or at least the Abrahamic religions. Innocent people stand accused, and punished, for crimes that are not actually committed against anyone. What's worse is that people are encouraged to accuse themselves, to punish themselves. I'm sure Joanne can explain the kind of pressure it causes for so many people to do what they are encouraged to do, to do the "right thing" even when it goes against their very base - and otherwise morally neutral - needs and desires. I speak up because my heart goes out to those who hurt, and because I can. The worst backlash I face here is people continually accusing me of being a one trick pony. I speak up because life is short, pain is deep, but for the truly frightening and uncontrollable variable we must face in life, people shouldn't be afraid to be who they are.

 

 

 

Not all Christians do quash things they don't agree with or things they feel are not within certain parameters.

 

 

Did you know more young evangelicals support LGBT causes than older Democrats? It isn't people lecturing that are making that change either, it is people who are doing it from the inside. The majority of my gay friends are Christians and they are loved and supported just as anyone should be. Not all of the Christian growth is towards the right. Just because some are more visible and apparent doesn't mean there are not just as many who are on the other side.

[Slartibartfast]

It's only offensive to slur someone and I have never witnessed it used that way.  Please describe in detail the times you have, I'd love to hear about it. Who said this in your hearing and what tone of voice were they using.  What wrong were they accusing the Irish or or what lesser state of value were they implying in using it.   In modern America it means two full term deliveries within 365 days.  It's isn't actually attributed to bad behavior by Irish people in particular or undesirable behavior in any way.  Just like the term "Mongolian Spots" isn't about people from Mongolia or used as a derogatory term.  It's an accepted medical term and it's perfectly neutral. I've met plenty of people who are "Irish Twins" who identify as such and I've never heard anyone use it in a derogatory way.

 

Being "gypped" is offensive because it means to have been treated cheated like Gypsies were accused of doing as group, not as individuals.  Cheating people is bad and associating a whole group of people with bad behavior is derogatory.  Being close together in age is not bad behavior on anyone's part.  There's a HUGE difference between the two.

 

The origin of Irish Twins is a slur on Irish Catholics. It was used as a derogatory phrase for Irish immigrants who did not use birth control.

 

 

[HS Mom in NC]

The origin of Irish Twins is a slur on Irish Catholics. It was used as a derogatory phrase for Irish immigrants who did not use birth control.

 

But people don't use it that way now. No one is accusing people of spacing children closely together as doing something wrong when they talk about "Irish Twins." They're making a matter of fact statement.  Tell me when you have witnessed it being used as an accusation of bad behavior.  Gypped is accusing someone of bad behavior. 

 

[albeto.]

Not all Christians do quash things they don't agree with or things they feel are not within certain parameters.

 

No doubt. 

 

Did you know more young evangelicals support LGBT causes than older Democrats? It isn't people lecturing that are making that change either, it is people who are doing it from the inside. The majority of my gay friends are Christians and they are loved and supported just as anyone should be. Not all of the Christian growth is towards the right. Just because some are more visible and apparent doesn't mean there are not just as many who are on the other side.

 

I suspect it has more to do with age than religious or political association. The church evolves to reflect the evolving moral code of society. It always has. That's why you don't see preachers leading church groups to carry banners and protest against a woman's right to vote or anti-miscegenation laws like they did generations ago. Within a couple generations, your children's children won't believe Christians ever fought against equal marriage. It will be the same argument that's made about slavery today: some people did, but they never did represent real Christianity. 

[Slartibartfast]

No doubt. 

 

 

I suspect it has more to do with age than religious or political association. The church evolves to reflect the evolving moral code of society. It always has. That's why you don't see preachers leading church groups to carry banners and protest against a woman's right to vote or anti-miscegenation laws like they did generations ago. Within a couple generations, your children's children won't believe Christians ever fought against equal marriage. It will be the same argument that's made about slavery today: some people did, but they never did represent real Christianity. 

 

I agree, I was using it as an example. People my age might bear those scars but their grandkids likely will not.

 

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/07/evangelicals-gay-marriage-108608.html#.VB-05vldWHM

 

 

 

Over the past decade, evangelical support for gay marriage has more than doubled, according to polling by the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute. About a quarter of evangelicals now support same-sex unions, the institute has found, with an equal number occupying what researchers at Baylor University last year called the â€œmessy middle†of those who oppose gay marriage on moral grounds but no longer support efforts to outlaw it. The shift is especially visible among young evangelicals under age 35, a near majority of whom now support same-sex marriage.