Oops! Looks like *some* conservatives really WANT to save marriage!

OK, it's pretty obvious that the whole defense of marriage bullshit was just homophobia trying to put on a pretty face. But, in this article a guy starts talking about "cohabitation and casual divorce and deliberate childlessness" as being problems, too.

Hey, this might get interesting!

to spout his idiotic right-wing fundamentalist bullshit.

We have to hammer it in that Republicans want to outlaw divorce...execute adulterers by stoning them to death...punish people who have pre-marital sex or cohabitate...and punish women who can't have or refuse to have children...

to wear different kinds of fabric.

is consistency.

It's far more apparent that the Bible DOES condemn divorce, much more so than it does homosexuality.

So, I say to them, work to ban all of it, or shut the hell up.

www.godhatesfigs.com

"Figs were a staple diet in ancient Greece. And I don't think I need to mention what they got up to back then..."

Bwahahahahaha! That site is AWESOME!

But somehow this argument doesn't even phase them. I seriously think many of them do not have the ability to critically analyze things. It's a failure of our public education system.

Seriously, I would. I don't think that even the most rabid Bush voters would like to see A Handmaiden's Tale come to life... well, okay, maybe a few of them would, but I think this would be the 'Now hold on there just a minute' moment for a lot of them. Especially I would love to hear what Rush/O'Reilly/Guiliani would have to say about it... hee hee.

Deliberate childlessness? WTF? Does Coulter have any kids? How would she feel about bearing the next generation of Lebensborn?

then they need to stop the practice of divorce. Divorce is the number one destroyer of marriages. Gay unions don't hold a candle to the damage done to families, especially the kids, by divorce.

just another way to say women are nothing more than baby factories and should know their place.

highest rates are among EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS

Wasn't it just like two minutes ago when they were pounding liberals for stuff like this because we wanted to do something about poverty?

Hypocrites, all of them.

They quack "small government, small government" when it suits them, then suddenly they're all about government taking over everyone's private lives!

Let's ask him to define the concept and explain what he thinks should be done about it.

Here's his email address: christensenb@suu.edu

Here's my letter. I wasn't able to maintain the type of academic detachment that's presumably the norm in such discussions, but who gives a fuck:

=====

Excuse me, you fatuous windbag, but however you might define "deliberate childlessness," it is so intensely and obviously none of your damn business that I'll thank you to keep your mealy mouth closed on the subject.

I'd recommend you go back to bullying undergraduate girls about abstinence. As I see it, THAT'S where you'll find "deliberate childlessness" being practiced, you hypocritical creep.

=====

:yourock:

I did it quickly so I'm sure there are grammatical and typing errors...sorry.


----------------------------------------------------------
We have been married for almost sixteen years and have two children. We however waited until we had been married almost seven years until we had our first child. OK, granted, we did have trouble conceiving, so technically we "chose" to be childless for only about five years.

We are Christians (Southern Baptist to be exact) and we have some questions for you? Do you believe God will punish us for being "deliberately childless" for five years or will we be forgiven because we eventually had two children?

Also, we've taken medical steps to prevent another pregnancy. On a police officer's salary, we can barely keep our head above water now so we felt that two children were all we could financially manage. Will we be held accountable for not having more than two children? Should we have married and "gotten busy" earlier? Should we have the vasectomy reversed and put our youngest child in daycare so the "Mrs." can then find a job to help pay for more children.? The "Mr." already has a full-time job and two part-time jobs and a fourth seems totally, well, suicidal (and suicide is a sin too).

Your help and vast expertise would be greatly appreciated. We're waiting for someone to tell us what to do because God blessed us with two beautiful, healthy children so we thought He was already pleased with us. Now we're confused.

Sincerely,

-------------------------------------------------------------

He took the e-mail seriously. (I guess my sarcasm is a wee bit too subtle....must work on that) He addressed it to my husband though, lol....

---------------------

Thank you for your thoughtful personal response to my statement to the
AP. I am not God and therefore cannot pretend to make any judgments on His behalf. What I can say is that my comment was not intended in any way to be a criticism of couples such as you and your wife.

When I made my comment, I had in view the broad cultural retreat from family and home life which has given us many DINK couples (Double Income, No Kids), couples who are (statistically speaking) especially likely to divorce because their union lacks the moral focus that childrearing gives such a union (whether the number of children be one, two, four, or more).

I apologize if my comment caused you and your faithful wife pain or
distress.

Sincerely,

Bryce Christensen

is the best argument for deliberate childlessness I've ever seen...

because there's no possibility of children THERE. Oh, and don't forget those old folks who shack up because social security rules would cause them to lose income if they married.

We've just got to defend marriage against these white haired terrorists!

Providing they also enact a law to Stone Adulterers. Adultery is clearly the root of all evil.

Who should we indite first? Guiliani, O'Reilly, Newt??????

In fact, I HOPE - oh my god I HOPE - that some democrat somewhere puts something like this up for a vote. I'll support it 100%

I also want that flag burning amendment passed with some language attached to it that says any speech vilifying the good ole USofA and it's presidentS (clinton included) is a punishable offense.

Give them what they want. That's the only thing I will support from now on.

"ok. You got what you want. Flag burning, saying anything bad about the USA, and saying anything bad about Bush are now punshable by death. Of course, I have to arrest you now, because you have been disparaging our president for years now. And by that, I mean your attacks on Clinton. Sorry, its the law..."

(as Vickers noted with the emphasis). . . "deliberate childlessness."

Not only do these crackpots want a camera in your bedroom, they want to track your condom purchases by RFID, and if you're buying too many, well, it's time for a little serious counseling by a nearby clergy-enforcer.

I'm all for strengthening marriage -- I'm convinced two committed adults (which, as a convenient shorthand, I'll call "a family") are a superior mechanism for navigating the challenges of daily life, supporting one another, raising dependents if they so choose, etc., etc.

But as one of the posters above mentioned, if they start meddling with child-bearing/raising decisions, they're going to step into a buzzsaw. They're already way behind on the abortion issue when they hold up adoption as the way out when their dumb-cluck abstinence strategy founders.

However, I'm happy to see 'em step into a buzz saw. I just want to have a raincoat on when they do.

There are those of us who are "deliberately childless" - and we have a right to be that way. Well, we currently do but for how long under this theocracy?

I was just waiting for this. I told my husband when all this anti-gay sentiment started bubbling up - it's a good thing we support gay rights because when they're done with them - they're going to be coming after us (the child-free). And here it starts.

All those who value your freedoms - stand up - be heard. Or when they come after you - there will be no one left to stand up for you.

Broodmares -- that's all the fucking crazy-ass, RW "christian" nutjobs view women as.

I made the choice not to have children, and I am thankful every day I was not forced into doing so by religion, society or my family.

This fuckwad can KISS MY CHILD-FREE ASS!! :mad: :mad: :mad:

It wasn't so long ago that birth control was illegal.

If you write a ban on birth control and abortion into the constitution, Roe v. Wade doesn't mean shit.

We will soon be greeting everyone with "Blessed be the fruit." (A _Handmaid's Tale_ reference.)

Anyone know what the required response is? You will get a prize:

The Handmaid's Tale in living color! Not on your TV screen, but right here in America!

-wildflower

What'd I win?!":bounce:

What do you win (besides our real life Handmaid's Tale) Uh...uh...why, a link to a Margaret Atwood's site, of course!

http://www.owtoad.com/

:hi:

-wildflower

Back atcha Wildflower :hi:

Yes we definitely need to appeal to the "Christian Right" :eyes:

Under the radar, so to speak, make the nuttiest Senators and Representatives think there was a bigger constituency for this than there really is and encourage them to overreach.

Good Lord! That's extremely creepy and irresponsible. How about people who can't have children. How about people who can't afford them, for that matter. There are too many children in this world who live in finanacially unstable homes. These fundies support a party that would rather see these children starve than to help them out w/ government support. How disgusting.

Fascists to continue the march toward a superior race and a fourth Reich.

and posted a note on the message board that said -- STAY THE HECK OUT OF MY HOUSE AND BEDROOM. If "they" bother me....I'll consider that breaking and entering AND DEFEND MYSELF.

They are meddling in Freedom of religion and States rights.

Sure, you think they're unconstitutional now, but once the Fundamentalists have their way....

not enough WHITE people having kids

Cohabitation and deliberate childlessness for me, please.

So not only can't you get an abortion, now they want to force you to have kids. There must be a draft coming and they want to make sure they have the military strength for decades to come.

But the more biblical solution is polygyny. Younger wives can be added to the household to ensure fruitfulness.

Viagra stocks will continue to go up.

in the neo-con ideology. Childless women are expendable. You must contribute children to society so they can be cannon fodder for the Reich!

no doubt that if they REALLY want to protect marriage, they will tackle the issue of easy divorce first of all.

My husband and I waited five years after we were married to start trying to have children. But, after a pregnancy gone very wrong (the embryo died and there were complications) I am not able to have children.

Is our marriage somehow not as good as a couple with lots of children? Am I somehow "un-woman"? Do these people have any idea how their words twist a knife in my soul?

AND -
So, we will come to see it pass that birth control will be illegal. But guess what, abstinence is birth control, right?

So, will we "encourage" young people to get married so they can reproduce?

Read the book "The Handmaid's Tale" - it is far deeper than the movie.