Is wanting a large family so bad?

LilacLouisa

SusanC wrote: »

Obviously there are minimum requirements for certain things but there are a lot of things which are used which aren't necessary. (I'm not saying that everyone should only have their basic needs met and never have any wants met but I think wants have taken over and become considered needs/essential/rights when they are not.)


I have every intention of doing this in the future. It may satisfy those purely concerned about environment/overpopulation but it still has the same "problems" of parental attention/money etc. being spread to thinly and other such objections people have.

I was born after the war, so a lot of thrift and make do and mend still going on. I can remember my Mother being outraged when she watched some American sit-com and saw the childen just opening the fridge and helping themselves to the food there. My Mum always run a "tight ship".

Things have come a long way since then, and although I am not as OS now as I should be, I am sure I could cope with more frugal living. I think a lot of younger people would find it difficult, for a while anyway, but would cope.
It is just a matter of how much to cut back isn`t it.

I wasn't making the comment about considering adoption to you btw, just wondered if anyone had considered it. These children are already here and desperately need love, but I have been told that most people just want babies. How awful to be cast on the scrapheap at a young age, mostly through no fault of your own.

SusanC_2

ceridwen wrote: »

Re the freedom of choice point - I think this boils down to the different world view you state you have Susan.

As I understand your worldview - it boils down to "Everything that happens to me or anyone else is ordained by God - and therefore is as it should be/exactly right/for a reason/etc". The vast majority of people (including myself) take the view that we ourselves make conscious decisions about the things that happen in our lives - including whether to have children or no. Some of us believe in God, some don't - either way it is still the case that the vast majority of us believe that we ourselves make all the decisions about our lives and duly act accordingly.

I can at least understand your viewpoint - though I don't agree with it. At least - also - you are polite in the way you express things and do try to understand the way other people think. So - kudos to you for those two things anyway.

Does that help in explaining the quote from another poster that puzzled you - ie about "God giving us free will" or words to that effect..

I do believe we have responsibility for our own choices/actions but we do not always get a choice. (I'm not saying you claimed I don't think that - I'm just clarifying.) I want more children. I can choose to try to have more children but but just because I choose to try doesn't mean I will get them.

There are various possible interpretations of the comment someone else made about freedom of choice and I wasn't sure which would be correct. Possibilities I can think of offhand are:
1) They assumed I was claiming no responsibility for my own actions on the basis that God is in control of all things.
2) They assumed I was intending to have as many children as possible on the basis that God is in control.
Neither of these would be correct assumptions about me and I'm sure they could have been meaning soemthing else which I hadn't though of so thought it better to ask for clarification rather than respond by making assumptions myself about their intended meaning. (Thank you for trying to help my understand though - I appreciate it.)

LilacLouisa

hngrymummy wrote: »

Well that IS rude, especially if somone takes the time to try and hold a proper debate with you.

I had already found you agressive as well as making comments which I feel are ill founded and argumentative, but now I think you are just a trouble maker.

I had already stated that I found the comments in red difficult to read. I have absolutely no intention of even trying to read them in future.

Imp

Now, now, I think we all need to calm down. Environmentalism has taken on all the hall marks of a 21st Century religion, with a series of beliefs which have somehow become universal truths - Global Warming, Over Population etc. Trying to debate environmental issues with a believer is like debating with a Christian whether Christ was the Messiah, or with a Muslim whether Mohammed was God's prophet.

So we just need to accept everyone had their own views, and not try and change them, wars have started over less.

jtr2803

Aside from the overpopulation debate....

Personally I think that number of children is far too many. I don't see how there can be that many children without someone's relationship with another in their house suffering, be it the parents with each other, a child with the parent or two children. I think children need room to grow and I don't just mean physical room but also the opportunity to be on their own and have the choice whether to interact with others (quiet time if you prefer to hear it like that).

How on earth, in a 3 bed house, could any single person get a moments peace? Are you planning on having your own bedroom and then 3 children in each bedroom? Would that not be overcrowding?

This may not be scientifically true but in my own experience I have often found that people that have come from large families often want/need the security of being in a large group as they have never become comfortable with being on their own. Like I say, just my personal experience.

digitalphase

jtr2803 wrote: »

Aside from the overpopulation debate....

Personally I think that number of children is far too many. I don't see how there can be that many children without someone's relationship with another in their house suffering, be it the parents with each other, a child with the parent or two children. I think children need room to grow and I don't just mean physical room but also the opportunity to be on their own and have the choice whether to interact with others (quiet time if you prefer to hear it like that).

How on earth, in a 3 bed house, could any single person get a moments peace? Are you planning on having your own bedroom and then 3 children in each bedroom? Would that not be overcrowding?

This may not be scientifically true but in my own experience I have often found that people that have come from large families often want/need the security of being in a large group as they have never become comfortable with being on their own. Like I say, just my personal experience.

Applaud this post :T

onlyroz

lemoncheesecake wrote: »

I truly do not beleive that children are damaged by being part of a large family and that they need all this one to one time so thats not an issue for us.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand why you think children don't need one-to-one time. Of course it's important to do things as a family, but giving each child some individual attention each day is vital too.

hngrymummy

LilacLouisa wrote: »

I had already found you agressive as well as making comments which I feel are ill founded and argumentative, but now I think you are just a trouble maker.

I had already stated that I found the comments in red difficult to read. I have absolutely no intention of even trying to read them in future.

That is your choice. Some people find them easier to read, some people find them harder to read. There's no point in getting argumentative because you find it harder to read and some people find it easier to read. Feel free not to read them, that is your choice, and not really a big deal.

My comments are based upon personal experience, eg the reservoir which I have had direct involvement in; new housing estates, which I have had direct involvement in; hosepipe bans, which I too have experienced; the study of the past human environment, which I did for 4 years, so I know a fair bit about Anglo-Saxons, desire for space etc . So I wouldn't say they were ill-founded, but based on personal knowledge and experience. Please, if you're going to accuse me of making ill-founded comments, at least state what you think they are so that I can explain them a bit more.

I have a different opinion to you on a few things, which you seem to find difficult to come to terms with. But to be honest, I don't know you, so I'm not in a position to judge you, nor do I care how you judge me.

Please be aware that this is an open forum and people are entitled to their opinions, and there is absolutely no need to take people's opinions personally, nor to make negative personal comments towards another poster.

It would be nice to get back to a proper debate with proper discussions without people resorting to a "yer muvver" argument (where I grew up, this statement was commonly believed to be the trump card that won any argmument, as it was a rude personal comment against the other person).

LilacLouisa

Imp wrote: »

Now, now, I think we all need to calm down. Environmentalism has taken on all the hall marks of a 21st Century religion, with a series of beliefs which have somehow become universal truths - Global Warming, Over Population etc. Trying to debate environmental issues with a believer is like debating with a Christian whether Christ was the Messiah, or with a Muslim whether Mohammed was God's prophet.

So we just need to accept everyone had their own views, and not try and change them, wars have started over less.

I am already calm thank you.

I have my own ideas about religion as I have on Global Warming and Over population.

I am more than happy to debate these things and consider that debate and exchange of ideas can only be good. What I do resent is some muppet trying to tell me what I think, and what I waste, as if it was fact.

LilacLouisa

hngrymummy wrote: »

That is your choice. Some people find them easier to read, some people find them harder to read. There's no point in getting argumentative because you find it harder to read and some people find it easier to read. Feel free not to read them, that is your choice, and not really a big deal.

My comments are based upon personal experience, eg the reservoir which I have had direct involvement in; new housing estates, which I have had direct involvement in; hosepipe bans, which I too have experienced; the study of the past human environment, which I did for 4 years, so I know a fair bit about Anglo-Saxons, desire for space etc . So I wouldn't say they were ill-founded, but based on personal knowledge and experience. Please, if you're going to accuse me of making ill-founded comments, at least state what you think they are so that I can explain them a bit more.

I have a different opinion to you on a few things, which you seem to find difficult to come to terms with. But to be honest, I don't know you, so I'm not in a position to judge you, nor do I care how you judge me.

Please be aware that this is an open forum and people are entitled to their opinions, and there is absolutely no need to take people's opinions personally, nor to make negative personal comments towards another poster.

It isn't a big deal for me, I said I found it hard to read the comments in red, and chose not to read them any more. It was you who seemed to find it a big deal, saying that it was rude of me.

Are you unaware of what you post, or are you actually a Troll? Either way it doesn't matter. I won't be reading any more of your posts.