|
Post by wraggy on Jan 14, 2011 2:42:54 GMT
"Because they are intelligent and realize that can't afford a dozen rug rats without some sort of welfare assistance? Because they don't have someone telling them that it's wrong or evil to use birth control?"
I don't know how that would explain the large families of believers from Protestant belief. They have no such problems with birth control and still have relatively large families. One family I know from the Baptist mob up the road had 13 kids at last count.
|
|
|
Post by gymnopodie on Jan 14, 2011 2:50:11 GMT
wraggy wrote:
So, Protestants are irreligious? Heh...
|
|
|
Post by eckadimmock on Jan 14, 2011 2:59:40 GMT
wraggy wrote:So, Protestants are irreligious? Heh... I think he means that contraceptives are not banned by Protestant churches, that's more of a Catholic thing.
|
|
|
Post by wraggy on Jan 14, 2011 7:20:43 GMT
wraggy wrote:So, Protestants are irreligious? Heh... I think he means that contraceptives are not banned by Protestant churches, that's more of a Catholic thing. Bang on Ecka. I personally don't know any Protestants who have an issue with contraception.
|
|
|
Post by ignorantianescia on Jan 14, 2011 11:33:48 GMT
Personally, I don't know any either, but I know that there are fundamentalist Christian groups (which are generally Protestant or otherwise (like) NRMs) in the US that oppose contraception.
|
|
|
Post by sandwiches on Jan 14, 2011 12:26:29 GMT
Back to Kaufmann: www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/shall-the-religious-inherit-the-earth-by-eric-kaufmann-1939316.htmlThe Mormons should have been a shrinking minority in Utah. But despite considerable non-Mormon immigration, they increased their share of the population from 60 per cent in 1920 to 75 per cent in 2000. The Quiverfull Protestants, who see children as a blessing, have formulated a "two hundred year plan" for demographic domination. And they are right on course.
Fundamentalists also have a few other tricks up their sleeves. Unlike the materialists who embrace the here and now, they are happy to make sacrifices. They are content with their non-consumerist lifestyles. They work hard to build a parallel world, away from the mainstream, with their own schools, universities, media and even separate beaches, hotels and shopping malls..Psalm 127:3-5 Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward. As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth. Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate
|
|
|
Post by eckadimmock on Jan 14, 2011 22:36:15 GMT
Back to Kaufmann: www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/shall-the-religious-inherit-the-earth-by-eric-kaufmann-1939316.htmlThe Mormons should have been a shrinking minority in Utah. But despite considerable non-Mormon immigration, they increased their share of the population from 60 per cent in 1920 to 75 per cent in 2000. The Quiverfull Protestants, who see children as a blessing, have formulated a "two hundred year plan" for demographic domination. And they are right on course.
Fundamentalists also have a few other tricks up their sleeves. Unlike the materialists who embrace the here and now, they are happy to make sacrifices. They are content with their non-consumerist lifestyles. They work hard to build a parallel world, away from the mainstream, with their own schools, universities, media and even separate beaches, hotels and shopping malls..Looks like they need more Mormonism in Asia: www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/asia-tells-its-young-love-is-in-the-air-20110114-19r75.htmlQuote: "Taiwan's fertility rate, the average number of children born to its women in their lifetime, fell to 0.91 last year, far below the rate of 2.1 needed to sustain population size."
|
|
|
Post by gymnopodie on Jan 15, 2011 13:52:10 GMT
ignorantianescia wrote:
Small groups can obtain high control over their members who answer to one leader or a group of leaders that act in unison. Even larger groups such as the Jehovah's Witnesses are able to enforce complete autocratic control by use of local Judicial Committees which are directed by thousands of rules that come directly from the Governing Body. The Governing Body, which oddly is not even a religious term, has complete control and absolute authority. Anyone, even a Governing Body member, is subject to excommunication if they voice disagreement or fail to follow the GB's rules. This threat has a long arm and reaches out to virtually every JW in the world. They keep this control by prohibiting all members from speaking to an exJW 'apostate' or reading anything an 'apostate' writes. This prohibition is so forceful that no JW, even fathers, mothers, children, brothers, or sisters can talk to an 'apostate' unless they live in the same house and can't avoid communication. But even then they are not allowed to discuss any religious matters with them.
So, with this type of high control NRM or cult, if the leader or leaders decide there should be no contraceptives, then it is obeyed no matter how ridiculous it may be. Some think that sex should only be associated with procreation. So, for example tubal ligation or vasectomy, is considered evil, or at best, lacking in Christian maturity. With JWs, the overall feeling is that they must live a miserable life to be a good Christian. If your having too much fun or enjoying life too much, Satan must be influencing you.
|
|
|
Post by merkavah12 on Jan 26, 2011 5:53:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by unkleE on Jan 26, 2011 6:29:25 GMT
I'm thinking of creating a new horror movie franchise, what do you think?: MEMES IV: LET US PREY. RATED R FOR GRATUITOUS SCENES OF RELIGION AND ONE MERCIFULLY SHORT SCENE INVOLVING WILL FERRELL. Judging by Ken Perrott's confident assumption that his metaphysical assumptions are all correct and shared by us all, he would be afraid, very afraid!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2011 9:31:59 GMT
I don't know why atheists have less children, but I know I wouldn't have them at all if I'd be one. The thought that my children will eventually die makes me incapable of having them for moral reasons. I love them so much I wouldn't have them. How can someone who beliefs in our annihilation after physical death have offspring baffles me.
|
|
|
Post by humphreyclarke on Jan 28, 2011 10:52:02 GMT
I don't know why atheists have less children, but I know I wouldn't have them at all if I'd be one. The thought that my children will eventually die makes me incapable of having them for moral reasons. I love them so much I wouldn't have them. How can someone who beliefs in our annihilation after physical death have offspring baffles me. Well i'm glad my parents did!
|
|
|
Post by elephantchang51 on Jan 28, 2011 14:27:38 GMT
Speaking personally the thought of eternal life is my worst nightmare.....
|
|
|
Post by acornuser on Jan 28, 2011 16:18:21 GMT
"Because they are intelligent and realize that can't afford a dozen rug rats without some sort of welfare assistance? Because they don't have someone telling them that it's wrong or evil to use birth control?"
Let me put the boot on the other foot. They are intelligent and realise that they can't afford to live on welfare assistance in their dotage without a large family to help them. Remember, the welfare state is completely ^()*&^ without a strong existing work force. Who is sponging now?
|
|
|
Post by eckadimmock on Jan 28, 2011 21:32:21 GMT
Speaking personally the thought of eternal life is my worst nightmare..... Especially with theists saying "ha ha, told you so..."
|
|