Birth Control Poll

[Zathura]

Okay, so nowhere Is it taught, except 1972 and 1995 so far.

When is the last time you heard a Church leader say that shooting heroin is sin? No seriously, don't say that it is covered in the WofW because, by your logic, if it has not been specifically addressed then it is not quite doctrinal.

That’s not the logic you’ve seen me use here.

It’s something the church used to teach and now directly teaches that topic a different way now. Its actual official answers to literally the same questions are different now. It used to be a sin to use birth control, now it’s between god and the couple which logically suggests that God might tell a family to use birth control and have a small family. That’s not even close to the same thing as what you just threw out there.

The only reason anybody teaches this is because they heard it taught in the 70s and 80s. Guess what, when everyone that is currently 40+ is gone from this earth, Youll likely never ever hear another Mormon make the claim that it’s a sin to use birth control or have few children because as it stands , the church and it’s leaders do not accept or spread such a teaching and the millennials will have grow up and their children will have grown up without this tradition of man.

Sorry. Blacks have priesthood, Adam is not God, Blood Atonement is false, you’ll be excommunicated for polygamy , and it is not a sin to use birth control and have small families. The church changes, they do away with traditions and teachings from time to time . It’s okay.

I wasn’t around when it was taught that birth control was a sin. My mother and mil and grandmothers and sisters all use it and praise it. I don’t use it, so I guess in 40 years some of us will still be around. For what it’s worth I decided that I was anti birth control when I was 20 and young and engaged.

I reject the idea that truth is subjective or that god doesn’t have an opinion on the topic.

As for those other topics... Sounds like we disagree on a lot !

The church changes yes... unfortunate. God never does.

Yes, but it still only exists because mortal men taught this tradition for a few decades. There's nothing anywhere in scripture that suggests it's a sin. God never announced it was a sin, never revealed it to any Prophet.

You say it's unfortunate that the church changes. The church changes because those same mortal men lead the church and they decide on the changes. Those same men are literally the only reason these teachings about birth control existed in the first place and they are the same reason those teachings about birth control and large families ended.

Why can you say it's unfortunate that those men change the church but you can't say it's unfortunate that they taught something like it's a sin not to have many kids and birth control before changing their mind?

It's easy to select the teachings to accept when you use scriptures as the bar by which you judge doctrine.

Your way, makes no sense to me. You have nothing to judge doctrine by, it seems you just want it to "make sense to you". Whatever sounds pleasing you accept, whichever doesn't you don't?You say .."Well, it seems God's main purpose is to have kids and therefore our main purpose should be to have kids."

That sounds like something a Philosopher would come up with(Which is fine, I love Philosophy), but not something to live by and preach as Doctrine.

It's simply not doctrine, it's nowhere in scripture. It only exists because some men taught for a short time, like many other things that are pretty much universally accepted as wrong now. Why cling to this teaching? Why not cling to Polygamy and excluding Blacks from holding the priesthood and blood Atonement and calling yourself a Mormon too then? None of those things were scriptural. The scriptures didn't explicitly forbid them(Except Polygamy, but whatever) or support them, so why not just cling onto them as well?

[Zathura]

I reject the idea that truth is subjective or that god doesn’t have an opinion on the topic.

As for those other topics... Sounds like we disagree on a lot !

Edit: you forgot consecration. It was updated with a replacement commandment too. Or is tithing the higher law ?

I don't believe I ever said that truth is subjective and that God doesn't have opinions? But if God does have opinions that MATTER, they would be COMMANDMENTS to us and there is no such commandment that says we should have many children and not use birth control.

It's perfectly fine to disagree.

Yes I could go through a large list of things. Second Anointings were no secret, doing the true order of prayer in your home etc. There is many many things you could talk about. I have no doubt there were probably untrue things taught during any period of time between 1900 and 1970 that came and went that many of us will never even hear of because mortal men come up with absolute nonsense from time to time. Men went around "sealing others up to Eternal Life" for heaven sake.

This is why you need the scriptures to judge doctrine by. Unless it's in the scriptures or revealed by Revelation to a Prophet of God, you have no reason to cling to silly traditions of men.

[ElizaRSkousen]

When is the last time you heard a Church leader say that shooting heroin is sin? No seriously, don't say that it is covered in the WofW because, by your logic, if it has not been specifically addressed then it is not quite doctrinal.

That’s not the logic you’ve seen me use here.

It’s something the church used to teach and now directly teaches that topic a different way now. Its actual official answers to literally the same questions are different now. It used to be a sin to use birth control, now it’s between god and the couple which logically suggests that God might tell a family to use birth control and have a small family. That’s not even close to the same thing as what you just threw out there.

The only reason anybody teaches this is because they heard it taught in the 70s and 80s. Guess what, when everyone that is currently 40+ is gone from this earth, Youll likely never ever hear another Mormon make the claim that it’s a sin to use birth control or have few children because as it stands , the church and it’s leaders do not accept or spread such a teaching and the millennials will have grow up and their children will have grown up without this tradition of man.

Sorry. Blacks have priesthood, Adam is not God, Blood Atonement is false, you’ll be excommunicated for polygamy , and it is not a sin to use birth control and have small families. The church changes, they do away with traditions and teachings from time to time . It’s okay.

I wasn’t around when it was taught that birth control was a sin. My mother and mil and grandmothers and sisters all use it and praise it. I don’t use it, so I guess in 40 years some of us will still be around. For what it’s worth I decided that I was anti birth control when I was 20 and young and engaged.

I reject the idea that truth is subjective or that god doesn’t have an opinion on the topic.

As for those other topics... Sounds like we disagree on a lot !

The church changes yes... unfortunate. God never does.

Yes, but it still only exists because mortal men taught this tradition for a few decades. There's nothing anywhere in scripture that suggests it's a sin. God never announced it was a sin, never revealed it to any Prophet.

You say it's unfortunate that the church changes. The church changes because those same mortal men lead the church and they decide on the changes. Those same men are literally the only reason these teachings about birth control existed in the first place and they are the same reason those teachings about birth control and large families ended.

Why can you say it's unfortunate that those men change the church but you can't say it's unfortunate that they taught something like it's a sin not to have many kids and birth control before changing their mind?

It's easy to select the teachings to accept when you use scriptures as the bar by which you judge doctrine.

Your way, makes no sense to me. You have nothing to judge doctrine by, it seems you just want it to "make sense to you". Whatever sounds pleasing you accept, whichever doesn't you don't?You say .."Well, it seems God's main purpose is to have kids and therefore our main purpose should be to have kids."

That sounds like something a Philosopher would come up with(Which is fine, I love Philosophy), but not something to live by and preach as Doctrine.

It's simply not doctrine, it's nowhere in scripture. It only exists because some men taught for a short time, like many other things that are pretty much universally accepted as wrong now. Why cling to this teaching? Why not cling to Polygamy and excluding Blacks from holding the priesthood and blood Atonement and calling yourself a Mormon too then? None of those things were scriptural. The scriptures didn't explicitly forbid them(Except Polygamy, but whatever) or support them, so why not just cling onto them as well?

So you think that our main purpose in life is not to become like God? Because I literally think we are supposed to try to become exactly like god.

The way I judge doctrine is through a hierarchy of sources. The scriptures are definitely on the list, but they don’t contain all truth. Other sources on the list include: Joseph Smith, someone who has seen God, science, the endowment, the current brethren, etc.

I take a topic and work it up the list. If there are contradictions then I try the next highest source.

Funny, I studied philosophy in univeristy.

You don’t happen to know my opinions on any of those other topics


You don’t consider ‘Blessed is the man who fills his quiver with them! He shall not be put to shame when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.’ or ’multiply and replenish the earth’ or ‘be ye therefore perfect even as I am perfect’ or ‘ for this is my work and my glory to bring to pass the immortality of man’ or ‘she will be saved through childbearing’ scriptural evidence for large families?

I do !

[Zathura]

So you think that our main purpose in life is not to become like God? Because I literally think we are supposed to try to become exactly like god.

I mean, eventually? We won't become as God is as this life. We can become one with him by being sanctified and receiving a remission of sins and pressing onward(The doctrine of Christ, which is how we receive Eternal Life), receiving a greater portion of his spirit and be a servant of his during this lifetime.

All that comes to mind is the scripture from Moses that you mention at the end of your post. His purpose is to bring about our Eternal Life and Immortality. This has to do with the personal salvation of individual souls, it's not about those individuals having many many babies.

The way I judge doctrine is through a hierarchy of sources. The scriptures are definitely on the list, but they don’t contain all truth. Other sources on the list include: Joseph Smith, someone who has seen God, science, the endowment, the current brethren, etc.

I take a topic and work it up the list. If there are contradictions then I try the next highest source.

Seems like a solid way to go about it, I just don't see how that method ends with you believing that birth control is a sin and it's unrighteous to have a small family when you could have a large family

Funny, I studied philosophy in univeristy.

Called it

You don’t happen to know my opinions on any of those other topics

Nope

You don’t consider ‘Blessed is the man who fills his quiver with them! He shall not be put to shame when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.’ or ’multiply and replenish the earth’ or ‘be ye therefore perfect even as I am perfect’ or ‘ for this is my work and my glory to bring to pass the immortality of man’ or ‘she will be saved through childbearing’ scriptural evidence for large families?

I do !

I have a hard time using Psalms as Doctrine, admittedly it's probably one of the portions of the scriptures I've studied least.

Multiply and replenish the earth does not mean--> have as many children as possible or you are damned. Also they were literally the only people out there, obviously they need to have children.

"she will be saved through childbearing" still doesn't quite say what you want it to say.

[ElizaRSkousen]

So you think that our main purpose in life is not to become like God? Because I literally think we are supposed to try to become exactly like god.

I mean, eventually? We won't become as God is as this life. We can become one with him by being sanctified and receiving a remission of sins and pressing onward(The doctrine of Christ, which is how we receive Eternal Life), receiving a greater portion of his spirit and be a servant of his during this lifetime.

All that comes to mind is the scripture from Moses that you mention at the end of your post. His purpose is to bring about our Eternal Life and Immortality. This has to do with the personal salvation of individual souls, it's not about those individuals having many many babies.

The way I judge doctrine is through a hierarchy of sources. The scriptures are definitely on the list, but they don’t contain all truth. Other sources on the list include: Joseph Smith, someone who has seen God, science, the endowment, the current brethren, etc.

I take a topic and work it up the list. If there are contradictions then I try the next highest source.

Seems like a solid way to go about it, I just don't see how that method ends with you believing that birth control is a sin and it's unrighteous to have a small family when you could have a large family

Funny, I studied philosophy in univeristy.

Called it

You don’t happen to know my opinions on any of those other topics

Nope

You don’t consider ‘Blessed is the man who fills his quiver with them! He shall not be put to shame when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.’ or ’multiply and replenish the earth’ or ‘be ye therefore perfect even as I am perfect’ or ‘ for this is my work and my glory to bring to pass the immortality of man’ or ‘she will be saved through childbearing’ scriptural evidence for large families?

I do !

I have a hard time using Psalms as Doctrine, admittedly it's probably one of the portions of the scriptures I've studied least.

Multiply and replenish the earth does not mean--> have as many children as possible or you are damned. Also they were literally the only people out there, obviously they need to have children.

"she will be saved through childbearing" still doesn't quite say what you want it to say.

Wow well, I’ve said this before on the forum when I’ve disagreed entirely with someone....

If we meet in heaven, one of us can have a friendly ‘i told you so’

[cab]

Having a small family when you were capable of having a large family is not gods plan, therefore it is not righteous.

Please show me where this is taught?

Everywhere on lds.org reflects the idea that it's between the couple and God. Period. How many kids to have? Between them and God. Birth Control? Between them and God.

As far as I can tell, this idea that it's unrighteous to have small families deserves to be grouped with other doctrines like :

Black's should not have priesthood, Adam God Theory, Blood Atonement. AKA traditions of man passed along for generations that were done away with because they simply weren't true.

Do away with checking lists off. It doesn't matter if you have a tattoo on your arm, if you have 1 kid, use birth control and go to church every other other week. Salvation is offered to you the same as any other person, the means by which God sanctifies you is the same. It all comes down to being humble, broken hearted, and depending wholly on Jesus Christ. Seriously. How do you not look at this list of do's and do nots and not see the parallel with the Jews?

Break your mind free from traditions that bind you down. You're missing the big picture.

Looking Beyond the Mark? Everyone uses this phrase to describe people who seek the Second Comforter.

How about using it to describe people that think they secure themselves a place in heaven by going to church every 7 days, paying 10% gross income in tithing, not swearing, not drinking coffee, holding a temple recommend, getting married in the temple, reading scriptures, "ministering", having a million kids, Having multiple wives(wait that's not required anymore), the list goes on. That's not the mark, that's not the Gospel.

Have faith in Jesus Christ, humble yourself. Repent of all your sins .Depend wholly on him. Be baptized to show your commitment to him. Receive the Baptism of Fire and Holy Ghost and then listen to the Holy Ghost for the rest of your life, whatever the Lord commands. That's it. Anything more or less than this has not built upon a sure foundation.

The Good works will follow a person that has been Born of God, not the other way around.

The entire point of god is his children. The entire point of us is our children.

I would argue that the point of us is to become God's children. The entire point of us having children is to try to bring them up to become God's children. The scriptures describe us becoming God's children (in the actual sense of becoming his heirs) when we are spiritually begotten of him and born again in Christ. This should be the focus of all we do. If we have not yet been spiritually begotten of God, it doesn't matter how many kids we have.

[cab]

So you think that our main purpose in life is not to become like God? Because I literally think we are supposed to try to become exactly like god.

I mean, eventually? We won't become as God is as this life. We can become one with him by being sanctified and receiving a remission of sins and pressing onward(The doctrine of Christ, which is how we receive Eternal Life), receiving a greater portion of his spirit and be a servant of his during this lifetime.

All that comes to mind is the scripture from Moses that you mention at the end of your post. His purpose is to bring about our Eternal Life and Immortality. This has to do with the personal salvation of individual souls, it's not about those individuals having many many babies.

The way I judge doctrine is through a hierarchy of sources. The scriptures are definitely on the list, but they don’t contain all truth. Other sources on the list include: Joseph Smith, someone who has seen God, science, the endowment, the current brethren, etc.

I take a topic and work it up the list. If there are contradictions then I try the next highest source.

Seems like a solid way to go about it, I just don't see how that method ends with you believing that birth control is a sin and it's unrighteous to have a small family when you could have a large family

Funny, I studied philosophy in univeristy.

Called it

You don’t happen to know my opinions on any of those other topics

Nope

You don’t consider ‘Blessed is the man who fills his quiver with them! He shall not be put to shame when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.’ or ’multiply and replenish the earth’ or ‘be ye therefore perfect even as I am perfect’ or ‘ for this is my work and my glory to bring to pass the immortality of man’ or ‘she will be saved through childbearing’ scriptural evidence for large families?

I do !

I have a hard time using Psalms as Doctrine, admittedly it's probably one of the portions of the scriptures I've studied least.

Multiply and replenish the earth does not mean--> have as many children as possible or you are damned. Also they were literally the only people out there, obviously they need to have children.

"she will be saved through childbearing" still doesn't quite say what you want it to say.

I just love how Paul (the apostle to the Gentiles) throws a complete monkey wrench into this topic with 1 Corinthians chapter 7... And no I don't believe the chapter heading that says that this counsel was only given to "those called on missions". Rather it seems to be Paul's inspired opinion given to those early Christians who had partaken of the love of God / received the Holy Ghost / been born again spiritually, and sought to know how to best press forward and serve God with their whole heart...

excerpts from 1 Cor 7
It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.... I speak this by permission, and not of commandment... I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I [not married]... But if they cannot contain [withstand fornication]. let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn... Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife. But if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh... He that is umarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord: But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife... The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit; but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband... And this I speak for your own profit... and that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction... So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better...

[Fiannan]

Gordon B. Hinkley said that it was not official doctrine that man can progress to godhood. Like Jesus and the parables he knew the members of the Church knew the difference between a truth and what could be called doctrine in the traditional sense. People who would mock this truth heard something different than those who were connected to the Gospel.

Many leaders have preached in recent years that the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth is still in effect - the Proclamation makes it clear as well. SO why is it not taught with the same forcefulness that it used to be? No clue except we have no idea what pressures from earthy entities and governments have on how messages are delivered anymore. You think we are powerful enough to skip attention from the NWO? Look around you at what is promoted nowadays - it is all designed to convince people in the developed world not to marry and if they do marry to limit their population. You get propaganda from many feminists, environmental organizations, etc. Is it coordinated? I have noted how media purposely injects story lines to convince people to have small families. And now some are saying that a man is a bigot if he does not consider dating a trans person who was born male. Really? How many kids can two individuals who have a penis, or used to create? None. That may be the point.

Sure, you can look forward to a time where no young person is aware of statements against birth control by LDS prophets. At that point we should ask which temples today will have to be sold off, maybe to Muslim congregations to create mosques. The pressure from the world is creating a negative birthrate. If Mormons have no reinforcement they deserve to be replaced by a superior religion that knows that the commandments given to Adam, Noah, etc did not have an expiration date.

[Fiannan]

It is good for a man not to touch a woman.

What, be like a Catholic priest? Oh wait, that is another topic.

I do believe he was addressing people who were doing front-line missionary work. In those days you could die quite easily. As for today don't we tell our missionaries to focus on the Gospel while on missions?

So Caburnha, what do you think of Shakers? How about Skopsy?

[LadyT]

[quote=Fiannan post_id=919115 time=1552485796 user_id=1868

Many leaders have preached in recent years that the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth is still in effect - the Proclamation makes it clear as well.
[/quote]

Any amount of children is still multiplying and replenishing the earth.

A women doesn't need to be a brood mare and pop out a baby every year.

I will say all the big families I knew growing up, the mother was depressed. The kids were neglected. All their basic needs were met. Nothing beyond basics. The older kids struggled with having to take care of the younger ones. Several of the older daughters only had 2 kids because they had already raised a ton of kids. This was the way of at least ten families in the ward I grew up in. I am the youngest of a bunch of kids. I talked to a lot of youngest kids. Some of their feelings and their memories are heartbreaking. I think they had way more kids than they could handle mentally and financially.

[Fiannan]

A women doesn't need to be a brood mare and pop out a baby every year.

Nobody said that.

Also, why so many metaphors in our culture comparing women having kids to animals? Seems rather rude.

I will say all the big families I knew growing up, the mother was depressed. The kids were neglected. All their basic needs were met. Nothing beyond basics. The older kids struggled with having to take care of the younger ones. Several of the older daughters only had 2 kids because they had already raised a ton of kids. This was the way of at least ten families in the ward I grew up in. I am the youngest of a bunch of kids. I talked to a lot of youngest kids. Some of their feelings and their memories are heartbreaking. I think they had way more kids than they could handle mentally and financially.

Weird how white kids have so many psychological problems nowadays as opposed to Hispanics. Oh wait, second-generation Hispanics catch up. Suppose that has to do with smaller families? Second-generation Hispanic births plunge as they grow up US culture. I have seen studies that suggest that large families provide a social network that helps kids as they grow up and beyond.

[simpleton]

Many leaders have preached in recent years that the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth is still in effect - the Proclamation makes it clear as well.

Any amount of children is still multiplying and replenishing the earth.

A women doesn't need to be a brood mare and pop out a baby every year.

I will say all the big families I knew growing up, the mother was depressed. The kids were neglected. All their basic needs were met. Nothing beyond basics. The older kids struggled with having to take care of the younger ones. Several of the older daughters only had 2 kids because they had already raised a ton of kids. This was the way of at least ten families in the ward I grew up in. I am the youngest of a bunch of kids. I talked to a lot of youngest kids. Some of their feelings and their memories are heartbreaking. I think they had way more kids than they could handle mentally and financially.

So I suppose you consider your Mother in Heaven a "brood mare" ? I also know many large families, and yes, there are good times and there are bad, but it is all for experience, and it is on purpose. But I wouldn't exchange the large family for the 1.6 average child family in America for no amount of supposed peace and tranquility that the media and society pretends comes along with it.
But hey, we can all think as we please. That for sure is a God givin right. But I do not consider America to be doing very well at all with the small family on average. But that is neither here no there. According to the Gospel it is eternal life, eternal increase, worlds without end. So how does limiting our family's go along with that? I think the idea of limiting our family's is from hell itself for the purpose of thwarting the purposes of God. But I've already said that.

[Zathura]

[quote=Fiannan post_id=919115 time=1552485796 user_id=1868

Many leaders have preached in recent years that the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth is still in effect - the Proclamation makes it clear as well.

Any amount of children is still multiplying and replenishing the earth.

A women doesn't need to be a brood mare and pop out a baby every year.

I will say all the big families I knew growing up, the mother was depressed. The kids were neglected. All their basic needs were met. Nothing beyond basics. The older kids struggled with having to take care of the younger ones. Several of the older daughters only had 2 kids because they had already raised a ton of kids. This was the way of at least ten families in the ward I grew up in. I am the youngest of a bunch of kids. I talked to a lot of youngest kids. Some of their feelings and their memories are heartbreaking. I think they had way more kids than they could handle mentally and financially.

Same here. My Fathers family was an absolute disaster and the consequences are still unfolding in the lives of the following generations as well. 12 kids is not okay. The kids don’t feel loved by the parents , they are essentially raised by their nearest sibling instead of their parents . I too have seen only negatives in having extremely large families. Friends from high school, families in wards, missionaries, etc. everywhere I’ve seen large families has shown me I should not have a large family.

[Zathura]

A women doesn't need to be a brood mare and pop out a baby every year.

Nobody said that.

Also, why so many metaphors in our culture comparing women having kids to animals? Seems rather rude.

I will say all the big families I knew growing up, the mother was depressed. The kids were neglected. All their basic needs were met. Nothing beyond basics. The older kids struggled with having to take care of the younger ones. Several of the older daughters only had 2 kids because they had already raised a ton of kids. This was the way of at least ten families in the ward I grew up in. I am the youngest of a bunch of kids. I talked to a lot of youngest kids. Some of their feelings and their memories are heartbreaking. I think they had way more kids than they could handle mentally and financially.

Weird how white kids have so many psychological problems nowadays as opposed to Hispanics. Oh wait, second-generation Hispanics catch up. Suppose that has to do with smaller families? Second-generation Hispanic births plunge as they grow up US culture. I have seen studies that suggest that large families provide a social network that helps kids as they grow up and beyond.

Something something correlation something something causation.

[simpleton]

[quote=Fiannan post_id=919115 time=1552485796 user_id=1868

Many leaders have preached in recent years that the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth is still in effect - the Proclamation makes it clear as well.

Any amount of children is still multiplying and replenishing the earth.

A women doesn't need to be a brood mare and pop out a baby every year.

I will say all the big families I knew growing up, the mother was depressed. The kids were neglected. All their basic needs were met. Nothing beyond basics. The older kids struggled with having to take care of the younger ones. Several of the older daughters only had 2 kids because they had already raised a ton of kids. This was the way of at least ten families in the ward I grew up in. I am the youngest of a bunch of kids. I talked to a lot of youngest kids. Some of their feelings and their memories are heartbreaking. I think they had way more kids than they could handle mentally and financially.

Same here. My Fathers family was an absolute disaster and the consequences are still unfolding in the lives of the following generations as well. 12 kids is not okay. The kids don’t feel loved by the parents , they are essentially raised by their nearest sibling instead of their parents . I too have seen only negatives in having extremely large families. Friends from high school, families in wards, missionaries, etc. everywhere I’ve seen large families has shown me I should not have a large family.

Hence the need to depopulate the earth, get it down to around 500 million....

[Zathura]

[quote=Fiannan post_id=919115 time=1552485796 user_id=1868

Many leaders have preached in recent years that the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth is still in effect - the Proclamation makes it clear as well.

Any amount of children is still multiplying and replenishing the earth.

A women doesn't need to be a brood mare and pop out a baby every year.

I will say all the big families I knew growing up, the mother was depressed. The kids were neglected. All their basic needs were met. Nothing beyond basics. The older kids struggled with having to take care of the younger ones. Several of the older daughters only had 2 kids because they had already raised a ton of kids. This was the way of at least ten families in the ward I grew up in. I am the youngest of a bunch of kids. I talked to a lot of youngest kids. Some of their feelings and their memories are heartbreaking. I think they had way more kids than they could handle mentally and financially.

Same here. My Fathers family was an absolute disaster and the consequences are still unfolding in the lives of the following generations as well. 12 kids is not okay. The kids don’t feel loved by the parents , they are essentially raised by their nearest sibling instead of their parents . I too have seen only negatives in having extremely large families. Friends from high school, families in wards, missionaries, etc. everywhere I’ve seen large families has shown me I should not have a large family.

Hence the need to depopulate the earth, get it down to around 500 million....

Oh yeah, so the globalists have it right then.

[cab]

It is good for a man not to touch a woman.

What, be like a Catholic priest? Oh wait, that is another topic.

I do believe he was addressing people who were doing front-line missionary work. In those days you could die quite easily. As for today don't we tell our missionaries to focus on the Gospel while on missions?

So Caburnha, what do you think of Shakers? How about Skopsy?

I believe Paul was one of the mightiest servants of Christ ever to teach the gospel. He preached to come to Christ and to be born again. If you hadn't obtained the new birth in Christ, he would consider all things to be in vain. That would include how many kids you managed to conceive with your spouse. If you had received the new birth in Christ he would say to it might be best to devote one's entire soul to the work of God (at least according to this chapter).

[ElizaRSkousen]

Having a small family when you were capable of having a large family is not gods plan, therefore it is not righteous.

Please show me where this is taught?

Everywhere on lds.org reflects the idea that it's between the couple and God. Period. How many kids to have? Between them and God. Birth Control? Between them and God.

As far as I can tell, this idea that it's unrighteous to have small families deserves to be grouped with other doctrines like :

Black's should not have priesthood, Adam God Theory, Blood Atonement. AKA traditions of man passed along for generations that were done away with because they simply weren't true.

Do away with checking lists off. It doesn't matter if you have a tattoo on your arm, if you have 1 kid, use birth control and go to church every other other week. Salvation is offered to you the same as any other person, the means by which God sanctifies you is the same. It all comes down to being humble, broken hearted, and depending wholly on Jesus Christ. Seriously. How do you not look at this list of do's and do nots and not see the parallel with the Jews?

Break your mind free from traditions that bind you down. You're missing the big picture.

Looking Beyond the Mark? Everyone uses this phrase to describe people who seek the Second Comforter.

How about using it to describe people that think they secure themselves a place in heaven by going to church every 7 days, paying 10% gross income in tithing, not swearing, not drinking coffee, holding a temple recommend, getting married in the temple, reading scriptures, "ministering", having a million kids, Having multiple wives(wait that's not required anymore), the list goes on. That's not the mark, that's not the Gospel.

Have faith in Jesus Christ, humble yourself. Repent of all your sins .Depend wholly on him. Be baptized to show your commitment to him. Receive the Baptism of Fire and Holy Ghost and then listen to the Holy Ghost for the rest of your life, whatever the Lord commands. That's it. Anything more or less than this has not built upon a sure foundation.

The Good works will follow a person that has been Born of God, not the other way around.

The entire point of god is his children. The entire point of us is our children.

I would argue that the point of us is to become God's children. The entire point of us having children is to try to bring them up to become God's children. The scriptures describe us becoming God's children (in the actual sense of becoming his heirs) when we are spiritually begotten of him and born again in Christ. This should be the focus of all we do. If we have not yet been spiritually begotten of God, it doesn't matter how many kids we have.

Sure.

But being spiritually begotten of god includes keeping his commandments, and also of having the mighty change of heart, being full of charity longsuffering meekness etc.

If you are purposefully limiting your family then you are lacking in those things in the area that we claim is most important, ‘the family’.

Look, you can believe whatever you want. Personally, I am not willing to look into Gods face someday and tell him “I chose to provide a life for only 3 of your children even though you had more to send, and I was capable of having them.”

[Davka]

I have no problem with big families if the parents are up for the work involved, and I believe it is good for older children to learn to help with the younger...it just shouldn't be their responsibility. My 6 year old watches the toddler while I get in the shower. She's learning to work as part of a family and to serve others. But it shouldn't be on her to notice, for example, that the baby is hungry and to feel like she needs to find something for him to eat. That is the job of mom and dad.

I do believe we should have as many children as we can care for, meaning as many children as we can make to feel loved and safe and that we can adequately teach the gospel to their individual needs. Every kid has different needs, some need more time than others, some need 1 on 1 time, others are fine being in a group most of the time. But mom does only have 24 hours in a day and is she is spread so thin that she can't see when Bobby is worried about something a friend at school told them, or spend a half hour teaching Sally who isn't doing very well at getting along with her siblings, etc. then you've got a problem. Yes, there is an element of faith, in that you say, "Lord, I am not sure if I can take care of another child right now, but not as I will, but as thou wilt"...and if the Spirit directs you to have another child, then yes, exercise that faith and have another child. It will work out and the Lord will give you strength.

I do believe that our posterity will give Glory to us as we progress, but that is only IF they are able to progress that far, and if we have so many children that we are unable to teach them and guide them on the gospel path, then it doesn't matter if you have 1 child or 1,000. I would rather have 100 percent of my 4 children, as well as my husband and myself, achieve celestial glory somehow than have 20 kids and none of them make it or only some of them make it. Kind of a quality over quantity thing.

I will also say that children in general and the role of being a parent help us *become* better, more Christ like people, if done with the help of and faith in God. I'd definitely be more worldly had I decided upon fewer children. My 4 kids in short succession have made me focus on the more important aspects of life, namely, faith in God to help me when I feel defeated, repentance because I mess up daily as another, and charity because I really do love them more than I love myself.

[Davka]

Please show me where this is taught?

Everywhere on lds.org reflects the idea that it's between the couple and God. Period. How many kids to have? Between them and God. Birth Control? Between them and God.

As far as I can tell, this idea that it's unrighteous to have small families deserves to be grouped with other doctrines like :

Black's should not have priesthood, Adam God Theory, Blood Atonement. AKA traditions of man passed along for generations that were done away with because they simply weren't true.

Do away with checking lists off. It doesn't matter if you have a tattoo on your arm, if you have 1 kid, use birth control and go to church every other other week. Salvation is offered to you the same as any other person, the means by which God sanctifies you is the same. It all comes down to being humble, broken hearted, and depending wholly on Jesus Christ. Seriously. How do you not look at this list of do's and do nots and not see the parallel with the Jews?

Break your mind free from traditions that bind you down. You're missing the big picture.

Looking Beyond the Mark? Everyone uses this phrase to describe people who seek the Second Comforter.

How about using it to describe people that think they secure themselves a place in heaven by going to church every 7 days, paying 10% gross income in tithing, not swearing, not drinking coffee, holding a temple recommend, getting married in the temple, reading scriptures, "ministering", having a million kids, Having multiple wives(wait that's not required anymore), the list goes on. That's not the mark, that's not the Gospel.

Have faith in Jesus Christ, humble yourself. Repent of all your sins .Depend wholly on him. Be baptized to show your commitment to him. Receive the Baptism of Fire and Holy Ghost and then listen to the Holy Ghost for the rest of your life, whatever the Lord commands. That's it. Anything more or less than this has not built upon a sure foundation.

The Good works will follow a person that has been Born of God, not the other way around.

The entire point of god is his children. The entire point of us is our children.

I would argue that the point of us is to become God's children. The entire point of us having children is to try to bring them up to become God's children. The scriptures describe us becoming God's children (in the actual sense of becoming his heirs) when we are spiritually begotten of him and born again in Christ. This should be the focus of all we do. If we have not yet been spiritually begotten of God, it doesn't matter how many kids we have.

Sure.

But being spiritually begotten of god includes keeping his commandments, and also of having the mighty change of heart, being full of charity longsuffering meekness etc.

If you are purposefully limiting your family then you are lacking in those things in the area that we claim is most important, ‘the family’.

Look, you can believe whatever you want. Personally, I am not willing to look into Gods face someday and tell him “I chose to provide a life for only 3 of your children even though you had more to send, and I was capable of having them.”

I agree this is a wise attitude.

I would add that I would feel bad for the slothful servant who had more children than they could teach and care for ...even if that was only one...and had to look into God's face and say "sorry, I failed to care for and teach the child you gave me the responsibility for, when you could have sent him or her to another family who would have done so."

So only have them if you're willing to do what God expects you to do as a parent.

Many children alone does not salvation provide.

But a thought did just occur to me that I just did the temple work for my great great grandmother who had 10 kids and probably about 50 grandkids, one of whom was my grandfather who joined the church...the only one in that whole posterity to do so, as far as I am aware. So in her case, more children upped the chances that one of her descendants would join the church and do the work for her and her family. Had she stopped at, say, 5 kids, my grandfather wouldn't have been born in her line and she wouldn't have had her ordinances done already, most likely.

[Zathura]

Please show me where this is taught?

Everywhere on lds.org reflects the idea that it's between the couple and God. Period. How many kids to have? Between them and God. Birth Control? Between them and God.

As far as I can tell, this idea that it's unrighteous to have small families deserves to be grouped with other doctrines like :

Black's should not have priesthood, Adam God Theory, Blood Atonement. AKA traditions of man passed along for generations that were done away with because they simply weren't true.

Do away with checking lists off. It doesn't matter if you have a tattoo on your arm, if you have 1 kid, use birth control and go to church every other other week. Salvation is offered to you the same as any other person, the means by which God sanctifies you is the same. It all comes down to being humble, broken hearted, and depending wholly on Jesus Christ. Seriously. How do you not look at this list of do's and do nots and not see the parallel with the Jews?

Break your mind free from traditions that bind you down. You're missing the big picture.

Looking Beyond the Mark? Everyone uses this phrase to describe people who seek the Second Comforter.

How about using it to describe people that think they secure themselves a place in heaven by going to church every 7 days, paying 10% gross income in tithing, not swearing, not drinking coffee, holding a temple recommend, getting married in the temple, reading scriptures, "ministering", having a million kids, Having multiple wives(wait that's not required anymore), the list goes on. That's not the mark, that's not the Gospel.

Have faith in Jesus Christ, humble yourself. Repent of all your sins .Depend wholly on him. Be baptized to show your commitment to him. Receive the Baptism of Fire and Holy Ghost and then listen to the Holy Ghost for the rest of your life, whatever the Lord commands. That's it. Anything more or less than this has not built upon a sure foundation.

The Good works will follow a person that has been Born of God, not the other way around.

The entire point of god is his children. The entire point of us is our children.

I would argue that the point of us is to become God's children. The entire point of us having children is to try to bring them up to become God's children. The scriptures describe us becoming God's children (in the actual sense of becoming his heirs) when we are spiritually begotten of him and born again in Christ. This should be the focus of all we do. If we have not yet been spiritually begotten of God, it doesn't matter how many kids we have.

Sure.

But being spiritually begotten of god includes keeping his commandments, and also of having the mighty change of heart, being full of charity longsuffering meekness etc.

If you are purposefully limiting your family then you are lacking in those things in the area that we claim is most important, ‘the family’.

Look, you can believe whatever you want. Personally, I am not willing to look into Gods face someday and tell him “I chose to provide a life for only 3 of your children even though you had more to send, and I was capable of having them.”

I don't see the link between might change of heart, charity long suffering meekness and then OH HAVE MANY BABIES. Like...??

Okay, if someone is actively limiting their family and using birth control and they have this mighty change of heart during this period of time and are Born of God, how can you tell them they lack those things though? You might think they do, but clearly God doesn't agree, otherwise they'd still be waiting for such an experience.

[tdj]

I Had a vasectomy after my wife miscarried 2 of our triplets, she was not capable of dealing with losing any more children.
We have two children, but I would have liked to have had 5.

IMO, this is a sad day in hell. And a very poor excuse to eliminate your manhood. And I'm sure I'll catch hell for this, but nevertheless this Is just pathetic, IMO.

You sure are going to catch hell. I don't think you know the difference between a vasectomy and castration. Besides, even if it WAS castration, he's still a man and your post is the one that's pathetic, frankly.

Does it even make a difference? Not at all, it is the same identical idea, to stop the increase of our species, to thwart the purposes of God. And as in all things, we will be rewarded accordingly, be it on the one hand or the other.....
"Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth", that was pretty much the first great commandment. And ever since then, the devil has inspired man to thwart that commandment as much as possible. It has been going on since the beginning, and it continues on today. All of these demonic ways and means and methods of checking the increase of our offspring, whatever they be, are from hell itself....

He didn't say how long to multiply. Frankly, I think that was a commandment for the species in general, which has been more then fulfilled. If a couple have two kids, then they have technically multiplied. Nowhere is there a number requirement.
Attitudes like yours is what gives us the stereotype of being so bat poop crazy.

[tdj]

[quote=Fiannan post_id=919115 time=1552485796 user_id=1868

Many leaders have preached in recent years that the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth is still in effect - the Proclamation makes it clear as well.

Any amount of children is still multiplying and replenishing the earth.

A women doesn't need to be a brood mare and pop out a baby every year.

I will say all the big families I knew growing up, the mother was depressed. The kids were neglected. All their basic needs were met. Nothing beyond basics. The older kids struggled with having to take care of the younger ones. Several of the older daughters only had 2 kids because they had already raised a ton of kids. This was the way of at least ten families in the ward I grew up in. I am the youngest of a bunch of kids. I talked to a lot of youngest kids. Some of their feelings and their memories are heartbreaking. I think they had way more kids than they could handle mentally and financially.
[/quote]

I know a spectrum of families that are large. I know a handful who had a bunch of kids but they were well off so the moms looked youthful and refreshed. But I also know one who has had 12 kids and they ALL grow to be delinquents or single moms a few times over. Sluts, in other words. The daughters dress like streetwalkers to church. Also are trouble makers with the neighbors to the point of the neighbors filing civil suits and installing cameras all over their property. They are also proficient in karate. Not kidding.

Another family has one kid a year without fail. It's a young family and while the mom looks happy more or less, she also walks with a stoop, with a constant look of tiredness, and she NEVER gets to get out of the house without the husband expecting her to take at least 1 or 2 of their 8 kids. They aren't well off at all. Her husband is nice, but is kind of stupid, and the poor woman is constantly seen having to drag a handful of the youngest ones around. But at the same time, I gather she's more or less content.

[cab]

The entire point of god is his children. The entire point of us is our children.

I would argue that the point of us is to become God's children. The entire point of us having children is to try to bring them up to become God's children. The scriptures describe us becoming God's children (in the actual sense of becoming his heirs) when we are spiritually begotten of him and born again in Christ. This should be the focus of all we do. If we have not yet been spiritually begotten of God, it doesn't matter how many kids we have.

Sure.

But being spiritually begotten of god includes keeping his commandments, and also of having the mighty change of heart, being full of charity longsuffering meekness etc.

If you are purposefully limiting your family then you are lacking in those things in the area that we claim is most important, ‘the family’.

Look, you can believe whatever you want. Personally, I am not willing to look into Gods face someday and tell him “I chose to provide a life for only 3 of your children even though you had more to send, and I was capable of having them.”

I don't see the link between might change of heart, charity long suffering meekness and then OH HAVE MANY BABIES. Like...??

Okay, if someone is actively limiting their family and using birth control and they have this mighty change of heart during this period of time and are Born of God, how can you tell them they lack those things though? You might think they do, but clearly God doesn't agree, otherwise they'd still be waiting for such an experience.

The only link I guess I can see here is that once you "enter in by the way, and receive the Holy Ghost, it will show unto you all things what ye should do (2 Nephi 32:5)". That is the
ultimate goal, to take all our commands from Christ and his Spirit.

So if simpleton or benishtart go through this process, and then are told to have many babies, many wives, or that a vasectomy is worse than death, then they have been so commanded. Period. However, that commandment would be for them alone, not everyone in LDSFFland.... And if an angel happened to give them this commandment, they might want to attempt to shake his hand, just in case (especially if that angel is wielding a flaming sword)

[LadyT]

A women doesn't need to be a brood mare and pop out a baby every year.

Nobody said that.

Also, why so many metaphors in our culture comparing women having kids to animals? Seems rather rude.

I will say all the big families I knew growing up, the mother was depressed. The kids were neglected. All their basic needs were met. Nothing beyond basics. The older kids struggled with having to take care of the younger ones. Several of the older daughters only had 2 kids because they had already raised a ton of kids. This was the way of at least ten families in the ward I grew up in. I am the youngest of a bunch of kids. I talked to a lot of youngest kids. Some of their feelings and their memories are heartbreaking. I think they had way more kids than they could handle mentally and financially.

Weird how white kids have so many psychological problems nowadays as opposed to Hispanics. Oh wait, second-generation Hispanics catch up. Suppose that has to do with smaller families? Second-generation Hispanic births plunge as they grow up US culture. I have seen studies that suggest that large families provide a social network that helps kids as they grow up and beyond.

Love how you assume there are all white. They weren't. I was the only blonde blue eyed kid in my grade at school.