toldailytopic: Do you think there is a suggested cut off line over how many children

[Nathon Detroit]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for June 12th, 2012 02:18 PM

toldailytopic: Do you think there is a suggested cut off line over how many children a couple can have? If so, how many is too many?

Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.

 

[Vaquero45]

We have two and that has been fine. I could see where more would be a lot of fun though. People with almost twenty... I don't get, but a big family is great if the parenting is good and everyone is cool. Hard to pick a cut off line, cause I'm not going to tell others whats right for them on this topic, (if they are good people, ONE is way too many for some people) but I think 9 or 10 sounds like a lot.

 

[genuineoriginal]

I think 101 would be over the limit, but anything up to that is okay as long as the couple can keep them all fed, clothed, sheltered, and educated.

 

[Lighthouse]

toldailytopic: Do you think there is a suggested cut off line over how many children a couple can have? If so, how many is too many?

No.

 

[chickenman]

I'd be curious what chrysostom's parents have to say about this topic.

 

[Eeset]

One. Anything more increases the total population. We need it to decrease and if it doesn't because of intelligent behavior then natural law will decrease it through disease, war, pollution, hunger and other mechanisms. That may take a few decades but in many places it has already begun.

 

[CabinetMaker]

One. Anything more increases the total population. We need it to decrease and if it doesn't because of intelligent behavior then natural law will decrease it through disease, war, pollution, hunger and other mechanisms. That may take a few decades but in many places it has already begun.

For somebody so concerned about the precise number of years since Jesus died, I am surprised that you don't realize that one child per couple results in a population decrees. To maintain a stable population (roughly), each couple would have to have two children.

As to how many is to many? I am happy with two. But I won't presume to tell you how many is to many provided that you can adequately care for your family.

 

[Breathe]

You shouldn't have more than you can afford to raise. If I have to pay for them, you have too many.

 

[Strefanash]

to the OP the answer is NO.

the problem is not and never had been overpopulation; and if you are asking about an optimum number for proper upbringing of children that depends on the parents. Some could not cope with any, others had huge broods of 10 or more.

For the record I am single, never married, not likely ever to be so now and I am childless

 

[Buzzword]

It's hard to throw a blanket over this issue.

We've all seen/known people for whom ONE is waay too many, especially when those people seem to be trying to birth an offensive line.

On the other hand, there are many wonderful people who, for one biological reason or another, are unable to have children, but would be amazing parents for the spawn of the idiots and the irresponsible.

It's interesting to see that more and more people are choosing to NOT have children, but that may just be the prelude to Idiocracy.

 

[Lighthouse]

One. Anything more increases the total population. We need it to decrease and if it doesn't because of intelligent behavior then natural law will decrease it through disease, war, pollution, hunger and other mechanisms. That may take a few decades but in many places it has already begun.

We could just execute all the rapists and murderers.

 

[Poly]

I was once in a checkout line and the lady in front of me had a basket full of groceries and what seemed like 5 young and very tired children (it was late).

They weren't really acting up. They obeyed their mother but there was a little bit of whining and wandering off with the mom having to keep a close eye on everybody while dealing with her grocery bill. I guess this really got on the cashiers nerves because by the time they finally left and I got up to check out my stuff, she said, "And that's why you shouldn't have so many kids." I looked at her square in the face and said, "Uh, I have 5 kids." She seemed to get off that topic really fast.

 

[Lighthouse]

I was once in a checkout line and the lady in front of me had a basket full of groceries and what seemed like 5 young and very tired children (it was late).

They weren't really acting up. They obeyed their mother but there was a little bit of whining and wandering off with the mom having to keep a close eye on everybody while dealing with her grocery bill. I guess this really got on the cashiers nerves because by the time they finally left and I got up to check out my stuff, she said, "And that's why you shouldn't have so many kids." I looked at her square in the face and said, "Uh, I have 5 kids." She seemed to get off that topic really fast.

:chuckle:

 

[Eeset]

For somebody so concerned about the precise number of years since Jesus died, I am surprised that you don't realize that one child per couple results in a population decrees. To maintain a stable population (roughly), each couple would have to have two children.

I am an advocate for population decline. Based on all the evidence I have seen the world was doing pretty well when it had 2 billion people. But at 7 billion we are polluting the skies, waters including the oceans, depleting fuels to the point of scarcity and creating starvation conditions in many countries. The human race is not very intelligent. It has sent people into outer space and created marvels such as the internet but can't control basic animal instincts. Every species which overpopulates ultimately exceeds available resources and then experiences massive die offs. Mankind will not be the exception to that rule.

 

[Traditio]

Every human being is 1. knowing, 2. living and 3. a being.

As such, God is the immediate creator of each human person.

Contraceptives intrinsically are immoral.
Abortions intrinsically are immoral.

 

[Alate_One]

Humans cannot populate indefinitely on a finite earth.


As long as the average children per woman is less than 2.1, we're at replacement value. An individual could have more or less children, the only thing that really matters is what the overall population is doing. The odd person could have 10 or 20 kids without issue so long as it is balanced. Reducing population is probably a better plan given our current rate of resource consumption.

Tipping Point

 

[Angel4Truth]

I think 101 would be over the limit, but anything up to that is okay as long as the couple can keep them all fed, clothed, sheltered, and educated.

I agree but i would also add as long as one is physically up to it too and considering how old they will be before their child reaches adulthood.

 

[eameece]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for June 12th, 2012 02:18 PM

toldailytopic: Do you think there is a suggested cut off line over how many children a couple can have? If so, how many is too many?

Two

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

The Bible always treats a barren womb as unnatural and children as a blessing. A full quiver (Ps 127:5) is around 13-14, so at that number, one is very blessed indeed.

AMR

 

[Lee52]

The Bible tells us that a man who does not take care of his family is worse than an infidel. (Sorry to use a word that sounds so "muslim").

It is my belief that we should have children up to the point where we cannot provide for them. Providing for them is all encompassing. It is spiritually, financially, timely, educationally, medically, etc.. Just because we live under Grace does not mean that we do not have responsibilities for our actions. Procreation is an action.

Be blessed,
Lee52