15 September 2008

Yes. We'll probably have more.

I grow annoyed with constantly being asked, "Are you guys going to have more?" by people who know us.

Religious conviction, folks. That's what this is about. No, really. We actually believe on the basis of Scripture as witnessed to by the confession of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church that God intends for married people not to hinder the procreative process. Furthermore, we believe that Christians are supposed to live according to Christian beliefs, even if these beliefs are inconvenient and style-cramping.

So quit asking. I've already told you this. If anything changes, I'm sure you'll hear about it.


Dan @ Necessary Roughness said...


I think it's important to draw a distinction between those who ask such a question to be snide and those who ask such a question as an unwitting product of theological liberalism. While you may be right, the tone is quite cynical, and you're not likely to win anyone to your side. Last time I checked, we need all the friends we can get! :)

Children are gifts. If all other people see of you is your struggles with your kids, then it is natural for them to think you aren't making a connection between your perpetual parturition and your suffering.

Is there a way to show others what a blessing your kids can be? And I'm asking this as a dad of twins, who gets to take them out on the swing or riding bikes and have the fortunate of them enjoying their time with me. Perhaps it's because I'm gone so much. :)

Blogversary said...

Are you guys going to have more kids?


Rebekah said...

Dan, I should have specified that by "people who know us" I mean people to whom we've already explained to contents of the second paragraph, and in friendlier tones (and let me also mention that I'm not referring to parishioners). What gets me cranky is that people don't listen to the explanation and just think, "Oh, they think they want a lot of kids--wait till they figure out how expensive that is!" Like we don't know. :P It's the constituency out there rubbing their hands greedily for us to admit we were all wrong and didn't know what we were getting into that I'm complaining about.

Blogversary, ha!

The Rev. BT Ball said...

Our answer is, "If the Lord gives them to us." Usually ends the line of conversation.

Joy said...

I feel your pain, Rebekah. I've tried things like, "We'll let the Giver of Life decide how much life to give," and "God knows exactly what's best for me." People claim to share these sentiments, yet lack the guts/faith/selflessness to live it out. Very few in our congregation of 270 have more than two children, except the elderly.

So would you still go BC-less if you had a Downs baby or some other high-need condition? I know several with Downs, but I don't know a single family who had more after that, and I can't blame them.

Joy said...

PS: Oh my goodness! Ben Ball, it's Joy Golden, Kevin's lucky lady. We micarried #3 but #4 is due in 6 weeks!

Rebekah said...

Joy, I don't blog "hard cases." Everybody else in the world enjoys it so much more than I do.

Very authentic pregnant lady post time. ;)

The Rev. BT Ball said...

I'm glad that Lord has been gracious to you and Kevin. I'll pray the Lord will get you through the perils.

Michelle in NM said...

I really appreciated the first question people (including family) asked when we found out that #3 & #4 (who arrive next week by c-section) were 2 instead of one was "So, are you having your tubes tied?"

The answer that works for us when people ask how many more, or if we'll have more, is that we will take however many God gives us. It does seem to end the line of questioning.

To the question of "how will you ever handle it?" or "what will you do with 4 under the age of 4?" I answer that we can't handle it, but the LORD will equip us and provide for us (also stops this line of questioning).

Michelle in NM, huge and somewhat miserable, awaiting the joyous arrival of our new girls.

Susan said...

Joy, when our #3 was a toddler, we attended an event for families with handicapped children. One of the things my husband noticed was that we were the only family there where the handicapped child was not the youngest in the family.

But then fast-forward about 15 years. Our youngest (#6) has VCFS which includes serious heart defects, cleft palate, speech problems, immune deficiencies, mild retardation, etc. And we have no younger children. Although it might seem obvious (and is often true) that birth-control will prevent handicapped children from having younger siblings, there is another reason. It is more common for old worn-out bodies to give birth to children with birth defects than for younger & healthier bodies to do so. But those old & worn-out bodies are less likely to become pregnant or safely carry the next baby to term. So the lack of younger siblings for kids with Down Syndrome or VCFS or other such problems might not be the decision of the parents, but might have more to do with the advanced age of the mommy. (Just another perspective....)

Susan said...

Okay, I just realized I didn't mention in that first paragraph that #3 was born without half her left arm. That's why she was/is considered "handicapped."

Joy said...

Quite true. It's been at the forefront of my mind between Sarah Palin (who looks deceptively young) and a 20-something (whose parents attend our church) who had a trisomy 18 baby. I also know a young couple who have had two babies with severe heart problems that both died late in gestation, but don't use BC. I'm amazed at their faith. Maybe my mixed feelings are the result of being adopted and being a foster parent. There are thousands upon thousands who desperately need loving Christian parents.