Quoting Quiverfull: Less Kids Equal More Depravity?

Quoting Quiverfull: Less Kids Equal More Depravity? December 3, 2016

quotingquiverfullby Nancy Campbell of Above Rubies – Are We Degenerating?

Editor’s note: Nancy is trying to make the case that having less children comes from the same sinful mindset that causes movie and television viewing. It’s not even close. Many people limit family size due to realities like income and wanting to focus fully on a few children. It’s not all some big selfish ‘me-me-me’ going on.

What about family life? We have so many wonderful godly families in the nation who are raising godly children. And yet sadly, across Christendom, the majority of families have the mindset of the world. They have limited their families to two children. They are so excited when they have their son and daughter, and think, that’s it!

I remember talking to an elderly gentleman on one of my flights. He told me that his father came from a family of ten children and he came from a family of six. “How many children did you have?” I asked. “Two,” he replied. Very typical. Ten, six, two! Every generation has less children. Degeneration. Falling away from God’s original plan and purpose for mankind. We have become victims of a humanistic society. The blind leading the blind into the ditch!

It was normal to sit together as a family to eat meals. To communicate with one another. Now, if families do sit together they bring their iPhones to the table! They don’t even communicate face to face. Now that really is degeneration!

QUOTING QUIVERFULL is a regular feature of NLQ – we present the actual words of noted Quiverfull leaders, cultural enforcers and those that seek to keep women submitted to men and ask our readers: What do you think? Agree? Disagree? This is the place to state your opinion. Please, let’s keep it respectful – but at the same time, we encourage readers to examine the ideas of Quiverfull and Spiritual Abuse honestly and thoughtfully.

moreRead more by Nancy Campbell:

Nancy Campbell’s Liberian Adoption Update


Stay in touch! Like No Longer Quivering on Facebook:

If this is your first time visiting NLQ please read our Welcome page and our Comment Policy!

Copyright notice: If you use any content from NLQ, including any of our research or Quoting Quiverfull quotes, please give us credit and a link back to this site. All original content is owned by No Longer Quivering and Patheos.com

Read our hate mail at Jerks 4 Jesus

Contact NLQ at SuzanneNLQ@gmail.com

Comments open below

NLQ Recommended Reading …

Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement by Kathryn Joyce

13:24 – A Story of Faith and Obsession by M Dolon Hickmon


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Storm

    Family size has nothing to do with whether you sit around the table. In fact, it’s probably a lot easier to sit around the table and talk with fewer kids than with many.

    I really, REALLY hate the “everyone is always on their phones” argument every single time I see it, no matter the source. You know what past generations complained about? People always talking on the wall telephone. People reading books too much. People waiting excitedly for letters from friends. It doesn’t matter what the technology is, if humans are bored we will do things that entertain us, often reading (whether books or online articles), or communicating with other people that don’t bore us so much. This isn’t new and it didn’t start with cell phones, they just made it easier and more convenient.
    And no, cell phones aren’t going to lead to the downfall of society. In my experience, the vast majority of people know when it’s ok to distract themselves with their phone and when it’s not. The rest would have been doing something else anyway if it wasn’t for the phone. Taking phones out of society isn’t going to magically fix all our problems, so stop blaming it on them.

    Lastly, I know she believes in a sky fairy who will fix all of mankind’s problems if we all worship him, but back in the times she’s talking about, everyone could have 10 kids because infant mortality was crazy high. Most people didn’t actually come from families of 6 or 10. “Family size declined between 1800 and 1900 from 7.0 to 3.5 children.” So by the time period Nancy is referencing, average families had around 3-4 kids. 10 was a outlier no matter when you lived, due to the mortality rate. “In 1900…one in five children died during the first 5 years of life.”
    But the real issue is that families back then didn’t have access to modern birth control. By the late 1800’s/early 1900’s some methods were available to married women, but weren’t always the most effective and only middle/upper class women could generally get them. If they did, they very likely would have used them, because childbirth was so much more dangerous!

    Nancy’s basically trying to say, our ancestors, who didn’t have the same options as us, didn’t choose the options we do (well duh), so we’re evil for using the options we have.
    You can think birth control is evil, that’s fine, but trying to use records of family size to do so just makes no sense. Those families had no choice in the size of their family. In addition, farming families needed the kids to work on the farm. We don’t do really do that anymore (not widespread at least). Limiting our family size has absolutely nothing evil or self-centered about it; in fact, I’d say it’s selfless to make sure you can give enough resources, time, and attention to each child you have. And that’s not even mentioning that if we all had 8 kids today overpopulation would happen far, far sooner, something Quiverfull people always ignore and say either “God will handle it.” or “The scientists are lying, the earth can support billions more no problem.” and point to some bullshit science backing up their claim.

    Source for quotes: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4847a1.htm

  • Finding Home

    I was recently in Japan, and I didn’t see any families with more than two children–most I observed only had one. I stayed in one area of Tokyo so it’s not like I visited the entire country, but I think I saw one normal (not commercial) vehicle that would accommodate more than four people the entire time I was there. So… what would Nancy think of Japanese culture? This is one reason that I left white, American Christianity. It’s blind to the fact that other cultures exist, and their “rules” don’t apply–don’t even make sense–in those cultures. If their god isn’t big enough for the whole world and all the people in it, I’m not interested in him.

  • Evelyn

    Do you know why a lot of kids from big families only have two kids? Because it sucked to be in a big family! Some large families are great, and they kids know they are valued and everybody loves each other and are mostly happy. But if you’re one of ten kids and you never wore anything new or got to do any extracurriculars and shared your bedroom with three others kids until you were 18, OF COURSE you’re going to stop at two and make sure your kids never feel like you can’t afford them. Duh.

  • SAO

    God’s plan for humanity is overpopulation, poverty and famine?

  • katiehippie

    My kids communicate better with me by text so I will take every communication opportunity that technology gives.
    I got told as a child that I always had my nose in a book. Like reading is a bad thing.

  • Anonyme

    My sister-in-law and my brother have two children and aren’t (at least the last time she referred to the subject) going to have more, because SHE NEARLY DIED in labor with my youngest nephew (needed a blood transfusion, was given the wrong blood type (!), and also only partially delivered the placenta, which led to an infection). I should tell them they “depraved” and that my SIL had better risk leaving her children motherless and have another baby.*

    *note that I would not criticized her for this choice, of course.

  • Astrin Ymris

    All the upvotes!

    My dad came from a family with ten children. Only one of all ten had more than three kids; two was the average number.

    Since most of them had kids during the Baby Boom or right after it, that puts them under the norm for the period of 3.09-3.65 children per family.

  • persephone

    Birth control and abortion were common in Bible times (one of the earliest Egyptian medical texts includes information on birth control), yet the Bible says nothing for or against either.

    Besides, I think we’ve fulfilled the directive in Genesis to fill the Earth. In fact, we’ve overfilled it, so there, Nancy.

  • ConcepcionImmaculadaPantalones

    Believe it or not, Nancy, but some parents specifically PLAN to limit the number of children they have because they want to be able to AFFORD to give the kids things like food, a safe home in an area with good schools, clothes and shoes, medical care, take them to the dentist and enroll them in activities they enjoy such as sports, dance, musical instrument lessons, etc. It’s not bad, it’s RESPONSIBLE.

    There’s also the issue of the planet having a certain capacity for sustaining life. So. Unless you’re volunteering to let others have your allotment of potable water, while you die of dehydration – don’t tell people how many kids is enough, or call them degenerates for not meeting your desired quantity of children.

  • persephone

    There’s are two beliefs in Christian extremists that apply:
    1. God will never let Earth be ruined, but will step in with some miracle. Some of them consider GMOs to be miracles backed by God.
    2. We have to destroy enough of the Earth that God will start Armageddon, and that will be the end of everything. This is often tied in with those groups that are supporting Israel, because they’re pushing for a war there, which will jumpstart Armageddon.
    So, yeah.

  • guest

    Both husband and I come from large families. We have three children. We don’t have iphones, but we do have computers and tablets that don’t sit at the dinner table with us. We talk with each other and we eat meals together. We go to Church together and we read the Bible together.
    Perhaps it’s that magical 3rd child that has kept us from the nosedive you talk about. Perhaps it’s not down to how many kids one has.

  • guest

    But, but, but…. the ENTIRE POPULATION of the earth fits in the state of TEXAS, standing shoulder to shoulder!!!!!!

  • guest

    That was me too. Always with my nose in a book.

  • ConcepcionImmaculadaPantalones

    I don’t like people enough to want to be shoulder to shoulder at every angle and in all directions, I need more space than that (plus Texas has some horrible weather – hot, humid or dry, storms…plus there are gigantic bugs with an option of scorpions depending on the part of Texas one is in…no thank you!)

  • pagankitty

    And in the good ol days when everyone was always breeding how many kids lived to adulthood again??

  • Rebecca

    Everyone’s different. Nothing wrong IMO with having a large family if you have the finances, and the temperment/desire to have many children. But, I don’t understand why people feel that this is the will of God for everyone, or automatically means people are going to be more godly. Totally agree with kids having less screen time, and more time to build relationships with parents, and other interests. Huge proponent of outdoor play and exercise.

  • Karen the rock whisperer

    Another me, too. For some reason, my mother in particular used to get cranky about my constant reading. I was doing my chores and fulfilling my obligations. I was severely restricted in what kinds of play I could do outdoors, because we lived in a questionable neighborhood. I had very few friends, and those were at school. What was I supposed to do, sit and rot?

  • guest

    Yeah, I need my space too and that climate doesn’t sound like a good fit for me.

  • ConcepcionImmaculadaPantalones

    It’s not a good fit for most. 😛

  • guest

    Whether it sucked or not, they know the reality of having a whole bunch of siblings.

  • Astrin Ymris

    Not to mention that all those people standing shoulder-to-shoulder have no place to lie down and go to sleep. Plus, what are they supposed to eat? How do they get drinking water? What about clothing and shelter? Large parts of Texas are pretty inhospitable for standing around in without air conditioning. And there’s no mention of space for any bathrooms… or sewage treatment.

    IOW, I can’t see standing shoulder-to-shoulder in Texas as being sustainable for very long. ;-D

  • ConcepcionImmaculadaPantalones

    I suppose people could sleep in shifts, on top of the people who are awake?

    As for the water and food…that would be the moment when someone would declare “God will provide!”…and about 10 days in most people if not all are dead from starvation and dehydration.