Babies? Or Arrows?

Found this in The Nation.

It's worth reading the whole article, but some of the main points:

'Arrows for the War'
Kathryn Joyce

Janet Wolfson is a 44-year-old mother of eight in Canton, Georgia. Tracie
Moore, a 39-year-old midwife who lives in southern Kentucky, is mother to
fourteen. Wendy Dufkin in Coxsackie has her thirteen. And while Jamie Stoltzfus,
a 27-year-old Illinois mom, has only four children so far, she plans on bearing
enough to populate "two teams." All four mothers are devoted to a way of life
New York Times columnist David Brooks has praised as a new spiritual movement
taking hold among exurban and Sunbelt families. Brooks called these parents
"natalists" and described their progeny as a new wave of "Red-Diaper Babies"--as
in "red state."

But Wolfson, Moore and thousands of mothers like them call themselves and
their belief system "Quiverfull." They borrow their name from Psalm 127: "Like
arrows in the hands of a warrior are sons born in one's youth. Blessed is the
man whose quiver is full of them. They will not be put to shame when they
contend with their enemies in the gate." Quiverfull mothers think of their
children as no mere movement but as an army they're building for God.
Quiverfull parents try to have upwards of six children. They home-school
their families, attend fundamentalist churches and follow biblical guidelines of
male headship--"Father knows best"--and female submissiveness. They refuse any
attempt to regulate pregnancy.

*****
Though there are no exact figures for the size of the movement, the number
of families that identify as Quiverfull is likely in the thousands to low tens
of thousands. Its word-of-mouth growth can be traced back to conservative
Protestant critiques of contraception--adherents consider all birth control,
even natural family planning (the rhythm method), to be the province of
prostitutes--and the growing belief among evangelicals that the decision of
mainstream Protestant churches in the 1950s to approve contraception for married
couples led directly to the sexual revolution and then Roe v. Wade.
*****
But if the Quiverfull mission is rooted in faith, the unseen, its mandate
to be fruitful and multiply has tangible results as well. Namely, in Rick and
Jan Hess's words, to provide "arrows for the war."
After arguing Scripture,
the Hesses point to a number of more worldly effects that a Christian embrace of
Quiverfull could bring. "When at the height of the Reagan Revolution," they
write, "the conservative faction in Washington was enforced [sic] with squads of
new conservative congressmen, legislators often found themselves handcuffed by
lack of like-minded staff. There simply weren't enough conservatives trained to
serve in Washington in the lower and middle capacities." But if just 8 million
American Christian couples began supplying more "arrows for the war" by having
six children or more, they propose, the Christian-right ranks could rise to 550
million within a century ("assuming Christ does not return before then"). They
like to ponder the spiritual victory that such numbers could bring: both houses
of Congress and the majority of state governor's mansions filled by Christians;
universities that embrace creationism; sinful cities reclaimed for the faithful;
and the swift blows dealt to companies that offend Christian sensibilities.

"With the nation's low birth rate, the high divorce rate, an
un-marrying and anti-child viewpoint, and a debauched nation perhaps unable to
slow down the spread of AIDS, we can begin to see what happens politically. A
half-billion person boycott of a company which violated God's standards could be
very effective.... Through God's blessing we would be part of a replay of Exodus
1:7, 'But the sons of Israel were fruitful and increased greatly, and
multiplied, and became exceedingly mighty, so that the land was filled with
them.'" "Brethren," they write, "it's time for a comeback!

So, what does all this have to do with the price of Trojans? This "Quiverfull" movement among Evangelicals isn't too far removed from the bile put forth by some of the more mainstream Holy Terrors, including members of the G.O.P.

For example, the FORMER Junior Senator from Pennsylvania, Rick "Man On Dog" Santorum is more famously known for comparing homosexuality to bestiality. However, lesser known is a statement the Senator once made on the Brian Lehrer Show:

“(T)he point of marriage from a societal point of view is not to affirm the love of two people, and to make people feel good about who they are in their relationship, but in fact the point of marriage is for having children …If we change that, we devalue the institution and we change it, and re-orient it more toward parents, and away from children.”

The highest courts in New York and Washington have said the purpose of marriage is to have children, and many other G.O.P. politicians have been gracious enough to shoot off their mouths on the subject as well. More details here.

I've got nothing against kids, myself. I'm happily married, and I've got four progeny of whom I'm very proud. But the fact is my Lovely Wife and I chose to have kids according to our plan, and not those of God, or the Republican Party. To reduce women to machines popping out babies and marriages to infant sweatshops seems so...Medieval to me. The next thing you know, they'll be trying to shut down any form of sex that doesn't expressly produce children. You know, gay sex, sex toys, pornography, contraception, and oh, I dunno, just about everything else fun about sex. A veritable War On Whoopie, if you will.

Or do I repeat myself?