Angry Sunshine State DUmmy doesn't like Quiverfull

[jinxmchue]

Two, two, two threads for the price of one!

First one compares Quiverfull to Nazis, fulfilling Godwin's Law in the first go.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6887970

madfloridian  Donating Member  (1000+ posts)
Fri Oct-30-09 12:38 AM
Original message
Goebbels in 1933 said nothing was of greater importance than a mother who gives the state children.   Updated at 1:16 PM
   
I was really surprised when I learned about how very similar Joseph Goebbels' view of the role of women was to that held by many religious groups today. This is from a speech in 1933 when he was in charge of the Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda.

*snip*

The article is from Calvin College's Nazi Propaganda website.

Goebbels went even further in his mandates about the role of women.

But that is not all. The main purpose of the exhibition "The Woman" is not only to show the way things are, but to make proposals for improvement. It aims to show new ways and new opportunities. Clear and often drastic examples will give thousands of German women reason to think and consider. It is particularly pleasing to us men in the new government that families with many children are given particular attention, since we want to rescue the nation from decline. The importance of the family cannot be overestimated, especially in families without fathers that depend entirely upon the mother. In these families the woman has sole responsibility for the children, and she must realize the responsibility she has to her people and nation.

Does that kind of thinking sound familiar? It should indeed. We are hearing it from certain religious movements, one being the Quiverfull movement.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6482947

madfloridian  Donating Member  (1000+ posts)
Mon Sep-07-09 01:21 AM
Original message
"Arrows for the War"...Quiverfull a political movement, not just religious.    Updated at 1:16 PM
   
After Barack Obama was elected it did not take long for the extremists to come out in full force. They had lost that permanent majority that was going to make it easier for a free-market theocracy to come into being. They have not handled it well at all.

I kept thinking that showing the screamers at the health care forums would embarrass them. Not at all. They seem to take pride in it. I thought that most school districts would refuse to cave in to those who think the President of the United States would warp their children's minds. Not at all...even the media is making these fools sound legitimate. They have no shame and nothing embarrasses them.

I just heard of two families in our area who follow the way of life of the Quiverfull movement. A friend mentioned them and the problems they face. They believe if they keep producing child after child, God will provide. The woman sacrifices herself and her womb to her husband, to the Quiverfull movement and to God.

I think we underestimate the power of religious extremists in this movement and in the overall religious community. My head is still reeling from the way Florida counties so quickly caved to the ones who were fearful of the president. I think this kind of situation may be unprecedented in our country. I though Bush looked pathetic reading My Pet Goat, but I assumed he had a right to be there. I didn't respect him because he lied us to war, but he was the president...he had a right to talk to school children.

My friend, a social worker, pointed out that movements like the Quiverfull one are not just about building a army...they are about into keeping their children isolated from the world as much as they can. Isn't that what we saw this week? Are other religious right movements like that? For some reason so many right wingers are terrified of the president's speech....why? What do they fear?

[Chris_]

Pardon my ignorance, but what is the Quiverfull Movement"?

doc

[Lord Undies]

http://www.quiverfull.com/

[jtyangel]

The woman sacrifices herself and her womb to her husband, to the Quiverfull movement and to God.

I've known some families in this movement and the women do not consider carrying pregnancies any kind of a 'sacrifice'. Since they see children as a blessing, they feel their womb is blessed with the gift of a child EVERYTIME they are given a pregnancy.

They also fail to follow through on their logic. Every one of the quiverfull families have a committed father in the relationship. If the woman is sacrificing, then it would stand to reason the husband of the wife and the father of these children is sacrificing something as well. Perhaps his entire work life in order to support his children? Hmm, but I guess the 'sacrifice' of the father matters little next to the martydom of the mother.  

The man, just as well as the woman, is submitting that God is the head of everything in their lives, including fertility. The trust relationship with God is between both people in the home, not just the woman. BOTH parties put trust in God. I wouldn't expect DUmmies to understand this concept of submission of both partners because in their world, unless you are of Islam of course, paternalism is under every rock. It doesn't occur to them that there are very happy and fulfilled families who are part of this lifestyle.

I've never understood their thinking where a woman bossing around a guy and expecting him to bow to her every whim while she withholdes relations with him is somehow a noble, headstrong, confident woman and the man is just a great guy, doing what he has to do...that's an acceptable sacrifice in their eyes is some wimp living under the burden of a bossy, feminist female. However, a woman submitting to the will of God and her husband is some kind of a downtrodden waif who needs rescuing and to have her turned around to be a big, bossy feminist too. What gets me is they never see that in most situations, the relationships are carried on in MUTUAL agreement and that their bias is just that: a biased worldview of marriage in general and very devoted Christian marriages in particular. I say if a man can choose to be a big ***** next to his feminist wife, then why can't a woman choose to be submissive to her husband?

[Chris_]

http://www.quiverfull.com/

Ahhh......thanks.....I now see why they view it as a threat.......Imagine, Christians having large families.......kinda like the Catholics have been espousing for over two millennia...

doc

[USA4ME]

At least the name "madfloridian" fits.    She could have also chosen "hatefilledintollerantfloridian," but she probably couldn't spell it.

.

[Odin's Hand]

Yes, "Flying Spaghetti Monster" forbid that "the state" be a traditional, Christian family and not some secular government bureaucracy, such as DHS or Lebensborn, answering to the centralized politburo.

[JohnnyReb]

And what was it that MOO-hammed told his followers? Something about looking upon their women as a field to plow and a duty to tillith their fields.

...oh excuse me, that's different and so culture insensitive of me. Well, I guess I'm just an old racist.

[MrsSmith]

Why, why, why do these people hate children with such venom??    

[thundley4]

And what was it that MOO-hammed told his followers? Something about looking upon their women as a field to plow and a duty to tillith their fields.

...oh excuse me, that's different and so culture insensitive of me. Well, I guess I'm just an old racist.

Didn't some court in Afghanistan recently rule that a wife must submit to sex with her husband at least once a week?

[franksolich]

Why, why, why do these people hate children with such venom??    

Because children take time, attention, and resources away from the primitives.

If there were no children, the primitives would have it all.

That's what the primitives want.