INSIDE OUT

Being an environmentalist, I hear some of the extremists. Not afraid to bring up their points of view for fear that those reading this might think, "good point", I'll bring up one of their standpoints. Some believe that having children is harmful to the environment. But, I'm sorry... What?!?! Are these people kidding? I suppose if families are not teaching their children to take care of the great planet, which holds them, then they actually have a point. But is it such a black and white issue? Eating meat is MUCH more harmful to the environment than having a child or two! Do I need to bring up the already umpteen articles on how raising pigs for food is more harmful to the environment than all of the transport trucks on the highways combined? What about divorce? The separating of families caused "an extra 38 million rooms, 73 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity, and 627 billion gallons of water in 2005 alone, if their resource-use efficiency had been comparable to married households."
http://www.pnas.org/content/104/51/20629.abstract?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hit...
Let's not even discuss the psychological impact that divorce has on children. Now, bringing up what "else" is harmful to the environment does not mean that actions, which also may be harmful to the environment, are null and void. However, making the decision to have and raise many children, who will do more to impact those already on our planet and take care of it safely, takes away any soapbox these extremists stand on. We need to have children who will grow up making a marked difference on this planet. I will not assume that others, who already have children, will raise theirs with the same conviction. No, I will not have children in order to save our planet. Yet, the children I will choose to have because I desire to have them, will make a positive change for our great planet Earth.

On the other side of the extremist debate, the phrase, "go forth and multiply" just bothers me. Religious extremists who extract verses like these from the bible and dictate it to our populated Earth give Christianity a bad name. If, for them, they would like to have many of these little blessings as possible before they reach menopause, then by all means, go right ahead!! What a beautiful thought! But, for those women (whom I've met, by the way) who have been dictated these rules to and whose actions caused more harm to their family than good for a variety of reasons, makes me think that this side of the extreme does not have the heart of God on their minds at all! The bible says many things in the Old Testament, which these fundamentalists do not pay such attention to as readily as this verse. Hypocritical and judgmental according to their own desires, they take one verse and try to force these Pharisee-like mandates on those whom these verses would be irrelevant and even harmful to. If they really want to take this verse to its fullest, then on the same coin, why do they not force husbands to have more than one wife in order to multiply as much as they can? Again, it would not be "convenient" or desirous for them so they choose to justify or ignore this line of thinking. Choosing to have many children or no children is an individual choice for each family. In this particular blog, I am merely speaking about our own family's ruminations. Not a generalization as to how everyone must/should feel.

Since being married, our desire to have three or even four children was talked about every so often. Now that we have three, the conversation comes up whether or not to have another one. So, here's our next question: with all the overrun orphanages on this Earth, how could we be so selfish as to have our own?? Yes, I've heard this argument as well. However, having very young children we are not in a position, at this time, to bring in another child of an older age. First of all, we are not in a financial position this year to pay the high cost of adopting. That, and the time needed to spend on a child who was raised in less than ideal circumstances, takes time away from the children we've chose to bring into this world. THAT would be unfair to our children at this age. This is the most important age in their life. They deserve to have the best of us.

But, what if we waited until they were over the age, five? According to the "experts", the first five years are the most influential, the most formative. If we wait until they are past this age, we would be doing a couple of things: 1. We would be bringing a child (we would choose an "older" child - perhaps a girl from China around the age, four) who might not ever be adopted otherwise, into our home. They would immediately find friends, a mother and father who would deeply care for them, and the time within our home to be given the extra time it takes for a child who has been neglected for so long. 2. We would have the finances more readily available if we started saving now. 3. We would be teaching the children we already have, the importance of bringing a child into their home from a less fortunate environment. It would teach them empathy toward other cultures, as well as provide an environment where they too might grow up, bringing adopted children into their own families. The more children we have, the more adopted children that would be welcomed into our subsequent generations.

Of course, this list could also occur if we started off with adopted children, raising them to do the same. Lack of finances would have prevented us even further had we thought this way when we were first married. Not to mention we didn't have the desire at that time. Even now, my husband, B, is not completely in support of adoption. It is very important that he and I are on the same page before bringing a child into our home for the rest of our and our children's lives.

So, the final decision of whether or not to have more children and how is continuing to permeate our conversations. The option of making the appointment for B to have a vasectomy is a frequent discussion that continues to be placed back on the shelf. We are not prepared to make things final as of yet. Baby items and clothing remain boxed up, waiting to be opened up for the next baby or donated with the decision to "snip". It's too arduous for us to make the decision final. Hanging out with those, who do not share the desire for many children, bring us closer to the decision of finalizing our own future pregnancies. But, when we realize the decision to have the three we have is the best thing that's ever happened to us, bringing more into our home seems the obvious choice despite the heavy maintenance that comes with the early years.

The question remains... to have more of our own and adopt later, wait to adopt, or complete our family as is?