Two mothers are better than none?

[DiscussingTheTopic]

So I would imagine being children in a polygamous family is like having more than one mother.

Typically in monogamous families the mother sends the children to public school to baby sit them for the day while she does whatever (possibly go to work or stay at home and not watch the children.)

If a Public School teacher get's paid $30,000 a year to teach 30 children that is $1,000 tax dollars per child, not counting books, but just to pay the baby sitter. If she/he get's paid $50,000 a year to teach 20 children that is $2,500 tax dollars per child per year. All this money does not come from the parents, but taxpayers! And it is actually more expensive because teachers get benefits like health insurance. Now none of this money is going to educate the children, this money is only going to pay someone to educate the children, textbooks, computer labs, curriculum etc. all cost extra money!

Now if you go and home school your children the books should cost less than $1,000 per year even if you are using college level textbooks. This generally does not drain from taxpayers, unless the homeschoolers go to public college courses, etc.

Furthermore homeschooling saves the government money because the mother does not get paid in excess of $30,000 per year but generally teaches for free.

So monogamous people, have the baby sitter (school teacher) cost other people tax money so the mom can ignore her children for 7 hours a day!

In addition to this the mother does not ignore her children enough between the stress of children and work she hires a baby sitter so she can ignore her children more and spend time with her husband at expensive restaurants paying other people to cook, when he/she could cook himself/herself.

Now if there was a polygamous family. Both wives could find more time with their husband! And both children could have more time with a mother(s)!

The mom's would not have to hire a babysitter but they could take turns watching the children, will the other wife/wives spend time with the husband.

Hence the one (but practically zero) mother problem is solved.

When I think about this I think children would be much happier in a polygamous family where they could always have a parent to care for them.

 

[Tlaloc]

Now if you go and home school your children the books should cost less than $1,000 per year even if you are using college level textbooks.

For books, sure, but for other activities it usually adds up to more than that. Keep in mind homeschooling goes beyond learning to an added opportunity for experiences around the city or province.

But for the case at large Public schooling costs WAY more than teachers salaries, to the point where solid quality private schools can be cheaper on a per student basis (but much more expensive for the parent, who has to pay for Public school via taxes AND private school) The whole school topic reminds me of the whole school choice thing and the movie http://www.voicesofschoolchoice.org/

I think we would still get a babysitter sometimes even with poly though, its good to have time away from the kids, and its good for the kids to have a fresh face, esp as our babysitters are usually a relative that should be building a relationship with them anyway.

I generally agree with what I think is the main point of this post.

 

[CecilW]

It all depends on the mothers, doesn't it? *grin*

When I asked my yougest if he didn't think having two moms would be cool, he replied, "No WAY!!! Then there'd be two women telling me 'Do this! Do that! Do this! Do that!'". Had to laugh, as from his perspective, that was definitely true.

 

[James]

Cecil,

I would like to agree that two mothers are better than one. I feel a child has so much to benefit from having two mothers in the same house. If the mothers get along and share the same love for the children things can only be positive for the kids. I know my future second wife already has a loving relationship with my boys, so her and Lacey will be giving them love unconditionally. She has two daughters and they love Lacey and told her they glad she will be their second mom. Great post Cecil.

God Bless,

James, Lacey and soon to be Angela!

 

[CecilW]

LOL. Not my basic post, James, though I agree, it is a good one. I just had the funny story about my youngest's response.

 

[Anonymous]

So monogamous people, have the baby sitter (school teacher) cost other people tax money so the mom can ignore her children for 7 hours a day!

I'm sorry, but this is not a fair statement. Some women, especially single mothers, don't really have a choice. I totally support homeschooling but it isn't always a viable option for families. I know several mothers, single and married, who would prefer to homeschool their children but they can't. They have to work outside their home, not because they want to, but because if they don't they will become homeless very quickly.
Blessings,
Fairlight

 

[Dr. K.R. Allen]

I would only suggest that it depends on the character of the moms. Mothers who are drug heads, criminals, and/or abusive would not be better than having none. A Godly family, however, would of course be better than a child being motherless.

I've seen some children come from homes where it would have been better not to have any child under the care of the women around and I've seen some children who are royally blessed by having a mom, step mom, or whatever the particular set up was. Character is crucial in the matter.

Dr. Allen

 

[sweetlissa]

I agree with Fairlight. Some women have been treated badly by men and have no choice but to work to support their children. Some people have never had to experience some of the uglier things in life but sometimes men don't behave the way that God tells them to. So sometimes women have to do what they have to do. When others on the board speak of mothers in a derogatory manner, it is unkind and unChristlike. Please remember that part of our ministry here is to single mothers, so saying things that will offend them isn't particularly wise. We want to bring people in not offend them. If I were a working mother I would be very offended by that comment.

SweetLissa

 

[DiscussingTheTopic]

"I'm sorry, but this is not a fair statement. Some women, especially single mothers, don't really have a choice. I totally support homeschooling but it isn't always a viable option for families. I know several mothers, single and married, who would prefer to homeschool their children but they can't. They have to work outside their home, not because they want to, but because if they don't they will become homeless very quickly."

I heard that legalizing polygamy in certain countries has helped single moms by getting them good husbands who can take care of them. If they got married they wouldn't be single moms and that would be irrelevant. I am not saying this is the only solution and trying to mock single mothers. I just think it is an often overlooked solution that is cheaper per individual than handing out welfare money + baby sitter public school money.

 

[Pretty Tulips]

...

 

[DiscussingTheTopic]

I did not mean to offend single moms.

I meant to offend moms who are married with a husband who can support the family economically on a single income, but prefer to send their children to public school to a babysitter while they go to work with their second job. And then after coming home ignore the children because they are to tired after their second unnecessary job.

In other words I meant to offend moms who care more about their career than children. I hope they will get so offended that they will start loving their children more than their career.

 

[Beta]

Reading through all of the posts I did not get the feeling that any statement was unfair or that anyone was insincere in what they were saying. Sweet Lissa's comments were thoughtful and her concern is for the single moms. In fact, nobody is against the survival of women and children on this forum.

That said, I was a single mom after years of living helpless as mother and a wife, for reasons God knows. The fact of the matter is that I finally took matters into my own hands, 'for better or for worse', and I worked to support the kids and myself. If someone had said to me then, that I was doing the wrong thing, or that I ought to have a husband, I would have defended myself and been defensive, as my only perspective was that I was doing 'the best I can' and I was honestly proud of myself for doing it, even if a lot of it wasn't good.

So I would say to everyone, yes, consider the feelings of the single mom's, but don't refrain from telling the truth. But make it clear that you're not against their paving a road for themselves where there was none, but that they shouldn't have to prove themselves and suffer loss or have their children losing valuable things in the process. I think it has been said, in ways, but maybe not clearly enough for them to realize you're on their side. Say it again, and again if necessary.

We lost much more than we gained... I can testify to that. Doesn't mean that they will. Still, there's nothing like having a real family, or communal support system, having someone or ones to share burdens with, or having children with people they love at home instead of in cold impersonal after-school facilities.

Single moms already had an ideal once that they tried to live up to and perhaps in some ways failed. Giving them another ideal is not exactly comforting unless it becomes real in their lives.

 

[CecilW]

Single moms already had an ideal once that they tried to live up to and perhaps in some ways failed. Giving them another ideal is not exactly comforting unless it becomes real in their lives.

Well, THAT would be the job of us BF fellas, wouldn't it? I'm sure that they're well aware of the imperfection of their lives. We guys get to step up and help make 'em better. Kinda a partnership with God. Neat, huh?

There is one thing ... all the guys on this forum are theoretically available, whereas there's often no telling with the ladies. So ladies, this is a situation very much akin to the book of Ruth. It's a perpetual leap year. If you don't like life as a single woman or single mom (uh, the second INCLUDES the first, not poses as an alternate! ) Feel free to ask a guy to step up and marry you. "Cecil, I know you got 8 kids. Wanna make it an even dozen?" :roll:

 

[CecilW]

Following the previous post, the following exchange occurred between Beta and myself. As she seemed to think I should post ,,, well, here it is.

Ok Cecil, you stinker... you found the one opening in my post and stuck your 'fellas' plug in there Well, ok I guess I'll let you get away with that... this time...

Well, of COURSE I’m a stinker! Surely THAT’s no surprise. Keeps it fun!

The point of my reply post, which may or may not have come through, was the FREEDOM of women to outright choose a fella on the board, and the joyful, exciting (Partnering with GOD! Imagine!) OBLIGATION of us fellas to be the human solution. When I was a kid, marriage seemed exciting cause my cojones were in an uproar, like most every teenaged male. Nowadays, it’s twice as exciting due to the above. Plus … lots of dull moments as a single – both as a teenager, and after my first wife divorced me. Never a dull moment in a God-ordained marriage, that’s fer sure!.

I did understand what you were saying in the post although you should say it again in the more clear manner you just did to me... and paint a real picture of what these ladies are missing so they don't just think... I've been there, done that, and it did nothing for me. they may be tired of a husband... but they can always use a good friend that doesn't abandon, that doesn't tire, that has unconditional love that covers a multitude of sins (for which they are notorious). You and your fellas are doing a good thing... for which you will be rewarded in due time.

In due time? IN DUE TIME? *righteously outraged* I’ll have you know we don’t HAVE to wait! This is just plain FUN!

So there you have it. *grin* I think Beta painted a pretty good picture her ownself.

I'm not sure what to add. Except perhaps to offer the opinion that a Christian man being led down the PM path on his knees is a whole different critter than the mono male heading down the Monday Night Football path on his butt. We probably are still tiring and tiresome at times, as we figure this all out and pontificate about our current theories in the human version of a particularly irritating 4am rooster, but I do think we're heading in an interesting direction, and hope that the fruit of our journey is showing up as positive. Maybe even sweet.

Hi-ho, it's off to work I go.

 

[steve]

amen to the both of youse

 

[T-C's Rebeka]

I did not mean to offend single moms.

I meant to offend moms who are married with a husband who can support the family economically on a single income, but prefer to send their children to public school to a babysitter while they go to work with their second job. And then after coming home ignore the children because they are to tired after their second unnecessary job.

In other words I meant to offend moms who care more about their career than children. I hope they will get so offended that they will start loving their children more than their career.

But you have to take into consideration that the mom may want to homeschool but the father does not want the kids homeschooled, for a variety of reasons.
The head of the household makes the decisions (or should) not the mom.