- Bobby Paluga on Your Reactions to Church Yesterday, 2/1: “In a sense people attend church to obtain feelings. It could be in the form of being with people who reinforce our hope of eternal life. And there is the social angle which has been beaten to the ground by newer church policies that have eliminated or reduced pageants, dinners, plays and any activity involving the entire ward. You can’t however change the desire to be surrounded by like minded people, as well as friendships, we call just call this affinity. I’ve always looked forward to Fast Sundays and the testimonies, I get a feeling of spiritual lift with so many of the spontaneous, off-the-cuff remarks. I leave just feeling good. As humans, most of us enjoy the feelings of belonging to something greater than ourselves, an organization that can do important humanitarian works that we as individuals cannot We can’t ignore the feeling of being worthy, of doing the right thing even when no one is looking of cares is motivating. I look through the ward list and see so many names I’ve never before seen and wonder what did these stone cold inactive members miss out on. They came to find good, positive, reassuring feelings maybe feelings of friendship, but failed to find what they pursued. When I put down the list I feel profound feelings of sadness, feeling helpless to change the inactive members situation. What can the church do to relight the fire, are we becoming too strict, too limited on those activities that used to bring us together, or in a race to rid ourselves of our uniqueness and fall in line with mainline Christianity? A few inactive friends and family members will speak to the church not being the church they grew up in during the 60-80?s, one friend told me church wasn’t fun anymore, dry as a cracker, punctuated by worn out 17th century hymns combined with the constant regurgitation of conference talks. Is the problem with the members or is it the results of so many changes from the top?” Feb 4, 13:23
- on How Many Big Families Are in the US? Where Are They?: “This tracks with my experience as the oldest of, eventually, eight children, maybe subtracting one since “normal” family size was bigger in the 70s and 80s. One possible shift: there were actually two families with eight children in our ward, and it wasn’t a particularly ideological project for either of us. (My parents planned to have two, but the Lord prompted them to have one more. Repeatedly.) I now know two families of comparable size, one LDS and one not, but both were planned that way for explicitly religious reasons. Having a large family seems to have become an intentionally counter-cultural thing. On being married with zero kids…I think our society generally agrees that being in a healthy committed relationship contributes to happiness, and marriage strengthens those relationships. I don’t hear a lot even on the left these days about marriage being obsolete or being an oppressive patriarchal institution. Whether to have kids or not is almost a separate decision from getting married. We’re not quite empty nesters yet, but our 19-year-old doesn’t need us to organize our lives around her anymore, and it’s been striking to me how our marriage has become even more important and fulfilling. But most importantly, congratulations!” Feb 4, 12:31
- on How Many Big Families Are in the US? Where Are They?: “Of particular “going against the grain” note, consider Kyung Yeol Park, his wife Myeongsuk, and their seven children. Elder Park was 48 when called to the 4th Quorum of the Seventy in April 2024. At the time of his call he was a counselor in the presidency of the Seoul Korea South Stake. Called as an Area Seventy last year there was, “Motoshige Karino, 52, Togane, Japan; Representative Director, Modere Japan GK; currently serving as president of the Chiba Japan Stake; former bishop, mission presidency counselor and stake presidency counselor; wife: Mirei; seven children.”” Feb 4, 11:38
- on How Many Big Families Are in the US? Where Are They?: “My mother was one of her parents’ fourteen children, the fifth of ten sisters. I formed from that an exaggerated sense that any couple that was willing could have a dozen children, but it is not really so. To be physically capable of that, even if willing, is very exceptional. For example, of apostles ordained in the 20th Century, Packer and Nelson each had ten children, and to find another with at least that many we have to reach back to Joseph Fielding Smith, who had two children with his first wife and nine with the second following the death of the first. Numerous 20th Century apostles had seven or eight children, though. Infertility is more than a yes/no matter. Many couples were able to have one or three, followed by miscarriages. Some women are blessed with healthy childbearing into their 40s, but not all. Elder Holland remarked on his and his wife’s experience with that. In the March 1987 Ensign, Flora Amussen Benson (wife of Ezra) was quoted, “I wanted twelve children, but had to settle for a choice half dozen. If we just would have had twins every time, we would have made it.”” Feb 4, 11:26
- on How Many Big Families Are in the US? Where Are They?: “Links: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr74/nvsr74-1.pdf https://www.jrganymede.com/?s=birth+order” Feb 4, 11:07
- on How Many Big Families Are in the US? Where Are They?: “For this sort of question one source to look at is, most recently, National Vital Statistics Reports, “Births: Final Data for 2023,” vol. 74, no. 1, March 18,2025. Table 3 on page 16 gives the number of births by birth-order. The number of first-borns, second-borns, etc. was: 1st: 1,406,183; 2nd: 1,126,450; 3rd: 589,447; 4th: 262,793; 5th; 108,652; 6th: 47,180; 7th: 21,661; 8th and over: 23,870; not stated: 9,781; total: 3,596,017. That makes for the following ratios: 1st/2nd: 1.25; 2nd/3rd: 1.91; 3rd/4th: 2.24; 4th/5th: 2.42; 5th/6th: 2.30; 6th/7th: 2.18. A decade ago I looked at the numbers then, and the ratios are all about the same now as they were then. Taking the ratios as approximately static, we can invert them and say: 80% of mothers of one child also had a second, 52% of mothers of two children also had a third, 45% of mothers of three children also had a fourth, 41% of mothers of four children also had a fifth, 43% of mothers of five children also had a sixth, and 46% of mothers of six children also had a seventh. (80%, 52%, 45%, 41%, 43%, 46%) This narrow range (41-46%) seems to indicate that past three children the choice or ability to have another is not changed by existing family size, and not much less than the choice or ability to go from two to three. I will put links in a subsequent comment, in case URLs trip some embargo on comments.” Feb 4, 11:06
- on “Don’t Try to Make Me Good; Shoot Me”: The Complicated Reality of J. Golden Kimball: “I could see him being extremely controversial. He was beloved for being relatable and funny, but was also overly blunt and very conservative. Immagine what would happen if a general authority made remarks like Holland’s musket fire talk on the regular, and you might get a feel for what it would be like to have J. Golden around today.” Feb 4, 10:53
- on How Many Big Families Are in the US? Where Are They?: “Is Colorado the second lightest state on your chart, or is that an optical illusion being next to Utah? I myself am living with my four children.” Feb 3, 22:28
- on “Don’t Try to Make Me Good; Shoot Me”: The Complicated Reality of J. Golden Kimball: “I can only imagine how electrifying such a personality would be today.” Feb 3, 17:38
- on How Many Big Families Are in the US? Where Are They?: “Interesting stuff, but I mostly came to the comments to say that the use of the term “gentile” here makes me deeply uncomfortable.” Feb 3, 14:11
