Hilarious article about those people with 16 kids...

[drmom]

http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford/

[Der Blaue Engel]

1. I love Mark Morford!

:thumbsup:

[tocqueville]

2. very very good

[chalky]

3. Summed up my feeling in one short statement:

....zips right by "touching" and races right past "disturbing" and lurches its way, heaving and gasping and sweating from the karmic armpits, straight into "Oh my God, what the hell is wrong with you people?"

[kath]

4. Wow. I laughed my ass off! What a great reliever of all the pre-Fitzmas

stress around here!

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

76. This phrase made my day -- and I'm still in the 3rd paragraph!

"18 spotless white hyperreligious interchangeable people" :rofl:

OK, back to the other Firefox tab.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

77. Now it's not so funny.

"I have a friend who used to co-babysit (yes, it required two sitters) for a family of 10 kids, and she reports that they were, almost without fail, manic and hyper and bewildered and attention deprived in the worst way, half of them addicted to prescription meds to calm their neglected nerves and the other half bound for years of therapy due to complete loss of having the slightest clue as to who they actually were, lost in the family crowd, just another blank, needy face at the table. Is this the guaranteed affliction for every child of very large families? Of course not. But I'm guessing it's more common than you imagine."

:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

[FreedomAngel82]

113. That was the sad part

:( This is one reason why I'm glad it's just me and my brother. I remember when I was younger a younger cousin of mine was the youngest out of three and she did stuff to gain attention from her parents and her older siblings. Nothing bad mind you, just to gain attention. My parents have never played favorite's or anything like that and my brother and I don't play favorites either (as far as I know of course with him). I'm glad to be apart of a family with two. I think it depends on the parents too and how they spend their time and if they have the children to when it's comfortable for them financially so they can make time to spend with all the kids. I know I someday want a big family (not that big though!) but not if I'm really working a lot.

[Maat]

5. Thanks.

I thoroughly enjoyed that column, and I told him so in an email (the author, that is)!

I worry he is correct about the reason for our society going religious hardright.

[bobbieinok]

153. large families in Mormon areas and in religious wrong areas

in IA saw mostly 1-2-3 kid families

in OK 4+ kid families seen quite often.......used to really freak me out when I first moved back in fall of 89

[BlueJazz]

6. Dear, Dear God (or FSM)...Please give me a woman who dislikes..

..the thought of having children. She'll have my heart for life...

[Tracyjo]

27. I'm yours baby!!

I can't imagine the thought of it.

[hyphenate]

34. You will find that there are more

women who do not seek to have children the more you look and ask questions. Do not assume that every woman you meet wants kids. I didn't, still don't, and happily at that point in my life where it would be near impossible to have them, anyhow. Yay, me.

[lse7581011]

75. I second that! n/t

[indie_voter]

98. I third that, though I have kids

I wanted to remain child-free (I had my first at 36, my second at 38). My husband sort of liked the child-free idea, but then changed his mind. D'OH!!

Obviously (well to me anyway... ;^) ), I don't regret my children, I would never wish them away.

HOWEVER, I do miss my child-free life.

Having children is not the "holy grail" for all woman. Contrary to popular myth, it doesn't fulfill all women.

Choice is a wonderful thing!

[Dem2theMax]

154. I'm here and waiting.

;)

[Erika]

7. And these parents will never pay a cent in taxes

We take care of their lack of common sense. Their deductions means they procreate and we pay for it.

[kurth]

8. Great find!

Of course, one must consider the statistics. The birth rate among whites has been declining in general, and the Duggars are a rare oddity in America. For every Duggar family, there are numerous Hispanic families with 5+ kids...

[cynatnite]

14. Do you have statistics by race available?

Link?

[Bridget Burke]

24. Yes, the racial balance is changing.

Especially here in Texas. Do you have a problem with that?

[radwriter0555]

9. OHMYGAWD they link to the MODEST SWIMWEAR site.... it's like Amish

bathing suits or something.



Totally HOT.

[drmom]

11. I missed this the first time! Where are the male swim suits???

Apparantly they don't need to be modest...

[Binka]

17. WTF? That Is SO Wrong. A Bathing Suit Does Not Need 18 Yards Of Fabric!

Is she going to hide her children in that thing? Holy Shit! The WEIRDOS ARE MULTIPLYING!

[booksenkatz]

22. We can still see her dirty pillows. NT

[Saphire]

33. ohh, you are bad...heehee.

[neebob]

129. I've always been confused about the dirty pillows.

Are they whole breasts, or just nipples?

[TahitiNut]

25. Well, it does help protect against skin cancer as the ozone layer depletes

As the destruction of our environment proceeds, all sorts of "fashion" changes will be needed.

[tmoore]

60. No way.... Does that thing have a zipper

:wtf:

[sandnsea]

124. Oh for pity's sake

That is just too freakin' much!!

But I bet it's for Mormons, they wear some kind of religious undergarment thingy and that's just about the right design to cover it up.

[neebob]

128. Not to defend Mormons

because I hardly ever do that and this may in fact be the first time, but I'm pretty sure it's okay for Mormon ladies to remove their garments for swimming. The Mormon church would be okay with a nice normal one-piece or a tankini, even. Mormon women can shop for swimsuits at Land's End.

[Momgonepostal]

134. Thanks, I think

I'm Mormon and have never worn nor have I ever seen another Mormon mom wear a suit like on the website. Most of the LDS women I know wear normal looking one piece suits.

[neebob]

137. You're welcome

I thought of you when I posted that. :)

[sandnsea]

156. It's a personal choice

My sister is a Mormon and wears the holy garments. I know she chooses shorts based on the garments, it made sense to me that swimming suits might be chosen the same way. It was just a statement, not an attack.

The swimsuits are still ridiculous, I'd think that no matter who they were targeted to. Since Mormon women wear normal swimsuits, then it begs the question, why can't they wear discreet, but normal shorts and tank tops too. Doesn't make any sense to me anyway.

[Momgonepostal]

166. I think it's a length of time thing really

You can take the garments off to go swimming, to work out, to play tennis, or whatever, then you get dressed in your regular clothes, and go on with the rest of your day.

As far as wearing shorter shorts, that's more of an all-day long wardrobe issue. I can't off hand think of a reason to wear a tank top for just an hour. Most people when they get dressed for the day, get dressed for the whole day.

Don't ask me what garment wearing Mormon lifeguards do...I have no idea...lol

Anyway, sorry for sounding snippy.

[sandnsea]

168. We were in Arkansas

In August, it was MISERABLE HOT. We were cleaning out my father's home. So I'm guessing that, like if you were working in a garden or something, one could choose to wear something cooler. Would that be right? My sister is weird in a way that has nothing to do with being a Mormon. If something can be taken to extremes, she's one that would do it. You didn't sound snippy, being poked fun at isn't any fun and I'm sure you get more than your share. But in this case, that isn't what I was doing. I really thought Mormon women always had to wear and cover their garments.

[Momgonepostal]

169. This is controversial...lol

To start, I think it's enough of a full time job just worrying about me, so I don't go around and try to be The Underwear Police. I don't really care what others wear and when they wear it.

Many people would choose to wear something cooler while doing a really hot activity like gardening, clearing brush, heavy duty physical work, etc. Some people would not, and think that its scandalous. I know it seems like we have a lot of rules, but this is something that's pretty much left up to the individual's discretion. Where people draw the line often comes down to their own body temperature issues, too.

[XanaDUer]

152. You're thinking of the holy underwear.

...

[AlCzervik]

10. Morford is the best, every column is funnier then the last

and he's always pretty much right on the money.

[Horse with no Name]

12. funniest.line.ever

"Let us be clear: I don't care what sort of God you believe in, it's a safe bet that hysterical breeding does not top her list of desirables. God does not want more children per acre than there are ants or mice or garter snakes or repressed pedophilic priests."

[Tinksrival]

13. Favorite snippet

"Is it wrong to notice how all the Duggar kids' names start with the letter J (Jeremiah and Josiah and Jedediah and Jesus, someone please stop them), and that if you study the above photo (or the even more disturbing family Web site) too closely you will become rashy and depressed and you will crave large quantities of alcohol and loud aggressive music to deflect the creeping feeling that this planet is devolving faster than you can suck the contents from a large bong? But I'm not judging."

Favorite new word: devolving

[sepia_steel]

15. Oh my god her hair is almost as freaky as her hobby.

ohmyfreakinggodSTOPITstopitNOW

[Buns_of_Fire]

16. The article says that Jim Bob wants to be a senator

I guess they're working on building a safe majority in votes, and they've realized that "Eight Isn't Enough."

[Binka]

18. Remember Groucho Said It Best

"I like my cigar but I take it out once in awhile."

Sheesh Rim Bob give it a fucking (oops no no no not fucking YOU must stop fucking) freakin rest already. Morford is right this woman has amazingly BAD hair.



Edit hell for Binka!

[latebloomer]

28. LOL!

Great quote from Groucho!

[jeanarrett]

81. Heh, heh, you forgot the comment that went with this

picture:

Here they are, the Duggar children and their father Jim Bob Duggar (top center), as their mother Michelle holds the 16th addition to the family. While the birth was successful, doctors were unable to remove the large feral monster squirrel growing from the back of Michelle's head. Nor were they able to convince any of the daughters that bad Amish-style haircuts actually make God cry. Discovery Health Channel photo by Spencer Tirey

[XanaDUer]

19. Anyone see the recipes from the family's web site?

...

[Starbucks Anarchist]

20. Any of them involve white bread?

[HughBeaumont]

21. Can anyone successfully NAVIGATE the family's website?

It's all religious quotes, fundie links and not ONE close up of this 80s hairdon't-cursed family. I guess they're too busy uneducating their chillun with some creationist Hovind-shit to care about building a website, though.

What are these kids going to be like when they get out into the real world?

I wonder if they use the Dobson method on their multispawn?

[fortyfeetunder]

36. Yes

:puke:

I wouldn't feed my family any of that casserole crap.

[MissMarple]

110. Yes! Gack. Tasty! Yummy! Mommy's favorite! Right out of the 60's.

Velveeta (other wise known as "food product"), cream of mushroom soup, must use real mayonnaise. Hoo Boy. They will all die at an early age. But, then there is all the ground turkey.

[MsTryska]

132. hell yes.....

looks like momma should get a side gig writing for:

[XanaDUer]

135. Lol!

I kinda like that book, though. I don't even think there is a Tater Tot to be found among its pages.

[MsTryska]

138. I love the book -

i'm not even white - but white trash cooking makes for some delicious comfort food.


and there has to be a tater tot casserole or 2 in there.

[XanaDUer]

151. I have to check it again (I have a well-worn copy)

but any cookbook that lets me open cans of food and mix them together is a cookbook I can use!

[ohio_liberal]

23. "visualize frighteningly capacious vaginal dimensions"

:rofl: :rofl:

[TahitiNut]

26. I doubt she has any time for Kegel exercises.

:shrug:

[Nihil]

32. But the good news is ...

... should they lose their house, at least 17 people will still stay
dry ...!

[KoKo]

59. Instead of trashing vaginas maybe you ought to talk about penile push ups

That was a disgusting comment. :-(

[ohio_liberal]

64. The author of the column wrote that line

I thought it was hilarious. My uterus would probably drag the ground if I had 16 kids.

[TahitiNut]

70. Push-ups (whatever they are) wouldn't come close to compensating ...

... for the dimensional impact of 16 deliveries on her reproductive tract. I have yet to hear of a penis that comes close to the size of an infant as it passes through the birth canal ... except in the horrible pathology of elephantiasis.

The fact remains that he's probably parking his Volkswagen in the Astrodome. :evilgrin: Laying pipe in Carlsbad Caverns? :silly:

[ohio_liberal]

73. "parking his Volkswagen in the Astrodome"

:D

Funniest line of the day.

[spinbaby]

29. Thanks, that was funny

And I found some frightening recipes on the family Web site:

TATOR TOT CASSEROLE
2 lb ground turkey cooked, seasoned, drained
3 2lb bags tator tots
2 cans cream of mushroom
2 cans evaporated milk
2 cans cream of chicken
Brown meat & place in large cass. dish.
Cover with tator tots. Mix soup & milk together.
Pour over top. Bake at 350 for 1 Hour.
(One of Daddy’s Favorites!) Makes 2- 9”X13” pans

[Ilsa]

38. Oh. My. God.

Loaded with fat and preservatives. Not a vegetable in it.

I bet she has a pantry full of cream of mushroom and cream of chicken soup.

[Ilsa]

41. Would those be organic tater tots? Oh yummy! eom

[MountainLaurel]

57. Organic food is for godless commies

They'll take their food with as many preservatives and chemicals as possible: God will protect them from liver failure.

[LibertyLover]

42. Tater tots

Oh my gods, my stepdaughter told us that her mother (my husband's ex) makes that. Poor stepdaughter won't look at anything vaguely resembling a tater tot. Only difference is that the ex- uses chicken nuggets instead of ground turkey. Come to think of it - stepdaughter won't look at chicken nuggets either. Can't say as I blame her in the least.

[HamdenRice]

83. That's not food -- it's feed, as in "animal feed"

These are clearly recipes for filling the trough and letting the animals have at it.

Fressen, not essen.

[Nobody]

30. Does anyone have a planet to colonize?

Can I sign this family up? They're ideal for repopulating an entire world by themselves.

[PDittie]

31. "My uterus would be hanging down to my knees"

That's what my wife said last week. I'm still LMAO.

[OhioChick]

35. OMG.........That was so funny......and true! n/t

[txaslftist]

37. What pap. Useless drivel.

My great grandmother had six children. My great grandmother on the other side had ten. I can trace my family back to before the Revolutionary war, and there's hardly a branch with less than eight kids hanging off of it.

They were farmers, and every hand was needed, and every hand worked. The great thing about it was, they were free to have as many kids as they wanted without a bunch of people judging them for it and making fun of them.

Too bad that's not the way it is anymore.

[Ilsa]

39. They also didn't have birth control.

On edit: After her sixth child, my grandmother moved my grandfather into another bedroom.

[txaslftist]

40. Because the neighbors were making fun of the size of her uterus?

Probably not. I imagine at the time her neighbors had the decency not to.

[TahitiNut]

78. That's what I call "Third World Social Security"

Given the mortality rates and life expectancy, folks depended on their children for their old age. Childless men and women didn't have an "old age" ... they become destitute or servants until they died.

My paternal grandmother gave birth to ELEVEN children by two husbands.

[gkhouston]

107. oho, is it ancestor baby bingo day?

I've got a greatgrandma who had 23. The things people used to do for entertainment when they didn't have DU... :evilgrin:

[Hardrada]

130. My Mater

had twelve! I turned out OK though. Raised by grandparents after the divorce. (Dad had four more kids, giving me 15 siblings and half siblings).

[leesa]

148. I grew up with 9 siblings. My Mom was a good Mom, but it is impossible

to give individual attention to all the kids...you learn to do without, and you learn to get it elsewhere. Your siblings become pseudoparents.

[Hardrada]

149. I am the eldest of them all.

So I was privileged in that respect.

[neebob]

131. My great-great grandpa Daniel Wood,

who was buddies with Brigham Young, had at least 32 children - but he needed 5 of his 11 wives to do it.

On edit - insert "at least," because the records tend to reflect the fact that polygamy was both uncool and illegal after 1888, and Daniel Wood died in 1892 at the age of 91. He was 73 when his 32nd child, who was also my great grandmother, was born.

[gkhouston]

140. 11 wives! Imagine the cat-fights!! n/t

[AngryAmish]

157. Two of my great-grandmothers had 20 kids each

One had ten taken in childhood (1918 flu and other things).

Great-grandmother Foley had all 20 live. In a 3 room house. Emigration, priesthood and the nunnery is where the kids went at age 18.


It is nice that there are so many people here who feel free to point fingers at people just because they choose a large family. It is the "right to choose" people.

I never figured out why this story was news.

[MsTryska]

133. the key is that your family was farmers....

these folks aren't farmers - they're breeding cuz the good book told 'em to. (and according to dad - they had a miscarriage because she was ont he pill)

[Catshrink]

43. Who is paying for all of these kids?

Does daddy work? If so, doing what? And he wants to be a senator? He has a ready volunteer staff, that's for sure.

Does anyone else see the irony in those swimsuits? They're supposed to be modest and asexual. But where do babies come from? Who's fooling whom here?

[txaslftist]

45. Daddy works and is paying the bills.

According to a previous tv show I saw on these folks, they don't get govt. assistance, other than standard child deductions on taxes.

Exactly why do we have a problem with these folks? Aside from the fact that they are religious, strict parents and Republicans?

Are we trying to make this family our version of the Republican's 'welfare queens'?

[distantearlywarning]

44. I agree with every sentiment in this article.

And I don't care who thinks it's "mean". And to those of you who mentioned that families regularly had 8 children in an earlier age, well, it was a different time. Like someone said, people owned farms and every hand was needed. And there was no birth control. And the planet wasn't overpopulated then. Etc. There is no earthly reason why anyone in this day and age in a Western country (and not 3rd world either except for the lack of birth control and the stupid Catholic Church telling people they shouldn't use condoms) should have 16 children. None. It's a selfish act.

[txaslftist]

47. You agree we should...

..."visualize frighteningly capacious vaginal dimensions"?

Is that okay with you?

If so, what would offend you?

[FlaGranny]

53. The sad fact is

txaslftist, that every woman who has given birth can visualize frighteningly capacious vaginal dimensions. We can also visualize urinary incontinence and uterine prolapse. We can visualize back pain and swollen legs. I'd even be willing to bet that this Duggan woman has hypertension (eclampsia) because she is wearing a blood pressure cuff. You don't wear one of those unless they are taking your pressure every 15 minutes. If that IS the case, she is taking her life in her hands every time she gets pregnant and putting that brood to risk for becoming motherless. Then I guess the oldest teenaged girl will get to be "mother." I hope she will be as bubbly and happy about it as her deluded mother.

Edit: Just wanted to repeat - this woman is putting her life at risk. Childbirth just isn't as safe as some people seem to believe. This woman's worn out uterus can kill her.

[txaslftist]

56. So this is appropriate?

It is not for this space to imagine this couple's soggy sexual mutations. We do not have enough wine on hand for that.

[FlaGranny]

67. I don't know - Is Jon Stewart appropriate?

He is constantly using the "f" word. How about all those night club comedians?

I've heard jokes all my life about sex with a woman who has had babies. Men seem to think it's not as good. Probably true.

My sense of humor tells me that the article was funny. My sense of being a woman absolutely horrifies me - but about the family not the article. The article, almost point by point, is what went through my head when I first heard about and saw these people.

[tx_dem41]

62. What you say is probably correct medically, but guess what?

Its her CHOICE. That's what being pro-choice is all about.

[KoKo]

65. It's HER CHOICE! FGS! Don't you all understand what CHOICE MEANS?

Sheesh. We've got Harriet Miers and Roberts ready to take away our choice about family planning by overturning Roe v. Wade and maybe even birth control if they really want to get carried away and yet some hear use the very arguments against this woman with 16 kids that the Right wing uses on us. Women can still have complications from abortions, they can have psychological pain over whether they made the right choice but that IS THEIR CHOICE.

The argument that this woman will have medical problems from this or that she's a "brood mare personality" is the same as those who scream "Baby Killer" outside of abortion clinics.

We are hypocrits about this family.

[FlaGranny]

71. I haven't seen one person in this

entire thread say that she should be stopped from making her stupid choices. But, I will still continue to cringe every time I hear about her. That's my right too.

For crying out loud, nobody is advocating passing laws against having children, or having demonstrations against it. It is not very honest to compare being repelled by excessive childbearing to screaming "baby killer" outside a clinic.

Yes, I AM disgusted by it and I KNOW what is going on inside her uterus. Next time, it might just be too tired to clamp down to stop the bleeding.

[stanwyck]

119. Not all choices are good, And

we're not talking about taking away their choice to breed like bunnies.
But we do NOT have to admire their admirable baby-making skills.
What we would admire is a couple who had six children and adopted ten.
Face it. Mom and Dad want the glory. The attention. The website and photo ops.
This is not about the children.
And we do not have to admire them for their fecundity.
Again. No one is taking away their choice. We're just refusing to congratulate them for their reckless, vainglorious behavior.

[belle]

171. Sure, it's their choice. Doesn't mean we can't mock or disapprove.

And no, in fact, saying that she is likely to have medical problems is not the same is shouting "Baby Killer!" That's some serious phyiscal/hormonal workout she's putting her body through. Multiply nine months by sixteen kids and see what you come up with. And that's hardly any recovery time between pregnancies--she's only thirty-nine!!

Yeah, it's not illegal. I don't even see anyone seriously saying it *should* be illegal.
That doesn't mean it's a good idea.

[belle]

172. From an article about people who had triplets, for example:

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:hfT1Bkcai-EJ:www.capecodonline.com/cctimes/health/art12a.htm+%2B+dangers+%2B+%22many+pregnancies%22&hl=en

The arrival of triplets put an enormous strain on the Polichs. "The exhaustion was unbelievable. I really don't remember much of the first year-and-a-half to two years," she said. "It's all the things that go into caring for a baby - the diaper changes, the feedings - times three. It's overwhelming. And you just don't get to do that bonding and nurturing the way you would like to, because it comes down to logistics and maintenance, for lack of a better word."

***

And that's just THREE babies (at once). This woman has sixteen children, and six are still under six years old. That's EXHAUSTING. Both the birthing and the caring, and yes, what with all the energy needed just to get the basics taken care of, there's not much time for individual attention or nurturing. That's not politics; that's just reality. Seriously, you try it sometime.

[belle]

173. Also see:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/science/nature/2978454.stm

http://www.arts.mcgill.ca/MEPP/PRRN/farah.html

[MountainLaurel]

66. That oldest girl already is mother

If you read the family Web site, you'll see that each of the younger ones is managed by an older child, who gets them ready in the morning, makes sure they eat their breakfast, et al. There's no way that two parents are going to be able to handle 16 children without the older ones taking on most of the duties. If you talk to any child who grew up in a family like this, it's stnadard procedure. Generally, it seems to lead to resentful older children and attention-starved younger ones. You can bet that most of these kids who escape the religious mania will have only one or two children, if any.

There was a case a few years ago here in DC where a child baked to death in a car because Dad forgot him. The toddler was one of 12 or 13 children. One of the teenagers was supposed to be "in charge" of the boy, but being a teenager, forgot, and the father also forgot. (There was a lot of forgetting in this family: They routinely left behind kids at the store, and the police had been called a couple months earlier because the same child who died had been found wandering on the family's street, which happens to be a four-lane road.) Could you imagine how that teenager feels? No child should have that kind of responsibility placed on them without their consent.

And relevant to my prior point, Mom and the eldest sister were in Ireland visiting a dying family member. Sis had just gotten out of the mental hospital after having a breakdown from the stress of caring for her younger siblings. She was 18 years old.

[Nobody]

159. It's also been my experience

that it's almost always girls that get that kind of responsibility laid on their young shoulders.

I have a sister 12 years older than me and she loved having baby duty and didn't mind changing my diapers.

I also have a load of classmates who are in huge families like this one. Always it's been the girls who had to stay home and take care of younger siblings. The boys could go out with friends.

I'm one of 4, my own mother is one of 9, classmates were one of 12, and 10.

My mother once told me she wasn't breast fed because my grandmother couldn't, not because she didn't want to.

What's the ideal family size? It depends on the individual. Some people can do a great job with a lot of kids, my own great grandmother adopted my grandmother after she already had 13 she gave birth to. Farm family.

Nowadays, there is no danger of humans becoming extinct. Families like this would be ideal for starting a human race foothold on another planet so we don't all die off after an asteroid hit, a comet hit, the sun going nova ahead of schedule, or any number of disasters.

[TahitiNut]

94. If "bigger is better" for a male, why not for a female?

:evilgrin:

[Mad_Dem_X]

175. I completely agree - there is no reason

to have that many children these days. It's very thoughtless.

[BrklynLiberal]

46. While they cannot win with reason they will win simply by numbers.

The thoughtful people do NOT have litters.
People like this just irrationally reproduce, and that is very scary.

Religious fanaticism of all types preaches against birth control, and encourages large families.

While we are laughing at this article, they are still having kids by the dozens. While I am laughing at them, it still makes me sick to my stomach, and scares me more than I thought it would.

[Orrin_73]

48. Who cares whether she has 16 kids or not

The family sure loves kids. No ones business move along.

[txaslftist]

49. Holy shit. I thought I was the only one ...

... thinking it was really none of our business.

[LeftyChristian]

51. Add another

This is no one's business but the Duggars.

So many "progressive" replies in this thread as well.

[sandnsea]

125. Who cares if gays adopt kids?

Why should it be socially acceptable to express an opinion over gays adopting kids, but not these people cluttering up the earth with their resource consuming pac-brats? If one is based on some supposed sense of social responsible, so is the other. City dwellers have a point of view on family values too.

[tx_dem41]

50. Let's see ....that article has racism, regionalism, lookism, elitism....

made fun of religion, and was a complete waste of a few column inches.

Ever wonder why we lose lately?

[Orrin_73]

52. I could not agree with you more

The Dems dont appeal to those folks at all.

[KoKo]

55. Agree.....trashing this family is really lowdown. They made a choice and

yet everyone here is supposed to be concerned with Roe V Wade going down...yet they trash this family for making their own choice.

It's hypocracy and makes us look like fools. It's like we are Freepers carrying on about these people. And, we need to worry that we don't get infected and turn out being Freeps of the Left.

:-(

[tx_dem41]

58. The threads (re: this family) have shown me that some DUers...

are Pro-Choice in name only (PCINOs?). Several have called for government-imposed limitations on the number of children a family can have. Talk about government controlling a woman's body?!?

[txaslftist]

63. Yep, even though every single poster on this board...

...can go up their family tree no more than three generations and find moms with six, eight and ten kids.

This is intolerance at its finest.

[stanwyck]

90. sure. But that's not how we live today

I'm from farm country in Illinois. I dated a boy who was one of 17 children. I have an aunt and uncle who had ten kids.
But. Face it. Is this to be admired in 2005? We're no longer an agrarian country. We were in the last century.
And in years past, our ancestors didn't have reliable birth control. Sex meant babies.
Life is different now. We're no longer farming. We don't need the "extra hands".
We need to be environmentally conscious. The tribe is not in danger of dying out. We have too many people on the planet.
Over 90% of our problems can be traced to TOO MANY PEOPLE.
Of course, it's their choice.
But I find it reflective of the parent's egos.
I don't find breeding like this to be responsible.
Your examples of family trees are meaningless. Much in life was different in centuries past.
Think about what this means in our current world.

[Solon]

103. Yes and half those kids were dead by the age of five...

on average, you want to go back to that again?

[Momgonepostal]

167. the difference being our ancestors didn't have much choice

AND it was more practical in an agrarian, high infant mortality rate society to have large families.

That said, I certainly do not advocate laws dictating how many children a family should have. I don't have to like the decision each family makes, but it's theirs to make.

[FlaGranny]

79. You have taken this way too far.

No one says the government should impose any regulations on anything. No one believes they should. What is being expressed here is a horror at what this family is doing.

That's the trouble here - reading into it something that was never there.

Would you be willing to argue that the right-to-lifers should NOT be horrified by the thought of abortion? I guess so, because you don't seem to be willing to allow pro-choice people, like most of us are, to show horror at the thought of excessive reproduction.

Or perhaps you would like to legislate how people feel about things? Perhaps government censorship against saying things that some people don't like would be in order? I know what I just said there is unreasonable. I know that is not what you mean, but why would you mischaracterize the reactions of people on this thread to wanting government to regulate anything?

[tx_dem41]

80. If it was only expressing horror, that would be one thing.

I have participated in about four threads related to this matter. Please go back and look at them. People definitely have endorsed government-imposed limitations.

And, if it was just expressing horror WITHOUT making childish comments about race, religion, their region, their freaking hair, and clothes, that might also be one thing.

[stanwyck]

92. Let me guess

you're not an environmentalist.
Think of the problems we face due to over-population.
Reckless (and selfish) breeding like this is all about Mom and Dad's egos. They have a website. This is an enterprise. This is "look at us". We have sixteen children! This is about Mom and Dad.
Not what is best for their children or the world.
Try this: babysit for a month for SIXTEEN CHILDREN.
Then report back.
Then you'll have a clue.
Also, you might want to read up on what over-population is doing do the world.
Maybe then you won't be such a cheerleader.

[CornField]

95. That is really low

But I guess unsurprising.

You cannot attack the original poster for his/her point-of-view on the matter of choice, so you instead toss out another issue to shame him/her and deflect from your own argument's shortcomings.

Just so you know, I am an environmentalist and I'm all for educating the public on over-population and all the sub-issues. I am not, however, willing to sacrifice a woman's choice to reproduce or not to reproduce. That's what choice is about: educating a person as to the issues at hand and then allowing that person to make choices based on that information.

[tx_dem41]

104. Believe me, Cornfield...

No shame was felt by me. But, thanks for stepping in.

[stanwyck]

117. No one is saying that

and you know it. These selfish, self-centered parents can, biologically, continue to breed and have 30 children. That doesn't mean we have to approve.
You're changing the argument to suit your purpose.
I don't admire these people.
I would admire them if they had ADOPTED sixteen children.
Do you understand the difference?

[CornField]

139. These selfish, self-centered...

These selfish, self-centered women can, biologically, continue to have abortions and destroy their chances at motherhood. That doesn't mean we have to approve.

----

Indeed, it doesn't. You don't have to approve, nor do I, nor does the local paper boy. You do, however, have an obligation as a pro-choice person to respect ALL reproductive choices (even those that don't meet your personal standards).

[stanwyck]

143. All reproductive choices?

All? Why? A father impregnating his willing daughter? That's their "choice"? I HAVE to approve that?
Doctors impregnating women whose pregnancy will result in their death? Or their child's death? I HAVE to approve that?
No. I can disapprove. And I do disapprove of people wantonly spawning children when they could adopt children who need a home.
Look up gluttony. It's one of those really bad sins.

[tx_dem41]

102. So, looking past all of your assumptions about me...

let me ask you a question that asks for a simple, factual response....


Do you believe that there should be a limitation on the number of children that a woman can have?

[stanwyck]

116. No. But you continue to play hyperbole

we're not saying that.
We're under no obligation to be supportive of these people who have put their own beliefs and selfishness ahead of their family and our society. Do you truly believe parents can effectively give sixteen children the emotional support each child deserves?
Who really is benefiting here?
This is gluttony, the lowest level of Dante's hell. You take more than you need. The parents don't need sixteen children. They're not keeping the new colony alive. They're not the last members of the tribe.
If they want us to admire them, they would have ADOPTED sixteen children.
I don't have to admire them.
And I don't.

[theHandpuppet]

142. Once and for all...

The word is spelled HYPOCRISY. Sorry, but I've seen you spell this word every way now but the correct way. People guilty of hypocrisy are known as HYPOCRITES.

Having said that, I happen to believe that anyone who chooses to breed like this family doesn't give a flying fuck about this planet or the future their children will inherit. Surely, they have the right to breed like rabbits, but I for one am not going to congratulate them.

[txaslftist]

61. Because we're the party of tolerance?

Or is it because we are the party that is supposed to be respectful of peoples' privacy?

Or maybe it's because we can make fun of other's vaginas?

Not sure.

[huskerlaw]

162. Being the party of tolerance

does NOT mean we can't have opinions. Our party does have certain platforms, such as environmental awareness, that are relevant to this discussion. I have not seen anyone in THIS thread say that having 16 kids should be illegal. We all have a right to feel that what this family is doing is WRONG.

Quit trying to make it seem like we're no better than Republicans. You see, we're not passing laws making it illegal for them to have kid number 17. In fact, most of us, despite how we feel about the issue, would fight tooth and nail AGAINST such a law. Why? Because we're Democrats. And one of our party platforms is to allow people to do things we don't agree with for the sake of the greater principle. We believe in reproductive choice. That means we believe in a woman's right to have 17 kids, even if we think she shouldn't. Just like some of us will fight to the death for abortion rights, even as we wish that there would never be another abortion performed.

As for being respectful of their privacy, we're not the ones parading them around on the Discovery Health Channel or in Parents Magazine. They chose to showcase their family, which means they also chose to allow public criticism.

Meanwhile, were some of the jokes a bit off-color? Yes. However, just as it is your right to be offended by them, it is our right to find them humorous. That's what the Democratic party is all about. We have the rights to our opinion, you have the right to yours. But again, being a Democrat means that even though you don't like the joke, you fight for our right to say them and to laugh about them.

[woo me with science]

176. Agree completely....especially with the "wonder why we lose" comment

The article is mean-spirited, and the responses here are equally pathetic. I especially roll my eyes at the awkward, after-the-fact attempts to justify the nastiness by pulling out virtuous arguments about population control or the environment. It reminds me of the defensive red herrings and self-stroking you see at freeperland when fools are confronted on their bigotry.

These threads are embarrassing and are the main reason I sometimes hesitate before recommending DU to moderates I know. It seems that some here just can't pass up a chance to be sneering, superior, and judgmental. No matter that this is an actual family of human beings that has broken no law and by all reports is self-sufficient. But oh no....they have committed the ultimate PC sin by choosing a (gasp!) different lifestyle.

Way to go, DU. Chalk up one more sneering, self-righteous and utterly gratuitous hatefest to drive potential democrats away from the party.

[borlis]

54. Great article except for one thing.

Aren't those people from Alabama or somewhere in the south? The author labels them "people from the midwest." Alabama is not the midwest on any of my maps.

[MountainLaurel]

68. Arkansas

Which technically could be South or Midwest, I suppose.

[HoosierClarkie]

69. Check this out from their site...

http://www.wholesomewear.com/page-4.html

:rofl:

on edit: didn't see the post at the top. :)

[Norquist Nemesis]

72. And nowhere do they mention her Mother of the Year Award

from last year. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/04/earlyshow/contributors/melindamurphy/main615586.shtml

I was watching TLC one day a few weeks ago and this family was highlighted for the whole hour. Hubby's already held an elected office; one term, IIRC, then he was defeated.

It was creepy, actually. I'll give her credit for her ability to manage a crew of that size. And I'm not willing to criticize another for their devotion to God. But, it became clear that God is a tool in a twisted way to keep everything in line.

It wouldn't surprise me if Daddy Duggar fancies himself as becoming an Joe Kennedy Evangelical Style with sons on the road to the White House.

[gulfcoastliberal]

74. Disgustng. Since we're such good buds with China we should adopt their

breeding policy. One kid each or bring on the state-forced abortions!

[tamtam]

82. I defend this families choice

If for some reason the Supreme Court decided they wanted to limit the number of children Americans could have I would be the first person fighting alongside these people. I defend their choice even though IMO I feel they have made a poor choice. I don't have to agree with their choice to defend their rights. For example,I don't agree with the Klan but I defend their right to free speech.

The point of the matter here is that children are individuals. They deserve individual time with each parent and they deserve not to have their individuality diluted. You cannot possible have that many children and tell me you take time out of your day to spend with each child. I think having that many children is irresponsible. I don't know them but simple math says there is no way they are spending quality time with each of those kids.

[HamdenRice]

84. After reading family web site, it's not funny anymore, it's child abuse

Some additional facts: It appears from the family's website, they are ALL home schooled, and basically all they are learning is bible study, or bible oriented general studies, and music.

Two of the girls in their early teens (13 and 14) do almost all the cooking.

Dad reflects that life is great. Here's an excerpt from Mom's diary:

Remember this is from 10 years and about 10 children ago.

http://www.duggarfamily.com/mothers.php

Dear Friend,

It was 1:00 AM in the morning as I stood folding laundry with tears streaming down my cheeks. Feelings of being overwhelmed flooded my mind. I cried aloud, ”LORD I NEED YOUR HELP, I can’t do it all! I feel so inadequate! Diapers, dishes, laundry, meals, cleanup, school lessons, baths, hugs, kisses, correction…” My list seemed to go on and on.

Then it was as if a still small voice said, ”Michelle, it’s easy to praise ME when things are going good, but are you willing to praise ME now?” Immediately the scripture that says, “Offer up a sacrifice of praise”, came to mind.

I said, “OK Lord, I will praise you even now! It really is a sacrifice!” So through the tears I began to sing, “The joy of the Lord is my strength”. In my heart there was a release as if a burden had been lifted. I finished the laundry at 2 AM and went to bed.

[CornField]

87. Please get a grip

I have three children and I've been known to shed a few tears in the early morning hours too. Does that constitute child abuse?

My oldest daughter is also required to cook and help with family chores. Does that constitute child abuse?

No matter what lifestyle we choose, there are still times when we question ourselves and our abilities. My niece who has chosen not to have children has times when she has shed tears about that choice. My other niece who has five boys also questions her choices. It's natural to glance to the other side of the fence to see if the grass is greener.

[HamdenRice]

88. Did you read the web site?

These people (or at least the caregivers) are clearly overwhelmed. By their own account, they are giving these kids about 5 hours of education per day, most of it "Wisdom Studies" and religion, which will make them perfectly useless in the real world -- except of course for the 13 and 14 year old girls who sacrifice their educations (such as it is) to cook meals for 18 people.

I'd say choosing two girls to give up their meagre homeschooled education to cook qualifies as abuse, or at least neglect. In many states, failing to send your kids to school and failing adequately to homeschool them, is grounds for removal from the home and placement in foster care.

I wasn't talking about Mom; I was talking about the kids.

[MsTryska]

136. yeah i was jsut going to post these links.....

the dichotomy between mom's letter and dad's letter is startling isn't it?


hers sounded like a frantic cry for help, he seemed to think everythings wonderful.

http://www.duggarfamily.com/fathers.php

[woo me with science]

177. oh please

Don't throw around the term "child abuse." This is a ridiculous argument, and it cheapens the horror of REAL child abuse. A large family does not equal child abuse--if it did, you would be making an argument for government intervention in countless families across the US and the world. You know nothing about this family other than what you have read in the media and on the website, so this kind of labeling is just silly.

[MN ChimpH8R]

85. They're free to do whatever they want and we are free

to express our opinions about the stupidity, selfishness and consequences of their choices.

In today's world thoughtful and responsible human beings do not breed like rabbits. If you want a large family, there are plenty of kids out there crying for help. Doing something for them would be far more "Christian" than what these imbeciles are doing.

And the column was very amusing.

edited to clarify a point

[CornField]

86. Wow -- guess I should just keep my mouth shut

But the truth of the matter is that I'm getting a little sore from biting my tongue all the time.

I'm the baby of 13 children. No, we aren't hispanic. No, we aren't Catholic. We are just your regular Wonder bread family.

Did my mom want more children? I don't honestly know. There were two miscarriages between my closest brother and I. When pregnant with me, mom originally thought I was menopause. :)

I do know that I never felt neglected or otherwise a superflous member of the family. While we were not a rich family in terms of money, we were very rich in spirit. My father worked during the day and my mother worked the graveyard shift as a nurse. We had a ranch and produced most of our food. We all had our chores and we all had each other. We all graduated high school and most of us have gone on to university (myself included).

I know that I am not prepared to raise that many children myself. And I feel comfortable in my choice... just as I'm sure my mother felt comfortable in her choice. What I'm not comfortable with is a group of supposedly pro-choice people not respecting the choices of others. If you are willing to stand up and be tolerant of women who make a choice to have no children then you should also be willing to stand up and and be tolerant of women who choose to have many.

Likewise, if you are willing to stand up and rant about stereotypes being placed on any ethnic group then you should also be willing to stand up and rant about stereotypes being placed on women/large families/etc. Broad brush strokes are a very slippery path.

[HamdenRice]

89. But your parents sent you to school ...

If you are referring to my criticism, it is that these kids are basically being kept home and not educated at all (except bible studies) and two of the pre teen girls are having even that meagre education sacrificed so they can function as cooks.

[CornField]

91. You don't know that

Homeschooling can be a very rewarding educational avenue. I even homeschooled my oldest daughter at one time. Blending religious belief into the educational experience is often a reason parents elect to homeschool (although not the reason in my case).

I believe you are making the assumption that one who studies the bible either refuses or is not allowed to study mathematics, science, social studies, etc.

As for functioning as a cook: I'm the cook for our family (most of the time) and I still manage to run my own business, complete graduate work, help my children with their homework, pay our household bills, take the dog to the vet and so-forth. Being one thing does not necessarily mean you are not being something else as well.

[MountainLaurel]

93. But you're an adult

And you made the choice to function as a cook. You're not a 14-year-old girl with no choice in the matter, and who should be playing and reading and learning.

[CornField]

97. Why do you assume these girls don't play, read and cook?

[MountainLaurel]

99. Let's see

They have the primary responsibility for cooking for 17 people (not counting the newborn), they get about 5 hours of homeschooling a day. This is all according to the Duggars' own Web site. Between those two activites, when are they going to have time for anything else?

[CornField]

105. I'm going to make a guess

I'm guessing 1) you've never been homeschooled and 2) you've never homeschooled anyone.

It is quite different from traditional school and techniques vary from family to family. Some family choose a topic and then develop curriculum appropriate to the age levels. For instance, when learning civics an older student might read and prepare a paper on a role-model from history while a younger student might put together puzzles of the United States. Later, the whole family might make a trip to the state legislature, each learning about state government at their own level.

When you homeschool you eliminate a lot of the 'noise' of public school. There is no need to queue up and lunch can wait until you've finished reading the chapter you're on. A great deal of the time allotted to "homeschooling" then wouldn't be seen by an uneducated eye as school at all. Pretend play, independent study, bug collecting, art, music and so much more is adapted into real-life educational experiences.

So... when the Duggars (or any other homeschooling family) states that they spend 5 hours per day on education, they are discussing the full gamut of education, not just their children sitting at desks with their noses to the grindstone.

As for the cooking, I did help cook dinner for our family of 15. It isn't the huge undertaking you're making it out to be. It is most likely built into their homeschooling curriculum -- you have to do math to follow a recipe, you know. :)

[txaslftist]

121. You seriously rock.

[HamdenRice]

100. Ever cook Thanksgiving or Christmas dinner?

For 18 people? Or some other dinner party? It's not quite the same as cooking for a family of five.

I mean, even if every meal seems to involve 2 lbs of ground meat, several pounds of tator tot, and a dozen assorted cans of cream of mushroom soup and canned beans -- still it's a lot of time out of a young girl's day.

[HamdenRice]

96. You, yourself said ....

that you and your siblings graduated from high school. You were not entirely home schooled. From your ambiguous post, I don't even get the impression you were homeschooled at all.

Second, it is very different homeschooling one daughter and homeschooling 16 children. I don't see how you can disagree with the idea that this family runs a dangerous risk of teaching their kids nothing, in effect producing 16 public charges.

Third, as for bible study, look at their own schedule. That's what I am basing my criticism upon. Three hours in the morning, two hours in the afternoon of "wisdom books" with the teen girls cutting that short to cook.

Fourth, you may be able to cook and run your business, etc., but you are an adult. We allow adults to work -- even in restaurants. 100 years ago or so, American society made a decision not to allow children to work because it interfers with their education, creating intergenerational poverty. Family chores, including cooking for a normal size family is one thing; a little girl cooking for 18 is more like being a cook in a restaurant. I don't see how you can compare your experience to that of a 13 year old.

[CornField]

101. I was not homeschooled

I homeschooled my oldest daughter in the past. (She now attends public school.)

So... you don't think one mother can handle 16 children, but you believe public school teachers can handle 20+?

Most of the homeschooling curriculum out there is religion-based and religion-bias. Matter of fact, we had a difficult time finding secular materials, even in the core subjects.

Let's say you open a book and find the following word problem: "Sally's mother witnesses to three people each day and has been doing so for the past 3 years. If Sally's mother continues this trend each day for the next year, how many total people will have received the Word of God?"

Is that a religious teaching or is it a math problem?

That's the type of stuff you find in many homeschooling curriculums -- and that's the type of religious blending that some Americans desire for their children. But, when push comes to shove, is the child who completes this problem learning any less math?

As for your restaurant argument, I'm sorry but I have to laugh. Cooking for our family of 15 growing up was not the mega-task you've made it out to be. For all you know, the girls may only cook one day of the week and freeze for for the rest of the week.

Truth be told, that's my whole point: assumptions are being made about a lifestyle that most here have never experienced. To make such assumptions is wrong.

[HamdenRice]

108. Here's why teachers can do it ...

You mentioned:

So... you don't think one mother can handle 16 children, but you believe public school teachers can handle 20+?

The difference is that the 20 students are the same age and doing the same curriculum. Works for 200 college students studying the same subject as well.

It's really the industrialization of schooling, which may sound harsh, but is efficient.

My father was schooled in a typical one room school house for Black people in the south with all grades. While he adored his "Black Teacher's College" educated, very dedicated teacher he was aware that he and his classmates were virtually illiterate, because it is impossible to teach 15 kids of different ages simultaneously, and he had to educate himself and take formal education when he moved north.

As for the religion stuff -- look at their website. They have a pre-rational world view, in which religion suffeses everything.

"Lord, help me finish my laundry" indeed!

[CornField]

109. Then why is it

that people educated in the efficient school districts of today cannot pass tests given to young children back in the days of one-room schoolhouses?

Let us not forget that our founding fathers, with all their faults and brilliance, were products of homeschooling, independent study and one-room schoolhouses. Compare them and their attitudes on religion, society and our nation to the attitudes expressed by our lawmakers today.

School districts are now beginning to lament the distruction of multi-level teaching and are encouraging high school students to return to the middle schools to interact with students there as tutors and mentors. Middle school students are being brought back into elementary schools to act as tutors and mentors to the younger students. Why? Because it is beneficial both to the older and younger students -- it is one of the grand things about education that teacher's have kept to themselves: When you teach someone else, you learn something yourself.

This family's refusal to mold itself into something others can be comfortable with is not the problem. The problem lies with the members of society who cannot accept that someone, somewhere may want to live their life differently than they do. If I'm not mistaken, that is a pretty good definition of intolerance, and something that should not be proported by the membership on a progressive message board.

[HamdenRice]

144. What on earth are you talking about????

You said, "people educated in the efficient school districts of today cannot pass tests given to young children back in the days of one-room schoolhouses?"

Children educated in one room school houses were asked about the proper time to shoe a mule. Kids today are tested on statistics, evolution and global studies.

I have a friend who did a massive study of education in New York and he found that contrary to the "gold old days" ideology that prevails, public educations "sucked" in the old days and it sucks today, but not nearly as bad as it sucked then.

Nobody laments the end of one room school houses. There is a trend to welcome the help of older students with younger students, but that is not a return to one room school houses.

But this isn't even a one room schoolhouse. We are talking about a religious fanatic who is depriving her children of education and especially burdening the pre teen girls with the obligation to cook for the clientele of a small restaurant.

[KoKo]

111. Nicely said Cornfield...especially since you come from a large family..

Thanks for sharing.

[txaslftist]

120. You absolutely rock, Cornfield.

[HamdenRice]

145. Maybe you two should mate and have 17 kids ...

After all, there is an underlying concern that breeders like the couple in the OP are creating red state zombies. Maybe you and Cornfield could produce 17 or 18 or 30 or 35 blue staters in your next home schooled litter.

[txaslftist]

163. I guarantee they'd be better mannered than the OP

and half the nasty folks on this thread.

And yeah, they'd be blue staters.

And too bad, cause I'm already married with three kids. (I'm so terrible for global overpopulation waaaah)

[CornField]

179. You are now being nasty and juvenile

The really great thing about the internet is that I can turn off stupid people.

[sandnsea]

127. Overpopulation is a legitimate social issue

That's the point the author is trying to make. And if the religious right can bring their issues into the political arena, then those who believe having 16 kids is irresponsible when there are billions on this planet in poverty can make theirs too. No you ought not to have 16 kids when the US is the #1 consumer of the planet's resources, it's irresponsible. We know more now than we did when your mother was having children.

[CornField]

141. The author overstepped the bounds of good writing

when he elected to stoop to the low-brow method of stereotyping and name calling.

Look, if you want to volunteer your time and go into high schools to educate the students there about over-population and other environmental problems, I'll be the first one to applaud you. If, however, you are someone who believes that the government should have authority over any woman's reproductive rights, I'll fight you tooth and nail.

There is a saying: "There are two things you give a child, one is roots and the other is wings." I feel the same way about the issue of reproductive rights. Educate... educate... educate... but, when all the educating is done, the choice resides with the woman. Furthermore, whatever that choice may be, it is to be respected.

[sandnsea]

155. oh yes, heaven forbid anyone should make a joke

We don't do well when we stick to the high brow either, in fact we do worse. It's perfectly fine to make a million liberal jokes, to make denigrating jokes about racially mixed or gay families; but don't make fun of the lady with the 16 kids. She's white and married and loves Jesus, so she's off limits. Puhleeze.

[neebob]

150. No one's criticizing your family

It's Jim Bob Duggar's family that's in question here. Would you want to be one of his children? Sure, he has a right to make as many as he wants, and his wife has a right to blindly follow him and make more babies and isolate and brainwash them until the cows come home. If you want to defend them, do it because you approve of what they're doing. It doesn't sound like you do.

[neebob]

174. Since this thread popped up again, I'd like to apologize

for this comment. It was presumptuous of me, and I'm trying not to be clairvoyant.

[wicket]

165. AMEN!

Well said Cornfield.

[woo me with science]

178. Thanks for posting, Cornfield...

It's a heck of a lot harder to demonize this family when someone who had a good experience in a large family has the guts to show up and say it.

At least some in here are honest enough to make it clear that they hate this family because they are fundies, not because of high-minded ideals about population control. What an elephant in the room, and what disingenuousness.

[VolcanoJen]

106. Funniest damned thing I've read all month!!

Thank you for that, drmom! Mark Morford sounds like my inner voice, only he has the guts to type it and publish it!!

[FreedomAngel82]

112. Good article

Do they really have a son named Jesus??? :crazy: I liked this paragraph the best:

<Ah, but this is America, yes? People should be allowed to do whatever the hell they want with their families if they can afford it and if it's within the law and so long as they aren't gay or deviant or happily flouting Good Christian Values, right? Shouldn't they? Hell, gay couples still can't openly adopt a baby in most states (they either lie, or one adopts and the other must apply as "co-parent"), but Michelle Duggar can pop out 16 kids and no one says, oh my freaking God, stop it, stop it now, you thoughtless, selfish, baby-drunk people.

No, no one says that. That would be mean. >

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

114. Exponential growth is irresponsible.

Bad things will happen if too many people do this. Hell, bad things are ALREADY happening because of this.

If you ask me, families should be taxed out the yin-yang after the 3rd child. Something like China does, but without the tyrannical coercion. Just taxes.

[Beausoir]

115. What are they getting out of this?

Why are these people publicizing their spawning habits?

I would sooner die than have a newspaper reporter print a story about how and when I breed.

What are they getting out of this?

And...ick. The human equivalent of a puppy mill. They can choose to breed as many offspring as they want and I can choose to be sickened by it.

[stanwyck]

118. They're in it for the glory

this is not about children. If it was, they would have stopped at six and adopted ten.
This is about vainglory for Mom and Dad. Websites and attention.
This is gluttony...taking more than what you need. It's greedy and vain.
And I am under no obligation to admire these people because they know how to make babies.

[Batgirl]

123. Since they're using their gi-normous family

expressly as a p.r. tool, I guess I'm not obligated to primly refrain from thinking uncomplimentary thoughts about them.

[stanwyck]

126. I'm certainly not

I'm being flatout mean and judgmental.
I grew up in central Illinois with many large families. Some did fine. Others didn't. Probably about the same as the 2-3 child families.
However, with so many children needing to be adopted, these people seem prideful and ignorant to spawn so many children.
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
If their hearts are so big, they should adopt.
Then we'd all be singing their praises.
And that's what they really, really want.

[Batgirl]

147. It's the attention-seeking

that bugs me the most.

I also wonder what it feels like to be one of the crowd of offspring, always aware that the parents' true attention is perpetually aimed at the next baby, the one who's not here yet, the dream baby who is always just over the horizon. Each of them lost their "special" status as soon as they came into the world and planning immediately started for the next baby, who in turn would also be fascinating and special until it's birth.

[stanwyck]

164. interesting point

I hadn't thought of that perspective.
I just can't see how parents with this many children can give each child the attention and guidance needed. It's difficult to nurture two kids, I know.
But sixteen?
How much of a relationship with each child could the parent have? And is that relationship not a critical part of the child's development?
It just seems inherently selfish. It's pro-creating for the mere reason of being able to pro-create. And that's not the same as parenting.

[marions ghost]

146. agreed

when people put it out there so publicly, they are fair game for commentary. This goes for anything people do to get attention.

[atommom]

122. Verily I say unto thee, it ain't lookin' good.

:rofl:

[tlsmith1963]

158. That Family is Insane

I saw them on TV once. They seemed a bit creepy, especially the mother. *Why* do religious nuts keep having so many kids?!!

Tammy

[Puregonzo1188]

160. Did anybody see some of the scary stuff they have on their website

On why they have 16 kids:

"We chose to use the birth control pill. After our first child was born, Michelle started back on the pill, shortly after, she miscarried. We found that sometimes the birth control pill will allow you to conceive, but then cause a miscarriage.

We then realized we had the same heart attitude about children as those willfully choosing abortion (wanting to make our own plans, live our own lives, children could be a bother or interruption). "

They really are nuts.

[beam me up scottie]

161. This is what pisses me off about the posters who say we're being

judgemental.

We're wrong for opining about how stupid and selfish it is to have 16 goddamn kids?

And you accuse us of invading their privacy?

Excuse me?

Maybe those posters missed the self righteous tone of their message in their WEBSITE.

You know, the one that says that they are morally superior to those of you who kill your children and deny god by practicing birth control?

Here it is again, in case you missed it:

We chose to use the birth control pill. After our first child was born, Michelle started back on the pill, shortly after, she miscarried. We found that sometimes the birth control pill will allow you to conceive, but then cause a miscarriage.

We then realized we had the same heart attitude about children as those willfully choosing abortion (wanting to make our own plans, live our own lives, children could be a bother or interruption).

We searched the scriptures & found that God says, “Lo, children are an heritage of the Lord: & the fruit of the womb is his reward. As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth. Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them” (Psalms 127:3-5).

We asked God to forgive us for not wanting to receive His gifts, & we gave Him control of this area of our lives. We’ve been married 20 years & have been blessed with 15 precious gifts, 10 boys & 5 girls, which include two sets of twins. We had no idea life could be so abundant and full.

We would love to receive more children! Exhortation to other families…We face challenges everyday, but as we humble ourselves God gives grace & His mercies are new each morning. God’s Word is an owner’s manual for our lives. In it are the answers to all of life’s questions. James 1:5 states, “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally & upbraideth not; & it shall be given him.” Jesus said, “I am come that they might have life & that they might have it more abundantly” John 10:10.

God Bless you as you seek to follow Him with your whole heart & train your children in the way they should go!

I'm here to tell you that when some back ass-ward fundies want to advertise their spawning habits in front of the world and then pass judgement on ME for NOT HAVING 16 FUCKING CHILDREN, I think I have every goddamn RIGHT to do the same.

[Celeborn Skywalker]

170. Here's what I think about the article

I think this couple shouldn't have had all those children. However, it is their choice and should remain so.

The article, btw, has more than a few stereotypes about the poor and working class. It gives ammunition to the RW'ers charge that liberals are elitist.