OMG!!! Turn it on TLC right now! It's the SUPERFUNDIES (mom has 17 kids)

[goodboy]

<http://www.jimbob.info/

<>

[AirmensMom]

1. Those kids look exactly like my in-laws.

:scared:

[maveric]

2. Now if it was a black family with that many kids the fundies would be...

outraged. They'd be tagged as sexually depraved or something like that.

[name not needed]

3. Someone wanna tell this woman it's a vagina, not an assembly line?

[Misunderestimator]

14. LOL

oh man

[ronnykmarshall]

65. At this point ...

they just fall out at 9 months.

[Name removed]

139. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JVS]

158. Just so you know, Ronny, that deleted message was me telling a joke...

that must have been too crude. PM me if you didn't see it and want to know what it is.

[Rabrrrrrr]

4. OMG! That family is totally fucked up!

I've read them before.

THey are a loving, close family, but the kids are being raised - through homeschooling - to be less-than-ignorant Christian shitnobs, no different than the taliban.

I don't remember stupidity, ignorance, and blind adherence to misplaced authority to be a biblical mandate.

[deadparrot]

8. I shudder to think what would happen if one of the kids is gay.

:(

[Left Is Write]

13. It seems like it would be a statistical probability.

[momophile]

181. or, maybe worse, left-handed!!

BTW, I'm left-handed...

[Left Is Write]

212. So am I!

And I account for 20% of my left-handed mother's children. :hi:

I didn't get any left-handers myself.

[Misunderestimator]

17. Statistically one or two HAVE to be.

[kay1864]

128. Actually, no.

The homosexual population percentage is actually about 2-4%, not the 10% that's commonly cited.

[Misunderestimator]

129. Bullshit.

[kay1864]

130. Not at all.

Look it up if you don't believe me.

[Misunderestimator]

142. I have looked it up.... And no one can possibly know the truth...

since many, many, MANY people are not honest about it even to themselves. Anecdotally, however, I KNOW that it is more than your low claim.

[kay1864]

147. Sorry, anecdotes don't wash.

The percentage could be higher in your particular area, or in the particular group of people you associate with, or in the particular anecdotes you hear. That doesn't mean anything about the population as a whole.

And if you have looked it up, then you'd know that most studies show results in the 2-4% range. Not 10%. As I said.

[Misunderestimator]

149. I've lived in many, many places. Most studies that try to depict it as

a lower percentage... do so for a reason. 2 percent... what absolute bullshit.

Where do you get such a low number? The majority of studies have shown more than a 2% at the low end except for those whose purpose is to be anti-gay.

http://www.plu.sg/main/facts_05.htm

"(note: a simple websearch will yield many websites discussing this subject that are maintained by anti-gay organisations, mostly of a US Christian persuasion. Their purpose is often to highlight the lower range of figures, to dispute the higher figures and to suggest that homosexual persons are too few to be accorded equal rights.)"

By the way... it's organizations like this one: http://www.familyresearchinst.org/index.html that try so hard to make people believe what you claim. Why do you care anyway? Why on earth would it matter to you if there were fewer of us?

[kay1864]

159. "Many places"? Doesn't change my point at all.

I repeat: the percentage could be higher in your particular area, or in the particular group of people you associate with, or in the particular anecdotes you hear. That doesn't mean anything about the population as a whole.

Most studies that try to depict it as a lower percentage... do so for a reason.

And you know this how, exactly? More anecdotes?

It's obvious that statistical studies haven't changed your beliefs. Me, I'll take well-designed statistical surveys over anecdotes any day.

[Misunderestimator]

160. You read the studies you want to believe, and I read all with a grain of

salt. Yes, many places. Large cities, small communities, small towns, rural, suburban, progressive and conservative, all around this country, and in Europe. I do not "associate" with just gay people.

And why do you only believe those "statistics" that cannot possibly be accurate, whether it be 2% or 20%? It's like believing push poll results. Conservative, anti-gay groups will ask questions to get a lower number, and gay-activist organizations may ask questions that will get a higher number. Neither would be accurate.

I'll ask again... why do you care if it's 2% or 10%?

[kay1864]

168. Well, if you'd quit editing your posts...

...I could respond to your questions. Might I suggest you start a new reply if you want to avoid repeating your questions.

I do not "associate" with just gay people.
I never claimed you did.

You read the studies you want to believe
You have no idea what I do or do not "want to believe". Do not put words in my mouth or thoughts in my head.

why do you only believe those "statistics" that cannot possibly be accurate, whether it be 2% or 20%
I don't believe any "statistics" that are based on anecdotes. Especially on a topic as volatile as this.

Conservative, anti-gay groups will ask questions to get a lower number, and gay-activist organizations may ask questions that will get a higher number.
Agreed. I don't look at surveys like that. Instead, I stick to ones such as the ones on the webpage you cited (which produced a 2-6% range, not 10%)

I'll ask again... why do you care if it's 2% or 10%?
Because I prefer truth, not bad data that "everybody knows is true".

[Misunderestimator]

178. I edit my posts because it makes sense to...

not because I'm trying to trick you... so, no, suggesting that would be useless.

At this point, it's futile to continue a conversation with you though.

[kay1864]

183. WTF?

not because I'm trying to trick you... so, no, suggesting that would be useless
WHERE did I suggest you were trying to trick me? I merely pointed it out so you wouldn't repeat your questions, seeking an answer from me.

Mind-reading is not your forte. That makes twice now. Wrong both times.

[Misunderestimator]

184. It's the way you "suggested" that I stop editing my posts...

pardon my inaccurate mind-reading :eyes:

[kay1864]

Yes indeed, that would be the suggestion...

where I said "if you want to avoid repeating your questions". No implication of "tricks" at all.

[Misunderestimator]

191. Yes, time to move on... I accept that I misinterpreted you.

Now you're just being combative.

[LostinVA]

194. Tell me about it -- even when the posts aren't directed

at him,a nd aren't the least bit aggressive or hostile to anything he's said. I'm ignoring and going back to making fun of the Duggars.

[kay1864]

196. ...

Now you're just being combative
Not at all--just correcting your misstatements about me. Certainly my right here, wouldn't you agree?

[kay1864]

163. Since you edited your post...

The quotes on that webpage you cited support the lower range, NOT 10%. To wit:

The 1993 Yankelovich Monitor Survey, considered the first nationally representative survey to reflect what percentage of the population identified itself as homosexual, indicated that 5.7% described themselves as "gay/homosexual/lesbian."

The 1994 Sex in America Study Self-identified gay and bisexual men accounted for 2.8% of the surveyed respondents, while 1.4% of the women identified as lesbian or bisexual.

Given the identity category choices of heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, or something else, 2.8% of men and 1.4% of women surveyed reported "some level of homosexual identity."

They found that 5.9% identified as homosexual

(the other quotes refer to same-sex sexual contact, not classifications)

So for men, we've got a low of 2.8% and a high of 5.9%. For women, low of 1.4%, high of 5.9%.

IN CONCLUSION:

I'll amend the range to 2-6%, not 2-4%. But not the "unofficially accepted" standard of 10% (which was my main point).

[LostinVA]

171. When you figure in bisexuality, it is at least 10%, probably over

And, the 2% studies that the anti-gay crowd love to quote used suspect methods of interviewing, etc.

Statistically, several of their kids are gay or bidexual... and they will live a hellish life because of their upbringing.

[kay1864]

175. ...

1. We were talking about gay, not bi.

2. Might I suggest you look at the webpage Misunderestimator referenced (http://www.plu.sg/main/facts_05.htm ) before making claims of "suspect methods of interviewing".

A pro-gay website is unlikely to cite studies using "suspect methods of interviewing", as you claim.

[LostinVA]

185. I'm not talking about anything MIsunderestimator said

1.) And, I'M talking about bisexual people, too. Especially since I've known a while raft of them who claimed they were straight at one age, bi at another, and gay when they were older. In women, especially, sexuality can be very fluid. Trust me, I made out with plenty "straight" girls in college, and they seemed to enjoy kissing me as much as they boyfriends, but they NEVER would ahve admitted they were anything but straight. Even though some of them are raging dykes now. Bisexual people should be counted with gays. It's GLBT, not GL.

2.) The famous/infamous study I'm talking about is the sex in America poll in the 90's, whose stats of 2% is often used by ant-gay people. People who were interviewed had to give personal info, including SSNs. As someone else said on this thread, you can NEVER know how high the percentage is. People haven';t figured stuff out, or they are self-loathing, etc. But, it sure as hell is higher than 2%, even excluding those crazy bisexuals.

So, please do not put words into my mouth. You are being very combative, considering what I posted was not the least bit like that. I wasn't auguring with you at all, just going the discussion. You are being way too sensitive to anyone not agreeing with you hear.

As someone else said on this thread, you can NEVER know how high the percentage is. People haven';t figured stuff out, or they are self-loathing, etc. But, it sure as hell is higher than 2%, even excluding those crazy bisexuals.

For someone who says they are pro-gay, you're sure trying to agree with some really bad talking points. I'm not saying you're a freeper at all... I'm just saying that I've heard some of this very stuff thrown at me by some mighty anti-gay people, and that raises a red flag with me.

[kay1864]

204. ...

I'M talking about bisexual people
But WE weren't. The original topic was the number of gay children, not the number of gay or bi children.

please do not put words into my mouth
Where in the world did I do that?

For someone who says they are pro-gay, you're sure trying to agree with some really bad talking points
Non sequitur. Just because surveys yield a range of 2-6%, AND Freepers quote them, AND you don't like the survey's results...

does not automatically render the surveys suspect, nor any non-Freepers who quote them.

Example: it's Oct 2001. Chimpy's approval ratings are around 80%. Freepers quote that. Then I quote that for some reason (distasteful as that would be).
- Does the fact that we're both quoting the same results make me a Freeper? No.
- Does the fact that Freepers quote it make the survey suspect? Maybe, but not automatically.

[Tallison]

274. LostinVA's observation re: "talking points" was a very compelling sequitur

Check your logic and/or dictionary.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

186. what the fuck is a pro-gay website?

[LostinVA]

190. A website that doesn't say gays are deviants

I'm tired of this crap on DU.

[kay1864]

197. Well, the one Misunderestimator cited, for one.

Take a look and see if you don't agree.

[Misunderestimator]

199. I guess DU is a pro-gay website too. Since we try to debunk RW shit here.

Sheesh... welcome to my ignore list. :hi:

[LostinVA]

202. I've had him on ignore for a bit now

It's soothing. I'm especially glad I can't read the post that this post of yours answered.

Soothing and clam... like a York Peppermint Patty.....

[Misunderestimator]

203. Ah, yes...

Like a cool mountain breeze. :)

[LostinVA]

208. Or a mojito in the heat of a Summer's day...

[Misunderestimator]

210. My blood pressure has dropped to a manageable level now.

is my friend.

[LostinVA]

211. Told you!

[kay1864]

DU isn't a pro-gay website?

I would have assumed it was.

[Misunderestimator]

187. You are misinterpreting that site.... it is attempting to debunk those ...

surveys... not support them. I still have to wonder why you care, and why you quote statistics you already know cannot be accurate.

[LostinVA]

192. Because I think someone has an agenda

I gave the benefit of the doubt for the first eight zillion posts or so, but not now. My blood pressure was going up, so I had to use "Ignore."

[Misunderestimator]

201. Yep.

He's the sole inhabitant of my ignore list now too. Unbelievable.

[kay1864]

207. Actually the website was just quoting the surveys...

In an attempt to find the number of gays in the population.

Which I thought was the original topic of this sub-thread.

[Cats Against Frist]

266. Dean Hamer, author of the debunked "Gay Gene" study

relied on a figure of 2 percent to yield his results. That was the percentage of males, in the population that he believed were "really gay." Of course the whole study was flawed, de-bunked and is under investigation for misconduct. Most reviewers think his number was too low, however.

[cassandra uprising]

169. Regarding this issue stats don't wash either

As long as gay youth are getting harassed, spit on, degraded and killed we will never have an accurate study of our gay population. Period.

[kay1864]

172. In that case, NO number can ever be cited

Including the common 10% figure.

Which means that no funds can be appropriated (by local, state, or federal government) for any gay issues, since no one has any idea of the number of gays in the population.

Being pro-gay rights, I don't like that result. So I say governments have to have SOME number to work with.

[Misunderestimator]

180. Exactly, no number can EVER be accurate. My point precisely.

And claiming 2-4% is a conservative tactic. Since you know that no number can be accurate, why do you quote that?

[kay1864]

188. ...

And claiming 2-4% is a conservative tactic.
I wouldn't know what conservatives do. I try not to associate with them.

Since you know that no number can be accurate,
I never said that at all. I was merely making the logical extension of cassandra uprising's point.

why do you quote that?
Because 2-6% is what the studies support (from the website you cited). Not 10%.

[Misunderestimator]

195. Again, that website does NOT support those studies.

I find it highly offensive when straight people argue that gay people amount to only 2-4% of the population, when it is clear that no studies could possibly be accurate.

[LostinVA]

200. For two reasons

1.) I honestly think it's an effort to marginalize us, ie -- oh, only 2%, who cares, and

2.) THEY haven't experienced all of the things I've mentioned: feeling pressured to get married, to hide who you are, not even discovering this until you're in your 20s, 30s, 40s, etc. "Down low" crap. Etc.

And, I'm especially pissed about thinking bisexuals "don't count." Whatever. Of COURSE they do. Why so many people think sexuality is black or white is beyond me. My SO wouldn't like knowing she doesn't count in that percentage...

[Misunderestimator]

206. You're right.

Not only that, but reducing everything to "sexual experience" as if that is what defines one as being gay.

A year ago, my SO wouldn't have been counted on those surveys either.

[LostinVA]

209. My SO wouldn't have counted before 11 years ago, either

So, either bisexuals count, or I'm so powerful I can turn straight women gay. OMG! Maybe the Fundies ARE right!!!

[LostinVA]

173. Correct

Plus, people who ARE gay, but have never had sex with someone of the same gender often don't think they're gay... confusing sex with sexual orientation. Plus, many of those "down low" gays consider themselves straight.

So, it is impossible to come up with a percentage, but there's no way it;'s 2-4%. Definitely higher, no matter how the anti-gay crowd keeps on trying to say that. (Also, Jews make up "only" about 2% of the population, so does that mean anti-semitism is okay???)

[kay1864]

179. Please read the above posts, and the cited webpage

there's no way it;'s 2-4%.
The pro-gay website referenced above yields a range of 2-6%.

[Misunderestimator]

182. That site does not yield that AT ALL.

It lists many different surveys that do, but makes a POINT that they cannot possibly be accurate.

[LostinVA]

189. WHO CARES what that website said?

I haven't looked at it, I'm not citing it at all. Geez. Will you please quit attacking me? Are you even reading my posts? Are you? I don't think so.

There is NO WAY it's 2-4%. That's what the most RW surveys say, but as I said, there are too many variables for this to be correct. If the most conservative (big and little "c") surveys say this, then of course the number's much higher. Bisexuals are NOT straight. Very closeted people say they are straight, but aren't', The same for "sown low," crazy religious people, etc. that are. "Non straight" people make up a significant chunk of the population -- it's just rational and logical for that to be true. And, THAT is the point of everything. Why? Because "non straight" people are considered freaks and sinners and deviants by the anti-gay crowd. The world is NOT divided into gay-straight.

Sorry if it's upsetting you to think that queers and bisexuals may make up too much of the population. I was giving you a major benefit of the doubt, but you're being too rabid about this. I don't like having someone try to minimalize me.

I got enough of this crap out into teh real world, I don't ahve to listen to it here. Ignore.

[kay1864]

193. ...

Will you please quit attacking me?
Where did I attack you?

Are you even reading my posts?
Yes. Are you reading mine?

There is NO WAY it's 2-4%.
Repeating it several times doesn't make it so.

That's what the most RW surveys say,
And you know these are RW how? Because of the results? That would be circular reasoning.

Sorry if it's upsetting you to think that queers and bisexuals may make up too much of the population.
You're as bad a mind-reader as Misunderestimator. Nowhere did I say or imply any such thing.

[Cats Against Frist]

265. Actually NOBODY IN THIS ARGUMENT IS RIGHT

But I'm about to be. There's no way to statistically predict if someone is going to be GAY, because there are NO biologically or environmentally consistent indicators to predict whether or not someone is going to be gay. Every one of those kids could turn out to be straight as a 2X4, and a higher number of them could turn out to be gay than statistics predict.

Keep in mind, too, that a forcasted statistic is only a prediction. Usually, it's based on quantatative data, and there are complex mathematical formulas that determine rates, ratios and statistics. A statistic could and can always be nullified by real, on-the-ground events.

I've posted this, before, and it's been unpopular enough to get deleted, because it's not PC enough for some people who choose to rely on MYTH and HOPE and BAD SCIENCE to "prove" that homosexuality has biological origins. Every single study that has shown promise in determining that homosexuality is biological has been a. debunked, or b. inadvertantly shown that environment and psychological factors play an extrarordinarily large role.

Most of my information I have gotten from the Council for Responsible Genetics, which is NOT a right-wing organization, and their position paper on homosexuality:

http://www.gene-watch.org/programs/privacy/gene-sexuality.html

The last paragraph, lest anyone think they're homophobic, states:

The scientific argument for a biological basis for sexual orientation remains weak. The political argument that it will bolster gay pride or prevent homophobic bigotry runs counter to experience. The lesbian, gay, and bisexual community does not need to have its "deviance" tolerated because its members were born "that way" and "cannot help it." Rather, society must recognize the validity of lesbian and gay lifestyles. We need an end to discrimination, an acceptance of all human beings, and a celebration of diversity, whatever its origins.

*************

I agree. It is time that we look past the idea that homosexuality has to have a biological origin, because if we want to make a strong case for human rights, we can't live in fantasyland. I understand the potential damage that this can do, not only to those who are gay, but also those who have rationalized a loved one's homosexuality, as "they can't help it." The truth is: "they CAN'T help it." Sexuality is a combination of biological impulse and psychological narrative. This is what I research, for my book, and I've spent hella hours on Craigslist looking at the sexual preferences of individuals. Some people like fat people, other people like Asian women, other people like to be tied up & blindfolded, other people like to be spanked -- these are all perfectly legal, I would submit "normal," variations of sexual preference. It is not much of a stretch to see how homosexuality develops in much the same way.

In addition, what is homosexuality? Where is the "bisexual" gene? Who are the straight, masculine men on Craigslist, who insist they're straight, but want some dude to come over and top them? Who are the women, who, after dating men for 60-some years, suddenly decide to become lesbians? Are they any more or any less "gay" than someone who has felt that they were gay from childhood? Where is the "Woman trapped in a man's body" gene? Are men and women that seek same-sex partners in penitentiaries "really gay?" In Dean Hamer's debunked gay gene study, he suggested that only as many as 2 percent of males were "truly gay," and based his study on this number. It is also quite possible that, when the entire spectrum of sexuality is taken into account that a greater percentage of the population (more than ten percent), could exhibit, have had, or desire gay tendencies and/or experiences.

Homosexuality was considered "deviant," until, in the 60s, it was removed as a psychological deviance from the DSM-III. It was removed not in light of new evidence, but because societal factors changed the way we view homosexuality. Fetishism of some things, and other "-philia's" are still classified as deviant, because the psychological community still views them as deviant. It is still a mystery how philias develop, but they can and do develop, from early childhood, without the express "permission," of the person who is developing the philia. There is no reason to believe that homosexuality doesn't develop in much the same way -- that is, that, somehow, to the person who has homosexual tendencies, the same-sex body has become eroticized. It's NOT "deviant," but perfectly NORMAL.

Anyway, predicting "rates" of homosexuality is fruitless and pointless, because probability studies have only been found somewhat accurate in the studies of siblings and twins, when there is already a gay family member present, or a corresponding gay family member.

This is not to say that there might not possibly be some biological factors which predispose certain individuals toward homosexuality. It is simply not that fleshed out, and there is a very small body of scientific evidence that is begining to show promise, in that area. Any number of factors could be responsible for the rich variation of sexual preference in humans.

I agree with the Council for Responsible Genetics when they state that homosexuality does not need a biological origin to deserve equal treatment under the law, nor have the lifestyle "legitimized," in the eyes of the general populace. Being homosexual is confusing enough, and is confusing enough to straight individuals, however, without bad science and myth to accompany it. In my opinion, denial doesn't further the cause, but sets it back. How can we truly reconcile homosexuality, if we can't face up to the truth about what it is? What if we just don't know the truth, or can't know the truth? How can homosexuals experience real self-love in a prejudiced society, by lying to themselves? How does it help to have homosexuality "accepted," if that acceptance is based on nothing but a false narrative?

When Kerry asked Bush "do you not believe (cheney's daughter) was born gay?" Many liberals cheered -- but it was Kerry, who was wrong, unfortunately. No one knows for certain if homosexuality is biological. Bush should have said, "I have no fucking idea," and he would have been right.

[LostinVA]

275. Well, it certainly is something innately within me

It is as genetic with me as anyone else's straightness is with them. Nothing "created" my sexual orientation, it just is.

[Cats Against Frist]

276. I was hoping that, at the very least, some of this would be heard,

as to avoid a snarky retort -- but really, your opinion is based on information that is no more valid than a Christian suggesting that there is a god who wants to smite homosexuals. I'm sure it is something that you didn't intentionally create -- though I believe that some people can choose their particular sexual narrative -- but your statement that "it is as genetic with me as anyone else's straightness," is questionable, when taking into account things like actual science and genetics. As I said, we may find out that you're right, or partially right -- but, right now, no one knows. It is largely by faith, hope and theory that homosexuality having a single, isolated and consistent biological origin, is in the marketplace of ideas.

Didn't I get into a discussion with you about ETS not being an allergen, as well? It's long in the past, but, I just want you to know that I kind of have a fascination with bunk science and radical scientific claims -- I'm not picking on you, or any group, specifically. As I said, I think that all people's sexual lifestyle, as long is it as between consenting adults, is normal, and healthy, and that people shouldn't have to be looking toward bogus scientific claims or angry gods to try to make an issue out of it.

[LostinVA]

277. I am very put off by your, basically, calling

my sexual orientation an "opinion." I've known I've liked females better than males since, literally, I can remember,

And, it fucking pisses me off you're calling something that si part of me "bunk science." Talk about an agenda. I've never liked your posts much, anyway, and I really don't have to read what I consider anti-gay talking points about my sexual orientation on DU. Ican watch the 700 Club or go to teh Focus on teh Family siste for that. Ignore.

Whatever. Go spread your crap your thinly-veiled anti-gay gospel to another poster. I'm not reading any more.

[Cats Against Frist]

278. Have you ever considered the potential ramifications

of finding a genetic basis for homosexuality? Apparently, you haven't a firm grasp on the history of Eugenics, or the research that's been done into whether or not African-Americans are genetically inferior to whites.

What if a gay gene is isolated? Should babies be aborted or genetically altered because of their sexual orientation? I understand that it's difficult enough for homosexuals, currently, to withstand the prejudice of society -- what if the number of homosexuals were decreased, say, by 50 percent. With a genetic marker, who is to say that anyone, any longer, has to "tolerate" homosexuality -- we'll just breed out the "undesirables," yeah? What happens to the people who slip through the cracks, or their families cannot affort to breed out the homosexual gene, or whatever, making discrimination against homosexuals, not only a gender-based issue, but also a class-based issue? Finding a "gay gene," could as easily lead to homosexuality, in the future, being classified as a "disease," as it could lead to the road of hand-holding tolerance.

In addition -- I'm assuming that you're a liberal. Much of the liberal case, manifested in modernity, relies on the idea that socialization is the root cause of much societal stratification. I've lived and studied in Sweden, a very modernist country, and they unequivocally believe that everyone is genetically born equal, that everyone has the same potential. This is the basis of their theory of socialization, a rationalization for their social safety net, as well as the inspiration of movements that seek to create a truly egalitarian society, where there are no hierarchies -- such as eliminating the grading system in schools, and providing both men and women equal amounts of family leave time.

If you submit that you are genetically born gay, then you are subjecting yourself to a scientific construct of your sexuality, which might lead to a place that is far darker, than if we just learned to accept others' differences. Notwithstanding the fact that it still doesn't address the broad range of sexual preference, amongst humans.

Genetics are ripe fodder for those, such as Hitler, and some Republicans, to use against any number of groups. Women are "just born" weaker, than men. Blacks or Jews are "genetically inferior," to whites or Aryans. I read a quote, in my research, that said: (paraphrased) "Conservatives are those who believe everything is genetic, except for homosexuality, and liberals are those who believe nothing is genetic except for homosexuality."

As far as having an agenda? Yeah, you got me -- I'm equally opposed to gays, and that ever-persecuted "those who are allergic to smoke" contingent. I tried to explain, to dodge your accusations, but you just decided to hurl them out there, anyway.

Don't you think that it's just a LITTLE selfish, to advocate for a "gay gene," knowing the historical ramifications? And don't you think it's a little hypocritical to be a liberal, yet advocate for clear genetic markers to determine whether or not one "fits with the dominant" group? I'm not attempting to insult -- only challenge. I also NEVER specifically suggested that your homosexuality was anything other than what you state -- in terms of what you feel. I may disagree with, or simply be skeptical about the origins -- but if you say that you didn't choose to be gay, I have no reason not to believe you.

I think it may be hard to hear this, but I think that it's possible that homosexuals need to believe in a genetic basis to truly reconcile their homosexuality. I feel that that is an injustice, and that the people who attempt to make homosexuals hate and not accept themselves are terrible people. I'm sitting here, trying to tell you that I accept you -- however you are, and whyever you are, and that you should have equal rights, and that you're worthy of love, and respect, and to have the love of your family, and to create a family. I'm just not going to lie to you -- and I can't stay away from a scientific challenge.

As you said -- it is Pat Robertson who preaches faith -- my message has far less in common with Pat Robertson than the always-wishful gay gene panacea, that will suddenly legitimize homosexuality, and make all the religious whackjobs renounce their Gods and head on over to the rainbow. The message should be to love people, whomever they are, and that going down the genetic road is dangerous, and frought with a lot of baggage.

By the way, the site I linked to is active in the Safe-seed project, supports pro-choice, and has been active in helping people who are genetically discriminated against in health care. It is a non-partisan, scientific organization, and they have massive credibility.

[ronnykmarshall]

67. I put the mojo on two of them.

We can do that just with pictures ya know.

[Heddi]

69. isn't that part of the Gay Agenda?

I'm sure they think it is.

Not that some of these kids needed any, uh, help. I see plenty of rebellion and 'breaking away from traditional family roles' and "permanent bachelorhood" in the lives of several of these darling little...things.

"You know what, daddy? I'm not taking your stuff anymore. Me and Billy are in love. That's right. in LOVE. And you can't stop me. And you know what? I'm not parting my hair on the left anymore. And I'm not going to part it on the right either. I'm going to brush it STRAIGHT BACK. ANd you can't stop me. You can't do a thing about it. Just you try, daddy, just you try"

[jeff30997]

253. They would call an exorcist!

:rofl:

[LynneSin]

103. and we wonder why democrats are losing elections

They're out-breeding us!

[MountainLaurel]

123. There have been some interesting articles about that

And it's not a completely irrelevant point.

[LostinVA]

174. "Quiverful" movement -- gag

[Ellen Forradalom]

249. Our emphasis on quality over quantity

means that we, who are highly educated but fewer in number, are the people behind the blue-state economic dynamoes--Massachusetts, New York, California, Illinois and such. These states pay into the federal coffer more than they get back. Many of the red states are on the receiving ends of subsidies; Texas about breaks even.

And they sneer at us.

[MountainLaurel]

250. That's exactly it

As is the correlation between education (Dems on average have more of it) and family size (more education, fewer children).

[JVS]

135. true

[Sanity Claws]

5. I think they lost count

there are ONLY 14 in the picture.
At some point don't you run out of names that you like?

[deadparrot]

6. Check out the links page.

Creation science.

:scared:

And the father was elected to public office (and ran for the United States Senate).

[Initech]

7. Wow, 17 kids that all dress alike. And probably think alike.

:scared:

[bettyellen]

9. wow, the little girl with the ponytail is quite the rebel, huh?

[Misunderestimator]

16. HAHAHHAHA!! And the little boy with his hair parted on the other side.

:spray: :rofl:

[bettyellen]

29. yep, and you know they get blamed for everything cuz they're "different"

:hi:

[jakefrep]

263. Oh, those are the mailman's kids.

[FuzzySlippers]

10. I love this pic with the giant head of Jim Bob

lurking in the background.

[TheMightyFavog]

50. That.. is scary as hell.

:scared:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

112. Sadly, Ofjim had the potential to be quite the MILF

But, after 17 kids... :scared: :puke:

[LeftyMom]

132. Ofjim!

:rofl:

[Mad_Dem_X]

205. Took me a moment to get that

Ofjim...makes sense.

[JVS]

137. She looks so much younger there!

[LeftyMom]

11. Whatever you do, don't read the recipe page on their website

It looks like a distant outpost of the gallery of regrettable food.

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

[Arugula Latte]

21. Is there a recipe that DOESN'T call for cream of chicken soup?

I don't think so. :scared:

[LeftyMom]

25. So much processed, overpackaged crap

One would think such a large family would have to eat better by economic neccesity. It'd be cheaper and easier to bake a shitload of potatoes and serve with soup and a salad rather than making velveta and tatertot casserole or whatever that shit was.

Seriously, no wonder those kids all look like the waxy, underfed protagonists in some scary disease of the week movie. Eat real food and get a little sun, people.

[Left Is Write]

28. I noticed that the chicken was "optional" in the chicken and noodles.

How can chicken be "optional" in a chicken recipe? Wouldn't it then just be...noodles?

[Heddi]

31. snarf

ha ha.

I wonder if both the chicken AND noodles can be optional?

In her small and insignificant world, that's most likely a very real possibility "Look honey, I made something special. It's Nothing Casserole. Mmmmm"

[XemaSab]

73. The 12 and 13-year old daughters are doing all the cooking

:puke:

[samplegirl]

161. yeah this horrified me

my next door neighbors are doing the same thing
with their daughters all home schooled.
Sadly they dress them just like that as well.

[LeftyMom]

32. Well between teh 8 cans of cream of chicken soup and 10 T of bullion

I imagine it'd taste a bit like chicken anyhow, but much more like salt. Holy shit, I don't want to know what those kids' cholesterol is already. :scared:

[Left Is Write]

34. My mother would say...

that's not cooking. It's opening cans.

(Says the woman who used a can of tomato soup with her supper tonight!)

Generally, my mother frowns on the "open a can of this, open a can of that" school of cooking, though it does have its place in a time crunch.

[LeftyMom]

41. makes for really nasty food usually

I use canned beans when I'm in a rush and tomatoes when they aren't in season, but this is tel least healthy food ever.

BTW, did you see the salad recipe? It takes mayonaise, eggs, turkey bacon, sour cream and cheddar cheese. For a fucking salad. I revise my estimate- the kids start clutching thier chests and dying as undergrads at BJU.

[Heddi]

44. well give credit where credit is due

at least they're using Turkey Bacon, which COMPLETELY un-does all the nasty effects of the mayo, eggs, sour cream and cheddar cheese.

I bet they wash it down with a gallon of Diet Pepsi...you know...the "diet" erases any bad food you eat with it....

Wait..how can a salad have no vegetables whatsoever? Wouldn't that be some kind of hybrid uncooked casserole or something? Maybe I'm "out of the loop" but I thought salads had exotic things like lettuce and tomatoes and cucumbers. Must be afraid of fancy-pants cookin' recipes like that :eyes:

[LeftyMom]

46. Oh the veggies (prepare to be overwhelmed)

a head of lettuce (unspecified but since they eat shit food we can safely assume it's iceberg, and how the hell is one head of lettuce enough for 16 growing kids?)
one can of peas (presumably she drains this, but it's not mentioned so who knows?)
one small onion (color unspecified)

[Heddi]

49. Mmmmm....all the good ones

that have 0 nutrional value.

Isoflavones? What's dat? Probably some satanistic conspiracy to get us to THINK that eating dark leafy greens is good for you. If god wanted us to eat dark leafy greens HE WOULD HAVE SAID SO IN THE BIBLE>

As it stands, I'm sure there's some reference to a mayonnaise and sour-cream salad combo somewhere. I hear it's what Jesus at at the last supper. Along with chickenless chicken n noodle.

And yes, a head of iceburg can easilly feed a family of 16 as long as each family member agrees to share one leaf with another.

Mmmm! HEALTHY!!!

[Left Is Write]

53. Now...I do like sour cream and cheddar cheese.

In fact, I have a weakness for sour cream and cheddar cheese.

Iceberg lettuce tastes like water.

[Heddi]

56. But in a salad?

on nachos, that's great. We even make our macaroni and cheese with noodles, sour cream, and cheddar (or monterrey jack, or mozzarella) cheese. Just boil the noodles, put 'em in a casserole. Add 8oz sour cream, 8oz cheese, bake until brown and mm mmm mmmmmmmmmmm

Anyway.

yeah. sour cream and cheddar cheese I can hang with.

But with turkey bacon (what part of the turkey, exactly, does turkey bacon come from?)
and eggs?
and peas?
and mayonnaise?
and iceburg lettuce?

That's not a salad. That's a federal offense.

[Left Is Write]

59. I put sour cream in my macaroni and cheese too.

My basic salad is Romaine or green leaf lettuce, tomatoes in some form (cherry tomatoes, grape tomatoes, sliced Roma tomatoes...) and dressing. Depending on what else I have on hand (carrots, cucumbers, pea pods), I'll dress it up a little.

Sometimes I do fancy salads (usually recipes from my sister-in-law), like the one with spinach, strawberries, and poppy seed dressing. I also have a recipe that calls for green leaf lettuce, strips of Swiss cheese, almonds, and a homemade mustard dressing.

But no, that layered salad with the sour cream and cheddar cheese sounds more like a dip or spread of some sort.

[Left Is Write]

52. Canned peas. The most vile invention known to man.

Peas are delicious. I love them. I eat them often.

I do not, however, eat them canned.

Speaking of 16 growing kids, I noticed one of the hotdish recipes called for one cup of rice. One.cup.of.cooked.rice. That was to make a 9x13 pan hotdish. ??

[LeftyMom]

57. It's stupid, too

Rice is cheap, especailly in bulk. If I was making a rice dish to feed 16, there'd probably be 10 cups of cooked rice involved and I'd fill it out with veggies and maybe some beans. Good, healthy dirt cheap food and I promise it'd taste a hell of a lot better than mayo salad or velveta casserole.

[Left Is Write]

60. Yes, exactly.

Lots of rice is a great way to stretch out a dish that needs to feed a lot of people. My kids (even the picky four-year-old) love rice.

[Heddi]

63. At least they have variety

not only do they eat Tater Tot Casserole, but HASH BROWN casserole as well.

I'm sure it would blow their fragile little minds to find out that hash browns are just smooshed up tater tots.

They sure do like the cholesterol don't they. They must be heirs to the largest lard empire in the US or something. Major stockholders in the lard and boullion and salt conglomerates.

"If it ain't processed, it ain't goin' inside Mah baby! Whaddya think I am, some kidn of new age vegetarian lesbian feminist commie liberal?"

[LeftyMom]

66. Those poor kids

I feel really bad for them. Not only are they dressed like dorks (for fuck's sake, if your're going to wear matching outfits, get something that isn't ugly!) they're all pale enough to pass for goths and skinnier than rails. They look malnourished, especially when I glance over to my own robust and well fed little one to compare.

[Heddi]

68. Of course they're gaunt

if you had that much lard, lard, and oil in YOUR diet, you'd look gaunt too. Everything just slides down the gullet and comes out whole. Who needs digestion when you've got Mayonnaise Salad Casserole??

saves on toilet paper, I bet.

[JVS]

164. Oh come on, of course they're dressed like dorks, it's a family portrait!

[LeftyMom]

167. We usually just try to color coordinate a bit

Usually "everybody wear black" since I'm kinda color-averse.

[Left Is Write]

213. We coordinate for portraits too...

last fall we did a family portrait and we dressed in fall-ish colors (dark orange, brown, sage green) so the picture would look nice.

On any given day, my children are not dressed alike. Unless one counts blue jeans as being "dressed alike." :D

[LeftyMom]

214. I;m just happy if I can keep the kid fully dressed and matching himself

I'd wind up in the funny farm if I had to deal with even half that many kids. I've tended three (LK and my best friend's two stepdaughters) relatively well behaved kids for a couple of days and that was quite enough for me.

[Left Is Write]

216. My younger two can be a challenge sometimes...

My kids are 18, 6, and 4.

When we had that latest portrait done, I was just thrilled that we got one shot of everyone looking in the same direction and smiling nicely at the same time! My husband isn't anxious to repeat the experience any time soon.

[LeftyMom]

226. When LK was a baby, we actually took the full 18 shot session and didn't

have a single photo of him looking forward and smiling to show for it once.

We switched to a different studio- the one we were going to was very busy and he'd become distracted and overstimulated.

[MissB]

240. .

:spray:

[Heddi]

39. It's like a salt-lick with gravy

Fuck their cholesterol...I can't believe they're not bleeding from the brain due to the rampant hypertension that must run in that family...jesus christ. Do they have stock in a salt company or something?

How about a salt-n-noodle casserole (noodles optional)

[MissB]

241. You're killing me here.

:rofl:

[northofdenali]

93. "waxy, underfed protagonists in some

scary disease of the week movie............." :rofl::spray: OMFG, I haven't laughed this hard in days! It's awful that these people think they're real. I believe they must make themselves up as they go.

Unfortunately, there is a large church near my house, complete with electronic billboard, that manufactures families like these in all different colors........ of white.

[Ellen Forradalom]

86. I couldn't believe the saturated fat and cholesterol

I clutched my chest just reading it. Dinners chez Forradalom are from fresh foods, fruits and vegetables are prominent, and fat kept to a minimum.

[RebelOne]

116. The No-Bake Cheesecake seems like it would be tasty.

And fast and easy to prepare. I just may try it myself.

[eyesroll]

120. Eeeeew....their Broccoli Cheese Soup?!?!

Frozen broccoli, Velveeta, cream.

:scared:

See, they can get away with sharing few bathrooms because they're all constipated.

[JVS]

141. There's no way in hell this Sloppy Joe recipe serves 20!

JEANNE’S SLOPPY JOE’S
1 lb. ground beef/turkey
1/2 c. ketchup
1/2 c. BBQ sauce
1/2 envelope dry onion soup mix
2 tsp. liquid smoke
Brown & season meat, drain. Add all other ingredients, heat
Through. Serve on buns; enjoy!


I was really hoping that the recipes would be scaled up to feed this huge family! Take 5 lbs of beef. A 24 oz bottle of ketchup, etc.

I bet they are able to buy mayo in the institutional size and not worry about spoilage

Ah, I see the later recipes are scaled up! Excellent!

[Left Is Write]

146. One pound of beef?

It'll serve 20 if 16 of them aren't hungry.

[Elidor]

12. Some sort of viral replication going on here

They're not humans, they're spores.

[philosophie_en_rose]

15. The older girls basically raise the family.

They cook and do most of the cleaning - according to the website.

Those poor young women.

[JVS]

152. Would you rather have them not know what to do when they have...

over a dozen kids themselves? They have to learn now! :sarcasm:

[philosophie_en_rose]

198. Those old maids had been learn them how to cook.

or else they'll never catch a man. :eyes:

:P

[Left Is Write]

217. Sure they will.

Their parents will arrange "courtships" for them with suitable boys when they are at a suitable age, and then they will be married off. No thoughts of college or careers for these girls.

[Ellen Forradalom]

248. No further education for the girls

is a sacrifice to the Lord. Don't you know that?

[Ellen Forradalom]

18. From Michelle to Moms

"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."

How did it come to that? Think....real....hard.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

62. ...

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[bleedingheart]

124. I read it and though the same...

[JVS]

156. Where was that?

[Left Is Write]

218. Right here...

http://www.jimbob.info/mothers.html

[JVS]

225. thanks

[Heddi]

19. From my journal entry about this freaky family

"And the Lord thy God said unto them, "thou shalt not be holy in My eyes lest thou allow thy girl children to part their hair other than on the left." And so it was done"

"And the Lord thy God said further unto them, "Holiest of Holies shall not befall you lest your boy children also part their hair on the left, unless it's dad,and he can part his hair on the right." And so it was done"

"And God Continued, not seeing a need to stop since he was on a pretty good roll. "And thou shalt make your boy children wear those fashionable black loafers with the dangly things on the front. Because that's what manly men wear. And they shall all weareth the same pants, and the same coats, and thy daughter shall all have the same ringlets of hair, and the same dresses, and the same bows. Lest someone think you're a football team rather than a family. Because that would be an easy thing to mistake them for. Or sex slaves. Easier to imagine them as sex slaves. Especially the blonde one. Mmmm...."

Book of Cosmetology, 13:4-6

Thanks to these sick fucks, there is now an international shortage of small blue suits and paisley dresses.....

THere is a link on their website to THEIR favourite websites.

Among them:

http://www.wholesomewear.com/page-4.html
Wholesome Swim Wear:

This is listed under "slimming" swimwear:



oh yeah. Look at her. Is that Linda Evangelista? Oh no. It's just a frumpy Christian woman with a uterus the size of my washing machine. My bad

Why is this considered swimwear and not a dress?


"God says I have to hide my tiny tee-tee's from leering eyes, like the ones daddy has"

[Arugula Latte]

20. *snarf*

:spray:

[AirmensMom]

23. Heidi, you've done it again!

:rofl: I can't stop laughing. :rofl:

[Heddi]

30. Heddi...not Heidi

but thanks for the laughs anyways

:remembering to change my username one of these days to something a bit more memorable:

[AirmensMom]

36. I was laughing too hard!

Sorry, Heddi! It must've looked like Heidi through my squinty, laughed-till-I-cried eyes. :blush:

No, thank YOU for the laughs! :rofl:

[Heddi]

40. No problem

Hey, nothing's a big deal after visualizing this woman's vagina.

Having sex with her must be like waving you hand in a tunnel. A whole lot of hole and not much else.

I wonder if it echoes?

Hello-o-o-o-o

[AirmensMom]

43. Aaaahahahahaha!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

My mother-in-law had 11 kids (yeah, they're super-fundies ... but harleydad is a "black sheep" -- not like them). After the first few, they just sent the kids next door while she popped out another one.

You're a riot, you know! :rofl:

[FuzzySlippers]

79. I gotta tell ya, Heddi.

All your posts in this thread have had me peeing myself.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Richard Steele]

224. "Like throwing a hot dog down the hallway"...

I forget where I heard that, but it popped
into my head just now.

[realisticphish]

231. family guy

Stewie, to a prostitute:
"Is there any tread left on the tires, or is it just like throwing a hotdog down a hallway at this point"

[Richard Steele]

232. Thanks! That would have bugged me all day! nm

[Beausoir]

26. OMG! This is a masterpiece.

Aboslutely hilarious.

[Ellen Forradalom]

47. You can't actually swim in those

If they are that concerned about exposed bodies, the girls should be getting no fresh air and exercise at all.

[Heddi]

51. I imagine it would be easier to swim in a pair of jeans

than those baggy peice of shit kroker sacks. I mean....hello....tides? getting pulled under water?

feh. they probably don't care other than the fact that they lost a perfectly good breeder for the son of the family with 22 down the street....

This family looks quite vampirish for being so darn christ loving :D

[emmajane67]

111. I find the constant references to 'Daddy' entirely creepy.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

115. Think of it as Darwin in action. -nt

[jakefrep]

170. I have great difficulty believing...

...that the children in those ads would wear those "swimsuits" willingly.

[Left Is Write]

219. They will if it's all they know.

[Left Is Write]

22. And they homeschool...

"He teaches how to get the best buy, learning to live within your income & purposing to get out of debt..."

"We took Romans 13:8 literal..."

"We purposed to get out of debt & stay out of debt."

If I were catty, I might suggest that they pay more attention to their English studies.

[Left Is Write]

24. Oops. I shouldn't criticize grammar and spelling.

According to Michelle, God has poor grammar also:

"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?”"

[Heddi]

38. God don't need no grammar

What the hell are you...some kind of American hating, baby eating Commie leftist pinko lesbian transgendered child of mixed race with a disability?

pshaw on you! God can speak as good or as bad as he damn well pleases. Now go eat your chicken-optional chicken noodle casserole (without the chicken). And throw some extra boullion in there...it's not salt-licky enough :D

[Heddi]

35. what's Purposing?

I ain't never heard them fancy-pantsy words before. He musta gotton one of them cowle..cawled...higher edjuhcatyons.

God Said right there in 5th Korynthynanns "Thou shalt spend more time procreating and purposing than learning how to spell". And so it was done.

At least we know they've had sex at least 17 times.....well, 15 cuz I think 2 of them are twins.

[Left Is Write]

37. I'm not sure.

I have no idea if he "verbed" the word purpose, or if he means proposing. He uses it several times.

[Heddi]

42. Well I guess you can verbalize anything

if you want to. Or if he wants to. Looks like he has run of the den--I mean, HE can part his hair on the right. Him and that little clone below him. Everyone else--on the left.

I wonder if there's a form of OCD that relates to having clone children with clone clothing and clone hair. Sheesh. Now I don't feel so guilty about being child-free anymore. They have MORE than made up for any children I didn't have, plus some. Oooh.....it must suck to be her cervix. Hell, if I were it, I'd just stay permanently dilated....

[Left Is Write]

55. The matching clothes are for ease of laundry.

It makes sorting easier.

At first I thought maybe they just wore matching clothes for family portraits, but according to the FAQs or the organizational tips or whatever that page was, they each wear the same color every day (and each day has an assigned color) to make the laundry more streamlined.

[Heddi]

58. isn't that OCD?

or shouldn't it be?

I really don't see them as being too far off from the crazy cat lady down the street that has a porch full of old newspapers and collects all the empty starbux cups she finds on the street because they're "good luck"....

:shudder:

I wonder why the idea of adoption never occured to them. Surely there are 17 (or 33 or 17645 however the fuck many kids they have) kids out there that would have been just as manerly and obedient as their own, but would surely appreciate the home more.

Then again, no. that would be torture. I could not advocate any child being adopted into this family. They'd turn out like those feral kids who were suckled by wild dogs and grew up barking and crawling around on all fours. Which is probably a better fate than living with the Screwy McProcreators....

[Left Is Write]

61. There'd be no reason for them to adopt...

they wanted to accept all the children God would see fit to give them by virtue of Michelle repeatedly getting pregnant, and it is against their beliefs to use any kind of birth control, which might interfere with God's plan (apparently they tried that and decided it was wrong).

[Heddi]

64. I read that

he didn't know that when you're on the pill you can get pregnant and have a miscarriage.

Well, idiot, perhaps if you or your wife bothered to read the little insert that came with the birth control pills, you'd see that whole fucking section on what to do if you are taking the pill and suspect you're pregnant. You know. Stop. taking. the. pill.

The pill purpused them to have a miscarriage, I guess....

[MountainLaurel]

71. Google "Quiverfull"

:scared:

[XemaSab]

74. THAT is a Googling adventure!

:scared:

[Heddi]

77. whoah

That was so shocking my uterus just ran out the door....

[MountainLaurel]

121. That's a great image

Heddi's uterus popping out, sprouting legs, and hightailing it away!

:spray:

[deadparrot]

78. Wow, that's just insulting.

I especially love the page entitled "Help! Doctor says c-section!" All about how C-sections are a crock of shit.

http://www.quiverfull.com/clips.php/id24/

I'd like to tell the presumptuous lunatics that I (and probably my mother) would have died if not for a C-section. But oh. I guess that's ok, since I'm just a godless commie librul. :eyes:

[Left Is Write]

117. I'm familiar with the term.

And there are a lot of people of the "quiverful" mindset out there...

[GoddessOfGuinness]

87. American Heritage Dictionary

lists "purpose" as a transitive verb in addition to the more typical noun:

pur·pose (pûr'pəs)

n.
1. The object toward which one strives or for which something exists; an aim or a goal: “And ever those, who would enjoyment gain/Must find it in the purpose they pursue” (Sarah Josepha Hale).
2. A result or effect that is intended or desired; an intention. See synonyms at intention.
3. Determination; resolution: He was a man of purpose.
4. The matter at hand; the point at issue.

tr.v., -posed, -pos·ing, -pos·es.
To intend or resolve to perform or accomplish.

[lakemonster11]

110. I've definitely heard it used that way.

But usually in historical documents, not modern conversations. Certainly not on websites.

[Hardrada]

102. No, that would be at least 16 times.

15 and then two for the price of one.

[Lars39]

273. They're followers of "The Purpose Driven Life"

It's a control freak's book that fundy churches are using to brainwash their flocks.

[EstimatedProphet]

27. Welcome to Stepford Falls

Go ahead and laugh...after all, we're all the evil Satanists on our side dontchaknow.

[yellowdogintexas]

33. it took a whole bolt of fabric to make those uniforms.er.dresses,

didn't it?
jeez louize. And this photo is of only 14 of them.

If she has a baby every 18 months until her reproductive system shuts down, they would have enough for two football teams.

Some doctor ought to take action and take OUT her tubes during a C section or something to stop the madness.

[Heddi]

45. Has anyone done the "Breeding Math" of this family?

Okay. There's 14 kids there that I could count (i had to do it twice. It 'twas hard)

If each of those 14 have 14 kids of their own, that would be 196 children from just 14.

If each of those 196 children had 14 children of their own, that would be, like, alot of fucking kids.

"WHen I grow up I want to be just like mommy and be a slave to her menstrual cycle, which she says is a blessing from God and that I should look forward to years of labour and delivery just like her and Varicose Veins are chronic hemrrhoids are god's way of telling me that I'm special and loved."

14 kids at 9 months of pregnancy each = 10.5 YEARS of fucking pregnancy.

TEN POINT FIVE YEARS OF THIS WOMANS LIFE WAS SPENT BEING PREGNANT.

that *cannot* be healthy.

[LynneSin]

104. Think about this - all those kids will be raised to vote stupid

:scared:

[Left Is Write]

221. There's a chance that a couple of them will break out and rebel.

Even Phelps has children that turned away from his teachings.

[deadparrot]

106. And she has *16* by the end of the documentary.

She was pregnant and give birth, and was pregnant again when they did an "update" a year later. They announced the birth of *that* kid at the end.

I don't see how it's healthy--mentally or emotionally. Since I haven't been exposed to it, I guess I should keep my mouth shut. Still...I don't see how anyone could be healthy in mind, body, and soul living life the way those people do.

[LeftyMom]

131. That's the odd thing

Most QF families don't get that big simply because on-demand breastfeeding usually delays the return of fertility after childbirth and spaces kids better than that.

Does anybody know, is she not nursing (which would be highly unusual for a QF family) or doing some sort of nursing schedule? If she's a Babywiser or something that would explain the unsusually close spacing.

[Left Is Write]

148. I was wondering about that also.

[LeftyMom]

153. I know a fair number of QF families from Attatchment Parenting boards

and most of them seem to have kids that are somewhere between 18 mos and 2 1/2 years apart, so the spacing seems really odd. Mayby Ofjim is just one of those women who ovulates again really fast while nursing, but I'm guessing she's a scheduler and that's why she keeps getting knocked up so close together.

[Left Is Write]

155. Based on her notes about running the household...

I'd say you're on target. I'll bet she schedules everything.

[LeftyMom]

157. The comment about "correction" is what makes me think so

It sounds like she's a follower of the Ezzos' or the Pearls' scheduling and child abuse system. Probably the Ezzos, since the Pearls are at least pro-breastfeeding for all thier other evils.

[Left Is Write]

220. The bit about blanket time too...

Making the babies have "quiet time" on a blanket so they won't be a bother while the homeschooling and cleaning is going on.

[LeftyMom]

223. The blanket time is right out of Babywise/Growing Kids God's Way

They must be fans of the Ezzos.

For those who don't know who I;m talking about or why that's so concerning, please see : http://www.ezzo.info/index.htm

[XemaSab]

239. I'm reading this, and it's pretty appalling

Reminds me of Lakoff's assertions about conservative parenting methods, and it seems to substantiate everything he says.

[miss_american_pie]

228. Blanket time started with Gothard

who makes Ezzo look like a pushover. :scared:

[Ellen Forradalom]

48. In all fairness

Jimbo says 'owe no man but love' and apparently stays out of debt. Not bad advice.

[Heddi]

54. Of course they're out of debt

half the shit they have they got for free. I guaran-damn-tee you they're on SOME sort of public assistance.

They get the piano teacher to help out with the laundry 2x's a week and are getting ready to build a 7,000 sqft house. Isn't that a bit excessive? Even for a family of that size? I mean...that's the size of my community college. Sheesh.

I bet they get alot of stuff donated from their church and from places like that. I would bet that their total household expendatures are quite low for a family of that size because the majority of stuff is donated.

That one family that had the 22,000 babies or whatever a few years ago--they got a house donated. They got THREE minivans donated. They got 3 years worth of diapers donated. They had a team of like 10 people volunteer daily to help mom feed her small army. They got college educations for all the kids donated. They got clothes donated. They got health care donated. Then they bemoaned the free house they got and said it was too small because their kids were growing up and someone donated ANOTHER house to them that was larger and brand new.

Meanwhile, Dad quits his job and is now a "motivational speaker" touring the country motivatin' people, I suppose, to take fertility drugs and have 2 dozen children at once and get rich off the freebies they get from it.

Shit..and I thought I got good free stuff from filling out surveys online. I think I need to change my gameplan....

[XemaSab]

76. They're building a 7,000 square foot house

that has... get this... a room for mom and dad, a room for guests, one room for the boys, and one room for the girls.

If I were the kids I would be *so angry.*

Especially the two oldest girls, who have to do all the cooking and probably 3/4 of the cleaning.

Poor them. And after all that, to share a room with what, 5 other girls raging in age from 3-14?

[Ellen Forradalom]

80. OK that I was not aware of

Still, debt free is good advice. Even if pseudo-Christian scamming is not the way to do it.

[XemaSab]

81. Debt free is good advice

(easier for those without college educations to say!) but that's one piece of good advice amidst a shitstorm of fundie garbage and situations that border on neglect/abuse.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[Ellen Forradalom]

83. You got that right

And I found the page where they cheerfully say that the teenage girls fix lunch for 18 people. No wonder they eat wholesale-sized cans of pork and beans every day.

[XemaSab]

84. They're barely even teenagers

12 and 13.

Lunch and dinner.

That shit HAS to be bad.

:scared:

[LeftyMom]

88. I was a pretty good cook at that age

but I was doing it because I love cooking, not because I had to.

[XemaSab]

89. I was an okay cook at that age

but it's no wonder it's all overprocessed crap, asking two young girls to cook for 18 people ever day.

And you KNOW there's no curry, stir-fry, or anything ethnic in there at all. It's easy to cook up a massive vat of thai curry with veggies that tastes GREAT, but hotdish every day?

At that age I could have pulled off a good meal for 18 people every couple of days, but every day?

I'd lose my will to live.

[LeftyMom]

90. I still would

Hell, there are days I would sooner die than cook for two. Thank Amy for frozen pizza. :)

[XemaSab]

92. Now that you mention it

Making pizza for 18 people would be pretty easy.

But I think it's WAY fucked up that the boys don't help. WAY fucked up.

Those girls are going to get married at a VERY young age just to get out of the house. Taking care of 2 or 3 kids at 18 is MUCH easier than taking care of 15. :scared:

[LeftyMom]

95. My two oldest aunts did that

and there were only three younger kids for them to help my grandmother with (she married a Catholic and had the last three kids at one year intervals when her older girls were teens.)

[XemaSab]

96. I was divided on the topic of REALLY large families

until I read what some DU'ers had to say about it, and went and read their website. Their website alone makes having a large family sound like a total nightmare. Having a nervous breakdown while doing laundry at 1 AM???

[LeftyMom]

99. I can identify with that

just being a single mom with one kid. heck, being a partnered mother of one infant was not exactly a picnic.

Being a parent is stresful. Large families have some added complications and expenses, but also some advantages in terms of economies of scale and being able to have the older kids amuse the younger ones when you need a few minutes for your sanity's sake.

I think the worst arrangement, in terms of preserving one's sanity, is to fire out a litter in rapid sucession, especially if one does it near the end of thier fertile years when the energy usually isn't there.

[jakefrep]

233. With only 2 bathrooms...

... and 17 people it may be a blessing of sorts that there's no curry, stir-fry, or ethnic food.

:hurts: :hurts: :hurts: :hurts: :hurts:

[XemaSab]

236. You're right

Probably why the food's all meat and carbs too.... less pooping.

God forbid anyone in the family should eat any fiber. :eyes:

[Lydia Leftcoast]

94. Too bad they're not Catholic, or the oldest daughters could

follow the example of the two eldest daughters of a family of 22 children that was featured on a news report back when I was a teenager.

The report detailed the family's daily routine and showed how many gallons of milk and loaves of bread they went through in a week.

The reporter ended with, "If you've been keeping track, you're aware that you've seen only 20 children in this footage. That's because the two oldest daughters have become nuns!"

Unfortunately, that option is closed to the two oldest daughters of this family.

[XemaSab]

98. Yes indeed, yes indeed....

Since hearing about this family, I've tried to imagine what it would be like, and it seems like it would be REALLY hard to find your own identity.

Never being alone, never having your own space, dressing like everyone else, never getting any special attention from your worn-out parents, being schooled by your older siblings and having only your siblings as peers, never being exposed to anything different than your siblings....

It almost sounds like a twisted social experiment. In most large families the kids at least can go to school and meet different people there.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

114. They could always run into the nearest monastery (sp?) and say

they "heard the call of God."

Life as a Catholic nun HAS to beat this.

[RPM]

261. fucking bunkhouse for the kids

nice...

assholes.

[ComerPerro]

279. You're exactly right. Its the Republican breed of "welfare queens"

They leech off of society, and then have the audacity to act like they've made it on their own once they are set...

[JVS]

162. A ship with this many on board has to be a tight ship.

They've had 17 people in a 2400 sq. foot house with 2 bathrooms. Any sloppiness would have eventually led to complete chaos and collapse.

[RPM]

262. that has to violate some housing code....

you know they would raise bloody hell if there were than many latinos living in a house next door to them.

[bettyellen]

70. do the other three kids just fucking hate them?

i know i would.

[fishwax]

72. oh gosh

:scared:

[kedrys]

75. That is THE most sinister cloning experiment I've ever seen.

:puke: Now I'll have nightmares for days. :scared:

[Ellen Forradalom]

82. The pill causes miscarriages?

"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."

Don't tell them that their God frequently causes miscarriages for no discernible reason at all. Their heads will explode at the thought of their God, the abortionist.

[NMMNG]

85. Gah!

Of course the girls are charged with helping to raise the family, because that's womenfolks' duty you know. :eyes:

Just love those evangelical links they provide. :puke:

Stepford family anyone?

Feeding your family nothing but high fat, high sodium, over processed junk food is bordering on child abuse. It wouldn't kill you (or break your budget) to give them some vegetables and fruites once in a while, and it would certainly help them.


And BTW, if you don't like the pill there's still something called a "tubal ligation". Spewing out babies for the entirety of your reproductive capability is not "God's plan", it's utter irresponsibility.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

91. I don't really care how many kids they have...

But I have serious issues with those who are into the evangelical scheme that these yahoos support.

One of their links takes the surfer to "Free Evangelism Resources" http://www.livingwaters.com/m_equip.shtml
about 1/4 of the way down, it informs us that "150,000 people will die today" and most will be entering hell.

My heart goes out to those kids...

[deadparrot]

97. Just to let everyone know, I think TLC is repeating this

at 2AM EST.

[Heidi]

100. Reproductive choice is everyone, not just for _us_.

Just a friendly reminder. :)

[XemaSab]

105. This is true

but the only "choice" being made is to leave it up to God how many kids you have.

And after that, there's no "choice" at all. :(

[Heddi]

107. No doubt. She has the right to have as many kids

as she can squirt out--which she is obviously doing at a rapid clip

And I have the right to be totally creeped out not only by the idea, but to be creeped out by the whole freaking SITUATION surrounding it. I don't have anything against this family because they have 2377263 kids. They're a bunch of freaky-deakies that HAPPEN to have 2377263 children.

More power to her AND her uterus...

[Wapsie B]

101. I hope more than a couple of them

rebel against this super conservative mindset and become flaming Liberals. I saw the show too and was shocked that anyone would do such a thing. Like a co-worker of mine said, "She's not a breeding mare."
And one of JimBob's friends had 8 kids. Is this the way conservatives figure to completely overrun the rest of us, to outbreed us?

[Arugula Latte]

230. I think that's happening ...

:scared:

Look at the Mormon repukes in Utah breeding bushels more Mormon repukes ... that's why the fucknut preznint's numbers are so high there ...

[Hardrada]

255. The statistics are that at least one of those kids

will become a TERRORIST!!!

[JI7]

108. the youngest kid looks embarrassed

the little baby in the bottom middle. he looks embarrassed.

[Heddi]

109. wouldn't you be

if you had to share a bathroom with 34 other people?

I wonder if they have a Piss-n-shit schedule

"Now Timmy, you know your potty time is between 7:15 and 7:20am and again at 5:45-6:00pm. Now go hold your water like a good little clone"

[RebelOne]

113. Why do I only see 14 kids in the photo?

Where are the other three?

[Left Is Write]

118. Because the picture is from 2004.

She probably had a bun (or two) in the oven when the picture was taken, and has had time to make yet another one.

[RebelOne]

134. But how could she have 3 more children in 2 years?

[Left Is Write]

136. Twins. I think they have two sets of twins.

If she had twins in 2004 and another child in 2005, that would account for three more children.

[RebelOne]

145. Thanks, that would explain it.

[Name removed]

119. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CBGLuthier]

122. Interesting statement that

If christians were not allowed to breed then I would venture about 80% of DU would never have been born.

Including myself. I may be an atheist but my parents are christian.

You know, more and more I find myself being "entertained" by the lovely displays of "liberal" bigotry on DU.

I think that some of us would serve the cause better if "we" could lose these stupid, arrogant, smug displays of so-called superiority.

[progmom]

125. thank you

:hug:

[RebelOne]

138. Thank you, again.

Even though I am also an atheist, I found that statement offensive.

[KitchenWitch]

126. Gods, look at that vacant look in all the children's eyes

:cry:

Those are going to be some messed up adults.

[Patiod]

127. Well, growing up Catholic, I saw some big families

Two of our friends from church came from families of 9 and 11 respectively.

Of course, they didn't home-school or dress alike, which makes a huge difference.

I don't know, maybe because I hung out with these two families a lot, I just don't find this all that horrifying. I was sort of an only child (my only sibling is 7 years older than me) so there was some appeal to always having other kids around to hang out with. You weren't just friends with one kid in the family - they sort of came as a package deal. One more friend at the dinner table wasn't a big deal.

The family with 11 kids lived on a farm they called "Kids-a-Plenty Place", and every year they had kids from the city come out for "camp", and I'd go over and teach swimming. Good people, real Christians in the best sense of the word. The mom was a peace activist who was friends with the Berrigan brothers, and got arrested a few times protestesting the Vietnam war and local munitions factories (how did she find the time?) Very consistantly pro-life, which I can respect.
(One daughter wrote a song about her mom having 11 kids, and called it "Ninety-nine Months")

[Bridget Burke]

140. It's not just the size of the family.....

After all, that is their "choice."

But it appears the kids aren't getting a very good upbringing. The older girls do most of the housework--but the boys do nothing. Why must they all dress alike? Homeschooling works fine for some people, but these kids need some links to the outside world.

[philosophie_en_rose]

150. They try to keep the kids as ignorant as possible.

The boys will grow up to expect women to serve them. The girls will see no option but housework for the rest of their lives. (Not that housework isn't important; it's the lack of opportunities that is sad).

Frankly, I disagree with the idea that that baby factory of a woman is in any way more special than other mothers. She created a system in which she seems to do very little and depends heavily on her older girls to do household chores instead of focusing on education. If other parents had live-in domestics (aka Duggar children), there's actually less effort needed.

Typical Republican strategy. Act like martyrs, while depriving others.

[Left Is Write]

215. They live by the clock.

Schedule this, schedule that. The typical day as described on the website sounds horribly boring and unstimulating. Sure, I have systems and routines for getting my housework done, but I simply could not live the way they do.

I have my hands full with the two little ones I have. I have an older one too - she's 18 - but she works full time, has a boyfriend, and is generally off living her own life. It isn't her job to help me raise her brother and sister.

[XemaSab]

237. Reading between the lines of the schedule

I wonder how many hours a day are actually spent on schooling for each kid, particularly the girls who cook the meals. I can't imagine they could cook meals in under an hour, and the family isn't sitting around waiting to be fed while that's getting done.

:shrug:

[philosophie_en_rose]

244. The older kids get all joys of parenting without the sex.

I helped out with my younger siblings, but watching them for an evening or putting something in the oven for dinner is not the same as being assigned to be someone's guardian.

[Nikia]

246. There were some big Catholic families in my area too

Until recently, the churches in my town were very Conservative and strongly preached against birth control. Families with lots of children were held in high regard as a result.
One of the families on our bus route had 16 living children and a few more stillbirths. They were born over a thirty year time span. Her first child was norn when she was 20 and her last when she was 50.
One of my friends was a child in a family of 9. She was third oldest. She was upset that her family had so many children because they were poor as a result when they could have been middle class if they had stopped with her.
Another family at my school was more able to afford their big family of 13 as their father owned a construction firm.
My father's family wasn't Catholic but was of 6 children. My grandparents and all the siblings were happy about the families size because the parents handled parenting well and they all helped each other out.
One of my father's friends though had a mother sort of like Andrea Yates without the killing. Her family pressured her to have many children. After 6 children, she developed serious mental problems. She would get out of the mental ward, get pregnant, have the baby, and have a psychotic episode. She had eleven children before she was institutionalized for a long time.

[JVS]

133. I only count 14

[JVS]

143. According to the family FAQ, they only have 15 kids, 17 is the number...

of people in the household
http://www.jimbob.info/faq.html

[Burma Jones]

144. I saw them do this Act once

It was called "The Aristocrats"

[Taverner]

151. These people breed too much

And honestly, I think they're highly irresponsible....

[Heidi]

177. What, if anything, do you think should be done about it? (nt)

[Taverner]

229. Sterilization and Re-education

:evilgrin:

[Heidi]

254. Interesting answer.

I know you're joking.

I see those 17 (or whatever number of kids that couple has) as prospective Democratic voters.

[Taverner]

271. I am joking but having more than 2 kids is socially irresponsible n/t

[LostinVA]

264. hehehehehehe

[philosophie_en_rose]

245. Tax limitations.

You can deduct up to sixteen kids. But when you hit twenty, we draw the line.

;) :P ;)

[Lochloosa]

154. And for all you Mothers out there. A little advice.....

Remember mothers, where God guides He provides!

http://www.jimbob.info/mothers.html

:rofl:

[Left Is Write]

222. God provided me with the wisdom to accept my own limitations.

[sinkingfeeling]

165. Think they have 16 children now ....as of last October.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9680098/


LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - Michelle Duggar just delivered her 16th child, and she’s already thinking about doing it again.

Johannah Faith Duggar was born at 6:30 a.m. Tuesday and weighed 7 pounds, 6.5 ounces.

The baby’s father, Jim Bob Duggar, a former state representative, said Wednesday that mother and child were doing well. Johannah’s birth was especially exciting because it was the first time in eight years the family has had a girl, he said.

[quiet.american]

166. How is dad paying for all these kids?

What kind of work does he do?

[Kerrytravelers]

258. Ten bucks they get some sort of "subsidies."

Unless he has one hell of a good paying job. Oh, wait, I know. Their church helps them, because "hand-outs" are ok if it's from a church, but not of it's from the government. (Not that I think subsidies or government assistance are "hand-outs," but rethugs like these idiots constantly chide assistance programs. Especially is the recipients aren't white or fundie "Christian.") :eyes:

I also find it interesting that money people give to the church, which is suppose to go to the actual church, is instead used to "subsidies" church members. I don't know if it is what is happening in this case, but I can tell you my fundie-fruitcake brother-in-law and his piece of shit fundie wife sure hand their hands out whenever they could get something from the church. :eyes: But they were against ALL government programs. I pointed out the irony to them, but they said they were getting money from God. I replied :Oh, I didn't realize HE had a bank account.

:eyes:

[quiet.american]

267. Never thought of that angle -- wow! -- n/t

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

268. He's a Republican politico. Need I say more? -nt

[LostinVA]

176. She was a truly pretty young woman with a light in her eyes

And a decent hairstyle, for Southern big hair.

[ScreamingMeemie]

227. I say, live and let live. I have a problem with the recruitment of the

older kids to watch the younger and help them get ready-we pay our daughter if she chooses to babysit for us...or we go elsewhere. But, other than that, it's their life and if the kids are healthy I've got no issue with it.

[Ellen Forradalom]

247. They don't just live and let live, they pimp their family

The Big Fundy Family is their cheap-ass gimmick. It seems to be working really well for them.

[Polly Hennessey]

234. Oh, my god,

they are clones. How many grey dresses can you wash in a day?

[Dukkha]

235. She's a freaking Tribble!

She must have been born pregant! At this point they probably shoot out of her like a T-Shirt cannon.

[MissB]

238. Her uterus will someday fall right out.

Soon, hopefully.

[Odin2005]

242. It's people like this that make me support population control.

people shouldn't be having more than 2 kids.

[JI7]

243. they seem pretty selfish to me, and not much concern about the kids

setting aside what one's opinion on how many kids one should have and whatever.

lets look at how they live. what the fuck is a buddy system ? it should be the parents who are doing many of the things that they assign the older kids to do. but because they have so many kids they have no choice. i'm not talking about chores such as cleaning up rooms or setting the table etc. i'm talking about feeding the children, bathing them etc.

what is that shit where the mother is the "buddy" to the newest born child until a certain period when an older child takes over that job.

the oldest boy is probably at least 18 now. is he going to go off to college. will he continue homeschooling or helping in the family ? with no contact with the outside world since they don't go to school with other kids, no internet, tv , or even friends what will they do ?

spoiled kids who are given freedom yet taken care of financially often have a hard time on their own. imagine what the situation would be when you suddenly have to start interacting with strangers.

i'm sure it will be far worse for the girls unless they agree to marry whoever their parents want them to at a certain point.

[Catch22Dem]

251. I'm gonna 'splain this one last time. Pecker goes in...

Roots around for a couple of minutes (realistically.) Woman really has no idea because, well, I mean, come on! Hubby gets off. Hubby sez prayer to the baby jeebus and goes to sleep. Woman cries herself to sleep. Repeat again in 9 months. Find the step that's causing the fucking selfish population explosion you goddamn freeptards! Save some Earth for my ONE child.

[jeff30997]

252. They're rabbits!

:wow:

[MnFats]

256. you need a license to have a dog but any moron...

...can spawn 17 Stepford Children...

[Kerrytravelers]

257. Did you see this link from their website?

http://www.wallbuilders.com/

[SKKY]

259. Jesus Christ. It looks like "Fundies 'R Us"...

...That woman is a fundie factory.

[bluestateguy]

260. Normally I take sharp issue with the "breeder" label

but I think when we get into double digit numbers of children, it can be fairly used.

Oh well, I'm sure a few of them will turn out all right and rebel against their parents.

We'll just need to keep fighting to admit more illegal aliens and re-enfranchise more felons to make up for the loss of Democratic votes (that was a joke, btw).

[TallahasseeGrannie]

269. Sorry, duped it

[TallahasseeGrannie]

270. Rather creepy but thought provoking

So I have been playing Devil's advocate with myself because my first reaction was horror, and I like to mess with my mind a bit. So I'm going to look for positive things about this.

First, I think they are good looking folks. Healthy enough. Pale, but they're..white. Second, the crap they eat? Standard 1950's and 60's fare. Everything was casseroles made from soup.

There are things on their website that kind of freak me out, BUT the actual show about them, they appear rather happy as a family. There is joy and safety in numbers sometimes, or so I'm told. One of my favorite books growing up was Cheaper by the Dozen (the original). I was the youngest by 10 years and wanted younger siblings so badly.

Don't sell them too short on their future. You don't know WHAT is going on under those nicely combed hairdos, and either do Mom and Dad. They might LOOK cloned, but they aren't.

They obviously continue this behavior because they get attention for it, and this is the mother's sense of self, her ego. I was going to say that is rather sad, but I can think of a lot of worse ways to define oneself than as the mother of a passel of healthy kids.

I work with teenage mothers a lot and some are 14 and on their second child. I won't begin to go into the deficiencies these kids are exhibiting (in the program I work in the mothers bring their babies to school) and how grim the prognosis is for many of them. So who's to say that this family is doing something so wrong? At least they have sufficient food and care and a father.

Then I ask myself would I think it was so creepy if it were two hippy-types doing home school and tie-dying and learning to meditate, etc and I have to answer no. I'd think it was way cool. So I feel rather guilty for thinking they are creepy.

But thanks for posting..this has been an interesting thread that made me think.

[Dukkha]

272. I think my biggest issue with the family

They're parading them around the media like a sideshow. The mother's clearly a self-absorbed attention whore