The Duggars (and others like them)

[AFPheonix]

Because we all know that fostering is so easy. Many of the children in care have major issues arising from their reasons for being in care. There are attachment disorders and extreme behaviours that not everyone is strong enough to handle, and not everyone wants to take the necessary time required to learn the skills for coping with troubled children. Fostering children is not some warm, fuzzy, Hallmark moment like they show on the recruiting posters and TV ads.

I never claimed it was easy, but I still think it would be more worthwhile to help an existing person rather than make 18 extra people. I say this with the background that we are essentially fostering my 35 year old brother-in-law, who essentially hasn't had a stable home in 20 years or so and has some serious substance abuse issues.

True, it's not conclusive evidence, but she was on the pill and miscarried, but has had no other miscarriages in the other 17 pregnancies. The information given to her at that time by medical professionals, as well as by reading up on information provided by the manufacturer of her particular oral contraceptive was that there was a risk of miscarriage while on the pill, and so, she concluded that the miscarriage was caused by the pill. Not hard scientific fact, but certainly an interesting coincidence.

Like I said on the other thread, we don't know that she hasn't miscarried other times. She herself may not necessarily be aware that she's miscarried, and statistically, out of 17 successful pregnancies, I'm betting that she's had a few not get off the launchpad too.

That's interesting, since they live in a state where homeschooling is recognized and regulated, and all homeschooled children must pass state-mandated tests or risk being charged with truancy.
I wonder how he managed to fall through the cracks.
We all know that never happens in a public school system.
Also, it's only recently that colleges and universities have begun to accept homeschooled students, so perhaps it isn't that he doesn't have the necessary background or requirements for higher education, but was not accepted because of a bias on the part of the schools he applied to.

No one ever says that public school is perfect. It's not. At least he'd have the opportunity to be taught by people who would give him insight on things he wouldn't get from his parents.
It's possible that the schools were biased, but more possible that he just flat out wasn't qualified to get into their programs by the schooling he received.

This family can do as they like, but I'm equally as free to feel that it is irresponsible, especially in this point in time, to have that many kids. They may be able to afford them, and apparently they do so through the money he earns in his business, private donations, money they get from tv producers, and the fact that they pay no property taxes since their home is designated as a church.
But they can keep going on and having kids, I don't really care. I myself am the youngest of 6, a pretty large family. I am not advocating that they should be forced to stop. I am simply pointing out some of the reasons maybe that they should.

[Zyanya]

I'm not sure if this was directed to the person you replied to, or if you just mean "you" as people in general. If it's the former, I feel the need to point out that we don't attack other members, even on this board where the rules are a lot more relaxed. If it's the latter, then no worries. Still, if you could make things a little more clear in the future, we'd appreciate it.

The 'you' is directed at anyone who lives by that particular philosophy that I cited.

Anyone who thinks a woman 'needs' a husband to 'guide her through life' and subscribes to a philosophy that blames cabbage patch dolls for miscarriages is an idiot.

And if that makes me 'narrow-minded', I think I can live with that.

[Zyanya]

and how do you know this the CDC has not released the morbidity and mortality rates for abortion in 20 years

I pay attention.

I don't have to I saw them every day volunteering in a crisis pregnancy center that also provided post-abortion counciling. Or I could just ask my 22 year old co-worker who required a hysterectomy after her first trimester abortion after the doctor perforated her uterus 4 times during the procedure, she nearly bled to death on the way to the hospital. Or my sister who can also never have children due to a bad abortion last year.

Don't assume things about people you don't know

I know plenty about CPCs. They are havens of misinformation, dramatized horror stories, and sexist brainwashing.

and the breast cancer-abortion study was not just one study it was 17 different studies, from 17 different countries all with the same conclusion-the only one that disproved it was one done in the US by The CDC(who has something to gain by lying)

And conspiracy theories. Did I forget to mention that earlier? CPCs are all about the conspiracy theories. Which amuses me as they themselves are a conspiracy to spread misinformation and lies.

[Seshat]

On a semi related note, this is what I don't understand about my fellow pro-choicers. It's like, we're all for your right to choose, as long as you choose the type of lifestyle that the rest of us can all be proud of.

I was a SAHM for the first two years of my son's life(then his father and I divorced and he got custody)-you would not believe how many women were just shocked that I didn't immediately return to work, and kept telling me I was making a horrible mistake.

Allow me to join the chorus of pro-choicers who see being a stay at home mother as a perfectly valid choice.

about the same time they [the CDC] stopped releasing the morbidity and mortality rates for abortion
<snip>
It is not the "totally safe and harmless" procedure women are led to believe.

The CDC is not the only place in the world where that sort of information can be gained. I just did a quick Google search for 'abortion statistic .gov.au', and found several articles.

Admittedly, since our medical (and social) culture doesn't see abortion as such as huge issue as it is in some parts of the world, it seems that South Australia is the only state where abortions are reported separately from 'procedures which may result in abortion'. Still, in South Australia, 'less than one percent of women who had abortions experienced complications'.

Some Aussie abortion data.

Australia is a very small place, however. A similar search on a more populous First World country should provide a wealth of information.

Oh, and by the way? If abortion - or any medical procedure - is being touted as "totally safe and harmless", that's a lie. And none of the pro-choicers I hang out with would say such a thing.

We may well say that it has a lower risk of complication than pregnancy, and a lower chance of permanently changing your body: those two things are true. But "totally safe and harmless"? Bah. Never.

Why is it any better that those with pro-choice opinions are allowed to speak their piece unchecked, but someone with strong anti-choice opinions must stay silent?

I would strongly disagree with anyone speaking - or behaving - this way. I will respect another's opinions, and ask only that they also respect mine.

Or at least, that's what I try to do. I don't always succeed.

The pro-choice people are saying she is wrong to be having all these children and are forcing their own beliefs of birth control and abortion onto them, yet when it is suggested that the reason they are having all these children is because they belong to a group who want to eliminate the choice of birth control and abortion, then that becomes a major invasion of your rights?

Okay, let me try to sort this out.

I do think she's making bad decisions. I am willing to say so. If I was a close personal friend of hers, I would tell her so, and back up my opinion with my reasons.

In addition, if she didn't already have it, I'd provide her with the information for all forms of modern birth control and offer to take her to the gentlest, most respectful (of her patients) doctor I could find.

And I would stop there.

Whatever she decided, provided she had the information, would be her decision. Whatever she decided, I wouldn't ever raise the subject with her again. (Though if the subject was raised independently, I'd feel free to say my piece about my own life and my own decisions.)

However, I'm not a close personal friend of hers. Her life is none of my business. I may (and do) talk about her and women like her in the abstract, on a message board. But she'll almost certainly never see this. And if she does, or if some woman with similar ideals does, I see no problem in them finding out that if I were their friend, I'd ensure they had the chance to make a fully informed decision.

I do not see this as "forcing [my] own beliefs of birth control and abortion onto them". I see this as enabling them to make a fully informed decision.

Now, you (Ree) probably weren't talking about me - I hadn't spoken up in this thread yet. But if what I see as 'enabling a fully informed decision' is perceived as 'forcing my beliefs on others', I really would like to know.


So. To the other half of this. "they belong to a group who want to eliminate the choice of birth control and abortion, then that becomes a major invasion of your rights"

Yes, it is. I am for the choice. Whether it be the choice to have zero children, one child, or - yes - eighteen children, I believe women (and men) should have the right to make an informed choice.

Whether it be to stay at home and raise children, or to work, I believe that women (and men) should have the right to make an informed choice. (Though I do believe that if both parents are healthy and present, the family should at least attempt to be independent of welfare.)

Anyway: the type of group I find offensive are those that seek to prevent choice.

Their plan is not to go to their friends and say 'hey, I think you need to know these things to make an informed choice'.

Their plan isn't even to go to strangers and say 'hey, I think you need to know these things'.

Their plan is to make my choice impossible.

So yeah. I don't like that kind of group much.

[BlaqueKatt]

I know plenty about CPCs. They are havens of misinformation, dramatized horror stories, and sexist brainwashing.

good to know considering I was completely pro-choice at the time I worked there(as were 90% of the volunteers)-also completely non-religious, and even assisted women with making appointments at clinics, finding childcare if they already had children-I was usually sent as a chaperone to fend off the pro-life protesters and get the woman to her appointment unmolested, and staying with them for several hours if there was no one else to take care of them. Our "jobs" were to give them support whatever decision they made, we were trained that 95% of the women that called or walked through our doors had already made their decision, and it was not allowed to question their decision-only to support them, and remind them it was their decision, as only they knew their situation. We were funded in part by private donations, and a very liberal church(one who saw the right to choose as part of God's gift of free will-and that exercising the right given by God was not wrong).


again don't assume things

[Zyanya]

good to know considering I was completely pro-choice at the time I worked there(as were 90% of the volunteers)-also completely non-religious, and even assisted women with making appointments at clinics, finding childcare if they already had children-I was usually sent as a chaperone to fend off the pro-life protesters and get the woman to her appointment unmolested, and staying with them for several hours if there was no one else to take care of them.

That was not a CPC. That was an abortion clinic. There is a difference. Abortion clinics do not call themselves CPCs, though some CPCs masquerade as abortion clinics in an attempt to scare women out of aborting. If you were pro-choice and had worked at a clinic, you would be aware of this information. You would also not be passing on the falsehoods that you have been, such as that pathetic book which is on the same 'factual' level as 'the silent scream'. http://www.silentscream.org/

For the hell of it, I have to ask. What exactly do you believe the CDC stands to "gain" by lying about abortions? Please, amuse me.

[Ree]

I'd ensure they had the chance to make a fully informed decision.

I do not see this as "forcing [my] own beliefs of birth control and abortion onto them". I see this as enabling them to make a fully informed decision.

Who is to say these women need any education on the methods of birth control available just because we live in a society that has decided birth control is a necessity?

People go on about the "misogynist" husbands, and the "Stepford" mothers, all bowing to their whims, as if any sane or intelligent woman would not choose to actually give birth multiple times.

Everyone feels the need to educate them, but nobody wants to look at or validate their opinion that they do not need birth control in their life, as if they are ignorant just because they choose to procreate.

Who is to say they are not happy with their choice to have children and just be a mother?
Some women just love children and really do love all that comes along with motherhood.

I happen to be one of those women.

My reason for wanting children had nothing to do with my religion or anything else.
I just really love children.

Quite honestly, I had wanted a large family, myself. I was only blessed with one child, though.

I have chosen to be a mother in another way by providing a home to teen girls in the foster care system.
It's not the same as having my own children, and it is really hard and stressful much of the time, but I do have to say it has its moments.

[CancelMyService]

If this was a family with say, 6 or 8 or hell even 10 kids I can understand the whole "they choose to have a large family" argument but I would think most people find eighteen to be a bit excessive.

Also it's not as if they're taking a moral stand against birth control but more continuing the act of procreation and leaving the end result up to God rather than the usual biological result of two sets of naughty parts interacting.

That's what bothers me the most: folks who live their entire lives based on "God's will". What kind of education are their kids getting when they are being taught by people who seemingly don't realize that babies aren't wished into being by the Lord?

I grew up in an super religious family and the Duggars just send my spider sense off the charts. Having faith is one thing, being devoted to the point where you have your wife in a near constant state of pregnancy becase you believe God wills it is another.

[Amethyst Hunter]

Why is it any better that those with pro-choice opinions are allowed to speak their piece unchecked, but someone with strong anti-choice opinions must stay silent?

The pro-choice people are saying she is wrong to be having all these children and are forcing their own beliefs of birth control and abortion onto them, yet when it is suggested that the reason they are having all these children is because they belong to a group who want to eliminate the choice of birth control and abortion, then that becomes a major invasion of your rights?

...I don't know why people are so worried (re: theocracy)...

Last time I looked, it was *risky* to say you were pro-choice - depending on the area you live in - because sure as donuts come powdered someone is going to attack you for that. Perhaps not physically, but that, too, is always a possibility.

I'm sorry to say that I have met VERY few pro-life people who are willing to discuss the subject in calm and respectful terms (most of the PLs I know and can talk with are actually from this board; I know a lot less people IRL) - the minute the words "pro-choice" exit one's mouth, the accusations start flying.

Generally speaking (and not necessarily applicable to anyone here), pro-lifers are more than happy to spread outright lies and misinformation about certain subjects; when pro-choicers call them on that the pro-lifers get mad and try to shout them down. The big difference between pro-choice and pro-life is that pro-choice is NOT trying to force anything on anyone. NOWHERE has this been proven or shown to even exist. There is a reason why *no* self-proclaimed pro-choice groups are listed on government watch lists as bona fide domestic terrorists or hate groups.

Pro-life, on the other hand, has been obsessively throwing up roadblocks to choice every chance they get (and some of them also happily squash efforts that would actually help working families or childcare or such - so much for 'family values'), and part of the reason why there is such furor over this subject is because pro-life has been able to muddy the waters with their misinformation and deceptive tactics, thus confusing and disempowering people of their God-given ability to think for themselves. (Religious brainwashing doesn't count as thinking. There is a difference between practicing a faith faithfully and using that religion as an excuse for everything. And, frankly, given the record of abuse in ALL organized religions, I'm inclined to distrust claims of faith by people who say "God told us to do this/It's God's will" without evidence to back it up. In other words, 'faith without works is dead.')

Seshat (who said things much better than I could) pointed out that most of us pro-choicers don't have a problem with people living their own lives by their own beliefs, even if we think those beliefs are incredibly messed-up. We do, however, get very angry when the people with those beliefs try to forcibly extend them to the rest of us via ludicrous laws, harassment, and even outright violence.

No, the Duggars have not, to my knowledge, ever engaged in any of this type of behavior. But I don't believe that what they're doing is necessarily kosher, either - especially since the younger kids are basically being spoonfed something that they're not encouraged to question. My SIL is staunchly pro-life and even SHE thinks they're overboard. I'd say at the very least that their activities are at best questionable.

As for theocracy, Boozy summed it up well, but let me take it even further. The type of dominionists we're dealing with here are some of the very worst. These are the people who believe all that crap about those horrible "Left Behind" books and think that The Handmaid's Tale is a how-to-guide, and who would love nothing more than to make that hell-on-earth come true. The next POTUS will very likely get to choose a couple of Supreme Court Justices, which means an entire generation will grow up under the laws formulated by that batch of justices. Get malicious people in there, and the noose tightens that much more.

Worse, there is disturbing evidence that these dominionists have infiltrated the US military, and you put a bunch of literally trigger-happy dominionists together with a dominionist-friendly Commander-In-Chief...yes, this IS a recipe for a total, literal apocalypse. I have friends who literally had panic attacks in 2004 when Dictator II's camp snuck in for a second round. Hell, *I* was terrified and horrified that people allowed themselves to be snowballed by these scumbags. Now look at where we are. I honestly *pray* that we *can* get the current crop out come January '09, now that they've had nearly a decade to solidify their power...

So yes - anyone who's aware of it is absolutely right to be afraid of theocracy.

[Ree]

being devoted to the point where you have your wife in a near constant state of pregnancy

Once again assuming that the woman is just some mindless baby machine and the husband is the one making all the decisions.

Geez, people...either women are intelligent beings capable of making decisions regarding their body, or they are slaves to the will of men. Which is it?

The husband doesn't keep his wife pregnant. They choose together to have children.

I really am amazed by the assumption that the woman is a brainwashed piece of property owned by the man, and she has no say in anything, as if no rational woman would choose to have babies.

[Zyanya]

Once again assuming that the woman is just some mindless baby machine and the husband is the one making all the decisions.

Not an assumption.

That is what the philosopher they subscribe to constantly spouts and wants to enforce on the rest of the US. And is succeeding in getting his viewpoints added to the curriculum of PUBLIC schools under the guise of 'character education'.

THAT is why these folks concern us.

Because they teach "that the woman is a brainwashed piece of property owned by the man, and she has no say in anything".

You keep ignoring that part of it.

Everyone feels the need to educate them, but nobody wants to look at or validate their opinion that they do not need birth control in their life, as if they are ignorant just because they choose to procreate.

When she espouses the falsehood that she does - birth control is responsible for miscarriages and is a bad thing - then yes, she is ignorant and should be educated. Then, if she continues to make the decision that she does not wish to use birth control, that is her choice.

[blas87]

To me, this is not a family wherein the man forces the woman to have child after child. They agreed to have a large family. And a big KUDOS to them for staying out of debt and living comfortably. While 18 children is....quite a lot, ok, too many...if they can afford it, let's leave them alone.

Let's not jump the gun on how the husband and wife see each other until we get proof that she's been forced to have this many kids.

Just leave them be. Just remember, my child-free/anti-child/pro-choice friends.....they are not hurting anyone. We chose to be childfree or pro-choice and have to deal with being tormented and chastized for our opinons, so you know how it feels...why treat someone else that way? Especially when they are not forcing it on anyone else!

[Myra]

Okay the Duggars were not sought out by a few interveiwers because of this 18th child she is pregnant with. They have something like 4 or 5 specials on TLC and DiscoveryHealth, one of which features the finishing of the house they live in now which was paid for by TLC. So no, they don't live off the government.

But my point is this: If they didn't want me to snark on them, they wouldn't whore themselves and their children out on national television.

That being said: I DO NOT agree with the fact that the girls are basically the moms in this family. All Mom appears to do is be pregnant, give birth, nurse for a few months, then get pregnant again. Oh yeah, she also claims to homeschool the kids. The boys take the trash out or something, I don't know. All I know is on the shows, (I've watched each one) I never see a little J'Boy cleaning, fixing supper, or helping fold clothes. No, they're outside playing or the oldest boy is following dad around worshipping the ground he walks on.

OF COURSE the TV show and interviews are going to make them look rosy and perfect. Otherwise they'd never agree to the show or interview thus bringing in the ratings.

OF COURSE I think they are well-behaved. I have never heard anything differently from folks who've run into them. You'd be well-behaved too if you were brainwashed. But statistics generally prevail, so somebody's gonna flee the compound and hopefully write a book.

We are past the era where we needed 15 kids to help run the farm. I do agree that they have the freedom to procreate all day long, since this is the USA and that is Ma Duggar's choice. But if you put yourself on TV, I'm gonna have an opinion on ya. And I think the vapid look in her eyes creeps me the hell out.

[Rapscallion]

Not an assumption.

That is what the philosopher they subscribe to constantly spouts and wants to enforce on the rest of the US. And is succeeding in getting his viewpoints added to the curriculum of PUBLIC schools under the guise of 'character education'.

Interesting. Got a citation for that?

Rapscallion

[JuniorMintz]

All I know is on the shows, (I've watched each one) I never see a little J'Boy cleaning, fixing supper, or helping fold clothes.

I don't watch the show often but my mom is a big fan and I *do* remember seeing a few clips of the boys helping out- one that sticks out in my mind for some reason is of one of the little boys cooking biscuits and helping with breakfast.

(That's all. I didn't have much to add this time, did I? )