Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Michelle Duggar Pregnant with 18th Child

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

pennquaker09

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Nov 2, 2007
Messages
1,943
Date: 5/30/2008 3:41:27 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Penn, I''ll have to disagree with you, too. We have freedom of religion in this country and parents have every right to raise their children in their religion. When children become adults, they have the choice of embracing that religion or rejecting it, plain and simple. Please give people credit for being able to make that choice once they are on their own. I am sure you will teach your children certain principles that are deeply important to you. Any parent who deeply loves their children will want to pass along the principles by which they live. I fully support your right to do that just as I support the Duggar''s rights. I would think you would be very sensitive to discrimination against people for religion or lifestyle choices.
I don''t disagree with you. I think I said that I understand that some parents want their children to have religious instruction with their schooling. This is why many choose to homeschool. I fully support any parents decision to homeschool, including the Duggars. However, it''s just looks like religion is embedded in all aspects of their life. It''s kind of like they''re in a bubble.
 

diamondfan

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 17, 2005
Messages
11,016
Imbuing your home life with your values and beliefs is normal, those can be religious and otherwise. I suppose in home schooling a parent can exercise some license as to the content of any religious education that a school cannot due to the separation of church and state. I do not think one view should be taught in schools unless you are in a parochial setting. I think a comparative overview with options for more depth is great. But I think parents should take the reins as to religious instruction, depth and breadth, and that is also what religious school is for.
 

VRBeauty

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
10,168
Hi everyone! It''s my first time on this thread, and I just can''t believe all the fun I''ve been missing!

Actually the reason I haven''t bothered with this thread before is that the I just had a gut-level revulsion to the Duggar''s story when I read about #17 in the papers last year. That''s it, the unvarnished truth. "Selfish" was the first thought that came to my mind, probably followed closely by self-seeking. Mind you these are my biases coming through -- I haven''t watched their TV show (didn''t know they had one) or checked out their website. And although environmentalism plays a large role in my life (as does faith), it probably didn''t play a large role in my reaction.

I just can''t imagine why anyone would want to have that many children given the time, energy, and expense of raising them all. Why, if you wanted such a large family, part of it couldn''t be made up of children that you adopted, because otherwise they wouldn''t have a family at all. I know large families were the norm in other times. My mother was one of nine children. I''m sure she loves all of her siblings and and doesn''t begrudge any of them anything, but I''ve also heard her talk about how quickly she had to grow up to help keep her family together in difficult times and how she played a mother role when her own mother took ill... and it isn''t all fond memories she''s sharing.

Of course there are many, many worse family situations and there are many parents who should never have had a single child. I don''t mean to imply that the Duggars are in that strata. And those kids will probably have a wonderful sibling support system to fall back on when they grow up! I just don''t think the parents are taking their existing children''s needs into account in their decision to keep "accepting" new babies as long as they are "given" to them.
 

surfgirl

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
4,438
Date: 5/31/2008 2:45:57 AM
Author: MINIMS
Hi everyone! It''s my first time on this thread, and I just can''t believe all the fun I''ve been missing!

Actually the reason I haven''t bothered with this thread before is that the I just had a gut-level revulsion to the Duggar''s story when I read about #17 in the papers last year. That''s it, the unvarnished truth. ''Selfish'' was the first thought that came to my mind, probably followed closely by self-seeking. Mind you these are my biases coming through -- I haven''t watched their TV show (didn''t know they had one) or checked out their website. And although environmentalism plays a large role in my life (as does faith), it probably didn''t play a large role in my reaction.

I just can''t imagine why anyone would want to have that many children given the time, energy, and expense of raising them all. Why, if you wanted such a large family, part of it couldn''t be made up of children that you adopted, because otherwise they wouldn''t have a family at all. I know large families were the norm in other times. My mother was one of nine children. I''m sure she loves all of her siblings and and doesn''t begrudge any of them anything, but I''ve also heard her talk about how quickly she had to grow up to help keep her family together in difficult times and how she played a mother role when her own mother took ill... and it isn''t all fond memories she''s sharing.

Of course there are many, many worse family situations and there are many parents who should never have had a single child. I don''t mean to imply that the Duggars are in that strata. And those kids will probably have a wonderful sibling support system to fall back on when they grow up! I just don''t think the parents are taking their existing children''s needs into account in their decision to keep ''accepting'' new babies as long as they are ''given'' to them.
MINIMS, WORD! to your entire post, well said. I also am repulsed by the Duggars. To me, it''s incredibly selfish, self-centered and egotistical to have 18 children. It''s beyond ridiculous. I''m particularly disgusted by these parents because I''m in Zambia right now working, and to me, your comment about adoption rings so true. If the Duggars and people like them, want a large family, great, then have one or two of your own and adopt some of the massive numbers of orphans that abound in our world. There is simply no need to continue popping out Duggar offspring when there are so many family-less kids out there. When I think of all the kids here in Zambia who have nothing and nobody, who could be given a loving home, it just disgusts me all the more to read about a family like this one. We all have a responsibility to our planet. No getting around that. You can hide your head in the sand if you like, but we''re all in this together whether we like it or not. And ridiculously large families are just a selfish burden on the planet''s ever-shrinking resources.

OK, I''m done now. There''s a reason I''ve stayed off this thread for the most part...but MINIMS''s post prompted me to get this off my chest.
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
55,343
The Duggars have no more responsibility to the world''s orphans than you or I do. Has everyone here done their part to adopt orphans? Please don''t use that scenario to condemn them unless you have done so.
 

Skippy123

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 24, 2006
Messages
24,299
Date: 6/1/2008 4:18:39 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
The Duggars have no more responsibility to the world''s orphans than you or I do. Has everyone here done their part to adopt orphans? Please don''t use that scenario to condemn them unless you have done so.
agreed DS.
 

FrekeChild

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
19,456
My parents did. My aunt and uncle adopted two. My other aunt and uncle adopted one along with three biological children. Does that count?

If we have kids, we'll adopt. Why? Because there are children out there who need a family. And being an adoptee myself, I know what it's like.

None of my friends have kids except one and hers is biological. But I know that my best friends will adopt if they decide to have children.
 

VRBeauty

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
10,168
Date: 6/1/2008 4:18:39 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
The Duggars have no more responsibility to the world''s orphans than you or I do. Has everyone here done their part to adopt orphans? Please don''t use that scenario to condemn them unless you have done so.
Really, I think the adoption question is a little different for parents who have just a few children and a couple that has decided on an extraordinarily large family.
 

iheartscience

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
12,111
Date: 6/1/2008 4:51:39 PM
Author: MINIMS
Date: 6/1/2008 4:18:39 PM

Author: diamondseeker2006

The Duggars have no more responsibility to the world''s orphans than you or I do. Has everyone here done their part to adopt orphans? Please don''t use that scenario to condemn them unless you have done so.
Really, I think the adoption question is a little different for parents who have just a few children and a couple that has decided on an extraordinarily large family.
I agree. There''s a big difference from having 2 or 3 biological children and having 18 biological children.

However, I think adopting isn''t part of the Duggars'' religious ideology as "Quiverfull" Christians. I Googled Quiverfull because someone mentioned early on in the thread that that''s what the Duggars are, and the information and the articles about it just blow my mind.

The Quiverfull Christians believe they should just keep having kids forever and ever, even if they''re 60 years old, because "God open and closes the womb." (Incidentally, I wonder if the Duggars will keep having children if they start having children who have issues because of Michelle Duggar''s advanced maternal age.)

It''s a very misogynist ideology (women are just supposed to be mothers, they are supposed to be submissive to their husbands, etc.) and some of the stuff they believe is really just plain crazy. Yikes.
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
55,343
Date: 6/1/2008 4:51:39 PM
Author: MINIMS

Date: 6/1/2008 4:18:39 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
The Duggars have no more responsibility to the world''s orphans than you or I do. Has everyone here done their part to adopt orphans? Please don''t use that scenario to condemn them unless you have done so.
Really, I think the adoption question is a little different for parents who have just a few children and a couple that has decided on an extraordinarily large family.
I disagree. If the world''s orphans need help, I don''t think it matters one iota how many children people have. if the Duggars have a humanitarian obligation to help orphans, then everyone else does, too. The number of children one has should have no bearing on that.
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
55,343
Date: 6/1/2008 5:09:20 PM
Author: thing2of2


I agree. There's a big difference from having 2 or 3 biological children and having 18 biological children.

However, I think adopting isn't part of the Duggars' religious ideology as 'Quiverfull' Christians. I Googled Quiverfull because someone mentioned early on in the thread that that's what the Duggars are, and the information and the articles about it just blow my mind.

The Quiverfull Christians believe they should just keep having kids forever and ever, even if they're 60 years old, because 'God open and closes the womb.' (Incidentally, I wonder if the Duggars will keep having children if they start having children who have issues because of Michelle Duggar's advanced maternal age.)

It's a very misogynist ideology (women are just supposed to be mothers, they are supposed to be submissive to their husbands, etc.) and some of the stuff they believe is really just plain crazy. Yikes.
While I may not practice or agree with everything they do, I respect their choice. I think there are other religions where women are little more than possesions, which is certainly not the case here. So if you go down that path, you'd have to cover some other major world religions and their view of women. Many women are oppressed and have no freedom. I have little knowledge of the Duggars actually, but it would be my impression that she loves her husband and children and is not oppressed by her husband.
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
55,343
Date: 6/1/2008 4:24:33 PM
Author: FrekeChild
My parents did. My aunt and uncle adopted two. My other aunt and uncle adopted one along with three biological children. Does that count?

If we have kids, we''ll adopt. Why? Because there are children out there who need a family. And being an adoptee myself, I know what it''s like.

None of my friends have kids except one and hers is biological. But I know that my best friends will adopt if they decide to have children.
Adoption is a great privilege, and I hope you will have that joy of adopting!
 

Skippy123

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 24, 2006
Messages
24,299
Okay, why are people opposed to them???? I see them as a family that loves their children and wants to raise them the best way they can. I guess I just don't want people to tell me how to raise my kids as long as they don't harm anyone including themselves, which I don't see them doing.
 

iheartscience

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
12,111
Date: 6/1/2008 5:14:10 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Date: 6/1/2008 5:09:20 PM

Author: thing2of2

I agree. There''s a big difference from having 2 or 3 biological children and having 18 biological children.

However, I think adopting isn''t part of the Duggars'' religious ideology as ''Quiverfull'' Christians. I Googled Quiverfull because someone mentioned early on in the thread that that''s what the Duggars are, and the information and the articles about it just blow my mind.

The Quiverfull Christians believe they should just keep having kids forever and ever, even if they''re 60 years old, because ''God open and closes the womb.'' (Incidentally, I wonder if the Duggars will keep having children if they start having children who have issues because of Michelle Duggar''s advanced maternal age.)

It''s a very misogynist ideology (women are just supposed to be mothers, they are supposed to be submissive to their husbands, etc.) and some of the stuff they believe is really just plain crazy. Yikes.
While I may not practice or agree with everything they do, I respect their choice. I think there are other religions where women are little more than possesions, which is certainly not the case here. So if you go down that path, you''d have to cover some other major world religions and their view of women. Many women are oppressed and have no freedom. I have little knowledge of the Duggars actually, but it would be my impression that she loves her husband and children and is not oppressed by her husband.
I don''t respect their choice, just like I don''t respect the choice of any other people who abide by a misogynist or otherwise oppressive lifestyle, whether they justify it with religion or not. For example, I also don''t respect the choice of Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist church to push their disgusting agenda. Same goes for the FLDS.

Plus, even if Michelle Duggar loves her children and her husband, that doesn''t mean she''s not oppressed. I also realize that women everywhere are oppressed by many other religions, and I dislike and disagree with their views as well.
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
55,343
Date: 6/1/2008 5:29:04 PM
Author: thing2of2

Date: 6/1/2008 5:14:10 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 6/1/2008 5:09:20 PM

Author: thing2of2

I agree. There''s a big difference from having 2 or 3 biological children and having 18 biological children.

However, I think adopting isn''t part of the Duggars'' religious ideology as ''Quiverfull'' Christians. I Googled Quiverfull because someone mentioned early on in the thread that that''s what the Duggars are, and the information and the articles about it just blow my mind.

The Quiverfull Christians believe they should just keep having kids forever and ever, even if they''re 60 years old, because ''God open and closes the womb.'' (Incidentally, I wonder if the Duggars will keep having children if they start having children who have issues because of Michelle Duggar''s advanced maternal age.)

It''s a very misogynist ideology (women are just supposed to be mothers, they are supposed to be submissive to their husbands, etc.) and some of the stuff they believe is really just plain crazy. Yikes.
While I may not practice or agree with everything they do, I respect their choice. I think there are other religions where women are little more than possesions, which is certainly not the case here. So if you go down that path, you''d have to cover some other major world religions and their view of women. Many women are oppressed and have no freedom. I have little knowledge of the Duggars actually, but it would be my impression that she loves her husband and children and is not oppressed by her husband.
I don''t respect their choice, just like I don''t respect the choice of any other people who abide by a misogynist or otherwise oppressive lifestyle, whether they justify it with religion or not. For example, I also don''t respect the choice of Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist church to push their disgusting agenda. Same goes for the FLDS.

Plus, even if Michelle Duggar loves her children and her husband, that doesn''t mean she''s not oppressed. I also realize that women everywhere are oppressed by many other religions, and I dislike and disagree with their views as well.
That''s fine. We can all have opinions, that''s for sure. But I think Mrs. Duggar has made the choice to live the life she is in. I do not think she is kept there unwillingly like a cult or something. That family is not pushing any agenda on anyone. They are living out their personal preferences for family life just as each of us does. No comparison to situations where people are held against their will.
 

iheartscience

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
12,111
Date: 6/1/2008 5:43:12 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Date: 6/1/2008 5:29:04 PM

Author: thing2of2


Date: 6/1/2008 5:14:10 PM

Author: diamondseeker2006


Date: 6/1/2008 5:09:20 PM


Author: thing2of2


I agree. There''s a big difference from having 2 or 3 biological children and having 18 biological children.


However, I think adopting isn''t part of the Duggars'' religious ideology as ''Quiverfull'' Christians. I Googled Quiverfull because someone mentioned early on in the thread that that''s what the Duggars are, and the information and the articles about it just blow my mind.


The Quiverfull Christians believe they should just keep having kids forever and ever, even if they''re 60 years old, because ''God open and closes the womb.'' (Incidentally, I wonder if the Duggars will keep having children if they start having children who have issues because of Michelle Duggar''s advanced maternal age.)


It''s a very misogynist ideology (women are just supposed to be mothers, they are supposed to be submissive to their husbands, etc.) and some of the stuff they believe is really just plain crazy. Yikes.
While I may not practice or agree with everything they do, I respect their choice. I think there are other religions where women are little more than possesions, which is certainly not the case here. So if you go down that path, you''d have to cover some other major world religions and their view of women. Many women are oppressed and have no freedom. I have little knowledge of the Duggars actually, but it would be my impression that she loves her husband and children and is not oppressed by her husband.

I don''t respect their choice, just like I don''t respect the choice of any other people who abide by a misogynist or otherwise oppressive lifestyle, whether they justify it with religion or not. For example, I also don''t respect the choice of Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist church to push their disgusting agenda. Same goes for the FLDS.


Plus, even if Michelle Duggar loves her children and her husband, that doesn''t mean she''s not oppressed. I also realize that women everywhere are oppressed by many other religions, and I dislike and disagree with their views as well.
That''s fine. We can all have opinions, that''s for sure. But I think Mrs. Duggar has made the choice to live the life she is in. I do not think she is kept there unwillingly like a cult or something. That family is not pushing any agenda on anyone. They are living out their personal preferences for family life just as each of us does. No comparison to situations where people are held against their will.
I don''t think she''s being held against her will, either.

I wonder about her children, especially the girls. It seems like they have no choice or options because of how they are being raised and educated. Same goes for the girls and women in the FLDS.
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
55,343
Date: 6/1/2008 6:14:17 PM
Author: thing2of2


I don''t think she''s being held against her will, either.

I wonder about her children, especially the girls. It seems like they have no choice or options because of how they are being raised and educated. Same goes for the girls and women in the FLDS.
I believe the FLDS situation is totally different. Mrs. Duggar is married to ONE husband and I have no reason to think this was not her personal choice in life. I do not think that about the young girls in the FLDS group. I think they are forced into marriage and that they are forced to have sex against their will since the men are allowed to have multiple wives. Last I heard, I thought that was illegal. Again, totally different than the Duggar family.
 

Tacori E-ring

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
20,022
Date: 6/1/2008 4:24:33 PM
Author: FrekeChild
My parents did. My aunt and uncle adopted two. My other aunt and uncle adopted one along with three biological children. Does that count?


If we have kids, we''ll adopt. Why? Because there are children out there who need a family. And being an adoptee myself, I know what it''s like.


None of my friends have kids except one and hers is biological. But I know that my best friends will adopt if they decide to have children.
Forgive me if I am wrong but I thought you said you were going to adopt b/c of your BF''s medical issues and the fact you don''t know your medical background. I think adoption is a great choice and have relatives who have adopted or were adopted but I think it is unfair to deny anyone the right to have a biological child. It doesn''t make someone selfish. At least I don''t *feel* selfish for having a child instead of adopting. This is a choice my DH and I made. I also don''t think my friends are selfish for having biological children. I agree with DS 100%. It is not the Duggar''s responsibility to adopt *if* they want more than x number of children.
 

FrekeChild

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
19,456
Date: 6/1/2008 7:13:29 PM
Author: Tacori E-ring
Date: 6/1/2008 4:24:33 PM
Author: FrekeChild
My parents did. My aunt and uncle adopted two. My other aunt and uncle adopted one along with three biological children. Does that count?

If we have kids, we'll adopt. Why? Because there are children out there who need a family. And being an adoptee myself, I know what it's like.

None of my friends have kids except one and hers is biological. But I know that my best friends will adopt if they decide to have children.
Forgive me if I am wrong but I thought you said you were going to adopt b/c of your BF's medical issues and the fact you don't know your medical background. I think adoption is a great choice and have relatives who have adopted or were adopted but I think it is unfair to deny anyone the right to have a biological child. It doesn't make someone selfish. At least I don't *feel* selfish for having a child instead of adopting. This is a choice my DH and I made. I also don't think my friends are selfish for having biological children. I agree with DS 100%. It is not the Duggar's responsibility to adopt *if* they want more than x number of children.
There is a multitude of reasons, all of which apply. Certainly the medical reasons are the ones in which are hardest to argue with (for those of *you*-namely relatives- who will ask about when we're having kids in the future) but being an adoptee myself has made me feel the situation on a different level. We don't feel the need to pass on our DNA, so adoption would be the ONLY way we'd have kids. And we'd want kids so we could pass on our coolness in an experiment of nature vs nuture.
So while I might cite different reasons at different times, they all apply at all times.

I don't judge any of the members of this board for having biological children, nor do I in real life. But when you put yourself on TV with the pull for audiences being the number of children you have, and will have biologically, it leaves me feeling sick inside. In a lot of ways they are exploiting their children, their values and their religion, and I can't help that that leaves me feeling disgusted.

No, the Duggars don't have to adopt, but I would be SO happy if they had given homes to 18 or even 10-heck even just a couple of children who would be orphans. Can you imagine how selfless they would seem for bringing that many orphans into their home and supporting them?

ETA: the FLDS thing could get totally philosophical...
 

Kaleigh

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
29,570
Adoption is such a wonderful thing, and am glad I have first hand knowledge of what it''s like to adopt. My SIL and BIL adopted my beautiful nephew. Unless you''ve been there, done that, you just don''t know. I am blessed to know both sides. I don''t see how one trumps the other. I honestly was ready to adopt. I always thought I would never be able to carry to full term , as my Mom had terrible problems, it''s a miracle I am here.


Am I selfish, that I went on to have my 2 beautiful children??? Of course not!!


We all have diffrent perspectives, different vantage points. That''s what makes PS.

But on this, I have to say, I don''t agree, and that''s fine. The dialogue alone has been enlightening.
 

Tacori E-ring

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
20,022
Well Freke, I did kind of feel like you were judging those of use who DID want to pass our DNA on. I haven''t nor do I plan to adopt but let me tell you having a child (pregnant/child birth) is an amazing and powerful journey. Only those who have can understand.

I think the fact that the public *wants* to see their life is what should make you feel sick. After all of there wasn''t an interest there wouldn''t be their shows. No one knows their intentions (of being in the public eye). I really don''t believe they are having children JUST to capitalize off them.
 

FrekeChild

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
19,456
Date: 6/2/2008 7:59:15 AM
Author: Tacori E-ring
Well Freke, I did kind of feel like you were judging those of use who DID want to pass our DNA on. I haven't nor do I plan to adopt but let me tell you having a child (pregnant/child birth) is an amazing and powerful journey. Only those who have can understand.

I think the fact that the public *wants* to see their life is what should make you feel sick. After all of there wasn't an interest there wouldn't be their shows. No one knows their intentions (of being in the public eye). I really don't believe they are having children JUST to capitalize off them.
I'm truly sorry I made you feel that way Tacori, that was not my intention AT ALL. I'm very jaded about having children in general (like you couldn't tell!). Here's a small look into why:

One of my brothers has 4 kids, 15, 13, 11 and almost 2. They can afford to support them financially, but my SIL has zero interest in any of them. She literally will send my brother and the three older kids out to visit my parents and I, while giving the baby to her mom for the time my brother is gone. I'm not sure what the deal is there, but it leaves me feeling very icky. She is the most self centered spoiled B, I have ever met in my life.

My other brother I've complained about before, he lives in LA with his wife, his 5 year old, his 2 year old and his newborn-in a tiny one bedroom apartment. I don't know where all of them sleep. This is entirely by choice, they've had an offer from my dad to have 20k for a down payment on a house in New Mexico, and an offer from his mom for a free 5 bedroom house in Tennessee. But due to my brother's ego and other issues, he chooses instead to go further into debt every month because he can't afford to pay even the monthly bills, and she doesn't work so she can take care of the kids. His children will be homeschooled by his wife (I mentioned this a little earlier.) I know that they love their children, its more the finances that are the problem here, and I believe it's causing a rift in their marriage.

BF's sister has two sons, one 19 and one 13 by two different men. She is involved with a guy who won't commit and they've been together for 3 years. The older has been arrested a couple of times, while the younger has also been in some legal trouble as well. The little one is constantly in trouble in school and the older one has been kicked out of their house too many times to count, as well as having the cops called on him. Unfortunately, BF is often pulled into this as the authoritative figure because his sis's BF has taken more of a friend role. She doesn't enforce any rules she's made and her kids are both spoiled and get away with just about everything possible. She's come very close to telling me that she regrets having them both, although she hasn't come out and said it.

So maybe that gives you a little look into why my personal views are the way they are. The above are another reason for my lack of desire for children.

I hope you believe me when I say that I didn't mean to make it sound like I judged you or thought having biological children was somehow a detriment to society or whatever. My problem lies within the numbers of the Duggars and the lack of caring/love/attention paid to my present and future relatives to their children. From what I can tell from you, you seem to love Tessa very very much and care about her deeply-and that's awesome. That's what I got from my mom, even though she isn't my biological mother. Again, I'm sorry, and it was not my intention to make you feel judged for choosing to have and raise a child.

As for this, "I think the fact that the public *wants* to see their life is what should make you feel sick. After all of there wasn't an interest there wouldn't be their shows. No one knows their intentions (of being in the public eye). I really don't believe they are having children JUST to capitalize off them."

I completely agree. I don't think they are having children exclusively to capitalize off of them either. I guess a lot of it is their beliefs, and some of it is selfish. I'm also disgusted with the general public being interested in them as well. It makes me wonder how they gauge interest in things like this anyway.

Does this help clarify things?

ETA: The main reason BF's sister's BF won't commit is because of the kids. He has said this several times. I don't think he wants to be left legally liable if they do something stupid. Also, the older one has threatened him with a knife before. I should also mention that after that happened, the older one was sent to live with his father (the younger boy's father died before he was born). Also, he is a high school dropout and hasn't held down a job for more than a week-EVER.
 

Tacori E-ring

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
20,022
Freke, it does clarify. I can understand why you are spooked. But you have to remember *you* are not like your SIL, brother, etc...I don''t think there is ANYTHING wrong with deciding not to have children. I really don''t. It is such a personal decision that everyone has the right to decide. I guess that is why this thread bothers me so much. I try not to judge people based on these types of decisions. If you have the right NOT to have children they have the right to have 18. We don''t know what it is like behind closed doors. Maybe you are right. Maybe they are neglected. Maybe some of these other people are right and they are happy, well adjusted children. We will *never* know. I just do not like intolerance. It makes me angry. I am not religious (so trust me that is not why I think this way). I just think with everything wrong in this world Michelle Duggar is the LEAST OF OUR PROBLEMS!

I did feel attacked. Maybe it was the comment about how your best friends will adopt (like THAT is a better choice than having biological children). Obviously like everything in life there are a lot of gray areas. For the record DH and I love Tessa more than anything in the world. She is the *best* thing I have ever done in my life.

Some of the arguments against them in this thread are ridiculous (not directed at you Freke). I know I am not the only one who feels this way. I guess I couldn''t bite my tongue any longer. But trust me...this is me holding back
 

FrekeChild

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
19,456
I''m glad that it clarifies. And I really am sorry that you felt attacked-that was by definitely DEFINITELY not my intention in the slightest! I hope that no one else feels that way either.

I agree that it is a very personal choice. I certainly didn''t mean for you to feel attacked in any way-and definitely not by the part that seems to have had the biggest effect. In all actuality, the reason my best friends would adopt (if they have kids at all) is extremely selfish, or if they decided to have biological children they would do it by way of surrogate. Really, I don''t want to get started on that situation, because while I love my friends (they are male and female-so surrogate is not necessary) I don''t agree with why they would choose that. But as we seems to agree, it''s all a very personal issue and people are allowed to make whatever choices they wish.

I actually just got out of the shower and I thought about this thread the whole time (hope that''s not creepy-just the whole best thinking in the shower thing). My conclusion is that it is a personal choice, and people can do as they choose. With the Duggars I feel less that it''s about choice and more about acceptance. Yes, they''ve made the choice to follow the faith they follow, but I guess my problem (besides the homeschooling curriculum thing) is that I lead my life very much based on my choices. I weigh pros and cons very carefully before I make a lot of life changing decisions-and to me having 18 biological children is a huge choice that I think would take a lot of thought, and never be a passive thing (or things!) that I just let happen to me. Does that make any sense?

Partially this may have to do with my lack of religious base, because giving in to just accept what happens to you is a very religious idea, while choice takes thought and decision making. I don''t know, my head is going around in circles on all of this.

I just wish that all of the children of the world were loved and taken care of-whether that is by their biological parents or by adoptive parents. If the Duggars had chosen to have 9 children biologically and then chosen to adopt 9 others-that would almost take out an orphanage. You know?

I just don''t get it. But it''s not for me to get, because in all honesty, it does not affect me in my day to day life. And regardless of my stances on this subject, I also do not like intolerance. One thing I did not mention is that BF''s sister''s boys are half one race and then quarters of two other races. She is half and half and has essentially taught them to be racist against the races that she is of, and this is the trait that bothers me the most because it is one of the things I have to deal with whenever I am around them. I can''t tell you how much this bothers me to my very core. Honestly, it enrages me, but that would not be a pretty face to show to my future in laws. Don''t get me wrong, I love them very much (despite all of their flaws), but that intolerance could not tick me off more. People are what they are, and we can accept them as they are, and choose to not be exposed to them. So, I do my best to lower my exposure.

I guess it''s all about acceptance and choice right?

(I kind of want to see you stop holding back and let loose!)
 

Skippy123

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 24, 2006
Messages
24,299
Date: 6/2/2008 3:35:57 PM
Author: FrekeChild
I guess it's all about acceptance and choice right?
That is exactly what it is about!!!
I think we cannot decide for them "Oh they should adopt xx number of children," because then someone else will say "Well they should have adopted 10 instead of 5," and so on and there really isn't a right choice . . . just what works for them. For me it boils down to trying put myself in other people's shoes or having a bit of empathy for others even though I may not understand someone else. This family has been interesting discussion starter outside ps and many times I have talked to people they have said it really is no ones business what they do as long as they do it in a positive unhurtful way and clearly they are not hurting anyone in my opinion. Plus I think they are just positive people and I say kudos to that!
 

Tacori E-ring

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
20,022
Freke, trust me you do not want to see me let loose
I might lose some friends that way.
I can be very sassy.

I am guessing your friend doesn''t want to "destroy" her body which I do agree is a very selfish reason to adopt/surrogate. Again, I am not religious. I do not share the Duggars views (quite enjoy my BC pill) but for some reason it just doesn''t enrage me like it seems to bother so many PSers which is interesting. Like DS said, I would not want to live in a country where the government told me how many kids I could have.
Intolerance breeds hate and frankly *that* scares me.

I agree it is all about acceptance and choice. I think this thread is more about all of those who have replied than it ever was about the Duggars.
 

FrekeChild

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
19,456
Destroy her body, being incapacitated while being pregnant or carry a child in general. Her sister is the opposite and would love to have as many children as possible-much like the Duggars, but the difference being that she doesn''t care if they are biological or adoptive. They are the product of their mother''s 3 marriages. Their older brother had one father (27), three girls (including my friend and the child-friendly sister) from another father (25, 21, 19) and the final two from another (the second son passed away a few years ago at 5, and the baby is almost 4). I think it''s absolutely fascinating how different they are, even though they share the same genetics. I think that part of the reason of my friend''s issue with having children is that she already helped raise the two little ones, and then when her little brother passed away, I think it was very much like burying her own child. Every year around the anniversary her brother passed away, and again around her birthday, she goes into a very deep depression. So in a lot of ways, I understand her situation, but it''s still very selfish...But again, it''s still her choice.

Anyway, I need to go finish making a birthday cake!

(I can get pretty sassy too, I''ve tried to remain logical and rational in this thread.)
 

brazen_irish_hussy

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
2,044
I just wanted to comment on the TV thing. I have more respect for a family I know with 12 kids, the oldest in his mid twenties than for the Duggars. They had 12 because they were devout Catholics, but they never "went public". The lived in a very conservative city and often got requests to be on the news, but they always said no. They felt their decision was between them and god, not them, god and the American veiwing public.
Although they were well off and loved their kids and sent them to school, the oldest did still do a lot of the raising for the younger ones and the oldest felt like he never had a childhood from it. Our friends would take about playing on the playground or coloring or other fun things that we associate with childhood. He didn''t do that because from as soon as he was able, he was doing chores and raising the younger ones. Although this has left him a good, well rounded individual, it also makes him profoundly sad that he never felt relaxed or free, something he still has trouble with. This is part of my problem with the Duggars. Compared to them, my friend had it fairly easy; he got a proper education so he could go to college and reach his dreams and did not have to take care of his siblings all day like they do.
 

TravelingGal

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
17,193
This thread is a fascinating example of how we all judge the others by our own standards of morality, ethics and ideologies (but, duh, that''s normal). The adoption thing, IMHO is ridiculous. Since there are so many orphans out there, we should ALL not even have ONE child and adopt if we are financially able...how else are we going to save them all?

Don''t get me wrong, I believe people who adopt are angels. Especially since I come from a country with so many unwanted little girls - yet the people there generally do not want to adopt. Even in America, Koreans don''t seem to care for adoption as there is a saying that "you cannot deceive blood", i.e. you have no idea where that child has come from and what problems it may have and nurture is not enough to overcome nature. I wish more people WOULD adopt...because I, myself, am too selfish to do so.


Like I said, I think the Duggars are a bit off (and I DO have a religious base but still think that). But I don''t get the revulsion stated by some on this thread.
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,057

Interesting, all the talk of intolerance. FI and I had a good talk just now about it.


I for one don''t believe it is intolerant to point out that people''s choices, even ones as "none of your business" as having children or not having them, do have an impact on others, directly or indirectly, and that the impact to society may indeed be negative. We decide daily on both a societal level and a personal level, to tolerate some things and not tolerate others. Else, how can one take a moral stand on anything? We don''t allow slavery, women as chattel, and an entire host of other behaviors. This is not considered intolerant even though we have decided that this sort of thing is intolerable. This is where society has currently decided to draw the line. What seems to be happening here though, is the word being used in the sense that "I want no open criticism of my choices". If you do that you''re "intolerant".



No, you''re merely pointing out what you see as a consequence of an action. That may be considered poor form, or perhaps bad manners, but it isn''t intolerance. As the FI said, you tolerate the fuzz in the tub. You don''t have to like it. You may even state that you don''t like it. But you don''t shoot the furry one for it. That would BE intolerance. Just because I understand why a person does what he does, and agree that he has the "right" to do it, doesn''t mean that it is the best choice, or that I must be silent about the impact. And make no mistake, if everone subscribed to the reproductive teachings of that brand of religion, the impact would be severe, at least at this point in history. The only reason we DO tolerate such things is because we aren''t currently hip-deep in double-digit families.

Perhaps at some point society will one day decide that the consequence (unsustainability) outweighs the good (free choice for the individual to have 18+ kids).


I do find it ironic to pretty much know that while everyone here is thrashing about intolerance and choices, these people are very probably raising kids with views about as narrow as a slip of paper - minds "intolerant" of anything that appears to challenge scripture. I seriously doubt that these children are being taught to question everything, or much of anything. Do you think they''re given pats on the head if they have the gumption to tell mom and dad that they don''t think the same way? Judging by many people I''ve met and their personal experiences growing up, you don''t have to be a Duggar to get slapped down for having a thought that goes against your parents''. The FI has also noted that of the homeschooled he has met, while they frequently have a depth of knowledge, their intellects seem brittle to him, and unquestioning. Just his observation.

 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top