Duggars announce child #20 (maternity, smart, raising, American) - Children, problems, school, daycare, behavior, age, teenagers, infants - Page 11 - City-Data Forum

cc0789 · 11-09-2011, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTGirlNoMore

It's NOT possible. I know people who have 3 kids and have a hard enough time. Besides, as MICHELLE stated in an episode years ago (I must repeat that so no one thinks *I* am saying it), the baby is passed off to an older girl who then responsible for the baby's daily care - wake up, feeding, bathing, schooling (if of age), put to bed, etc.).

The girls help out with feeding, bathings, schooling, etc. I'm sure they clean toilets and dust, too. They boys also mow the lawn, cut down trees, etc. Its called responsibility. They don't do it all the time, there are 20 of them, they all chip in. I've seen that they rotate responsibilities, like one is responsible for the kids wardrobe room. So if they are short on socks or pants, she is responsible for buying some. The other one would be responsible for the pantry, making sure if there is a sale on flour, or whatever, she stocks up. I think that's wonderful to teach responsibility and delagation, and she's doing a great job. I on the other hand, am obviously failing in that role, as I can't seem to teach my children to pick up socks off the floor, much less buy them for their siblings.

CTGirlNoMore · 11-09-2011, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aconite

That just seems like hypocrisy to me. They didn't leave it up to God when she had her cesareans, or when Josie was born. Suddenly, they were good with medicine.

I can't rep you again yet, so

Exactly!!!!!

NJGOAT · 11-09-2011, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aconite

It became my business when they showed up on my TV.

My TV has around 300 channels, how many does yours have?

springfieldva · 11-09-2011, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkb0305

OK, when I posted the above this morning I didn't have time to look it up, but a quick google search now indicates that neither Jim bob nor Michelle went to college; nor do they believe in evolution. That just doesn't fit my definition of "educated and intelligent". Given that, I kind of cringe at the fact that they are the only teacher their kids have ever had. Yes, they do ok for themselves, but their genes aren't so fantastic that we need so many of them floating around in the pool.

The kids have had (or are getting) the basics with their education, enough to get a GED and probably enough to get into at least a community college. Each Duggar kid can then decide if they want to pursue higher education. Fair enough.

They all seem to be reasonably intelligent and decent people to me even if they are not all highly educated. So why not have one more?

At 45, Michelle's days of populating the earth will soon be over. She can then sit back and devote her time to her grandchildren - all 400 of them if the Duggar children prove to be as fertile as their parents.

NJGOAT · 11-09-2011, 02:13 PM

Quote:

That just seems like hypocrisy to me. They didn't leave it up to God when she had her cesareans, or when Josie was born. Suddenly, they were good with medicine.

There is nothing in the Bible or their personal beliefs that would prohibit one from receiving medical care. If we were to take the "Duggar Approach" to the topic they would state that God gave those doctors the intelligence and ability to save the life of Michelle and the baby.

As has been said repeatedly in the past few posts; intelligence, science and faith are not mutually exclusive and can coexist quite harmoniously, even if some choose to treat them as exclusive.

Quote:

Actually, I take it back-- it's rank stupidity. Even assuming one believes in the God of the Bible and that he takes a personal interest in the maximum occupancy rate of one's lady bits, would you really leave birth control up to somebody who sends bears to eat naughty children? I mean...dude, impulse control!

It is acceptable to not believe what they believe, but I personally find it unacceptable to attack them for their beliefs. What do you believe in, so I can ridicule that?

As for the bears, you can't take it literally. The passage in Kings 2:23-24 refers to them as "little children", this draws the picture in the mind of preschoolers that get mauled by bears. In context of the original Hebrew, "little children" would actually refer to what we would now call a "manchild", or an adult that still acted with the foolishness and impropriety of youth. God sent two bears to kill a pack of 42 idol worshipping, Jersey Shore-esque douches that were mocking his prophet. The purpose was to build up some street cred for Elisha, the successor to Elijah.

somebodynew · 11-09-2011, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DewDropInn

Ummm... To them it's not an "excuse". It is their faith. (Or religion or belief system or whatever description applies nowadays.)

I hate this. Calling something faith makes the most unreasonable thing reasonable, untouchable. Heavens forbid one might have a problem with something one does in the name of FAITH. Twenty children is dangerous. No amount of faith and prattering about god's will changes that.

somebodynew · 11-09-2011, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cc0789

I agree, and can't understand how somebody would call them cultish because they choose to follow God's word and be fruitfull and multiply.

How about global over population? This god person needs to update his or her book for the new reality. The earth does not feed fruitful population of more humans. We have too damned many already.

somebodynew · 11-09-2011, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTGirlNoMore

It's NOT possible. I know people who have 3 kids and have a hard enough time. Besides, as MICHELLE stated in an episode years ago (I must repeat that so no one thinks *I* am saying it), the baby is passed off to an older girl who then responsible for the baby's daily care - wake up, feeding, bathing, schooling (if of age), put to bed, etc.).

My great aunts had this responsibility in their family of many. I forget how many. It is a HUGE burden on the kids.

cc0789 · 11-09-2011, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkb0305

OK, when I posted the above this morning I didn't have time to look it up, but a quick google search now indicates that neither Jim bob nor Michelle went to college; nor do they believe in evolution. That just doesn't fit my definition of "educated and intelligent". .

Luckily, we don't have to live by your definitions. I count many people who don't believe in evolution as intelligent, and will raise my children to belive the same.

CTGirlNoMore · 11-09-2011, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by somebodynew

My great aunts had this responsibility in their family of many. I forget how many. It is a HUGE burden on the kids.

My friend has 3 kids - two of which were teenagers when the baby was born. They immediatlely became responsible for their sister. I was appalled at when I was over there (a lot, we are like sisters) anytime something needed to be done with the baby, the kids were expected to do it, and punished if they didn't. I saw the teenage girl miss her homecoming??? (or something) because her mother wanted her home to take care of the baby so she could relax.

Why should older children be punished for the parents choices? And yes, tehy grew up resenting their sister AND parents.