Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I disagree that they are not harming. They are harming their children whom they make responsible for raising THEIR other children. Having seen the impact of this kind of upbringing first hand, I can tell you it is a great harm. They are risking harm to their unborn child as well as risking leaving the remaining 19 childless.
They are doing society no favors by adding more to the overpopulation problem.
Yes, I disagree that they do no harm.
Your allegations are hearsay based on your perception of how they manage their family. Has it ever occurred to you that the older daughters may be perfectly content and even look forward to caring for their younger siblings? This may not fit into the mold of what you feel they should be doing, but it does not immediately equate to them being harmed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by somebodynew
Still going strong? How many species we have killed? The wealth of the world concentrated by a teeny percent of the population while the rest struggle? Food shortages? Global climate change? (myth my ass.) We have a responsibility to more than just dominate the planet with our selfish usurpation. God is an a-hole if he tells us to be fruitful and multiply at the expense of the rest of his supposed creation.
Do you have children? If so, why did you have them if humanity is nothing more than a plague on the Earth? If you believe so strongly in the destruction of man upon the planet, then why not lessen the burden?
We are still going strong, I'm not looking at any imminent calamity from the population having almost doubled in my lifetime.
We have killed plenty of species. However, being good stewards of our environment and respecting the other species upon the planet is not a mutually exclusive concept to the continued growth of the population.
The issue of wealth concentration is one I touched on when I mentioned Karl Marx. The issue of the strain on resources brought on by "overpopulation" is not a strain on the actual resources, but the system that allows for the concentration of the resources. Hence, there is no real food shortage when the United States alone produces enough food to feed the population of the Earth almost twice over. You are attempting to infuse a scientific absolute to justify your moral argument.
Global climate change may be happening, but it is not a proven theory that man is the greatest contributor to such change. Not even 40 years ago, the scientific community was in arms over a global cooldown. I am not adverse to the idea of climate change and accept that the climate is changing. I just have my doubts that man is the root cause.
What else are we to do with our planet if not enjoy its bounty and resources greatly enhanced by our own ingenuity?
I have seen the show twice and it was by accident. Honestly, super religious people like that kind of spook me. From the two times I saw the show, I can say that the Duggars really seem to put their heart into their parenting and seem equipped for it. I watched a few shows of Jon and Kate plus 8 and I had turn it off. Kate is a bully. Her kids were always screaming, crying and out of control. Ugh. Gave me a freaking headache. Of course this is reality tv but the household at the Duggars was busy but not chaotic. Do I think it wise to have so many children? No and eventually they will end up with a disabled child however it won't be my problem. Hope baby 20 is healthy and so is the mom.
Umm, yes, Catholics believe that a miracle happens each time and the wine and bread is converted into the body and blood of christ... not "symbolism". Every church I've ever been to has bells.
Ummm, no. The bells are not what makes it happen. I've been to exactly one church with bells. One. Most churches do not have them. You must live in one of the few areas that has them still. The bells are symbolism. The mass used to be in Latin, so they used the bells to kind of say that it was happening since the people didn't understand Latin. Please don't perpetuate a lie.
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.
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 became my business when they showed up on my TV.
Jim Bob and Michelle have never said they didn't believe in medicine. What they have said is that they are against birth control for them and are leaving the number of children they have up to God. Those are two vastly different things.
Ummm, no. The bells are not what makes it happen. I've been to exactly one church with bells. One. Most churches do not have them. You must live in one of the few areas that has them still. The bells are symbolism. The mass used to be in Latin, so they used the bells to kind of say that it was happening since the people didn't understand Latin. Please don't perpetuate a lie.
Ummm, yes, actually. They are rung throughout the North East (at least) and in every country where I've visited a Catholic Church (except in the absence of altar servers). They are actually called called Sanctus Bells. It has nothing to do with Latin (which are actually called Tridentine) masses (where they were also used) being almost obsolete or any ruling out of Vatican II.
And by the way, during the Tridentine Mass, they didn't ring the bells because people didn't understand Latin. Where in the world did you ever get that idea?
But back to the Duggars .... Look, I don't understand having 20 kids, but I'm like another poster here. I have only tuned in a few times, and the few times that I have watched them, they seem like an incredibly together family and very happy. I, too, would be a bit worried about lack of individual attention being paid to a child, but it really doesn't seem to be doing any of these kids any harm. The way an elder sibling is assigned to each younger child is actually quite a good idea in fostering a strong bond between siblings while teaching tween age children a lesson in responsibility.
I say bless them and I really do hope that she has a far easier birth experience this time around.
Not to mention it's incredibly selfish. It's mind boggling that these people are not only willing to risk the mother's life and the life of the child, but it's also apparently okay to leave the 19 children they already have without a mother if the pregnancy results in death. The reckless disregard they have for their children's needs is inexcusable.
How is it selfish for someone to chose to have 20 children or for someone to chose to not have any children? It's not. It's a choice that each person/couple makes based on their own set of beliefs, goals etc. There is no right or wrong here. Just because its wrong for you or me does not make it wrong for everyone. As I have stated a couple of times Michelle had the SAME issue with her second pregnancy (Jana and John David) she then went on to have many healthy pregnancies afterward before having any issues again. Heck she could go on to have 10 (used as an example) more pregnancies and may not see complications again, or should could have complications with this pregnancy (I hope not). Fact is we do not know what will happen at any time.
People have complications with the first pregnancy does that mean that they too should never have another child again even if they are cleared by a doctor??
I disagree that they are not harming. They are harming their children whom they make responsible for raising THEIR other children. Having seen the impact of this kind of upbringing first hand, I can tell you it is a great harm. They are risking harm to their unborn child as well as risking leaving the remaining 19 childless.
They are doing society no favors by adding more to the overpopulation problem.
Yes, I disagree that they do no harm.
Considering the number of people who are opting to not have children now days I'd say they equal each other out. Also, let me ask you this...How do YOU know they are having their other children raise the other kids??? Are you in their home? Do you know them on a personal basis? The answer would be no you do not. I however do and I also know for a FACT that the older kids are not raising the younger ones. Do they HELP around the house and at times with the kids...absolutely. Do they play parents to the younger ones....No not by a long shot. There is absolutely nothing wrong with kids helping out...it actually ends up helping them in the long run, by prepping them for real life. I would say the Duggar kids will be much better prepped fro real life than a lot of kids because their parents have given them some amount of responsibility. My parents were the same way, and I am forever grateful to them for it.
Another little tidbit of info for you....It would be really hard for the older kids to raise the younger one's as you are saying when they aren't even home/around most of the time.
Last edited by sherrenee; 11-09-2011 at 05:33 PM..
I find this argument of overpopulation and being "responsible" for the benefit of society laughable. So responsible, educated, intelligent, financially stable people should cease to reproduce in order to raise the offspring of the ignorant and irresponsible, often without proper prenatal care and at an extreme disadvantage?
One night watching "Idiocracy" does not an argument make. That movie was fictional. The planet is going to die long before the ignorant have the opportunity to try to feed plants gatorade.
Given the extreme health problems both Michelle and baby Josie faced, I wonder why they would risk putting another baby through that, w/ possibly a much worse outcome?
I disagree that they are not harming. They are harming their children whom they make responsible for raising THEIR other children. Having seen the impact of this kind of upbringing first hand, I can tell you it is a great harm. They are risking harm to their unborn child as well as risking leaving the remaining 19 childless.
They are doing society no favors by adding more to the overpopulation problem.
Yes, I disagree that they do no harm.
Look, having 20 children is not my idea of a wonderful time...but....I can't see where they are "harming" society. In fact, I'd be on the side that said, the people who have one or two kids, who they ignore or abuse, are at higher risk for harming society than those who have many (even 20) children whom they love,provide and care for.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
