# The Duggar Family Welcomes 18th Child!!!



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

I think I relived some of my labor pains when I heard this story.

*It's a girl! Duggars welcome 18th child*
_Ever-growing Arkansas family adds a holiday bundle-of-joy to their brood_
_TODAY staff and wire
updated 7:38 p.m. ET, Thurs., Dec. 18, 2008
Michelle Duggar has given birth to her 18th child. 

The Arkansas supermom delivered the baby girl by Caesarean section Thursday at Mercy Medical Center in Rogers. The baby, named Jordyn-Grace Makiya Duggar, weighed 7 pounds, 3 ounces and was 20 inches long. 

"The ultimate Christmas gift from God," said Jim Bob Duggar, the father of the 18 children. "She's just absolutely beautiful, like her mom and her sisters." 

The Duggars now have 10 sons and eight daughters. 

Jim Bob Duggar said Michelle started having contractions Wednesday night. She needed the C-section, her third, because the baby was lying sideways. Jim Bob said both baby and mother were doing well Thursday night. 

"We both would love to have more," he said. 

The cable network TLC broadcasts a weekly show about the Duggars, called "Seventeen and Counting." Chris Finnegan of TLC  which handles public relations for the Duggar family  said the show's name would be updated to account for the latest addition to the family. He said TLC also will air a show Monday on the baby's delivery. 

Jim Bob Duggar is 43, a year older than his wife. Their oldest child, Joshua, is 20. 

"Our whole family is excited about Jordyn's addition to our family," Jim Bob Duggar said. "She's just perfect in every way." _

Read more below if you can handle it.  Actually, I always wanted a big family, but I dislike being pregnant.

It's a girl! Duggars welcome 18th child - Parenting & Family - MSNBC.com


----------



## DiamondDave (Dec 19, 2008)

My great-grandmother was 1 of 22... only 1 set of twins!!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

DiamondDave said:


> My great-grandmother was 1 of 22... only 1 set of twins!!



Why didn't I hear it in the news?  LOL!  Has the family carried on this tradition and if so how many are in your family?

Were the kids educated in public schools?  I don't remember if it was mentioned, but the Duggars homeschool their children.


----------



## Lycurgus (Dec 19, 2008)

Well I wonder if they are going to ask congress for a bail out?


----------



## xsited1 (Dec 19, 2008)

They are an amazing family.  They are one of the most loving and functional families I have ever seen.  They are also very frugal and are financially secure (self-made).


----------



## Frolicking Dino (Dec 19, 2008)

Lycurgus said:


> Well I wonder if they are going to ask congress for a bail out?


The father says the family is debt free so that is unlikely.  While it would be very difficult to meet the emotional and physical needs of 18 children, this family does seem to be doing it and doing it well.  My hat is off to them.

(My maternal grandfather was one of 21 children my great-grandfather fathered with three wives - no, he wasn't a polygamist; the first two wives died)


----------



## random3434 (Dec 19, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> They are an amazing family.  They are one of the most loving and functional families I have ever seen.  They are also very frugal and are financially secure (self-made).



I bet the money they get from their tv show helps too!


At least the older kids can help take care of the younger ones!

I'm the youngest of 6 and some people are amazed by that, that's just the first few years for the Duggars!


----------



## Lycurgus (Dec 19, 2008)

Frolicking Dino said:


> The father says the family is debt free so that is unlikely.  While it would be very difficult to meet the emotional and physical needs of 18 children, this family does seem to be doing it and doing it well.  My hat is off to them.
> 
> (My maternal grandfather was one of 21 children my great-grandfather fathered with three wives - no, he wasn't a polygamist; the first two wives died)




Obviously I was simply kidding. Relax!

I think large families are wonderful.

I have been married four times and divorced once. None of my wives have passed and I too am not a polygamist! ............. Life can be interesting! 

For me........ Children are the greatest blessing we are given. The opportunity to be a parent is simply as good as life gets. Nothing tops it.


----------



## DiamondDave (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> Why didn't I hear it in the news?  LOL!  Has the family carried on this tradition and if so how many are in your family?
> 
> Were the kids educated in public schools?  I don't remember if it was mentioned, but the Duggars homeschool their children.



You gotta remember... this was in the late 1800's and early 1900's... LOL

some died in childhood

There was some schooling... but not for long.. I think the average was a 9th grade education... many worked the farm... some involved in WWI

As for me... 2 kids.. but I would have welcomed more... though glad, since I am divorced, that I did not have more kids dragged thru that... I would certainly welcome more if I were to be blessed with them....

I am one of 6... the oldest, best looking, and smartest 






Family reunions are abso-freaking-lutely huge though


----------



## random3434 (Dec 19, 2008)

DiamondDave said:


> You gotta remember... this was in the late 1800's and early 1900's... LOL
> 
> some died in childhood
> 
> ...


I always heard the youngest of 6 were the smartest and cutest!


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Dec 19, 2008)

We had another thread on a family nearly this large and several of our prominent Liberal friends INSISTED it was child abuse to have so many. That is was mental torture to have so many and that a family could not possibly be run with that many children. Some of them would be ignored or unloved.

Notice a trend? They want to control the names people can give their children and want to control how many children a family can have, resorting to claiming it is a crime to name a child what they do not like or to have more than some magic number they get to pick.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

DiamondDave said:


> You gotta remember... this was in the late 1800's and early 1900's... LOL
> 
> some died in childhood
> 
> ...



You forget to add that you also have the best sense of humor.  

I would have loved it if my mother had more.  I'm one of two sisters -- oldest, best looking, and smartest.  

I envy the huge families.  I love my two kids, but I'm one of those people who need a lot of quiet solitude, so I don't think I would be happy if I had more.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> We had another thread on a family nearly this large and several of our prominent Liberal friends INSISTED it was child abuse to have so many. That is was mental torture to have so many and that a family could not possibly be run with that many children. Some of them would be ignored or unloved.
> 
> Notice a trend? They want to control the names people can give their children and want to control how many children a family can have, resorting to claiming it is a crime to name a child what they do not like or to have more than some magic number they get to pick.




Our liberal friends have got it all wrong.  Most people who I've spoken to that come from large families, love it.  There is a lot of closeness there that you can't have with "friends."


----------



## jillian (Dec 19, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> We had another thread on a family nearly this large and several of our prominent Liberal friends INSISTED it was child abuse to have so many. That is was mental torture to have so many and that a family could not possibly be run with that many children. Some of them would be ignored or unloved.
> 
> Notice a trend? They want to control the names people can give their children and want to control how many children a family can have, resorting to claiming it is a crime to name a child what they do not like or to have more than some magic number they get to pick.



I don't think anyone said it was "child abuse". If I recall correctly, people thought it was pretty pathetic, though. I don't think humans should have litters... but that's just me.

I think there were also many of us who said there was no way in hell one could be a good parent to that many kids.

I stand by that and I don't see any reason to applaud someone for being nothing but a breeder. I felt the same way when I got the email the other day that my husband's cousin had something like her 11th child.


----------



## xsited1 (Dec 19, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> We had another thread on a family nearly this large and several of our prominent Liberal friends INSISTED it was child abuse to have so many. That is was mental torture to have so many and that a family could not possibly be run with that many children. Some of them would be ignored or unloved.
> 
> Notice a trend? They want to control the names people can give their children and want to control how many children a family can have, resorting to claiming it is a crime to name a child what they do not like or to have more than some magic number they get to pick.



Some Liberals believe they know what's best for everybody.  If they had it their way, they would have the government limit the number of kids a family could have.  It's this kind of arrogance and intolerance that make these liberals so dangerous.


----------



## random3434 (Dec 19, 2008)

Well, I lean more left than right, but........

If I had the money and resources I would buy a huge mansion and have all the unwanted, abused and negleted children come live with me. Seriously.

What does that make me?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

jillian said:


> I don't think anyone said it was "child abuse". If I recall correctly, people thought it was pretty pathetic, though. I don't think humans should have litters... but that's just me.
> 
> I think there were also many of us who said there was no way in hell one could be a good parent to that many kids.
> 
> I stand by that and I don't see any reason to applaud someone for being nothing but a *breeder.* I felt the same way when I got the email the other day that my husband's cousin had something like her 11th child.



You liberals like to use the term "breeder."  She is not an animal.  Her name is Michelle Duggar and she is a _mother_ to these beautiful children.  Children are a gift from God.  If you do not see it this way, you have a right to your opinion, but please do not put down people who have big families and look to be doing a better job than most. 

Congratulations to your husband's cousin.  She is a better woman than I.  I wish I had the courage to have so many kids.  Perhaps it is my selfishness that is getting in the way.  

What about the people who choose not to have kids?  I have a dozen reasons why they should, but I don't go around putting them down.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

Echo Zulu said:


> Well, I lean more left than right, but........
> 
> If I had the money and resources I would buy a huge mansion and have all the unwanted, abused and negleted children come live with me. Seriously.
> 
> What does that make me?



A nurturing woman with a good heart!


----------



## DiamondDave (Dec 19, 2008)

jillian said:


> I don't think anyone said it was "child abuse". If I recall correctly, people thought it was pretty pathetic, though. I don't think humans should have litters... but that's just me.
> 
> I think there were also many of us who said there was no way in hell one could be a good parent to that many kids.
> 
> I stand by that and I don't see any reason to applaud someone for being nothing but a breeder. I felt the same way when I got the email the other day that my husband's cousin had something like her 11th child.



1) I don't see how it is pathetic
2) Humans don't have litters.. they have children not animals... they have families
3) It is inherently HARDER to raise more kids... but with commitment, strong values, etc a parent of 10 can be as good to their children as a parent of 1 can be to their single child
4) I do applaud ones who have more kids and do a good job raising them to be good adults. I would not approve ones that have multiple children or huge families and do not have the commitment necessary to that family. Ones who abuse their kids, ones that have them for additional entitlement benefits etc, those are the ones to withhold applause from. Not just simply because a couple choose to have a large family that they love and enjoy.


----------



## xsited1 (Dec 19, 2008)

Echo Zulu said:


> Well, I lean more left than right, but........
> 
> If I had the money and resources I would buy a huge mansion and have all the unwanted, abused and negleted children come live with me. Seriously.
> 
> What does that make me?



That makes you worthy of a positive rep!  

(Notice, I just said 'some liberals'.  Wingnuts exist on both sides of the aisle.  It's the arrogant, controlling and intolerant ones that scare me.)


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> That makes you worthy of a positive rep!
> 
> (Notice, I just said 'some liberals'.  Wingnuts exist on both sides of the aisle.  It's the arrogant, controlling and intolerant ones that scare me.)



Good!  I second that.


----------



## del (Dec 19, 2008)

Echo Zulu said:


> I always heard the youngest of 6 were the smartest and cutest!



gotta go with DD here, definitely the oldest of 6 rocks.


----------



## random3434 (Dec 19, 2008)

del said:


> gotta go with DD here, definitely the oldest of 6 rocks.



Ah, but when you are the youngest of 6, you're spoiled rotten!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> We had another thread on a family nearly this large and several of our prominent Liberal friends INSISTED it was child abuse to have so many. That is was mental torture to have so many and that a family could not possibly be run with that many children. Some of them would be ignored or unloved.
> 
> Notice a trend? They want to control the names people can give their children and want to control how many children a family can have, resorting to claiming it is a crime to name a child what they do not like or to have more than some magic number they get to pick.



I'd like to view the craziness.  Where can I find that thread?


----------



## del (Dec 19, 2008)

Echo Zulu said:


> Ah, but when you are the youngest of 6, you're spoiled rotten!



i know. my baby brother stole my freaking birthday. 
the nerve of some people.


----------



## random3434 (Dec 19, 2008)

del said:


> i know. my baby brother stole my freaking birthday.
> the nerve of some people.



Did he give it back?


----------



## del (Dec 19, 2008)

Echo Zulu said:


> Did he give it back?



right before he turned 40.


----------



## jillian (Dec 19, 2008)

DiamondDave said:


> 1) I don't see how it is pathetic
> 2) Humans don't have litters.. they have children not animals... they have families
> 3) It is inherently HARDER to raise more kids... but with commitment, strong values, etc a parent of 10 can be as good to their children as a parent of 1 can be to their single child
> 4) I do applaud ones who have more kids and do a good job raising them to be good adults. I would not approve ones that have multiple children or huge families and do not have the commitment necessary to that family. Ones who abuse their kids, ones that have them for additional entitlement benefits etc, those are the ones to withhold applause from. Not just simply because a couple choose to have a large family that they love and enjoy.



I'm not talking about five or six kids. I have friends who have five kids and it's no issue because they can afford to maintain them, love them and give them everything a family needs. But, in this thread, we're talking about 18 kids. And it's posted as if that, in and of itself, is something to admire. I don't think it is. And I think someone who feels the need to have 18 children has something seriously wrong with them in this day and age. I do. I can't help it. It's how I feel.

That said, you are correct that someone having a small family is not guaranteed to be a great parent... or can be abusive... or neglectful. They aren't immune.

But this isn't the 1800's. That many kids isn't needed to work the land or because kids die, etc.


----------



## Red Dawn (Dec 19, 2008)

> They want to *control the names people can give their children* and want to control how many children a family can have, resorting to claiming it is a crime to name a child what they do not like or to have more than some magic number they get to pick.




Can you point me to the thread where Liberals wanted to pass laws about what you could name your child?  

Or, did you just imagine a thread like that existed,  after a crack binge?


----------



## Shogun (Dec 19, 2008)

As long as they are not on public assistance and using a uterus as a way to increase subsidized income I couldn't give the first rats ass about how many kids this family has.  if they can remain autonomous while pumping out that many kids then more power to em.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

Shogun said:


> As long as they are not on public assistance and using a uterus as a way to increase subsidized income I couldn't give the first rats ass about how many kids this family has.  if they can remain autonomous while pumping out that many kids then more power to em.



Spoken like a man who probably doesn't have kids of his own.


----------



## Shogun (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> Spoken like a man who probably doesn't have kids of his own.



You are right, I don't choose to create babies for the sake of larger subsidized housing.  


oh, and just so you know, babies are not gifts from god; they are the product of a sperm and an egg becoming a zygote.  Every piece of human trash can manage to get, or get someone, pregnant.  It's not like this is some kind of fucking miracle.  It's about as miraculous as the jelly not falling out of the jar after you screw the lid back on.  Breeders are no more special than any other citizen even if it makes your tits lactate to hear as much.


But, AGAIN, as long as they can stay off of government subsidies then they can have 30 more for all I care.  There can be a proverbial nest of cockroach-like progeny scampering this way and that on the family compound and it wouldn't interest me in the slightest.  So some chick got pregnant after fucking her husband.  WOW.  Someone save me a fucking newspaper headline for keepsakes.


----------



## jillian (Dec 19, 2008)

Shogun said:


> You are right, I don't choose to create babies for the sake of larger subsidized housing.
> 
> 
> oh, and just so you know, babies are not gifts from god; they are the product of a sperm and an egg becoming a zygote.  Every piece of human trash can manage to get, or get someone, pregnant.  It's not like this is some kind of fucking miracle.  It's about as miraculous as the jelly not falling out of the jar after you screw the lid back on.  Breeders are no more special than any other citizen even if it makes your tits lactate to hear as much.
> ...



So much anger... so little time.

And if you had kids, you'd know they ARE miracles.

It's the cheapening of it by having 18 that I find so discomfiting.


----------



## Ravi (Dec 19, 2008)

> The Duggars are followers of the evangelical Christian movement called Quiverful


God must spend a lot of time up there laughing at the idiocy below.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

Shogun said:


> You are right, I don't choose to create babies for the sake of larger subsidized housing.
> 
> 
> oh, and just so you know, babies are not gifts from god; they are the product of a sperm and an egg becoming a zygote.  Every piece of human trash can manage to get, or get someone, pregnant.  It's not like this is some kind of fucking miracle.  It's about as miraculous as the jelly not falling out of the jar after you screw the lid back on.  Breeders are no more special than any other citizen even if it makes your tits lactate to hear as much.
> ...



It is a tragedy that you weren't a product of a loving family, even without spelling out the details of your misfortunes and your Oliver Twist-like upbringing, I can hear the anger, sadness, misery and self-deprecation that leads you to refer to children as "cockroaches" and "human trash."  Oh, how many times these terms must have been applied to you by people who should have loved you.  Oh, the humanity, the humanity!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

jillian said:


> So much anger... so little time.
> 
> And if you had kids, you'd know they ARE miracles.
> 
> *It's the cheapening of it by having 18 that I find so discomfiting*.




It is so difficult to read what is someone's heart, but from all that is evident, it seems to be a loving family where the coin of the realm is love in every permutation and combination.  

I don't get the feeling that this family has children just so you and I can give our opinions of the event.


----------



## editec (Dec 19, 2008)

Echo Zulu said:


> Well, I lean more left than right, but........
> 
> If I had the money and resources I would buy a huge mansion and have all the unwanted, abused and negleted children come live with me. Seriously.
> 
> What does that make me?


 
A masochist?

Unless you set your wards upon the world in a petty crime spree, of course, then that makes you Fagin.




 

And if one more homeless teen moves in with me, I might have to resort to that_ modus operandi_ myself.


----------



## Ravi (Dec 19, 2008)

jillian said:


> So much anger... so little time.
> 
> And if you had kids, you'd know they ARE miracles.
> 
> It's the cheapening of it by having 18 that I find so discomfiting.


Come on Jillian!!! What greater purpose in life is there than having 18 kids to score brownie points with God?


----------



## Shogun (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> It is a tragedy that you weren't a product of a loving family, even without spelling out the details of your misfortunes and your Oliver Twist-like upbringing, I can hear the anger, sadness, misery and self-deprecation that leads you to refer to children as "cockroaches" and "human trash."  Oh, how many times these terms must have been applied to you by people who should have loved you.  Oh, the humanity, the humanity!



you can spare me the dimestore psych.  To imagine that every human who fucks is a marvel of humanity is a crazy leap of faith.  Again, it doesn't take much to get pregnant or to get someone pregnant.  Less people can build their own computer than can manage to stick a dick into a receiving pussy.  If you don't comprehend the cockroach analogy in regards to the amount of kids these people chose to have then so be it.  Would you have felt better if I referred to something soft and furry like rabbits? If you don't think there is such a thing as human trash, trash that can manage to get pregnant even, then you might wanna step out of your bubble and discover reality.  We are not all noble, worthwhile creatures that quest like Odysseus to get preggers.


----------



## jillian (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> It is so difficult to read what is someone's heart, but from all that is evident, it seems to be a loving family where the coin of the realm is love in every permutation and combination.
> 
> I don't get the feeling that this family has children just so you and I can give our opinions of the event.



You wouldn't know from an article what their coin of the realm is. I can tell you I've never been involved in anything that was covered by a newspaper that got it's facts right. 

And you obviously feel that you wanted to state a positive opinion, or you wouldn't have created a thread on it. Now, that's fine. You're certainly entitled to your opinion. But that also opens it up for me to give my opinion of the event.

And I guess I don't feel someone having an 18th child is anything to be applauded.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

Shogun said:


> you can spare me the dimestore psych.  To imagine that every human who fucks is a marvel of humanity is a crazy leap of faith.  Again, it doesn't take much to get pregnant or to get someone pregnant.  Less people can build their own computer than can manage to stick a dick into a receiving pussy.  If you don't comprehend the cockroach analogy in regards to the amount of kids these people chose to have then so be it.  Would you have felt better if I referred to something soft and furry like rabbits? If you don't think there is such a thing as human trash, trash that can manage to get pregnant even, then you might wanna step out of your bubble and discover reality.  We are not all noble, worthwhile creatures that quest like Odysseus to get preggers.



So you're not denying what I said.


----------



## Shogun (Dec 19, 2008)

jillian said:


> So much anger... so little time.
> 
> And if you had kids, you'd know they ARE miracles.
> 
> It's the cheapening of it by having 18 that I find so discomfiting.



yea jill.. something that happens EVERY DAY sure is a miracle!

It's so unpredictable that the concept of birth control doesn't even exist!

Getting pregnant doesn't make one a better person.  Nor is it some kind of mystical magic.  It's a human bodily function no more mysterious than taking a shit after stuffing your belly with a feast.


----------



## Shogun (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> So you're not denying what I said.



that I don't have kids?  Indeed, I do not have kids.  congrats, eagle eye.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

Shogun said:


> that I don't have kids?  Indeed, I do not have kids.  congrats, eagle eye.



You know what I meant -- you're family background.


----------



## jillian (Dec 19, 2008)

Shogun said:


> yea jill.. something that happens EVERY DAY sure is a miracle!
> 
> It's so unpredictable that the concept of birth control doesn't even exist!
> 
> Getting pregnant doesn't make one a better person.  Nor is it some kind of mystical magic.  It's a human bodily function no more mysterious than taking a shit after stuffing your belly with a feast.



it may happen every day... but i'm telling you that everyone looks at their own child in amazement.... They are miracles regardless of the ease or difficulty with which you become preggers. I'd say more, but it's kind of pointless, because you don't get it.


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

Lycurgus said:


> Obviously I was simply kidding. Relax!
> 
> I think large families are wonderful.
> 
> ...



Wait...married four times and divorced once...but none of your wives died?

If you're not a polygamist how does that work?


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

jillian said:


> So much anger... so little time.
> 
> And if you had kids, you'd know they ARE miracles.
> 
> It's the cheapening of it by having 18 that I find so discomfiting.



So if you're one of 18 instead of Jillian's only treasured son, you're less valuable?

You are such an elitist piece of shit.


----------



## Lycurgus (Dec 19, 2008)

This thread is incredible.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

Lycurgus said:


> This thread is incredible.




Having fun?
	
	



```

```


----------



## Lycurgus (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> Having fun?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



ahuh


----------



## Shogun (Dec 19, 2008)

jillian said:


> it may happen every day... but i'm telling you that everyone looks at their own child in amazement.... They are miracles regardless of the ease or difficulty with which you become preggers. I'd say more, but it's kind of pointless, because you don't get it.



Oh I get it.  But having kids is no more a miracle than taking a shit.  It's a body function that has been happening for quite some time now.  Pretending that doing it 18 times in a lifetime is an amazing feat only conveys a low expectation and standard when it comes to miracles.


Right now somewhere in your house anything from a roach to a rat is busy having this miraculous event under the floorboards of your house.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Dec 19, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Can you point me to the thread where Liberals wanted to pass laws about what you could name your child?
> 
> Or, did you just imagine a thread like that existed,  after a crack binge?



Sure thing, there is a thread where a guy named his kid Adolf Hitler ( last name) and several Liberals said it was child abuse, that it was neglect and that the parents should not be allowed to name their children thus. But then you probably already know this.


----------



## Shogun (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> You know what I meant -- you're family background.



like I said, you can keep your dimestore phych.  Your crystal ball aint so crystal clear, if I may quote the beastie boys.


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Oh I get it.  But having kids is no more a miracle than taking a shit.  It's a body function that has been happening for quite some time now.  Pretending that doing it 18 times in a lifetime is an amazing feat only conveys a low expectation and standard when it comes to miracles.
> 
> 
> Right now somewhere in your house anything from a roach to a rat is busy having this miraculous event under the floorboards of your house.



It's a miracle every time a woman and her baby survives it.

It really annoys me when some female-hating turd tells me that "having birth is what women are supposed to do..there's nothing special or dangerous about it".

Having died a few times in the process of giving birth and miscarrying, I beg to differ. It's a fucking miracle. And it's even more of a miracle when your child is a normally intelligent, good looking human being.


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

Whoops, lol. "Having ALMOST died". I did not die and come back to life. But the mistake was too funny to edit.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> A nurturing woman with a good heart!



Not according to Jillian.


----------



## DiamondDave (Dec 19, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Oh I get it.  But having kids is no more a miracle than taking a shit.  It's a body function that has been happening for quite some time now.  Pretending that doing it 18 times in a lifetime is an amazing feat only conveys a low expectation and standard when it comes to miracles.
> 
> 
> Right now somewhere in your house anything from a roach to a rat is busy having this miraculous event under the floorboards of your house.





Sentient life... big difference from "a piece of shit"... though we have ones that try and blur that difference, like bobo the clown

You can always tell the self absorbed prick, from the people who know how special and miraculous a child is


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Dec 19, 2008)

jillian said:


> So much anger... so little time.
> 
> And if you had kids, you'd know they ARE miracles.
> 
> It's the cheapening of it by having 18 that I find so discomfiting.



Arrogant opinionated blowhard. You do not know the woman, you do not the father, you do not know the children BUT you know they are just "breeders" with a mental problem, you know they can not possibly take care of and love 18 children even though the stroy clearly shows they can and are. What you really mean is YOU could not love that many or care for that many ans so it is wrong cause YOU can not do it. ARROGANT as hell.


----------



## Lycurgus (Dec 19, 2008)

I thoroughly enjoy being a parent (and now a grandparent) and I think that opportunity is the greatest gift this life gives us. If I thought I could afford both financially and emotionally to support 18 children (and of course my wife felt the same) I would have that many too. 

As one person has gone out of their way to stress, anyone can have sex and produce a baby. But, making love with the intent of producing a child is different. Also, not everyone can truly be a parent. Supporting a child until they are of legal age is one thing, but, being a parent to them and enjoying the process of that life experience is totally different. Some embrace it and others look at it like fucking, going through the motions. 

ah well, to each their own. I dig being a parent.


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

Don't forget elitist.


----------



## editec (Dec 19, 2008)

*MY* child was a miracle.

Your child?

_eh!_


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Dec 19, 2008)

jillian said:


> it may happen every day... but i'm telling you that everyone looks at their own child in amazement.... They are miracles regardless of the ease or difficulty with which you become preggers. I'd say more, but it's kind of pointless, because you don't get it.



Unless of course they have more than a couple, then they are "breeders", that can not care for or love their children. Right?


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

Lycurgus said:


> I thoroughly enjoy being a parent (and now a grandparent) and I think that opportunity is the greatest gift this life gives us. If I thought I could afford both financially and emotionally to support 18 children (and of course my wife felt the same) I would have that many too.
> 
> As one person has gone out of their way to stress, anyone can have sex and produce a baby. But, making love with the intent of producing a child is different. Also, not everyone can truly be a parent. Supporting a child until they are of legal age is one thing, but, being a parent to them and enjoying the process of that life experience is totally different. Some embrace it and others look at it like fucking, going through the motions.
> 
> ah well, to each their own. I dig being a parent.



I wanted at least 5 children and would have been happy with 10 or more.

Unfortunately, life did not turn out that way. I had two..and when I had almost finished raising them I had two more, and lost one more.

My mom was the youngest of 11. They were the joy of their parents and of each other, and I can tell you there's nothing better than being a kid in a family where you have hundreds of relatives and dozens of first cousins. Family gatherings...you wouldn't BELIEVE the food! And the stories! And the laughs!

Not only that...but when I travel, I never have to stay in a motel, unless I want to. That's a big perk.


----------



## Shogun (Dec 19, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> It's a miracle every time a woman and her baby survives it.
> 
> It really annoys me when some female-hating turd tells me that "having birth is what women are supposed to do..there's nothing special or dangerous about it".
> 
> Having died a few times in the process of giving birth and miscarrying, I beg to differ. It's a fucking miracle. And it's even more of a miracle when your child is a normally intelligent, good looking human being.



I never even hinted in the slightest that giving birth is "what women are supposed to do" so, please, enjoy a coke and a moment to go fuck yourself.

and it's no miracle.  It's quite mundane, really.  babies are born every day.


----------



## Shogun (Dec 19, 2008)

DiamondDave said:


> Sentient life... big difference from "a piece of shit"... though we have ones that try and blur that difference, like bobo the clown
> 
> You can always tell the self absorbed prick, from the people who know how special and miraculous a child is



it's still a BIOLOGICAL PROCESS that is no more miraculous than taking a shit.  Go ahead and think that your child is more unique and special than everyone else's.. Hell, it's the same thing they think about your little piece of crotch fruit.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Dec 19, 2008)

Shogun said:


> it's still a BIOLOGICAL PROCESS that is no more miraculous than taking a shit.  Go ahead and think that your child is more unique and special than everyone else's.. Hell, it's the same thing they think about your little piece of crotch fruit.



Ya people die every day from taking a shit. And of course everyone that takes a shit has to have a doctor to supervise the procedure or a mid wife. Ohh and I forgot they take a knife to the crapper with them so they can cut the cord connecting the shit to their ass.


----------



## Shogun (Dec 19, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Ya people die every day from taking a shit. And of course everyone that takes a shit has to have a doctor to supervise the procedure or a mid wife. Ohh and I forgot they take a knife to the crapper with them so they can cut the cord connecting the shit to their ass.



some people do.. Let your colostomy bag fester a few weeks and you'll understand.


Hell, people get wisdom teeth taken out with a scalpel and a fucking outpatient procedure too... I guess wisdom teeth are miraculous too.


----------



## DiamondDave (Dec 19, 2008)

Shogun said:


> it's still a BIOLOGICAL PROCESS that is no more miraculous than taking a shit.  Go ahead and think that your child is more unique and special than everyone else's.. Hell, it's the same thing they think about your little piece of crotch fruit.



You show yourself as more of an ignorant prick every time you type

1) Never claimed my child is more unique or special.... but nice try
2) Sentient life is something rather special and miraculous.. and something more than a biological process to >90% of the world
3) The more your little self absorbed and self centered ass speaks, the more I feel sorry for any family that you must have. You're a sad, sad little man, lost in his self absorbing delusions


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

DiamondDave said:


> You show yourself as more of an ignorant prick every time you type
> 
> 1) Never claimed my child is more unique or special.... but nice try
> 2) Sentient life is something rather special and miraculous.. and something more than a biological process to >90% of the world
> 3) The more your little self absorbed and self centered ass speaks, the more I feel sorry for any family that you must have. You're a sad, sad little man, lost in his self absorbing delusions



Where does he come from where he believes his view should be everyone else's view.  He doesn't want have kids.  Better for us.  I don't think we need Shogun Jr.  I wouldn't want to see a 3 year old cursing like a truck driver.


----------



## Shogun (Dec 19, 2008)

DiamondDave said:


> You show yourself as more of an ignorant prick every time you type
> 
> 1) Never claimed my child is more unique or special.... but nice try
> 2) Sentient life is something rather special and miraculous.. and something more than a biological process to >90% of the world
> 3) The more your little self absorbed and self centered ass speaks, the more I feel sorry for any family that you must have. You're a sad, sad little man, lost in his self absorbing delusions




HA!  yea, life is so fucking miraculous that you are going to go EAT SOME for lunch today, eh?  give me a break.  You may feel like a living god after having kids but I assure you that you have done nothing that an alley cat can't manage.

By all means, if my posts strike you square in the nuts so badly then feel free to block me, pussy.  Trust me, my life will go on and, MIRACLE OF MIRACLES, dogs and cockroaches and breeders will still be discovering that, yes indeed, sperm meeting an egg leads to fertilization.


----------



## Shogun (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> Where does he come from where he believes his view should be everyone else's view.  He doesn't want have kids.  Better for us.  I don't think we need Shogun Jr.  I wouldn't want to see a 3 year old cursing like a truck driver.



b-b-b-but I thought giving birth was such a MIRACLE!





When did I state that you must conform to my opinion, hook?  I stated my opinion and you, predictable as the fertalization of an egg and sperm, REACTED to it.  If I hold up a hoop will you jump through it?  I mean, I have the same kind of snacks that a pregnant dog enjoys..


----------



## Silence (Dec 19, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Ya people die every day from taking a shit.



maybe not every day but my father died taking a shit.  he had a massive heart attack so it does happen.  Just sayin 

I'm glad this thread was shit before I joined, now i can't be blamed 

I watch the Duggars show on television.  they seem like a very loving and functional family, however, they are  too.  They actually believe that the earth is only 6,000 years old and that man and dinosaurs were living at the same time.  They teach their children this AS FACT too and claim evolution is nonsense.  

Unless those children remain on the family compound all their lives they are going to be confronted with some very harsh realities at some point in their lives and I have to wonder if some of them won't feel betrayed by the teaching their parents instilled in them.  

Now, do I see anything wrong with having 18 kids?  personally I wouldn't do it but hey if that's what Mrs. Duggar thinks her calling in life is, then so be it.  Her children are seemingly clean, healthy and happy so who am I to pass judgement.


----------



## Lycurgus (Dec 19, 2008)

Shogun said:


> HA!  yea, life is so fucking miraculous that you are going to go EAT SOME for lunch today, eh?  give me a break.  You may feel like a living god after having kids but I assure you that you have done nothing that an alley cat can't manage.
> 
> By all means, if my posts strike you square in the nuts so badly then feel free to block me, pussy.  Trust me, my life will go on and, MIRACLE OF MIRACLES, dogs and cockroaches and breeders will still be discovering that, yes indeed, sperm meeting an egg leads to fertilization.





Well your right. The act of fucking produces offspring, be that dogs fucking, cats fucking or humans fucking. In the biology of it, in the nature of it, after the little offspring is off the tit, for the most part they are shoved out to fend for themselves, with much less to teach them. Clearly you can relate to that. 

However, unlike the rest of the animal kingdom, humans have been the ability to surpass that and nurture, love and guide the offspring for many years to come. Again, sticking with facts here. Not God and no fucking miracles. 

So when you look at our society it is normally pretty easy to separate the basic animals, from the ones who are capable of using the other tools humans have been given, through nature. In fact, that is what I'm doing here. Using your own words. 

So as you Fuck, I make love.

As you kick the offspring off the tit and out the door, I raise and nurture.

.........& as you take a shit, I relieve myself while enjoying a cup off coffee and some good reading materail.

Hey, have a nice day!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

Shogun said:


> b-b-b-but I thought giving birth was such a MIRACLE!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Have you seen the movie called, The Omen?


----------



## Shogun (Dec 19, 2008)

*Well your right.*


Thats pretty much all you really needed to say.


----------



## Shogun (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> Have you seen the movie called, The Omen?



uh, yeees?


----------



## Lycurgus (Dec 19, 2008)

Shogun said:


> *Well your right.*
> 
> 
> Thats pretty much all you really needed to say.





haha ............. ahuh I expected no less!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

Shogun said:


> uh, yeees?



Do you need me to spell it out for you?


----------



## jillian (Dec 19, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Arrogant opinionated blowhard. You do not know the woman, you do not the father, you do not know the children BUT you know they are just "breeders" with a mental problem, you know they can not possibly take care of and love 18 children even though the stroy clearly shows they can and are. What you really mean is YOU could not love that many or care for that many ans so it is wrong cause YOU can not do it. ARROGANT as hell.



Dude, we're not talking about a few kids... we're talking about 18... that's insane; it's retarded; there's nothing admirable about it.

And, btw... you're the blowhard... so get a grip. You were doing so well, too. Pity.


----------



## jillian (Dec 19, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> Don't forget elitist.



says the person who's dumb as toast but thinks she has the moral answers for everyone else....

go drool elsewhere.


----------



## catzmeow (Dec 19, 2008)

DiamondDave said:


> 1) I don't see how it is pathetic
> 2) Humans don't have litters.. they have children not animals... they have families
> 3) It is inherently HARDER to raise more kids... but with commitment, strong values, etc a parent of 10 can be as good to their children as a parent of 1 can be to their single child
> 4) I do applaud ones who have more kids and do a good job raising them to be good adults. I would not approve ones that have multiple children or huge families and do not have the commitment necessary to that family. Ones who abuse their kids, ones that have them for additional entitlement benefits etc, those are the ones to withhold applause from. Not just simply because a couple choose to have a large family that they love and enjoy.



I lived and worked in Utah for 10 years.  Utah has the largest average family sizes in the nation.  I'd like to say that every family that large is functional, but we also had the highest rate of prescription drug abuse in the country.  We used to refer to Prozac as "Sandy Candy," (Sandy was a well-to-do suburban area known for large mormon families), because so many of the moms of these big families were using prescription drugs to cope.

Would I ever force someone to limit the size of their family?  NO.  HOwever, I do believe that if families want to have this many children, they should be prepared to pay for the commensurate expenses of educating them, and the corresponding societal requirements.  Our tax system is not set up to fund families of this size, for the most part, and everyone else ends up paying the financial cost of educating these children.  It's hardly fair to the neighbors who choose to limit their family size.  And frankly, I don't WANT to pay the expense of someone else's religious beliefs about having a big family.  If you're doing it, you should be prepared for ALL of the expense it entails, including societal costs that normal families pay for through taxes.   So, instead of claiming eighteen deductions, you should be PAYING an additional amount.  We should not be subsidizing these kinds of decisions.  Nor would it be a good thing if many families started following this trend.

In utah, I routinely worked with families of 10-12-15.  Most were quite religious.  Some of these families were poor and paid almost no taxes.  Further, I saw quite a few that were in chaos, with the kids raising the kids.  Certainly, not all of these parents were cut out for raising children, as was evidenced by the fact that their children were involved in gangs (hence, my involvement with the family).

Things may work okay for the Duggars, but as a rule, I would suggest that having this many children is not necessarily a positive for the kids.  I saw the global experience of living in a society overwhelmed with huge families, and it has it's negative elements.


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

jillian said:


> says the person who's dumb as toast but thinks she has the moral answers for everyone else....
> 
> go drool elsewhere.



I can drool right here, thanks.
But anyone who thinks that the life of one of 18 children is "cheaper" than the life of an only child is as sick as her friend Pederastate.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 19, 2008)

jillian said:


> I don't think anyone said it was "child abuse". If I recall correctly, people thought it was pretty pathetic, though. I don't think humans should have litters... but that's just me.
> 
> I think there were also many of us who said there was no way in hell one could be a good parent to that many kids.
> 
> I stand by that and I don't see any reason to applaud someone for being nothing but a breeder. I felt the same way when I got the email the other day that my husband's cousin had something like her 11th child.



This is the kind of comment that makes people look like nuts.  You don't even know these people, so reducing someone you don't know to 'nothing but a breeder' says more about your own prejudices than anything about the person. I mean, you've not no basis for anything you've said here as it pertains to this family.


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

Silence said:


> maybe not every day but my father died taking a shit.  he had a massive heart attack so it does happen.  Just sayin
> 
> I'm glad this thread was shit before I joined, now i can't be blamed
> 
> ...



Hey, Elvis died that way too.
And I have a friend whose father in law succumbed to carbon monoxide poisoning in the crapper.

So it must be pretty common.


----------



## Shogun (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> Do you need me to spell it out for you?



um, sure?


----------



## jillian (Dec 19, 2008)

Steerpike said:


> This is the kind of comment that makes people look like nuts.  You don't even know these people, so reducing someone you don't know to 'nothing but a breeder' says more about your own prejudices than anything about the person. I mean, you've not no basis for anything you've said here as it pertains to this family.



Not nuts at all, honey. This woman spent about 18 years of her life pregnant. I'd say that's being a breeder. Mostly, I'm entitled to MY opinion, right? I stated my opinion. Didn't advocate that they should be prohibited from doing their thing. But I certainly am entitled to think what I'd like.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 19, 2008)

jillian said:


> Not nuts at all, honey. This woman spent about 18 years of her life pregnant. I'd say that's being a breeder. Mostly, I'm entitled to MY opinion, right? I stated my opinion. Didn't advocate that they should be prohibited from doing their thing. But I certainly am entitled to think what I'd like.



Sure, you're entitled to it.  But to feel it so necessary to develop such an opinion about someone simply because they value thing differently from you makes it look like you have issues (e.g. insecurities) to address.  Otherwise, there is no rational reason you would feel the need to present such an opinion unless you know something about these people apart from what was reported.  From that the reports say, they seem to be doing well, and that seems to bother you.  Why do you need external validation?


----------



## jillian (Dec 19, 2008)

Steerpike said:


> Sure, you're entitled to it.  But to feel it so necessary to develop such an opinion about someone simply because they value thing differently from you makes it look like you have issues (e.g. insecurities) to address.  Otherwise, there is no rational reason you would feel the need to present such an opinion unless you know something about these people apart from what was reported.  From that the reports say, they seem to be doing well, and that seems to bother you.  Why do you need external validation?



You do understand that my feelings on this subject aren't earthshaking... I'm not overly vested in this subject. I will tell you that regardless of what the article says, I cannot imagine how one can be a good parent to 18 children. Perhaps one can keep a home running... with the kids taking care of each other. But there is no way someone with 18 children is parenting them properly.


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> I lived and worked in Utah for 10 years.  Utah has the largest average family sizes in the nation.  I'd like to say that every family that large is functional, but we also had the highest rate of prescription drug abuse in the country.  We used to refer to Prozac as "Sandy Candy," (Sandy was a well-to-do suburban area known for large mormon families), because so many of the moms of these big families were using prescription drugs to cope.
> 
> Would I ever force someone to limit the size of their family?  NO.  HOwever, I do believe that if families want to have this many children, they should be prepared to pay for the commensurate expenses of educating them, and the corresponding societal requirements.  Our tax system is not set up to fund families of this size, for the most part, and everyone else ends up paying the financial cost of educating these children.  It's hardly fair to the neighbors who choose to limit their family size.  And frankly, I don't WANT to pay the expense of someone else's religious beliefs about having a big family.  If you're doing it, you should be prepared for ALL of the expense it entails, including societal costs that normal families pay for through taxes.   So, instead of claiming eighteen deductions, you should be PAYING an additional amount.  We should not be subsidizing these kinds of decisions.  Nor would it be a good thing if many families started following this trend.
> 
> ...



But really that can be said of anyone having any number of children. Having children, whether it's one or 20 is no guarantee of a happy carefree life (HA! HAHAHA!) and some are better equipped to handle it than others.

But I have to say...I see nothing wrong with older kids helping out with siblings. I've never seen it have anything but a positive effect on the older siblings who are required to do it. They may feel they miss out on a lot of "fun" that other kids get to enjoy...but every person I've known who was responsible for assisting with (or essentially being the parent) younger siblings became remarkable, goal-oriented, solid citizens with their feet firmly on the ground and an excellent value system.

My sister  helped to raise me...there were four kids in our family, and she was 9-1/2 years older than me and believe me she wasn't particularly happy about it most of the time (my mom worked 2-3 jobs until I was in my teens) but she graduated from high school at 16 (she was highly motivated to get the hell out of the house) and graduated from law school at 22. She continues to be my touchstone...and as we've aged, I like to think I'm hers, too (we have different strengths and different ways of looking at things, it's wonderful). She was a wonderful mother, a wonderful wife, and talk about a worker (that actually comes in part from our mom).

I have another friend who was essentially deserted by her useless parents to raise her 4 younger sisters when she was something like 10. I can't say her life has been wildly successful, she's had her bouts with substance abuse (which was her parents' problem as well) but she managed to raise her sisters,  4 kids of her own (one set of twins, for Pete's sakes) on her own, and they all turned out well. At least they're self-sufficient. Given what her parents were like, they should have turned out much, much worse. But she took charge and by golly she kept them together and safe.

It seems like the kids who get to take on that responsibility at that age gain an ability to keep their eye on the ball, and I can't see that missing out on teen-age partying is such a negative trade off.

So I guess what I'm saying is yeah, kids are a royal pain any way you cut it, and there are of course situations where people shouldn't have any children, let alone dozens, and there are situations where women are pressured into popping them out by controlling husbands or off-kilter religious beliefs. 

But I've read the story of the family with the 18 kids, how they tried and then lost a baby, and made a committment to take whatever God handed them, whether that meant no children or dozens. And it looks like God is giving them dozens. I think it's sort of neat.

But there's another moral...there's a reason we in the know never ask God to teach us patience...because how do you learn patience? By being sorely tried...over and over again. 

Likewise, it's not really a good idea to bargain or make promises to God assuming it will work out one way (hey, God, we'll take as many or as few as you throw at us) thinking you know exactly what you're going to get.

And the more kids you have, the greater the heartache you'll end up enduring, there's just no way around it. But the more you have the more joy you'll have, too..there's no way around that, either.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 19, 2008)

jillian said:


> You do understand that my feelings on this subject aren't earthshaking... I'm not overly vested in this subject. I will tell you that regardless of what the article says, I cannot imagine how one can be a good parent to 18 children. Perhaps one can keep a home running... with the kids taking care of each other. But there is no way someone with 18 children is parenting them properly.



Says you.  Based, again, on no objective evidence.  Sounds to me like it is important to you to maintain that belief, your protestations aside.


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

Jillian's full of shit, as usual. 

Just because someone doesn't parent the way you choose to parent doesn't make their parenting any less valid or successful.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 19, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> Jillian's full of shit, as usual.
> 
> Just because someone doesn't parent the way you choose to parent doesn't make their parenting any less valid or successful.



People tend to be bigoted and/or intolerant of views differing from their own.  I don't care for it, and it makes no difference to me whether the bigotry or intolerance is coming from the left or right.  

Jillian demonstrates it in this thread.  In another thread, I'm sure we'd see the same sort of thing coming from other people if we were talking about a gay couple raising a child (for example).

It's nonsense.  People deal in generalities and caricatures rather than specifics and people.


----------



## strollingbones (Dec 19, 2008)

having 18 kids is just egotistical...there is no way they are supporting their family without help...figure out the food bill for 20 people a day?  and the falling real estate market


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

strollingbones said:


> having 18 kids is just egotistical...there is no way they are supporting their family without help...figure out the food bill for 20 people a day?  and the falling real estate market



The family does not take welfare.  They are self-sufficient in many ways.  Does that change your viewpoint?


----------



## catzmeow (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> The family does not take welfare.  They are self-sufficient in many ways.  Does that change your viewpoint?



Do they pay the actual cost for the services they take out of the system, i.e., attending local schools?  If not, they are indeed being subsidized by the rest of us.


----------



## del (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> Do they pay the actual cost for the services they take out of the system, i.e., attending local schools?  If not, they are indeed being subsidized by the rest of us.



even if you have only one or two kids, you're not paying in taxes what you receive in services.

 it just feels that way.


----------



## xsited1 (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> Do they pay the actual cost for the services they take out of the system, i.e., attending local schools?  If not, they are indeed being subsidized by the rest of us.



They homeschool their children.  More here:

The Jim Bob & Michelle Duggar Family | Official Website


----------



## Lycurgus (Dec 19, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> Jillian's full of shit, as usual.
> 
> Just because someone doesn't parent the way you choose to parent doesn't make their parenting any less valid or successful.




Exactly! 

I've yet to see a blueprint for perfect parenting!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> Do they pay the actual cost for the services they take out of the system, i.e., attending local schools?  If not, they are indeed being subsidized by the rest of us.



As I mentioned before, they are homeschooled.  So they are actually paying into the system if they have local, city taxes.  My husband and I pay into the system, and my kids never attended a brick & morter school.  Does that mean I should get a tax rebate?

Lots of people seem to have their back up about families with lots of kids.  Why?


----------



## Ravi (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> Do they pay the actual cost for the services they take out of the system, i.e., attending local schools?  If not, they are indeed being subsidized by the rest of us.


Imagine for a minute the size of their tax break with that many kids. I'm not sure how it works, but don't many poor people actually get a refund check larger than the amount they paid in?


----------



## catzmeow (Dec 19, 2008)

del said:


> even if you have only one or two kids, you're not paying in taxes what you receive in services.
> 
> it just feels that way.



Actually, it largely depends on what you are paying in property taxes.  I have some neighbors who quite clearly are.  But I'm certain that with 18 children, they aren't paying REMOTELY close to what they are paying into the system, if they are paying taxes, at all.


----------



## catzmeow (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> As I mentioned before, they are homeschooled.  So they are actually paying into the system if they have local, city taxes.  My husband and I pay into the system, and my kids never attended a brick & morter school.  Does that mean I should get a tax rebate?
> 
> Lots of people seem to have their back up about families with lots of kids.  Why?



As I explained in my post, I've worked with them directly and seen that quite a number of them are non-functional.


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

It's called eugenics, and the politics of abortion and population management.


----------



## xsited1 (Dec 19, 2008)

So who doesn't approve of the Dugger's having 18 children?  Is it just the big-government Liberals or do others object?


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> Lots of people seem to have their back up about families with lots of kids.  Why?



For most people, if they disagree with a lifestyle (for example) they don't want to admit that it can be successful.  It's an insecurity, I think.  I don't know why people have it.

A family that large is not for me.  Nor is religion.  But people who have large families and who are very religious can do quite well and be great people.  Likewise, a gay couple raising a child can do quite well.  So can atheists.  You have to take people individually on a case by case basis and not get sucked into stereotypes and caricatures.


----------



## catzmeow (Dec 19, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Imagine for a minute the size of their tax break with that many kids. I'm not sure how it works, but don't many poor people actually get a refund check larger than the amount they paid in?



Tax break for 1 child is $5k.  That adds up to a $90k tax write off.

Yes, I consider that welfare.


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Imagine for a minute the size of their tax break with that many kids. I'm not sure how it works, but don't many poor people actually get a refund check larger than the amount they paid in?



Only if you pay for child care.

I get a huge tax refund, and pay very little in taxes. But I get it because I get earned income credit for being a single mom...and I have to pay a huge amount in child care each year.

That will change this year, my babysitter doesn't report her babysitting income so I won't get a signed statement from her, so I can't claim the child care. This year I will get back just about what I put in.

In a two-parent household, if one parent is in the home and there's no child care so they can work, they won't be getting a big tax break.

Nice try, peeps.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> Actually, it largely depends on what you are paying in property taxes.  I have some neighbors who quite clearly are.  But I'm certain that with 18 children, they aren't paying REMOTELY close to what they are paying into the system, if they are paying taxes, at all.



Here's an amazing example of the kind of family America used to be proud of, so many of you seem to be concerned about the tax deductions they get based on the size of the family.  Are you equally incensed about drug addicts and alcoholics who are sponsored by the state?  How about welfare recipients?  Which of those do you choose to abuse?  Does it have something to do with the fact that these are traditional religious people?  Does that make you feel guilty?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

Steerpike said:


> For most people, if they disagree with a lifestyle (for example) they don't want to admit that it can be successful.  It's an insecurity, I think.  I don't know why people have it.
> 
> A family that large is not for me.  Nor is religion.  But people who have large families and who are very religious can do quite well and be great people.  Likewise, a gay couple raising a child can do quite well.  So can atheists.  You have to take people individually on a case by case basis and not get sucked into stereotypes and caricatures.



I think you make a good point.  Perhaps they become defensive in order to justify their own lifestyles.


----------



## Lycurgus (Dec 19, 2008)

You know..............

Based on Shogun's understanding and some others here, the case can be made that Joseph was a dead beat husband, Mary was a whore and Jesus a bastard child. 

This thread truly is incredible.


----------



## catzmeow (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> Here's an amazing example of the kind of family America used to be proud of, so many of you seem to be concerned about the tax deductions they get based on the size of the family.  Are you equally incensed about drug addicts and alcoholics who are sponsored by the state?  How about welfare recipients?  Which of those do you choose to abuse?  Does it have something to do with the fact that these are traditional religious people?  Does that make you feel guilty?



I work with drug addicts, alcoholics, and welfare recipients, and I'd be happy to give you my opinions of all three.  If you'd like me to talk about the parents of gang members, I can interject that, as well, along with the pussification of America.

I'm openly critical of a high percentage of my fellow Americans, and I certainly don't limit it to those whose constantly populated vaginas are controlled by their religious faith.

A hundred years ago, PC, we weren't dealing with overpopulation, social infrastructure (roads, highways, schools, hospitals, etc.) that can barely contain us, and an environment that is in crisis.

So, different times, different values.  Conspicuous over-consumption (and overpopulation) aren't en vogue anymore.  It is my hope that we will begin to live more thrifty, less hard on the earth lifestyles...all of us.

If we don't, I fear for our children and our children's children.

Maybe Jesus will come and save you from the earth you trash, but since I don't believe in fairy tales, I think it's up to use to save the earth for our future generations.


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

And if you cook your own food, you can feed 20 people a day on about the same amount most families pay who eat out every day (at work, with the family after work, etc.)

Turkey costs .69 a lb. an 18 lb turkey is less than $20, a bag of potatoes is a few bucks, eggs are a couple of bucks, pancake batter is a couple of bucks.

Quit knocking yourself out. YOu don't whine when you pay for 13 year old girls to get abortions.


----------



## del (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> Tax break for 1 child is $5k.  That adds up to a $90k tax write off.
> 
> Yes, I consider that welfare.



why? i have 2 kids. am i on welfare, too?


----------



## Ravi (Dec 19, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> Only if you pay for child care.
> 
> I get a huge tax refund, and pay very little in taxes. But I get it because I get earned income credit for being a single mom...and I have to pay a huge amount in child care each year.
> 
> ...


I don't know if that's true or not, but they certainly get a deduction for each child.

btw, you can fill out a 1099-MISC and report to the IRS how much you pay your babysitter. In fact, by law, she has no choice but to report her income. Is she an illegal?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> I work with drug addicts, alcoholics, and welfare recipients, and I'd be happy to give you my opinions of all three.
> 
> I'm openly critical of a high percentage of my fellow Americans, and I certainly don't limit it to those whose constantly populated vaginas are controlled by their religious faith.



I don't see the reason why you are so critical of an intact family raising their children in a successful manner?

BTW, the last remark wasn't necessary.  Frankly, it was quite classless.


----------



## Lycurgus (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> Tax break for 1 child is $5k.  That adds up to a $90k tax write off.
> 
> Yes, I consider that welfare.




I don't know what planet you live on, but, it takes more than 5k per year to raise a child. 

I understand many of your points and when applied properly, they are valid for a certain segment of people, but, your really taking liberties in trying to be this broad. 

Nevertheless, please continue.


----------



## catzmeow (Dec 19, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> Quit knocking yourself out. YOu don't whine when you pay for 13 year old girls to get abortions.



I don't support abortion, and I am certainly doing everything in my power to raise a teenage girl who respects her body and HERSELF.


----------



## catzmeow (Dec 19, 2008)

Lycurgus said:


> I don't know what planet you live on, but, it takes more than 5k per year to raise a child.



Yeah, that's just the share the U.S. taxpayers are putting into the pot.


----------



## catzmeow (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> I don't see the reason why you are so critical of an intact family raising their children in a successful manner?
> 
> BTW, the last remark wasn't necessary.  Frankly, it was quite classless.



Because the time in which having 18 children was good for this country is past.  At this point in time, we need to do everything we can to encourage small families with very engaged parents.  We lack the infrastructure (schools, roads, highways, bridges, hospitals, courts, etc.) to support population growth on this scale.

God isn't going to rescue us from this earth being trashed by overpopulation.  You may believe that there's going to be a new heaven and a new earth, but I don't.

And, I want my kids, and their kids, to have a planet where there are still wild things, and wild  places, rather than more asphalt, more suburbs, more traffic, more box stores, more strip malls, more apartment complexes, etc.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> Yeah, that's just the share the U.S. taxpayers are putting into the pot.



A deduction is the share of the family's own money they are keeping in order to raise their children.  Again we have people speaking in terms of baseless assumptions and prejudices.  There is nothing in what I read to suggest they are being subsidized by the taxpayers, so unless you have some objective evidence to demonstrate it, then I think it is a mistake to assume it.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> I work with drug addicts, alcoholics, and welfare recipients, and I'd be happy to give you my opinions of all three.  If you'd like me to talk about the parents of gang members, I can interject that, as well, along with the pussification of America.
> 
> I'm openly critical of a high percentage of my fellow Americans, and I certainly don't limit it to those whose constantly populated vaginas are controlled by their religious faith.
> 
> ...



Boy you must be out of touch.  Time to update your reading list.

_The Population Bomb (1968) is a book written by Paul R. Ehrlich. A best-selling work, it predicted disaster for humanity due to overpopulation and the "population explosion". The book predicted that "in the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death", that nothing can be done to avoid mass famine greater than any in the history, and radical action is needed to limit the overpopulation. *History proved Ehrlich wrong, as the mass starvations predicted for the 1970s and 1980s never occurred.*_

The Population Bomb - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You can also cross Malthus off your list. 

Now see if you can come up with another reason to dislike this family.


----------



## catzmeow (Dec 19, 2008)

del said:


> why? i have 2 kids. am i on welfare, too?



To a certain degree, this country has always relied upon the taxpayers to subsidize education for all children.  So, in fact, your childless neighbors are subsidizing you to some degree, depending upon what you pay in income and property taxes.  However, I doubt they are subsidizing you to the tune of 90k a year because your wife can't keep her legs closed.


----------



## catzmeow (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> Boy you must be out of touch.  Time to update your reading list.



I'm talking about today, sweetie.  Have you driven on the roads lately?  Have you seen the rampant destruction of more and more wild places in this country as cities encroach on what used to be farmland and natural habitats?

Do you want a country with nothing but asphalt and strip malls to leave to your children?


----------



## Lycurgus (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> Yeah, that's just the share the U.S. taxpayers are putting into the pot.



Well here you have proved that you are either dumb or ignorant. 

Either way, your not open to understanding the different applications and how it is not welfare. 

Your like an old horse with blinders on who has traveled the same road for so long, if the blinders were removed, you would know no different. 

Enjoy.


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> I work with drug addicts, alcoholics, and welfare recipients, and I'd be happy to give you my opinions of all three.  If you'd like me to talk about the parents of gang members, I can interject that, as well, along with the pussification of America.
> 
> I'm openly critical of a high percentage of my fellow Americans, and I certainly don't limit it to those whose constantly populated vaginas are controlled by their religious faith.
> 
> ...



I work with them, too. 

I think the whole "conspicuous over-consumption and over-population" hysteria is a fairy tale, along with the concept that we have the ability to harm the earth in any substantial manner.

And while it's good sense to be good stewards, I don't think that carries over to telling people whether or not they should be having children, what religion they should follow, or how many children they should be allowed.

I mean, it's working so well in CHina, isn't it. Infanticide, child sweatshops, the worst pollution in the world.

But by golly, they keep t hose kids to one per family, and they pooh-pooh religion. I guess that makes them better.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> To a certain degree, this country has always relied upon the taxpayers to subsidize education for all children.  So, in fact, your childless neighbors are subsidizing you to some degree, depending upon what you pay in income and property taxes.  However, I doubt they are subsidizing you to the tune of 90k a year because your wife can't keep her legs closed.



I don't see any support for the 90K figure.  Where are you getting that?  It doesn't come from the deduction, and if it did it wouldn't be a subsidy.  The child tax credit is generally not refundable, so again it wouldn't be a subsidy unless you wanted to argue the limited cases where it IS refundable, and I don't think it approaches 90K even then.  Not even close in fact.


----------



## Lycurgus (Dec 19, 2008)

> I gave myself to Jesus, but now he never calls.




Hmmm ............. You sound like those welfare people your bitching about. Waiting around for a handout, then pissed because it never came! 

At least now I understand your avatar. lol

Hey, enjoy the evening .............. Tis the Season!


----------



## del (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> To a certain degree, this country has always relied upon the taxpayers to subsidize education for all children.  So, in fact, your childless neighbors are subsidizing you to some degree, depending upon what you pay in income and property taxes.  However, I doubt they are subsidizing you to the tune of 90k a year because your wife can't keep her legs closed.




let's leave my wife out of the conversation. 

you're correct that taxes have always subsidized the education of all our children. yes, my childless neighbors have paid taxes for services that they didn't receive. my neighbors that don't own cars got screwed for highway repairs, and they're also going to help pay to plow the roads tonight. 

letting someone keep the money they've earned is not a subsidy.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> I'm talking about today, sweetie.  Have you driven on the roads lately?  Have you seen the rampant destruction of more and more wild places in this country as cities encroach on what used to be farmland and natural habitats?
> 
> Do you want a country with nothing but asphalt and strip malls to leave to your children?



Do you realize how inane your response was?  Talk about anectodal reports!  I bet because you go to the movie theater that you believe that this country is populated by people shoulder to shoulder.  

"As of September 30, 2003, 29.6% of all land in the U.S. was owned by the federal government, with total acreage of 671,759,297.7. "

Next time, pick a subject you know something about.


----------



## Lycurgus (Dec 19, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> Do you realize how inane your response was?  Talk about anectodal reports!  I bet because you go to the movie theater that you believe that this country by people shoulder to shoulder.
> 
> "As of September 30, 2003, 29.6% of all land in the U.S. was owned by the federal government, with total acreage of 671,759,297.7. "
> 
> Next time, pick a subject you know something about.





LOL Yep!


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> I'm talking about today, sweetie.  Have you driven on the roads lately?  Have you seen the rampant destruction of more and more wild places in this country as cities encroach on what used to be farmland and natural habitats?
> 
> Do you want a country with nothing but asphalt and strip malls to leave to your children?



Unfortunately, what you support is destructive to our economy and our population. 

People have a right to use the resources on their land, we have a right to use our own resources, instead of purchasing things like lumber from Japan and oil from Mexico, and people who own land should damn well be able to develop it as they see fit.


The price of having the highest standard of living in the world is development. The landscape will change, and change is not bad. The Romans changed the world with roads and garrisons, they brought order and education to the masses. It is DEVOLVING to refuse to develop your own resources and move forward because you want a primitive landscape for city dwellers to enjoy the one time a year they step foot outside the smog zone and take a vacation.


----------



## Ravi (Dec 19, 2008)

Actually kids, we are pretty close in this country to zero population growth. That's why amnesty for illegals is a good idea.


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 19, 2008)

Just when I think you've used up your trove of idiotic nonsense....


----------



## Silence (Dec 22, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> Do they pay the actual cost for the services they take out of the system, i.e., attending local schools?  If not, they are indeed being subsidized by the rest of us.



These children do not attend public shcool and therefore noone's tax dollars pay for their education.  They are home schooled which given that they teach them that the earth is 6,000 years old might be a problem later but it won't be the tax payers problem I'd guess.   

They apparently own residential and commerical rental property as well, which would seemingly generate a substantial income not to mention I doubt they do their show for free.  

They never buy their clothing or shoes new, only at thrift stores and I just watched an epi where they got 20 pairs of shoes for something like $6.00!  

They buy their food in bulk and make their own laundry soap as well.  They have figured out how to live within their means and even if you don't have 18 kids they way they run their home could be a lesson for all of us.  They don't waste anything it appears.  

Is the mother and father able to "properly" parent each and every child every minute of the day?  probably not but that's really no different than the mother and father with 1 or 2 children who are so wrapped up in their own lives that they don't properly parent either.  At least in this family there are older sibilings around to look after the younger ones.   They certainly all appear to love each other and IMO that counts for a lot.


----------



## dharma (Dec 23, 2008)

im going to create as many miracles as possible


----------



## DiveCon (Dec 23, 2008)

dharma said:


> im going to create as many miracles as possible


better hope you have a willing partner in that


----------



## Zoom-boing (Dec 23, 2008)

It's her body, she can have as many kids as she wishes without anyone telling her otherwise.  Or does that stand only pertain to abortion?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 23, 2008)

I have a theory that people who don't want to have children are too darn selfish.  They are afraid that children will "ruin" their lifestyle.


----------



## Silence (Dec 23, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> I have a theory that people who don't want to have children are too darn selfish.  They are afraid that children will "ruin" their lifestyle.



Isn't it much more selfish to have a child you don't want and then neglect it or pawn it off on other people so you can do your own thing?  Not everyone is meant to be a parent and sometimes it's much more selfish to have a child because it's EXPECTED rather than admit that you just don't want them.  

I find the opinion that it's selfish to NOT have children to be disturbing and judgemental as the opinion that too many children is selfish.  I have a friend who is nearing 50 and she never had children because she never wanted them.  She's a fantastic aunt to her nieces and nephews and she's in a loving and healthy relationship with a wonderful man but neither of them ever felt the need to have children of their own.  I'm not sure what makes you see that as selfish.....


----------



## Anguille (Dec 23, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> I think I relived some of my labor pains when I heard this story.
> 
> *It's a girl! Duggars welcome 18th child*
> _Ever-growing Arkansas family adds a holiday bundle-of-joy to their brood_
> ...



Are these people retarded??


----------



## Anguille (Dec 23, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> I have a theory that people who don't want to have children are too darn selfish.  They are afraid that children will "ruin" their lifestyle.



Having a child is always a selfish act.


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 23, 2008)

Is it any of your business?

Her body, her choice, right?

Oh wait..that's only for abortion. Personal choice is only personal choice when it involves the killing of another...not when it comes to creating life.


----------



## Anguille (Dec 23, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> Is it any of your business?
> 
> Her body, her choice, right?
> 
> Oh wait..that's only for abortion. Personal choice is only personal choice when it involves the killing of another...not when it comes to creating life.



Being a person choice doesn't make it any less selfish. People have kids to please themselves or maybe to please their parents who want grandkids. It's no longer a patriotic duty to have kids and populate the nation.


----------



## editec (Dec 23, 2008)

catzmeow said:


> I'm talking about today, sweetie. Have you driven on the roads lately? Have you seen the rampant destruction of more and more wild places in this country as cities encroach on what used to be farmland and natural habitats?
> 
> Do you want a country with nothing but asphalt and strip malls to leave to your children?


 
Absolutely.

We already have one New Jersey, and that's one too many.


----------



## Silence (Dec 23, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> Is it any of your business?
> 
> Her body, her choice, right?



I must grudgingly agree with Allie.  I'm not sure why the option to have a baby is any less a choice than the option to not have one?  if the duggars want to have 20 children and can support them, who is anyone else to say it's wrong?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 23, 2008)

Silence said:


> Isn't it much more selfish to have a child you don't want and then neglect it or pawn it off on other people so you can do your own thing?  Not everyone is meant to be a parent and sometimes it's much more selfish to have a child because it's EXPECTED rather than admit that you just don't want them.
> 
> I find the opinion that it's selfish to NOT have children to be disturbing and judgemental as the opinion that too many children is selfish.  I have a friend who is nearing 50 and she never had children because she never wanted them.  She's a fantastic aunt to her nieces and nephews and she's in a loving and healthy relationship with a wonderful man but neither of them ever felt the need to have children of their own.  I'm not sure what makes you see that as selfish.....



You know what.  Upon further consideration, I agree with you.  I find so much enjoyment in watching my kids smile, growing up that perhaps I am the selfish one.


----------



## Silence (Dec 23, 2008)

PoliticalChic said:


> You know what.  Upon further consideration, I agree with you.  I find so much enjoyment in watching my kids smile, growing up that perhaps I am the selfish one.



I never said having children was selfish.... I think having children is selfless..... but not having them isn't selfish either.


----------



## AllieBaba (Dec 23, 2008)

Anguille said:


> Being a person choice doesn't make it any less selfish. People have kids to please themselves or maybe to please their parents who want grandkids. It's no longer a patriotic duty to have kids and populate the nation.


People also have abortions to please themselves.

Except, of course, in the matter of abortion, you are killing another human being, instead of creating it.

Ask anyone you know....do you wish you'd been aborted instead of living your life?


----------



## Silence (Dec 23, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> Ask anyone you know....do you wish you'd been aborted instead of living your life?




we had an entire thread discussing that topic....I believe I might have been one of the few who picked wanting to be aborted rather than live through some of the things I've been through.  

it's not a black and white issue Allie, it never has been and never will be, not in reality.  For you it's all or nothing and life just isn't set up that way.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Dec 23, 2008)

Silence said:


> we had an entire thread discussing that topic....I believe I might have been one of the few who picked wanting to be aborted rather than live through some of the things I've been through.
> 
> it's not a black and white issue Allie, it never has been and never will be, not in reality.  For you it's all or nothing and life just isn't set up that way.



Sounds like you've been through some rough stuff.  Wow, I've gone through crap, but I never wished to have been aborted.  I hope you are at peace with some of those issues.


----------

