Posted on 05/21/2007 6:24:57 PM PDT by Pinkbell
Who are you to judge? Who are you to say that the more than slightly creepy 39-year-old woman from Arkansas who just gave birth to her 16th child yes that's right 16 kids and try not to cringe in phantom vaginal pain when you say it, who are you to say Michelle Duggar is not more than a little unhinged and sad and lost?
And furthermore, who are you to suggest that her equally troubling husband -- whose name is, of course, Jim Bob and he's hankerin' to be a Republican senator and try not to wince in sociopolitical pain when you say that -- isn't more than a little numb to the real world, and that bringing 16 hungry mewling attention-deprived kids (and she wants more! Yay!) into this exhausted world zips right by "touching" and races right past "disturbing" and lurches its way, heaving and gasping and sweating from the karmic armpits, straight into "Oh my God, what the hell is wrong with you people?"
But that would be, you know, mean. Mean and callous to suggest that this might be the most disquieting photo you see all year, this bizarre Duggar family of 18 spotless white hyperreligious interchangeable people with alarmingly bad hair, the kids ranging in ages from 1 to 17, worse than those nuked Smurfs in that UNICEF commercial and worse than all the horrific rubble in Pakistan and worse than the cluster-bomb nightmare that is Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise having a child as they suck the skin from each other's Scientological faces and even worse than that huge 13-foot python which ate that six-foot alligator and then exploded.
Excerpt...Read rest, it gets more interesting.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
I wondered that as well.
If they can, more power to them.
I recall reading a story years ago about a family that had 18 kids (some were adopted). The article was very in-depth about how they made ends meet with NO government assistance. The bottom line was that they did not splurge on $100 sneakers, ipods, etc. that most kids have today. The kids were home-schooled, so there was no real pressure to have fashionable, expensive clothes. They wore hand-me-downs purchased from thrift stores. The older ones helped care for the younger ones. THey had a once a month splurge on dinner and a movie. They bought second hand bicycles and toys that were in good shape. They all looked healthy and happy. The older ones had gotten academnic scholarships for college.
What Moford know about this... ain’t no chance of him reproducin’ outside of a test tube...
Surely the writer is a Nancy Pelooser confident.
Typically I would agree with you but she had five herself.
Maybe, maybe not. I'm the oldest of seven and I saw a lot of big families growing up. Most, like you say, raised daughters who wanted or... didn't think of, at least, anything else. Two or three of us did go to college. I'm a computer scientist now and my sisters are both in college, I knew an oldest-of-eight who went to college for nursing. But there was the oldest-of-six who learned hairdressing, the girl with six younger brothers who was married at 18....
It's one reason I don't want an extra-large family myself, besides the fact that I don't like the regimentation that's required for anything beyond eight or nine. And I don't care to drive full sized vans.
This sort of lifestyle does seem to be hard on the oldest couple kids. They get tasked with surrogate-parent chores and responsibility for younger siblings that yes, can be valuable but sometimes just gets old. I wouldn't have traded any of my siblings for anything, but my dad was a computer scientist, we rarely worried about eating and we always had new shoes when we needed them. I'm not sure what I'd think if it had been otherwise.
Yes, but that's largely because you savor the dry, bittersweet taste of schadenfreude.
(There's no point in denying it, you know -- I admit the fault in myself, as well).
Hubby and I watched this last night and were mesmerized. This family has it together. I wish I had done as good a job with my brood of four. Those kids are never going to be parasites—they’ll give much more than they take. They live debt free.
I don’t care one way or the other about their volume of children, but those Duggars have undoubtedly the slowest loading page on the internet. After 2 minutes and the main page still wasn’t loaded (and me with cable internet), I gave up.
These are just my observations, but they have been striking enough for me to wish I had had more children at a younger age.
“I’m actually jealous of them. No matter how I try, I cannot get my children that organized.”
LOL. Your not the only one. My wife and I have three that at times can be a challenge.
WoW! Sounds like a total gay activist meltdown over this family!
So it's true his organ had no stops!
As someone who comes from a tiny family, I am terribly jealous of all you who have big families! I have friends in the religious, black community and have been invited to many family reunions. What wonderful times! What wonderful people! Sigh.
The article is from ‘05.
The Duggar family gives me HOPE in America!!! What a terrific CHRISTIAN family. Sadly, I think that the writer is the majority of America.....anti-CHRISTIAN.
WHo has a picture of Mark Morford???
I agree with that :-)
The poster child for “Drugs are bad, mmkay?”
Why does this paper tolerate, if not encourage, anti-white racism? And why is no one calling them on it?
Wow. How can this guy get away with this scathing article, but Don Imus loses his job over 3 words?!!!!
...speechless...
The sad part is he thinks he’s being witty. I had to stop reading after the first couple paragraphs, because the article was so boring.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.