 |
|
05-12-2008, 01:15 PM
|
 |
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: mountains of East TN
Posts: 10,592
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceanbreeze
Listen, the Duggars religion has zip, zero, zilch, to do with the argument over OVER reproducing 18 children. Quit making it about Christianity, when it's clearly not. She's been pregnant 17x the woman knows her cycle and if she cared enough about her kids and the earth she would not have sex when she ovulated. She is not raising those children by herself, the other children are raising them and I can guarantee you will see many of the Duggar children without children when they are married.
|
(1) I am not making this about religion, your side is. Look at how many have commented on her religion. My entire argument has been based on personal choice.
(2) What is wrong with teaching the younger kids responsibility for each other?
(3) If many of the kids don't have kids that will be their choice don't you think?
(4) Why does she have to be barren in order to care about the earth?
__________________
Its better to have fussed and crabbed then never to have fussed at all - Lucy
|
05-12-2008, 01:18 PM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,248
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceanbreeze
Yep, I do agree with you. 
The Duggar mom and dad aren't raising or schooling those children by themselves. The older children are being burdened with that responsibility.
I also like the point about if Mr. Duggar become disabled. Who will support a family of 20? How can he even support a family of 20? When most people have a hard time supporting a family of 4. |
Who will support yoru family if your husband dies or becomes disabled?
What does it matter to you how he can support his family? They claim to live debt free, can you say that? |
05-12-2008, 01:18 PM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: mountains of East TN
Posts: 10,592
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by George O Well
>>>If you can gaurantee that daddy won't end up on disability tomorrow or that the kids won't be wards of the state when daddy ends up on disability, then you can guarantee that they'll leave me alone. But my only REAL issue is the amount of personal attention that these 'parents' can give to 18 kids. The mathematics say it can't be much.
|
George, that is the same argument for wearing seatbelts, motorcycle helmets, eating fat free hamburgers and a host of other issues progressives want to control. So, because I might fall out of a tree and end up on disability (disability that I have paid into for decades) then I should not have children?
I have an idea, stop having the state responsible for disability. Put the oneous back on the individual. You can buy a disability insurance policy, do it.
__________________
Its better to have fussed and crabbed then never to have fussed at all - Lucy
|
05-12-2008, 01:23 PM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,218
|
|
All I'm saying is that the kid could have called it a helluva lot worse than 'compound'. I think 'compound' is a pretty innocuous term.
|
05-12-2008, 01:27 PM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,248
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by George O Well
All I'm saying is that the kid could have called it a helluva lot worse than 'compound'. I think 'compound' is a pretty innocuous term.
|
And I think it is obvious what people are referring to when they call a family of 18 a compound, especially when religion is brought into it like it was. Thing is, why not defend its usage rather than make yourself look ridiculous by saying it really wasn't meant in a negative way. |
05-12-2008, 01:32 PM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,218
|
|
Quote:
|
but if I were to lay down a bet I would say it is a lot higher than your figure that you pulled out of thin air.
|
>>>I READ, Dom buddy. And I don't always put my articles into my "favorites" bin for future arguements. But 8 billion is the last I've heard. If you're a man of big faith, go with 50 billion. I really don't care.
Quote:
|
Either way, it is their choice to have the children, not yours.
|
Do you say the same thing about welfare mothers? Because no matter how you cut it, those people are a slow sales month away from being welfare parents. |
05-12-2008, 01:36 PM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,218
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dom1
And I think it is obvious what people are referring to when they call a family of 18 a compound, especially when religion is brought into it like it was. Thing is, why not defend its usage rather than make yourself look ridiculous by saying it really wasn't meant in a negative way.
|
To me, it's a 'compound'. I make no defense. |
05-12-2008, 01:41 PM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,218
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanbforrest45
George, that is the same argument for wearing seatbelts, motorcycle helmets, eating fat free hamburgers and a host of other issues progressives want to control. So, because I might fall out of a tree and end up on disability (disability that I have paid into for decades) then I should not have children?
I have an idea, stop having the state responsible for disability. Put the oneous back on the individual. You can buy a disability insurance policy, do it.
|
>>>Realize, Nate, that my ONLY issue with having 18 kids is that kids require AND deserve attention. You know (and I know) that it's tough to give personal attention to one-third or one-fourth that many kids. |
05-12-2008, 01:43 PM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,248
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by George O Well
>>>I READ, Dom buddy. And I don't always put my articles into my "favorites" bin for future arguements. But 8 billion is the last I've heard. If you're a man of big faith, go with 50 billion. I really don't care.
Do you say the same thing about welfare mothers? Because no matter how you cut it, those people are a slow sales month away from being welfare parents.
|
Evidently you do care because you are worried about a family having more children than you think is acceptable.
Like I said, I don't know how much the 'carrying capacity' is, but common sense tells me it is more than 8 billion, especially when the UN is saying a higher number.
I have never said that welfare parents should be told how many kids they can have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by George O Well
To me, it's a 'compound'. I make no defense.
|
And I don't expect you to make a defense for saying it, which is why I was surprised you were trying to help them out. |
05-12-2008, 02:16 PM
|
 |
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Uptown Chicago and the Green Mill on a regular basis
Posts: 2,713
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanbforrest45
(1) I am not making this about religion, your side is. Look at how many have commented on her religion. My entire argument has been based on personal choice.
(2) What is wrong with teaching the younger kids responsibility for each other?
(3) If many of the kids don't have kids that will be their choice don't you think?
(4) Why does she have to be barren in order to care about the earth?
|
You can claim you are not making it about religion...but there is NO DOUBT, that this family is
Non secularism and mental illness is a common, but dangerous combination
__________________
Argue with some..IGNORE the stupid
Yeah it hurts, you have been fucked by an Elephant !
"Happamia, sanoi kettu pihlajanmarjoista kun ei niihin yltänyt" ("Sour, said the fox about rowan berries, being unable to reach them"
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
