Well jim bob has a place to park his F-150 again.

Like we need more people spreading their genes... Sterilize them both!

I'm glad some people are still having kids. There's a lot of ground to be made up for the hundreds of thousands of future taxpayers and Social Security fund contributors that are snuffed out every year.

Like we need more people spreading their genes

An interesting point... these people are "successful" from an evolutionary point of view. They're fucking lunatics by the standards of any rational individual, though. Fortunately, the Duggars' specific breed of insanity is the result of choice, not biology. Their children are not condemned to develop their parents' mindless adherence to Medieval dogma.

The state has a compelling interest in seeing these children raised in a stable household where the quality of their education is not in doubt. How these fools are allowed to keep their brood is beyond me. If it is maintained, the environment that these kids are being raised in will cause them long-standing psychological damage and impair their ability to function in society.

Typical selfish, irresponsible GenX'ers. What else has the Duggar generation given us, other than adding "slacker" to the dictionary?

What else has the Duggar generation given us, other than adding "slacker" to the dictionary?

They've also added a new definition for the word "stretchy".

Oh, well... the duggars themselves added that definition.

Time to abolish child tax credits. Should have been done the day the Duggars got married.

Left a load on the music thread for ya, Nulli...

Is she pregnant again?

Well, give it a week.

Libbies hate babies. See above.

Hopefully you all get some nice coat hangers in your stockings. Merry Christmas.

Dunno if I brought this up before, but on the corner of the street where I grew up was a big brick house - family had 20 kids, no shit. Catholic family. The mom looked like a frickin' zombie. Nice kids, tho. Several were about my age.

Hopefully you all get some nice coat hangers in your stockings.

That's not where you're supposed to put them...

#4 | Posted by ZombieHunter at 2009-12-11 07:56 PM | Reply | Flag: Well-spoken by a Strangelovian faithful servant of elitist propagandists.

How these fools are allowed to keep their brood is beyond me. If it is maintained, the environment that these kids are being raised in will cause them long-standing psychological damage and impair their ability to function in society.

In 1977, Mr. Holdren was a young academic who helped anti-natalist guru Paul Ehrlich and his wife Anne write an arrestingly horrible book entitled Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment. In a passage that reads eerily like the direct counterpoint to Ginsburg's musings about the reduction of undesirable populations, Holdren and the Ehrlichs wrote:

"If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility just as they can be required to exercise responsibility in their resource-consumption patterns."

The authors endorse the creation of "a Planetary regime" in charge of regulating all human economic activity and interactions with the environment and the "power to enforce the agreed limits" on human population growth through whatever means might be necessary....

In 1967, sociologist, demographer, and population control heavyweight Kingsley Davis published an essay in Science magazine observing:

"the social structure and economy must be changed before a deliberate reduction in the birthrate can be achieved in the West"

He urged governments to subsidize voluntary abortion and sterilization and restructure their tax systems to discourage both marriage and childbirth. Davis's recommendations apparently inspired Frederick Jaffe, Vice President of Planned Parenthood, when he composed a 1969 memorandum intended for use as a template for anti-natalist efforts. Like Paul Ehrlich, Jaffe suggested the placement of "fertility control agents in [the] water supply"; this recommendation was filed, oddly enough, under "Social Constraints." "Social Controls," on the other hand, included such measures as "compulsory abortion of all out-of-wedlock pregnancies," "compulsory sterilization of all who have two children except for a few who would be allowed three," and the issuance of "stock certificate-type permits for children." (radical population control system are built around the idea of a government-issued "permit" or "license" to have children.)

"How can we reduce reproduction?" wrote Garrett Hardin in a 1970 Science magazine article entitled "Parenthood: Right or Privilege?"

"Persuasion must be tried first. Mild coercion may soon be accepted for example, tax rewards for reproductive non-proliferation. But in the long run, a purely voluntary system selects for its own failure: noncooperators out-breed cooperators.

No libs, this is the type of people we WANT to have kids. Nice europeans (I dont't think I can say white on this board anymore, it will be considered racist against blacks and they will dump my post), who are self sufficient, have high standards, and are a benefit to society. Not a burden like so many WELFARE MOMMAS WHO DON'T KNOW WHO/WHERE BABY DADDY IS.

Libbies know that such people don't vote Democratic, though.

That's why they wish they were never born.

self sufficient ...

They may be self-sufficient, but it took publicity generated by their ginormous family. A cable TV channel and corporate sponsors built their house and donated household appliances. Most "Quiverfull" families wouldn't have that option.

Cork must have popped out and Jeebie or Jehosophat or whatever fell out.

Anything for ratings. btw, the baby wasn't Tiger's was it? talk about sinking an easy putt.....

More like throwing a hot dog down a hallway.

While I think they are nuts, they are at least self sufficient. They aren't a drain on society, and as far as I can tell, their children , while appearing a little brainwashed, don't seem stupid or lazy.

they are at least self sufficient.

What happens when their 15 minutes is over? I guess there are still travelling freak shows, or they can use Michelle for the tunnel of love.

#21 north
What happens when their 15 minutes is over?

what are you talking about? They aren't the Kate+8 moron TV parents.

The Duggars are devout Baptists and members of the Quiverfull movement, a Christian group that advocates having as many children as God gives them. They home-school all of their children and say that they live debt-free. They have always said that each child is a blessing and they would never try to avoid having more.

as far as I can tell, their children , while appearing a little brainwashed, don't seem stupid or lazy

You can be smart and brainwashed to believe shit from the Dark Ages. They have known nothing else. Remember the allegory of the cave?

It is not right for the State to deprive 19 children of their right to a quality education because their parents are so deluded that they think ignorance is a virtue.

They aren't the Kate+8 moron TV parents.

No, they're far, far worse. They're religious lunatics who stunt their kids' social and intellectual growth a little bit more with each day they're allowed to continue raising their brood. Those parents belong in a psych ward.

Libbies hate babies. See above.

No, I hate people that have 19 of them.

Drawing conclusions is tuff werk, eh RiR?

How good this little one has it! To be born as a wanted and loved child, to be cared for and doted on by such a large loving family. There are so many neglected, pushed aside children who are institutionalized in day care centers every day in this once great nation, who would trade anytime with this baby. These are not the people adding to America's crime, drug problems or drain on welfare. Children brought up in this type of home are not selfish or self centered. Our society is greatly blessed by responsible families who carefully teach each child their responsibilities such as the Drugers do. Congratulations to the large, happy family and to all of us who are benefited by them!

The Duggars don't let their kids date. Their son Josh was only allowed to meet his future bride face-to-face a few times, always with a chaperone:

#23 | Posted by ZombieHunter at 2009-12-11 11:38 PM | Reply | Flag: Goes Bananas at Every Anecdote of content Christians

#23 | Posted by ZombieHunter at 2009-12-11 11:38 PM | Reply | Flag: Holdren, Ehrlich, Kingsley Davis philosophy made you into some vampire-zombie sick puppy!

lunatics who stunt their kids' social and intellectual growth a little bit more with each day they're allowed to continue raising their brood. Those parents belong in a psych ward.

#26 rcade
Just because they made the news because of their family size, what gives us a license to judge every facet of their lives, as if we can decide if they are happy?

Libbies hate babies. See above.
Hopefully you all get some nice coat hangers in your stockings. Merry Christmas.

#11 | POSTED BY RIGHTISRIGHT

THAT is just a fucking stupid statement.

Having kids and having more children than some of my heifers have in their lifetime is another.

Hopefully Santa will take a great big shit in your stocking.

Just because they made the news because of their family size, what gives us a license to judge every facet of their lives, as if we can decide if they are happy?

#29 | POSTED BY L_RCONTRARIAN

Just how the fuck do you truly know if they are happy?

What happens behind closed doors could be totally different than the appearance given to their corporate sponsors.. Hell the Dad has never paid a dime in taxes in his life due to the size of the family and I doubt they pay for anything.

Don't like being judged.. too bad.

#31 | Posted by Legio at 2009-12-12 01:04 AM | Reply | Flag: Takes Full License as Lib Judging Non-Libs

Just how the f*ck do you truly know if they are happy? What happens behind closed doors could be totally different than the appearance

You stole my point, Leg, though expressed a bit less elequently.

Hell the Dad has never paid a dime in taxes in his life due to the size of the family and I doubt they pay for anything.

Just pontificating a lib assumption on a conserv.

I like how no one ever questions the Duggars' claims of being self sufficient. "They" don't home school their kids - they have a group of retired school teachers from their church that come to the house and teach the kids. "They" don't take care of the infants and toddlers. The older kids (10 and up) are assigned an infant or toddler and they are basically responsible for raising that kid.

Now this one is born 3 months premature (1 lb, 6 oz!) and, more likely than not, will have significant health problems for her entire life. I hope this isn't the case, but with Michelle now being 43, the children she bears from here on out are at a huge risk of having medical problems and birth defects. And at some point, they need to ask themselves, not if they could handle having one or more special needs kids, but if by the simple act of using some birth control from here on out, they could avoid bringing a child into this world that would probably never delight in a day without suffering.

If Jim Bob makes $125,000 in wages (He's actually a commercial slum lord) and with 15 kids under the age of 17, Jim Bob and Canyonero would qualify for $14,250 in Child Tax Credits. Their exemptions last year were $66,500. Taking Standard Deduction instead of Itemizing, with these facts, they would owe a TOTAL of $63 in Federal Income Taxes. Do with that information what you want.

I was hoping this one would be a boy and, in keeping with the J name theme, they would name him Jerk Off to help get Jim Bob out of this rut he seems to be in.

"...their children , while appearing a little brainwashed, don't seem stupid or lazy."

I thought they were from Arkansas? Not stupid or lazy?

Here's the sad part...not only did someone think it would make a good TV show, there must be people watching it or there would be no Corp. sponsors.

"don't seem stupid or lazy."

The parents on the other hand...

#33 help!
Would you like to share your source of your "info"?
Or are you selling your political day-dream?

No political day-dreaming. Guess you're not Karnack.

content Christians

Content? The parents are content with that life? Good for them. They have no right to force their own willful stupidity on 19 innocent people - blood relation or no. The kids deserve better.

a Strangelovian faithful servant of elitist propagandists

I see the thin-skinned schizophrenic schoolgirl has finally quit whimpering about "ad hominems" long enough to put one of her own together.

You're learning quickly, LR. By the end of this month, you should be arguing more coherently than a cretin on ketamine. Keep up the good work.

Drudge math
Serial-poster Goatman - "lol" for each post = L R Hubbardian

More like throwing a hot dog down a hallway.
#19 | Posted by LetUsPrey

..ff....

What happens when their 15 minutes is over?
#21 | Posted by northguy3

.....sadly for us, it will never be over......

...as with John & Kate & 8, the popularity of the Duggars will just increase in proportion to the dysfunctionality of the family .........

....a Duggar kid gets on drugs ?...ratings bonanza !!....all over CNN, Fox, MTZ........

.....a Duggar kid gets pregnant ?...a Duggar kid gets a DUI ?.....man...oh...man.....

.....we have been set up for a lifetime of fucking Duggar newsflash misery by the Infotainment Industry........

They may be self-sufficient, but it took publicity generated by their ginormous family. A cable TV channel and corporate sponsors built their house and donated household appliances. Most "Quiverfull" families wouldn't have that option.

#17 | Posted by rcade at 2009-12-11 08:53 PM | Reply | Flag: WISH I THOUGHT OF IT FIRST

Looks like she's had more than her stocking stuffed...

1 lb. 6oz.

either it's a very small child or a large worn out uterus

Just because they made the news because of their family size, what gives us a license to judge every facet of their lives, as if we can decide if they are happy?

We don't need a license. This is a discussion site. They have sought fame by becoming reality TV stars.

It's interesting that you didn't make this objection when people suggested that the Duggars were superior to "welfare mamas" and inner city parents. Was it OK to judge their lives when praising them?

I hope this isn't the case, but with Michelle now being 43, the children she bears from here on out are at a huge risk of having medical problems and birth defects.

Yep. I hope that's not the case with this child and she's completely healthy, but the odds are getting worse for that with the mom's age. I can't imagine any doctor would tell a 43-year-old woman with 19 kids that it's worth the risks to have a 20th.

#40 | Posted by ZombieHunter at 2009-12-12 04:34 AM | Reply | Flag: Dr Strangelove is back

Btw, You're clearly wholly unqualified to speak about what is a "quality education" being the fringe sick puppy you are.

#44 | Posted by vernon at 2009-12-12 08:45 AM | Reply | Flag:

They may be self-sufficient, but it took publicity generated by their ginormous family. A cable TV channel and corporate sponsors built their house and donated household appliances. Most "Quiverfull" families wouldn't have that option.

#17 | Posted by rcade at 2009-12-11 08:53 PM | Reply | Flag: WISH I THOUGHT OF IT FIRST

Why, rcade? Because it is a witty "slam" against a conserv? Perhaps the real story is the other way around. They got publicity and were offered housing because they were admired for their unique family values in the Quiverfull belief system.

Amazing how many people jump on the bandwagon to slam conservative family values at every opportunity.

#38 helpme, nothanks!

Regarding the tax info, I was just playing around with numbers till I got them owing nothing in Federal Income Taxes. With the TV show and what not, I expect they have more income than I ran the numbers on.

Since you feel so inclined to make things up, you have no credibility.

Why, rcade? Because it is a witty "slam" against a conserv?

Your contrarianism is boring. Are you actually for anything, or do you just sit on the sidelines asking dumb, cynical questions?

Good for them. They have no right to force their own willful stupidity on 19 innocent people - blood relation or no. The kids deserve better.

#39 | Posted by ZombieHunter
* * * *

The kids deserve better. Uh huh. Upthread you said we should sterilize them, not have allowed them to be born in the first place.

You're just a douchebag. Is there any part of anyone's life living anywhere, that libtards don't think they just know better than everyone else? Drop dead.

#48 rcade

Can you show conclusively that they "sought fame", or do you conveniently transfer one family's lack of values [Kate+8] on another family with family values?

They are not "reality Tv stars". Think you've confused the lib retard family Kate+8. Where is the thread about their "irrepsonsibility" having so many children? If anyone is irresponsible it is them because they are truly pimping on the stupidity of Americans and "reality TV". Not to mention their immoral fillandering, pending divorce which is a tragedy for these kids.

you didn't make this objection when people suggested that the Duggars were superior to "welfare mamas" and inner city parents.

Ridiculous. Why would I care to make an objection based some moron observer's opinions? I objected to the license libs think they have to selectively judge one family, while ignoring a much more deserved judgment of another "similar" family who literally have had a detrimental effect on their kids.

Can you show conclusively that they "sought fame" ...

They pimped out their family and signed a TV deal with TLC, just like Jon and Kate:

For all of the talk about the Duggar family values, they could be publicity whores just as bad as the Heene parents in Colorado. For all we know, this assembly line of children is motivated by a desire for fame. Who would want their family to be fodder for reality TV entertainment?

#51 rcade
Sorry to bore you.
Obviously I am "for" something. I vigorously defend family values and civil liberties.

I haven't asked any dumb questions, instead have made conservative counter-arguments. Certainly you must understand that, rcade since you earlier admitted your admiration of Alan Colmes on that ill-advised thread on Glenn Beck.

Sorry to bore you.

I was probably being too snippy. But I get tired of the knee-jerk claim that I "slam conservative family values at every opportunity" any time I dare to discuss this family. I think I've been fair in how I discussed the Duggars during the last four times they popped out a new kid or got pregnant. My wife's one of 9 kids, my mom's one of 7, and her mom's one of 12.

#54 rcade
I was not aware of that. I have to take back my earlier statements about license to judge. But judgment must be done fairly, not on convenient "slam" opportunities on family values.

Just curious, was it "pimping" for Kate-sters to do this?

Why don't you hold off on speculative unsubstantiated judgment until the show airs and see how they fare in their presentation of family values on a daily basis. Or is this what libs are actually afraid of?

#55 rcade
For all of the talk about the Duggar family values, they could be publicity whores just as bad as the Heene parents in Colorado. For all we know, this assembly line of children is motivated by a desire for fame. Who would want their family to be fodder for reality TV entertainment?

#57 rcade
How much have you discussed Kate+8 where there are solid grounds for judgment rather than the Duggar's on supposed "irresponsibility" of having another kid.

#58 | Posted by L_RContrarian at 2009-12-12 11:46 AM | Reply | Flag:

They got publicity and were offered housing because they were admired for their unique family values

Like the family of midgets, or Jon and Kate? The 800 channel cable uuniverse needs cheap shows to fill the time. Hence shows about fat people,truck drivers, auto body shops, breeders, and 27 versions of mythbusters and home reno/flipping shows.

And the ballon family and WH gate crashers attempts are just the tip of the pilot iceberg.

"vigorously defend family values "

Family values mean selfish, self-centered, self-indulgent, mindless breeding?

My wife's one of 9 kids, my mom's one of 7, and her mom's one of 12.

#57 | Posted by rcade
* * * *

And if jackoffs like Zombie and Nulli Spud had their way, you wife and mom wouldn't have been allowed to be born. Yet your only vitriol on this thread is reserved for the family itself.

If you have any real objections to the pro-death libbie posters advocating forced sterilization, I've yet to hear it. Say hello to your wife and mom. Up to those douchebags, they wouldn't exist. Neither would you.

#52 rir
Upthread you said we should sterilize them, not have allowed them to be born in the first place

Actually, that may have been implied, but the actual statement was that they should have had their kids taken away and the parents placed in a psych ward.

Zombie was educated and brainwashed, as many in the collegiate scientific acadamia, on the Ecoscience textbook where these policies are espoused like a cult religion.

#60 north
They got publicity and were offered housing because they were admired for their unique family values

Like the family of midgets, or Jon and Kate? The 800 channel cable uuniverse needs cheap shows to fill the time. Hence shows about fat people,truck drivers, auto body shops, breeders, and 27 versions of mythbusters and home reno/flipping shows.

North, I wasn't speaking of the show. I wasn't aware of that, as you would see if you read the full thread. I also addressed Kate+8.

"And if jackoffs like Zombie and Nulli Spud had their way, you wife and mom wouldn't have been allowed to be born. "
#62 | Posted by rightisright

You're a liar, douchebag

" pro-death libbie posters advocating forced sterilization,"

I haven't seen anyone you mentioned in that little rant advocate that on this thread. Don't you ever stop lying?

Yes. He's just another Stalinist. They know best, for everyone, and so they should be able to dictate how families live their lives.

Imagine how much better this world will be, when the ME generation gets lowered into the ground, once and for all. The same crowd that shouted, "Hey Hey LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?", then went home and slaughtered millions of their own.

Nothing is more despicable than a self-loathing, baby-booming libtard.

I've said here before that the Gosselins are terrible parents for pimping their kids to TV, especially after their marriage started falling apart and they didn't kick the show out and reclaim their privacy.

As for the Duggars, the idea that their show will be an uplifting experience for all -- themselves included -- seems laughable to me. Seen any reality TV?

If you have any real objections to the pro-death libbie posters advocating forced sterilization, I've yet to hear it.

I didn't realize I was required to comment on every single idea put forward in this discussion.

But looking back at Null's comments, I don't see any advocating forced sterilization. The most he said was that we should abolish the child tax credit, which as far as I know does not cause women to be infertile.

#61 | Posted by nullifidian at 2009-12-12 11:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

"vigorously defend family values "

Family values mean selfish, self-centered, self-indulgent, mindless breeding?

No, that is your transposed definition.

Like we need more people spreading their genes... Sterilize them both!

#2 | Posted by apparatchik

" apparatchik"

#69 | Posted by rightisright

Yeah, but you specifically mentioned Zombie, Spud, and myself. You were lying...again.

It's a question of balance. We see it all the time. The many ministers of faith that become popular while compensating for their dark sides...Swaggert, Haggard, Baker, Barnes, etc. Politicians espousing family values are another example of people seeking balance in their lives...see Sanford, Ensign, and the rest. I've learned, we all should have learned, to wonder what is going on behind the scenes whenever someone is talking of high standards and their superior moral values. Those folks are compensating for some weakness in their characters. Tiger Woods is the most recent example, his discipline in his professional life compensated for his lack of discipline away from golf. One, or both, of the Duggars are compensating for something...perhaps we'll learn of it when the kids begin pumping out the books of their lives at some point.

RightIsRight: You specifically called out Zombie, Null and Spud for "not wanting my wife and mom ... to be born." Show me where they advocated forced sterilization and I will take them off my Holidaymas card list.

"Nothing is more despicable than a self-loathing, baby-booming libtard.

#66 | Posted by rightisright

Conservatism is a mental disorder, and RubeisRube belongs in a psych ward. See! Blogging is easy.

#67 rcade
The most he said was that we should abolish the child tax credit, which as far as I know does not cause women to be infertile.

I was with you on most of the post. Certainly you are aware what effect abolishing child tax credits would actually have. Recall this was the propaganda all the way back to 1970 thru the current time in academia.

"Persuasion must be tried first. Mild coercion may soon be accepted for example, tax rewards for reproductive non-proliferation. But in the long run, a purely voluntary system selects for its own failure: noncooperators out-breed cooperators.

Rock on Duggars. I think You are a great wonderful Family. I just have one question. Does the "Y" have two off ramps or just one?? Just curious.

Larry

It doesn't matter to me, really, Rcade. You're typical of the old saying, "A conservationist is someone who already has a beach house." You owe your existence to families not unlike this one. But why should that stop you?

You libbies always know best. Up until the boomer generation, children were a blessing, through all the ages, through every civilization. Now, having children is irresponsible. A drain on the planet's resources. Children are like locusts. But I'll agree to a point: the people who believe such nonsense shouldn't be having children in the first place. So, I guess the so-called pro-choice movement has managed something good after all: a whole lot fewer libbies being born.

Tiger Woods is the most recent example, his discipline in his professional life compensated for his lack of discipline away from golf.

It remains to be seen if his golf is as good without a lot of sex.

RightIsRight: You specifically called out Zombie, Null and Spud for "not wanting my wife and mom ... to be born." Show me where they advocated forced sterilization and I will take them off my Holidaymas card list.

#72 | Posted by rcade

* * * *

I don't want you to. It's obvious you have a special kinship that transcends their viewpoints on big families like your mom's and your wife's. You know, the ones that indulge in "selfish, mindless breeding."

"Pro-Choice IS pro-life!" Sure.

#71
Duggars are compensating for something

Supposition based on cutesy selective anecdotes of "conservatives" like Tiger Woods, Sanford, etc, supposedly evidencing that anyone purporting family values has some sinister secret just waiting to be discovered by the vampires of libland waiting for some blood.

You owe your existence to families not unlike this one. But why should that stop you?

I had nothing to do with the decision of my relatives to have lots and lots of kids. If I was the product of an arranged marriage would I be compelled to support that too?

I've never said that people shouldn't have large families. But at a certain point -- 18, 19, 20 and still counting -- it seems crazy to me. Do you think the Duggars should go for 21 after having this preemie? She'd be 44 when it was born. The health risks are growing with each year after 40.

Up until the boomer generation, children were a blessing, through all the ages, through every civilization. Now, having children is irresponsible.

Times change. Resources are not infinite. Although the U.S. doesn't have to think about population control measures like they do in China, at some point in the future that day is probably coming for everybody.

RightIsRight: It's lame that you won't retract the statement about Nulli, Zombie and Spud. You were wrong. Admit it.

Fine. Nulli and Zombie and Spud didn't advocate forced sterilization. I'm so sorry; I apologize for "lying". It was Apparatchik who did. Zombie advocates forcibly removing the children from the home, because the parents would rather home-school than send them to the local Arkansas public school.
Nulli pretends to know the difference between having a lot of children simply because a family loves them, and doing so out of "selfish, self-centered, self-indulgent, mindless breeding", and knows, somehow, that this family is the latter. Spud says that daddy needs a vasectomy. ASAP.

But Rcade didn't have anything to say about any of those posts. Fine with me. Keep your families very, very small. Don't have kids at all. Maybe all your family trees are upside-down, and will end with you. All for the sake of the planet, of course.

I had nothing to do with the decision of my relatives to have lots and lots of kids.
* * * *

Do you think it was irresponsible? We're talking about your mother's and your wife's family--it wasn't that long ago. Malthus did his work in the 19th century; warnings of overpopulation began in the early 20th century. So were your grandparents, and your mother's parents--reckless? Were they guilty of "mindless breeding"?

Do you think it was irresponsible?

No. I do wonder sometimes whether it's a good idea to have so many kids that it is difficult to look after them closely and afford things like their college education. When my wife and I made the jump from two kids to three, that was big enough for us. But my wife's family is happy and healthy and mostly sane, and my mother's are as well. My grandmother's the last of her 12 still living. Catholicism did alright by us (though I don't think any of them are still in the church.)

It's a bit hypocritical for you to knock people harshly because they want small families or no kids at all. I thought we weren't supposed to judge.

Zombie advocates forcibly removing the children from the home, because the parents would rather home-school than send them to the local Arkansas public school.

I don't think home-schooling comes anywhere close to the quality of most public schools. I also think that kids miss out on the opportunity to create an identity for themselves as independent people outside the home, which they get by going to school. But I don't think that should be grounds for getting child services involved in their lives. I disagree with ZombieHunter.

Nulli pretends to know the difference between having a lot of children simply because a family loves them, and doing so out of "selfish, self-centered, self-indulgent, mindless breeding", and knows, somehow, that this family is the latter.

Given the number of children the Duggars have had, I can't blame anybody for thinking they are being selfish.

Spud says that daddy needs a vasectomy.

Why is it OK to support their decision to have 20 but wrong to think that's too many?

Amazing how many people jump on the bandwagon to slam conservative family values at every opportunity.
....#49 | Posted by L_RContrarian

.....that's because they are sick, backward people.....

.....they share all essential values with the Taliban......

Arkansas - where they don't even know the best and cheapest form of birth control.

It's a bit hypocritical for you to knock people harshly because they want small families or no kids at all. I thought we weren't supposed to judge.

#84 | Posted by rcade
* * * *

That's what I thought too. Be sure to tell your friends.

I don't knock people for wanting few, or no, children. In fact, in most of their cases, it's good. Tens of millions of liberals believe that it is a crime to have children--it's here, on the DR, all the time. And in their case, I agree.

And these decisions, made millions of times over the course of a generation, have consequences. Vermont is having to merge school systems, because the number of children is collapsing. Ditto for New York City and San Francisco. Europe is on a demographic death-spiral, from which no population has EVER recovered. EVER, in history. World War II did less damage to Europe than Europe's post-Christian philosophy has.

For all the supposedly family-friendly policies enacted by the most liberal enclaves on planet earth, where are all the families?

#80 rcade
Although the U.S. doesn't have to think about population control measures like they do in China, at some point in the future that day is probably coming for everybody.

Good point, maybe even sooner than most would ever believe. Which reminds me? Why not promote EU Times article? Are they not mainstream enough?

No, it isn't coming. You can fit the entire human population of planet earth in Jacksonville, Florida, and nobody would be able to touch anyone else, even with everyone swinging his arms. WE are earth's most valuable resource. And as more and more of us are around, we become more cunning in how to use the resources that are here.

What is the matter with you people.

#80 | Posted by rcade at 2009-12-12 12:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

Times change. Resources are not infinite.

I would disagree to the simple assertion that 'times change'. Was it not an engineered crisis that was called for by the de-population fanatics? Here's just one of thousands of excerpts:

"What if a small group of world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the Earth [environment] comes from the actions of the rich countries? So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about? This group of world leaders form a secret society to bring about an economic collapse." Maurice Strong, May, 1990 interview with West Magazine describing a "novel" that he would like to write

How was this done? Many ways. For one, Clinton passed Nafta, Bush expanded it, now Obama is running with it. Many policies that destroyed industry.

You can fit the entire human population of planet earth in Jacksonville, Florida, and nobody would be able to touch anyone else, even with everyone swinging his arms. WE are earth's most valuable resource. And as more and more of us are around, we become more cunning in how to use the resources that are here.

Tell that to the Chinese. The issue with population isn't the amount of physical space that people consume, it is the resources they consume.

This issue seems detached from us because the US isn't going to have to deal with population issues in our lifetime. Our population is projected to grow by another 150-200 million by 2100. The US certainly has the natural resources to support that sort of population growth so you might ask, "what's the big deal?"

This isn't true of other countries - China and India especially. Even if China's population didn't grow by another person starting tomorrow, they will still be consuming more water for drinking, irrigation, and industry than they receive from rain, rivers, and recycling. The US may be able to sustain half a billion people, but the Chinese can't keep sustaining the billion-plus they already have. The Chinese are still awhile from actually having to suffer the consequences of depleting vital resources, but it is foolhardy to dismiss an imminent problem because its effects aren't being felt yet. It's even more ignorant to buy into a bunch of religious mumbo-jumbo that encourages you to pop out kids as fast as possible - population problem or not.

What happens, though, when the next "Irish potato famine" hits? Much of the world's population is dependent on one staple crop. Plants inevitably get sick, just as humans do. Thanks to the yammering of new-age loons, GM crops engineered for resistance are not being planted. We're not going to pass some magical threshold and start starving. There will be so many of us here that our grasp on vital resources will grow too tenuous and the loss of just one will jeopardize the survival of millions.

Mother nature will take care of the "depopulation," not LR's Legion of Doom. When that happens, the morons who complain about vaccines and GM crops will have the blood of millions on their hands. They are the "eugenecists," the evil men who spread lies to hasten the death of the fools who believe them. LR doesn't need to piss himself every time the thought of secret society crosses his mind. Maybe he realizes this and just likes the warm sensation running down his leg. Who knows. The guy is an idiot without a clue as to what he's talking about. For all his prattle about "eugenics," it's quite ironic that the positions he supports will result in that exact outcome.

Rightisright vomited:
"it's here, on the DR, all the time."
#88 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-12-12 01:02 PM |

Where?

Their next child should be another J name: Jesuswhatwerewethinking

Where?

#96 | Posted by SamBarber
* * *

Just google posts from Herm, Buffalo, Zatoichi, Apparatchik.

But I digress. I believe the answer to many of our problems lies in liberals agreeing not to reproduce. Carry on! Save the planet, and wear a condom!

Jesus, you're really batshit over this topic, eh RIR?

It was me. I advocate forced sterilization. There's no good reason to have that many children in today's society. Rcade's parents' generation, generations before, different story, different circumstances.

Today, its selfish and despicable.

I also believe in permanent sterilization of violent felons. On top of that, I'm all for some form of sterilization before puberty until one demonstrates an ability to handle the responsibilities of having a family. You need a license to drive, you should have one to breed.

Save the planet, and wear a condom!

Advice your father got to late...

Rcade's parents' generation, generations before, different story, different circumstances.

Today, its selfish and despicable.
* * * *

That's what the apologists for slavery and Nazism say.

I'll give you credit for this much: you're not shy about your douchebaggery. How many kids do you have?

The ultimate greed in 2010 are selfish parents over-populating an already overpopulated world for their own self interest. The Chinese have hit the target on this by limiting the number of offspring. Our IRS and welfare policy that gives rewards for having children is at the root of the problem. The problem with the world environment be it global warming or over fishing or a polluted atmosphere is about a population that tripled in 40 years. These idiots are part of the problem.

Why, rcade? Because it is a witty "slam" against a conserv?
Your contrarianism is boring. Are you actually for anything, or do you just sit on the sidelines asking dumb, cynical questions?

#51 | POSTED BY RCADE

He reminds me of Boss Tweed in gangs of New York and Bill addresses him

Bill: [taps his glass eye with a knife] I know your works. You are neither cold nor hot. So because you are lukewarm, I will spew you out of my mouth.

I was with you on most of the post. Certainly you are aware what effect abolishing child tax credits would actually have. Recall this was the propaganda all the way back to 1970 thru the current time in academia.
"Persuasion must be tried first. Mild coercion may soon be accepted for example, tax rewards for reproductive non-proliferation. But in the long run, a purely voluntary system selects for its own failure: noncooperators out-breed cooperators.
#74 | POSTED BY L_RCONTRARIAN

the child tax credit is welfare

This issue seems detached from us because the US isn't going to have to deal with population issues in our lifetime. Our population is projected to grow by another 150-200 million by 2100. The US certainly has the natural resources to support that sort of population growth so you might ask, "what's the big deal?"

#95 | POSTED BY ZOMBIEHUNTER

Since we don't live in a fish bowl, we have to deal with the issue or it spills over into our little world.

Too many people, not enough resources to go around = war, invasion, mass starvation, genocide.

Time and again this is a method to control population by nature much like disease.

But I digress. I believe the answer to many of our problems lies in liberals agreeing not to reproduce. Carry on! Save the planet, and wear a condom!

#98 | Posted by rightisright

Most libs want a manageable family of 1 or 2 kids. 19 is just insane. At 43 she should really stop. The odds keep going up she will have a child with birth defects. I think she will have more though because I think they crave the attention each child birth brings.

Since we don't live in a fish bowl, we have to deal with the issue or it spills over into our little world.

Did you read the rest of the post?

I may not have explicitly stated what you did, but I did describe the problems other nations will face and ithe problems of one nation never stay confined within its borders.

#100 | Posted by ZombieHunter at 2009-12-12 04:29 PM | Reply | Flag Too bad your Daddy's condom broke

#95 | Posted by ZombieHunter at 2009-12-12 02:22 PM | Reply | Flag: Thought you had removed yourself and your perverted govt child-dormitory policies to a more appropriate thread.

#4 | Posted by ZombieHunter at 2009-12-11 07:56 PM | Reply | Flag: Well-spoken by a Strangelovian faithful servant of elitist propagandists

#23 | Posted by ZombieHunter at 2009-12-11 11:38 PM | Reply | Flag: Goes Bananas at Every Anecdote of content Christians

#23 | Posted by ZombieHunter at 2009-12-11 11:38 PM | Reply | Flag: Holdren, Ehrlich, Kingsley Davis philosophy made you into some vampire-zombie sick puppy!

Yes, LR, I can see you want attention. Now what is it?

That's what the apologists for slavery and Nazism say.

To borrow a term from you; Your douchbaggery knows no bounds.

They're "fucking lunatics" all right. Libbies hate babies if it's 20 to a family. Does anyone still think that these people do NOT commit a crime against humanity? Pollution, climate change, overpopulation... herm

Well Herm--

Why stop at 19--you would have them at zero.

1lb 6oz? I've eaten steaks bigger than that!

Baby very tiny and early by 3 months or so.

Thoughts and prayers for the baby and the family.

Murphy is too much of shill to even mention that having babies over 40 isn't a good idea.

"Well Herm--Why stop at 19--you would have them at zero." Murph, 'tis the season to be jolly. Why talk trash? I have two kids and five grandkids. Seems like a decent number. Doesn't peril our world. herm

I have two kids and five grandkids. Seems like a decent number. Doesn't peril our world. herm

#116 | Posted by herm at 2009-12-13 02:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

What was your tally on abortions?

What I don't understand is how you survived the intact dilation and extraction process.

Way too many kids for two parents to devote the necessary love and attention towards.

Never had an abortion, tonsillectomy, appendectomy or broken bone. herm

Put the poor woman in witness protection.

She had preeclampsia - she and the baby are doing well.

Never had an abortion, tonsillectomy, appendectomy or broken bone. herm

#120 | Posted by herm at 2009-12-13 08:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

That lobotomy sure worked out for you though. Hope your drooling problem clears up.

FF!

"She had preeclampsia"

She needs a postclampsia before Jim Bob mounts her again.

The typical douchebaggery surfaces on every thread about large families.

Leftists are pure scum.

The typical douchebaggery surfaces on every thread about large families.

Leftists are pure scum.

No, the douchebaggery is purely found on the right on this thread.

Praising the Duggars for their "family values"?

WTF?!

Asserting that the left "hate" babies?

Asserting that the left thinks the ideal number of kids is zero?

That shit bypasses yer RW radar somehow but then you call lefties "scum" for suggesting that an overly large family in this day and age is selfishness and ignorance incarnate?

Douchebag, thy name is Jeff.

Give yer head a shake, Jeff.

Be Well.

No libs, this is the type of people we WANT to have kids. Nice europeans (I dont't think I can say white on this board anymore, it will be considered racist against blacks and they will dump my post)

Pure racist scum.

Be Well.

I don't think RCADE watches this like he used to.

Long road ahead for such a small baby.

My prayers are with them.