Welcome to Gaia! ::

Reply Pro-Choice Gaians
~Quiverfull~ (a "movement") Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2 3 [>] [»|]

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

Grip of Death

PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 10:56 am


[Ernie]
Oh God, the Duggars. They're "traditional" in the way that mommy shouldn't work outside the home (so I don't where they're getting all that money if they've only got one income) and her job is solely to make babies for God and her husband. The kids are homeschooled, of course (no supersized family is complete without racist, anti-gay, creationist schooling!) and they spend all their time doing chores around the house. Because there are seventeen of them, plus the parents. That's a lot of clothes, sheets and dishes to wash.

Those kids are going to have serious problems when they grow up.


I hate how they have their own show on TLC or some other cable channel. I don't watch it, but I know it exists. Just because those people think that their biological genetics are "superior" to many people's and pop out 17 kids, does not mean we should give them the "attention" they want on the news or media. But it's kind of hard to ignore that they exist, because it's supremely arrogant to pump out all of those kids in a time like global overpopulation, and they DO love the media attention which raises a big red flag. They think they can "convert" other people to "their" lifestyle, which undoubtedly they think their lifestyle is superior to everyone elses. Lots of insecurity there, if you ask me.
PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 6:18 pm


Joselle`Stark
People like that drive me nuts. What bugs me even more is that they call themselves "traditional". I'm sorry, human beings were NOT made to have litters.

Thanks to that "traditional" nonsense, I get lumped in with freaks like that --- solely because I currently choose to be unemployed and I've almost always got dinner on the table when my fiance walks through the door. Seriously, how ******** up do some people have to be not to recognize the difference between a CRAZY PERSON and a slightly eccentric college student who just loves to cook? I mean, jeez, I do the same freaking thing for my roommates!


Exactly! I hope to be a stay at home mom someday, but... that's just because I love caring for kids... not cause I want 17 of them out of my body! (I'm planning on having 2, then adopting more, to the amount I can afford/handle, and with experience in childcare already, and a fiance going into a well-paying career due to his major in college, and the fact I'm willing to foster-adopt... there may be a lot of kids in my future, but BECAUSE of my experience, I know how many I can handle) The Duggars give even religious people a bad name... Babywise, I've heard of it, it's DANGEROUS..

If you don't have time to give your kids love, don't have them.

RoseRose


Lady Adriata

Friendly Entrepreneur

7,800 Points
  • Tycoon 200
  • Profitable 100
  • The Perfect Setup 150
PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 6:54 pm


Grip of Death
Lady Adriata
Natalism makes sense for places that have a failing birth right and rising mortality.. they need a population and need one NOW.

I believe Russia is actively engaged in Natalism. It isn't forced but they provide excellent incentives to women who choose to mother many children, from free cars to tax breaks to free medical care and money.

Natalism in the USA though? For one thing, it's not needed, and second, there are no incentives given to us by our Government to have children.

Natalism is socially pushed but not backed up by anything tangible or even able to sway a mother's decision.. it's kind of sad. I personally think it has no use being legislated into our system.

Should someone choose to follow it, good for them-- but our Government should in no way enforce or push it.


Natalism does NOT make sense in a world that is heavily overpopulated even if there's a country or two where the population is shrinking. Of course a nation will want their birthrates to be high, and their people to be many, but do they really give a crap about the environmental consequences of those actions, muchless the quality of lives of their citizenry?


I do disagree- I understand that the world suffers overpopulation, but I mostly mean that first world countries or relatively close to that, with shrinking rates of population, DO need a human force for the own good of their people in that general area, the area that forms their "nation".

I'm not saying I think Natalism is WONDERFUL, I'm merely saying I can understand why some countries have it. I don't think that the US needs it at all though.
PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 11:29 pm


With nations comes with the myth that the world is carved into huge chunks of territories owned by certain humans. This was an effective belief system back in the colonial/pre-colonial days. But how long can we sustain that ideology? Can a wolf, beaver, gazelle, or bear not cross an imaginary border, a human-construct?

What we haven't collectively realized is that we live on one land, one world, and the environmental destruction in Brazil's rainforest, for example, affects people all the way across to Japan. And the Japanese ambitiously overfishing the waters due to their cultural preference for fish affects our future grandchildren when there will be nothing in the oceans of the world except slimy bacteria goo and jellyfish.

...Not to mention that the more industrialized nations exploit the developing nations in order to be where they are now, standing high in wealth and resources.

We are in an era where many multi-national companies have as much wealth, power, and prestige as a nation. Infact, these corporations often supersede the "law of the land" wherever they go- look at companies like Coca Cola if ya don't believe me. And there's much lobbying interests here and there to twist things to the company's favor. Nations just aren't as sovereign as they used to be.

* I really don't know myself how to examine my own post here. Having "territory" lends itself to security. Like, for example, when you buy a house with land on it, you feel secure that you "own" space for yourself away from anyone else, and it's protective. Or only the feeling of protection, since invasions can and do happen. No one likes their "space" invaded. at the same time... ultimately... can we really say we own anything afterall? For example, I have nearly 2 acres of land... can I prevent birds, squirrels, possums, stray dogs, and deer from stepping on my land? no...

Grip of Death


Lady Adriata

Friendly Entrepreneur

7,800 Points
  • Tycoon 200
  • Profitable 100
  • The Perfect Setup 150
PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 3:55 am


On a Utopian level, I agree with you.

But on a realistic level, I just still have to disagree with you, Grip of Death.

On a Utopian level we wouldn't need abortion because we could perfectly control pregnancy and getting pregnant and having kids would have no risks and problems..

We don't live in a perfect world nor will we ever live in a perfect world. I can't be Pro-Choice do to rationality and practicality and at the same time dismiss the same practicality and rationality that sometimes is used to promote natalism.

The world IS carved into huge chunks of territories owned by certain humans. It may not apply to animals as it does humans, but that IS the way it is and I am sure it's how it will be for a long time -- countries exist and we are controlled by our respective countries.

I really don't want to get into a long debate over it, but I can't be against the right to childbirth being impeded on in any sense by our respective Governments. Should they choose to pour more funding into abortions, or alternatively, natalism, I can't complain so long as women aren't having their choice to decide taken away from them.
PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 6:48 am


murasame blade
Joselle`Stark
People like that drive me nuts. What bugs me even more is that they call themselves "traditional". I'm sorry, human beings were NOT made to have litters.

Thanks to that "traditional" nonsense, I get lumped in with freaks like that --- solely because I currently choose to be unemployed and I've almost always got dinner on the table when my fiance walks through the door. Seriously, how ******** up do some people have to be not to recognize the difference between a CRAZY PERSON and a slightly eccentric college student who just loves to cook? I mean, jeez, I do the same freaking thing for my roommates!

The Dugger lady depends solely on the "buddy system" to raise her kids, if you've ever seen that show, you'll see that she hardly puts an effort into raising her kids, instead she relies on the older siblings to take care of the younger siblings.


The Dugger mother pisses me off to no end.
I watched the shows that they had and the entire time she bossed her kids around, I didn't ever see her cuddling her kids or giving them kisses. And her "buddy system" looked more like forced parenting if not neglect to me.
The only thing you ever see her do is laundry and perhaps throw something in the oven, the older kids do practicly everything else.
Anyways...
I felt so sorry for their children, they all seemed unhappy despite the smiles (which all seemed forced) and very uptight.

I just thought of this, to give birth to all her kids.... wouldn't she have been pregnant for almost ten years?

crystal_pepzi

7,050 Points
  • Clambake 200
  • Sausage Fest 200
  • Nudist Colony 200

[Ernie]

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:39 am


Grip of Death
[Ernie]
Oh God, the Duggars. They're "traditional" in the way that mommy shouldn't work outside the home (so I don't where they're getting all that money if they've only got one income) and her job is solely to make babies for God and her husband. The kids are homeschooled, of course (no supersized family is complete without racist, anti-gay, creationist schooling!) and they spend all their time doing chores around the house. Because there are seventeen of them, plus the parents. That's a lot of clothes, sheets and dishes to wash.

Those kids are going to have serious problems when they grow up.


I hate how they have their own show on TLC or some other cable channel. I don't watch it, but I know it exists. Just because those people think that their biological genetics are "superior" to many people's and pop out 17 kids, does not mean we should give them the "attention" they want on the news or media. But it's kind of hard to ignore that they exist, because it's supremely arrogant to pump out all of those kids in a time like global overpopulation, and they DO love the media attention which raises a big red flag. They think they can "convert" other people to "their" lifestyle, which undoubtedly they think their lifestyle is superior to everyone elses. Lots of insecurity there, if you ask me.


The guy who narrates the show is so annoying. I saw an episode of it once. It was like a trainwreck. gonk
PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 11:39 am


The thing that really irks me about the Duggars is that it doesn't appear that Michele actually does any real, well, parenting. Due to the 'buddy system' they have in place, it looks more like the other kids are the ones who are actually performing the day-to-day drudgery of parenting each other while Michele has little to no involvement beyond scheduling and basic home maintenance.

If it weren't for the fact that the kids have little to no exposure to the outside world (and therefore, no experience with other families to compare/contrast with,) I wouldn't be surprized if the kids resented their parents for gypping them out of a full childhood experience. But seeing as that's all they know, they probably don't know any better.

For the Quiverfull movement as a whole, I think it's irresponsible like whoa to have umpty-bajillion kids. Unless the parents are independently wealthy and lead an eco-friendly lifestyle, I find it hard to believe that they can afford to raise these kids well or not put a dent in an already unstable environment and its natural resources.

And why don't these people adopt, for crying out loud? Why do these Quiverfull types always have to have a child shot straight from their loins? If they want to have s**t-tons of kids for the Lord, why won't they adopt some in need of a loving home and raise them? There's no need to breed when there's so many kids already available.

paper_phoenix


PhaedraMcSpiffy

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 3:41 pm


Sorry, I can't resist:

User Image
PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 4:22 pm


I continually wonder why she hasn't had a prolapsed uterus yet... or why after so many pregnancies she isn't a withered shell of her youthful self.

Talon-chan


Dissnitive Blade

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 6:07 pm


PhaedraMcSpiffy
Sorry, I can't resist:

User Image

Thats just freaky, like B-rated horror movie freaky.
PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 7:02 pm


Talon-chan
I continually wonder why she hasn't had a prolapsed uterus yet... or why after so many pregnancies she isn't a withered shell of her youthful self.


I know the v****a is a resilent organ and all,
but don't you ponder if she is just like......flapping in the wind down there?

Trite~Elegy


Dissnitive Blade

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 8:01 pm


Trite~Elegy
Talon-chan
I continually wonder why she hasn't had a prolapsed uterus yet... or why after so many pregnancies she isn't a withered shell of her youthful self.


I know the v****a is a resilent organ and all,
but don't you ponder if she is just like......flapping in the wind down there?

Maybe she doesn't even go into labor anymore, the baby just slides out -bad mental image-
PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 8:41 pm


murasame blade
Trite~Elegy
Talon-chan
I continually wonder why she hasn't had a prolapsed uterus yet... or why after so many pregnancies she isn't a withered shell of her youthful self.


I know the v****a is a resilent organ and all,
but don't you ponder if she is just like......flapping in the wind down there?

Maybe she doesn't even go into labor anymore, the baby just slides out -bad mental image-

Isn't that how she said her last pregnancy was?
Like she went into labor and it was over in an hour?


ECHO! ecccchhoooo!...... eccchhooo!..... ecchoo!....... echo!

If I ever meet her in real life I'm going to scream 'echo!' or 'Hello!' at her crotch. xd

Trite~Elegy


Trite~Elegy

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 8:51 pm


wait wait wait.
I found it.

This is what her v****a sounds like
Reply
Pro-Choice Gaians

Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2 3 [>] [»|]
 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum