Saturday, May 26, 2007

Speaking of Featured Content...

This post caught my eye because I saw one of the TLC shows on the Duggars while we were at my in-laws last spring. Think of them what you will, 17 is a lot of kids from one Momma. Anyway, in case it's not still on FC, here's the Xanga site: cindyjg. Obviously she doesn't agree with them, but at least her arguments are polite and articulate (unlike some of the Duggar supporters who are leaving her comments). :-|

Oh, and related tangentially, I read recently that if we were to give one whole acre of land to every man, woman, and child alive on the earth today, we'd still all fit inside the land mass of the good 'ole U.S. of A.... so I kinda think the natural resources argument is specious one, but that's just me.


Now this guy.... I'll let his words speak for themselves... Back to the fall-out over the Duggar post from a few days ago (see above), one of the nut-jobs that commented on her post said: To have so many children [is]almost the same as abortion because in both cases life or death of the future child [is] in the mind of mother. THAT idea, my dears, takes a special kind of stupid to believe, but hey.... it takes all kinds, right? *shakes head*

(update #2)

Now this is a quote worth reading (because it agrees with me, of course! ;-))

G.K. Chesterton compared a mother's duties to those of a monarch, a merchant, and a theology teacher. He said, "I can understand how this might exhaust the mind, but I cannot imagine how it could narrow it. How can it be a large career to tell other people's children about (arithmetic), and a small career to tell one's own children about the universe? How can it be broad to be the same thing to everyone, and narrow to be everything to someone? No; a woman's function is laborious because it is gigantic, not because it is minute. I will pity Mrs. Jones for the hugeness of her task; I will never pity her for its smallness."


LoroJoro said...

Posted 5/26/2007 1:57 PM

yeah, her "strain on the resources" argument is dumb. If you split the 17 kids up between 4 or 5 childless families, would they still be a strain on resources? ... I don't see how having more human beings is a bad thing, not if you believe that humanity itself is an incredible, God-given resource of potential, talents, and creativity.


17 kids is a lot. I grew up like an only child, so that sounds like hell to me. LOL But I don't see how it's anyone's business as long as the kids are cared for -- which seems to be true by all accounts. If the mom is willing to sacrifice herself to that level, then great.

If I were a fundamentalist homeschooler (hahahhahahahhaha *falls on floor with laughter*), I'd be kinda irritated though because this is just more ammo for the people who think conservative Christian homeschooling families are whack as it is.

The Savage said...

Posted 5/26/2007 6:29 PM

Agreed. On all accounts. Especially the concept of that many kids after growing up as an only. :-D