Is 17 Enough?

Wow... with a name like "Jim Bob Duggar" what can you say to the father but "You done good!"

More than their willingness to breed so prolifically, I question their choice to name all their children with names that start with "J." Especially awful is "Jinger" which I can't help but pronounce like "ringer" or "finger" as opposed to the clearly intended pronunciation, "ginger."

 

It strikes me as excessive, but that's not my call.

What would I say to father: "here's a pack of Trojans" for starters. I don't see how being so prolific is something that warrants complements.

All I can say is, if Jim Bob's family needs assistance from social services later, I for one am not going to be too pleased about it.

Also, no complaints from the brood about the poor quality of public schools, the unavailability of classes at the local junior college or scholarships to four-year schools. Same with the cost of childcare and health care.

With a mature comment like, "we just love the ruffles and lace," (while already contemplating their next child in the hospital), I'm *quite* sure they're on top of their financial obligations...no doubt seventeen college funds have already been established.

They sound like very responsible parents to me; this large family of theirs is obviously the result of significant foresight and planning.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Aug 3 2007, 01:40 PM) [snapback]490131[/snapback]</div>

Kind of sounds like you didn't come from a large family. Your sarcastic remarks seem to be emanating from a position of vast ignorance.

1) "no complaints from the brood" : Are you blaming the individual kids? :huh:

2) "poor quality of public schools" : So, are you making a snobbish, San Franciscan (oops, redundant. ) crack at the quality of public schools in Arkansas? (Hey, isn't that where the liberal hero Bill grew up?) What makes you think they aren't attending private schools . . . or even home schooled? Besides, all 17 (+) won't be attending the same class, or schools, at the same time - so any "impact" would be minimal.

3) "local junior college or scholarships to four-year schools." : So you are again assuming . . . they will only qualify for junior college or need scholarships??? Would you be complaining about these 17 (+) kids if they were all little Einsteins or MENSA material? You are snobbishly assigning to them the lowest common denominator. Do you really think you are being fair????
The dad is a former state representative - so apparently he is not the dumb hick you people who are making fun of his "Jim Bob" name are implying. Yep, snobbery rears its ugly head. <_<

4) "the cost of childcare . . ." : What don't you understand about a "7,000-square-foot home."??? Oh, I know . . . you are assuming dirt floors, plastic windows, several couches on the front porch, and bare foot kids and wife.
Raising these kids doesn't cost 17 times more than raising one. There are built-in economies of scale. The babysitters are built-in, hand-me-down-clothes [I loved hand-me-down clothes from my older brothers who I looked up to . . . I loved emulating them.], cribs, beds, toys. I bet you the parents are good at giving haircuts :lol: . Jobs around the house are often done by the kids themselves. Why do you think farmers had large families???

5) "health care" : Aren't you one who is for Universal Health Care in the USA? WELL, THERE YOU GO!!!! . . . now just multiply it by 15,849,470.89!!!! Just shut up and pay for it!
Medical insurance also doesn't cost 17 times more . . . It comes in Family Plan sizes which cover all family members.

6) "With a mature comment like, "we just love the ruffles and lace"" : What? :huh: You don't like ruffles and lace? Hmmmm. Ain't that curious.

Please just don't come down on this family because they don't drive a Prius. They really do need a bus. :lol:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Aug 3 2007, 05:19 PM) [snapback]490187[/snapback]</div>

Thanks for setting me straight on this issue.

 

Why would anyone want 17 kids. This planet has to many people now. China might have this one right with their one or two kid per family rule.

 

Having so many kids is irresponsible and creates a significant burden on society, the environment and taxpayers' dollars. For example, it further compounds problems such as overpopulated classrooms, wasteful consumption of natural resources, limited availability of qualified medical personnel and healthcare costs (just to name some). This is beyond excessive.

Let's hope that such irresponsible behavior is not passed on to all 17 children and each of their children and so on.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(huskers @ Aug 3 2007, 07:08 PM) [snapback]490282[/snapback]</div>

China's actions are hardly worth emulating:

The rest of the article is at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9766870

The "One Child" policy is a disaster in the making. Besides the civil rights violations, the STOOPID Red Chinese haven't figured out you don't reduce population to generate wealth, you create wealth to limit population!

We are barely replacing ourselves in this country, with an overall birth rate per child bearing woman of 2.1 children. Most of Europe, where the birth rates have fallen below the magic 2 child replacement average, is destined to become majority Muslim by 2050, and the cultural change there is already starting. In the next 25 years, the average Italian of Italian descent will have no siblings, no uncles and no aunts. His five friends will all be Muslim immigrants or the Muslim children of immigrants.

The Dugars wanted 17 kids because they wanted 17 kids. They have had several "documentaries" they have produced about how they manage it shown on the Discovery Channel, all without any special government assistance. One of their older sons helps in the production, as that's his career path. They are home schooled, and test higher than the kids at the local public schools. These are well adjusted, middle class, ethical and moral people who are responsible for their choices. They don't gripe and complain, they buckle down and work through problems. I suspect 25 years from now, the Dugar children will be well adjusted adults who have paid off their student loans.

I come from a large family, and I'm always stunned at the prejudice about large families in the media and from people who have never known large families. It isn't a "division of resources" ... you end up living the parable of the loaves and fishes every day. Love isn't divided up, its multiplied out.

 

All of the kids are homeschooled.

And he's a former Representative. So I wonder if his free and high quality healthcare as a former member of Congress covers just himself or the entire family too?

I'll bet his retirement is pretty generous. I mean, you get a pension even if you only serve one term...right?

7,000 square feet. Wow. My home is only 1,277 square feet. It's a three bedroom.

I'm sure they have PV, wind, solar hot water, grow their own vegetables and fruits, recycle paper, plastic, glass, metal, cardboard and have a compost heap. With such a large family I'm sure they're doing everything to zero out their carbon footprint. They probably walk or ride their bikes to church.

I wonder if Mrs. Jim Bob is going for a record. Last I read there was a woman in African who had 19 children. Maybe Mrs. Jim Bob is going for 20 and the Guiness World Record.

 

The production of the children? Now that's just sick!

As much as I can't imagine having to deal with 17 kids, I guess so long as they are self-sufficient and the kids "appear" to be happy, more power to them. I personally would not want the responsiblity of raising a younger sibling at such a young age, but I guess the kids have never known anything different.

They follow something called "quiver-full" which encourages very large families.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 4 2007, 12:43 AM) [snapback]490387[/snapback]</div>

Actually the record is 69 live births for one mother. Look it up!

I only have 3 siblings, but even that seemed like a lot for my mother to handle. And my joke about his name was not unwarranted... I mean come on, the guy's named Jim Bob and he has 17 children whose names start with J. That's funny no matter what social or economic strata you occupy.

 

17 kids? Come on, that is just idiotic and irresponsible. How many diapers go into the landfill from them? wow wow wow.
Can you think of anything more selfish than having 17 kids?

On the other hand, just 3 more kids and they can have enough for a full football game (11 people per side)!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ichabod @ Aug 4 2007, 08:13 AM) [snapback]490473[/snapback]</div>

Mother what? Cocker Spaniel?

 

ISn't it a woman from Russia/USSR that holds the record?

They used to give out medals to women who bore litters for the motherland. I don't know that it happens any more.

 

wow. i imagine the kids have a pretty large hand in raising their younger siblings... but i can't imagine keeping track of 17 kids, 17 sets of friends, 17 schedules, where all 17 of them are at any given time.

my mom never knew what just one of me was up to most of the time.

 

There seems to be a prevelent knee-jerk reaction that Jim Bob and company must be ignorant southerners, (17 kids with names like jinger... c'mon), and that this is somehow bad for society that they are reproducing in such scale.

I submit that if the trend of certain socio-economic strata to reproduce in greater numbers will have a huge effect on the evolution of our species. Wath the film "Idocracy" if you want a humourous lowbrow illustration of how this trend plays out.

If you think this is true, then it's time to quit whining about it, and even out the playing field. Quit whining on the chatroom, and get down to procreating. Idiots have babies every day... if intellectual environmentally minded people do not do so, our role in the future is in question.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Greenkeeper @ Aug 4 2007, 04:31 PM) [snapback]490612[/snapback]</div>

Greenkeeper, that' an interesting thought, offsetting "the dumbification of America (as it was dubbed on the Simpsons)."

 

The problem is that the smart people know when they can't handle any more kids - emotionally, financially, etc. - so they STOP when they know they couldn't handle another one.

The dumb ones don't know or don't care if they can handle another child or not, or maybe they just can't figure out the instructions on the little condom package.

The Duggars don't fall into the "dumb ones" category, though. They are financially independent and obviously don't mind being on call to 17 little ones.

 

Evidently 17 is NOT enough.

They are pregnant again.

I guess I'll just have to keep waiting for her uterus to fall out.