Posted on 09/01/2009 10:09:12 PM PDT by GoldStandard
Sometimes, 18 kids is simply not enough, so Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar of Tonitown, Ark., are expecting a new addition to their household this spring.
That's right, at that point they will have five more children than Nadya "Octomom" Suleman and 11 more children than Jon and Kate Gosselin. Wow.
"We are so thrilled," says Michelle, 42. "We just can't believe it is happening."
You can't, Michelle? Not after the previous 18 times you were pregnant?
Her husband, Jim Bob Duggar, 44, agrees: "I never gets old. We are so grateful for each child. We look forward to our first grand baby and 19th child."
Their first grandchild is due soon, as their oldest son Joshua, 21, is apparently getting a fast start in joining the family profession of making humans.
He and his wife are expecting a daughter next month, who will be older than her new aunt or uncle: "I think it is going to be awesome," Josh said.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehollywoodgossip.com ...
It’s their choice to take the health risks after so many babies at a now older age that turns heads, not their love of children, a large family or God.
My three are great fun but leaving for college. The Duggars family are truly blessed. More is better as things always work out for those who have faith. !
Before discussing their sex life, why don’t you do a little googling about the family and birth control.
Michelle Duggar, when first married WAS on birth control. She learned while taking the pill that she had become pregnant and had lost the child. She was advised by her Doctor that this was common for women taking the pill. They felt as if they had killed their first child and refused any birth control that was man-made from that point forward. Both of them speak about this topic when they travel to various churches speaking of living a Christian life.
They decided after losing their first child that they would let God decide how many children to have. What you call being irresponsible, they believe is living God’s will. Given their family life nobody could say, who knows anything about them, that they do not live a 100% Christian life.
They belong to the quiverfull movement; you may want to google that before making any more claims about them or others in the movement.
So in response to the later half of your response, what qualifies you to to deem judgment upon the Duggars that they are being irresponsible? She might be older and in the range to have a baby of poor health. Generic statistics have little bearing on personal FACTS. The facts are this woman has so far given birth to 19 children. Statistics say she's bound to have a unhealthy one. Sooo?
The Duggars are bringing their kids up to UNDERSTAND and ACCEPT personal responsibility. Sometimes that personal responsibility is not something we take on, but something that is put upon us. When these kids are older, they will be adept at personal responsibility, which the oldest boy is demonstrating quite well.
Somehow you seem to be of the impression that any child not born healthy is a curse upon the family and anyone who has to care for them. That an inconvenience on one person is irresponsibility of another.
Following your line of thinking, YOU leaving your house and driving a car, STATISTACALLY says you WILL get in an accident sooner or later. SO you driving a car, having a risk of getting in an accident and killing someone, means you are being irresponsible.
These people seem to be healthy.
They seem to meet their kids needs.
They seem to be bringing their kids up morally.
They take PERSONAL responsibility, and home school their kids. And all seem very well educated.
All kids seem to have a very high acceptance of personal responsibility. Above that of other kids their ages.
The only thing I see that seems to be irresponsible about them, is your unfounded attitude towards them.
They don't fit into your little box, and so you want to vilify them as irresponsible. You refuse to see ALL the wonderful things they do, but are waiting with baited breath for a failure, mistake, sin or loss on their part.
So you are an authority on how and how much they love their kids? And you know about their love and devotion to God?
Hey who would you rather see populating the country, more hard-working non-burdonsome Duggars or a few thousand more illegal Mexicans sucking up our resources?
-PJ
they can sing and dance. Suffer little children and come on to Me.
I wish I could have one baby nevermind 19. I think this is wonderful then again I’ll bet a lot of other mother-wannabes think it is too.
High risks or not, this couple is living out loud the trust they profess in God. They see children as a blessing from the Lord and leave conception in his hands. If God chooses to allow a handicapped child into their family, their faith will not waiver a bit.
I know plenty of people who try for years to get pregnant and it never happens. I also know people who left it in God’s hands the same way and end up with one or two. It boils down to trust and I admire them. We certainly NEED new life in this world and I’ll bet everybody in this family will grow up to be a productive, decent and honorable person as that is how they are being raised.
condom - only about 60% - 70% effective - pregnancy could still occur - and DOES
BC pill - most are ‘abortifacient’ in their effect - meaning they can cause a viable embryo to not be able to attach to the uterine wall and be expelled (still an abortion) I had a friend who got pregnant two times while on the pill!
Rhythm method - could be they already do use this, maybe not. Not extremely effective (my mom had 5 kids using this method)
Tubal ligation - risk to woman's health as a surgery. Not always 100% effective. Some see this as “playing” God with reproduction.
Vasectomy - not 100% effective either (my Dad had one and went on to father two more kids - a brother and a step-brother).
So, in other words, whatever they do, it is their decision and nobody else's.
FREERIDER PING???
You should see the comments that are posted to those of us here who have chosen not to have children...then tell me about hateful comments.
Where did you get those statistics on condoms? Perfect use puts it at 98% effective and typical use puts it at 85%.
I was interested to see a study that said “pulling out” is almost equally effective. Obviously only where pregnancy is concerned, but not STDs.
No method is 100% effective, and she is clearly very fertile, but with some kind of BC they wouldn’t have as many children. But that is whatever, they are paying for all of it.
Saying perfectly used, condoms are 98% is, I know, totally incorrect. That would put them up there in the birth control pill's territory.
I think it was Reggie White who used the example where he got ten teen volunteers to come forward on a stage from the rest of the assembly. He showed them a plate where he said he had placed ten pieces of chocolate candy. Only problem was, he said, is that three or four of the pieces were really Ex-lax, the constipation cure.
He then held the plate above the kids’ heads and told them to reach up and pick a piece and whichever one they picked, they had to eat. Not ONE kid was willing to take the chance. He then explained the lesson as it related to condom use.
He said not one of you was willing to take a chance on eating a candy that, at worst, would make you go to the bathroom, but you take a greater chance every time you use a condom to prevent pregnancy, STDs or even, AIDS. Condoms only are 60% - 70% effective, if used correctly and consistently every time, in preventing pregnancy and a woman can only get pregnant 1 or 2 days out of a month, on average. You can get AIDS or a sexually transmitted disease every day of the month.
I thought this was a great object lesson for teens and hopefully made them think about risks. That's why I remember the statistic. It could vary from study to study, I suppose, but the point I tried to make is the BC options this couple have are between them and God.
Agreed. Of course, I have to find a guy first.
Or it breaks, or slips off, or it's defective, or not latex. I'm not really trying to argue about the statistic. Maybe stats or usage has improved since the example I used occurred, don't know. Not really the point. Uncle!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.