I have to wonder at the motivations. I can think of several reasons not to have 19 children, emotional, moral, financial and the ethical reasons. I cant for the life of me think of a reason to have that many. If 19 is ok...well is 35? or how about 40. The crap that they provide better for them the someone else that may have less children is BS, and has no baring on the argument. Do you argue that because someone can provide for more children then they are obligated to have them? I also question the motivations of being on TV. If you doing all this for the "right reasons" what ever that is .......why do you feel its ok to exploit it for financial gain? A 19 kids spending their lives in front of a TV camera making circus of a family, I am sure that real healthy....
So then why don't YOU set the # that works for everyone? Anything above your number will get an automatic "irresponsible" tag to those that go there ....
Tony, they have the right to have as many kids as they want. Likewise other people have the right to criticize them if we disagree with what they are doing. It's just like anything else in life and nothing more than that. We are not saying there should be a number of max kids. We are taking this one specific example of 19 kids and questioning it. You take this topic so personal but you have not provided why you believe the way you do.
There's people that would argue that my four kids are irresponsible as well. We have friends that have 7, are they as well? If you can provide a healthy, loving environment for the kids, then have at it.
IMO, I'm perfectly fine with someone that wants a big family to have 7. Hell, I can't even decide for sure myself if 19 is irresponsible. I go back on forth on this. But sure, there would be people with the opinion that 4 would be too many. There would be some that think having any kids is bad. But we are taking about 19 now. That is the example used.
The more I think about it, if you have 19 then why not have more since at that point the oldest ones are starting to leave house as the newest ones are coming in....
I have a right to criticize the criticizer..... FYI, ... I am not taking it personal ... I am pointing out your inconsistant thought process ... I still love ya!
Yes you do. It's a great country we live in hey? I'll use your word. You are insinuating that you were taking this personally when you posting that you "can't believe the ignorance of some of the posts" and "you had to read Rybo's post 5 times because you can't believe he posted it". You had some pretty strong statements earlier in the thread. But that's cool. Having a strong opinion on something isn't a bad thing. And I have pretty thick skin.
I have know Ryan for years ... hence the shock .... insinuations from me ... I am pretty strait forward ... so I don't believe I insinuated anything ... I wasn't the one playing devil's advocate
First off, when I say that they can provide better, I'm not just talking money. It's part of it, but not the the most important part. 'Providing' is so much more. Giving a child a foundation of love, stability, knowledge, responsibility, morals, socialization, etc., etc. This has more to do with providing that money. Also, they didn't have kids to be on TV. Their show started when they already had 17 (or there were 17 in the family). They were approached to do the show because they were unique. I'm sure they get good money for it, good for them! If someone wanted to make a show about me because I run a resort and hunt, that's cool. But, I don't do those things to get on TV. I too like to be the devils advocate on topics, partly because I like to challenge my own thoughts & beliefs. That process not only refines what I believe, but it can help me to see other points of view. I agree that the world is overpopulated, and never see myself with that many children (biological or adopted). That's my choice. Like shooting a 2.5 yo buck is my choice. Like responding or ingnoring a post on the internet is my choice. Two things to think about with these two families. 1. The Duggers seem to have it together, but no one is perfect. I can make a judgement call on 15 minutes of seeing them on TV (or and hour, or 5 Seasons), but no one is perfect, and I shouldn't expect them to be. 2. The Welfare family. While I don't agree with what seems to be the mother's ways, I do think she's trying. Even if it's in her own mind, she's trying. Working the system does take work. I'm just happy the kids weren't born into dumpsters or aborted.
I have noooooooo problem with this what so ever. Could I do It?? Hell no!! A relation of mine had 8 or 9 kids. Worst thing they could've ever done In my opinion. Problems with the kids etc. My mom came from a family of 17. Their closer them most family's are. Another family I know had 17 kids. Half were crack heads. It's all about the parenting. If your up for the challenge you'll be just fine. The people who disagree with this, how many kids If any at all do you have? I haul milk for a living. I have 20 dairy farms I go to everyday. Most of these family's are big. 95% of these family's would make you and I's family look bad. Their close, very close!!
The point I was trying to make is where would you draw the line on irresponsibility? Is it 2? 4? 7? 10? In my opinion it is only irresponsible if they can not care for their children and that applies to anybody with any number of kids. Just my .02 on the matter.
But where do you draw the line? Case by Case basis IMO. You need to evaluate each situation individually. There is not absolute number for all situations. I don’t think anyone is going to argue that the women Dan posted earlier in the thread should have had so many kids.
If they support themselves, who cares how many kids they have. I hear they have a TV show....not my kind of entertainment, but if you enjoy watching it, good for you.
