19 Kids and Counting

[Bruised_Reed]

Some of your questions were answered in Post 186. It appears you just didn’t like the answer you were given. Instead of spending your time worrying about the Duggars and watching idiotic “reality” television, read the lives of Saints and other good Catholic material. There is plenty out there. If you must watch the television, watch EWTN- it’s authentically Catholic and doesn’t promote some legalistic, Bible-only form of Christianity. Before you get yourself all in an uproar, I didn’t refer to the Duggars as “idiotic”- just reality television.

You beat me to it.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

(…)

I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with buying instead of making clothes or having laptops and cell phones. I just wanted to agree with robwar and others that obviously, the money the Duggars get paid for the show, or possibly show-related expenses that the producers are paying for (such as travel expenses for their travel-based episodes), are allowing them to live a much more comfortable lifestyle than they did pre-show. And that this also raises the question of whether the kids are being conditioned to expect to live the same way themselves, without the same financial cushion the parents likely have, is fair.

’ . . . conditioned to live the same way . . .’ Wow, so what!? Should they be expected to aspire to live on welfare? A way to overcome envy is to practice charity. The Duggars are exemplary in their charitable efforts. I pray for dependence upon God.

In response to what I bolded: I don’t think that’s what ToeInTheWater was suggesting at all. I don’t know if you really thought that or just letting your frustration show but give us a bit more credit than that.

 

[agnes_therese]

What kind of people go to a Catholic website and than attempt to denigrate a wholesome family like the Duggars? I have some assumptions of my own, you are mainly envious of their success, of their ability to thrive in our current materialistic ammoral culture. How would you define a successful family? Why do make comments like you do? If you’re truly ‘concerned’ for the rest of us there are certainly other more productive avenues for you to pursue.
Peace be with you.

So, anyone who disagrees with them (and you) must be envious? What kind of person comes on a Catholic website and throws out insults like that?

 

[gracepoole]

As usual, my questions do not get answered.

*Your *questions seem to have been answered many times over. My questions to you, on the other hand…

 

[AnnArbor]

As usual, my questions do not get answered.

Actually, a lot of your questions were answered. I don’t think most people here were bashing the Duggars, but they were pointing out the very real differences between their lifestyle and Catholicism. Their treatment of their adult daughters, in particular, and their attitudes toward marriage, are not consistent with Catholic teaching. In fact, as someone accurately pointed out, the Duggar weddings would have inbuilt grounds for decrees of nullity.

 

[kmkarbo]

That TV show is healthy for anyone. As for your attacks on peripheals I hope that you spend the same energy on heretics.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

That TV show is healthy for anyone. As for your attacks on peripheals I hope that you spend the same energy on heretics.

By technical definition, the Duggars are Protestants. I’m sure you’re well educated enough in the faith to say that the less politically correct term for that is, in fact, heretics.

But then again, I suppose one man’s heretic is another man’s saint in this crazy world.

And yeah, I tried watching the first episode of season nine but… I just stopped in the first few minutes. Couldn’t take it. Nope, no, nooooope.

I have some assumptions of my own, you are mainly envious of their success, of their ability to thrive in our current materialistic ammoral culture.

Whoa!? Envious? Of that? I’d sooner switch lives with the Kardashians! At least the riches of ‘amoral materialism’ is a better fit for my independent thoughts. (While we’re at it, I might as well put the Borgias or even the Starks and the Lannisters before the Kardashians. The Duggars wouldn’t even make it on my list of families I’d switch with. )

How would you define a successful family?

I’m sure History and Discovery Channels have reality shows that fit my definition more. (Tanked, Pawn Stars, Swamp Brothers, and Kings of Restoration just to name a few.)

 

[robwar]

That TV show is healthy for anyone. As for your attacks on peripheals I hope that you spend the same energy on heretics.

I’m not sure what you are thinking here but the quiverfull movement which the Duggars represent and are trying to promote is a fundamentalist based and THAT is not at all pro-Catholic. Bill Gothard is a heretic himself. He teaches Christians need to follow OT laws to be holy which include circumsicion on the 8th day, Jewish diet which mean no pork, shrimp, shellfish and separation of meat and dairy. He also promotes OT rules regarding marital relationships which mean no sex for half the month, no sex 40 days after birth of a boy etc. Now if you are concerned about heresy, you need to start with Bill Gothard because these sorts of rules are what the Duggars follow. If you think this is healthy and even Catholic, then you need to read up on your own faith and stop watching fundamentalists families like the Duggars on TV.

 

[LightBound]

I’m not sure what you are thinking here but the quiverfull movement which the Duggars represent and are trying to promote is a fundamentalist based and THAT is not at all pro-Catholic. Bill Gothard is a heretic himself. He teaches Christians need to follow OT laws to be holy which include circumsicion on the 8th day, Jewish diet which mean no pork, shrimp, shellfish and separation of meat and dairy. He also promotes OT rules regarding marital relationships which mean no sex for half the month, no sex 40 days after birth of a boy etc. Now if you are concerned about heresy, you need to start with Bill Gothard because these sorts of rules are what the Duggars follow. If you think this is healthy and even Catholic, then you need to read up on your own faith and stop watching fundamentalists families like the Duggars on TV.

:clapping:

 

[Evania]

From my experience, having faith in God doesn’t necessarily excuse reckless procreation. I’d sooner father bastard children than exhaust a single woman with an entire brood. Heck, I’d wager even the Biblical Jacob had that much sense compared to Jim Bob.

Quite a few saints had large families. I wonder if their fathers felt the same way. While I’m in no way comparing the Duggar’s to saints, (you may read my critique of them at the beginning of the thread), it’s uncharitable to speak of large families in such a demeaning manner. After all, fathering multiple children out of wedlock, let alone with multiple women as you are suggesting, is reckless procreation. That’s better than a large family brought into existence between a husband and wife?

Whereas when I hear stories of my mother’s much larger family or look at the Duggars, it’s like any sense of self is diminished. Everyone’s just focused on struggling to scrape by. No thanks. I’d rather stick to my sense of identity and ownership and even enjoy the personality politics with my brothers and sister.

I can’t speak for the Duggar’s or for your mother’s family, but I know many people who have experienced the opposite. My sister in law came from a big family. They weren’t rich by any stretch of the imagination. Did they get the latest gadgets, game consoles, name brand clothes for Christmas? No. Would it have increased their happiness if they did? Absolutely not. However, like you have noted, they are able to enjoy “personality politics” amongst themselves, albeit with a larger amount of siblings. Personally, I could care less how many children the Duggar’s have. That’s not any of my business. Sure, the fascination is there which explains why so many people tune in, but I personally don’t believe that anyone is put on this earth by accident or by chance. We, as humans cooperate with God’s creative power to bring life into the world, but God holds everything into existence, and also the power to fashion souls into the wombs of their mothers. We can sit here and argue the Duggar’s parenting philosophy, arranged marriage, etc. In fact, I will probably agree with you on many points, but I’m not going to criticize them for adding to their family. After all, I’m sure Josie is glad to be here! Anyway, just my two cents…Hope you all had a great Thanksgiving!

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

After all, fathering multiple children out of wedlock, let alone with multiple women as you are suggesting, is reckless procreation. That’s better than a large family brought into existence between a husband and wife?

Well look at this way, on one hand, we have only one woman who’s had to go through years and years of giving childbirth and child-rearing. On the other hand, we hear plenty stories of women who have only had to give birth once or twice because their disgraced lover high-tailed.

Comparing the two, let’s ask ourselves this: Who literally has more on their plate? The single parent with a single kid or a stay-at-home mom who’s tied down to children, children, and more children?

Honest question.

Did they get the latest gadgets, game consoles, name brand clothes for Christmas? No. Would it have increased their happiness if they did? Absolutely not. However, like you have noted, they are able to enjoy “personality politics” amongst themselves, albeit with a larger amount of siblings.

I’m just saying that I prefer a more moderate combination of personal space, personal property, and, yeah, competition for resources. When you break it down to bare-bones logic, there’s really only so much you can have for yourself in a larger family compared to a smaller one. Worst case scenario? All of the above three are at an all-time low and the family starts looking like a hive.

 

[Evania]

Well look at this way, on one hand, we have only one woman who’s had to go through years and years of giving childbirth and child-rearing. On the other hand, we hear plenty stories of women who have only had to give birth once or twice because their disgraced lover high-tailed.

Comparing the two, let’s ask ourselves this: Who literally has more on their plate? The single parent with a single kid or a stay-at-home mom who’s tied down to children, children, and more children?

Honest question.

That’s a strawman argument.

One can say the father with multiple children by different women has more on his plate. One can say that the single mother feels more burdened by having to work multiple jobs to just barely scrape by on the most basic living essentials, let alone Christmas gifts. In the meantime, you have children in a daycare setting from 6am-6pm five days a week either paid for by the single parent (not cheap at all) or by society through taxes. I volunteer at a soup kitchen a few times a month, and there are people who are living under an interstate bridge while they have kids in foster homes. Some might say these parents have a lot on their plate, probably a lot more than Michelle Duggar. Then you have to take into account the trauma that many kids go through being exposed to the world without the benefit of a stable home life. Many children are shuffled back and forth between parents while being exposed and possibly mistreated by whomever mom or dad has in their lives at that moment. One needs only to watch the news to see how society has deteriorated when more and more people bring children into the world without the benefit of marriage. Is there a study in which you can point to that proves the same is true by choosing to have a large family with your husband after praying and discernment?

Out of curiousity, how many children would you have advised the parents of St. Catherine of Siena to have? Would you have discouraged them from having any more children than what the Duggar’s now have, especially in a time of greater material hardship? Would you have ridiculed them or shook your head disapprovingly at them if they didn’t stop after 3, 5, 10, or 19? God made St. Catherine the youngest of 25. Ben Franklin was one of 16. St. Therese was the last of 9. Would their fathers wish they had fathered multiple children with women other than their wives? Doubt it. Plus, I would argue that our world would be a lot poorer without the great many of those saints that came from large (and small) families.
And I would argue that would go for the Duggar’s, my family, your family or any other large (or small) family. Why? Because we were conceived in the mind of God BEFORE we were conceived in the womb of our mothers.

I’m just saying that I prefer a more moderate combination of personal space, personal property, and, yeah, competition for resources. When you break it down to bare-bones logic, there’s really only so much you can have for yourself in a larger family compared to a smaller one. Worst case scenario? All of the above three are at an all-time low and the family starts looking like a hive.

Fair enough. However, would you trade in any of your siblings in order to have any of that stuff? Because in the end, it’s all stuff that is temporal in comparison to the immortal soul of your brother or sister. I think everyone would prefer to have more of what we have. A 1400 sq ft house would be an ideal house for the family that has lost their home or for a family living in Africa. Living in a large family, you do have to share, you may not a lot of privacy, you might wear some hand me downs, but that isn’t neccessarily bad. Heck, there are religious orders that rely on God to feed them their next meal. Why would they do that? I’m not saying that families should do the same as them, but my point is: Simplicity is oftentimes better for our souls.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

One needs only to watch the news to see how society has deteriorated when more and more people bring children into the world without the benefit of marriage. Is there a study in which you can point to that proves the same is true by choosing to have a large family with your husband after praying and discernment?

I live in a Third World country and as part of my Jesuit education, I was drafted to volunteer for my school’s own aid programs. So yeah, you do enough digging about overpopulation in this country (particularly the fracas over the RH Bill) and you’ll find plenty of poverty and suffering among large families. You’ll also hear plenty of stories about married mothers struggling to feed so many mouths all the while dreading the nights where they’re beat up by drunk husbands. Same husbands who do nothing but gamble and waste whatever savings they have left on cockfighting, karaoke, and NBA.

And yes, I’ve seen these families first hand. This is not a strawman. I see them coming down every Christmas to beg on our city streets. I’ve personally know two single mothers who aren’t as destitute in comparison. Do they struggle? Yes but at least they’ve got a roof over their head and don’t smell like street refuse.

Because really, that’s what I’m getting at. My experience tells me that if we just go by the law of the jungle, a single parent with one or two kids isn’t going to have as tough a time as two parents with twenty mouths to feed. I’m just talking ratio here. How hard is it to imagine a single parent with a decent career and doesn’t have that much of a hard time raising one kid? For me, not that much because I don’t see a single parent having as much of a hard time as the poor lady running the run-down general store.

Plus, I would argue that our world would be a lot poorer without the great many of those saints that came from large (and small) families.
And I would argue that would go for the Duggar’s, my family, your family or any other large (or small) family. Why? Because we were conceived in the mind of God BEFORE we were conceived in the womb of our mothers.

So what, because God’s plan is for you to have as many babies as possible beyond what you’re capable of providing? The article I linked has an archbishop who flatly tells the interviewer that this is not the case.

The fact that many famous/saintly people came from large families is irrelevant, if not a really bad excuse for irresponsible parenting and reproduction.

Fair enough. However, would you trade in any of your siblings in order to have any of that stuff?

I take it further and say I wouldn’t trade them for two more siblings. Because, as they said in the game Darksiders:

“And the number of the Horsemen shall ever be… Four.”

Because as much as you think it’s just ‘stuff,’ this stuff is but a manifestation of who we are as individuals. It is our way of forging our own identities. We take it as marks that our souls are not the reduced shells of human beings that we see in those who suffer from having so little.

We have space. We live decently enough. We have the freedom to value ourselves and through that, learned how to value others.

I’ll take that over needlessly sacrificing everything just to keep feeding more mouths.

Living in a large family, you do have to share, you may not a lot of privacy, you might wear some hand me downs, but that isn’t neccessarily bad.

Yes it can. I’ve seen how. You can say that there is even a silent pact among the four of us that says we will not see ourselves and each other brought down so low.

And if that makes us look like aristocratic, irreligious schemers to anyone, so be it.

Simplicity is oftentimes better for our souls.

No it isn’t. Trust me. Many religious attempted such things on my family with none too pleasant results. Are we spoiled brats? Hardly. We just know that we deserve better and do not work for a penny less.

 

[Evania]

You’ll also hear plenty of stories about married mothers struggling to feed so many mouths all the while dreading the nights where they’re beat up by drunk husbands. Same husbands who do nothing but gamble and waste whatever savings they have left on cockfighting, karaoke, and NBA.

That doesn’t negate or disprove what I said about opening the newspaper and seeing the degradation of society due to people not giving their children the benefit of being raised in a faith filled marriage. All it does is show that the examples you listed are marriages that are not rooted in God. And while I don’t doubt that there are some families that are experiencing hardship, there are plenty of hardships of the same kind that you mentioned, suffered by those who don’t have large families as well. Plus the same scenario can easily be played out by an unmarried couple as well.

I’ve personally know two single mothers who aren’t as destitute in comparison. Do they struggle? Yes but at least they’ve got a roof over their head and don’t smell like street refuse.

Have you lived in a third world country all your life? I agree that poverty is greater there than say in the United States. If someone is so destitute that they actually smell like street refuse, then I agree that it wouldn’t be wise to bring a child into that environment. However, the Duggar’s and many others that have large families don’t smell anything remotely like that and mothers of large families are more than capable and joyfully willing to raise their large family.

Because really, that’s what I’m getting at. My experience tells me that if we just go by the law of the jungle, a single parent with one or two kids isn’t going to have as tough a time as two parents with twenty mouths to feed. I’m just talking ratio here. How hard is it to imagine a single parent with a decent career and doesn’t have that much of a hard time raising one kid? For me, not that much because I don’t see a single parent having as much of a hard time as the poor lady running the run-down general store.

If a couple prayerfully discerns after thoughtful prayer to God that they can handle another child, and if God, in His loving Providential care decides for them to have another child, then who are you to say it was wrong? It is between the two of them and God; not you, me or the poor grocer to decide if their marital union brings forth another immortal soul. Period. God is the Author of life, and His desire for families is that children have a mother and a father that love and trust in Him. If a couple prayerfully discerns that based on their financial situation that having another child would be unwise, then that’s totally okay. However that is still none of our business and we are not to place ourselves in the position of God and dictate how many children a married couple can handle.

The fact that many famous/saintly people came from large families is irrelevant, if not a really bad excuse for irresponsible parenting and reproduction.

Of course, it’s relevant! You are criticizing the Duggar’s for their family size, and you keep stating those with large families are somehow burdened by their children. Does that mean every single moment is absolutely perfect? No. However, show me a mom or a dad that would trade their child to be “unburdened”. I pointed out to you clear cases of saints who came from large families. These saints happened to be the last child out of a large number of children. You are essentially saying that if you had your way they wouldn’t have been born. Let me ask you this. What should they have done? Obviously married people have sex. Should married people contracept? That is against Church teaching. What is, in your mind, “responsible reproduction”?

I take it further and say I wouldn’t trade them for two more siblings. Because, as they said in the game Darksiders:

Of course you wouldn’t, because those two other siblings don’t exist. It’s hard to feel love for hypothetical people.

Because as much as you think it’s just ‘stuff,’ this stuff is but a manifestation of who we are as individuals. It is our way of forging our own identities. We take it as marks that our souls are not the reduced shells of human beings that we see in those who suffer from having so little.

Jesus was born in a stable and placed in a feeding trough, and He is God. His parents were dirt poor. He was hardly a reduced shell of a human being.

We have space. We live decently enough. We have the freedom to value ourselves and through that, learned how to value others.

You just said that you view the poor as reduced shells of human beings.

I’ll take that over needlessly sacrificing everything just to keep feeding more mouths.

Do not store up for yourselves treasure on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal but store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves do not break in or steal.
for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."

Here’s the thing my friend, if you are clinging too tightly to your treasure, that you can’t hear God speaking to you to bring another immortal soul into the world, where ultimately it will live forever with Him in Heaven, than your treasure isn’t in Heaven.

Yes it can. I’ve seen how. You can say that there is even a silent pact among the four of us that says we will not see ourselves and each other brought down so low.

And if that makes us look like aristocratic, irreligious schemers to anyone, so be it.

Yes, so be it.

However forgive us if we decide not to listen to you and instead decide on following Chuch teaching.

God Bless!

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

All it does is show that the examples you listed are marriages that are not rooted in God.

If you’re going to tell me that the plight of so many poor, Catholic Filipino families have marriages not rooted in God, why do I see too many American Catholics here who trumpet my country as a bastion in an otherwise non-Christian corner of the world? Aren’t you perpetuating a lie?

Plus the same scenario can easily be played out by an unmarried couple as well.

Again, law of the jungle. Laws of proportions. I’m just giving you plain old common sense. One kid = One mouth. Be honest with yourself, one mouth to feed is going to be less of an expense compared to the Octomom lot. (Not to mention, it’s enough proof for me that I have just as much experience as you.)

Have you lived in a third world country all your life?

I’m a natural born Filipino citizen. Do you want pictures of what I’ve seen? I can take some photos right now and put them up here. Maybe you can send them to the Duggars too as food for thought. (Because apparently, it’s not enough for you to get them from a reporter.)

However, the Duggar’s and many others that have large families don’t smell anything remotely like that and mothers of large families are more than capable and joyfully willing to raise their large family.

Yep but take away that reality show and I’d bet me and my siblings have bigger lives plus bigger careers compared to any one of the Duggar kids. With all due respect ma’am but I’ve seen smaller, ‘broken’ families achieve more than what the Duggar clan ever has.

Case in point:



I’m sure there’s a lot of holes you can dig up on the Trumps and other families like them but the fact is, they’re living much larger compared to the toddlers of Jim and Michelle.

I mean how many of Ben Franklin’s siblings ever even go close to the prominence he has? And the saints, what do we know of their brothers and sisters? What kind of life did they live?

If a couple prayerfully discerns after thoughtful prayer to God that they can handle another child, and if God, in His loving Providential care decides for them to have another child, then who are you to say it was wrong?

You’re already making the case for me to say it’s wrong. Because, sending your words back to you, why should the number of your children give you reason to dictate how my parents should’ve spaced us?

Furthermore, I let the results speak for themselves. The Duggar siblings strike me as anything but the sort of reliable, independent people I could count on to, say, expand the family business. (And from what I gather in other threads, I’m not alone in this.)

Let me ask you this. What should they have done? Obviously married people have sex. Should married people contracept? That is against Church teaching. What is, in your mind, “responsible reproduction”?

The kind that was already cited in the article I linked. You yourself agree that you shouldn’t bring in a child if you’re not ready to raise it up in a good environment and into a well-rounded human being. You think the Duggar kids are well-rounded human beings?

I’ll believe that when at least five of them decide to move out on their own without getting married. I’ll believe that when they can at least spend months separated from each other and from their parents.

Because really, even my sixteen-year-old brother managed that much without suffering emotional scars.

Of course you wouldn’t, because those two other siblings don’t exist. It’s hard to feel love for hypothetical people.

Aren’t you suggesting that I should? :ehh:

Here’s the thing my friend, if you are clinging too tightly to your treasure, that you can’t hear God speaking to you to bring another immortal soul into the world, where ultimately it will live forever with Him in Heaven, than your treasure isn’t in Heaven.

Though while we’re on the subject, my treasure isn’t just my belongings. My family is also my treasure and any other treasure we accumulate is the result of how much we value each other. Like it or not, there is a perk to sharing that treasure without the need to spread it so thinly amongst ourselves.

Can’t say the same for families that have to resort to hand-me-downs and lack of personal space.

Jesus was born in a stable and placed in a feeding trough, and He is God. His parents were dirt poor. He was hardly a reduced shell of a human being.

He’s Jesus. We’re talking about muddy street urchins who can’t even sing English Christmas carols properly.

You just said that you view the poor as reduced shells of human beings.

Exactly. If I didn’t value myself, I wouldn’t be able tell if they were nor be able to thank God that I’m capable of avoiding their situation.

However forgive us if we decide not to listen to you and instead decide on following Chuch teaching.

So irresponsible procreation is Church teaching now?

 

[Evania]

If you’re going to tell me that the plight of so many poor, Catholic Filipino families have marriages not rooted in God, why do I see too many American Catholics here who trumpet my country as a bastion in an otherwise non-Christian corner of the world? Aren’t you perpetuating a lie?

Oh good grief! You referenced examples of husbands that beat their wives after getting drunk! Does those examples sound like marriages that are rooted in God?
Also that behavior is not exclusive to married couples, or those who have a large family.

Again, law of the jungle. Laws of proportions. I’m just giving you plain old common sense. One kid = One mouth. Be honest with yourself, one mouth to feed is going to be less of an expense compared to the Octomom lot.

Okay, you can follow the law of the jungle. We’ll follow the Law of God. No one is denying that it is more of an expense, but an expense they are comfortable with. If they turn to God in prayer and discernment and God gives them another child, what business of it is yours? Their “expenses and finances” are none of your business and your opinion of how you find their marital sex act irresponsible is irrelevant to them. Please remove yourself from their bedrooms.

I’m a natural born Filipino citizen. Do you want pictures of what I’ve seen? I can take some photos right now and put them up here. Maybe you can send them to the Duggars too as food for thought. (Because apparently, it’s not enough for you to get them from a reporter.)

So what? I can take pictures of loving, happy and unburdened large families and show them to you. Let’s trade!

Yep but take away that reality show and I’d bet me and my siblings have bigger lives plus bigger careers compared to any one of the Duggar kids.

Like I said again and again…Money is not the only measure of success. Our end goal is Heaven. St. Francis had nothing but the cloak on his back, but I would venture to say he was more successful than you and your siblings combined.

I mean how many of Ben Franklin’s siblings ever even go close to the prominence he has? And the saints, what do we know of their brothers and sisters? What kind of life did they live?

What are you inferring? If you don’t have worldly wealth or prominence than you are insignificant? Just because you personally have not witnessed the influence of Ben Franklins siblings, is hardly an argument that there were none. Every life influences everyone around it. It’s simply arrogant to believe that the only life out of the large family that mattered is the one that rose to fame.

Why should the number of your children give you reason to dictate how my parents should’ve spaced us?

I never formed an opinion as to how your parents should have spaced you.
I will ask however why should couples listen to you over God?

You yourself agree that you shouldn’t bring in a child if you’re not ready to raise it up in a good environment and into a well-rounded human being. You think the Duggar kids are well-rounded human beings?

You seem to assume that every woman automatically feels burdened and that every large family is being brought up in a bad environment. That’s not the truth. As for the Duggar’s, I’m not going to argue their parenting philosophy. Not every large family is like the Duggar’s.

Though while we’re on the subject, my treasure isn’t just my belongings. My family is also my treasure and any other treasure we accumulate is the result of how much we value each other. Like it or not, there is a perk to sharing that treasure without the need to spread it so thinly amongst ourselves.

Can’t say the same for families that have to resort to hand-me-downs and lack of personal space.

We don’t “resort” to hand me downs. We just feel there is more to life than keeping the stores in business. I wouldn’t think that the treasure you accumulate is due to how much you value eachother. I would think that it’s more with how you value materialistic possessions.

He’s Jesus. We’re talking about muddy street urchins who can’t even sing English Christmas carols properly.

Well, Who came to live His life as an example for these “muddy street urchins”? Jesus came to show that if He didn’t value wealth than maybe we shouldn’t think of it too highly either. He also showed that since He is God, and willingly walked a path of poverty, that poor people need not feel like “reduced shells of human beings” as you so eloquently put it in your earlier post.

Let me also cut in at this point and say: Your disdain for the poor is disgusting. Reading over your last three posts, you have referred to women with children as reeking of street refuse, as being muddy street urchins. Etc. I would say that I would rather be one of these poor people you’re describing instead of being in your shoes and viewing the people around me as lesser beings. Nowhere in the Bible did Jesus speak of people as you are doing. So therefore, I don’t count you as a reliable spokesperson for what people should follow.

Exactly. If I didn’t value myself, I wouldn’t be able tell if they were nor be able to thank God that I’m capable of avoiding their situation.

Thankfully, their worth isn’t what you say or determine it to be. And to be honest, you have a lot that is worse than theirs is if this is honestly how you view God’s poor, which is in stark contrast to the Gospel. Your wealth won’t last forever, but how you treated those around you will. No thank you, I’ll take Mother Teresa’s example over yours anyday…

So irresponsible procreation is Church teaching now?

Only if you think prayerfully discerning God’s Will is reckless procreation.

 

[kmkarbo]

God loves everyone and He wants us to make more of us.
19 Kids and Counting is wholesome and a fine example of family values and responsibility. I cannot think of a better TV show, OK, except for EWTN.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Oh good grief! You referenced examples of husbands that beat their wives after getting drunk! Does those examples sound like marriages that are rooted in God?

Yet you guys champion my country as a Catholic voice in an otherwise pagan-secular corner of Asia.

Okay, you can follow the law of the jungle. We’ll follow the Law of God.

FYI, people call it Natural Law for a reason. It’s not for eugenics but neither is it for breeding kids like rabbits.

Their “expenses and finances” are none of your business and your opinion of how you find their marital sex act irresponsible is irrelevant to them. Please remove yourself from their bedrooms.

Only if they removed themselves from my conference rooms. You really think it’s so irrelevant? You know it says a lot that I don’t see a lot of parents with large families where I work (if at all). Because really, I don’t see how you can have that many kids and not have it interfere with a job that requires full-time attendance. Heck, Jim Bob only started having kids after setting himself up with enough money to invest in that large family. And even then, he’s no Warren Buffett. Really telling. That.

So what? I can take pictures of loving, happy and unburdened large families and show them to you. Let’s trade!

You’re the one who asked if I lived in a third world country all my life. I don’t know about you but we don’t like it when people question the truth of where we came from.

Like I said again and again…Money is not the only measure of success. Our end goal is Heaven. St. Francis had nothing but the cloak on his back, but I would venture to say he was more successful than you and your siblings combined.

Nothing? Yeah, read up on his life after he established his order. Please do not tell me his life was so simple then. He traveled extensively and met with royalty. Yeah. That’s a beggar all right. For someone many people champion as a man wholly sustained by divine providence, much of that providence took in the form of people wealthier and more influential than he was.

If that doesn’t say something to you, it’s no wonder you’d rather look at the little family picture than the big one that the world comprises of.

Just because you personally have not witnessed the influence of Ben Franklins siblings, is hardly an argument that there were none. Every life influences everyone around it. It’s simply arrogant to believe that the only life out of the large family that mattered is the one that rose to fame.

Right, and the fact that you didn’t witness means you can claim the exact opposite? That’s my point! It’s rather sad that out of all those children, Ben Franklin was the only one who really made history. That’s what I mean about being lost in a hive. That’s what it means when I say that when you live in a life as crowded and anti-independent as that, you losing anything that could take you to the same level of greatness. If you ask me, I find it more saddening that these people didn’t get to share in Ben’s spotlight. Surely, being human beings, they deserved their own moment?

Because really ma’am, a majority of the Duggar children really strike me as nothing more than hapless ducklings.

I will ask however why should couples listen to you over God?

When said couple have fans like you who act like they’re the ideal and think all of humanity should follow suit.

You seem to assume that every woman automatically feels burdened and that every large family is being brought up in a bad environment.

Seeing the kind of resources needed to just raise one kid, I would say a spade is a spade (even by your own admission).

That’s not the truth. As for the Duggar’s, I’m not going to argue their parenting philosophy. Not every large family is like the Duggar’s.

Right, get back to me when you find a family like the Duggars but they live like the Hiltons.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

We don’t “resort” to hand me downs. We just feel there is more to life than keeping the stores in business. I wouldn’t think that the treasure you accumulate is due to how much you value eachother. I would think that it’s more with how you value materialistic possessions.

Wow, and you accuse me of making assumptions and generalizations. You still not getting my point at all.

It’s not just about the possessions. It’s about how those possessions are manifestations of who we are. We are not defined by our ‘stuff’ but that stuff is born from the stuff inside us that grew from having the independence, space, and free thought that no Duggar child could compare.

He also showed that since He is God, and willingly walked a path of poverty, that poor people need not feel like “reduced shells of human beings” as you so eloquently put it in your earlier post.

Yet we create charities to eliminate poverty. The irony of this religion gets starker every day.

Let me also cut in at this point and say: Your disdain for the poor is disgusting.

It’s not disdain. It’s fact. I ask you again, would you like to come down here and live among the very poor you worship?

I would say that I would rather be one of these poor people you’re describing instead of being in your shoes and viewing the people around me as lesser beings.

Well then why aren’t you? Go ahead! Do it now! I’m sure the airports have a lot of discounts for overseas travel this season. I’d really like to see you live in the squalor and then tell me this is how a human being should live.

Because really, even my Jesuit education taught me better than that.

Only if you think prayerfully discerning God’s Will is reckless procreation.

So reckless procreation is God’s will now?

God loves everyone and He wants us to make more of us.
19 Kids and Counting is wholesome and a fine example of family values and responsibility. I cannot think of a better TV show, OK, except for EWTN.

You two should start club.

 

[recklev]

I kind of feel sad about people who can get so whipped up and vituperous about a TV show.

The Duggers are a wholesome, interesting family. I enjoy watching that show. Enjoy – not emulate.

I know that TLC is paying the Duggers money for their show. Good for them. I’m glad they are prospering. I would far sooner watch their show
than " Snookie" or Big Brother.