umm i cant decide ~warning emotional/umm stuff~

~Tucker&Me~

Active Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Messages
4,940
Likes
0
Points
36
#41
I think they are doing their children a disservice in several aspects, and was angry for the other kids when I found out she was pregnant again. I disagree vehemently with some of the choices the Duggars make and how they choose to raise their kids. Oh well.

However, it's sad that the baby died and I won't judge them for how they choose to grieve.
 

sillysally

Obey the Toad.
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Messages
5,074
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
A hole in the bottom of the sea.
#42
Okay... Let's rephrase it. I think it is irresponsible to put not only yours, but your children's life on a public platform like this. They aren't old enough to decide if they want to be on TV, they can't think far enough down the road. Type in any of the name of the Duggars kids... It will pop up on the Internet forever and ever. Friends, dates, college applications... There it all is, for the rest of their lives.
The same could be said for any child in the public eye--kids on TV, in movies, even the president's kids. Obama's daughters are not old enough to fully understand what is involved in the life of a president's child. Not only are they in the public eye, but their lives are altered significantly due to security concerns. Heck, look at how much interest there was in Chelsea Clinton's wedding years after Bill Clinton left office. I would be willing to bet that more people internationally could recognize the President's kids than and of the Duggars. Is any presidential candidate with minor children then irresponsible for running because their children can't fully understand the implications of their parent's choice?
 

sparks19

I'd rather be at Disney
Joined
Jul 7, 2005
Messages
28,563
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
42
Location
Lancaster, PA
#43
The same could be said for any child in the public eye--kids on TV, in movies, even the president's kids. Obama's daughters are not old enough to fully understand what is involved in the life of a president's child. Not only are they in the public eye, but their lives are altered significantly due to security concerns. Heck, look at how much interest there was in Chelsea Clinton's wedding years after Bill Clinton left office. I would be willing to bet that more people internationally could recognize the President's kids than and of the Duggars. Is any presidential candidate with minor children then irresponsible for running because their children can't fully understand the implications of their parent's choice?
Excellent post
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
3,199
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
St. Louis, MO
#44
The same could be said for any child in the public eye--kids on TV, in movies, even the president's kids. Obama's daughters are not old enough to fully understand what is involved in the life of a president's child. Not only are they in the public eye, but their lives are altered significantly due to security concerns. Heck, look at how much interest there was in Chelsea Clinton's wedding years after Bill Clinton left office. I would be willing to bet that more people internationally could recognize the President's kids than and of the Duggars. Is any presidential candidate with minor children then irresponsible for running because their children can't fully understand the implications of their parent's choice?
Thats true to an extent, and I do think they defiintely have to take that into consideration. However, politicians, actors, musicians, etc...their children being in the public eye is a side effect (and sadly driven by the general public) and to an extent can be minimized. The duggars, jon and kate plus 8, on and on, those children are put on tv reality shows for the sake of being exposed. The purpose of the show is to show the ins and outs of their lives, the ups, the downs, etc. I do personally think there is a big difference. Then again, I think most reality shows are pretty disgusting.

Child actors I think fall in between...I think it can be ok if the parents are very cautious and careful about it but I also think often the parents take advantage and use their children to realize their own dreams of fame and money not taking the childrens best interests into consideration.
 
Joined
Aug 1, 2007
Messages
2,609
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
36
Location
Benton Arkansas
#45
I don't see anything wrong with taking a picture. I would do the same. I took pics at my grandpa's funeral last month. I felt a little weird about it but dad thought it was important and I agree. I don't feel weird having the pics but it felt a little disrespectful taking them.
 
Joined
Aug 1, 2007
Messages
2,609
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
36
Location
Benton Arkansas
#46
The same could be said for any child in the public eye--kids on TV, in movies, even the president's kids. Obama's daughters are not old enough to fully understand what is involved in the life of a president's child. Not only are they in the public eye, but their lives are altered significantly due to security concerns. Heck, look at how much interest there was in Chelsea Clinton's wedding years after Bill Clinton left office. I would be willing to bet that more people internationally could recognize the President's kids than and of the Duggars. Is any presidential candidate with minor children then irresponsible for running because their children can't fully understand the implications of their parent's choice?
I agree. It's certainly not an ideal situation but it doesn't make them bad parents.
 

Miakoda

New Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2006
Messages
7,666
Likes
0
Points
0
#47
I guess we should all be mad that they aren't on Medicaid and welfare, and be irate because their kids are not dealing drugs and shooting their peers in the streets.
 

sillysally

Obey the Toad.
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Messages
5,074
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
A hole in the bottom of the sea.
#48
Thats true to an extent, and I do think they defiintely have to take that into consideration. However, politicians, actors, musicians, etc...their children being in the public eye is a side effect (and sadly driven by the general public) and to an extent can be minimized. The duggars, jon and kate plus 8, on and on, those children are put on tv reality shows for the sake of being exposed. The purpose of the show is to show the ins and outs of their lives, the ups, the downs, etc. I do personally think there is a big difference. Then again, I think most reality shows are pretty disgusting.

Child actors I think fall in between...I think it can be ok if the parents are very cautious and careful about it but I also think often the parents take advantage and use their children to realize their own dreams of fame and money not taking the childrens best interests into consideration.
I suppose I just don't see much difference between the Duggars having a reality show and Obama's daughters up in stage during campaign rallies, etc. Even the family photos coming released by the White House are meant to portray a certain message about the President and his family--a message intended to help the President's career. In both instances being in the public eye is a family affair--Obama's job might not be as a reality show star, but his family is still under the microscope and I don't believe that his children aren't used to help his image (not trying to pick on just Obama BTW, I think you could say the same for most presidents's and their families).
 

Dekka

Just try me..
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
19,779
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
48
Location
Ontario
#51
I never thought I'd ever defend the Duggars, but I am. I'm not paying for their children. Their children are polite and spend much of their time involved in community service programs. But I think so many people have already said it better than me, so I'll leave it at that.
See to me I don't think anyone should have that many kids. Its not paying for them now issue. The earth can only hold so many people, so while yes we do need to keep the population going and the next generation is critical having this many.. even if you can pay for them is selfish and harmful. Its not about money.

If these kids grow up to have large families etc etc.. they will absolutely be responsible for over population issues.
 

sillysally

Obey the Toad.
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Messages
5,074
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
A hole in the bottom of the sea.
#52
See to me I don't think anyone should have that many kids. Its not paying for them now issue. The earth can only hold so many people, so while yes we do need to keep the population going and the next generation is critical having this many.. even if you can pay for them is selfish and harmful. Its not about money.

If these kids grow up to have large families etc etc.. they will absolutely be responsible for over population issues.
The amount of people in the US at least that have this many kids is in the extreme minority, hence the reality show-if it were common it wouldn't be worthy of a show. The birth rates in many western nations are dropping as fewer people are having fewer children. I really doubt that the Duggars will have any sort of measurable effect on world population when the trend in the US is to have fewer children, not more.
 

JacksonsMom

Active Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
8,694
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Maryland
#53
The amount of people in the US at least that have this many kids is in the extreme minority, hence the reality show-if it were common it wouldn't be worthy of a show. The birth rates in many western nations are dropping as fewer people are having fewer children. I really doubt that the Duggars will have any sort of measurable effect on world population when the trend in the US is to have fewer children, not more.

Exactly what I was going to say.
 

Dekka

Just try me..
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
19,779
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
48
Location
Ontario
#54
The amount of people in the US at least that have this many kids is in the extreme minority, hence the reality show-if it were common it wouldn't be worthy of a show. The birth rates in many western nations are dropping as fewer people are having fewer children. I really doubt that the Duggars will have any sort of measurable effect on world population when the trend in the US is to have fewer children, not more.
Birth rates are dropping but more children are living to maturity, so its not the same thing.

I agree its a bit of a rareity. I still find it selfish. Knowing people personally with more than 3 kids its not THAT rare to increase the population. (even if you figure many people won't... the populations are still rising)
 

Members online

Top