Devout Catholics Have Better Sex, Study Says

[Gathomas88]

Is that really you and your parents?

Lol. Calling me a liar now? :lol:

Here's a picture of my mother and I from my college graduation.



She's about twenty years older here, but I think you can still see a resemblance.

 

[ChrisL]

Lol. Calling me a liar now? :lol:

Here's a picture of my mother and I from my college graduation.

View attachment 67150793

She's about twenty years older here, but I think you can still see a resemblance.

She's a very lovely lady, and you're not so bad yourself! Very cute Gath!

 

[Gathomas88]

She's a very lovely lady, and you're not so bad yourself! Very cute Gath!

Thanks.

You too.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

I disagree. If a child is going to eat, sleep, and generally consume the resources of a given household, they should be expected to chip in to the day-to-day maintenance of that same household.

They aren't going to be given a free ride in the adult world. Why should they be raised to expect one?

Yeah, and I did as well. But at what point does a child running a 24/7 daycare get to be themselves?

Again, only four of them are old enough to even require that kind of care.

Between 15 teenaged to young adult children and two parents, that is more enough people to adequately care for four young children without significantly overtaxing anyone.

Dude, I just picked an arbitrary age. I've seen kids who can barely see over the stove playing parent to 2 or 3 younger children at once in interviews with those people. It's ridiculous

She didn't, and neither do most of the women in the movement she belongs to.

If she's willing to accept the risk, why should it matter?

And the only thing that stops them is usually emergency surgery to remove their battered uterus. But some do die.

Yes, it does matter. What has happened to that woman's mind to make her willing to leave 19 children motherless? That isn't normal or healthy.

The same is true of extreme distance runners and athletes.

It is their body, is it not?

Yes, it is. Do you see me trying to pass any laws?

I am still allowed to comment that it's unhealthy.

Source?

Besides, modern medicine (and nutrition, for that matter) is more than capable of easily dealing with such problems.

If you'd read my post, you'd know I was commenting on people I know.

But it's a simple and well-known fact that women who have more than 4 children are prone to osteoprerosis. If she doesn't have enough calcium for herself, how can she have enough for a fetus?

First off. Michelle Duggar wasn't raised in the movement, and neither was her husband. They both voluntarily adopted the lifestyle later in life after miscarrying their first child.

Secondly, what evidence do you have that the Duggars are even doing this to their female children?

So? None of the Jonestown people were born into it either.

I'm not talking about the Duggars; I'm talking about women who've left the movement and come out about it.

 

[Gathomas88]

Yeah, and I did as well. But at what point does a child running a 24/7 daycare get to be themselves?

Dude, I just picked an arbitrary age. I've seen kids who can barely see over the stove playing parent to 2 or 3 younger children at once in interviews with those people. It's ridiculous

This might be the case with a majority of these families or it might not. I'm simply pointing out that it doesn't seem to be the case with the Duggars.

I'd also say that it probably isn't a great idea to make sweeping generalizations based off of what you saw in a couple of interviews.

Yes, it does matter. What has happened to that woman's mind to make her willing to leave 19 children motherless? That isn't normal or healthy.

Yes, it is. Do you see me trying to pass any laws?

I am still allowed to comment that it's unhealthy.

What was going through this guy's mind? Are his actions healthy?



Or this guy's? His actions definitely aren't healthy.



You are absolutely entitled to your opinions. I'm simply saying that it's more than a little hypocritical for you Liberal types to complain about how society is always "judging you" for your unusual lifestyles, and then turn around and give the exact same treatment to someone who makes life choices that you happen to find strange.

Live and let live, people. Sheesh.

I'm willing to bet that most of the families living this way are a lot less sinister than you might think.

If you'd read my post, you'd know I was commenting on people I know.

But it's a simple and well-known fact that women who have more than 4 children are prone to osteoprerosis. If she doesn't have enough calcium for herself, how can she have enough for a fetus?

It might make a difference. However; I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that the difference is as dramatic as you're making out.

My father was the sixth son of a family with seven children. The man has never had a cavity in his entire life. I'm the first born of my family, and I had more than half a dozen fillings by the time I was ten.

I actually have a small cavity developing right now that I need to get taken care of when time and money permits.

Birth order clearly isn't everything. Having a number of children that could easily run into double digits used to be the norm in human society, not the exception.

I'm not talking about the Duggars; I'm talking about women who've left the movement and come out about it.

Were they prevented from leaving?

I'm not denying that some members of the movement might be cultish. It would simply strike me as being a bit of a leap to assume that all of them are based solely off of the testimony of a handful of people who have every reason to want to bad mouth it.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

This might be the case with a majority of these families or it might not. I'm simply pointing out that it doesn't seem to be the case with the Duggars.

I'd also say that it probably isn't a great idea to make sweeping generalizations based off of what you saw in a couple of interviews.

They come right out and say it: the only way they manage is because their children take care of all their other children.

What was going through this guy's mind? Are his actions healthy?

Or this guy's? His actions definitely aren't healthy.

You are absolutely entitled to your opinions. I'm simply saying that it's more than a little hypocritical for you Liberal types to complain about how society is always "judging you" for your unusual lifestyles, and then turn around and give the exact same treatment to someone who makes life choices that you happen to find strange.

Live and let live, people. Sheesh.

I'm willing to bet that most of the families living this way are a lot less sinister than you might think.

Neither of those people are willing to die for a demanding patriarch, and leave an enormous family without a parent.

The first guy just has his own take on what his body is for. Whatev's.

The second guy's a little out there, but some people just can't feel alive unless there's risk. He's doing it to live, not for someone else, knowing he'll die trying. Big difference.

I don't judge her. Honestly, I worry about her, and everyone in the Quiverfull movement. It has every single mark of dangerous cult.

I don't "find it strange." I recognize that it is extremly detrimental to herself and others to do what she's doing, and the most obvious answer for why she's doing it is the cult she's in, and the extremely controlling nature of her husband. Notice what letter all their kids' names start with?

You're essentially defending abuse. I don't even take you seriously on this.

If this were ANY other situation -- just some random couple who treated each other this way, regardless of how many kids they do or don't have, or what their religion is -- you wouldn't even think to defend it.

It might make a difference. However; I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that the difference is as dramatic as you're making out.

My father was the sixth son of a family with seven children. The man has never had a cavity in his entire life. I'm the first born of my family, and I had more than half a dozen fillings by the time I was ten.

I actually have a small cavity developing right now that I need to get taken care of when time and money permits.

Birth order clearly isn't everything. Having a number of children that could easily run into double digits used to be the norm in human society, not the exception.

The difference between 4 and 20?

No, birth order isn't everything, but being late in a long line certainly tips the odds against your general health -- and that of your mother, in a lot of cases.

Were they prevented from leaving?

I'm not denying that some members of the movement might be cultish. It would simply strike me as being a bit of a leap to assume that all of them are based solely off of the testimony of a handful of people who have every reason to want to bad mouth it.

Yes, I would say so. They are not permitted to be alone, they don't get a real education, they are not allowed to make money... yeah, I would say removing all possible avenues of escape means they were prevented from leaving. This kind of behavior is usually one of the biggest markers of abusive relationships, by the way.

Dude, the movement is named after the concept of using children as grunts for their holy war. Breeding cannon fodder. It's not just "some of them."

 

[Captain Adverse]

WOW! Have there really been over 150 posts regarding a small study completed over 20 years ago....which professes that some Catholics are having "better sex" merely because they are devout?!?! I mean, seriously? Seriously??? lol

Hmmm, I must be dreaming....

 

[Gathomas88]

They come right out and say it: the only way they manage is because their children take care of all their other children.

My parents would likely say the same thing. Most large families tend to ask that their older children chip in to help with the younger.

I think that you're allowing your personal biases to get the better of you here.

You're essentially defending abuse. I don't even take you seriously on this.

It hasn't been demonstrated that any abuse is even taking place. You're basing this opinion completely off of the hearsay of a handful of bitter apostates, and your own (heavily biased) personal perceptions.

Again, do you not see how this is problematic?

You've basically taken it upon yourself to speak for and "crusade" on behalf of these women without knowing the first thing about their personal lives or feelings on the matter. You're running pretty much completely off of assumptions here.

i.e.

"I wouldn't want to like that, so no woman could possibly want to live like that!"

"They must all be secret slaves for their husbands!"

Hell! I've even read a couple of the websites these fallen away apostates run. A lot of their criticisms would strike me as being rather subjective.

Homeschooling (even with a religious focus), spanking, internet censorship, modest clothing, and social attitudes that run contrary to popular culture are not forms of "abuse" in and of themselves.

My family was never quite so extreme in its views as the Quiverfull crowd, but we knew several families that were. I wouldn't say that I feel particularly "abused" and neither do they (not that this prevented several more liberal minded members of my extended family from claiming abuse anyway regardless while I was growing up :roll: ).

It simply comes off as being another way for narrow-minded and intolerant people to try and claim that only their lifestyle is acceptable.

Yes, I would say so. They are not permitted to be alone, they don't get a real education, they are not allowed to make money... yeah, I would say removing all possible avenues of escape means they were prevented from leaving. This kind of behavior is usually one of the biggest markers of abusive relationships, by the way.

Dude, the movement is named after the concept of using children as grunts for their holy war. Breeding cannon fodder. It's not just "some of them."

The oldest Duggar girl is talking about going to college to become a nurse, and one of the younger ones has expressed a strong interest in studying photography.

http:Jill Duggar College Plans

If they don't like the movement, they can leave when they get older. It's not like any of these families surround their homes with barbed wire and attack dogs.

They're simply a tad on the overbearing side when it comes to raising children.

WOW! Have there really been over 150 posts regarding a small study completed over 20 years ago....which professes that some Catholics are having "better sex" merely because they are devout?!?! I mean, seriously? Seriously??? lol

Hmmm, I must be dreaming....

A lot of fuss over something so self-evidently silly, no?

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

My parents would likely say the same thing. Most large families tend to ask that their older children chip in to help with the younger.

I think that you're allowing your personal biases to get the better of you here.

That's something every decent parent does. Where you had lots of siblings, I had lots of animals. Best-spent time of my childhood.

But I don't think you get it. When there's nearly 20 of them, it's a full-time job for a very young child who's inefficient, has to go to school, and has more than they can handle.

And while it may be good for children to learn how to work, it's also necessary for them to have time to play and just be kids.

There's a difference between "teaching responsibility," and "using your children as unpaid labor."

It hasn't been demonstrated that any abuse is even taking place. You're basing this opinion completely off of the hearsay of a handful of bitter apostates, and your own (heavily biased) personal perceptions.

Again, do you not see how this is problematic?

You've basically taken it upon yourself to speak for and "crusade" on behalf of these women without knowing the first thing about their personal lives or feelings on the matter. You're running pretty much completely off of assumptions here.

i.e.

"I wouldn't want to like that, so no woman could possibly want to live like that!"

"They must all be secret slaves for their husbands!"

Hell! I've even read a couple of the websites these fallen away apostates run. A lot of their criticisms would strike me as being rather subjective.

Homeschooling (even with a religious focus), spanking, internet censorship, modest clothing, and social attitudes that run contrary to popular culture are not forms of "abuse" in and of themselves.

My family was never quite so extreme in its views as the Quiverfull crowd, but we knew several families that were. I wouldn't say that I feel particularly "abused" and neither do they (not that this prevented several more liberal minded members of my extended family from claiming abuse anyway regardless while I was growing up :roll: ).

It simply comes off as being another way for narrow-minded and intolerant people to try and claim that only their lifestyle is acceptable.

You don't read anything you respond to.

Every account I've read from an ex-Quiverfull woman includes some kind of abuse. There isn't one I've ever seen that just says, "It wasn't for me. This different culture was weird at first, but my family supported me, blah blah blah." It's more like, "My father systematically broke down my sense of worth from the moment I was born and I was scared when I ran away."

Plenty of people who aren't Quiverfull have big-ass families. I don't really get it, but I don't think there's anything wrong with it.

Quiverfull literally breeds women to death, or as close as they can get to it. I see a difference. Michelle Duggar herself is lucky to be alive. Unfortunately not all of her children made it.

The oldest Duggar girl is talking about going to college to become a nurse, and one of the younger ones has expressed a strong interest in studying photography.

http:Jill Duggar College Plans

If they don't like the movement, they can leave when they get older. It's not like any of these families surround their homes with barbed wire and attack dogs.

They're simply a tad on the overbearing side when it comes to raising children.

Of course they are. They're on TV, looking for converts.

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Gathomas88]

That's something every decent parent does. Where you had lots of siblings, I had lots of animals. Best-spent time of my childhood.

But I don't think you get it. When there's nearly 20 of them, it's a full-time job for a very young child who's inefficient, has to go to school, and has more than they can handle.

Again though, the point you continue to miss here is that the vast majority of those "children" are anything but. Most of them (almost 4/5, as a matter of fact) are in their teen years or older.

To be honest, it isn't even really possible for a family like the Duggas to create a scenario like you have proposed. A family using completely natural reproductive methods can't have children that are closer than a year or two apart in most cases. After all, the act of breastfeeding keeps most women hormonally more or less infertile for the duration of the infant's feeding and weaning period.

This tends to result in fairly generous age distribution among these family's children.

And while it may be good for children to learn how to work, it's also necessary for them to have time to play and just be kids.

I agree. I'm just saying that you haven't really made a solid case to demonstrate that anything like this is actually taking place in most Duggar-esque households.

The one solid example you have provided, the titular Duggar family, rather clearly doesn't support your argument. In a house with fifteen teenagers or young adults, and two adult parents, there are only four small children to be cared for.

Between all of the older people in the household, the workload that goes into caring for four small children is perfectly manageable.

You don't read anything you respond to.

Every account I've read from an ex-Quiverfull woman includes some kind of abuse. There isn't one I've ever seen that just says, "It wasn't for me. This different culture was weird at first, but my family supported me, blah blah blah." It's more like, "My father systematically broke down my sense of worth from the moment I was born and I was scared when I ran away."

Plenty of people who aren't Quiverfull have big-ass families. I don't really get it, but I don't think there's anything wrong with it.

Quiverfull literally breeds women to death, or as close as they can get to it. I see a difference. Michelle Duggar herself is lucky to be alive.

Again, the problem here is that you're only accepting the accounts given by clearly disgruntled former Quiverfull women as being valid depictions of life inside the movement. Hundreds, if not thousands, of women in this country beyond the relative handful you've heard of (who were apparently angry enough with the movement to not only leave but make it their mission in life to proselytize against it) have voluntarily decided to remain among the Quiverfull's number.

You pretty much categorically refuse to believe that these women exist.

Unless you want to argue that they are all being coerced into staying (which I would need to see some seriously thorough evidence to accept), it would appear that these women are perfectly content living within the philosophy's confines.

The bottom line here is that you are making things out to be more sinister than they probably are. It's pretty obvious that these people aren't running anything on nearly the same scale as the Church of Scientology, or even the Church of Latter Day Saints.

They're not "re-educating" their women and children in giant concrete compounds surrounded by razor wire and "inner circle" security guards. They're basically just a fringe group of exclusivistic ultraorthodox religious people who happen to have some rather atypical views on child rearing and procreation.

I'd basically put them on roughly the same level as the inhabitants of your average radical Left Wing Commune or Amish Ordnung.

Granted, they're definitely "weird" and sort of self-righteously judgmental where certain things that the rest of us take for granted are concerned. Their life style also certainly isn't for everyone; many times not even their own children.

However, at the end of the day, they're little more than harmless kooks.

Unfortunately not all of her children made it.

Aren't you a staunch supporter of the "fetuses aren't really people" line of reasoning? :roll:

What do you care if she had a miscarriage?

I'll believe it when I see it.

To each their own. :shrug:

 

[Fiddytree]

And Protestants were most unhappy with theirs. BOOOOYA!

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Again though, the point you continue to miss here is that the vast majority of those "children" are anything but. Most of them (almost 4/5, as a matter of fact) are in their teen years or older.

To be honest, it isn't even really possible for a family like the Duggas to create a scenario like you have proposed. A family using completely natural reproductive methods can't have children that are closer than a year or two apart in most cases. After all, the act of breastfeeding keeps most women hormonally more or less infertile for the duration of the infant's feeding and weaning period.

This tends to result in fairly generous age distribution among these family's children.

All of the Duggar children are less than 2 years apart, so apparently not. :lol:

The thing you don't understand is that the lifestyle doesn't allow for "natural" spacing because we have environments today that cause UNNATURAL fertility functioning. Under natural circumstances, where humans are leaner and aren't getting constant hormones from their water and food, it's rare for children to be born within 5 years of each other, let alone 2.

But it's perfectly possible, under modern conditions, to have an endless slew of "stair-step" children until the woman's body gives out. And that's exactly what the Duggars did. Michelle Duggar isn't just insanely fertile. You'll see this repeated in most Quiverfull families (although for most of those women, their body gives out sooner).

I agree. I'm just saying that you haven't really made a solid case to demonstrate that anything like this is actually taking place in most Duggar-esque households.

The one solid example you have provided, the titular Duggar family, rather clearly doesn't support your argument. In a house with fifteen teenagers or young adults, and two adult parents, there are only four small children to be cared for.

Between all of the older people in the household, the workload that goes into caring for four small children is perfectly manageable.

I'm close enough to it to know that "reality" television is nothing close to reality. So, I believe nothing I might see on TV. I know better. However, the stories of dozens of women and their children are more convincing.

At some point those children were younger, were they not? Or do Duggar children just pop out at their current age?

Again, the problem here is that you're only accepting the accounts given by clearly disgruntled former Quiverfull women as being valid depictions of life inside the movement. Hundreds, if not thousands, of women in this country beyond the relative handful you've heard of (who were apparently angry enough with the movement to not only leave but make it their mission in life to proselytize against it) have voluntarily decided to remain among the Quiverfull's number.

Actually, most of these women post anonymously in online support groups. Yes, there's enough of them that there's a need for support groups.

They post anonymously because they're frightened, and they post there in an attempt to get their head right enough that they can carry on with their life.

You're right, I'm suspicious of isolationist cults whose members flee in terror. I see nothing wrong with that.

You pretty much categorically refuse to believe that these women exist.

Oh, I certainly believe it. As Chris pointed out, isolated and brainwashed people have a tendency to wind up with Stockholm syndrome.

Unless you want to argue that they are all being coerced into staying (which I would need to see some seriously thorough evidence to accept), it would appear that these women are perfectly content living within the philosophy's confines.

The bottom line here is that you are making things out to be more sinister than they probably are. It's pretty obvious that these people aren't running anything on nearly the same scale as the Church of Scientology, or even the Church of Latter Day Saints.

They're not "re-educating" their women and children in giant concrete compounds surrounded by razor wire and "inner circle" security guards. They're basically just a fringe group of exclusivistic ultraorthodox religious people who happen to have some rather atypical views on child rearing and procreation.

I'd basically put them on roughly the same level as the inhabitants of your average radical Left Wing Commune or Amish Ordnung.

Granted, they're definitely "weird" and sort of self-righteously judgmental where certain things that the rest of us take for granted are concerned. Their life style also certainly isn't for everyone; many times not even their own children.

However, at the end of the day, they're little more than harmless kooks.

I'm not going to do your Google-fu for you, but you're welcome to do it yourself.

Most cults don't have concrete compounds. They are mostly run out of someone's home or neighborhood. You don't seem to understand what a cult is, or what makes them so hard to catch. It's the fact that they DON'T seem institutional, and all their members smile for the camera... until something goes horribly wrong, or a sufficient number start to escape and clear their heads.

Aren't you a staunch supporter of the "fetuses aren't really people" line of reasoning? :roll:

What do you care if she had a miscarriage?

No, actually. I'm a staunch supporter of "it doesn't matter what fetuses are," due to the magnitude of the woman's right. You don't read a damn thing, do you?

I care as much as she cares; that's the nature of being truly empathetic and not simply agenda-driven.

 

[Gathomas88]

All of the Duggar children are less than 2 years apart, so apparently not. :lol:

First off, Michelle admits herself that she is somewhat atypical in this regard, as her periods tend to return within only a few weeks of the births of her children regardless of breastfeeding. This isn't the case for a lot of women.

Secondly, all of the Duggar children are roughly two years apart either way regardless. Such an arrangement is hardly unmanageable.

The thing you don't understand is that the lifestyle doesn't allow for "natural" spacing because we have environments today that cause UNNATURAL fertility functioning. Under natural circumstances, where humans are leaner and aren't getting constant hormones from their water and food, it's rare for children to be born within 5 years of each other, let alone 2.

Families with a number of children that could easily range into the teens have been common for most of recorded human history.

They were frankly needed to offset the high childhood mortality rates and short lifespans that were common in the pre-modern era.

But it's perfectly possible, under modern conditions, to have an endless slew of "stair-step" children until the woman's body gives out.

Michelle Duggar is in her late forties. In another couple of years, she will be in menopause.

There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that her body has "given out." Granted, her last two pregnancies were somewhat rough and she did recently have a miscarriage.

However, that could've happened to any woman her age regardless of their past reproductive history.

The simple fact of the matter is that she is still alive, well, and apparently more or less content with the life she has chosen for herself.

Why should this bother you so much? All's well that ends well.

I'm close enough to it to know that "reality" television is nothing close to reality. So, I believe nothing I might see on TV. I know better. However, the stories of dozens of women and their children are more convincing.

Again, this is what is commonly known as "confirmation bias."

You're right, I'm suspicious of isolationist cults whose members flee in terror. I see nothing wrong with that.

"Terror" of what, exactly?

Is Jim Bob Duggar going to break into their homes and throw acid on these women if they so much as think about using a condom? :screwy

Oh, I certainly believe it. As Chris pointed out, isolated and brainwashed people have a tendency to wind up with Stockholm syndrome.

Yes, yes... Those barefooted kitchen dwelling Duggar women are all just mewling weaklings in desperate need of rescuing by some nice "liberated" female who can teach them the proper way to live. Once the misogynistic evil of the vile lord Jim Bob has been crushed beneath your menstruating heels, you'll all ride off into the sunset together in your hot pink convertible like Thelma and Louise, settle down somewhere nice, cry, and swap stories of the evils of male dominated culture while eating ice cream out of the tub and watching Lifetime Network original movies forever more.

I'm quite familiar with this particular spiel. :roll:

Can you really not see just how presumptuous and self-righteously arrogant your attitude here comes off as being?

ALL human beings are ultimately indoctrinated to some degree by the environment in which they are raised. Why do you view modern notions of "gurl power" as being untouchably sacrosanct in this regard whereas the views of people like the Duggars are basically intolerable anathema?

It is one thing to merely disagree with someone's lifestyle or personal choices. It is another entirely to go out of one's way to vilify, mock, and belittle those choices while suggesting that only someone who is otherwise incapable of rational introspection could possibly be happy to have made them.

I'm sorry, but most of the opinions you have so far expressed in this thread constitute little more than bigoted ranting.

Most cults don't have concrete compounds. They are mostly run out of someone's home or neighborhood. You don't seem to understand what a cult is, or what makes them so hard to catch. It's the fact that they DON'T seem institutional, and all their members smile for the camera... until something goes horribly wrong, or a sufficient number start to escape and clear their heads.

In other words, "they're a cult because I say they are a cult."

Going back to my earlier examples, do you consider Left Wing communes or isolationist Amish communities to be "cults" as well?

They are guilty of basically all of the same things you attribute to the Duggar family.

No, actually. I'm a staunch supporter of "it doesn't matter what fetuses are," due to the magnitude of the woman's right. You don't read a damn thing, do you?

I care as much as she cares; that's the nature of being truly empathetic and not simply agenda-driven.

Why should it matter then if Michelle Duggar is willing to risk them in her pursuit of pregnancy?

 

[ChrisL]

First off, Michelle admits herself that she is somewhat atypical in this regard, as her periods tend to return within only a few weeks of the births of her children regardless of breastfeeding. This isn't the case for a lot of women.

Secondly, all of the Duggar children are roughly two years apart either way regardless. Such an arrangement is hardly unmanageable.



Families with a number of children that could easily range into the teens have been common for most of recorded human history.

They were frankly needed to offset the high childhood mortality rates and short lifespans that were common in the pre-modern era.



Michelle Duggar is in her late forties. In another couple of years, she will be in menopause.

There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that her body has "given out." Granted, her last two pregnancies were somewhat rough and she did recently have a miscarriage.

However, that could've happened to any woman her age regardless of their past reproductive history.

The simple fact of the matter is that she is still alive, well, and apparently more or less content with the life she has chosen for herself.

Why should this bother you so much? All's well that ends well.



Again, this is what is commonly known as "confirmation bias."



"Terror" of what, exactly?

Is Jim Bob Duggar going to break into their homes and throw acid on these women if they so much as think about using a condom? :screwy:



Yes, yes... Those barefooted kitchen dwelling Duggar women are all just mewling weaklings in desperate need of rescuing by some nice "liberated" female who can teach them the proper way to live. Once the misogynistic evil of the vile lord Jim Bob has been crushed beneath your menstruating heels, you'll all ride off into the sunset together in your hot pink convertible like Thelma and Louise, settle down somewhere nice, cry, and swap stories of the evils of male dominated culture while eating ice cream out of the tub and watching Lifetime Network original movies forever more.

I'm quite familiar with this particular spiel. :roll:

Can you really not see just how presumptuous and self-righteously arrogant your attitude here comes off as being? View attachment 67150930

ALL human beings are ultimately indoctrinated to some degree by the environment in which they are raised. Why do you view modern notions of "gurl power" as being untouchably sacrosanct in this regard whereas the views of people like the Duggars are basically intolerable anathema?

It is one thing to merely disagree with someone's lifestyle or personal choices. It is another entirely to go out of one's way to vilify, mock, and belittle those choices while suggesting that only someone who is otherwise incapable of rational introspection could possibly be happy to have made them.

I'm sorry, but most of the opinions you have so far expressed in this thread constitute little more than bigoted ranting.



In other words, "they're a cult because I say they are a cult."

Going back to my earlier examples, do you consider Left Wing communes or isolationist Amish communities to be "cults" as well?

They are guilty of basically all of the same things you attribute to the Duggar family.



Why should it matter then if Michelle Duggar is willing to risk them in her pursuit of pregnancy?

I don't think they're a cult or anything, just very strange people. :lol:

 

[Gathomas88]

I don't think they're a cult or anything, just very strange people. :lol:

Exactly. They're a group of somewhat kooky ultra-conservative religious people who just so happen to have a lot of kids.

There frankly isn't much reason to take things any further than that. :shrug:

 

[ChrisL]

Exactly. They're a group of somewhat kooky ultra-conservative religious people who just so happen to have a lot of kids.

There frankly isn't much reason to take things any further than that. :shrug:

Kooky, good word to describe anyone with 19 kids. :2razz: