Members misterhinkydink Posted August 3, 2007 Members Share Posted August 3, 2007 Speaking of hobbies...... (08-03) 07:56 PDT Little Rock, Ark. (AP) -- It's a girl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members misterhinkydink Posted August 3, 2007 Author Members Share Posted August 3, 2007 Arkansas mom gives birth to a whole freakin' baseball team. How deeply should you cringe? Who are you to judge? Who are you to say that the more than slightly creepy 39-year-old woman from Arkansas who just gave birth to her 16th child yes that's right 16 kids and try not to cringe in phantom vaginal pain when you say it, who are you to say Michelle Duggar is not more than a little unhinged and sad and lost? And furthermore, who are you to suggest that her equally troubling husband -- whose name is, of course, Jim Bob and he's hankerin' to be a Republican senator and try not to wince in sociopolitical pain when you say that -- isn't more than a little numb to the real world, and that bringing 16 hungry mewling attention-deprived kids (and she wants more! Yay!) into this exhausted world zips right by "touching" and races right past "disturbing" and lurches its way, heaving and gasping and sweating from the karmic armpits, straight into "Oh my God, what the hell is wrong with you people?" But that would be, you know, mean. Mean and callous to suggest that this might be the most disquieting photo you see all year, this bizarre Duggar family of 18 spotless white hyperreligious interchangeable people with alarmingly bad hair, the kids ranging in ages from 1 to 17, worse than those nuked Smurfs in that UNICEF commercial and worse than all the horrific rubble in Pakistan and worse than the cluster-bomb nightmare that is Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise having a child as they suck the skin from each other's Scientological faces and even worse than that huge 13-foot python which ate that six-foot alligator and then exploded. It's wrong to be this judgmental. Wrong to suggest that it is exactly this kind of weird pathological protofamily breeding-happy gluttony that's making the world groan and cry and recoil, contributing to vicious overpopulation rates and unrepentant economic strain and a bitter moral warpage resulting from a massive viral outbreak of homophobic neo-Christians across our troubled and Bush-ravaged land. Or is it? Is it wrong to notice how all the Duggar kids' names start with the letter J (Jeremiah and Josiah and Jedediah and Jesus, someone please stop them), and that if you study the above photo (or the even more disturbing family Web site) too closely you will become rashy and depressed and you will crave large quantities of alcohol and loud aggressive music to deflect the creeping feeling that this planet is devolving faster than you can suck the contents from a large bong? But I'm not judging. I have a friend who used to co-babysit (yes, it required two sitters) for a family of 10 kids, and she reports that they were, almost without fail, manic and hyper and bewildered and attention deprived in the worst way, half of them addicted to prescription meds to calm their neglected nerves and the other half bound for years of therapy due to complete loss of having the slightest clue as to who they actually were, lost in the family crowd, just another blank, needy face at the table. Is this the guaranteed affliction for every child of very large families? Of course not. But I'm guessing it's more common than you imagine. What's more, after the 10th kid popped out, the family doctor essentially prohibited the baby-addicted mother from having any more offspring, considering the pummeling endured by her various matronly systems, and it's actually painful to imagine the logistics, the toll on Michelle Duggar's body, the ravages it has endured to give birth to roughly one child per year for nearly two decades, and you cannot help but wonder about her body and its various biological and sexual ... no, no, it is not for this space to visualize frighteningly capacious vaginal dimensions. It is not for this space to imagine this couple's soggy sexual mutations. We do not have enough wine on hand for that. Perhaps the point is this: Why does this sort of bizarre hyperbreeding only seem to afflict antiseptic megareligious families from the Midwest? In other words -- assuming Michelle and Jim Bob and their massive brood of cookie-cutter Christian kidbots will all be, as the charming photo suggests, never allowed near a decent pair of designer jeans or a tolerable haircut from a recent decade, and assuming that they will all be tragically encoded with the values of the homophobic asexual Christian right -- where are the forces that shall help neutralize their effect on the culture? Where is the counterbalance, to offset the damage? Where is, in other words, the funky tattooed intellectual poetess who, along with her genius anarchist husband, is popping out 16 funky progressive intellectually curious fashion-forward pagan offspring to answer the Duggar's squad of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Captain Fathead Posted August 3, 2007 Members Share Posted August 3, 2007 Like throwing a hotdog down a hallway I'd guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members misterhinkydink Posted August 3, 2007 Author Members Share Posted August 3, 2007 She did mention that "it actually went fast". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Crescent Seven Posted August 3, 2007 Members Share Posted August 3, 2007 As long as they can afford to feed them I don't give a hot {censored} how many kids they have. I met a woman in Ireland, my friend's grandmother, that had 21 children over the course of 35 years. C7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bonoman Posted August 3, 2007 Members Share Posted August 3, 2007 I don't even want to imagine what this woman's vagina looks like... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members hi.flyer Posted August 3, 2007 Members Share Posted August 3, 2007 Holy crap this post was awesome. How much speed are you on?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members misterhinkydink Posted August 3, 2007 Author Members Share Posted August 3, 2007 I don't even want to imagine what this woman's vagina looks like... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Svi Posted August 3, 2007 Members Share Posted August 3, 2007 The vagina is not a clown car. (I can't take credit for that-it's a common phrase used on Fark) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Crescent Seven Posted August 3, 2007 Members Share Posted August 3, 2007 The vagina is not a clown car. (I can't take credit for that-it's a common phrase used on Fark) What are you trying to say? I should stop trying to fill it with midgets?C7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bonoman Posted August 3, 2007 Members Share Posted August 3, 2007 Yeah, that seems about right... Now I wonder what her husband looks like? I want to meet this woman who obviously has never once had a headache... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members misterhinkydink Posted August 3, 2007 Author Members Share Posted August 3, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pbass_groovin Posted August 5, 2007 Members Share Posted August 5, 2007 They live about 20 minutes away from me in a HUGE, nice house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members toolbar Posted August 5, 2007 Members Share Posted August 5, 2007 Arkansas mom gives birth to a whole freakin' baseball team. How deeply should you cringe? Who are you to judge? Who are you to say that the more than slightly creepy 39-year-old woman from Arkansas who just gave birth to her 16th child yes that's right 16 kids and try not to cringe in phantom vaginal pain when you say it, who are you to say Michelle Duggar is not more than a little unhinged and sad and lost? And furthermore, who are you to suggest that her equally troubling husband -- whose name is, of course, Jim Bob and he's hankerin' to be a Republican senator and try not to wince in sociopolitical pain when you say that -- isn't more than a little numb to the real world, and that bringing 16 hungry mewling attention-deprived kids (and she wants more! Yay!) into this exhausted world zips right by "touching" and races right past "disturbing" and lurches its way, heaving and gasping and sweating from the karmic armpits, straight into "Oh my God, what the hell is wrong with you people?" But that would be, you know, mean. Mean and callous to suggest that this might be the most disquieting photo you see all year, this bizarre Duggar family of 18 spotless white hyperreligious interchangeable people with alarmingly bad hair, the kids ranging in ages from 1 to 17, worse than those nuked Smurfs in that UNICEF commercial and worse than all the horrific rubble in Pakistan and worse than the cluster-bomb nightmare that is Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise having a child as they suck the skin from each other's Scientological faces and even worse than that huge 13-foot python which ate that six-foot alligator and then exploded. It's wrong to be this judgmental. Wrong to suggest that it is exactly this kind of weird pathological protofamily breeding-happy gluttony that's making the world groan and cry and recoil, contributing to vicious overpopulation rates and unrepentant economic strain and a bitter moral warpage resulting from a massive viral outbreak of homophobic neo-Christians across our troubled and Bush-ravaged land. Or is it? Is it wrong to notice how all the Duggar kids' names start with the letter J (Jeremiah and Josiah and Jedediah and Jesus, someone please stop them), and that if you study the above photo (or the even more disturbing family Web site) too closely you will become rashy and depressed and you will crave large quantities of alcohol and loud aggressive music to deflect the creeping feeling that this planet is devolving faster than you can suck the contents from a large bong? But I'm not judging. I have a friend who used to co-babysit (yes, it required two sitters) for a family of 10 kids, and she reports that they were, almost without fail, manic and hyper and bewildered and attention deprived in the worst way, half of them addicted to prescription meds to calm their neglected nerves and the other half bound for years of therapy due to complete loss of having the slightest clue as to who they actually were, lost in the family crowd, just another blank, needy face at the table. Is this the guaranteed affliction for every child of very large families? Of course not. But I'm guessing it's more common than you imagine. What's more, after the 10th kid popped out, the family doctor essentially prohibited the baby-addicted mother from having any more offspring, considering the pummeling endured by her various matronly systems, and it's actually painful to imagine the logistics, the toll on Michelle Duggar's body, the ravages it has endured to give birth to roughly one child per year for nearly two decades, and you cannot help but wonder about her body and its various biological and sexual ... no, no, it is not for this space to visualize frighteningly capacious vaginal dimensions. It is not for this space to imagine this couple's soggy sexual mutations. We do not have enough wine on hand for that. Perhaps the point is this: Why does this sort of bizarre hyperbreeding only seem to afflict antiseptic megareligious families from the Midwest? In other words -- assuming Michelle and Jim Bob and their massive brood of cookie-cutter Christian kidbots will all be, as the charming photo suggests, never allowed near a decent pair of designer jeans or a tolerable haircut from a recent decade, and assuming that they will all be tragically encoded with the values of the homophobic asexual Christian right -- where are the forces that shall help neutralize their effect on the culture? Where is the counterbalance, to offset the damage? Where is, in other words, the funky tattooed intellectual poetess who, along with her genius anarchist husband, is popping out 16 funky progressive intellectually curious fashion-forward pagan offspring to answer the Duggar's squad of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members J. Posted August 5, 2007 Members Share Posted August 5, 2007 As long as they can afford to feed them I don't give a hot {censored} how many kids they have. I agree. They can have as many kids as they want as long as they don't expect the taxpayer to pick up the tab. There's a lot of that going around unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bassman1956 Posted August 5, 2007 Members Share Posted August 5, 2007 There's a lot of that going around unfortunately. I agree with this, at least mostly, in theory. Breeding numerous children is one way poorer families make better money out of our social system, however, and this is true, for whatever reason, justified or not. Personally, I believe anything beyond 2 children, and you should have to pay higher taxes per each child you have above 2. You've replaced your spot on the earth, that's it, anything beyond is luxury, and you should pay accordingly. It's not the 1800's, it's the 2000's, with the infrastructure of the 2000's. Then, we were a sparsely populated mainly agricultural country. When taxes were originally devised, roads, hospitals, schools, social institutions, and welfare programs were not what they are today. Credits for children were based on the idea that they were no load to the system, were actually beneficial in helping families produce taxable revenues, and would be themselves good resources of taxable income in the future. It isn't so now. Children are an immediate burden onto the system. Few if any have great impact on improving the taxable income of families. All contribute to the load of mankind on earth, and you cannot deny the (PC unaddressable) issue of overpopulation's impact on this. As a single taxpayer with no children, I get upset with the idea that I have a tax burden obligation by law, to help somebody achieve their status of the LUXURY of overpopulating the earth, while at the same time, they wind up with a tax credit, funded by me. People should pay tax for each child they bring into the earth. As far as tax credit versus costs of raising kids:Look, if you can't afford having kids, plan accordingly, and don't believe i have an obligation to help you out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members L-1329 Posted August 5, 2007 Members Share Posted August 5, 2007 +1 to all of what Bassman1956 said. My boss has 10 kids, and they home school them too. It's crazy! They are by-the-book catholic's and don't believe in birth control, and the odds are that they will have more. I had to stop by his house to drop off some trip information last week and they had another couple there with six kids. It was a freakin zoo, kids running around everywhere you looked. I could never in a million years deal with that kind of a situation at home. No way. But, now I know why he loves going out on so many trips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members timmerz Posted August 5, 2007 Members Share Posted August 5, 2007 They live about 20 minutes away from me in a HUGE, nice house. Yeah, it was noted as being 7000 sq. ft. in the original article...I'm gonna go out on a little limb here and say he's from a decently wealthy family or or is well paid for what he does (outside of the bedroom:rolleyes:) or some such, and can afford the kids...more power to him....7k sq. ft. is a considerable home....mine's 2400 sq. ft. and I'm lost in it and the wife wants to find something smaller.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.