New Posts  All Forums:
 

16 children - Page 9

post #161 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by eightyferrettoes
Nope, but it does demonstrate that it's no cure-all for what ails ya, either. The pretty pictures don't really match up with what happens when the rubber meets the road, so to speak.

Why is it so difficult for people to just admit this and fix it within the religious communities?
What it proves is that your father didn't take his responsibility seriously and sinned.

It isn't the system, it is the humans shortcomings that fail.

You may also like:

Sitting or Squatting: What's Really Best in the Bathroom?
There Is Not Always a "Fix" For the Difficult Child
10 Things You Don't Need For a New Baby
post #162 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by eightyferrettoes

And seriously, the blanket thing is messed up. Even if you're not hitting the baby for having the temerity to leave the blanket, how does forcing a baby to remain on two square feet of blanket do anything beneficial for its development?
Right. This is my point - it's all fine and good to have 12, 15, 17 kids, whatever...but I would assume that you actually liked children. Making a toddler sit on a blanket at home QUIETLY for the express purpose of teaching it that God wants you to sit on a blanket and be trained by mama, is totally wack. It's so developmentally inappropriate and not just enjoying those wall-scribblin,' "I'm a wildebeest!" toddler years. I don't even want to know how potty training works there.

Maybe they don't believe in child development? Perhaps she wishes she could just spring forth fully-formed adults from her loins?

On family input - on the website it says that every day, everyone has their chores daily except when it's "daddy day" and daddy overrides the schedule and takes everyone out for fun! When is Jinger day, I'd like to know? Poor, poor Jinger.

Regarding "children of the corn" style - at least in the photos, all the girls have the exact same haircut and styled the same as mom, all on their left shoulder. Mom, BTW, should get a new free hairstyle while she's on this donation kick, and someone should tell her that the mullet has seen its day.

Regarding cheetoh pie - yes, it's much better with processed cheese food on top. Velveeta melts a little better than the government kind.
post #163 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelBee
You should come to my house.

Dh treats me like a queen.
Yup, the pedestalling of women-who-conform is a traditional part of the patriarchal notion of woman. Flip side of that is demonizing the ones who "fail," according to the subjective judgments of the men in charge. It's worked for a heck of a long time.

Sing me a new song, folks! This one is so worn out I dunno where to start.
post #164 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kathryn
So, you're ok with the Pearls too?
I have actually wrote the Pearls with my concerns. I ahve also prayed for them and their families.
post #165 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelBee
I will through judgement at them when I am a perfect parent myself.

That will never happen.

We should reach out in love if we believe they are mislead, not attack them or slander them.

How does that contribute to a greater good?
It is not judgement to look at something and say, "That is wrong."
post #166 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelBee
What it proves is that your father didn't take his responsibility seriously and sinned.

It isn't the system, it is the humans shortcomings that fail.
Why are you willing to judge and call it sin here, but not call hitting babies sin?
post #167 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelBee
What it proves is that your father didn't take his responsibility seriously and sinned.

It isn't the system, it is the humans shortcomings that fail.
Hmmm. Then maybe "the system" should quit vesting so much authority in men, who have repeatedly failed to uphold their vaunted responsibilities, eh?

Fool me once, shame on you-- fool me twice, shame on me.
post #168 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by annettemarie
But if any of it, even a smidgen, involves smacking their children around, why on earth would you want to emulate them? There are plenty of godly women raising godly children who don't promote the Ezzo's and Gothard (our own DB for one!). Why on earth are you defending a family who does?
I know NO ONE that I would emulate 100% except for Jesus Chirst himself.

So to me that point is moot.
post #169 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:53pm
Moot, AB, moot.
post #170 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by eightyferrettoes
Yup, the pedestalling of women-who-conform is a traditional part of the patriarchal notion of woman. Flip side of that is demonizing the ones who "fail," according to the subjective judgments of the men in charge. It's worked for a heck of a long time.

Sing me a new song, folks! This one is so worn out I dunno where to start.
Those men are sinning and are in the wrong. Period.

I "fail" often. My husband treats me the same regardless and loves me no less.
post #171 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by eightyferrettoes
Moot, AB, moot.
: Ooppss!
post #172 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCVeg
As for the whole "let's not judge" issue...I think this is true in principle, but when someone puts their family on TV multiple times for many reality TV shows and puts out a website to promote their family and philosophies, then I think they are in some sense inviting us to judge. Why is it wrong to form opinions about what you see on TV or read about? I think reality shows like this are "advertising" in much the same way that commercials are advertising--and, honestly, I think we have the right (and perhaps even the obligation?) to judge what we are being "sold" by the media.
Sorry, I wasn't going to respond until reading this whole thread, but what the heck. Yes, I agree with you on this. I'm honestly not going to hold this family to a higher standard than a 2 kid family and start picking on her that way. For example, just because she weans at 6 months to get pregnant again doesn't mean she doesn't deserve to have more kids. Plenty of people don't even breastfeed.

Yet this family has made itself very visible appearing in magazines and television numerous times. They are a phenomenon of sorts. They do things that some of find a little weird or disagree with--of course we are going to comment! Hell, we do that here on MDC with other members, don't we? Why should this family be exempt?

Look at the jokes that were going around about the name Gwyneth Paltrow chose for her daughter.
post #173 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelBee
I have actually wrote the Pearls with my concerns. I ahve also prayed for them and their families.
If you've written to the Peals concerning the fact that they beat children, why are you defending people that follow people like the Pearls and Ezzo? You are defending the Pearls and Ezzo's by doing that. Why are you defending infant abuse?
post #174 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelBee
Those men are sinning and are in the wrong. Period.
Now how are they sinning? If you consider the husband/father the final authority on what is and is not acceptable behavior and attitudes from the subordinated women in the family, then WHY should he not have the latitude to make judgments about who should be "treated like a queen" and who requires chastisement?
post #175 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by annettemarie
It is not judgement to look at something and say, "That is wrong." That is not what Christ was talking about when he instructed us not to judge. It is not slandering them to say that what they are doing, in God's name, is wrong, wrong, wrong.

If no one ever stood up for what was right, how would the gospel ever be preached? If no one was ever willing to name sin for what it is--and I call hitting babies sin--what is the point of being a Christian? You are called to be salt AND light, AngelBee. You are called to stand up AGAINST evil as well as proclaiming what is good. When you take a middle of the road "Oh, some of what they do might be wrong, but I think they're OK because they happen to share my convictions on quiver-full families and modest dress" you are not standing up for what's right. You're not proclaiming the gospel.
People aren't just saying that there actions are wrong.

They are calling them weird, making jokes about how they look/dress, calling them bad parents.....that is wrong.
post #176 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by annettemarie
Why are you willing to judge and call it sin here, but not call hitting babies sin?

:
post #177 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by annettemarie
Why are you willing to judge and call it sin here, but not call hitting babies sin?
Hitting babies is a sin. I never said that it wasn't.
post #178 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelBee
I know NO ONE that I would emulate 100% except for Jesus Chirst himself.

So to me that point is moot.
It's a legitimate question.
post #179 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by eightyferrettoes
Hmmm. Then maybe "the system" should quit vesting so much authority in men, who have repeatedly failed to uphold their vaunted responsibilities, eh?
It would be the same with women.

Both sexes make bad choices.
post #180 of 1903
3/13/06 at 5:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelBee
Hitting babies is a sin. I never said that it wasn't.
No, what you said was that we weren't to judge the baby hitters. But you're judging 80f's father.

You may also like:

Sitting or Squatting: What's Really Best in the Bathroom?
There Is Not Always a "Fix" For the Difficult Child
10 Things You Don't Need For a New Baby