Commentary

It’s a vagina, not a clown car

POSTED AT 08:16 PM ON Aug. 24, 2009 | PRINT | Email | SHARE | COMMENTS (11)

“TLC” has stood for many different things.

In the ’90s, it meant female hip-hop with condom wrappers used as fashion statements. For 50-year-old women baking pies, it means tender loving care. What we’re focusing on today is its other meaning: The Learning Channel, or as it should be called now, “Woah, Look At That Weird Family Channel.”

What once contained programming only a home-schooled kid could love has now become a circus of strange family setups. The tent pole of this carnival is the Duggars. Like some twisted Dr. Seuss book, the Duggars have 18 children.

That is not a typo. We’re biologically driven to make sure our genetic code carries on, but here we’re looking at insect-brood numbers of offspring.

Part of the Quiver Movement, which celebrates having families big enough to play full baseball games, the Duggars raise the question of when it’s appropriate to forcibly remove a person’s reproductive organs. It’s hard not to sound insensitive, as the reason for their multitude of moppets is faith-related, but at what point is a person’s right to practice their religious beliefs overridden by common sense?

I don’t want to physically stop these people, but someone needs to sit the Quiver families down for a nice chat. Dr. Phil, why aren’t you on this?

Michelle Duggar home-schools her kids, somehow teaching 7-year-olds as well as 17-year-olds. The quality of their education is doubtful, as even trained teachers can’t give adequate attention to every student in the classroom.

There’s only so much time two people can share with their kids. If the Duggars don’t sleep, that gives each kid a maximum of 80 minutes a day to be alone with their parents.

If nothing, the law of averages guarantees that one child in a huge family will be emotionally messed-up or at least develop an affection for music by Marilyn Manson.
“Octomom” became famous earlier this year when the single mother became pregnant with eight children in addition to the six she already had. While she became generally reviled in the media, she still became a media focus and developed her own reality show.

Any rational person would observe these related stories and learn from it, but there are unbalanced people who will look at these events and think that’s their ticket to becoming famous.

I can only imagine what the next eccentric family setup will be. Cannibals who eat one of their kids every year? A pastor and his demonically possessed family? How about “Brother, Brotha,” a show about minority kids with different dads?

It’s hard to champion a giant family like this. It’s offspring gluttony, as our world is already overpopulated. England has started to run out of places to bury bodies, and some American women are turning their ovaries into Sam’s Clubs.

China might be onto something with their one-child policy, which has reduced population growth by 300 million people in the past two decades. Well, except for that trend of abandonment happening with female infants.

We’re having trouble not screwing up kids with one or two siblings. Maybe President Obama can stimulate our medical economy by giving tax breaks on vasectomies.

PRINT | Email | SHARE | COMMENTS (11)





Name: *
Email: *
E-mail address will not be published.
Comments:
Verify image: Security Text
  *
 
 
All Comments  (11)

Posted by Natalie at 11:21 AM on Sep 02, 2009 | Report this comment

This guy is a jackass! This is what America is all about. The freedom to choose for yourself. Choose what? Whatever you feel is right for you. When I read articles written by guys like this I find no trouble believing we're headed in the direction of socialism. The other good thing about America is the fact that if you prefer socialism to capitalism you are free to leave at any time. Oh, except that China doesn't want you!

Posted by Pat at 6:12 PM on Sep 01, 2009 | Report this comment

I find several of my ancestors in the 1700-1800's in French Canada with more than a dozen kids -- the most 18. Large families were the norm in those days. Of course, many did not live to adulthood.

Posted by Ron Wolters at 6:9 PM on Sep 01, 2009 | Report this comment

Not a thing in the world wrong with large families but 18 going on 19, seems to far surpass the term normal large family; They truly need to figure out what is causing this or change water?

Posted by Brit Brat at 5:2 PM on Sep 01, 2009 | Report this comment

Ummm You need to go a little bit beyond, Chad: Do you think your parents might had thought that sterilization is the answer? Give birth control to middle school through Grad School to all the youth. Abortion is in the Obama-Health Care package, too, so the government will create their new generation that will be male-BOTS and fem-bots are only covered.

Posted by Bob at 3:27 PM on Sep 01, 2009 | Report this comment

haha! Obviously the author is a product of our failing educational system. If only he had done a bit of research before writing this lame article.

Posted by Sarah at 10:58 AM on Sep 01, 2009 | Report this comment

"I don't know if you realize that our country barely has enough replacement children being born to maintain our population." Replacement children? Wow. "I don't know if you realize" that your statement is wrong. We have plenty of "replacement children," as Joan so eloquently stated. The birth rate is slowing, yes, but so is the death rate, thanks to medical advancements. In fact, the population is expected to reach 400 million people by 2039 (Thank you, Duggar family!). I'd suggest checking facts before making such broad statements. Why don't we all look into the stress millions of people put on our dwindling resources before we champion huge families? Maybe we'd be praising smaller families for their responsibility. I'm with Chad on this one.

Posted by TERRIE PEARSALL at 9:22 AM on Sep 01, 2009 | Report this comment

SHE HAS A RIGHT TO HAVE AS MANY CHILDREN AS SHE WANT'S. WHAT WORRIES ME IS THAT THE CHILD CARE IS PUT ON THE OLDER CHILDRED. THEORETICALLY, THAT IS A GOOD IDEA, THEY LEARN TO CARE FOR OTHER PEOPLE AND ETC. BUT THOSE KIDS SHOULD BE KIDS AND NOT HAVE TO BE MOTHERS BEFORE THEY ARE EVEN 10 YEARS OLD. THEY DIDN'T HAVE A CHOICE ON CHILD CARE, THEY ARE BORN IN TO IT. IF SHE CAN'T TAKE CARE OF EACH CHILD HERSELF, SHE NEED'S TO STOP IT. I WILL AGREE, THEY ARE A WONDERFUL EXAMPLE OF LOVE AND CARING IN A FAMILY, BUT I STILL DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO THE YOUNGER KID'S WHO WILL NEVER KNOW THAT ONE ON ONE THAT YOU HAVE WITH A PARENT.

Posted by Joan at 7:9 PM on Aug 27, 2009 | Report this comment

Although the title of your article is pretty witty, I have to say you're making some pretty nasty assumptions about large families and the Duggars. This is America and families should have the right to have as many children as they can medically and financially handle. From what I can see, the Duggar children will be assets to our country. Speaking of assets, I don't know if you realize that our country barely has enough replacement children being born to maintain our population. Europe is worse off--Italy has an aging population with a very small number of young people to be the producers. I grew up in a large household (5 kids) and we rarely got "alone" time with our parents. Who came up with that term--"alone time?" Let's turn this around. Maybe it's the small families that are the problem, because it seems like kids nowadays are more alienated from their families and peer-dependent. These troubles coincide with the rise in small families. Entitled, overly-applauded adolescents are everywhere--people aren't even taking on adult responsibilities until their 30s nowadays. Maybe it's all those small families, with their cloistered vaginas. I think maybe you need exposure to a little diversity of thought. I'm just saying...

Posted by Packman at 2:17 PM on Aug 27, 2009 | Report this comment

And then some people, like Chad Quandt, should not reproduce at all, or at least be required to depend solely on their one child, and maybe two illegal aliens, for their entire living after retirement.

Posted by Scott Tibbs at 8:46 PM on Aug 25, 2009 | Report this comment

Large families have existed for thousands of years. Given the unprecedented economic prosperity and technological advancements we have enjoyed over the last century, do you think large families are more or less difficult today? Does Mr. Quandt actually know any large families? I know several, and they're all proverbial pillars of the community.

Posted by Scott Tibbs at 8:39 PM on Aug 25, 2009 | Report this comment

http://www.hslda.org/docs/study/ray2009/default.asp "Surveying 11,739 homeschooling students and their families from all 50 states through 15 independent testing services, Progress Report 2009: Homeschool Academic Achievement and Demographics is the most comprehensive study of homeschool academic achievement to date. The results support the large existing body of research on homeschool academic achievement and show homeschoolers, on average, scoring 37 percentile points above public school students on standardized achievement tests. The study also found that the achievement gaps common to public schools were practically insignificant in the homeschool community."


Email

Your Name: *
Your Email: *  
To Email: *  
Subject: IDSnews.com | It’s a vagina, not a clown car
Comments:
Verify image: Security Text



*