(Closed) New Duggar article on MSN

posted 8 years ago in The Lounge
Post # 3
Member
5263 posts
Bee Keeper
  • Wedding: June 2012

@Melissa – I love that you rile everyone up! Life is more fun with some spice. 🙂 Off to read the article. 

Post # 5
Member
1638 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: September 2010

oh @ Melissa you are a pot stirrer! Tongue out

Post # 6
Member
135 posts
Blushing bee
  • Wedding: June 2010

I was just reading that! I am not a fan of the Duggars. I have seen the show a few times and I think they’re kind of creepy, so I pretty much much agree with what the author was saying. Have you read the comments people left though? Man, people get so angry, it’s almost more entertaining to read the comments than the actual article!

Post # 7
Member
4765 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: January 2011 - Vintage Villas

Wow, what an interesting article! She makes a good point about all of the television crews around the baby – I know I would never be okay with that!

Post # 8
Member
5263 posts
Bee Keeper
  • Wedding: June 2012

Hmm, spicy honey? 

I’m afraid I can’t add much to the Duggar conversation. I don’t agree with them personally or philosophically, but it’s a free country. I would hope that the doctors, etc, of their newborn would have set the limits that were best for the baby, but I know next to nothing about the health of premies, so I don’t really feel like I can comment on that either! 

Suffice it to say that the Duggars, like, oh, say 98% of reality shows, makes me shake my head and wonder why. 

Post # 10
Member
166 posts
Blushing bee
  • Wedding: May 2011

how do they afford all those kids?

Post # 11
Member
2008 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: September 2009

I believe having as many children as possible is incredibly socially irresponsible however, I have to admit they appear to be raising very good children.  Whether the credit is due to Jim and Michelle or the older children parenting the young ones or the camera crews even, I have no idea but they seem to be having a good effect.  Those kids are very polite and well mannered from what I’ve seen. 

Post # 12
Member
1426 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: December 1969

@miss geek- they don’t do that show for free :-/

Post # 13
Member
14186 posts
Honey Beekeeper
  • Wedding: June 2009

Yeah i can’t say I’d want my babies and tiny children exposed to what they expose their family to. I’d rather keep my family MINE…private…

Post # 14
Member
166 posts
Blushing bee
  • Wedding: May 2011

@greenleafmountain  lol whoops I didn’t really think about that. How did they afford to have so many kids before the show?

Post # 15
Member
396 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: April 2011

I read that article this morning too. I don’t think the Author is as informed as she thinks she is. Honestly; I’m sure they were not putting their newborn babies life in danger by having them there. I’m sure there was a long period of time that NO ONE was allowed to see her. I think the author of this article is just blabbing @ the mouth because she doesn’t agree with that many kids to begin with. Honestly I’ve always wanted a big family (not that big; but still). I think that they raise their children right. Even thougth I would never be on a national TV show with my family; I can’t look down on them for doing that. It’s something unique and it’s actually a family to look up to so they might as well have positive shows on TLC instead of stupid shows like little people who make chocolate; or woman who sleep with tiger woods. As far as the comment goes about the “scheduling once a week” witht he kids. I’m sure they made one comment about makeing it a point to sit down with their children and have a real conversation at least once a week. Most people in even small families don’t even do that. That’s why there are soo many kids running the streets. I for one find no reason to look down on this family. I think their children have more respect and better values then most in my town….

Post # 16
Member
815 posts
Busy bee

I don’t know anything about the health of premies and the restrictions that hospitals have in place.  So I hope that the baby was not actually in any danger bc of the show.  

That being said, I don’t think it’s really anyone’s job to determine what the family’s reasons are for being part of such a show ( the author attributed the reason as “God,” which is annoying to say the least.  If they said it, fine.  But if not, there are millions of people out there that believe in God and don’t procreate as often as the Duggars).  It doesn’t matter if we think they’re weird, or that they’re wrong for having the older children be responsible for the younger ones.  It seems to be working pretty well for them, so why should be we bothered by it?

We can question their motives and the motives of TLC, but all that we end up doing is speculating, I guess that’s why it’s an opinion piece.  I know, I wouldn’t want to put my family on TV for any reason.  But I hate to judge others. 

@melissabegins – lol spicy honey! 

The topic ‘New Duggar article on MSN’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors