Interesting take Debbie! I wouldn’t have drawn the connection, but it is interesting that this appears the week of Tebow’s ad. I find the title of People’s article insulting. you’re totally right, the Duggers are better adjusted and seem happier than most families with 1/5 of the kids, so why pose the question? Because the editors at People want people to agree that there is something “wrong” with the Duggers because they have 20 kids. It’s not my choice, but it seems to work for them so good for the Duggers! I’d be willing to bet that those 20 kids are a positive gain for society and not a negative drain like so many kids from disfunctional families.

Kaiser Sozay on February 5, 2010 at 4:51 pm

I guess People Magazine will be trying to mainstream infanticide now. NARAL and Planned Parenthood were never about “choice”. The use of that word was simply a marketing gimmick to make their activities seem less noxious to the public. Abortion was not to be viewed as a very bad last resort, but as a liberating experience and positive good. This covered up the fact that most of the people who used their clinics were minorities, the poor, and underaged girls impregnated by older men. NARAL and Planned Parenthood, as well as others, promote a fairly misogynist message as a feminist one. Irresponsible males and pedophiles owe them a deep debt for such an awesome spin job.

Also, we have not even gotten into the racial and class bias aspects of this.

Worry01 on February 5, 2010 at 4:55 pm

Having kids is a gift of god as any parent will tell you. But it’s their business as to how many babies to bring into the world. Is that in conflict with my first statement?

Chuck on February 5, 2010 at 4:55 pm

I personally feel that something is a little weird when a woman uses her vagina as a clown car. Having nineteen kids is weird enough, but then to make it even worse by whoring your children out the media? Someone tell me a reality show that didn’t end in a train wreck.

J: Joe Millionaire and the reality show on FOX where the girl pretends she’s marrying a total slob (cannot remember the name but it was hilarious). But other than that, you’re right–those shows are horrid. DS

Jedi3129 on February 5, 2010 at 5:01 pm

As an Obatetric Anesthesiologist, I believe I can speak with some authority on the medical condition of women who have a lot of children.

Few medical experts would say havig 19 children is healthy for a woman’s body; excessive bleeding may occur during childbirth, making a hysterectomy or other serious medical procedure necessary.

On the other hand, likely the Duggars have had this conversation with their doctors many times, and have decided to have more children. As long as they pay their own bills, so be it.

And what authority does People Magazine have to give out such medical advice?

Ditto that the attacks on Tebows is beyond hateful.

Frank G Zavisca, M.D. on February 5, 2010 at 5:18 pm

Debbie:

There is another issue here with the Duggars – Leftists love to trash Christians while ignoring other “religious differences”.

Muslims in rural areas are famous for having large families they can’t afford to support – yet don’t hold your breath waiting for People and Planned Parenthood to comment on this issue for Muslims.

Frank G Zavisca, M.D. on February 5, 2010 at 5:34 pm

Well after reading this, I hope my future wife and me raise more than 2 children.

Squirrel3D on February 5, 2010 at 6:32 pm

How many children a couple wants to have is up to them. There was a time when large families used to be the norm in America and in the Western world. The biblical commandment to be “fruiful and multiply” isn’t taken very seriously these days. Debbie can tell you one thing though: the kind of snickering disdain “People” holds for the Duggars, they would never hold towards Muslims who have large families. You don’t see NOW and the so called “pro-choice” – really “abortion on demand” lobby attack them for having too many kids.

Hilarious!

NormanF on February 5, 2010 at 6:45 pm

It is my understanding that the Duggars are not out to have as many children as possible, rather, they feel that their bodies are not their own…they belong to G-d. Therefore, Michelle will not tell G-d how many children she will allow Him to bless her with, G-d is in charge of that.

It is the polar opposite philosophy of the pro-abortion women screaming that it’s MY body and I have the right to complete and total control; even to the point of sucking out a baby piece by piece.

I think people are freaked out by the total absence of pride and selfishness in the Duggar family. True humility and servanthood are seen as very odd.

Plus, unlike the previously mentioned large Muslim families, the Duggars have never taken a penny of other people’s money through welfare.

LifeInaShoe on February 5, 2010 at 6:51 pm

Life, that’s true… unlike the Muslims who are out to change us and our way of life, the Duggars strictly mind their own business. Big difference there already, not that the mainstream news media ever acknowledges it.

NormanF on February 5, 2010 at 6:57 pm

Two comments — medical generalizations are just that — medical generalizations. I am aware of no data that the higher birthrate among Orthodox Jewish women, for example, has had an injurious impact on their health. Of course it depends on the woman — some women are at more risk with one child than others are with twn.

Re Time-Warner, they are mired in political correctness. I have no doubt that Debbie is right re People magazine. Fortune, supposedly a business magazine has also succumbed to political correctness; 100 best corporations for women, 100 best corporations for diversity, and so forth. If they have actual business news, it is by accident, or just squeezing in one or two articles in case their obsequious articles about women executives, black executives, etc. aren’t enough to fill up the magazine.

Little Al on February 5, 2010 at 7:00 pm

It’s part of the progressive agenda to reduce the population.

Used to be very common for families to have 4 & 5 (or more) children.

Access to abortion/birth control, high costs of raising children as well as both parents working have all resulted in smaller families.

Don’t even get me started on the social norm that has no father in the household with the gov’t providing entitlement supports.

Sam Adams on February 5, 2010 at 7:08 pm

Dr Zavisca

You have a great pharmaceutical name.

Four out of Five doctors prescribe Zavisca!

Pinandpuller on February 5, 2010 at 9:11 pm

Maybe the trolls at People would like to have seen an abortion clinic garbage can with the human remains in it after Mrs. Duggar did the liberal thing.

Joe on February 5, 2010 at 9:19 pm

It’s Supper Bowl, ’cause that’s what I’m focused on while the game is being played. I’ve never subscribed to the All-American Bull Male ethos, with it’s ultra-macho chest-thumping, high-fiving, bellowing, strutting lunacy. I enjoyed playing football (usually devolving into “smear the queer”) with neighborhood pals as a kid, but would much rather watch an educational documentary in my dotage.

Graty Slapchop on February 5, 2010 at 9:30 pm

I don’t understand why people deride the Tebow commercial. If NARAL, NAG or Planned Deathhood wanted to spend $2 million to run an ad, more power to them. Would rather see a pro-life commercial than two well-endowed women wrestling in the water and wet cement yelling “Tastes great! Less filling!” But then, I’m one of those rare men who hates beer.

Joy Behar’s comment about how an aborted child could’ve grown up to become a child molester is preposterous. There have been plenty of men and women who grew up in good, well-to-do homes who still turned out to be burdens on society.

Richard on February 5, 2010 at 10:30 pm

What business is it of People Magazine’s to tell the Duggars how many kids they can or can’t have? The Duggars seem like a very friendly couple, ones that I wouldn’t mind having as neighbors.

As for the ad with Tim Tebow and his mother, it NAILS the pro-aborts where they live. Tebow is the walking embodiment of the pro-life position. If the NAGS or NARAL or some other pro-abort group wants to spend $2.5 million on an ad for the Super Bowl, more power to them. They had their opportunity and they blew it. NARAL, it’s called the free market. Use it once in awhile instead of bitching and moaning.

Jon on February 5, 2010 at 10:45 pm

Having 19 kids is highly irresponsible! Every planned child is entitled to a father and mother who are legally married, who love each other, and who expect to be together forever. These children are also entitled to parents who have sufficient time and energy to provide sufficient quality time. There is no way you can provide much attention to each child when you have 19 of them. These people are selfish and should be criticized. It’s not a legal issue, I am not saying this should be illegal, but it is a moral issue. In the words of Bob Dole, where is the outrage?

James Mitchell
http://www.jmitchell.me

James Mitchell on February 5, 2010 at 11:05 pm

Mr. James Mitchell you have a right to your opinion.I do too. Coming from a family of 14. My parents were not selfish. But you know unless you have been there I really don’t think one gets to actually witness how wonderful it is to have 10 brothers, 3 sisters as I did. 2 brothers have passed away and there isn’t a day I don’t think of them. I would like to say the only outrage that I feel is when someone that asks how many were in my family, I say 14, within a second they say– must be catholic. Well yes I reply, with a Great big smile on my face, and I add, a practicing one at that!! We all help one another to this day because having that large of a family brings many positve traits. More than I have time to tell you.Speaking of a moral issue, the only moral of the story is, having a large family can be a Blessing.Unless you’ve been there one doesn’t really know,I guess?

Darlene on February 6, 2010 at 1:19 am

Obama’s desire to repeal “Don’t ask, don’t tell” can actually help to fulfill the “days of Lot” (Luke 17, cf. Gen. 19), the fulfillment of which will hurry up the return of the Heavenly Commander-in-Chief who will make all things straight (pun intended)! Interesting Google articles include “Obama Supports Public Depravity,” “Separation of Raunch and State” and “David Letterman’s Hate Etc.”
For some dessert visit Yahoo and type in “Obama Avoids Bible Verses.”
PS – You’re invited to use these new pro-life slogans: “Unborn babies should have the right to keep and bear arms – and legs and ears and eyes etc.!” and “Unborn babies should have the same right to be born alive that abortionists had!”

Alicia on February 6, 2010 at 2:19 am

Evidently Pro-Choice means simply Choice for abortion. If it truly were about choice, then they would advocate HAVING a child, as well as NOT. That is choice, deciding between more than one thing. Again, liberal slant is freedom of speech as long as you agree with their speech.

anne colwick on February 6, 2010 at 7:36 am

That article title ALONE tells you about the sick demented twisted world of the eugenicists!

Bob Porrazzo on February 6, 2010 at 7:53 am

Oh an in terms of the Super Bowl, JUST ANOTHER DISTRACTION WHILE THE NEW WORLD ORDER DESTROYS AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY!

http://www.theresistancemanifesto.com/

Bob Porrazzo on February 6, 2010 at 7:56 am

The really annoying part of this, is that the simplest things are “controversy!” A large loving family is “controversial” now. Spare me. It’s also always the white people that get in on this and make speculative and stupid assessments about other white people.

Too much white guilt. Another reason the Duggars are being called on the carpet for this is because the Liberals think man is the cause of climate change and they, and others wish to see families with one or less child to help the Earth.

On a side note, I’m sure the environmentalists will read this article and stew, because the Duggars probably drive a 15 passenger Dodge van or Ford Excursion. And not some stupid little Prius (with brake trouble).

Maybe the writers of this article in People and all the other girlie-men, are jealous of Mr. Duggars’ um, abilities, his boys can swim! 😉

And that’s an important aspect too. It’s not about global warming, climate change, environmentalism, speculation, victim groups weighing in in something they know nothing about, etc. It’s about carrying on the family name. And with that many children, the Duggars family is sure to carry on for generations to come. I congratulate them.

John on February 6, 2010 at 8:44 am

I have a feeling that people like Ashton Kutcher and the like…the Choose abortion over life group…They must have substantial investments in the abortion clinics. Big money to be made there.

perception of truth on February 6, 2010 at 10:39 am

The only problem I have with the Duggar`s is the sect they belong to wrongly believes any form of contraception is a sin. Families are supposed to keep having children no matter what. They don`t have a choice how many kids they have.

I can`t remember her name right now, but that one lady who killed her kids in the bathtub was a member of that same sect.Inspite of her history mental illness the sect and her husband kept encouraging pregnancies. It`s one thing to choose to have many children, quite another to be pressured and manipulated into it by declaring it is God`s will like this sect does.

hermster on February 6, 2010 at 2:21 pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiverfull

here`s the sect.

hermster on February 6, 2010 at 2:24 pm

The Duggars (if you watch the show) appear to value their babies more than their older children. They have said that they hope that there always a TODDLER in the house and expect each of their children to have at least 7-10 children each.

I agree that their children are well-behaved and happy, but the parents are addicted to having children. It is their personal decision, but when you have a TV show you have to expect to be criicized.

Lee in the US on February 6, 2010 at 3:39 pm

Reply to ‘Lee in the US’ and ‘James Mitchell’

I watch the show as often as I can. Although, being a single mother for the moment (my husband is in Iraq) and working full time with two young children makes that difficult at times.

First, in reply to Lee, younger children require more carefull watching than older children and young adults. I see no greater love for the younger children and babies, but thankfully, more attentiveness to what they are doing. I am sure the Dugger parents love all their children equally. And if their love was not enough the love of 18 other siblings would more than make up for it!

Second, in reply to James, I see the Dugger parents give more attention to their 19 children then I usually get to spare for my two! I wish I had the time management skills and well disciplined children they have. They are an inspiration for anyone with sense and a desire for a disciplined, love-filled, and wonderful life!

rachelle on February 6, 2010 at 4:24 pm

I’ve seen only one episode of 19 Kids and Counting. It was the most recent episode that recounted the birth of child #19. I was very impressed with how well behaved and well adjusted the kids are. But there was one scene that gave me the real creeps. About half of their kids are older than 10 or 12, and about half are “little” kids. They have a baby, a toddler, and a couple of kids under 5 or 6.

Towards the end of the episode, where Michelle had spent weeks in a distant hospital and the family got updates from Jim Bob through phone calls and emailed videos, all the kids traveled to the hospital to see their mother and baby Josie. I was struck by how subdued all the little kids were when they see Michelle for the first time. The very young ones? OK, not too surprised that they were quiet and clinged to their older siblings. But the older little kids made no attempt to go to Michelle in her wheelchair and she made no gestures towards them. Nobody touched her or came near her. Not one kid.

Wow, I thought. Does she ever hug and kiss any of these kids?

The episode I saw may not be representative of the parents interaction with the kids since they were separated the whole time except for two scenes in the hospital, and maybe the kids were told not to approach her because she had a C-section, but I just found it very weird that there was no physical affection at all. The kids were very emotional when they saw Josie, but showed almost none when they saw Michelle.

Weird. I couldn’t help compare Debbie’s contempt for Sarah Palin with her defense of Michelle Duggar. When I started reading this post about the Duggars I expected to read a rant from Debbie about how selfish the Duggars are to have so many kids. But I guess the fact that Michelle doesn’t work outside the home is enough to make up for her divided time.

Jaynie59 on February 6, 2010 at 5:49 pm

I was also offended by that article in People. It definitely had a condescending tone. I did want to respond to the posters about the reaction when the children saw Michelle in the hospital. I don’t think it showed the whole thing because in the previous weeks show they showed many of the kids coming to Michelle for hugs and kisses and she was holding the youngest, Jordyn in her lap. You frequently see her interacting with all the children if you watch the show frequently. The kids certainly aren’t “perfect little angels”, especially the younger ones but we all would be happy to have children who are so loving and helpful to their siblings.

Millie on February 6, 2010 at 10:00 pm

It would have been the Duggars own business, but they made a choice to make a living from a reality show that invited us all into their lives. A reality show that provides a fine living for them while exploiting their young children – who have no choice or say in the matter.
So,no shock that not everyone agrees with their values and beliefs. No shock that People magazine has an article. It’s the attention the Duggars sought (craved, maybe?). They should be prepared, and so should the rest of their supporters, to get opinions that are in sharp contrast to their beliefs.
The world is overpopulated. A lot of our problems stem from the fact that there are just too many of us. That’s a fact. Doesn’t matter what religion you are or aren’t. Our naturual resources are drying up.

Realist on February 6, 2010 at 10:57 pm

I would lock Jim Bob up in the closet. I think they are just having all these kids to keep the show going. If they had to get out there and both work real jobs like the rest of us they would be too tired to be making babies all the time. The real heros are those of us that quietly go about our lives, working and taking care of our children without exploiting them to make a living.

Pat on February 7, 2010 at 1:30 am

How many kids did they have when this show started airing? I don’t watch it so I don’t know. If most families had this many kids Social Security at least wouldn’t be going bankrupt although it was wrong for the government to take this money out in the first place and put an IOU in there and then hope the next generation will pay for the older generations Social Security which of course is going to be a problem when the baby boomers retire.

adam on February 7, 2010 at 1:46 am

I am Pro-life, NOT Pro-abortion.

M. on February 7, 2010 at 7:31 am

It’s always interesting to me how some people think the human race should just stop reproducing. Yet, here they are, enjoying life. Why can’t there be more people enjoying life too? Granted some are born into grinding poverty, but that IS life.

The Earth at some 26,000 miles in cirumference is absolutely huge from a human standpoint. It is not being overpopulated. Those big industrial complexes and steel foundries on the ground are cities unto themselves. But from an airplane, 30,000 feet up, they’re barely noticeable save for the hairline smoke coming from the thin and tiny smoke stacks.

I submit that the resources are being wasted, and not used wisely, but they are not drying up. All that’s needed is better management. But not having kids is absurd. Earth is meant to handle life, and lots of it. That is the reason G-d created it; for animals, plants, trees, and us.

John on February 7, 2010 at 8:56 am

Yeah, “Peeps” should worry about all the starlets and studs who have kids out of wedlock than this couple. If they are a good family and no one suffers I have no interest in butting into their business.

FU “Peeps”. Do a cover story on that bastard factory Nicole Ritchie and the idiot who knocked her up TWICE a has so little respect for her, he won’t marry her. Also feel free to highlight Camilla Alves and Naomi Watts.

Skunky on February 7, 2010 at 3:51 pm

I just find it amazing that the same people who insist on a woman’s right to ‘choose’ get all tied up in knots when a woman ‘chooses’.

Abortion on demand = Good!
Birth on demand = Bad! Very Bad!

ShyAsrai on February 8, 2010 at 10:52 am