Duggars expecting child #19

Child AbuseWatch’s Position about the Use of Children on Reality TV Shows

"Child AbuseWatch regards the use of children in reality TV shows as exploitation at best and abuse at worst.

Why? Children on reality shows have no legal position as individuals nor do they have 3rd party representation as they are not classified as child actors. Despite being the focus in the reality show, children are not paid for their time or the intrusion into their lives. Their parents are paid without any motivation or pressure (other than moral) to put any of the funds aside for their children. The children are in fact unpaid workers.

Parents and the TV channels are motivated by financial gain and as such, can (and do) lose their perspective as parents in their protective role of their children. . . ."

 

I agree that you can't live in a house with others and not talk to them. What I was referring to is when a child is upset about something, and needs to talk to mom or dad I wouldn't want my kid to have to schedule it. Not saying the Duggars do this, just that I can't imagine not being able to talk to my kid any time they need to talk.

I've watched the show a couple of times, and they seem to be doing a pretty good job with their kids. Their marriage seems to be stable (as opposed to Jon and Kate Plus 8--what a train wreck!!), and they are providing for their family. God does not forbid us having as many kids as we want to, nor does He mandate that we should have as many as we can. So we should be responsible in our decision about children. I say kudos to them, if they're happy. I'm happy with my 2.

 

But Ann, if you and your husband decide on this, that's fine. The problem comes if you say we all should decide like this, or that it is wrong to try to have some sort of birth control or contraception. That is what is going on with Quiverfull. They think everyone should think and behave like them.

 

But who cares? A perversion of scripture is bad enough! A leader/organization does not have to cultlike or a cult to be avoided.

 

But it would be wrong if someone told you this was the only way to raise your children, and that if you didn't, you were not being a good Christian or were not raising your children in a "godly" manner. That would be wrong!

 

Meet a few more. I have. I got a tongue lashing from a quiverfull, after they found out my wife and I don't plan on having any children. I still have arrows stuck in my spiritual armor from that quiver argument.

 

To each his own when it comes to how many children they have, but in this day and age, I personally think it is irresponsible to have more than one can readily support and raise. I can't for the life of me conceive of us working in ministry with more than the two children we had, eighteen months apart by plan.

Cheers,

Jim

 

"chosen childlessness must be named as moral rebellion" ---Albert Mohler, President, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary link

 

I agree with Ann.

The Gothard thing does bother me for the family as a whole---but a whole lot of families, regardless of size, have beliefs that bother me a great deal.

What I do like about them is that they seem like a very closely knit family. The parents seem very close as well (obviously. wink wink).

As far as the daughters go, I have no problem with them being raised to be keepers at home. Of course, that goes against the feminist grain of today, but my opinion still stands. If they want to go to college, I think they should be allowed, but they are already quite equipped to run a household, which many girls today simply aren't learning, imo.

I also like it that they support themselves. It's admirable. They have not been irresponsible because they can clearly afford to have that many.

As an aside, my father is one of 12---his father one of 15. In that day it wasn't uncommon. In this day, my 5 is a LOT! LOL!

 

That's one thing I don't like about Mohler...he feels the need to "help" the Christian's priesthood of the believer from time to time.
(sorry, back on topic now)

 

But Ann, I think you're missing the point. Gothard followers think they are right and everyone who disagrees with them or Gothard is wrong, wrong, wrong, and maybe even ungodly and not being a Christian. Since you are avoiding pregnancy, they would condemn you. That's the point I am trying to make - that is wrong for them to do. These movements are divisive.

Some missionaries who were Gothard followers cut off contact with me several years ago when I sent them material exposing Gothard's unbiblical teaching (this was after they sent me material promoting him). Looking close-knit can also be a result of legalistic control - what appears godly can be done out of fear.

 

Mohler is wise on many topics, but if that's Mohler's view here, then he's an unrighteous pharisee on this specific topic. Scripture does not mandate children as a requisite for obedience. Neither does scripture anywhere equate chosen childlessness as moral rebellion.

 

Your emotion is getting to you. Even if he is wrong (and he is not) he still wouldn't rate your terminology.

 

On the contrary, I speak with objectivity.

Mohler's statement cannot be supported by scripture. Since Mohler is passing his claim off as a mandate, it categorically qualifies him as a pharisee. Since he labels anyone in violation as beign in rebellion, it categorically qualifies him as unrighteous.