Amazon.com Widgets

A Stitch in Haste

A Stitch in Time Saves Nine...But Haste Makes Waste

A collection of real-world libertarian, individualist and laissez-faire rants on law, economics, politics, culture and other current events
by an average, everyday lawyer & investment banker and part-time pop scholar.

(Note: On Semi-Hiatus Until May 19th.)

"Comment Left Elsewhere" of the Day
Few topics instigate as lively a discussion here as my contempt for Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar of — obviously — Arkansas.

To review: They have, as of yesterday, 17 children (with another on the way and an overtly expressed amenability to having more). Which, somehow, is considered a "warm, happy pre-Mothers-Day story on a morning show" rather than grounds for a child neglect investigation.

For whatever reason (ka-ching!), the Duggars felt a need to whore their kids out on national television yet again. So I felt a need — obviously — to comment on them yet again:
I find it fascinating that the same people who screech from the rooftops that "kids do best with a mother and a father" have no problem with kids being raised with 1/18 of a mother and a father. They'd get more personalized attention at the DMV.

I also wonder how much is in each kid's college fund. Oh wait, they're Evangelical-homeschooled, so college will not be an option. Never mind.

Note also that the older children are conscripted into "chores" that essentially make them full-time surrogate parents. Mowing the lawn and setting the table is one thing; having to serve as a dawn-til-dusk au pair for 10 or more of your younger siblings is child abuse, pure and simple.
The fluff piece shows toddlers packing away groceries and notes that the children must, literally, make appointments in advance to have one-on-one time with Mom. Charming.

There is a point at which "delightful parental love" metastasizes into "decrepit parental narcissism." I certainly don't want to be the one trying to identify that point. I'm reluctant in the extreme to let anyone in the government determine that point as a matter of policy to be imposed on all families in all circumstances.

But I'll be damned if I'm going to pretend that such a point doesn't exist. "I know it when I see it" may be the worst kind of hopelessly sloppy jurisprudence. But it's better than wearing a blindfold.

And did I mention that the Duggars, qua Evangelical Christians, are — obviously — associated with and supportive of rabidly anti-gay bigots?

---

For Discussion: The next Stitch in Haste Podcast will be on "The Fourth Amendment in the Non-Criminal Context." I intend to cover two topics: (1) laptop searches at the border, and (2) the FLDS incident in Texas. I would love to know people's thoughts on the latter. Comment away...

Related Posts (on one page):

  1. "Comment Left Elsewhere" of the Day
  2. Talk About "Focus on the Family"
Posted by Kip on 10 May 2008

Feel free to post as a Guest.
You do not need to provide a valid email address.
Comments are open for fourteen days only.
All comments are subject to editing or deletion.

There is a 2000-character limit for comments;
lengthy multi-part comments are NOT permitted;
you should email me such responses instead.

Please note that time constraints preclude me from replying
to most comments, although I do try to reply to all emails.
Tom Hanna (mail) (www):
On the 4th amendment and the FLDS raid: It seems like a good, no great, example of why warrant does not equal reasonable. A whispered phone call from the wrong area code, in the day when every pizza place has caller ID and the police have supercaller ID that can't be blocked, shouldn't be grounds for a neighborly chat, much less a search warrant. The same would apply if this were an atheist nudist colony or a Zoroastrian rock singer's apartment, fwiw. The 4th amendment doesn't require that searches be warranted any more than the 2nd requires that gun owners join the National Guard, but it does require that the warrants that are issued be reasonable.
5.10.2008 4:37pm
John Harrold (mail):
The first thought that crossed my mind was how the prolific couple plan to adequately finance sixteen college education funds.

Then I remembered: they're from Arkansas.
Kip, I'm more or less on your side politically. I'm not gay, but I don't think that others should control what consenting adults do. I also don't think anyone should get in the way of contracts between consenting adults. I also don't favor religious nuts.

But is being snide like this really going to help your cause? I'm from Arkansas; heck I'm from a smallish town (about 30k people). There were about 300 people in my high school graduating class and of those I know of four with PhDs in the sciences. Now this may be below the national average, but caricatures like the one made in your comment are not going to win any folks over.

I understand your frustration -- I grew up there, but civility is important.
5.10.2008 4:46pm
J-Philip (mail):
I don't see it your way on this one. I don't see the neglect. And you seem to discount the powerful gift that siblings are. They can afford it and the kids will get an education. They own a 7,000 square foot home free and clear. They have domestic help. There is plenty of one on one time with the parents if need be, I am sure, but I just don't see how this environment is any worse than others. How are chores bad?

Time will be the judge, of course. We'll know more in 10 or 20 years but I think they'll be fine. With 17 or 18 kids, the chances of one being gay are relatively high. Now that would be instructional.
5.11.2008 3:13pm

Post as: [Register] [Log In]

Account:
Password:
Remember info?