Rampant Overpopulation is a Gift from the Lord
by Giulianna LamannaA lot of people ask me, “Giuli, how do I know if I’m ready to have children?” Actually, no one asks me that, but I don’t care - I’m answering anyway. If you think it’s a cute idea to give all your kids names beginning with the letter “J,” you are not ready to have children. You also might be a redneck.
Decide for yourself which of these applies to the Duggar Family. It’s so profoundly easy to make fun of these people that I briefly considered not doing so, because it would just be too obvious. The father’s name is Jim Bob. Their family website’s “favorite sites” include Focus on the Family, Creation Science Evangelism, and Wholesome Wear (Modest Swimwear). They recently gave birth to their 16th child, and they still want more. All their children have names beginning, as I said, with the letter “J”: Joshua (17), John David (15), Janna (15), Jill (14), Jessa (12), Jinger (11), Joseph (10), Josiah (9), Joy-Anna (8), Jeremiah (6), Jedidiah (6), Jason (5), James (4), Justin (2), Jackson Levi (1), and now little Johannah Faith.
There are a number of things wrong with this picture, just from a baby-naming perspective. Who the hell thinks of the name “Josiah” before “Jason”? Or the misspelled non-name “Jinger” before “James”? And why would anyone hear the name “Jedidiah” for any other reason than the church sign ran out of “b”s? But obviously, the parents’ horrific taste in baby names is not the biggest problem here. The problem is that we have over 6 billion people on this planet and people like the Duggars are enthusiastically racing towards 7 billion as fast as Jim Bob’s little sperm can swim.
Apparently, Jim Bob and Michelle love children so much that they’d rather make a million of their own than take care of already-existing children who desperately need loving homes, some of whom are also sick or starving. Apparently, their god - the same god who gleefully casts guys who like guys into the fiery pits of Hell for all eternity - would like us to not exercise personal responsibility or concern for others, as that would take away from time better spent lactating for 18 years straight.
Taking care of 16 kids - even 16 homeschooled kids like the Duggars - can’t be less difficult than taking in a baby born with HIV or a drug addiction. And it certainly isn’t less difficult than taking in a baby with no problems at all other than being unwanted. And you know what’s even easier than that? Not having any children at all. Hell, even I can do that. Look, I’m doing it right now!
But I suppose that, in the long run, there is one thing that’s much more difficult than raising 16 kids: thinking about the consequences of your decisions on the rest of the world.
Jezus is my No. 17
Comment by JCamasto — 15 October 2005 @ 9:19 PM
It amazes me how so many people with six or seven larva, when asked about the overpopulation problem, joke, “Well, if there’s going to be overpopulation, it might as well be my beautiful kids.”
- Chuck
Comment by Chuck — 16 October 2005 @ 8:07 AM
most people around here ’stop’ at two kids, but then have the ‘mistake’ child.
Comment by Tosspot — 16 October 2005 @ 12:09 PM
2 > 1.2
Comment by Jason Godesky — 16 October 2005 @ 12:10 PM
Didnt the YooHWHoo say “go forth and fill the earth”?
so miss giulli is right, it is a gift and a a commmandment.
I wish Jesus had commanded me to fill human females. oh shit, he did…….
Comment by Rory — 18 October 2005 @ 4:15 PM
“Reproductive freedom” is a euphemism for the abuse of yet another commons and, so long as the majority of the costs of that abuse can be passed along to, and suffered by, society and the environment at large, the abusive practice will continue. The commons will be debased by those who are either too stupid to understand what they are doing, or too venal to care; either way, the “best and the brightest” are overrun by the “worst and the dumbest.” Mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon, is an ideal solution, otherwise rampant overpopulation will be dealt with through war, plague, and famine: dieoff.
In the interests of full disclosure, and to illustrate my own hypocrisy on the issue, I have fathered three children, and my wife has given birth to five. We are educated American whites, whose ecological footprints are much too large to sustain. My wife has partially rationalized her prolific nature with the explanation that she’s exercising the proxies from our nonbreeding gay friends.
Thanks for the good post.
Comment by Rick — 5 December 2005 @ 5:03 PM
I think Garrett Hardin understands the problem relatively well, but his solution is as flawed as the others he criticizes. Mutual coercion mutally agreed upon will fail, because of our biological impulse to procreate. If the material reality rewards such reproductive excess, then people will be reproductively excessive. If it does not, they won’t.
You’ll notice hunter-gatherers don’t have this problem.
The way to stop overpopulation is to change our way of life to something that will preclude overpopulation as a possibility. And that means die-off … which was already an inevitability for many other reasons.
Comment by Jason Godesky — 5 December 2005 @ 5:10 PM
I think you might find it interesting that I used to be of the same mind of Duggar family
For starters, I was naturally born a fertility goddess and as a young adult seeking the know, honor and obey what I thought was God; (or the way to please God) took to heart scriptures like “Lo, children are a heritage from the Lord….blessed is the (man) whose quiver is full”. Believe me, the mindset is a minority even amongt fundamentalists, but the ideology more or less is this: Children are a gift and blessing from the Lord. Who would want to stop the Lord from blessing you? Not being “open” to the will of the Lord in matters of birth control and family planning was a lack of faith. Many, many children being a mark of faith.
Oldest is Juliet, 2 years after the death of our first. Another daughter, tears of joy! Two years later twin daughters. Two years later a birth control blunder resulted in the conception and birth of our first son. The night I had him–16 tornados in Wichita with 110 mph winds. He was the most jovial baby ever!
–Enter super fundamentalist mindset–
Another daughter, the another, and then–at a very strange time in our lives–the caboose, another son! Now I might also add that in the midst of the 2 last daughters I very much came out of the fundamentalist mindset. So much that I have reached the polar opposite of what fundamentalism presses into its adherants–I am simply a Pagan, a panentheist, and yes—I realise that having many children greatly taxes the Earth. something I ask myself: how can I now responsibly own my behaivor? How can this be a blessing and not a burden? In hindsight I can’t think of any of thse people–my people–that I would NOT have wanted.My challnage is to teach them how to be a bright and shining; persons who will make the World a better place…to be awre and consciencious people who will be procative in things that really, really matter….and not just self-absorbed consumers.
Comment by Beth — 19 December 2005 @ 10:36 PM
Beth,
You want to make good of your irresponsibile behavior? Start digging your kids survival bunker. Their gonna need it sooner than later. Dont bother stocking it with a bible, its not going to feed them. Buy them guns, ammunition, and books on farming. Buy seed stocks and learn about storage methods. Oh yea, and dont forget the extra socks and jackets. jeeze.
Thats the problem. All these hollow headed zombie humans out there are following the most primitive animal instinct of all, survival via procreation, without any thought on the matter. Is there REALLY any possibility in this world of everyone all coming together and NOT having kids for a few years? NO! Why? Because it is simple human behavior, as it is with ANY other animal on this planet. There is no MASS intelligence, only MASS stupidity. I’m really surprised that our civilization has become as complex as it has.
For 200 years, we have held out our chin, and asked Mother Nature to take a swing. Well guess what? Were about to get a pop right on the nose.
Comment by Dave (0 kids after 11 years) Smith — 21 January 2006 @ 12:19 PM
The Duggar family appeared on a TLC show last night where they all were surprised with their new house. I was seriously grossed out & I can’t help but think how irresponcible and CULTISH they seem: their pollyanna clean looks & phony smiles. I bet they don’t dare let a fart rip.
16 kids and wanting more? Is that all these people do is breed? They would love to be Amish.
Actually remind me of mennonite people.
I just gag at the sight of them. That woman is just begging for a prolapsed uterus, isnt she?
Comment by mary — 14 March 2006 @ 11:30 PM
Wow. What hateful people you are. If a lady wants to have a bunch of kids and raise them as Christians, so what? Why do you have to make fun of them and call them fake? Is it just that you hate white Christians or something? Would you be as spiteful about a large family of blacks? Or Hindus ?Why do you criticize these people for not adopting? Most fertile people don’t. They love their children and they want to have more. And in a nation that’s murdered (aborted) 40 MILLION babies since the seventies, what’s the big deal with 16 kids?
Comment by Courtney — 4 July 2006 @ 6:56 PM
Courtney:
First of all, I never mentioned her raising them as Christians, nor did I call any of them “fake.” Being white myself, with a white Christian father and a white Christian fiancee, naturally, I also didn’t say anything bad about whiteness or Christianity. I did mention that the god that fundamentalists worship is hateful and off his rocker. But the fundamentalist god has nothing to do with the Christian god, at least according to the scriptures I’ve read.
Although I would hesitate to call myself “spiteful,” I absolutely would respond the same way to a similarly large family of any race/creed/color/ethnic group/religion/whatever. I don’t see what race has to do with it. The problem is too many people. It doesn’t matter whether it’s black people or white people having more children than the earth can support. They’re all people, and there’s too many of them consuming too many resources, and their skin color has nothing to do with that.
So what’s your point? If most people do it, it must be a good thing? If most people don’t do something, it must not be that good? Everyone - fertile or infertile - should consider adopting or becoming foster parents rather than having their own kids. The fact that so few people actually do doesn’t make for any fewer needy, homeless children. Actually, it creates MORE.
You can have more, by adopting. Unless you’re only capable of loving people who are genetically related to you. Which is kind of sick…
The world population is still rising at an astonishingly unsustainable rate. Abortion hasn’t made a dent in its astronomical rise. Until the world is no longer overpopulated, there will be a serious moral problem with having 16 kids.
Comment by Giulianna Lamanna — 4 July 2006 @ 11:21 PM
40 million is obviously not enough, since the population keeps rising. Foragers not only allow abortion freely, they even have infanticide. Maybe you think that’s wrong, but their culture isn’t careening towards oblivion like ours. Overshoot is an ugly, ugly thing.
Comment by Jason Godesky — 5 July 2006 @ 11:15 AM
And their 17th child has just been born (link).
Comment by Hasha — 3 August 2007 @ 10:19 AM
Good lord, God help us.
Comment by Phoenix — 3 August 2007 @ 7:41 PM