Jessa Duggar has some thoughts about abortion & the Holocaust

jessa1

Last week’s Us Weekly cover story was the straw that broke the camel’s back for CB. She’s handed off Duggar coverage to me, so this should be an epic treat, right? I guess I might have a higher tolerance for ultra-conservative wingnuts and Taliban-like rules of sexuality and femininity. Jessa Duggar is one of the older Duggar children (one of 19 kids) and Jessa recently got engaged to a fellow ultra-conservative dude named Ben. Ben is the guy who ranted about Catholics on social media, then deleted the rant because OOPSIES. The younger Duggars are much more adept at spreading their message through social media. Just FYI. That’s going to come up again.

Well, Jessa and her fiance decided to travel to Washington, DC for some sight-seeing (and probably to fundraise for something, I bet). I wonder if they stayed in the same hotel room? OF COURSE NOT. Because they are engaged, they are only allowed to hold hands and pose butt-to-crotch in photos and that’s the only physical contact ever. While in Washington, Jessa and Ben went to the Holocaust Museum. I’ve been there and it is devastating. Jessa was devastated too… because all she could think about was abortion. From her Instagram:

I walked through the Holocaust Museum again today… very sobering. Millions of innocents denied the most basic and fundamental of all rights–their right to life. One human destroying the life of another deemed “less than human.” Racism, stemming from the evolutionary idea that man came from something less than human; that some people groups are “more evolved” and others “less evolved.” A denying that our Creator–GOD–made us human from the beginning, all of ONE BLOOD and ONE RACE, descendants of Adam. The belief that some human beings are “not fit to live.” So they’re murdered. Slaughtered. Kids with Down syndrome or other disabilities. The sickly. The elderly. The sanctity of human life varies not in sickness or health, poverty or wealth, elderly or pre-born, little or lots of melanin [making you darker or lighter skinned], or any other factor. “If thou faint in the day of adversity, thy strength is small. If thou forbear to deliver them that are drawn unto death, and those that are ready to be slain; If thou sayest, Behold, we knew it not; doth not He that pondereth the heart consider it? and He that keepeth thy soul, doth not He know it? and shall not He render to every man according to his works?” (Proverbs 24:10-12) May we never sit idly by and allow such an atrocity to happen again. Not this generation. We must be a voice for those who cannot speak up for themselves. Because EVERY LIFE IS PRECIOUS. #ProLife

[From Instagram]

When in doubt, apply Godwin’s Law. Nothing says “abortion is like the Holocaust and pro-choice people are like Nazis” like supporting a forced, state-sponsored curtail of every woman’s reproductive rights. If you are anti-choice, fine. Don’t YOU have an abortion. Just know: these are the same people who are against birth control too. Being pro-choice is about a lot more than abortion. Anyway, do we have to fight about this? Or can we just… I don’t know, not care what a Duggar girl has to say about anything?

jessa3

Photos courtesy of Jessa’s Istagram.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

255 Responses to “Jessa Duggar has some thoughts about abortion & the Holocaust”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Jules says:

    Big deal, she was brainwashed by her parents, and she is being pushed because she is one of the better looking of the litter. Go have your litter of brainwashed brats………..it’s called a CHOICE!!!!!

    • T.C. says:

      I have decided to call them what they are: Anti-choice. You can’t call yourself pro-life and buy guns to shoot innocent animals or be all “fry the criminals” death penalty lovers. At the end of the day, they are about denying a woman the right to make medical choices over her own body. It all goes back ultimately to women’s sexuality and wanting control over that. Pro-choice groups really need to call these people on their B.S.

      • Decloo says:

        You make an excellent point. I will call them that from now on too.

      • The Bobster says:

        What choice does the unborn baby get?

      • grimmsfairytale says:

        Sigh. Oh, bobster.
        As it, during the time period most women get abortions, is just a dividing cluster of cells, it is about as able to have strong opinions about the topic as any other basic cell dividing. Which is imo, arguably none.
        Your arguement is based on the assumption that eveyone believes in a soul and ALSO (haaa) can agree when consciousness and awareness arises. Which not is impossibles. Not everyone believes in a soul. And those who do can’t seem to agree when it gets plopped into the creature. I am an athiest. I dont believe in a soul. I believe consciousness and awareness develop from the brain, not that it is a divene gift or indication of a higher power. I dont think dividing cells have more going on in their alleged soul or consciusness than any other cell dividing. Thus it can not be said to “care” or be asked to express its “opinion” about whether or not i, a fully formed creature with self awareness and developed consciousness, decide to abort it.
        Not everyone agrees with you.

      • K says:

        Bobster: about the same choice a corpse does, when organs can’t be harvested without consent. Or that you do, when choosing not to donate one of your kidneys (hey, you only need one!) to someone dying of renal failure. The same choice anyone gets when not wanting to donate bone marrow, or even blood. Because their body is their own, and they get to choose who they want to help, and how much, when there’s a personal physical cost.

        Google rectocele. And cystocele. And then have a swirl through the myriad of ways a woman’s undercarriage can collapse after a perfectly normal delivery. Examine the stats on prevalence, post-menopause, of urinary (and even faecal) incontinence amongst women who have birthed – or carried, even, as a section can’t necessarily save you. Ponder the fact that most women will tear through the most sensitive flesh in the human body when expelling the baby, unless they have a major op in their gut. Then remember that pregnancy is the most dangerous time in most women’s lives, and risks of thrombosis skyrocket, even without the usual complications such as pre-eclampsia, that only affect pregnant women. Oh, and did we mention diabetes? SPD/PGP? Hyper-emesis, which is disgusting, miserable, and if untreated can be lethal? Not to forget the appallingly common pre- and post- natal depression, of course. Major risk of a psychiatric illness, ahoy! Post-partum psychosis? Heard of that? How about uterine prolapse? Rectal prolapse? Good old-fashioned piles? And that’s without even touching on the fact that labour is widely recognised as being such a horribly painful exercise that most – MOST – women suddenly plead for a very large needle to be inserted into their spinal column, just to make the pain go away. Or that pregnancy involves a myriad of minor ailments even for the luckiest woman, and a bunch of complete strangers getting their hands all up her business. And by “business” I totally mean vagina. Vagina, not just vulva.

        But no, please. Go ahead and tell me how you have the right to decide that you can completely ignore the fact that none of this is any of your business, and you still want to force women into going through the above, just because you don’t like the idea that they have the option of a safe procedure at a very early stage to remove the potential for a human life from their own bodies.

        I’ve had two abortions, by the way. One at 19 when I had an absolutely evil boyfriend. I use the word advisedly. My relief that I am not tied to him by a child, and that no child was brought into such a toxic situation, is huge. I’ve never regretted it, and I don’t feel guilt. It was for the best in a horrible situation. I’m grateful I had that choice. The second time I had an ectopic pregnancy – it was in a fallopian tube – and I am also very grateful to live in a country that gave me a medical abortion, instead of removing the affected tube, thus allowing me to have my beautiful second baby later on, because I still had two tubes. And I’m grateful I don’t live in one of the three countries on earth who forbid abortion even when it would save the mother’s life, because I would be dead, and (worse to me, as with any mother) my beautiful eldest child would be motherless.

        I will never fathom how people think they have the right to bind such huge burdens for other shoulders. The arrogance is breathtaking. You want to donate a kidney? I applaud you. Just don’t force other people to do similar. And if you haven’t… what’s stopping you? You can save a life!

      • Cyndi says:

        @Bobster
        As Grimm said, the time most have abortions is when the cell is dividing over and over. The cell does not have a heartbeat at this time. There is no life without a heartbeat. Without llfe, it can feel no pain nor can it form opinions as it has no developed brain.

      • suziemaq says:

        YES, K.
        YES, grimmsfairytale.
        x 1000
        Don’t give a platform to the Duggars to spread their narrow mindedness.

      • Gea says:

        Why people like her any platform to speak on any issues?

      • only1shmoo says:

        Thank you for that! I’ll never understand how so many self-proclaimed Christians seem to think that one of the most important lessons in the Bible — the 6th Commandment, Thou Shalt Not Kill — is negotiable. Last time I checked, there was no subtext that read: “unless it has fur, a visible tail, feathers or scales, or if it walks on four legs”. If we’re all God’s children, then surely one is living in sin if they’re glorifying the destruction of another life, regardless of how much or how little of a resemblance it bears to homo sapiens.

        The main differences one could argue on behalf of animals is that: A) They have developed central nervous systems and are therefore aware (and terrified) when their lives are coming to an end, while aborted embryos or fetuses are still in the early stages of physical development, which means they are not yet sentient or subject to the same misfortune as the animals. B) Hunting animals is a sadistic pastime done under the guise of “bonding” and is a manifestation of people ENJOYING cruelty and death (sounds like something the devil himself would endorse). Abortion, on the other hand, is never carried out for “fun”, but rather is a difficult and often painful experience that women undergo out of desperation and necessity.

        I’m wondering if I should visit Jessa’s Twitter page and condense this message, what do you think?

      • doofus says:

        K, thank you for your post and thank you so much for sharing your story. Stay strong, lady.

    • MaggieOwns says:

      Well said, grimmsfairytale! Thank you for that eloquent and respectful response. 🙂

      • minnieder says:

        Well put “K”. I have respect, you made the best decision you could make for you and a fateful pregnancy. I’m happy you’ve now got a beautiful child in your life. Three of my closest friends made the same decision at difficult times, and years later know what they did was right at the time. Women should not judge you or any other woman, you never know what’s really going on in someone else’s home.

      • wolfpup says:

        You don’t need to explain yourself to anyone, K: your argument was persuasive and powerful.

  2. Darkladi says:

    Nothing says “Christian” quite like trout pout lips & an automatic weapon. what would Jesus do? Probably weep.😣

    • Brrrrr says:

      Christ Versus Christianity? If Christ showed up now he would probably deal with these Duggar types like he did with the Pharisees.

    • A~ says:

      Nothing says “pro life” like a sexy pose with a weapon used to kill as many people you can in the shortest time possible.

      • InVain says:

        Yup. Posing with an AR and then commenting on the Holocaust…and abortion? Um. Okay.

      • Elleno says:

        +1

      • Esmom says:

        Ugh, don’t even get me started on the gun lunacy.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        That contradiction stood out to me as well.

      • wolfpup says:

        Those guns are intended to shoot people!!! She must be with the the gun lobby who needs to sell them. She speaks about the sanctity of life, and is photographed with an assault weapon? I find her viewpoint so offensive!

        It is much worse than Harry in the nazi uniform.

      • Veronica says:

        My mother actually left organized religion altogether after she got fed up with the anti-abortion rhetoric that existed in Christian media while they simultaneously praised and supported soldiers. Her feeling it is the most fundamentally misogynistic and hypocritical sentiment in Christianity – men who kill at war are heroes, while women who are abort are murderers.

        (Before I get screamed at for calling soldiers murderers, check yourself. What do you think war is? It’s government-sponsored killing. It may be killing in the name of a greater moral intent – although rarely – but it is still killing. Why do you think soldiers have to be mentally conditioned to shoot at other human beings? And that’s not even getting into the statistics regarding the impact on civilians, ranging from murder to rape to resource starvation. Just look at the WWII casualty statistics. Remember that most of those people were *civilians,* not armed forces.)

      • Isabelle says:

        The golden rule of these neo-christians “Kill thy neighbor first before they kill you”

      • Maria of MD says:

        Exactly. They never seem to recognize the hypocrisy in that. If you’re so totally pro-life, you should be anti-gun as guns were invented to kill more efficiently.

      • wolfpup says:

        Veronica – point well taken!

    • BooBooLaRue says:

      Jeezus take the wheel this is the funniest comment!

    • LetsBeCivil says:

      @darkladi, you are SO right! Why is it that “Christians” feel the need to idolize and objectify Semi Automatic Weapons?
      Jesus would cry.

  3. Sayrah says:

    Comparing the mass genocide of millions of living adults and children to a legal medical procedure is offensive.

    • Other Kitty says:

      It may be a legal medical procedure, but that doesn’t make it right. People’s constant deflecting and justifications of a truly heinous and evil act when faced with what abortion REALLY IS is offensive to me.

      • Lemony says:

        What is it? Abortion is the expulsion of a non-human from the host’s body. Thats all. I find it REALLY and DEEPLY OFFENSIVE when ignorant people call abortion evil and heinous. It is NEITHER of those things. Time to get educated. Further, woman who are traitors to their gender and call a medical procedure heinous and evil are despicable and the lowest in my opinion and disrespect their gender. ‘Women’ like that should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves!

      • Soxfan says:

        Simple, really. Don’t have one.

      • doofus says:

        abortion is REALLY offensive to you? there is a simple solution for that.

        DON’T HAVE ONE.

        you know what I find offensive?…when people try to force their religious (or other) morals onto others who may not share them.

      • JM says:

        For the record, I was adopted, born 1 year after Roe V Wade so I could have been an abortion. I am grateful for the choice my biological mother made and wouldn’t consider having one myself. That being said…

        You are entitled to think of abortion as “heinous” and “evil” and choose not to have one. However, you don’t have the right to dictate what goes on in any other woman’s uterus. Her choices are between her and her God, whatever she perceives him or her to be, if at all.

      • SamiHami says:

        And Lemony, that’s nice that you have an opinion. Calling others ignorant for not sharing that opinion is offensive. Whatever happened to tolerance for other people who have other beliefs? Why assume that those who disagree are “ignorant?” Maybe, just maybe, they aren’t ignorant…they just happen to have a different opinion.

        There are people of good will on both sides of the abortion debate, and it’s pretty small minded to claim that those who disagree with you are “the lowest” in your opinion and that we disrespect our gender. I am an educated, intelligent woman and I do not hold the same beliefs as you. I am not ignorant. I am not low. And I do not disrespect my gender.

        If anyone should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves it should be you for painting everyone with your own world view of “Good”-people who agree with you and “Evil”-people who don’t agree with you.

      • Jenny says:

        @Samihami,

        I think that the frustration and animosity on the part of people who are pro-choice is that people who are pro-life are attempting to make the decision about abortion for all women. People who are pro-choice are not forcing you to have abortions; they want you to be able to make that choice.
        Tangentially, I don’t really understand how people can be pro-life and yet against birth control and social services like welfare. I don’t think that you can logically hold those three positions concurrently and not see how those policies together would lead to A LOT of problems.

      • Cindy says:

        Lemony, a non-human? I just do not get that debate. Is she a host?!? or a woman? What a terrible choice of words.

      • LetsBeCivil says:

        Then DON’T have an abortion!
        I FIND YOU OFFENSIVE!

      • Pandy says:

        I agree with Lemony – I get the point she’s trying to make (survival outside the womb for an early term “tadpole”). I do think that women who oppose abortion are “traitors” to other women. Just as I support your right to not have an abortion, you need to support my right to have one. Technically, we are all here because we were not aborted – deliberately or spontaneously, so I don’t buy the argument that you could never have an abortion because you weren’t aborted.

        Anyway, it’s always a hot button topic but I do think we need to stop hearing about the Duggars. In the sh*t vs diarrhea debate Lainey has …
        Kardashians over Duggars.

      • Marianne says:

        Being pro-choice doesn’t mean you are pro-abortion. It just means that you will respect someone’s decision to do what they want with their body. Step into someone’s else shoes. You have no idea what their situation is. Perhaps they can’t handle it emotionally or financially. Maybe they need to get one because they are afraid of how their family might react (like an honor killing).

      • wolfpup says:

        Other Kitty: (hello) This was in the Huffington today. I wonder how one would explain this:

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/01/abortion-womens-health_n_5912648.html

      • Mira says:

        @Everyone

        For the record, I do believe women should have the right to an abortion. It simply is more beneficial to society and women overall that way. That being said, a lot of hte pro-choice arguments here are really unsound.

        First off, the “babies are a bunch of cells” argument is weak. FYI…that’s what we all are. The whole point of an abortion is to not have a baby, i.e. stop the life forming inside of you, i.e. end life. You can’t rest an argument with giant implications on “it’s not fully formed yet” when women wouldn’t be getting the procedure in the first place if they weren’t pretty darn sure a baby was going to come out of them. What is fully formed, anyway? Being able to survive outside a body? What about preemies who need a machine? And the tadpole argument doesn’t make much sense either. A baby couldn’t survive on it’s own either, yet we don’t allow parents to kill their baby because they didn’t want to – or couldn’t – take care of it.

        This brings me to my biggest pet peeve, which is when pro-choice people vehemently refuse to acknowledge that the “it’s a woman’s body, it should be her choice” DOESN’T present a gray area. Yes, it’s her body, but there is now a life forming inside of it. So…it’s not really just her body anymore. It IS a gray area whether other people now have more of an interest (especially the father, who helped create that baby). I think woman have a greater responsibility to consider the fact that there is a life inside of her and weigh these options when they’re considering whether they’re pro or anti-abortion. Not saying that women who actually get abortions don’t consider this, I’m just talking about those advocating for pro-choice.

        Again, ultimately I think women should have the right to an abortion, but it really bugs me that pro-choice people act like there’s no gray area at all. It’s disrespectful of life in general. I know I’m going to get a lot of hate for this, but I personally think the reason some pro-choice people refuse to acknowledge that it’s more of a gray area than they purport is because they don’t want to feel morally responsible if they were ever to get an abortion. Just because something is legal (usually because it’s apparently better for society) doesn’t mean it doesn’t have moral implications attached.

      • jwoolman says:

        Abortion is a lousy method of birth control for many reasons, but it just is plain wrong to force a woman to remain pregnant against her will. Offer yourself for embryo transfer if you want to provide an alternative. Hopefully one day contraceptive approaches will have advanced enough so that the whole question withers away. Most abortions today are done due to contraceptive failure. Funding research on contraception is another way to lower the abortion rate, and likewise funding problem pregnancies and after birth (especially when children are born with very expensive and sometimes lifelong problems). Abortions often occur for purely financial reasons: a parent is laid off or fired from a job and doesn’t know when he or she can get another one, and existing children take priority, or insurance won’t cover the real risks of pregnancy and birth of a disabled child. Even when abortion was illegal, married women were often the ones getting them – they had to feed their other children and couldn’t take on another.

        Many of those abortions would have ended in miscarriage if the pregnancy proceeded. God is the Great Abortionist. Even back in the 1950s Merck Manual, they were estimating at least 50% miscarriage rate. I suspect the number is much higher. It’s a rough road to birth and rejections occur so early that many women don’t even realize it. Boys are especially at risk- apparently more boys than girls are conceived, but more girls are born (whenever the statistics are otherwise by adulthood, you know girls have been selectively underfed and given less access to medical care, or today- selectively aborted). Another change in technology has been ways to determine pregnancy much earlier than before, but for most of our history- a missed period was the only clue and that was never certain. But still the pregnancy can be over in a flash.

    • SamiHami says:

      @Jenny,

      I don’t know of anyone who is against birth control except for strict Catholics. I’m completely in favor of it myself. As for welfare, I think there are a lot of reforms that need to be made. We should always help out those who are down on their luck and can’t get by on their own (no one should go hungry in America) but I do think that there are horrendous abuses in the system. Welfare shouldn’t be used as a lifestyle; it should be temporary assistance (unless the recipient is unable to work due to mental or physical disability). I think a system that requires people to do some sort of work (community service type work maybe?) or attend some sort of job training while receiving benefits would be they way to go. They would get more work experience/training/education, therefore making them more employable. Not to mention having a sense of pride and a reason to get up in the morning. Those things are important to one’s self esteem, I think.

      • JustVisiting says:

        @SamiHami

        Spoken like someone who’s never been through the system. Guess what? In order to qualify for welfare, you have to either A) be actively looking for a job with proof provided to your case worker B) have a job that is below the poverty line and therefore qualifying you for assistance or C) be medically unable to work with proof provided.

        You want to reform something to get people off welfare? Reform the minimum wage laws so people can afford to exist.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        Also, there are a LOT of people (most of whom are men in a position of power) who are against women having access to birth control. A LOT.

      • Esmom says:

        SamiHami, “welfare shouldn’t be used as a lifestyle.” If you really believe that’s true then you’ve clearly never been in a situation where it’s nearly impossible to make ends meet. It’s just callous to dismiss people who are caught in the cycle of poverty with a talking point like that.

      • wolfpup says:

        SamiHami: Where do you get your talking points on the welfare system in America? It sounds like the same tired, old rhetoric, that grumpy old men in Congress have been using for decades…just the same old thing, ad nauseum…(using Ayn Rand to justify themselves is new, however).

        These proclamations are really hurtful to the people who need welfare, as it *does* make people feel ashamed, when the Republican party keeps calling people in poverty, some type of bottom-feeder losers. Do you know how little these people have to survive on it? Who would choose that for themselves – seriously!!? Do you know someone personally who abuses the system? I’ve never met a single one! A lot of people show up to bully the impoverished; they are the same people who continually hoot for war, which is far more costly!

      • doofus says:

        wolfpup, nice post. while I will admit that fraud does exist, it is not nearly as widespread (or widespread AT ALL) as some would like to portray. but it supports their narrative of “poor people = bad people” and class warfare that the GOP likes to play up. it fits their position of wanting to get rid of welfare all together. never mind those people who literally could not survive without it, according to them everyone who is on welfare is just a mooch looking for a free ride and we should just stop the whole program.

        along the same narrative as voter fraud. prevent a whole boatload of people from voting because of a VERY FEW documented voter fraud cases. of course, the people who get disenfranchised from the restrictive voter laws are usually the ones who vote democrat. and who is pushing the more restrictive laws?…you got it!

      • SamiHami says:

        One last thing, too…re: the minimum wage comment upthread. All minimum wage does is increase inflation and hurt businesses, therefore hurts employees-usually the ones who most desperately need their jobs. Minimum wage is a terrible idea that should be eliminated, not raised.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        SamiHami, your claims about minimum wage are not supported by the data.

        “In 2014, 13 states raised their minimum wages, five through legislation and eight through inflation indexing. Gould compared wage growth for the bottom 10 percent of Americans in those 13 states with the rest of America. In the former, real wages grew 0.9 percent, a non-negligible increase. In the remaining 37 states, real wages declined 0.1 percent. In other words, wage growth for the bottom 10 percent of Americans is entirely attributable to states that increased their minimum wages.”

        “… job growth was higher in states that raised their minimum wages than it was in those that didn’t (1.8 percent versus 1.5 percent).”

        http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119440/states-raised-their-minimum-wages-had-stronger-job-growth

      • jwoolman says:

        Samihami- the vast majority of people are on welfare for only short periods of time. The politicians started spreading the myth about “welfare queens”. In any system, there are those that misuse it. But you don’t toss the system or push people out in your zeal to have an impossible 100% compliance rate. My uncle worked on government programs and always said you just watch the rules enough to avoid too much corruption, but at some point you would spend more money trying to prevent it than you would lose accepting a certain amount of it.

        I remember when the politicians thought it was a grand idea to force people on welfare to “work”. As if taking care of small children wasn’t already work. So they had to get low paying jobs which, once childcare subsidies ran out, would mean less money to feed, clothe, and shelter those children than if they had the welfare check plus the kids had less time with mom. Great idea, guys. It’s really very much connected with the lack of respect for unpaid “women’s work”.

      • snowflake says:

        @ Just Visiting

        I’ve known plenty of people who abuse the system. Yeah they look for jobs. I used to take applications from people who were supposedly trying to get a job. When I would say hold on I’ll get the hiring manager, you would be shocked how quickly they were ready to leave. And standing there in a tank top and shorts. uh they weren’t looking for a job. just to meet their job application quota so they could keep getting benefits.

        at this same restaurant, in a two year period, I saw about 6-7 women get pregnant and have a baby. no bullshit. One lady had two babies in that time period. So they got another job, you say? haha. no need for that. all the other women told them how to apply for WIC, food stamps and assistance. they would come in with their nails done and brand name shoes. One shift manager cut her daughter’s hours, she was starting to get too many and losing some of her benefits. Meanwhile, i ate all the free food I could because I couldn’t afford groceries. but i couldn’t get ANY help at all. i made a princely $10 an hour and had no kids. YES, WELFARE ABUSE EXISTS AND IS RAMPANT!

        changes do need to be made, unfortunately, it will prob affect some people that are actually in need of help.meanwhile, my taxes keep going up,, got to support the freeloaders! I support people who genuinely need help, btw.

        sorry if my post offends anyone, but to say there is hardly any abuse in the welfare system is ridiculous, imo

      • deehunny says:

        @All Against Sami Hami– OK, I get it ya’ll. I am pro-choice and it irks me too when women try to tell me what to do with my body. However, I only listen to women during abortion debates and automatically tune-out men because, ya know, they aren’t women and would never be in such a position.

        Now, with that being said– welfare is a whole different can of worms. Sami’s got a point here dolls– I’VE BEEN ON WELFARE and you don’t have to prove you are looking for a job– Not in MA or NY anyway. Simply stating is good enough. As a matter of fact, getting foodstamps is supposed to be “easy and accessible” to promote “heads of food prep in a single household” (usually women) being able to feed their kids.

        I worked for a National FoodStamp Campaign for Americore and know exactly how welfare works, what qualifies you and what doesn’t. While the monthly cash asisstance is almost impossible to get, Medicaid for kids and foodstamps is easy. Also– I was working for Americore while on welfare, and guess what, they used it as part of their package to get you to work for them– that’s right. The government sanctions those with certain jobs to be able to collect foodstamps.

        SO– I’m tired of liberals on this site beating up on conservatives. Working on the campaign, some people DID use it as a lifestyle and NOT temporary assistance. It lasts for a whole year before you have to renew and prove you still qualify. I saw it with my own eyes. However, I also saw a lot of immigrants say they felt like they were too ashamed to apply. It cuts both ways. Those who used it as a lifestyle were mostly born here in the US.

        Come after me, I’m ready lol

    • T.C. says:

      It’s offensive that she went to a Holocaust museum and couldn’t even put the name Jews or Jewish people in her entire rant. Sad. Because if they were Christians she would be all over the prosecution of religion wagon.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Good point. It is striking that she didn’t mention people of Jewish faith, when that factor played such a large role in the Holocaust.

      • ol cranky says:

        actually, it seems pretty clear to me that she has no problem with people being murdered for being Jewish, LGTB or Romani. . .

  4. LadyMTL says:

    Am I surprised? Not at all…she’s a Duggar.
    I’ve been to the Holocaust museum and was practically in tears by the time I left, and the last thing on my mind was trying to come up with a statement that had a freaking hashtag at the end of it. Ugh. This girl is making me sad.

    • Hautie says:

      I am not remotely convinced, that Miss Duggar wrote that statement for herself.

      Simply because I don’t believe her grammar is that well formed. Just look at all of the correct punctuation. That statement was wrote for her, to post. Right down to that hashtag for the ProLife cause.

      Makes me wonder if the ProLife folks paid for this trip to DC.

    • Irishserra says:

      I, too, was affected by the Holocaust Museum. I will never ever be able to forget the room with the shoes. Just thousands and thousands of shoes from the deceased. I remember the sight and smell very clearly. The whole experience was so heart wrenching that we were silent and pensive long after the exiting the museum.

  5. don't kill me i'm french says:

    Who cares on what she thinks?

    • Jules says:

      She thinks? Nah, she’s programmed.

    • Belle Epoch says:

      Unfortunately the Duggars are extremely popular. People look up to them because “the children are so well behaved.” They use their TV show to present their cult as warm and cuddly. However, THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT BENEVOLENT. They are uneducated bigots with a racist agenda, and they are extaordinarily adept at working the system (and TV) for financial gain. People are fooled by them. They should be exposed for what they really are so that instead of saying “who cares?” people will say “this is what happens when you combine corporal punishment and religious brainwashing with lack of education.”

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        I hate that they have a forum, too, and that people buy into their “wholesome” act. They are anything but wholesome.

      • joy says:

        Yeah she talks about how we’re all one race but I bet old Jimbo would poop himself if she brought a black guy home.

      • Merritt says:

        Exactly. People pretend that the Duggars are harmless but they are marketing very dangerous ideas. The Quiverfull movement is downright scary.

      • Algernon says:

        Is it (the Quiverfull movement) something that really has gained traction, though? Most people I know view the Duggars as circus freaks, basically, and think that having such a large family is selfish/wasteful in this day and age. I know they’re very famous, but are they actually drawing others into their lifestyle?

      • Merritt says:

        @Algernon

        I have no idea how many people are being drawn into the movement. But the Duggars being on tv, given magazine covers, and endorsing politicians or political referendums is giving the movement legitimacy. And that is scary.

  6. delorb says:

    I find it hard to believe that any parent would look into their daughters faces and think that the only thing they’re good at is having babies.

    • Erinn says:

      Sad, isn’t it?

      • Tulip says:

        It is sad. And part of me sympathizes, since there are many parents who aren’t as religious, but after their daughters reach a certain age, disregard all of their daughter’s accomplishments and ask when the grandchildren are going to arrive. Popping out kids is still too close to a woman’s identity, no matter where you go.

        Having said that, I wish this girl would not use a visit to the holocaust museum to promote her own political views. It’s wrong on so many levels.

    • Tapioca says:

      Especially given that the biggest problem mankind faces is overpopulation – according to the WHO, at the current rate of growth by 2100 we’ll have a worldwide population greater than current farming methods could feed and Soylent Green will be a documentary.

      Of course a huge part of that is down to religion still regarding women as brood mares, long after modern medicine (mostly) removed the need to have 6 kids, in case 4 of them die.

      • wolfpup says:

        I met a woman several years ago, who was married to a gynecologist. At the time she was pregnant with her 13+ child. The poor woman’s belly was almost to her knees (her weight was average). I was shocked at the wear and tear of so many pregnancies. I had a hard time believing that he cared about her health.

        She told me that she had to cook and feed the children in shifts.

  7. Frida_K says:

    Well, I know that Jesus just squeals with joy when he sees her with that weapon in her hands! What is it, an Uzi? That’s a gun used for hunting deer and rabbits, right, things that a Jesus-loving Christian girl like herself can cook for dinner, right?

    As I wipe a way a tear–Jessa’s profound thoughts on the Shoah are so edifying! I’m farklempt!–lyrics from “Killing for Jesus” by the Circle Jerks are winding through my brain. To wit:

    I’m never bored
    When I’m killing for the lord
    Now I’ve seen the light
    Hail Mary! I’ve got Jesus on my side!

    And so forth.

    Yes, lovely gun she’s carrying. And the duck lips really make her look holy.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Right? Sex and guns. How very sweet.

      • Ag says:

        i don’t understand these people’s obsession with sex. it’s like they think that that is all that people who don’t belong to their cult are about – while it seems like it’s all that they themselves are about.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Exactly. Like a male and female can’t be in the same room alone together for 5 seconds without jumping each other. They don’t trust their children to make ANY decisions about anything. It’s so weird.

    • Cheryl says:

      Thanks for the laugh. Though this post would just be stomach ache inducing.

  8. tanesha86 says:

    I can appreciate the fact that she believes in equality however her statement smacks of colorblind racism. Thus whole family needs to go away

  9. Jess says:

    I can’t get into what she said, I’ll never stop and then I’ll be stabby the rest of the day. I am disappointed in her though, I really thought she’d be the Duggar gone wild, but, looks like she’ll be hitched and spitting out a bunch of babies in no time, sad.

  10. lindylou says:

    I vote for let’s not care about anything this wing nut family spews from their pie holes.

  11. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    She never had a chance to think or form her own ideas. She thinks the Holocaust was caused by people believing in evolution. Ugh. These people.

    • hmmm says:

      That’s really the subtext, isn’t it? I couldn’t put my finger on it. Fabulous point and thanks for clarifying it for me. The entire thing is an anti-abortion/evolution screed. Nothing scarier than a simpleton with a platform.

      Oh wait…..yes there is- a simpleton with an assault rifle.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      I picked up on how she was trying to work evolution in there. Very disgusting for her to use such an issue to set up her own unrelated soapbox.

    • kranky says:

      Eh… I give her a pass on this one. Darwin begat evolutionary theory which begat eugenics (developed by Darwin’s cousin) which in turn was used by the Nazis to JUSTIFY racial cleansing, i.e., the Holocaust. The last time I went to the Holocaust Museum, there was a whole section on this topic and the material was absolutely gutting. I am not surprised that it made an impression on her.

      Bottom line: it’s reductive to say that evolutionary theory caused the Holocaust, but not entirely untrue.

  12. Toodles says:

    Can you just not report on them, then? Seriously. Kardashians are bad enough, but these people are famous, why? Because their mom is really good at getting pregnant? That’s biology, not talent.

    Drop all coverage of them. All this does is give them a platform to spout their beliefs- deny them that opportunity. I’m all for the first amendment, they can proclaim their beliefs, but no one has to give them a megaphone.

    • Talie says:

      I agree. It makes me sick that they have fanbases and get national attention — they spread a message that is frankly, quite dangerous, especially for young women.

    • teatimeiscoming says:

      I came here to say something quite similar. These people belong in a circus freakshow, not on TV.

    • AntiSocialButterfly says:

      As soon as I read your statement about the mom’s frequent pregnancy, the scene of the beleaguered, multiparous mother in “The Meaning of Life” popped into my head- you know the one, where she scarcely stops her washing to off-handedly drop out another newborn, placenta and all, amidst the sea of children she already has. Ewww (I have three of my own). I am sorry, but these Duggars are revolting on just so, so many levels.

  13. ncboudicca says:

    I can’t stop myself from clicking on a Duggar article, but I know it’s wrong. I guess I should be glad that she’s not a Holocaust Denial person? That’s how low my expectations are for these people at this point.

  14. Talie says:

    Honestly, I’m surprised she was even taught about the Holocaust, but I’m sure she was taught about it in this warped way that brought it all back to abortion.

  15. su says:

    People who equate abortion with the Holocaust, or slavery make me sick.

    The willful ignorance of the complexities of such a comparison makes me wanna break things.

  16. littlemissnaughty says:

    That girl needs an education. Every life IS precious … except if you’re Catholic I guess? Or Muslim? I wonder whose precious life she wants to threaten with that gun.

    • L says:

      Or gay of course. Mention the # of homosexuals that Hitler targeted and I’m sure she’d be fine with it.

      • littlemissnaughty says:

        I can’t even go there because every time I do, I lose my sh*t. It wasn’t just Hitler. When the Allies Forces freed the camps, they often kept homosexuals in prison/concentration camps because they were in there for a reason after all. Sometimes they were arrested again shortly afterwards. It’s a group that – along with the Roma – fought the longest and hardest to even be recognized as victims of the Holocaust. … I digress. It makes my blood boil and so do these “Christians”. I read her post and all I see is CULT. Her language is not her own.

    • megs283 says:

      Why the dig at Catholics and Muslims???

      ETA: I’m sorry, I thought you were saying every life is precious, except to Catholic and Muslims. Now I understand that you were referring to her earlier interviews…

    • littlestar says:

      Yep, she says she’s “pro-life” but poses for a picture holding a gun. Considering it’s a Duggar, I doubt Jessa realizes the irony of it all. She’s a moron and I think it’s sad that NONE of the children have even attempted to think for themselves.

      UGH. Duggar posts really get me worked up.

  17. Eileen says:

    I’ve heard the same argument before-genocide of Jews,gypsies,homosexuals and disabled in the Shoah is nowhere equal to abortion-women aren’t segregated and forced to abort due to their unborn fetus’s race,religion,creed,etc. apples vs oranges. I don’t know anyone who loves abortion but it is legal and will remain so

  18. Jenns says:

    Enough with the Duggars. They are just morons, who were raised by morons, and who will end up birthing 20 kids that they will raise as morons. Wash, rinse, repeat.

  19. Sara says:

    im almost impressed. how she also manages to put evolution together with Nazi ideology. (when she talks about monkeys and all humans coming from Adam) Kudos!

    seriously, its disturbing. i feel for her, how could this woman ever have learned it differently?

  20. Lilacflowers says:

    A Duggar has thoughts?

  21. daisyfly says:

    Wilful ignorance and apathy like hers is why the holocaust happened in the first place. She can act as though being a Christian is what protects her from the responsibility of history, but the truth is that the holocaust happened in a heavily religious area and with great Christian furor. Hitler invoked Christ and Christianity numerous times in speeches and papers to justify his final solution. He used the belief that Jews killed Christ, and that they fed on the blood of Christian babies to build fear and hatred against them. He used the scripture of Christ preaching against excessive wealth, coupled with the stereotype of Jews being stingy, greedy misers to breed jealousy and stoke the fire of hate and discontent against them.

    Tl;dr It wasn’t evolution but nationalism, blind faith, and ignorance that caused the holocaust. Everything that she embodies.

    • Frida_K says:

      My comment up-thread is pure snark but this, your comment, is substantive. This is what she needs to hear…not that she’d ever listen, but she and others like her would do a lot better if they shut their mouths and opened (a) their ears and (b) their history books.

      Well, anyway. Great comment, and I totally agree with what you write here.

    • littlemissnaughty says:

      Just to add to what you said: It was a two-edged sword. One part of the church (protestant church) heavily bought into the idea that Hitler was actually some sort of new messiah and that he was doing God’s work. They mixed religion and politics. In 1936 the protestant church was split into two factions because the other half (figuratively speaking) openly disagreed and protested against the Nazi regime. They realized that it went against everything they and their faith stood for. And on a smaller scale, the Nazis did everything to prevent people from attending church. My grandmother and her family (in small village without any anonymity whatsoever) had to walk past SS and SA every Sunday to get to church. It wasn’t illegal of course but they wanted to show that they knew who went to church and that it wasn’t the best idea to be a regular churchgoer. Privately Hitler abhorred religion.

  22. Chris says:

    One of nineteen children? What happened? Did her parents keep going until they had one they liked?

    • Rhiley says:

      I honestly think Jim Bob needs to be arrested for spousal abuse. At some point it seems he should have either talked with his wife about some kind of birth control or if they are against that, made a choice not to roll up on top of her. It seems as though he needs his urges and desires met at the expense of his wife mental and physical health. I realize they are a couple and make decisions together, but I doubt she can keep him off of her at night.

      • Sunny says:

        Michelle has done numerous interviews where she explains she is “not allowed to say no to her husband”.

    • Mitch Buchanan Rocks! says:

      What a great way to begin October – cacklin like a witch so loud it awoke my crackie neighbors – excellent posting 🙂 🙂 🙂

    • I Choose Me says:

      Thank you for giving me a much needed chuckle. I hate Duggar articles ’cause they make me stabby but the comments are always worth my temporary rage.

  23. BeckyR says:

    What an ignorant comment for her to make.

  24. Ag says:

    i wish these people would get less publicity for themselves and their cult. i would be happy if i never saw another story about them again.

  25. shayne says:

    No one care what this trailer trash thinks.

  26. rianic says:

    I really think the oldest son is getting ready for some sort of political run. Their Instagram pages have all been filled with antiabortion blurbs and photos of Republicans. Also, he’s been speaking at a lot of “events” (check out the fakejoshduggar feed)

    • Rhiley says:

      It wouldn’t surprise me. Aren’t these people part of the Quiverfull or whatever it is called?

    • Belle Epoch says:

      He has to get elected to something… To get the insurance! We all pay for every Duggar because Jimbob (who is truly stupid) was an elected official for ten minutes. Good deal!

  27. kpoodle says:

    My favorite part, is where she breaks down melanin for all the homeschooled fundies who aren’t taught science.

  28. doofus says:

    “every life if precious…”

    …except if you’re gay or trans, apparently.

    F these people.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Or Catholic. Or not white. They are so full of it.

    • Zimmer says:

      Is it just my experience or do most people that call themselves “pro-life” and make “sanctity of human life” statements also support the death penalty? Wait that couldn’t be right…..

      • Sam says:

        You are correct. They generally justify this by pointing out that the 5th Commandment is mis-translated. The commandment is not “Thou shall not kill.” It is “Thou shall not murder.” Many pro-lifers then base their objections to abortion on the basis that the unborn are innocent who have committed no moral or legal wrong – thus, ending their lives is murder. However, a person who has killed is not innocent, so taking their life is not a murder, it’s justice, and that makes it morally acceptable. There’s the logic.

        It’s worth pointing out that this isn’t a given across the pro-life sphere. Catholicism opposes both the death penalty and abortion. The types you speak of tend to be of the fundamentalist strain.

      • Amanda_M87 says:

        Yes. Most of them are hypocrites.

  29. Sam says:

    I love how she expounds upon the idea that every life is precious – except for animals, who seem to get treated poorly by her family. To my knowledge, none of the Duggars are vegetarians/vegans, so I guess that animal lives (which, let it be said, are more cognizant than unborn humans) don’t exactly count.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      This times a million.

    • littlestar says:

      Just read a report on the CBC yesterday that world wildlife populations have decreased by 50% since the 70s. News like that makes me want to just stay home and cry. We’ve destroying our world and the Duggar’s willful ignorance is just helping it even more.

      • Erinn says:

        I saw that segment when I was waiting in the Dr’s office yesterday. It made me so angry and so sad.

      • wolfpup says:

        I saw that report too, and can’t help but think of those who will come after…

    • Mc17 says:

      My younger sister watches their show, so last week I saw part of an episode where one of the little boys had a pellet gun. One of the older girls explained to the camera that “it wasn’t nice to shoot his siblings, so he went outside to hunt animals.” Clearly they have no problem hurting animals if they’re letting their kids shoot at them with pellet guns. The kid even shot at their pet cat on the porch, and nobody stopped him.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        Yeah I just can’t with stuff like this. I can’t with anybody who treats animals like trash.

      • Decloo says:

        If that really happened on camera where’s PETA? They would just LOVE a PR brawl with the Duggars.

  30. Amy says:

    Doesn’t their oldest brother Josh live near DC? I think that’s where they probably stayed so they had a “chaperone.” I was watching some random episode last night and it was all about Jill’s wedding preparations. But there was some Anna and Josh thrown in. I like Anna a lot, despite her having to be a brood mare for Josh. I just wish someone in this family would stand up and say they weren’t going to have 30 kids. I was hoping Jill woul wait a little bit but no… Knocked up right away.

  31. Abbicci says:

    The Duggars ( all eleventy billion of them) have just reached Fit Mom Levels of attention whoring. Between the crazy ignorance and their stolkhom syndrome style of raising children I feel like I am yelling at victims of domestic violence when I say anything.

    I’m out. Uncle, I’m done.

  32. Mitch Buchanan Rocks! says:

    I thought Jim-Boob doesn’t like make-up on his wiv…..daughters. There was another poster who questioned, on another Duggar post, why is this one allowed to wear so much of it? Do the Quiverers have to have clear skin to get one on ones with Jesus?

  33. A~ says:

    I guess she’s pro-life except when it comes to weapons designed to kill in the shortest time possible?

  34. Aye says:

    Different subject here but it needs to be pointed out: That girl and the fiancée are. Totally. Fucking. Separate rooms or even searate hotels have never been a hindrance in that sense, just ask anyone who has been on a high school trip.

    • Koala says:

      THANK YOU. Came to the comments section to say exactly this. I get body language vibes that these two are totally doing it. Totally doing it. And I wish it would come out publicly that they’re totally doing it, to start to chip away at this ridiculous farce of a life this family lives and expose them for what they really are.

      • Aye says:

        Or at the very least, they are doing it Opus Dei-style, Opus Dei being the Catholic, rich people-only version of whatever the Duggars are. And the “style” refers to having sex in ways that many liberal, leftist and open-minded women everywhere are not quite into.

    • sigh((s)) says:

      He probably just pulls out then proclaims it’s not really sex because there wasn’t a baby making opportunity. I know people like this.

    • pirategirl says:

      I watched the show last night too, and thought the same about Jessa and Ben. No way they aren’t doing it. And he now lives on the family’s property I think. But since they don’t believe in birth control, will she get knocked up, or maybe they are using protection?

  35. grabbyhands says:

    ‘Every life is precious…”

    Well, while you’re in the womb. After that, you and the woman who gave birth to you will be vilified as worthless leeches feeding off the social benefits of the country. And we won’t give a damn if you are abused, malnourished or under educated.

    Honestly, if that family had adopted 19 kids out of our horrible foster system or children with special needs or children born with drug addictions, I MIGHT listen to them. As it is, they are just more of the same hypocrites who think life is precious until an actual baby is born and someone has to take care of it.

    • Lemony says:

      Cheers and claps. Well said. Anti-choicers are the greatest evil and hypocrites of all. They are usually pro death penalty, which is evil slaughter of EXISTING BORN human beings. And as you said, once the fetus is born (and then because an actual human being) they don’t give a flying F*CK! If you are on welfare, they look at you as if you are SCUM. Never mind that you chose to keep the baby. Its always the anti-choicers anti-women women traitors that are the ones that will spit all over a single mom on welfare. Anti choicers DISGUST me, REPULSE me and make me so LIVID and INFURIATED!!

  36. Lex says:

    Well at the very least she is speaking out against prejudices against minorities (racial and social). You often hear about radical Christians spouting that they’re superior in this way and that. As a standalone comment it’s not so bad… when you consider her poor education and brainwashed upbringing though it’s a little less enlightening as all the subtext comes through that people are bringing up. She thinks all life is precious and is commenting on it. Good for her?

  37. Green_Eyes says:

    Well if Duggars like a spin.. Ms sweet & wholesome & her clan there reminds me.. Jesus was also betrayed by Judas- one he trusted & loved. Another one-beware of Wolves in sheeps clothing.. Think those fit better describing the Duggars than A Duggar describing Holocaust & abortion.

  38. Amanda_M87 says:

    It’s pretty obvious that this young lady is basically brainwashed by her parents and their religion to say these kinds of things. I honestly don’t think she’s capable of independent thinking.

  39. vilebody says:

    I know I’ll get lambasted for this, but I really don’t think it’s as horrible comment as everyone’s making it out to be. Abortion is a complex issue, and I find it frustrating when many so-called progressives don’t bother to see the pro-life side. Scientists don’t know when life actually “starts,” which means that the official start of life is up to personal judgment. Many people consider it when there is a heartbeat, or when there is brain activity (my opinion is the latter). Pro-life people consider it at the moment of conception, which is when new and unique DNA is formed. I may not agree with that point of view, but I do understand that those who do absolutely 100% find it a horrible moral wrong for abortion to exist.

    There are many things I don’t like about the Duggars, and many have been highlighted above. Having a girl talk about the tragedy of lost lives in general and ending it with a cause important in her life doesn’t seem that terrible to me.

    • Kiddo says:

      ‘Pro life’ should also include self determination in an individual’s own life. The person who already exists, in person-hood, is often tossed aside and not considered, for a concept of a ‘new life’ based on belief of “official start of life’ and that isn’t ‘pro’ anything, but ‘pro’ control. If you have a belief system that A=B, then follow it, yourself. NO ONE has abortions for fun. No one makes that determination easily, and so someone throwing their bullshit into an already completed deliberative process is harmful to someone’s LIFE.

      I think you have no right to decide what someone else does with their own body. Sure, have a philosophical conversation. But don’t impose your belief on “official start of life” in order to dictate legislation or to control the physiological functions that deeply impact a person who is already alive. People who are alive have feelings, experiences, intellect and a history. They are not merely incubators created to satisfy some stranger’s belief structure.

      • Chris2 says:

        Well said Kiddo
        Unbending anti-abortion attitudes in Ireland were recently challenged, to say the least, when medics refused to terminate a pregnancy to save the mother. That foetus had superior rights, in the eyes of the doctors, and so the mother (and foetus) died. Result.
        In 2014, for gød’s sake.

      • vilebody says:

        Once again, there’s more to address in the pro-life stance. To those people (and again, I am not pro-life!), conception means that the fetus IS already alive. An example that was once given to me is that it is akin to taking care of a relative who is in a medically induced coma for 9 months. If you had a relative who was in a coma for a set period of nine months, would you not pay for medical treatment, visit the hospital, figure out their bills, etc. despite the inconvenience or financial burden on you? Of course you would, even if your own life would be “tossed aside” in the “harmful” process.

        Defining life at the moment of conception has a lot of medical backing, so it isn’t a random determination. The law itself (established in Roe v. Wade) specifically says that so many doctors had so many opinions that the court could not establish an official “start to life.” So it is a personal determination by law and once made, OF COURSE you would try to establish it on other people. That is how every single policy in any area works (e.g. old-fashioned light-bulbs are now banned for no reason other than it wasn’t as effective as the eco ones)!

        @littlestar: We have no idea the process behind her beliefs. I could just as easily say that you have been brainwashed to repeat pro-choice talking points and Kaiser judges her spin on celebrities by flipping a coin. The point is that we don’t know. The Holocaust comparison bothers me because death was only one part (though naturally the major one) of the horrible atrocities committed. Those in camps had to endure slave labor, starvation, and torture for years before the “Final Solution.”

        @Chris2: Just to get my own opinion out there, I find that so sad and horrible. In all the abortion debates I’ve had, I have never had anyone give a compelling or even reasonable argument on why medically necessary abortions should be banned.

      • Kiddo says:

        “Life” is not the same as personhood. Cancer cells are living. Bacteria is living. A relative, who is an established individual, fully formed in personhood with thoughts, history, personality, self awareness and a place already established on Earth is different than early developing cells that directly impact the host human body, sometimes to the very detriment of that body, whether physically or psychologically. No one has an abortion due to ‘inconvenience’. That’s really minimizing and devaluing the contemplation and reasons for having the abortion, and speaks more about those who describe it in such a manner. You said yourself that it is a matter of opinion, but since those rights were granted, they should not be rescinded because some portion of the population has tied religious beliefs to their own determination of this question. Freedom of religion and all.

        Further, no one is advocating for abortions. Responsible sex and planned parenthood is the very best way to bring children into the world, those who are wanted and who can be cared for. Making abortion illegal is going to put the LIVES of people at risk. It will not stop abortions. And it will make criminals out of people, increase costs of the industrial prison system and for what? So that those who are opposed can get revenge against those who don’t subscribe to their belief system?

        As an aside: I couldn’t afford to pay for anyone’s hospitalization. including my own.

        I would add that if my relative was so ill that it rendered their life as miserable, and they no longer wished to live, as sad as it would be, I agree with the right of self-determination as it also applies to assisted suicide.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        “An example that was once given to me is that it is akin to taking care of a relative who is in a medically induced coma for 9 months. If you had a relative who was in a coma for a set period of nine months, would you not pay for medical treatment, visit the hospital, figure out their bills, etc”

        Well first of all it depends on what that person had written in their living will (if they have one) and the details/circumstances of their condition. I know for myself that if I have no chance of coming out of that coma, I would want my family freed from the burden of caring for me.

        Secondly, even if we were to agree that life begins at conception, the debate is whether the “life” is worth anything without personhood. It’s life, but it’s not human life. A fetus cannot exist independently without the mom as a host (sorry people don’t like Lemony’s word but it’s true). A fetus cannot be pulled from a mother and grow and develop on its own. In that sense, it is no more “alive” than a tumor.

        Anyway, this is why I stopped arguing with anti-choice people a LONG-ASS time ago. It’s like talking to a wall because they think life is as simple as a parasitic clump of cells. To me, human life requires an ability to exist independently, the ability to think/feel, etc.

      • wolfpup says:

        Agree, Kiddo – you said it best!

      • vilebody says:

        @Kiddo: This is the last post I’m going to do on this, because I don’t think you’re taking the debate seriously. Again, the main point of contention for pro-life/choice people is when life officially begins. I wish you would have explained your own view on the matter other than your abstract idea of “personhood,” for which a newborn would not qualify. But, once again, the creation of unique DNA does define personhood for pro-life people, and at least this definition is concrete and based on scientific basis. You say you don’t want others to impose their beliefs on you? Pro-life people say that you are imposing YOUR beliefs to allow what they consider murder. I AGREE that Planned Parenthood/safe sex is the best way, outlawing abortion will not lead to a decrease in abortion, and that it is messed up to force a woman to continue a pregnancy despite medical complications, and said above to Chris2, I have heard NO argument that can convince me otherwise. But I understand where certain pro-life people are coming from and wish that more pro-choice people would do the same. Finally, I thought the analogy of the medically induced coma would be widely understood to be a metaphor for being in the womb. Thus, your relative would, to your knowledge, have a desire to live and would assuredly come out of said coma in 9 months. I hope that clarifies.

        @TOK: I hope to rate my debate skills higher than those of a wall. I have clarified any confusion about the comparison of the induced coma above to Kiddo. If you can now understand it, I think the comparison is apt as a person in a medically induced coma relies on medical equipment and personal resources to live, just as a fetus relies on the mother, i.e. not independently. Moreover, what happens when technology makes it possible for a pregnancy to happen without a host mother? Already it can be done as early as 20 weeks. However, that is not my point. My point is that without understanding both sides of a debate, there can never be any real compromise, and you have proven my point. You do not provide a definition of life or personhood other than with sketchy and objective terms. You call your opponents derogatory terms, here and in the past. You do not address that a pro-choice stance is imposing a view on others. And what is the cause of all this “long-ass” debate? The cause was a girl (an annoying and uneducated one, granted, but still a girl) expressing her sadness at the deaths of those without a voice.

      • HBIC says:

        “No one has an abortion due to ‘inconvenience’. ”

        Please. People are crazy. Don’t put anything past anybody.

      • Kiddo says:

        HBIC says:
        October 1, 2014 at 9:13 pm

        “No one has an abortion due to ‘inconvenience’. ”

        Please. People are crazy. Don’t put anything past anybody.

        So we should make general sweeping statements based on a small number of outliers?

      • Kiddo says:

        @vilebody, I tried answering and my response hasn’t shown up, I’m not writing it all out again.

    • littlestar says:

      What bothers me about her comparing abortion to the Holocaust is that she is so very ignorant to the world. Those words, that’s not really her! It’s what she’s been TOLD to think and believe, and she hasn’t been given access to the other side. I realize it’s not her fault that she is so ignorant and sheltered, but she is a woman now – she should be able to think for herself. But she doesn’t. She regurgitates what her cult and disturbing father tell her.

      So that’s my beef with this. She has no clue. She’s probably never even met a woman who has had an abortion and listened to her side and why she made the CHOICE for HERSELF.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        I agree. I do not agree with people who oppose abortion, but I can respect an informed opinion about it. This girl has never been allowed to be alone with a boy, or go to a normal school, or choose her books or music or friends. Her opinion means nothing.

  40. Steph says:

    Who gives these people a national TV show and why? I am a Christian and these people make Christians look terrible. Live your life and don’t judge. As far as abortions go,it is none of my business,but since I am prolife I do not want my tax dollars paying for abortions-period.

    • Sam says:

      Even if tax monies were used (and they by and large are not), you don’t really have an argument against it. I’m a Christian Scientist, so should I be allowed to refuse to pay any tax monies that fund medical programs like Medicare? I don’t personally use medical care, so why pay for it? My father is a Seventh Day Adventist, which preaches vegetarianism. Should he be allowed to refuse to pay any tax dollars that go towards subsidizing the meat industry? My best friend is a Quaker, which is a pacifist religion. Should she be allowed to refuse to pay any tax dollars that support the Department of Defense? Should the Jehovah’s Witnesses next door demand that any tax dollars allotted to the Red Cross be returned to them (since they oppose blood transfusions)?

      Christians like you, frankly, bother me. Because you’re all about getting yours and satisfying your own conscience, but you don’t exactly stop and think about what would happen if every other person thought the way you did – nothing would ever get done, because everybody would be fighting over who has to pay what. It’s ridiculous.

      • Lemony says:

        Agreed with your points Sam. I might no like funding freeways, but what am I going to do? Tell them to keep my part of the taxes separate?

        However, you are wrong about Seventh Day Adventists. I know them well, even know someone who is a Deacon in the religion, and vegetarianism has absolutely nothing to do with the religion – at all!! If your father is a vegetarian that’s fine, but most SDAs are not.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        OT but have you ever been to the Christian Science Center in Boston, Sam?
        It’s one of my favorite places in the city. So beautiful…

        And I agree with your response to Steph.

        Also, as an atheist, I strongly object to churches having tax-exempt status, yet they do and will continue to do so. So the religious institutions that you subscribe to in no way support anything with their tax dollars.

      • Sam says:

        Lemony: Sorry, but the Wiki page on them notes that the Church promotes a message of vegetarianism as part of their rules on “moral and physical hygiene.” They also eschew a lot of other stuff as well. Just because those you know don’t do it doesn’t mean it’s not part of the faith:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh-day_Adventist_Church#Health_and_diet

      • Sam says:

        Kitten: Yes I have, and I agree it is an amazingly beautiful place to be.

        To your point: I tend to agree. I think churches have become so entwined with politics that now, the point of exempt status to begin with is muddled and frankly, it needs to stop. So many churches – especially the conservative ones – have made politics their bread and butter, and honestly, it’s slightly disturbing. If I want politics, I turn on the news. I go to church to get away from that stuff. I don’t get people who like to mix the two.

      • Kiddo says:

        @TheOriginalKitten, All faiths should be taxed. Not contributing to the financial structure of safety nets in society would seem counter to most of the belief systems anyway. You would think they would feel compelled to do so.

    • FingerBinger says:

      TLC gives them a show.

    • Algernon says:

      Well I don’t want my tax dollars paying for war, but oh well. That’s where most of it goes. In comparison, very, very little of your tax dollars go to abortion clinics. I mean very, very, very, very, very, very, very little. Meanwhile, most of my taxes go to war. And yet, I continue to pay my taxes and I don’t berate soldiers or anyone for enlisting.

    • maddelina says:

      Well are you willing to support an unwanted child with your tax dollars until that child is an adult and can hopefully support themselves?

      • Steph says:

        I already do. Besides,there is free birth control,shouldn’t the need for abortions be declining?

        To be quite honest,I really am getting FED UP with how elections are monopolized with this one main issue,abortion,to supposedly attract women voters or are women too dumb to think about other issues that deeply impact their families and major world events.

        I apologize for my tone.

      • Sam says:

        Steph: correction – some women have free BC. There are still a large number of plans that have to be “grandfathered” into the ACA.

        Secondly, 5 seconds of Google will show you that the abortion rate in America has been declining – for years now, from a peak sometime in the 1980s.

        Thirdly – there will always be a need. BC cannot be used by all women (shocker, I know). Hormonal BC cannot be used by women with a host of health issues, including high BP, some hormonal conditions, etc. Look up “contradictions to hormonal BC” sometime. Also, not all terminations are because of lack of BC. BC can fail (the newer methods are better, not foolproof). Also, sometimes, women terminate wanted pregnancies (fetal defects, maternal health issues, abandonement, abuse, etc.). Women get raped when they aren’t on BC because they’re not involved with anyone otherwise. It’s stupid to think that BC can eliminate the need. Which is exactly why its best to keep the option legal and available, even if that means using tax money in very, very limited circumstances.

        (Also, you might want to tell some of your pro-life brethren about this stuff, since they’re busy protesting BC as well).

      • Kiddo says:

        Yes, women are all dumb. /s

        What is more important/basic than the right to make decisions regarding your own body? If people stopped trying to take control and power away from self-determination by individuals, it would not be an ‘issue’ for either side. It is dumb to make a campaign out of rescinding already existing rights. It gives the voting power to your opponent. THE GOP has VERY VERY little support from women voters. Don’t you think that’s dumb?

        Birth control is not effective 100% effective all of the time.
        Women who are not in relationships might not be on birth control, but might get raped, same with victims of incest, who can get pregnant.

        Or should all women, including girls, of childbearing age automatically be on BC all the time, just in case? Then the GOP will call them sluts.

      • wolfpup says:

        If men were the ones to carry and breast feed an infant, there would be some very quick turn around on this debate!!!

  41. Amanda_M87 says:

    I know this might sound awful, but I wonder what one of the Duggar girls would do if she were faced with an ectopic pregnancy. With an ectopic pregnancy its not a case of the woman may die, she WILL die if the pregnancy isn’t terminated. Would this girl just let her fallopian tube burst and leave it up to fate?

    • Lemony says:

      Good point. Or if she is raped? Or if there is any other medical emergency which means the mother will die? etc. There are so many valid reasons for termination.

      • Suzy from Ontario says:

        Even in those cases they would not abort. Can you imagine if not only abortion was outllawed, but birth control as well (which is what they believe should happen)? Can you imagine the amount of kids that would be living in extreme poverty, neglect and abusive situations? Even in the Duggars belief-circle of Fundumentalists there are a lot that are barely surviving. I know of one family (friends of the Duggars) who have 11 kids and are living in an RV and I believe she’s pregnant again. Not everyone has TLC money to make it look good.

        I cannot believe that someone would go to the Holocaust Museum and come away with the central thought about it having to do with abortion rather than racism and treating people who believe differently as if they were not even human. (Which sadly, is how many people are today with other cultures and religions and races, they just don’t see the connection). When you see other human beings as non-people, it frees many to commit horrible atrocities and justify it through their Faith or Bigotry which is horribly sad. 🙁

    • Peppa says:

      Does it ever freak anyone else out that some very Christian people will refuse to abort (if it is safe) a child with anencephaly even though the baby will only live for a very short time after birth? I know that sounds horrible, and I feel guilty thinking it. As someone who is not religious myself, it’s hard to wrap my head around. A child with Ds can lead a rich full life, a child with anencephaly cannot. I just cannot fathom someone putting there own life in danger just because they strongly oppose abortion.

  42. bros says:

    I disagree with her logic but she is FAR more eloquent and well spoken than say, Bristol Palin on the same topic. home schooling has worked out for her a lot better.

    • Decloo says:

      The Duggars have a better PR team than the Palins. That’s all.

    • Rudy says:

      This nonsense may be her opinion but I don’t think this is her writing. She sounds like a hillbilly when she speaks – she’s not well spoken at all.

  43. BoredAndExtremelyDangerous says:

    I guess these people and their programme are on pay-tv here in Australia, because I’ve never seen it or them, and I refuse to pay for tv. I vaguely remember hearing of them some time ago, but didn’t really pay much attention, so knew very little about them, and what I have gleaned has been on this site. I’ve really enjoyed reading all the comments on here today – very enlightening. Great posts, everyone!

    And I think this entire family is bonkers.

  44. LadyKarinsky says:

    “Jessa Duggar has some thoughts..”

    Stop there and you’re lying.

  45. Michelle says:

    I was afraid to read this after the headline!

    Jessa proves ignorance is not bliss.

  46. Lauren says:

    Funny how she is so offended by racism when her family practices a similar brand of christianity when it comes to reproduction like that of ‘Christian Identity’ which preaches that white people should have as many children as possible to prevent the white race from been over taken by the rest of us coloured people.

  47. Algernon says:

    There is a very small part of me that wants to see Roe v. Wade struck down, just to watch the chaos unfold. People think that banning abortion = *stopping* abortion. I confess to sometimes having the vicious desire to watch society at large be confronted with the reality of what happens when abortion isn’t available in safe, legal clinics subject to professional medical standards. Pre-Roe v. Wade, people were much more discreet and circumspect about personal matters. But in this day and age? It’ll be all over social media. First girl, and let’s be real, it would probably be a *child*, who dies of a heinous infection/internal hemorrhaging from a back alley “doctor” will be splashed all over the news. And suddenly we’ll have to have the real conversation no one wants to directly address: which is more important, the theoretical person or the actual, real person standing in front of you?

    I just want to see the look on people like the Duggars’ faces when they have to face the fact that banning abortion doesn’t decrease the rate of abortion.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Yes, we would be back to the back alleys and death. It also annoys me that anti-choice people act as though there are no moral or practical repercussions to forcing a woman to have a child against her will.

      • wolfpup says:

        It took a huge effort by women to have these rights come into being.

        These pro folks are pretty smug about changing it up again. It’s important that we know what our politicians are doing, and that we vote against those who would take away our hard earned rights.

  48. kri says:

    That was a beautiful, truly Christian (not at all) thing to do Duggar Drone-nice hijack of a horrific period in history to further your own political agenda. Really, these people have no shame. If you are pro-life ( aren’t we all technically “pro-life”?)that is your business, but please don’t use one of the world’s worst tragedies to compare the two. They make me want to slap their faces.

  49. Kcarp says:

    I’m pro life but pro choice at same time. I do not like the idea of abortion BUT if my 12 year old is raped and becomes pregnant, abortion is the first option.

    I think all these people who want to outlaw abortion do not consider or admit how it would negatively effect their family if not available.

    I’m conservative but I can’t stand conservative politics. To me these people who preach against gays or whatever are usually the ones with the hidden gay son.

  50. buzz says:

    If you are pro-gun, you are NOT pro-life. Period.

    • Kcarp says:

      I agree with your statement for me personally. However, I just can’t get on board with telling upstanding citizens that they cannot have a gun.

      I will not allow a gun in my home. Period. The chance of my 2 year old getting near it is much greater than a gun wielding manic coming into my home. My entire family on both sides have guns. My husband wanted to get a gun for protection I put my foot down and said absolutely not.

      This picture makes me want to puke. Duck lips, a perm, and a gun is not hot.

      • Jayna says:

        That is what I”m sick of. No one is trying to take away guns. It’s called gun control. Who needs assault weapons? Go to a gun show and watch tons of guns and assault weapons with large magazines being sold out of the back of cars.

        That’s the line used to scare people: They are trying to take away our guns. That’s a lie.

        Any fool that isn’t for better regulations as far as banning assault weapons and better control is stupid. I was raised in a family that had a gun and lots of uncles and cousins with rifles and guns either for protection and hunting. They
        are for better regulations and the banning of assault weapons. The NRA has deep pockets and will stop that from happening and all of these fear tactics that guns are being taken away.

      • wolfpup says:

        Who is funding the NRA?! Those are the people that need to be targeted, not with firearms, but with REASON. WHO is behind the moronic thinking? If it is the industry trying to make a buck, why do other industries lack this same ability to withstand reform? Especially when it is such a public horror…

  51. Anastasia Beaverhausen says:

    I visited a Holocaust museum and concentration camp while I was in Germany and the very last thing on my mind was the politics of abortion. There is no comparison because the Holocaust was much more than just the taking of life.
    Pro life or pro choice, this is just insensitive to the millions who lost their lives and to those who survived.

    • vilebody says:

      +1. I’m glad someone else mentioned this, too. A survivor once said he wished he had died because the memories were so painful. He had a lot of substance abuse problems (no doubt from PTSD) and was basically alone in the world as his family had not survived. I still think of it as one of the most depressing moments of my life.

    • PortlandJan says:

      Her words are not just a slap in the face to theeople who were killed or maimed in concentration camps. She’s also very disrespectful to the many allied soldiers, some of them 2 or 3 years her junior, who died to liberate these places,

  52. sarah says:

    I love the pro-choice crowd. You are not pro-choice, you are agree with me or you are ignorant. You are pro-abortion, nothing else.
    Lemony: Abortion is the expulsion of a non-human from the host’s body. Umm, no. Scientifically speaking, it is a child. it is a human. For you to say otherwise is a lie. Its not like this non-human goes through the vagina and magically becomes a baby. From the moment of conception, it carries all of the DNA to make it a human being.
    Woman who are against abortion are traitors? To what? Because we believe that all women, even those unborn, have a right to life?
    You have your right to your choice that abortion is okay. Others have their right to their choice that abortion is not.
    Please, keep yelling Jesus would be unhappy with a girl who believes in Him. I dont think he would care that she has a gun, she isnt using it to kill people over idiots who believe that the aborting of millions of babies is A-okay.

    • Kiddo says:

      “You have your right to your choice that abortion is okay. Others have their right to their choice that abortion is not.”

      That makes you pro-choice. As long as everyone has the right to make that determination for themselves.

    • Kcarp says:

      I don’t think it is ok. Like I said before if my 12 year old daughter was raped and got pregnant I would strongly push for an abortion.

      It is probably a sin but I think the sin would be on me not her and I would be saving her from a horrible situation.

    • Chris2 says:

      Sarah
      You accuse those pro-choice of seeing things in only black and white, as it were. In your own position though, you are denying any grey areas quite as robustly.
      It’s not strictly true to say that a (for example) ten week foetus is a child. It’s a potential child. I’m only jumping on this here, because I earlier cited a case where a life-saving abortion was denied….even though the foetus was not yet viable outside the uterus, even with everything modern medicine could do….it had nowhere near the necessary development. The physician was so strongly anti *any* abortion, that the mother had to die, due to his personal beliefs….As it was, there were 2 deaths, where he had a clear responsibility to prevent one of them. But his beliefs came first, and he didn’t for a moment consider himself guilty of killing his patient: his priority was to refuse to abort.
      How anyone could believe that ill-equipped foetus was the equal, as a living being, to a young woman, is beyond me.
      Except it isn’t really…..he was also refusing to be dictated to by any woman’s claim for precedence over his moral comfort. It’s an d and tired argument, but by hell if men were the pregnant ones……..well, you know the rest.

    • doofus says:

      good lord, no one is “pro abortion”. no one is out there saying “abortions for everyone, all day every day!”

      there are pro-choicers, and anti-choicers. so-called “pro-lifers” can be in either camp.

      sounds to me, as Kiddo said, that you’re pro-choice. welcome aboard, heathen!

      • wolfpup says:

        +1! I don’t think that Jesus would be irritated at anyone, as he is not present. So many christians complain about the perceived unkindness of abortion, yet have no problem with everlasting hell for anyone already here.

    • JustChristy says:

      @SARAH, I don’t think you understand what words mean.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      “Scientifically speaking, it is a child. it is a human. For you to say otherwise is a lie. ”

      I don’t think you’re someone who is even remotely equipped to be speaking about science.

    • Lemony says:

      Sigh. Sarah, you are very ignorant and ill-informed. Scientifically speaking it is nothing more than an embryo. It is NOT a child or a human, you lying. Science does not classify it as a child or even a human at that stage. Do your research. You will see you are wrong. It is most certainly not classified as a child. You don’t understand science or biology. No one is pro abortion, however you appear to be anti-choice and anti-science. Maybe if you are ever raped or suffer a pregnancy where you will die if you don’t terminate you will finally ‘get it’. There is no reasoning with scientific and biology illiterates like yourself. You think you know everything. Newsflash – the world is NOT black and white. It is shades of grey. Maybe with time you will eventually learn this.

    • Phenix says:

      If you were in a burning hospital, would you have a hard time choosing between saving a newborn and a IVF tube of fertilized eggs? If it’s both a life, than that should be a big dilemma. I don’t like abortions, I don’t think anyone does, but there is a difference between a living human (or a baby that can survive outside the womb) and a bunch of cells clumped together.

      • EmmGee says:

        Phenix, that might be one of the most straight-forward analogies I’ve ever heard (read) to illustrate the question of where life begins. Next time I’m faced with a discussion of the issue, I will use your example, giving you full credit of course!

      • Phenix says:

        Emmgee: the burning hospital argument was one of the most famous arguments used by the pro-choice side when we had our national debate about abortion in the 70’s here in Norway. So I can’t take the credit! But it is a great argument!

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Sarah, you have every right to believe that life begins at conception. And if you do, I respect your decision not to ever have an abortion. But that is not a scientific belief, it’s a religious one. And we live in a country where church and state are separated. You do not have the right to force me to base my decisions on your religious beliefs. Period. And I don’t think you help your cause by making statements like “you are pro-abortion, nothing else.” That is untrue, unfair, close-minded and, yes, ignorant.

  53. putchka says:

    Wow Kaiser. I nodded out 5 seconds into her speech. You have much more patience than I. Bless you, always entertaining!

  54. Decloo says:

    Why is she allowed to be on social media at all? Isn’t that, like TV and the internet, a bad influence? Put her back in the kitchen and nursery where she belongs!

  55. Sara says:

    The other side of this issue, the one that no one talks about, is that if you don’t allow women access to contraception and abortion you are forcing them to go through 9 months of pregnancy which can be painful and have serious medical complications. And then what? You take their baby away and give it to someone else? It’s fine if a women makes that decision herself but forcing a women to go through pregnancy and then give up the child is punitive, sick and f-ed up. I would never wish that on anyone. I’d rather allow women to have abortions and use birth control. It’s your body, your right to privacy, no one else’s business what you do with it. I don’t care if people don’t believe in abortion but they still need to mind their own business.

  56. SillySimone says:

    Not anti-choice, but actually pro-death. The Conservative crazies like this family only value a child’s life when they are in the womb. Starving children and adults? Nope. Homeless children and adults? Nope. War killed children and adults? Nope. Executed people? Nope. Abused children and adults? Nope. Does anyone ever wonder why all of the missions they take to third world countries “to help” others are never the type of missions taken in the US? Because it is not about helping people. It is about converting them. Otherwise, these people would be working in soup kitchens and volunteering in shelters in the US. They have to fly to a third world country to rebuild someone’s home. Apparently Central America is easier to travel to than New Orleans.

    • wolfpup says:

      SS – So, so right on.

    • Elleno says:

      Well said

    • PortlandJan says:

      They don’t even do much rebuilding in these places, they spend much of their time looking for photo-ops. And when they bring stuff, it’s candy, cheap toys and Bibles. What the locals could really use are things like water purification tablets, mosquito netting, salt pills and baby formula.

  57. mj says:

    The reason I can’t with the pro-life stance is there are too many circumstances to account for–there’s a difference between a stable, secure married a/o fully committed, mature couple having an accidental pregnancy, and an unknowing 14 yo girl getting knocked up, or a pregnancy that puts the mother’s life in danger, or a situation in which there is rape or incest. Too many differences. Being pro-choice, to me, is being actively aware that there are differences. Ultimately, I don’t judge the stable couple who elects to have an abortion–there are already plenty of neglected, abused, and unwanted lives in this world. And personally, if I were to get pregnant by accident (yes, I use protection but it can still happen), I value my own life over the unborn’s because quite frankly both of us would be seriously messed up since I don’t want kids. Sure, some people change their minds during gestation or after the birth, but I’m not taking that chance as of now. Also just like go listen to people ramble in smaller cities in the South and Midwest and you’ll hear a million statements like Jessa’s. Not original content.

  58. some bitch says:

    For a pro-lifer, she’s looking pretty murderous in that first photo.

    • KatyD says:

      I totally agree. She looks like she’s ready to go out on a rampage there. It wouldn’t surprise me if one of the Duggard kids suddenly snapped, given what their parents put them through with rules, rules, rules, chores, restriction, and fame on top of everything. I don’t wish it on them but that photo of her with the big gun is beyond creepy.

  59. Peppa says:

    Pro-life, anti-choicers often compare abortion to the Holocaust. Once, an anti-abortion group handed out flyers in front of the Holocaust museum when my niece went on a field trip there.

  60. UmamiMommy says:

    I’m pretty curious to see what happens down the line with the Duggar kids. Even the oldest aren’t very old–maybe mid to late twenties? And, having grown up in the public eye, it stands to reason that at least some of them would follow the sad, well-traveled path of child star decline. It’s very easy when you’re 19 or so and childless to anticipate having many, many children, and quite another to be ten or so years into marriage with multiple children and then realize you didn’t know everything you thought you knew when you were younger, at which point it’s okay to decide to stop having children. I’m trying not to be judgy–after all, the idea of “reproductive rights” by nature has to include the right to have as many children as you want, as well as the right to limit your family size. Whatever their faults, I do hope this is a genuinely loving family and that the support network will remain just as strong for any children that decide not to live in total accord with their parents’ philosophies.

  61. Meg says:

    Pro choice is not Pro abortion. This family also wears shirts that says, ‘I survived Roe vs. Wade’, as if abortion being legal means abortion is mandatory. They stayed in a home for a few weeks that was a historical site because a women’s rights activist lived there and of course Jim Bob said if she was there she’d have something to say about the Duggar’s staying there. She fought for a woman’s right to choose, Michelle chose to have 19 kids so I’m not sure why a Women’s rights activist would be mad at them staying at the home she once owned. Suggesting in any way that people who were forced into concentration camps and murdered is in any way like a woman willingly choosing to have power over her own body and creating her family how, when, and where she wants to is insanity. I agree, lets not listen to anything a Duggar girl has to say-ever

  62. BooBooLaRue says:

    Am surprised she is allowed to have thoughts of any kind.

  63. Paul says:

    She’s a freak like the rest of that family! I’m sick of these so called pro life a$$holes! It her body she has a right to do what ever she damn well pleases with it. I wonder if this programed freak knows what’s a miscarriage is? Duh ugh makes me sick

  64. Sookie says:

    I agree with most of the comments. She is beyond stupid with her comments.

  65. jenny12 says:

    She’s a puppet who thinks she is saying deep and profound things. Just sad.

  66. moon says:

    That message is surprisingly well written. I wonder who wrote it for her.

  67. ch2 says:

    Nothing like lugging around a big gun to show how “pro life” you are… these people are crazy. How can anyone in their right mind REQUIRE that another human being make a lifetime commitment that puts their life in danger? That is surely some psychotic behavior

  68. Nikki L. says:

    I am SUPER jealous of her hair.

    That said, she’s a moron.

  69. Leah Donigan says:

    Wow, I’m getting to this story a little late but I had no idea that they were rounding up pregnant women by the millions, taking them to death camps and forcing them to get abortions. Good to know.

  70. Rudy says:

    They were in DC for The Values Voter Summit along with Sarah Palin, Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum and others. The oldest one works for FRC.

    I hate myself for knowing all of this.

  71. ramona says:

    Comparing the Holocaust to abortion is irrational and stupid. Sorry, it just is. You can sign up for the online college class I teach on the Holocaust if you would like more information (this class runs in FA2015, so you’ll need to wait a bit).

    And as for the pro-choice/pro-life discussion, I find “pro-life” a misnomer as “pro-choice” does not mean “pro-death”. It should be “pro-choice and anti-choice” or “pro-legal and anti-legal” or two other terms that actually RELATE to one another. The opposite of choice is NO CHOICE, not LIFE. The argument can never be settled as you’re pitting terms that don’t fit against one another – does that make any sense?

    For the record, I am adamantly pro-choice – and further, I feel if this was a procedure that was performed on male bodies, we wouldn’t have to argue about it. Men would, of course, unquestionably be able to make their own medical decisions without the government interfering.

    The pro-life stance denies an option to those in a situation they may be unprepared to deal with. The pro-choice stance provides women with an option they may consider, should it be compatible with their morals.

  72. peaches mcdooby says:

    i sure know why i don’t post here anymore….you take Christian viewpoints and turn them something very sick and twisted. something i should be embarrassed to be.

    the Duggars and the Duck Dynasty crew are decent people….

    Godly, good, charitable people … they speak up publically and unashamedly about their faith, their love of God, family values, hard work and patriotism.

    …but you ignore all the good they say and then go back to your old rants that all Christians hate gays and and are anti-abortion..

    you attack them, cruelly, and viciously.

    then you preach about tolerance, if fact, it is you who are intolerant.

    i shouldn’t be White or a Christian or Pro Life …if i am i am a racist, and anti gay….i hate all those who oppose God and the Word. oooooh!

    i am a detriment to society, perhaps i should be exterminated?

    i should be exactly what you all want me to be.

    it is easy to make fun of those you despise on an anonymous website.

    but it is not the Christians that are the problem here, they believe in something more than themselves, a greater purpose.

    they are taught to turn the other cheek, and are taught not to provoke, to love others , and treat others as they wish to be treated.

    it is you humanistic, atheist folks that make me laugh… so busy telling everyone what is right and wrong till everything is relative, anything goes, if it feels good do it.

    as if you are judge and jury of us all. more important than you really are.

    good and evil are blurred for the sake of human satisfaction, then anyone can do anything they want.

    good luck with that! when mere humans set the rules, it usually doesn’t work out to well.

    • Rudy says:

      Personally I don’t care if someone has different ideas and values – to each their own and all. However, the Quiverful movement is extremely oppressive to both women and children, and could easily be considered a dangerous cult. (Remember Andrea Yates?) These are not “good people”, no matter hard they’re smiling and posing for the camera.

      What really bothers me is when these extreme cults enter into the mainstream political arena and threaten my choices and my freedom. I don’t need my morality dictated by a cult or, God forbid, a politician.