Should women be allowed to have 14 kids without job? (page 20)

John Doe

I don't know what nut butter is, but I hope it's not what I'm thinking.

John Doe

I spose I should stop picking on you. It's just that you have a tendency of hitting a tone that just annoys the heck out of me. Perhaps I should work on my tolerance.

cognizant dissident

Cog Dis said: "Should Independent Ire be allowed to keep his job at the county hospital when he clearly has severe anger issues and is projecting his hatred of all the drug addicted moms who put their newborns in foster care onto some strange woman he has never met?"
CD, I've been reading your postings on this subject in utter disbelief. Your rant above really sticks out in my mind and I'm wondering what the hell you were thinking even posting such a thing. Are you trying to insinuate that someone should NOT be filled with anger when they see drug addicted mothers who either neglect or abuse their newborns or small children?? What should we be filled with when we see these things? Love? Give me a f*cking break. This assinine woman who had the 8 kids is no hero. She's an irresponsible, leeching, moron.
Mary: My comment above was tongue and cheek and meant to be a humorous response to Independent Tre's previous post where she made the association between drug addicted mothers she works with neglecting and abusing their children and the behaviour of this woman she has never met. Since there is no indication the mother of the octuplets is drug addicted or that any of her children have been neglected or abused, her analogy was extremely weak. By her mother's own account and a neigbours account her other 6 children are well cared for and she is a good mother. There is no apparent co-relation to the two scenarios that I can see which led to my attempt at an amateur psychology diagnosis of Independent Tre, suggesting she was projecting and misdirecting her anger from one situation (where it may indeed be justified) to another totally inappropriate situation. Obviously, the subtle irony of me trying to diagnose Independent Tre with a psychological problem when I had never met him/her after previously criticizing her for doing the same to a woman she has never met, was totally lost on you. I guess if I have to explain my sense of humor in this much detail, either I'm not as funny as I think I am, or you are just taking this thread way too seriously. I'm guessing it's the latter.
No, I'm not trying to insinuate people shouldn't be angry when they see drug addicted mothers and abused children. I've seen a few myself. I'm suggesting that judgemental, angry filled rants like most of the posters on this thread have been spewing are not helpful or constructive. If anger is justified and can be used to motivate constructive action for change in solving some of the root causes of drug addiction, poverty and abuse in our society, then more power to you. I just don't see any drug addiction, poverty or abuse in this woman's family so I'm wondering what's the true source of the villification of this woman. As I stated before, I believe it has more to do with her exercising her free choice to be unmarried and use a sperm donor to have a large family that is the real issue. You admit that is a good part of the digust.
We don't see this level of anger at the other woman who had octuplets using fertility drugs who chose not to abort any of them. We are fine with her receiving a donated house, car, clothing, and food to raise her family. Of course, she is married and used her husband's sperm. So that is a totally different matter. One woman is deserving and the other is not. My questions and challenges to other posters were designed to get them to examine their own prejudices and motivations more deeply.
The title of this thread says it all. How many children will we as a society ALLOW women to have. We will make the choice for her. We will judge whether she should be married or not, whether sperm donation is acceptable to us or not. It is not enough that we can make that choice for ourselves. We want to force our moral values and choices on to others whether they share them or not. If you want six children and the rest of us decide that two is the ideal number then two it shall be!
You may call my posts "rants" but I'm not angry nor upset. I'm not swearing at others, judging others, disgusted by others, or banging my head in frustration on my keyboard in any of my posts. I just call em as I see em.

cognizant dissident

I can't help but wonder why some are so defensive of this loon.

It is said that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. I would guess that the level of defensiveness of some posters is in direct proportion to the level of aggression that most poster are exhibiting towards her.

It puts me in mind of a witch hunt of old with all the villagers gathering in a mob mentality with noose or firebrands in hand. A few villagers (posters) may prefer not to join the mob hysteria and wait for all the facts to come out at a fair trial. A fair trial not being something we would expect to find in the Guardian newspaper. Isn't that rag the British equivalent of the National Enquirer in the US?

cognizant dissident

I figure it's a whole lot of things David. As you say, raise the standard of living, possibly tax incentives, education. Not glorifying this kind of thing, but rather condemning it. Empowering women around the world.

The type of comments made about this woman without substantiation in the media and on this thread empower no women anywhere, least of all her. Ironically, it seems most only want to empower those women who conform to their moral values and choices.

cognizant dissident

The only problem with this premise David is that there are now 14 little humans that are being raised by this woman. This should not have been allowed to happen if she is mentally ill. Someone must have seen it. I would think the Doc.

The only problem with your premise, Beks, is that there has been no shred of evidence proffered by anyone that this woman IS mentally ill other than the comment by her mother that she is obsessed with having children. Perhaps no one saw it, including her Doc, because it wasnt there.

cognizant dissident

Independent Ire: Your memory is so short that I'm beginning to wonder whether you have mental illness or drug addiction problems. You made the analogy between this mother's irresponsible parenting which was based on number of children she had to the drug addicted, neglectful and abusive mothers you have worked with in this post:

Maybe my "ire" if you will, comes from having to look square in the face of irresponsible parenting.
And you know what? The eyes on that face are usually closed and it's the most beautiful face in the world because that face is only a day old. The triage nurse has called me up to find out what to do with this beautiful face, cause Mom is a drug addict, and all 7 or 8 of her other children are all in state custody and she has since checked out AMA and has left the hospital, no name, no nothing. And dropped this child into the world as if it were yesterdays news. Do you know what it's like to have to place a 2 day old infant in foster care? Do you know what it's like to see a child come in to the emergency room because of abuse or neglect suffered at the hands of mothers ( and fathers) too caught up in there own issues to properly care for a child? Come do my job, 40 hours a week. Then maybe you can begin to comprehend real "ire".
IMO, this woman is too caught up in her own issues and obsessions to realize the potential harm she is doing to these children. And she probably cares the least bit about how her actions are impacting her family. And of course the public can probably kiss her @zz, even though it will be this very public that will end up paying for these children.
You then deny making the association and claim the person who called you on it, David, is the one who made it. In this post you also claimed that your ire (anger) is due to your personal experiences working in county houspital, then in a later post to me you deny you are angry at all and claim I'm the one taking the thread way too personally.
You think this mother is mentally ill and should not be allowed to make any more children? Due to the irrationality of your logic and the severity of your short term memory loss, I would diagnose you as delusional and suggest you should not be allowed to make any more posts on this thread. Now some might think that arrogant, judgemental and presumptuous of me to say such a thing about someone I barely know, based on a few comments on such an unreliable medium as the internet, but I know you will be Ok with it because that's how we roll on this thread, isn't it?

quietlyleaving

cog -

It puts me in mind of a witch hunt of old with all the villagers gathering in a mob mentality with noose or firebrands in hand. A few villagers (posters) may prefer not to join the mob hysteria and wait for all the facts to come out at a fair trial. A fair trial not being something we would expect to find in the Guardian newspaper. Isn't that rag the British equivalent of the National Enquirer in the US?

The Guardian used to be a very sober, fact finding sort of newspaper but it has recently been taken over by Rupert Murdock who owns National Inquirer type newspapers. Plus he has posted losses of £8.5 billion. I don't think we can expect a fair trial in the Guardian any more. I hear that Murdoch has also taken over the Wall Street Journal

llbh

The Guardian is owned by Murdoch now?? That explains it. It does tend to be a nanny paper though

David

quietlyleaving

The Guardian is owned by Murdoch now?? That explains it. It does tend to be a nanny paper though

David

yup times are changing. By nanny do you mean middle class? Unless you mean leftist

Should women be allowed to have 14 kids without job?

Share this