ABC News.com Hosts Bigoted Snark Against Fertile Christians

Photo of Matthew Balan.
  • Bookmark and Share

ABCNews.com republished a bigoted attack against a famously large Christian family on Tuesday. Amelia McDonell-Parry of gossip website TheFrisky.com snarked about Michelle Duggar's latest pregnancy in the post, stating that it "can't be good news...if you're at all concerned about overpopulation." She also hinted that Mrs. Duggar's daughter-in-law was forced to have a baby of her own.

McDonell-Parry, who is also an employee of Turner Broadcasting (no surprises there, as Ted Turner himself put down Catholics who bore the sign of their faith on their heads on Ash Wednesday) never explicitly mentioned the Duggars' deep Christian faith in her screed, titled "Surprise! Duggar Family Expecting Their 19th Child," but made it clear that she frowned upon the fertility of Mr. and Mrs. Duggar. Unsurprisingly, she incorporated her left-wing, sex-crazy views into her brief attack (warning: explicit language below the fold):

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

"When Meredith Viera says, 'The Duggar family is here and they have a very special announcement,' you know it can't be good news. And it isn't, if you're at all concerned about overpopulation or the health of Michelle's vagina."

Leftists always complain about intrusions into people's bedroom, especially if homosexual activity is involved, but when a married Christian couple decides to practice tried-and-true, old-fashioned reproduction, it's becomes an occasion to trot out their talking points in favor of population control for the sake of the environment, with a sprinkling of their usual vulgarity.

The gossip site editor then directed her attention towards the pregnant wife of the Duggars' eldest son, implying that the poor woman is doomed to have tons of children without her consent: "As usual, Viera just oohed and ahhed over the fantastic news, which comes only a few months after the eldest Duggar kid, Josh, announced that his new wife Anna is expecting their first child. You could almost see the terror simmering in Anna's eyes as she looked at her future. One (almost) down, 18 to go." That's a bit of projection on your part, Miss Editor, along with some faux pity.

McDonnel-Parry, in her biography on TheFrisky.com, described herself as someone who makes "soy lattes and icky smelling chai tea" and "lives alone with her amazing dog Lucca who she's pretty sure is more awesome than all adorable babies combined." It shouldn't be a shock then that she vented such loathing at the conception of two new babies. It points to the one thing that conservative Christians can do to make secular leftists become completely unhinged: "Be fruitful and multiply." 

[H/t: Angelqueen.com thread (a traditionalist Catholic forum).]

—Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

More often than not...

More often than not, secular liberals are hideous swamp creatures that no one would want to breed. Id only have to mention two words: Janeane Garofalo. They reproduce by poisoning textbooks of children in schools, teaching classes at colleges, and all around lying about their agendas.

Isn't it rich that the

Isn't it rich that the tolerant liberals will support just about anyone's lifestyle, be it gay, bi, or transgender, except one they don't agree with?  And then they look down their noses at those who live that way, as if they just don't know any better.

Man...

Normal
0

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

I certainly do not want to know what Amelia McDonnel-Parry no
doubt has that poor dog Lucca
do to her vagina…

delete  

delete

 

Liberals and feminists can't

Liberals and feminists can't stand it that Michelle Duggar LOVES her big family and doesn't complain and whine about it.  They also fail to mention that the Duggars receive NO government support of any kind.  This family is totaly self supporting, relying, on God, themselves, and others of their faith.  Good for them.

Amazing, isn't it?  They

Amazing, isn't it?  They receive NO government support.  How refreshing, in this day of Obama Claus, that there are families in America who still seek the One who provides for everything.  What a testimony to their faith and their relationship with God.  Amazing.

-Eric

A few observations

They also fail to mention that the Duggars receive NO government support of any kind.

It's not just that, but the Duggars have NO debt.  They pay cash for everything.  Bet you five bucks that bitter shrew who wrote such things has debt - and she lives alone!  (Which clearly makes her a much more shiny, happy person than someone with kids, huh?)

And now my observations:

  1.  Liberals and feminists are hypocrites.  I've lost all respect for them and refuse to engage them with any serious consideration any longer.  They want tolerance and love and peace but do not tolerate anyone who thinks differently -  at least most conservatives and non-feminists (like me) don't pretend to want those things while doing the total opposite.
  2. The same people who march on January 22nd with "Keep your Rosaries off my ovaries" signs have no problem telling a woman who freely chooses to have lots of children what to do with her ovaries.  Back when Michelle Duggar had 15 or 16, I was part of a wedding message board where the oh-so-tolerant liberal feminist women wanted the government to forcibly sterilize Michelle Duggar and then ME when I defended Duggar's right to have children.
  3. Feminist are actually anti-woman and anti-science.  Conservative Christians, at least, know that a woman's body was created and evolved with a uterus in order to get pregnant and have offspring.  Fertility is healthy and normal.  Contraception and sterilization treat a healthy condition like a disease.  Any feminist who doesn't see that the pill has dire consequences for the environment, and may even make women infertile, are ignorant and maliciously so.
  4. To feminists, a woman's desire to be a woman and a mother is a purely social construct, but all manner of sexual proclivity are above reproach and totally natura...
  5. Feminists hate women who leave the plantation.  They aren't mind-readers, yet they are 100% certain they know Michelle Duggar and her daughter-in-law can't really want to have kids.  They're supposed to defend women's choices, but treat women who don't act like Camille Paglia like crap.
  6. Liberals and feminists hate the family.  Since most of them have socialist bents, they see the cohesive family unit as a threat to Nanny government.  They also have a mortal fear of conservative Christians like the Duggars outnumbering them.  Nothing wins a culture war like fecundity; why else do liberals so desperately try to indoctrinate our children via public schools?  They have far fewer children than conservatives and know that doesn't bode well for continuing their agenda (since kids are likely to eventually adopt the political, social, and religious ideologies of their parents - even if and after they go through a stage of rebellion).

I just gave birth to my second child.  There is no more fulfilling or rewarding choice I can make as a woman than to carry, birth, and nurture my sons.  Were that I could have 19 children - I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Here's hoping for lovely pregnancies for Michelle and Anna and that they have dozens more children - just to piss off the feminists and liberals.

Aut viam inveniam aut faciam

...

And the fact that they have 18 children without government support  just irks these hateful leftists to no end because it's proof positive that right living destroys their ideology. 

 

"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing -- they believe in anything."
  --  GK Chesterton

The liberal, lonely life

I'm sure Lucca is on a new-age doggy vegetable diet.

Sleep lightly tonight, Amelia. Lucca is waiting for a chance at some 'meat.'

If....

I went to a message board where the Duggars were getting bashed and wondered - If this was a self-sufficient large household, not on welfare, with a seemingly happily married couple, with happy healthy kids, and were black.....

I see your point, Texndoc, but . . .

 . . then they wouldn't be black by the Officially Sanctioned Liberal Standards for Black People.

They aren't part of the 'black experience in America.'

Not down wid da struggle.

They too would have to be demonized by the left.

Ain't that the

Ain't that the truth!

After all, as Toni Morrison instructed us, the characteristics of "blackness" are: single-parent household, born poor, working-class,
saxophone-playing, McDonald's-and-junk-food-lovin....

And she's black, so I guess we have to believe her....

You're right about the reaction: they would be ridiculed for "acting white."

...

Ding!  Ding! Ding!  That's absolutely right.  They'd be Uncle Tom's and runaway slaves for escaping the Democrat plantation of dependency.

 

"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing -- they believe in anything."
  --  GK Chesterton

McDonell-Perry

A left wing feminist women living alone with a dog.

My guess is that it is a male dog and everyone can use their own imagination on that.

 

You bet, John Galt 1776, but . .

If it is a male dog, it has been emasculated years ago.

Probably has a doggy ponytail, tofu breath and a "I love Obama and my veggies" doggy shirt.

Use their own imagination?

Use their own imagination? Really? 

When Amelia McDonell-Parry looks at the Duggar Family...

...does she see 16 or so children that should have been aborted to prevent overpopulation? She should clarify that.

...

Not to mention a depressed alcoholic who aborted rather than bore her children.  

 

"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing -- they believe in anything."
  --  GK Chesterton

Tried-and-true? Almost to a

Tried-and-true? Almost to a fault.

 

There probably isn't a lick

There probably isn't a lick of difference between the fertility rates of conservative Christians and secular liberals. 

What is different is the Christians don't choose to abort the product of their union be it the first, second, or third trimester.

Next we'll be hearing for enhanced voting priviledges (representation) based on the dwindling numbers of their ilk.

"Fighters are fun but bombers make policy"

Duggar Family

Over-Populationists amaze me. Have any of them EVER flown in a jet during the day? Once you leave the city, there's almost nothing down there. Plenty of room out there for them and their friends.

Duggar and Overpopulation

I just did some quick math:  Sqft of Texas = 7,488,000,000,000sqft.   Approx.Population of Earth = 6,000,000,000.  So Texas/Earth = 1,248sqft  per person.

The entire population of the earth would fit in Texas, and each person would have a 1,248sqft condo. We could use the rest of the planet for food and prisons. (This includes water areas). Check my math, not being a liberal ,I may have made an error.

Probably a half a billion

Probably a half a billion people ago but there was an estimate that the entire population of the planet could fit inside of San Antonio's Loop 410.

"Fighters are fun but bombers make policy"

If all the "progressives"

If all the "progressives" who believe in the myth of the population "crisis" would simply kill themselves, that would solve alot.

Libs???

It sounds like she things it's icky that he did it to her at least 19 times. Ewwwwwww!!!

Bet she's got a large jar of peanut butter at the ready all the time.

Here Fido!!!

...

Except they're phonies; all talk no conviction.  It's like proabortionists -- all for it now that they've been born.

 

"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing -- they believe in anything."
  --  GK Chesterton

...

How blessed the Duggars are.  I've marveled how they followed God's plan and put their trust in Him and He gifted them many times over.  And you have those who put off having babies only to find they're having difficulties later in life and visiting doctors to implant multiple zygotes in the hopes one will take.  Frustratingly many don't and little human lives are discarded... Then you have jealous haters like this Amelia McDonnell-Parry who probably is reminded of the abortion she probably had to advance her career...all these large family haters need to thank these people because while people fear the insolvency of social security, at least the Duggars are doing their part to help save it!!

 

 

"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing -- they believe in anything."
  --  GK Chesterton

over population

Ms Parry should not be concerned. I am sure she read section 1701 thru 1714 of HR 3200. This section of the bill gives the local  health care commissioner authority to assess and attempt to "alter birth-pregnancy intervals" with referrals to Family Planning for recommended "treatment and or required medical procedures". After reading this bill you no longer wonder why liberals are pushing for passage.

"Be fruitful and multiply." ...and enjoy the process too!

It points to the one thing that conservative Christians can do to make secular leftists become completely unhinged: "Be fruitful and multiply."

...yeah and add to that, if we survive another generation or two, we will certainly out-vote them too! 

hmmm....maybe that's why ol' teddy changed the immigration laws to import more votes?

v

...pass the popcorn please

more pop-left stupidity run amok

  1. The Duggars, if anything, are public benefactors who ought to be the recipients of tax-breaks-up-the-ying-yang for their heroic and patriotic work.  U.S. Federal mandatory spending is unsustainable -- this is directly attributable to the aging population and declining fertility rate.  It would seem that the Democrat solution to this very real impending crisis will be death panels.

  2. It doesn't take rocket science to realize that this large family is simply the natural organic product of a healthy, sexually active marriage.  No high-dose artificial chemical female hormones.  No latex (produced from petroleum) entering landfills or sewage systems.  No chemical spermacides to apply to the cervix.  No communicable diseases.  How could anyone in their right mind have anything but praise for this?  So much for environmental stewardship and organic lifestyles.  When it comes to sex, artificial chemicals and barriers is where it's at.
  3. Funny how we never hear complaints about "overpopulation" when it's one man fathering large numbers of offspring with multiple women (e.g., rapper Flavor Flav).

 

"Let's wrap him up, alright?" -- Keith Olbermann

...

Hear hear.

"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing -- they believe in anything."
  --  GK Chesterton

EEEWWWW

You mean multiple women have had sex with that weirdo? I can't imagine that even ONE woman would.

Chai

“When all government...in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided...” Thomas Jefferson

→ Flavor Flav

That must be a biological clock hanging around his neck.

We will Barry you! - Russian prophecy

yeah boouy!

I know, sorry 'bout that example.  That was the only one that came to my mind -- but seriously, isn't there some liberal Hollywood activist out there who's fathered like 5 with 5 different women?  I forget who that was.

 

"Let's wrap him up, alright?" -- Keith Olbermann

While I don't agree with McDonell-Parry's comments...

and find them offensive and certainly intolerant from a political standpoint, I have to admit that I am less than thrilled by the news that the Duggar's are having their 19th child.

Yes, children are a blessing, and it's a personal issue between the Duggar's to have such a large family, and I'm very happy to know that they aren't on any type of public, taxpayer supported assistance to help take care of their large brood. That said, from a parenting standpoint, and as a parent, I believe that there is no way that two parents can properly nurture and care for the emotional needs of 19 children. Doing that for one child can be exhausting at times, let alone 19. Apparently, the Duggar's have the older children acts as "buddies" for the younger ones, and are charged with helping them with all manner of issues, from tying their shoes, to getting dressed, to even getting their meals for them. Aren't these generally what parents should do? I understand that siblings are expected to help each other, but getting their meals for them, too? The Duggar's have come under criticism for using their older children as surrogates for themselves, since there is no way that these two parents obviously can divide themselves 18 (soon to be 19) ways. 

On Michelle Duggar's blog about this latest pregnancy, she states that she was very surprised about it, and didn't think that she would have anymore children. Why did she think that? Her last child was just born 8 months ago, and she is only 43 years old...too young for menopause. I know that this couple doesn't believe in any form of birth control method. She said at least twice that she thought she was finished having children...I'm wondering what made her think that...Was it wishful thinking? After 18 children I wouldn't be surprised if it was.        

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

who cares?

Either we believe in letting parents raise children however they want to - or we don't.

 

candance...Actually, I don't believe...

in exclusively letting parents raise their children however they want to, and neither does our criminal justice system, or we wouldn't have depts. of children and family services looking out for the welfare of the children who have been neglected and mistreated by some parents who believed that they could raise their children however they want to.

My point is this...Yes, it is a private decison between a couple as to how many children they choose to have....However, I do not believe that any two parents can adequately provide for the physical and emotional needs of 19 children. I think it is irresponsible to have that many children, and most importantly, I think it is very unfair to the children themselves. There is no way that their emotional needs can be met when there are so many siblings to compete with for their parent's attention.    

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

...

PrarieSky,

I suggest you check out the Duggars' website: www.duggarfamily.com/                                                 

You can have parents with one child who doesn't get his/her emotional needs met.  It's who the parents are and how they rear their children, not the quantity of children.

These are the most well-adjusted, well-spoken children you will see.  (I wonder if you've seen their show.)

There are kids with no siblings or a few who whine about not being "fed emotionally."  What families with fewer than three kids miss is the important lesson of sharing and thinking about others.  And the Duggars have shown that they HAVE and DO provide adequately -- in fact, even beyond typical parents -- for their children.   They pray, play, work, cook, together.  The older kids help out with the little ones.  They learn the importance of family and others' needs and that they're not the center of the universe. 

It's better to rear children to grow up to be decent, caring human beings rather than being someone who navel-gazes and whines about not having their emotional needs met. 

 

"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing -- they believe in anything."
  --  GK Chesterton

Eugenia...FYI, I have checked out their website...

I am well aware that parents with even only one child can be guilty of not meeting their child's emotional needs...That can be true, no matter how many children are involved, and is an obvious point. However, the more children that parents have, the more challenging it becomes. That is just common sense. I disagree with you that all that matters is what kind of people the parents are, and how they raise their kids, and that the number of children is irrelevant. Human beings can only divide themselves so many ways, and it just isn't possible to spend enough one-on-one time and give enough attention to 19 children, regardless of what we see on TV. And as for your question about whether I have seen the show, yes I have seen their show.

As for what we have seen of this family on TV, well, it's TV...Do the children seem like good kids, and do the parents seem like good parents? Sure, but it's TV, which can be edited and re-shot. None of us know this family, no matter how much we may feel like we do from watching their show. There is no way to know for sure what all the dynamics of this family are. We don't know them. 

And in regards to your comment "what families with fewer than three kids miss is the important lesson of sharing and thinking about others", that is a totally ridiculous and unfounded statement. Do you really believe that families with less than 3 kids are raising children who don't know how to share or how to think about other people? Who are you to say that? That's one of the most ludicrous things I have ever heard here at NB...Only children that come from large families know how to share and how to think of other people? To paraphrase your earlier statement, it isn't the number of kids, it's how the parents raise them, and it is completely possible for parents of 1, 2, or 3 children, to raise giving, thoughful kids. To think otherwise is absurd. 

So, we just disagree.       

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

...

"I disagree with you that all that matters is what kind of people the
parents are, and how they raise their kids, and that the number of
children is irrelevant. Human beings can only divide themselves so many
ways, and it just isn't possible"

You have the pie mentality, only so many slices to go around.  Ever think that the more children you have the more love you have to give? Does a mother love any one of her children less?  Or perhaps that her children feel loved and blessed that their parents were selfless enough to provide them with many brothers and sisters? Of course there are parents who suck who have one child or ten, but that's not the point.  The point is that have 19 children is not selfish when you can do it and with a loving spouse, it's exactly the opposite -- it's selfless. 

"There is no way to know for sure what all the dynamics of this family are.  We don't know them."

Exactly.  So why do you say it's irresponsible for the parents to have 19 children?

Do you really believe that families with less than 3 kids are raising
children who don't know how to share or how to think about other
people? Who are you to say that? That's one of the most ludicrous
things I have ever heard here at NB...Only children that come from
large families know how to share and how to think of other people?

No, of course not.  I see that I miswrote my intention.  What I'm saying is that very small families are not any more of an indication that the children will be emotionally well-adjusted.  Therefore, you can't argue that more children in a healthy family will necessarily make them less so either.  Again, it's not the quantity of children...yes, it's the quality of parents and family life.  And to think otherwise is not absurd, it's just a difference of opinion based on your own experience.  I come from a family of lots of siblings and I'm forever grateful to my parents for all my wonderful sisters and brother.

 

 

"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing -- they believe in anything."
  --  GK Chesterton

Eugenia...No "pie mentality" here...

You completely misunderstood what I said. I never said anything about a parent with many children not having enough love for them all. This is not about having enough love...With love for your children, it's not about subtraction, it's about multiplication...The more children you have, the more love you have to give.

What I was talking about was having enough time and energy to give to each child...It's about dividing your time and energy 19 ways, everyday, and having the time to give them each the love, nurturing and attention that they all need, and as a parent, I just don't see how those needs of 19 children can be met adequately by 2 parents, everyday.

Like I said, we just disagree.   

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

...

You know what, that is clearer, but I still think you're putting too much emphasis that each and every child needs a parent's attention every waking hour of every day or any part of the day, especially as they got older.  If that were the case, who would send their kids to summer camp or even school during the day?  In fact, these kids are with their parents ALL DAY EVERY DAY since they're homeschooled.  I would argue that some kids would even want a break from their parents once in a while. 

And the older siblings do serve the purpose of teaching the younger ones what they were taught by mom and dad when it was just a few of them.  It helps mature them as well to look after their younger sisters and brothers.  And just because there are 18 kids doesn't mean that the older children are going to need the same amount or as much attention as the newborn or toddler.  

But you're right, we disagree. 

 

 

"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing -- they believe in anything."
  --  GK Chesterton

Population growth is not a

Population growth is not a problem in the United States with growth rates below 1% annually.  Most world population growth is in 3rd world countries.  But don't confuse the green movement with facts, their minds have already been made up.

It turns out that negative population growth is a major problem in developed nations.  Japan has had this problem and pays people money to have children!

 

Referanced your post

On http://www.jeremiahf... Exposing bias and deception at ABC

Wondering how they are going to continue with the sell of Obama service on September the 9th ??? They have a history of supporting progressive issues.

Not that I am against "Public Service"  I just think one should serve God and not Obama. ... http://www.at-the-wa...

 

...never mind, my head is

...never mind, my head is exploding.

I think it's ignorant to

I think it's ignorant to have that many children.  Obviously, their choice so what I think matters not.

But, they seem to be well shod, fed, educated and brought up with manners and morals.  At least we're not having to pay for their upkeep.

What about all the baby factories out there and the God knows how many we have to support through sacrificing a portion of our hard-earned incomes?  

One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 86% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.