22 hours ago, Kiki03910 said:

Omg, for real. I wonder if this means they'll be reverting to enslavement and coverture and the one-drop rule too. Because you know they want to do all those things.

I think someone should pull out a list of 1864 laws still on the book there and start reporting people for it. "You took the lords name in vain on a Sunday!" or "no wearing suspenders" or "no spitting on side walks" whatever ridiculousness. Just to show people "look - these laws are this old and we've moved PAST it..." (but the weirdos would probably love it.

23 minutes ago, MariaariaM said:

Isn't there a parable about that? Jesus asks his disciples whose gift God would be more pleased with: a big gold coin from a rich guy or a tiny copper coin from a poor old lady. No prizes for guessing the outcome. Of course that's also how they rationalize making even the poorest of the poor tithe, so I'm not 100% impressed.

I hadn’t heard that parable before. But I’m sure it would go straight over Braggie’s head. I think I’ve read that lower class people tend to give a larger percentage of their yearly income to charity compared to rich people. A lot of rich people hoard their wealth. Braggie spends a lot so I don’t think she hoards their money. But I do think she spends a ton of money on herself and her wants compared to each child. 

19 hours ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

My best example of what I’m talking about above is like a billionaire donating $100,000 to a hospital. Everyone’s like, “omg that billionaire is so generous!” When really that’s just a literal drop in the Bucket when it comes to their wealth and they can also get tax benefits from it. So it’s not generous at all. 

Isn't there a parable about that? Jesus asks his disciples whose gift God would be more pleased with: a big gold coin from a rich guy or a tiny copper coin from a poor old lady. No prizes for guessing the outcome. Of course that's also how they rationalize making even the poorest of the poor tithe, so I'm not 100% impressed.

16 hours ago, EmiSue said:

I looked at Deena Dillard's IG page--she's married to Derick's brother Dan. They have two boys and have had three miscarriages, two in the last year. Deena called Isla "our first Dillard girl" and that really got me. It's not just Jill and Derick's baby, not just their first daughter after three sons, but the first granddaughter on Derick's side after five grandsons. It makes this horrible loss even worse for everyone.

Though of course for the Duggars she's just #34 and the child of the prodigal daughter. I really hope Jill gets the support she needs outside of her shitty family.

That’s heartbreaking. This little girl was very much wanted and just didn’t make it. I hope the families find peace. 
 

12 hours ago, SoSoNosy said:

I fully agree with that, but I am prone to grieve privately.  But the Dugger kids (and Bates) don't know anything but living in the public eye.

 

I only hope Jill is sharing because she wants to, but because she feels he has to. 

On 4/15/2024 at 8:47 AM, Bassett Lady said:

I am not going to criticize your view, but I will share another view that may help clarify. 
 

Everyone grieves differently. Having personally lost 7 pregnancies, whatever the grieving family does that helps them through the pain, while not hurting anyone else,  is fine by me. 
 

I also understand why some people bring up the technicalities because the technicalities can shape how the grieving family experiences the loss. 
 

For my 7 losses, some were past 20 weeks and therefore officially a stillbirth. In each of those cases I was given a death certificate. For my losses that were before 20 weeks a death certificate was not issued. 
 

I found their lives being recognized, legally, a great comfort. For my losses that were before 20 weeks, the lack of official recognition was difficult, especially when I still had to go through labor and delivery or have a D&C. 
 

When I had still births the hospital offered a professional photographer if we wanted to have pictures. I found a great deal of comfort in taking those photographs. 
 

I never wanted to share them with anyone else, but Jill may have found taking the photos a very cathartic experience and she may look at those photos and feel peace. 
 

If she finds solace in them she may want to share them with others. 
 

When we took photos of our still children I wasn’t grieving, yet. 
 

I was in awe of tiny hands,  little perfect ears, and looking for family traits. (I lost a little girl whose second toe was longer than her big toe, just like me and my maternal grandmother.)
 

The grieving, for me, came later. When I had to leave my babies, then the grieving began. 
 

I have no Idea of what Jill was feeling while she took those photos or why she shared them, but I can understand why people take the photos and why some want to share them. 
 

My grief changed me. I became a more humble person. I give people the benefit of the doubt more easily. I am also keenly aware that my way is not the only way. 

 

oh babe, 

so amazingly expressed. I'm tearing up at work.

How proud your angel babies must be of their awesome Mum, who despite tragedy has grown in grace and compassion. 

Sending you some lovely ju ju to you.