Karissa Collins: Quiverfull Public Facebook, Instagram, and Blog

[luv2laugh]

I bet she’s the type that thinks “spilling seed” = murder.

[feministxtian]

11 hours ago, Anonymousguest said:

I strongly disagree that the lives of potential future not even conceived children are just as important as the lives of people who already exist. Yikes, what kind of theology is that? I don't understand that at all. 

That's typical "pro-life" "theology". They put the life of a fertilized egg over the life of someone who's been around awhile. Just ask them about universal health care. 

[Anonymousguest]

9 hours ago, feministxtian said:

That's typical "pro-life" "theology". They put the life of a fertilized egg over the life of someone who's been around awhile. Just ask them about universal health care. 

She's taking it even further than that, she's putting the life of the could-be-fertilized-in-the-future egg above the mother and children. 

[WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?]

On 7/2/2018 at 12:30 PM, Anonymousguest said:

I strongly disagree that the lives of potential future not even conceived children are just as important as the lives of people who already exist. Yikes, what kind of theology is that? I don't understand that at all. 

 

15 hours ago, Anonymousguest said:

She's taking it even further than that, she's putting the life of the could-be-fertilized-in-the-future egg above the mother and children. 

She's starting to remind me of LDS women who desperately want to have more children, because they "can hear the unborn babies in heaven crying out to be born". In both cases, I find it very troubling. 

[luv2laugh]

Karissa’s crazy rant of the day:

Quote

”Brainwashed...

Last night I was accused of being brainwashed. I have been accused in the past of brainwashing my children also. Here is why this isn't true. 

God taught me the truth of trusting Him with my womb. This has never been preached to me or taught to me. I haven't even met anyone in person that lives this way or believes this. This was a direct revelation from God. When I was seeking His truth in the Word, the Holy Spirit revealed God's heart. And after eleven years of researching this topic I am fully convinced of God's heart regarding prevention. It is such a blessing to know for sure what ministry God has called you to even though it comes with a high degree of persecution. But what a complete blessing it is to see the Holy Spirit use you to reveal the truth to so many women. 

God has also taught me that this truth is not revealed or practiced through simple facts. It is revealed by the Holy Spirit alone when we seek God's Word. Therefore, my children will have to have a personal relationship with God in order to see this truth. I will not force them to submit their wombs to God. I will encourage a personal relationship with Jesus. I will show them what I have learned and allow the Holy Spirit to speak to them. I will pray for revelation. I know that if we are simply obeying rules, then we will not find freedom. Religion is not the answer. A relationship with Christ that is based on trust is the key to living in the freedom of God's best. 

I am not brainwashed. I am convinced that God's Word is true. I am convinced that God is who He says He is. That He is our Provider, Protector, Comforter, Joy, Strength, Decision maker and Author of our best. I am not brainwashed, I have a daily relationship with Christ and allow Him to lead me. 

Brainwashed means "make (someone) adopt radically different beliefs by using systematic and often forcible pressure." 

I have never been forced to believe this. I have never even been taught this. I don't force my children to and I don't force anyone in my life to. I simply share the truth God has revealed and invite other familes to seek God in this area. 

Children love children. If I could have an unlimited supply of children my kids would love it. They have pure hearts with no cap on love. What a blessing it is to have a home filled with children God provided and an overwhelming amount of love and laughter. 

We are not brainwashed but rather convinced that God is good. 

Romans 12:1,2
"And so, dear brothers and sisters, I plead with you to give your bodies to God because of all he has done for you. Let them be a living and holy sacrifice—the kind he will find acceptable. This is truly the way to worship him. Don’t copy the behavior and customs of this world, but let God transform you into a new person by changing the way you think. Then you will learn to know God’s will for you, which is good and pleasing and perfect."

 

Edited February 8, 2019 by Jellybean
Added quote box

[luv2laugh]

Here’s Karissa’s public Facebook: 

 

That post went VIRAL.

 

[WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?]

9 hours ago, luv2laugh said:

Here’s Karissa’s public Facebook: 

 

That post went VIRAL.

 

I like that photo better than the overly posed/Photoshopped ones.

[EowynW]

On 7/2/2018 at 1:30 PM, Anonymousguest said:

I strongly disagree that the lives of potential future not even conceived children are just as important as the lives of people who already exist. Yikes, what kind of theology is that? I don't understand that at all. 

This reminds me of when Matt Walsh lost his shit about the lady who started Project Prevention. They will pay for birth control & sterilization of drug addicts. He called her evil and immoral. 

[luv2laugh]

No words 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=526859443272&id=98100015

[Lurky]

18 hours ago, EowynW said:

This reminds me of when Matt Walsh lost his shit about the lady who started Project Prevention. They will pay for birth control & sterilization of drug addicts. He called her evil and immoral. 

Advocating sterilisation of people with drug addictions is immoral, to me.  It's saying that people can never change, and don't deserve children, which is pretty damn dehumanising.  The projects I've seen also use pretty nasty tactics, offering desperate people cash to use to feed their habits to make a decision that will impact the rest of their lives, in a time they're not able to make an informed choice. 

I completely, 100% am in favour of helping people access contraception, from free condoms to giving women long term solutions like IUDs and other options that will work for someone with a chaotic life.  But I can't see how it's moral to decide another person is broken and useless that they should never have children, and using manipulative tactics to make that come true.

 

[CyborgKin]

And I thought the Duggars were bad with their J names, but they didn't really get any sillier than 'Jinger'.

If she needs suggestions, I've got Antwonett, Anchovee, Ansillary, and Anion.  Though that last one's a bit negatively charged.

Joking aside, Anissa is a pretty good name. (Anyone else watch Black Lightning?)

It's 'nice' to see an example of two-letter-constrained naming in real life, cos I'm writing about a fictional family who does the same thing.

[luv2laugh]

I like Anissa but I was really surprised with her newest one’s name, Ansjer.

I recommend the name Ananya pronounced as Anon-yah. I like it.

Edited July 7, 2018 by luv2laugh

[JermajestyDuggar]

12 hours ago, CyborgKin said:

And I thought the Duggars were bad with their J names, but they didn't really get any sillier than 'Jinger'.

If she needs suggestions, I've got Antwonett, Anchovee, Ansillary, and Anion.  Though that last one's a bit negatively charged.

Joking aside, Anissa is a pretty good name. (Anyone else watch Black Lightning?)

It's 'nice' to see an example of two-letter-constrained naming in real life, cos I'm writing about a fictional family who does the same thing.

If she has a second boy, I think his name will be Androyd, Anker, or Androo.

[Lisafer]

On 7/2/2018 at 12:53 PM, Mrs. Bean said:

Women like her with their “womb ministry” make me sick. Not all women are able to tolerate being pregnant over and over again. I’m fertile AF despite being 36, and currently pregnant with our second and final child, but the Hyperemesis Gravidarum was worse with this one then it was with the first. There is no way in hell I’m ever doing this again. Not everyone with a womb is able or willing to breed like that. 

I propose the “womb minister” becoming a post count. 

I have two kids. Severe exacerbation of mental issues with each. Hyperemesis with the second. It was fucking brutal and I'm so sorry you're dealing with it.

For this bitch to call my desire not to get pregnant again a "sin" is personally offensive on a deep level, deeper than if she called tattoos a sin or working outside the home a sin. 

And that first pic? My immediate reaction: "Quit praying in the middle of the floor, get up and parent!" 

 

[katilac]

On 7/6/2018 at 2:55 AM, Lurky said:

Advocating sterilisation of people with drug addictions is immoral, to me.  It's saying that people can never change, and don't deserve children, which is pretty damn dehumanising.  The projects I've seen also use pretty nasty tactics, offering desperate people cash to use to feed their habits to make a decision that will impact the rest of their lives, in a time they're not able to make an informed choice. 

I completely, 100% am in favour of helping people access contraception, from free condoms to giving women long term solutions like IUDs and other options that will work for someone with a chaotic life.  But I can't see how it's moral to decide another person is broken and useless that they should never have children, and using manipulative tactics to make that come true.

 

I'm torn on this.  Yes, sometimes people change, but seeing the absolutely horrific things drug abusers do to their children? I struggle with the idea that dehumanizing the drug addict is somehow worse than subjecting children to that life. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. If a person has repeatedly had children, and repeatedly neglected or abused them, I have a hard time feeling bad about it if they choose to get sterilized for cash. That goes for anyone, not just drug addicts. 

If they sober up a decade later and wish they had made a different decision?  That's unfortunate, but I'm not sure it's terribly unfair. Again, I'm mostly talking about people who have had and neglected/abused children already. If they feel like they 'deserve' more children just bc they sobered up, I have a problem with that, like, eh, too bad about the first few I fucked up, but I'm ready to try again and my feelings are what's important here. 

and, fwiw, I don't think anyone 'deserves' children, they're not a merit badge. 

 

Edited July 9, 2018 by katilac

[Lurky]

Not all drug users have children, let alone neglect them, by any stretch of the imagination - and the idea that because they are drug users, they will inevitably commit horrific abuse on children (as if non drug users never do this) so should be sterilised because they can never change, is a very, very cold world view.

But above it, it seems to be working on the assumption that people are choosing to become addicted to drugs, and are destined to become monsters and so are getting what they deserve, and they should be sterilised and treated as less-than-human forever.  Contrary to popular culture, most people don't get into becoming hardcore heroin addicts (which these programmes are aimed at) through making informed choices, and hedonism.  There is a ton of research about how people get into heroin and become chaotic because they're self-medicating, often to deal with untreated mental health issues, or to block out their own abuse.   Or take the current opioid crisis, where people have been inappropriately given prescription opioids, and have turned to heroin as it's cheaper.  Or all the young women who are introduced to heroin as a way for men to control them and sell them for sex. 

There are so, so many routes into addiction, and most of them involve people who really needed help, and were let down years before they even started drugs through desperation, or who have tried to get clean, but just can't access decent services (have you see the cost of rehab/community based services?).  Adding an extra punishment of conning women into irreversible medical procedures on the tenuous grounds they are evil abusers, is even more unfair.

 

ETA:  These programmes are not aimed at people who are committing horrific abuse on children - they are aimed at drug using women, who often have never had a child.  If anyone was abusing/neglecting kids, they should 100% be prosecuted for it, and dealt with by the courts, not given $500 to have a sterilisation and sent on their way to continue their addiction.  It doesn't make any sense - and it doesn't stop them abusing children anyway.   But I can't don't know any countries that sterilise people who are child abusers as a punishment, so why is it ok to do it to this group?

 

Edited July 10, 2018 by Lurky

[dairyfreelife]

1 hour ago, Lurky said:

Not all drug users have children, let alone neglect them, by any stretch of the imagination - and the idea that because they are drug users, they will inevitably commit horrific abuse on children (as if non drug users never do this) so should be sterilised because they can never change, is a very, very cold world view.

But above it, it seems to be working on the assumption that people are choosing to become addicted to drugs, and are destined to become monsters and so are getting what they deserve, and they should be sterilised and treated as less-than-human forever.  Contrary to popular culture, most people don't get into becoming hardcore heroin addicts (which these programmes are aimed at) through making informed choices, and hedonism.  There is a ton of research about how people get into heroin and become chaotic because they're self-medicating, often to deal with untreated mental health issues, or to block out their own abuse.   Or take the current opioid crisis, where people have been inappropriately given prescription opioids, and have turned to heroin as it's cheaper.  Or all the young women who are introduced to heroin as a way for men to control them and sell them for sex. 

There are so, so many routes into addiction, and most of them involve people who really needed help, and were let down years before they even started drugs through desperation, or who have tried to get clean, but just can't access decent services (have you see the cost of rehab/community based services?).  Adding an extra punishment of conning women into irreversible medical procedures on the tenuous grounds they are evil abusers, is even more unfair.

 

ETA:  These programmes are not aimed at people who are committing horrific abuse on children - they are aimed at drug using women, who often have never had a child.  If anyone was abusing/neglecting kids, they should 100% be prosecuted for it, and dealt with by the courts, not given $500 to have a sterilisation and sent on their way to continue their addiction.  It doesn't make any sense - and it doesn't stop them abusing children anyway.   But I can't don't know any countries that sterilise people who are child abusers as a punishment, so why is it ok to do it to this group?

 

I 100% agree against sterilizing drug users just because, especially giving them money to do so. I DO think giving them temporary birth control such as patches, shots, IUDs, etc are a good idea though. As someone who grew up in an area with high drug abuse, seeing the effects of babies born drug-addicted and the longer term consequences of it as well, I do wish more drug abusers would use contraception. 

I have seen people who were drug abusers get pregnant and get clean because of it. People do get clean and get off drugs and they may want to have a family. They have that right. Drug abusers are vulnerable to money and paying for sterilization is something they may do without thinking because they need money for a high and may regret in the future if they get clean. I've seen people do things they would never do while clean and sober just to get a high. Stealing money from family and friends, selling prized items, selling themselves, lying, cheating, committing crimes, etc. Anything to get some cash and get that high. In such a vulnerable state, they cannot make rational decisions and as such, a permanent fix to their fertility for some cash is a bad idea. Solutions using temporary birth control to lower their risk of pregnancy and certainly condoms to lower the risk of STDs are a wonderful idea since they are at a higher risk of both with lowered ability to assess their risks while high (or drunk or both). 

In short, temporary birth control solutions=great, permanent birth control solutions=major negative. 

[Lurky]

20 minutes ago, dairyfreelife said:

I 100% agree against sterilizing drug users just because, especially giving them money to do so. I DO think giving them temporary birth control such as patches, shots, IUDs, etc are a good idea though. As someone who grew up in an area with high drug abuse, seeing the effects of babies born drug-addicted and the longer term consequences of it as well, I do wish more drug abusers would use contraception. 

I completely agree - and especially getting women on contraception while they're in the process getting clean, as heroin can stop women getting pregnant, but moving to methadone doesn't have the same effect, so women can get unexpectedly pregnant, whether because of the change of drugs, or because she's getting more healthy.

I do think it's very telling that these programmes aren't about IUDs, implants, the injections etc, they're about sterilisation, and without too much digging, have unpleasant eugenics overtones.

(It's also worth pointing out that sterilising a woman who has kids, in exchange for cash, doesn't do anything to help those kids, it just gives her more money to spend on drugs.  Spending the cash-for-sterilisation money on helping parents get clean, and supporting their children, whether still in their care or elsewhere, would be a far more effective way to stop drug-related child abuse)

[EowynW]

The organization I follow serves people who have already had multiple children shuttled around in foster care and abortions. It's why she founded it. She was seeing addicts on their 4,5,6th + kid and using abortion routinely as a birth control method (she has seen addicts coming in for help after their 14th abortion.) She is also an adoptive mother of several drug babies and finally said enough was enough. She covers the cost of long term birth control (IUD, etc) or sterilization for those who ask for help, men and women. 

Edited July 10, 2018 by EowynW

[katilac]

 

5 hours ago, Lurky said:

Not all drug users have children, let alone neglect them, by any stretch of the imagination - and the idea that because they are drug users, they will inevitably commit horrific abuse on children (as if non drug users never do this) so should be sterilised because they can never change, is a very, very cold world view.

 

2

I never said non-drug users never abuse their children, I actually explicitly stated that "That goes for anyone, not just drug addicts." 

2 hours ago, Lurky said:

 Spending the cash-for-sterilisation money on helping parents get clean, and supporting their children, whether still in their care or elsewhere, would be a far more effective way to stop drug-related child abuse)

 

Well, I don't think it's enough money to make a dent in rehab and supporting children, but I'm not at all arguing that it's a particularly cost-effective (or even effective) program. I'm just saying that I don't feel particularly bad for anyone who has abused/neglected children, and then can't have more bc they got sterilized for cash. Or for any other reason. 

[AuLait]

I can't seem to get off the mailing list of the horrifying Above Rubies magazine that my Mom signed me up for like 15 years ago.  I can't help but hate read it. This most recent one is extra disgusting, but look who had a little blurb!

[EowynW]

Oh my gosh. She's been in Above Rubies before. I recognize her and just put the two together. Doh! 

[MarblesMom]

11 hours ago, Lurky said:

Or take the current opioid crisis, where people have been inappropriately given prescription opioids

HELLO.  I was given *60* oxy pills following a knee scope.  I took *one.*  The thought of being zoned out for 30 days was overwhelming. 

I was over-prescribed.  I think perhaps many people who are also over-prescribed start off "following dr's orders" and take it ALL and then ... 

 

[dairyfreelife]

On 7/1/2018 at 7:52 PM, JMarie said:

 

  Hide contents

She does!  In the bathtub! https://www.instagram.com/p/BhwlhbSFVaX/?hl=en&taken-by=thecollinskids

And she's also anti-vax https://www.instagram.com/p/BhzslffFkTw/?hl=en&taken-by=thecollinskids or maybe she's not? https://www.instagram.com/p/Bhp3DU5FENW/?hl=en&taken-by=thecollinskids (sorry, the anti-vaxers really make me mad)

And she claims she doesn't make any money from her Instagram, but she promotes businesses like the Daddysaidyesboutique (barf) and her cousin's "Scriptural" clothing line, not to mention her own photography business.

 

 

 

I can't deal with them either. I do blame the huge amount of misinformation and fear put into them that scares people into not vaccinating. 

However...this...

Quote

Well, I got sick instead. I am sure she passed it to me and my breastmilk antibodies kept her from getting worse. 

I have only one response to that. 

Spoiler

 

[EmiGirl]

10 hours ago, MarblesMom said:

HELLO.  I was given *60* oxy pills following a knee scope.  I took *one.*  The thought of being zoned out for 30 days was overwhelming. 

I was over-prescribed.  I think perhaps many people who are also over-prescribed start off "following dr's orders" and take it ALL and then ... 

 

I was prescribed oxy for an ear infection. Didn't have it filled, but most would have.