Jump to content
IGNORED

Dillards 86: It's a Long Way to Tipperary


samurai_sarah

Recommended Posts

I think all the adult children probably do have bank accounts - they run cars, phones and all the other expenses. Plus it would be against JB’s ‘headship’ ideology to have control of the married ones accounts.

What goes into the accounts is another issue. My idle speculation is JB as executive producer does the deal with TLC/ production company and his line is  that it is the family ‘ministry’. He doles out cash and benefits such as homes, cars and provides employment based on their contribution to the ministry. Any extras they make from YouTube or Instagram promotions are theirs.

When the Dillards engaged a lawyer for proper payment I think Jeremy flexed his muscles about possibly he and Jinger leaving the show. They managed to have a mortgage on a house in Laredo despite not appearing to have jobs. Jeremy was pastor of a church with about 2 dozen in the congregation- there’s no way he could afford the lifestyle they have.

in short JB is a control freak but even he is struggling to control adults who realise they are the reason there is a show.

  • Upvote 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not sure that JB would ever acknowledge that the kids(now adults) are the reason for the show. I could imagine him saying something along the lines of without my connection and influence with TLC, there would be no show at all-

If the money all goes to him, he does control all.

I don’t know why the Vuolos would flex muscles. They have never been stars of the show; have always had limited roles d/t geography. 

Edited by SassyPants
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SassyPants I’m sure JB thinks it’s all down to him - but despite him & Michelle trying to get back in, the show is supposed to be about the adult children.

Jeremy has an inflated sense of his importance but he is trying to carve an existence away from Duggar central. Ben was quite happy to go along with whatever JB threw his way, Derick seemed to as well. I think Jeremy had a game plan and it never involved living in a JB house renovating JB properties. JinJer are very popular with the fans and Jinger herself has a huge SM following.

Seeing Josh be deleted from the show, the Seewalds are dull and the Dillards beginning to look dangerously out of control I could see JB giving way a bit to the Vuolos.

  • Upvote 4
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a hard time believing Jill and Derick have LGBTQ+ and trans friends. I think they’re referring to Derick’s classmates that they may greet with a “hello”.

  • Upvote 15
  • I Agree 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI: for people haven't seen the show. JB and Michelle are all over that show. They are on all the time. They do voice-overs and talking heads. They are on almost every episode. I mainly notice from recaps/other snarkers, but I watched the episode to see Justin's courtship episode and JD's wedding and they were on featured in both. Michelle talked so much during JD's wedding that I had to mute and even change the channel. 

They used the weddings starting with Jinger to get back on the show. Of course they're going to be front and center at their children's weddings. 

I feel like NFP could have some conflict with the constant "be joyfully available" . 

Joy and Austin announced their pregnancy with Evelyn on the show just a few weeks ago. I also heard that TLC couldn't film at the hospital due to COVID, but I'm not sure if that's true. I don't know if Joy and Austin have fully quit the show. I'll read the re-caps (and maybe even watch). I think Joy and Austin are still too fundie to be hanging out with Jill and Derick.

There's a fine line between fundie/fundie-lite/mainstream conservative Christian. I'm never sure which is which. 

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, FiveAcres said:

This approach would also prevent them from establishing credit in their own names, which will be another way the JB maintains control over his adult children.

How would that theory line up with the older kidults having property in their names (didn't Jana have property in her name and a couple of the unmarried boys?) I'm totally clueless but would you be able to wouldn't they at the very least need a bank account in their name to be able to purchase property?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, LacyMay said:

How would that theory line up with the older kidults having property in their names (didn't Jana have property in her name and a couple of the unmarried boys?) I'm totally clueless but would you be able to wouldn't they at the very least need a bank account in their name to be able to purchase property?

They buy with cash. I don't think a bank account would matter. The money could come from JB's accounts.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/1/2020 at 9:15 PM, nolongerIFBx said:

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2006/PSCF9-06Sullivan.pdf I have this book marked because it comes up frequently enough. You can't prove a negative, or at least, what this article is stating is that you can't prove that the endometrial lining being thinned by HBC doesn't cause some embryos to fail to implant. If someone feels very strongly about not doing anything that would cause a fetus to abort, it is reasonable for them to avoid HBC.

The fact that reproductive endocrinologists prescribe it to patients that are TRYING to get pregnant is pretty convincing that the thinning of the endometrial lining doesn't prevent implantation in subsequent months (although patients are usually taking something following a course of HBC to increase the lining).

But isnt it only considered an abortion if it happens after implantation has happened?

Of course, people who feel that preventing implantation is wrong should take that into consideration when chosing contraception, but I just wonder /doubt if medically speaking something that prevents implantation is considered an abortifacient. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think many fundies define "life" as beginning at fertilization, not at implantation. So by that standard (inaccurate as it nay be), contraceptives that  prevent implantation would be abortificants. 

  • Upvote 2
  • I Agree 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pecansforeveryone said:

I think many fundies define "life" as beginning at fertilization, not at implantation. So by that standard (inaccurate as it nay be), contraceptives that  prevent implantation would be abortificants. 

Yes, I think most strongly anti-abortion people in general believe this. Isn't this why they are against the morning after pill, which I believe only inhibits ovulation and implantation? (And which they often mislabel an "abortion pill" both through ignorance of its function and because they see it as morally performing the same function as an abortifacient.)

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do fundies do if they suffer an ectopic pregnancy? Would they get the fertilised egg removed or just hope they don't die from the internal bleeding? Has there been any instances of fundie ectopic pregnancies? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SorenaJ depends. Tam who has threads here has a husband who peddles nonsense about ectopic pregnancies moving reimplanting  and surviving! Which of course is tot nonsense and ignores the damage a ruptured ectopic pregnancy can do. 

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SorenaJ said:

What do fundies do if they suffer an ectopic pregnancy? Would they get the fertilised egg removed or just hope they don't die from the internal bleeding? Has there been any instances of fundie ectopic pregnancies? 

I;m not sure about Protestant fundies, but I know of hardline Catholics who believe the ectopic pregnancy should not be "aborted" as they see it and the mother should risk her life.

However, I believe the official RCC stance is that the fallopian tube can be removed to save the mother's life, which results in indirectly "killing" the child as they see it, but the aim of the surgery should not be to abort the fetus and therefore they don't support a chemical injection. Even though the latter makes it easier for the mother to conceive again. 

Like @byzant, I've heard a lot of hard core anti-abortion types, even lawmakers, also try to skew the actual statistics and claim that these pregnancies can often be carried to term or the egg can magically fall into the uterus. 

  • Upvote 4
  • WTF 3
  • Thank You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phew. So, Dillards using protection, didn't come as a surprise, but I'm glad it's now been confirmed.

I'm glad for all of the development. There are still shitty parts and things we're not gonna enjoy, but honestly, this is amazing stuff and proves that Jill has had the chance for some deprogramming. And I'm so happy for her. And the boys, too. This life is so much healthier for them.

  • Upvote 9
  • I Agree 6
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, finnlassie said:

Phew. So, Dillards using protection, didn't come as a surprise, but I'm glad it's now been confirmed.

I'm glad for all of the development. There are still shitty parts and things we're not gonna enjoy, but honestly, this is amazing stuff and proves that Jill has had the chance for some deprogramming. And I'm so happy for her. And the boys, too. This life is so much healthier for them.

This, I don't see them ever being pro choice but they are making some good decisions for themselves and children. I am happy for them, especially Israel and Sam because they both have a better chance of being able to go to college than most of their cousins, if they choose to. 

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/2/2020 at 5:07 PM, luv2laugh said:

I have a hard time believing Jill and Derick have LGBTQ+ and trans friends. I think they’re referring to Derick’s classmates that they may greet with a “hello”.

KInd of the way Trumpsters have Black friends--the guy who works two cubicles over and you exchange a few sentences about last night's game at the water cooler.

  • Upvote 6
  • I Agree 5
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/2/2020 at 5:20 PM, Bluebirdbluebell said:

FYI: for people haven't seen the show. JB and Michelle are all over that show. They are on all the time. They do voice-overs and talking heads. They are on almost every episode. I mainly notice from recaps/other snarkers, but I watched the episode to see Justin's courtship episode and JD's wedding and they were on featured in both. Michelle talked so much during JD's wedding that I had to mute and even change the channel. 

They used the weddings starting with Jinger to get back on the show. Of course they're going to be front and center at their children's weddings. 

I feel like NFP could have some conflict with the constant "be joyfully available" . 

Joy and Austin announced their pregnancy with Evelyn on the show just a few weeks ago. I also heard that TLC couldn't film at the hospital due to COVID, but I'm not sure if that's true. I don't know if Joy and Austin have fully quit the show. I'll read the re-caps (and maybe even watch). I think Joy and Austin are still too fundie to be hanging out with Jill and Derick.

There's a fine line between fundie/fundie-lite/mainstream conservative Christian. I'm never sure which is which. 

Personally, I see Jill and Derick as mainstream conservative evangelical Christian. They are no different now than conservative Catholics I know. They are no different than the evangelical, conservative Christians that populate the “non-denominational” mega-churches. I don’t know if evangelical Christian = fundie-lite. What are the differences? All I know is that Derick and Jill are not the pious frumper-wearing Christians that frown upon working single moms and those that drink, public school, listen to music, or use birth control. However, Jill still has a long way to go. She was adamantly clear she uses “non-hormonal BC to prevent abortion”. ? However, in Lori A or Jill Rod’s eyes, Jill Dillard is a heathen. If Jill and Dillard ever support LGBTQ+ rights or become progressive politically, I think it will be after many more years. Although, I’m pretty surprised at the changes Jill and Derick have made in a short time. I saw that Jill liked the Innocence Project on Instagram which I think is an organization that brings awareness to those wrongfully imprisoned. I am surprised that Derick wants to go into a type of law that he said will be to seek justice for the vulnerable or something? If he does, I think he may become progressive with time. I don’t have a lot of hope though because his mom is pretty hateful despite having a full-time career. If anything, I bet that Jill will go to college or pursue a career. His mom works and I see him encouraging Jill to do the same.

Edited by luv2laugh
  • Upvote 9
  • I Agree 3
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/1/2020 at 9:08 AM, Glasgowghirl said:

Sad thing is Jim Bob has most likely shown more anger over Jill and Derick legally getting their money back than Josh abusing his daughters. 

This is so true! Jill can't go to the TTH without JB's permission, yet their son the molester can come and go any time? That really shows you how screwed up the Duggar parents are!

 

  • Upvote 13
  • Sad 3
  • I Agree 14
  • Love 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not think that Either Jill or DD would sacrifice Jill’s life for that of a fetus implanted in a Fallopian tube. 

  • Upvote 7
  • I Agree 4
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am proud of Jill and Derick for thinking about and deciding on some of their own beliefs.

I also like that they have a smaller family, although I'm guessing that more difficult births play a part in it. I wonder, if Jill has another difficult birth (or two) if Derick would consider getting snipped. There are no hormones involved, and there have been some babies born after Dad has been snipped. (No counting Steve Maxwell and his reversal- ugh!) :brain-bleach:

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Pecansforeveryone said:

I think many fundies define "life" as beginning at fertilization, not at implantation. So by that standard (inaccurate as it nay be), contraceptives that  prevent implantation would be abortificants. 

I’m not sure that I would call the belief that life begins at the moment of fertilization inaccurate; everyone is going to hold different beliefs about when a)life begins and b) said life is a person. My belief will likely be different than yours and this doesn’t mean that either of us are wrong; we just think differently. For me personally, given that each individual cell is a living organism, two fused cells are also a living organism. However, I do not have the right to impose my view on others and HBC should be affordable and accessible for any woman who wants to take it and can safely take it. One of my friends went into rages on the pill and had to come off. Another didn’t realize that vomiting 20 minutes after taking it would reduce its efficacy and ended up pregnant. For these two, non-hormonal BC is much safer. I know colleagues who have been on the pill since they were 15 and never had an issue. It’s so dependent upon the individual. 
I think it’s great that Jill and Derrick are responsible enough to limit their family size to what they can handle. 

  • Upvote 8
  • I Agree 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, nausicaa said:

I;m not sure about Protestant fundies, but I know of hardline Catholics who believe the ectopic pregnancy should not be "aborted" as they see it and the mother should risk her life.

However, I believe the official RCC stance is that the fallopian tube can be removed to save the mother's life, which results in indirectly "killing" the child as they see it, but the aim of the surgery should not be to abort the fetus and therefore they don't support a chemical injection. Even though the latter makes it easier for the mother to conceive again. 

Like @byzant, I've heard a lot of hard core anti-abortion types, even lawmakers, also try to skew the actual statistics and claim that these pregnancies can often be carried to term or the egg can magically fall into the uterus. 

Catholics have this fancy “conscience” loop hole now that as long as you do whatever in good conscience with your own personal beliefs and you feel it’s the right thing your good. Lots of people use it for all sorts of things. And not that I really care too much but for example sake I am a fragile x carrier. I Found out after I was already pregnant with my second. I personally didn’t want to do testing while pregnant but I’m free and clear to use BC now technically because I feel it’s wrong to intentionally have a child that you know could have sever disabilities. Now I’d use BC either way personally but just to show how the loop hole works it’s a good example 

  • Upvote 4
  • Confused 1
  • Bless Your Heart 3
  • Love 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Daisy0322 said:

Catholics have this fancy “conscience” loop hole now that as long as you do whatever in good conscience with your own personal beliefs and you feel it’s the right thing your good. Lots of people use it for all sorts of things. And not that I really care too much but for example sake I am a fragile x carrier. I Found out after I was already pregnant with my second. I personally didn’t want to do testing while pregnant but I’m free and clear to use BC now technically because I feel it’s wrong to intentionally have a child that you know could have sever disabilities. Now I’d use BC either way personally but just to show how the loop hole works it’s a good example 

Yea, I never knew anyone, no matter how anti-abortion, or whatever religion, would think there was anything wrong with removing an ectopic pregnancy, or consider it an abortion. I only learned that here. My local Catholic hospital will do whatever is necessary to save the mom, and her fertility, in that situation. Or in any situation where they feel the life of the mother is at risk. Just personally I know of a family member who they offered a therapeutic abortion due to health problems ( she refused) . And ectopic pregnancies where they saved the tube. 

  • Upvote 3
  • I Agree 1
  • Thank You 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were taught, by a priest, in our university medical ethics class at a catholic university (not in the US) that the principle of double effect applies in the situation of an ectopic pregnancy. So you absolutely can ethically/catholically go ahead and treat the ectopic, even if that results in disrupting the embryo.

God, how I wish we could just 'move' the fertilised egg safely in an ectopic pregnancy. Most women who have an etopic have a wanted pregnancy, it's not a get out clause for abortion (that law , I forget which state it was, made me so incandesantly angry). They are so dangerous. So very dangerous. I know several women who have almost died from ectopics.

  • Upvote 16
  • Thank You 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally don’t like hormonal birth control

bc of the hormones, but there are plenty of options that can prevent pregnancy besides that. Even fundies who believe fertilization is the beginning of life could use some of them and prevent even the fertilization aspect. 
 

the real Issue w quiverfull people is most of them believe it’s wrong to do anything to prevent pregnancy including nfp. 
 

 

  • Upvote 1
  • I Agree 4
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • samurai_sarah locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.