News: Jim Bob Duggar’s Rules Apply Even To Married Duggars

News: Jim Bob Duggar’s Rules Apply Even To Married Duggars September 27, 2014

usmagazineby Suzanne Titkemeyer

More Duggars in the media this week. Both Jill Duggar Dillard and Jessa Duggar are on the cover of US Weekly and they’re talking about the expectations of their father carrying over into their entire lives. Very ridiculous rules considering his adult children are just that, adults, capable of making their own rules and knowing their own minds.

So what are these rules?

Both Celebitchy and E! Online have a partial list of the rules that Jim Bob Duggar demands all of his numerous offspring keep, even the married no longer living in the Duggar compound adult children.  Well, perhaps the text sharing one isn’t enforced or practiced after you get married.

Here is the short list:

Parents Are CC’d on Texts: Yes, at 20 years old your mom and dad may be peeping your text messages. Once Ben Seewald jokingly wrote to fiancée Jessa, “Give me a ring.” Jim Bob’s reply? “No ring yet.” Oh, and his response was complete with smiley face emoticon. On the bright side…at least they don’t have to worry about naked selfies?

Dates Are Chaperoned: Parents accompany their children on dates in order to maintain their “accountability.” It “keeps things from going in the wrong direction,” explains Jim Bob. Likewise, the girls are comfortable with their parents’ presence, noting that being alone with men puts them in grave “moral danger.”

No Chest-to-Chest Contact Until Wedding Day: Side hugs are the preferred method of PDA in order to prevent any further temptation. And boy, do the Duggars sure love their side hugs!

Don’t Drink Alcohol: In the eyes of the Duggars, booze is a buzz kill. At a past event, Jill and Jessa accidentally sipped spiked punch. Jessa’s reaction? “Disgusting!”

They’re not allowed to listen to the radio: Michelle explains that dancing encourages “sensual” feelings while Jessa warns that modern day music is “promoting sex, drugs, all that type of stuff.” Instead, the family chooses to play gospel together.

They’re not allowed to celebrate Halloween: According to the Duggars, magic and witches are “part of a demonic realm God wants us to stay away from.” No hocus pocus here!

They’re not allowed to go to the beach: While there is Duggar-approved swimwear available for purchase, other beachgoers prove to be problematic for the religious clan. “It’s just too hard for the guys to try and keep their eyes averted,” Michelle explains.

All I know is that TLC must have a huge budget for publicists and press agents considering every time you turn around there is something completely inane in the news about the Duggar family. Dreck ahoy! I know more about the Duggars lifestyle and tmi moments than I do about most of my close friends because of the media around them.

Expect to hear more about this family before the weekend is over because today Jim Bob Duggar will be speaking at the Values Voter Summit in Washington DC on his favorite top – the evils of abortion. He loves to call it ‘Baby Holocaust’. Pretty sure TLC isn’t going to promote that, but you never know.

I would love to know what that publicity budget is for “19 Kids & Counting”

And again, if you are a Duggar fan please make sure you read the special Duggar fan comment policy below before commenting.

Comments open below

NLQ Recommended Reading …

Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement by Kathryn Joyce

13:24 – A Story of Faith and Obsession by M Dolon Hickmon




Find the Best Fundraising Ideas on GiveForward

Welcome fans of the Duggar television show “19 Kids & Counting”

Likely you arrived at No Longer Quivering via Google or a long-outdated link to an NLQ posting on the Duggar family and you’re getting ready to post on a article anywhere from six months to two or three years out of date.

Before you post in the comments please be aware…

1 – If the article is not at least a month or so current you’ll be necroing a very old thread with the only reply being the moderator telling you that the article is out of date. Please use our search function in the right hand sidebar and seek out more current Duggar content to interact with others on. You will not be prevented from posting in an old Duggar thread, it’s just that no one is likely to answer.

2 – Keep in mind we do not allow commenters to bash other commenters, readers, writers or administration. If you post something that has phrases such as “Get a life” or “You are just jealous” or, the kicker, “You’re all going to hell” you’ll be warned then banned. Please consult our Comment Policy before posting at NLQ. Our moderator has no problem banning people who refuse to play nice with others or insult others or name call.

3 – No ‘Ad Hominem’ type comments. What do we consider ‘Ad Hominem’ here?

From Wikipedia’s section on Ad Hominem

A – Abusive – Abusive ad hominem usually involves attacking the traits of an opponent as a means to invalidate their arguments. Equating someone’s character with the soundness of their argument is a logical fallacy. Mere verbal abuse in the absence of an argument, however, is not ad hominem nor any kind of logical fallacy.[8]

i.e. Calling someone jealous or bitter or sinner because they’ve expressed a position you don’t agree with without any logic or facts.

B – Circumstantial – Ad hominem circumstantial points out that someone is in circumstances such that they are disposed to take a particular position. Ad hominem circumstantial constitutes an attack on the bias of a source. This is fallacious because a disposition to make a certain argument does not make the argument false; this overlaps with the genetic fallacy (an argument that a claim is incorrect due to its source).[9]

i.e. Saying that you know someone is biased against the Duggars because they are atheists and only atheists could possibly object to the supposedly Godly Duggars.

C – Tu Quoque – Ad hominem tu quoque (literally: “You also”) refers to a claim that the source making the argument has spoken or acted in a way inconsistent with the argument. In particular, if Source A criticizes the actions of Source B, a tu quoque response is that Source A has acted in the same way. This argument is fallacious because it does not disprove the argument; if the premise is true then Source A may be a hypocrite, but this does not make the statement less credible from a logical perspective. Indeed, Source A may be in a position to provide personal testimony to support the argument.

i.e. Calling everyone in the comments ‘nasty’ people and using foul language or behaving in the manner you are accusing others of.

If you still wish to post here you need to:

  • Read the Comment Policy page.
  • Follow the rules listed on the Comment Policy page
  • Use facts, logic and reason to make your assertions instead of ad hominem attacks
  • Educate you on what “Quiverfull” actually is instead of relying on what little you’ve seen in the television show.
  • Do not attack others. Attack ideas, not people.

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!