Talk:The Rugrats Theory/@comment-25537529-20141014123205

Okay, when I was younger I loved this show so much. Now I feel like I have to save the show I once loved from this lie. This theory is very accurate and when I first read it I thought this was true and my jaw dropped. I couldn't beleive this was what the show was really about. But this was not true, and this is not how it really happened. I noticed that they brought up Dil being the only real baby. Yeah well the Rugrats cartoon series started in 1991, And Dil was first introduced to Rugrats in the Rugrats Movie, which came out in 1998. So if this was a true story why would they wait 7 years until they put Dil in the show? It's because they decided they wanted to add a new character to the show to make some changes so right there is a fact why this theory isn't true. Plus whoever made up this theory mentioned Chuckies step sister Kimi was a baby taken away from Chaz's new wife Kira. Well Kimi and Chaz's wife Kira came into the show even later than Dil. Now whoever made up this theory did a really good job trying to ruin peoples childhood. But yes I do give props it was very accurate. But why would anybody publish a show about a sick drug addict that died at 13? No this was a show for kids to watch and enjoy. I loved this show so much when I was a kid and seeing this theory about the show trying to ruin a once great shows reputation. Every now and then I talk to people about my favorite things and shows when I was younger and Rugrats was always in my top 5 list. Well now everytime I say Rugrats the person will say 'yeah I loved it too but I read this theory that ruined it all for me" it's seriously just a damn shame that someone had to make up this dumbass theory to make a show that was family friendly and enjoyable, into a sick domestic story that no one will forget about. Shame on whoever came up with this bullshit.