Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:37 PM
tnetennba is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceplace57 View Post
Exercising personal religious beliefs does not make someone a bad person. These days it takes quite a bit of courage to openly endorse fundamental religious beliefs that have been held true for over two thousand years.

I don't agree with much of what the Duggars follow. My wife and I sought out and attend a moderate church. Our congregation and deacons wouldn't hire an ultra conservative pastor. But, I do respect people in religions that I don't follow.
  #202  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:41 PM
aceplace57 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: CentralArkansas
Posts: 26,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnetennba View Post
I was responding to all the hate directed at Josh because of his work with the Family Research Council. I don't agree with them, but they have every right to lobby for what they believe in. The same rights that protect them, also protect all the rest of us.

I do understand hating Josh for what he did to those little girls. Especially since it didn't get heard in a juvenile court and he didn't get court recommended treatment.

Last edited by aceplace57; 05-23-2015 at 08:43 PM.
  #203  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:42 PM
jayjay is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 37,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceplace57 View Post
Exercising personal religious beliefs does not make someone a bad person. These days it takes quite a bit of courage to openly endorse fundamental religious beliefs that have been held true for over two thousand years.
Bull and shit. Come back with that happy horsecrap when you're the one in the gunsights of those "personal religious beliefs" (how benign you make it sound...). People like the Duggars are horrible, awful people who try to make their "personal religious beliefs" into law and force the rest of us to live under them. Fuck. That.

Especially when you add in the utter hypocrisy of how they lend their name and fame to attempts to prevent LGBT rights under the lie that LGBT are sexual predators, when the list of ACTUAL sexual predators (one of which happens to be their own goddamn SON) that they're connected to in one way or another is LOOOONG. Fucking hypocrites. The parents and the oldest spawn can go fuck off and die slow, painful deaths as far as I'm concerned.

All of this hoity-toity "But there's no PROOF that they're horrible, awful people" blah blah blah is bullshit. All of it. Both from you and Litigitron 2000.
  #204  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:46 PM
tnetennba is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,339
Nobody to my knowledge has taken a stance against their right to believe what they believe or said that 'exercising religious beliefs' is what makes them 'bad people.'

And religious fundamentalism isn't 2000 years old. It's actually a rather recent, and American, invention. http://teachinghistory.org/history-c...istorian/24092

Last edited by tnetennba; 05-23-2015 at 08:48 PM.
  #205  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:49 PM
aceplace57 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: CentralArkansas
Posts: 26,294
LGBT rights are very firmly entrenched in America. the Family Research Council has absolutely no chance of ever reversing LGBT. Let them huff and puff all they want. Waste tons of money. They'll never get anywhere. There's no way anyone can reset the clock back to 1950. Won't happen. Guaranteed.

Last edited by aceplace57; 05-23-2015 at 08:51 PM.
  #206  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:51 PM
running coach's Avatar
running coach is offline
Arms of Steel, Leg of Jello
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 37,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceplace57 View Post
Exercising personal religious beliefs does not make someone a bad person. These days it takes quite a bit of courage to openly endorse fundamental religious beliefs that have been held true for over two thousand years.

I don't agree with much of what the Duggars follow. My wife and I sought out and attend a moderate church. Our congregation and deacons wouldn't hire an ultra conservative pastor. But, I do respect people in religions that I don't follow.
When those beliefs include destroying other peoples' lives, it does make you a bad person.
  #207  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:51 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
No. This is a case of " based on everything we know about this family, including their reliance of Gothard material and involvement with the organization that spawned the really, really shitty counseling guidelines [that include asking the victim if maybe it isn't better that as a result of abuse, they get a better relationship with God-- so isn't it really a good thing that you were abused???]...isn't it LIKELY that they ALSO used that shitty material to counsel the victims?"

Or is it more likely that they fall in with everything else the Institute says, BUT NOT THAT?"
Show me that they fall in line with everything else the Institute says, then, and I'll grant you that this one point would be an unlikely outlier. For example, is there any evidence that the Duggars believe they are affected by the "sins of [their] forefathers?" (Gothard: "Looking back to our parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents, we can often trace our physical features, strengths, and weaknesses through the family line. In the same way, we can observe character traits and spiritual influences that span the generations.") I admit I'm no expert on the Duggars, but it what ways do you believe they embrace this teaching?

Quote:
I am sure you are a thing of beauty in a courtroom, Bricker, but this sort of nitpicking of human reaction is a little unseemly.
Why do you believe you can excuse making unproven claims by labeling it "human reaction?"

If you can, then why do you deny me my human reaction: asking for evidence for your weak and unproven claims?
  #208  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:55 PM
Honey is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Adirondacks ♀
Posts: 4,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceplace57 View Post
If that's what the girls received then it was terrible.

Exposing this story now (12 years later) makes it worse. That 5 year old kid is probably a senior in high school. The comments from her classmates won't be kind. Kids can be extremely cruel. I guess it's not hard to figure out which Duggar girl is 16 or 17 today. That's probably the victim. Or at least that's the person her schoolmates will assume is the victim.
None of them go to school. They are home schooled by their older siblings.
  #209  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:57 PM
jayjay is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 37,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceplace57 View Post
LGBT rights are very firmly entrenched in America. the Family Research Council has absolutely no chance of ever reversing LGBT. Let them huff and puff all they want. Waste tons of money. They'll never get anywhere. There's no way anyone can reset the clock back to 1950. Won't happen. Guaranteed.
Says a man who wouldn't be affected one iota if a reversal DID happen. May I remind you that it's only been 12 years since Lawrence v Texas, the SCOTUS case that made actual criminalization of homosexuality unconstitutional? There are still more states without non-discrimination protections than with. I can get married here in Pennsylvania but putting a wedding photo of my husband and me on my desk could still get me fired in the private sector. Housing discrimination is still legal in many places and most of the non-discrimination measures that currently exist only exist by statute or (even worse) local ordinance. And that's only LGB. Don't even get me started on T. That's a whole other universe of disgusting personal and religious opinions that pass for legislative reasoning.

LGBT equality is NOT firmly entrenched except in the imaginations of people who have no real reason to try to keep up with the subject.
  #210  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:58 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinastasia View Post
Look Bricker, you're a devout Catholic, as you've stated here. Thus, I think it's safe to assume that you accept the church's teachings on the Immaculate Conception of Mary (the doctrine that Mary was born without Original Sin), correct? In fact, I'd go so far as to say one shouldn't need to ask for a site that most devout Catholic accept this, since it's a major part of the Catholic faith.
Correct, on both counts. I accept that teaching as true, and I agree that it's a fair assumption to make of anyone who identifies as a devout Catholic.

Quote:
Well, one of the major teachings of the Gothard sect is that women are supposed to dress modestly, lest they lead men astray. That the way women dress can indeed incite a man to lust after her, and thus if it happens, she is partly responsible for it. The Duggars follow Gothard's teachings. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume they believe this. They're wrong, and it's a disgusting concept, but that's what they believe.
I agree with everything you wrote above.

But the problem I'm attacking goes beyond what you wrote. Honey confidently asserted that the Duggars believe that in the case of sexual assault, the victim is at fault for stirring up desires in the male. That goes beyond the incitement of lust in a man. Sexual assault is not about lust, but about power. There is nothing I'm aware of in any Duggar comment or action that suggests that in the case of sexual assault, the victim is to blame.

So I'm not disagreeing with you that they believe the woman is to blame for arousing lust. I disagree with Honey that they believe the woman is to blame in the case of sexual assault.

Do you see the distinction now?
  #211  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:01 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayjay View Post
All of this hoity-toity "But there's no PROOF that they're horrible, awful people" blah blah blah is bullshit. All of it. Both from you and Litigitron 2000.
This is not an argument that is remarkable for its cogency.
  #212  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:09 PM
tnetennba is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,339
I can only conclude that Bricker has pursued none of the provided links on the history of the Duggars and their involvement with ATI and is not interested in talking about the topic, only arguing his insane digressive point for purposes of derailing the thread.
  #213  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:11 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnetennba View Post
I can only conclude that Bricker has pursued none of the provided links on the history of the Duggars and their involvement with ATI and is not interested in talking about the topic, only arguing his insane digressive point for purposes of derailing the thread.
I have read every link provided here.

My point is not contradicted by any link in this thread.

Is it?
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #214  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:13 PM
tnetennba is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,339
Yes. yes it is actually. You're like somebody trying to argue that being in the KKK didn't necessarily make someone a racist.
  #215  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:16 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnetennba View Post
Yes. yes it is actually. You're like somebody trying to argue that being in the KKK didn't necessarily make someone a racist.
Great. Then please provide the SPECIFIC link, and the SPECIFIC text therein that SPECIFICALLY contradicts my point.

A good clue as to the total lack of any argument is your tactic here, in which you indignantly insist that you're correct and are too offended/busy/above-the-fray to provide any specifics about how I am wrong.

It's just up there, somewhere, eh?
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #216  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:17 PM
salinqmind is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Liverpool NY USA
Posts: 10,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by salinqmind View Post
Let me ask this: do you all think this kind of thing is maybe more common in huge families where the parents just can't cope and leave the younger ones to be 'raised' by the older ones? Throw in religion and homeschooling and I think it's not unheard of. I ask because there was a huge family living next door where the kids were not allowed to play with normal neighborhood kids. The two oldest, boy and girl, rode together on the school bus sitting next to each other every. single. day. Then there was a younger kid in the family who got some dread disease, taking up the time and attention of the parents, shopping around various doctors, hospitalizations, etc.... And then... they just up moved to some culty compound out west, I'd heard. After the 14 year old girl was rumoured to be pregnant....So have any studies been done? It makes sense to me.
Bumping it up, am I just conjuring up a worst-case-scenario? Am I wrong in thinking this kind of stuff? These people were real, and they creeped me out. I felt so sorry for the kids. They practically ran away when you said anything to them.
  #217  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:20 PM
tnetennba is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,339
Your point was terribly weak and digressive and has been thoroughly debunked. Now go back to whatever subway terminal you pretend to practice law.
  #218  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:22 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
Show me that they fall in line with everything else the Institute says, then, and I'll grant you that this one point would be an unlikely outlier. For example, is there any evidence that the Duggars believe they are affected by the "sins of [their] forefathers?" (Gothard: "Looking back to our parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents, we can often trace our physical features, strengths, and weaknesses through the family line. In the same way, we can observe character traits and spiritual influences that span the generations.") I admit I'm no expert on the Duggars, but it what ways do you believe they embrace this teaching?
I have not seen any evidence of them rejecting any tenet of the Gothard version of religion -- it seems to me that you are making a claim that they do? What's your evidence that they do? As I have pointed out, every point that they publicly embrace adds (slightly) to the weight that they do fully support the church they adhere to. That seems like an assertion that they, in defiance of reasonable assumption, as they very publicly align themselves with Gothard and his teachings, that they don't align themselves with specific aspects of the church they follow, a rather extraordinary claim.

Why, given that they rather publicly endorse his teachings, we should assume that they eschew certain distasteful aspects? Show me an aspect that they have publicly denied the teaching of the religion they joyfully give speeches in support of?

YOU have stated you don't agree with the SSM stance of your religion. Have the Duggars publicly broken with the Institute? Unless they have, it seems unreasonable to assume that they have.

(Honestly, I would be happy to hear of their religious breaking in this (or any) regard. I just haven't seen any.)

Last edited by raventhief; 05-23-2015 at 09:26 PM. Reason: Emphasis and whatnot
  #219  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:24 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnetennba View Post
Your point was terribly weak and digressive and has been thoroughly debunked. Now go back to whatever subway terminal you pretend to practice law.
Yes, yes .... Debunked in that post you can't be bothered to quote, eh?
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #220  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:31 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
I have not seen any evidence of them rejecting any tenet of the Gothard version of religion -- it seems to me that you are making a claim that they do? What's your evidence that they do? As I have pointed out, every point that they publicly embrace adds (slightly) to the weight that they do fully support the church they adhere to. That seems like an assertion that they, in defiance of reasonable assumption, as they very publicly align themselves with Gothard and his teachings, that they don't align themselves with specific aspects of the church they follow, a rather extraordinary claim.

Why, given that they rather publicly endorse his teachings, we should assume that they eschew certain distasteful aspects? Show me an aspect that they have publicly denied the teaching of the religion they joyfully give speeches in support of?

YOU have stated you don't agree with the SSM stance of your religion. Have the Duggars publicly broken with the Institute? Unless they have, it seems unreasonable to assume that they have.

(Honestly, I would be happy to hear of their religious breaking in this (or any) regard. I just haven't seen any.)
ETA - I am also far from an expert on the family. Again, I welcome correction on this point. But the fact that their children tout the Gothard summer camps -- ALERT and Journey to the Heart, makes me suspect that they FULLY embrace the teachings of the church.
  #221  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:32 PM
LavenderBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 6,635
No counseling for Josh:

Quote:
http://defamer.gawker.com/the-web-ha...did-1706258269

March 2003 to July 2003. Josh’s mother Michelle later admitted to police that Josh did not see a counselor, and was instead sent “to a family friend who was in the home remodeling business” in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Not even the crappy, stupid, Duggar kind. We apparently don't know what kind of counseling the sisters he molested got. In all probability they were given nothing or the usual blame the victim bullshit that governs the Duggar cult because the Duggars are uneducated, dumb, sexist, homophobic religious fanatics. Worse, arrogant, educated, dumb, sexist homophobic religious fanatics who want to force the rest of us to live under the same stupid rules that govern their deeply dysfunctional lives.
  #222  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:34 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
I have not seen any evidence of them rejecting any tenet of the Gothard version of religion -- it seems to me that you are making a claim that they do? What's your evidence that they do? As I have pointed out, every point that they publicly embrace adds (slightly) to the weight that they do fully support the church they adhere to. That seems like an assertion that they, in defiance of reasonable assumption, as they very publicly align themselves with Gothard and his teachings, that they don't align themselves with specific aspects of the church they follow, a rather extraordinary claim.
We're not discussing a religious tenet here. This is not a dogmatic pillar of any faith. It's a singular point of an example counseling session. It's a fallacy to argue that every single Gothard expression is one they believe. If Gothard is a Red Sox fan, it's impossible to imagine that JimBob is a Yankees fan?

No, no. You cannot assert, with certainty, that they believe something like this when your only evidence is that they followed Gothard and he did.

When Obama was running for President, I criticized those people who sought to make hay over Rev. Wright's rhetorical excesses. I said that there is no reason whatsoever to assume that Obama agreed with Wright, merely because Obama followed Wright's general teachings.

Oddly enough, when I said that, no one condemned me for being overly legalistic or suggested I was some sort of fraud.

Huh.
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #223  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:35 PM
jayjay is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 37,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by LavenderBlue View Post
No counseling for Josh:



Not even the crappy, stupid, Duggar kind. We apparently don't know what kind of counseling the sisters he molested got. In all probability they were given nothing or the usual blame the victim bullshit that governs the Duggar cult because the Duggars are uneducated, dumb, sexist, homophobic religious fanatics. Worse, arrogant, educated, dumb, sexist homophobic religious fanatics who want to force the rest of us to live under the same stupid rules that govern their deeply dysfunctional lives.
I'm sorry, that's not good enough. Bricker requires an enrollment form, in triplicate, for each child, for a known Gothard counseling center. Otherwise, it's all unproven and we're horrible people for defaming this good, religious family with our scandalous insinuations.

ETA: I see the ridiculous false equivalency has arrived...

Last edited by jayjay; 05-23-2015 at 09:37 PM.
  #224  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:37 PM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 52,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
Correct, on both counts. I accept that teaching as true, and I agree that it's a fair assumption to make of anyone who identifies as a devout Catholic.



I agree with everything you wrote above.

But the problem I'm attacking goes beyond what you wrote. Honey confidently asserted that the Duggars believe that in the case of sexual assault, the victim is at fault for stirring up desires in the male. That goes beyond the incitement of lust in a man. Sexual assault is not about lust, but about power. There is nothing I'm aware of in any Duggar comment or action that suggests that in the case of sexual assault, the victim is to blame.

So I'm not disagreeing with you that they believe the woman is to blame for arousing lust. I disagree with Honey that they believe the woman is to blame in the case of sexual assault.

Do you see the distinction now?

YOU know that sexual assault is about power, and I know that it's about power. But THEY believe it's about lust. That's what Gothard teaches. Honey may have exaggerated, yes. But they do indeed believe that the victim bears some responsibility.

They certainly aren't the only ones who teach this. Why do you think women in radical Islamic sects are forced to wear burqas -- to avoid sunburn?
  #225  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:38 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
We're not discussing a religious tenet here. This is not a dogmatic pillar of any faith. It's a singular point of an example counseling session. It's a fallacy to argue that every single Gothard expression is one they believe. If Gothard is a Red Sox fan, it's impossible to imagine that JimBob is a Yankees fan?

No, no. You cannot assert, with certainty, that they believe something like this when your only evidence is that they followed Gothard and he did.

When Obama was running for President, I criticized those people who sought to make hay over Rev. Wright's rhetorical excesses. I said that there is no reason whatsoever to assume that Obama agreed with Wright, merely because Obama followed Wright's general teachings.

Oddly enough, when I said that, no one condemned me for being overly legalistic or suggested I was some sort of fraud.

Huh.
They endorse him. They tout his teachings, his conferences, his materials for religious instruction, and refused to distance themselves from him when he publicly expressed his "regret" for defrauding his underage employees by sexually harassing them. They publicize his institute on they website.

What EVIDENCE do you have that they don't follow him to the letter?

ETA - and I never implied you were a fraud. In fact, I outright stated that you were no doubt very good at your job. BUT this is not your job, and it is reasonable to expect that a family that overtly and publicly follows a particular religious leader would agree with said leader.

Last edited by raventhief; 05-23-2015 at 09:42 PM.
  #226  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:50 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
They endorse him. They tout his teachings, his conferences, his materials for religious instruction, and refused to distance themselves from him when he publicly expressed his "regret" for defrauding his underage employees by sexually harassing them. They publicize his institute on they website.

What EVIDENCE do you have that they don't follow him to the letter?

ETA - and I never implied you were a fraud. In fact, I outright stated that you were no doubt very good at your job. BUT this is not your job, and it is reasonable to expect that a family that overtly and publicly follows a particular religious leader would agree with said leader.
Not only did I NOT indicate that you were a fraud (did you confuse the use of "defrauded," because I honestly cannot imagine the inference you made there) but I outright said you were no doubt good at your job. But since all evidence indicates that they are Gothard adherents, it seems like an extraordinary claim to state that they don't. Remember, this is a man who was forced out of his position due to sexual harassment of UNDERAGE church members. AFTER that scandal, they spoke at the conference at his institute. That may be some sort of indicator that they disbelieve some of the most basic tenets of his religion, but I don;t see it. Please provide evidence that they don't follow certain aspects of his religion.
  #227  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:54 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayjay View Post
I'm sorry, that's not good enough. Bricker requires an enrollment form, in triplicate, for each child, for a known Gothard counseling center. Otherwise, it's all unproven and we're horrible people for defaming this good, religious family with our scandalous insinuations.
That's a strawman argument, and it's poisoning the well.
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #228  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:02 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinastasia View Post
YOU know that sexual assault is about power, and I know that it's about power. But THEY believe it's about lust. That's what Gothard teaches. Honey may have exaggerated, yes. But they do indeed believe that the victim bears some responsibility.
Who is "they" in your last sentence?

Quote:
They certainly aren't the only ones who teach this. Why do you think women in radical Islamic sects are forced to wear burqas -- to avoid sunburn?
If we were having a discussion about sexual assault victims in an Islamic society and the collective response of that society, I probably would not have raised a similar objection.

But if someone had asserted that the parents of a girl who was sexually assaulted believed it was her fault, and we know this, because they are Muslim, we would be having this identical conversation.

Actually, of course, we wouldn't. Because anyone who said such a thing would be roundly condemned, and I would only be one of many voices pointing out how unsupported this claim was.
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #229  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:06 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
We're not discussing a religious tenet here. This is not a dogmatic pillar of any faith. It's a singular point of an example counseling session. It's a fallacy to argue that every single Gothard expression is one they believe. If Gothard is a Red Sox fan, it's impossible to imagine that JimBob is a Yankees fan?
I dunno. Have you found Gothard documents explaining why the Red Sox are better than the Yankees? If so, I will accept that sports fandom is an integral part of the church.
  #230  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:09 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
Who is "they" in your last sentence?



If we were having a discussion about sexual assault victims in an Islamic society and the collective response of that society, I probably would not have raised a similar objection.

But if someone had asserted that the parents of a girl who was sexually assaulted believed it was her fault, and we know this, because they are Muslim, we would be having this identical conversation.

Actually, of course, we wouldn't. Because anyone who said such a thing would be roundly condemned, and I would only be one of many voices pointing out how unsupported this claim was.
Islam is a multifaceted religion. I can easily find evidence that Muslims don't all agree on the One true way to deal with sexual abuse. Can you show evidence that adherents to the Gothard version of Christianity have a similar diversity of opinion?
  #231  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:21 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 41,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
If we were having a discussion about sexual assault victims in an Islamic society and the collective response of that society, I probably would not have raised a similar objection.

But if someone had asserted that the parents of a girl who was sexually assaulted believed it was her fault, and we know this, because they are Muslim, we would be having this identical conversation.

Actually, of course, we wouldn't. Because anyone who said such a thing would be roundly condemned, and I would only be one of many voices pointing out how unsupported this claim was.
Except that as I read it, Gothard's cult is not comparable to Islam. It's comparable to a Sharia-practicing mosque whose imam fondles underage girls in his care and who publishes tracts blaming the victims of assault.

Nobody is saying that all Christians believe that victims of sexual assaults are responsible for the assault. Folks are saying that Gothard has published materials making that charge, and that the Duggars appear to go along with a lot of what he says about sexuality and modesty.
  #232  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:21 PM
Lobohan's Avatar
Lobohan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leffan's Ire
Posts: 13,375
I'm pretty sure sexual assault has, at least sometimes, a lust component. Saying it's only about power is a bit much.

It being about lust doesn't make the victim at fault, mind you. So the sickening cultists in question are still insanely wrong.



I now return you to Bricker bending over backwards to cut some slack to the cultists in question.
  #233  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:25 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
Islam is a multifaceted religion. I can easily find evidence that Muslims don't all agree on the One true way to deal with sexual abuse. Can you show evidence that adherents to the Gothard version of Christianity have a similar diversity of opinion?
Raise your hand if you understand who bears the burden of persuasion in an argument.

Your hand would not be raised.

It's always up to the person who raises the initial claim to advance proof in support of his proposition. If you advance a claim, I deny it, and then you say, "Well, prove me wrong!" you have committed the fallacy of "argument from ignorance."

Do you understand this fallacy and what it means, and why it's a fallacy?
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #234  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:29 PM
tnetennba is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,339
Do you understand what it means to be a bloviating pettifogger, and do you know why your presence here is shitting up the thread?
  #235  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:30 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
Raise your hand if you understand who bears the burden of persuasion in an argument.

Your hand would not be raised.

It's always up to the person who raises the initial claim to advance proof in support of his proposition. If you advance a claim, I deny it, and then you say, "Well, prove me wrong!" you have committed the fallacy of "argument from ignorance."

Do you understand this fallacy and what it means, and why it's a fallacy?
YOU compared it to Islam, not me. But ultimately, that's completely irrelevant. You made the rather extraordinary claim that's fair to assume (against all evidence) that the Duggars eschew certain teachings of Gothard. Even one example would be sufficient. Everyone else in this thread is (reasonably, imho) assuming that hey embrace his other teachings, so it logical to assume that they embrace this one as well. What is your evidence that they don't?
  #236  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:31 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
Except that as I read it, Gothard's cult is not comparable to Islam. It's comparable to a Sharia-practicing mosque whose imam fondles underage girls in his care and who publishes tracts blaming the victims of assault.

Nobody is saying that all Christians believe that victims of sexual assaults are responsible for the assault. Folks are saying that Gothard has published materials making that charge, and that the Duggars appear to go along with a lot of what he says about sexuality and modesty.
Yes. But the missing link is: do the Duggars go along with this, which is about assault and NOT about sexuality or modesty? Honey says they do. I say that's not a justified claim.
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #237  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:33 PM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 52,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
Who is "they" in your last sentence?
The Duggars and people who belong to their particular brand of religion.


Quote:
If we were having a discussion about sexual assault victims in an Islamic society and the collective response of that society, I probably would not have raised a similar objection.

But if someone had asserted that the parents of a girl who was sexually assaulted believed it was her fault, and we know this, because they are Muslim, we would be having this identical conversation.

Actually, of course, we wouldn't. Because anyone who said such a thing would be roundly condemned, and I would only be one of many voices pointing out how unsupported this claim was.
I'm not talking about mainstream Muslims and/or Christians. I'm talking about your extreme fundamentalists. And I think you know it.
We've given you plenty of cites to show that the sect the Duggars belong to teach that girls bear a responsibility NOT to tempt men's desires. (NOT that they are totally at fault, but that they do share some of the blame).

Here.

And THIS is what the program teaches about sexual abuse.

Notice certain parts under, "Why did God let it happen?":

-immodest dress
-indecent exposure

There's also a section called "Is there Any Guilt". As well as "If Abused Was Not At Fault". Notice the IF part.

If that's not enough for you, I give up. Bricker, the Straight Dope is not a court of law, and no one is required to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt here. You play this game every time and I can't be the only one who's tired of it.

Here's another cite, if you're interested.
  #238  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:34 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
YOU compared it to Islam, not me. But ultimately, that's completely irrelevant. You made the rather extraordinary claim that's fair to assume (against all evidence) that the Duggars eschew certain teachings of Gothard. Even one example would be sufficient. Everyone else in this thread is (reasonably, imho) assuming that hey embrace his other teachings, so it logical to assume that they embrace this one as well. What is your evidence that they don't?
No.

Have you read all the posts in this thread?

Guin brought up Islam first; I was replying to her.

Honey made the extraordinary claim that the Duggars believed sexual assault victims are at fault for their own assault. I replied to that claim.

Do you recall that sequence of events?
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #239  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:38 PM
Lobohan's Avatar
Lobohan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leffan's Ire
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
Raise your hand if you understand who bears the burden of persuasion in an argument.

Your hand would not be raised.

It's always up to the person who raises the initial claim to advance proof in support of his proposition. If you advance a claim, I deny it, and then you say, "Well, prove me wrong!" you have committed the fallacy of "argument from ignorance."

Do you understand this fallacy and what it means, and why it's a fallacy?
Don't you think these followers of a small cult, who advocate its teachings to the extent of turning Ms. Duggar into a human t-shirt cannon, might be presumed to follow said teachings across the gamut? If I meet a Catholic, that person may be for or against abortion. Casual believers believe whatever they want.

If I meet a member of a small cult that only a complete nutjob would be a member of, I think the presumption is that he takes his religion a little more seriously.

If the Duggars were casual about their beliefs, they could choose a less shitty religion. Is there anywhere you're aware of that they don't vapidly toe the line?

If you told me your nana is a, "Serious Fucking Catholic." I'd assume she'd be against abortion. I see no evidence that these whakadoos aren't Serious Fucking Gothtards.
  #240  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:38 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
Raise your hand if you understand who bears the burden of persuasion in an argument.

Your hand would not be raised.

It's always up to the person who raises the initial claim to advance proof in support of his proposition. If you advance a claim, I deny it, and then you say, "Well, prove me wrong!" you have committed the fallacy of "argument from ignorance."

Do you understand this fallacy and what it means, and why it's a fallacy?
My hand is ABSOLUTELY raised. In fact, I established why I believe that it is reasonable to assume that the Duggars do believe this utter crap. I then asked you to explain why YOU assume that they don't. Given the evidence that they adhere to the teaching of Gothard, please explain why that's still in doubt for you.
  #241  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:42 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinastasia View Post
The Duggars and people who belong to their particular brand of religion.




I'm not talking about mainstream Muslims and/or Christians. I'm talking about your extreme fundamentalists. And I think you know it.
We've given you plenty of cites to show that the sect the Duggars belong to teach that girls bear a responsibility NOT to tempt men's desires. (NOT that they are totally at fault, but that they do share some of the blame).

Here.

And THIS is what the program teaches about sexual abuse.

Notice certain parts under, "Why did God let it happen?":

-immodest dress
-indecent exposure

There's also a section called "Is there Any Guilt". As well as "If Abused Was Not At Fault". Notice the IF part.

If that's not enough for you, I give up. Bricker, the Straight Dope is not a court of law, and no one is required to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt here. You play this game every time and I can't be the only one who's tired of it.

Here's another cite, if you're interested.
And where is the cite that the Duggars believed, taught, or in any way accepted that?

See, this is the hop you want everyone to make. And it's not a justified one.

You were so eager to splash blame on Josh that you quoted him as saying he asked for forgiveness from his victims, and then indignantly criticized him for failing to ask forgiveness from his victims. That is pointed out, and you shrug it off and continue. Is it possible that you're so consumed with joy at this story that you have abandoned any interest in assessing the claims here fairly? You certainly eschewed fairness in your own recitation of Josh's faults in apologizing.
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #242  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:43 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
My hand is ABSOLUTELY raised. In fact, I established why I believe that it is reasonable to assume that the Duggars do believe this utter crap. I then asked you to explain why YOU assume that they don't. Given the evidence that they adhere to the teaching of Gothard, please explain why that's still in doubt for you.
Because there's a gap between following general religious teachings and slavish adherence to each and every utterance the man makes.
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #243  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:44 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
My hand is ABSOLUTELY raised. In fact, I established why I believe that it is reasonable to assume that the Duggars do believe this utter crap. I then asked you to explain why YOU assume that they don't. Given the evidence that they adhere to the teaching of Gothard, please explain why that's still in doubt for you.
In other words, I supported my claim. your claim, in response, was that there was no reason to believe that the Duggars supported every tenet. So I would like to see the reasons for your doubt. My reason for believing that they do support the tenets is that they have yet to denounce ANY tenet. PLEASE prove me wrong.
  #244  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:44 PM
River Hippie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: N.E. Indiana, USA
Posts: 5,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceplace57 View Post
LGBT rights are very firmly entrenched in America. the Family Research Council has absolutely no chance of ever reversing LGBT. Let them huff and puff all they want. Waste tons of money. They'll never get anywhere. There's no way anyone can reset the clock back to 1950. Won't happen. Guaranteed.
Agree.
  #245  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:47 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lobohan View Post
Don't you think these followers of a small cult, who advocate its teachings to the extent of turning Ms. Duggar into a human t-shirt cannon, might be presumed to follow said teachings across the gamut? If I meet a Catholic, that person may be for or against abortion. Casual believers believe whatever they want.

If I meet a member of a small cult that only a complete nutjob would be a member of, I think the presumption is that he takes his religion a little more seriously.

If the Duggars were casual about their beliefs, they could choose a less shitty religion. Is there anywhere you're aware of that they don't vapidly toe the line?

If you told me your nana is a, "Serious Fucking Catholic." I'd assume she'd be against abortion. I see no evidence that these whakadoos aren't Serious Fucking Gothtards.
Sure. Because abortion is a serious issue for Catholics, and the Church admits to no diversity of acceptable opinion on the issue.

But what does my nana believe about altar girls? She's a Serious Fucking Catholic. That's a Catholic issue. What does she think?
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #246  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:48 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
In other words, I supported my claim. your claim, in response, was that there was no reason to believe that the Duggars supported every tenet. So I would like to see the reasons for your doubt. My reason for believing that they do support the tenets is that they have yet to denounce ANY tenet. PLEASE prove me wrong.
Nice try.

But you can't transform me into the proponent. I was responding to Honey.
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #247  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:50 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
No.

Have you read all the posts in this thread?

Guin brought up Islam first; I was replying to her.

Honey made the extraordinary claim that the Duggars believed sexual assault victims are at fault for their own assault. I replied to that claim.

Do you recall that sequence of events?
Jesus God, Bricker. An assumption was made. You challenged, others supported with cites, I supported with cites. You continued to challenge. We have tried to explain, that. based on every other indicator available, it is reasonable to assume that the Duggars also accepted this as the church's teachings. And yet, I am the one who can't grasp the problem here?
  #248  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:50 PM
Lobohan's Avatar
Lobohan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leffan's Ire
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
Sure. Because abortion is a serious issue for Catholics, and the Church admits to no diversity of acceptable opinion on the issue.

But what does my nana believe about altar girls? She's a Serious Fucking Catholic. That's a Catholic issue. What does she think?
I dunno. What does the homeschooling literature she uses to brainwash her children say?
  #249  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:59 PM
AustinJane is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 28
I know it's been suggested many times, including Pit threads, but can y'all just pretend Bricker is not participating. I understand I am a dedicated lurker, and it appears it is easier said than done. But taking conversations off topic with his nit picking and obsession with semantics is his thing. I don't think he is capable of understanding his OCD style participation is not considered by most to be "on topic".

Back on topic. What kind of repercussions do y'all think may be felt by TLC? In hind site it seems they probably knew much more than they have admitted to at this point. The internet and Social Media is full of folks with excellent sleuthing skills. I will not be surprised if a lot more negative attention is coming their way as more is discovered about what they actually knew and when. I can't agree more with everyone's deduction that it is likely, victim blaming is the Duggar's default choice of response. Not only does it align with many of their stated beliefs, it is also very much human nature. Blaming the victim is often easier than dealing with the perpetrator. It is a common means of denial. Can we state that as a fact, no, but we have every right to state it as an opinion in a Cafe Society discussion of a Reality show family who has been found to have some serious skeletons in their closet.
  #250  
Old 05-23-2015, 11:05 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
Jesus God, Bricker. An assumption was made. You challenged, others supported with cites, I supported with cites. You continued to challenge. We have tried to explain, that. based on every other indicator available, it is reasonable to assume that the Duggars also accepted this as the church's teachings. And yet, I am the one who can't grasp the problem here?
Yes.

There's a difference between "It's reasonable to assume," and the bald assertion of fact.

It's a reasonable assumption. That doesn't make it likely, and it certainly doesn't allow for the confident assertion that Honey offered up.

But it's a reasonable assumption. Who said it wasn't? It's not fair to say it's likely.

Are you of the opinion that those mean the same thing?
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:17 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017