Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:00 AM
tnetennba is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,339
The story was less than 24 hours old. I think she just wanted some headlines about her.
  #152  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:55 AM
Honey is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Adirondacks ♀
Posts: 4,773
This is a quote from Michelle Duggar from the most recent episode, which was an interview by Erica Hill. She was talking about dressing modestly.

Quote:
"You can't control what someone else thinks, but we can control what we do. So if we stir up desires in someone else, that can't be righteously fulfilled, then we're responsible for that."
  #153  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:00 AM
Jeep's Phoenix's Avatar
Jeep's Phoenix is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 5,681
Made the mistake of looking at Ray Comfort's Facebook page and comments this morning...So, according to the logic employed by these people, it would be just fine to release imprisoned people -- no matter how severe their crimes -- as long as they've been forgiven by Jesus. >.<

Even if you truly believe that this guy has relented and found Jesus, I don't understand how you can excuse the cover-up.
  #154  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:21 AM
Sattua is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Close to home
Posts: 9,941
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeep's Phoenix View Post
Even if you truly believe that this guy has relented and found Jesus, I don't understand how you can excuse the cover-up.
Because they believe that evil is something you are, not something you do. Crimes are no longer crimes if you get right with the Lord, see?
  #155  
Old 05-23-2015, 09:28 AM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Honey View Post
This is a quote from Michelle Duggar from the most recent episode, which was an interview by Erica Hill. She was talking about dressing modestly.
Yes, but that doesn't seem to address sexual assault, which is not about sex but about power. Right?
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #156  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:35 AM
bup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: glenview,il,usa
Posts: 11,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
Yes, but that doesn't seem to address sexual assault, which is not about sex but about power. Right?
Right, so her reasoning is flawed, self-hating and dangerous. Right?
  #157  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:52 AM
ftg's Avatar
ftg is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Not the PNW :-(
Posts: 20,297
Who could have foreseen that devoting hours and hours to weird, messed up families would backfire on these cable networks?
  #158  
Old 05-23-2015, 10:59 AM
Randolph is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NxnyC
Posts: 1,234
It's quite a shame when reality intrudes on reality shows.
  #159  
Old 05-23-2015, 11:36 AM
kaylasdad99 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,025
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinastasia View Post
And his so-called "apology" seemed more self-serving than anything else. Did you read what he said?

“I understood that if I continued down this wrong road that I would end up ruining my life,” said Duggar. “I sought forgiveness from those I had wronged and asked Christ to forgive me and come into my life.”

HIS life. He asked CHRIST to forgive him. Not his victims. He didn't stop because he was afraid of the harm he might be doing to other people. He was afraid because of what it might to do HIM. Fuck him.
Guin, I've color-coded the contradiction in your post. However justified the rest of the post is, the contradiction kinda taints it, and makes the whole thing more easily attacked (or dismissed) by those who are inclined to do so.

Bricker, in my view, is generally honest enough to compartmentalize his objections to the specific contradiction, and not explicitly declare the entire post to be invalid (although he will allow his overall tone to invite the reader to do so); it might be wise to keep in mind that he's not the ONLY person who might be motivated to nitpick the controversy to death.

My point is that with a little more care, you could avoid handing Bricker ammunition like the bit I pointed out above.

As for you, Bricker, while BigT's comments in post 148 touched on it, I'd like to elaborate on a specific facet of your contributions to this thread. If we stipulate that every statement of condemnation leveled at young Master Duggar in this thread, and to which you have raised your objections is unproven, it still seems to me that unproven is the limit to the basis on which they can be legitimately impeached. And yet you freely and repeatedly* attack them as "inaccurate."

I submit that "inaccurate" is a descriptor which can be applied to a statement only when the statement's inaccuracy has been established. I'd be grateful if you would either walk back your claims of inaccuracy (and baselessness, if it's not too much trouble), or instruct me in how my observations are inadequate to the situation. Thanks very much, and I hope you and your family are enjoying the holiday weekend.


*Repeatedly: cite1, cite2
  #160  
Old 05-23-2015, 11:41 AM
Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
Well, a little bit of good news. The producer of the show claims the camera crews have left the Duggar home and whether or not they return has not been determined.
  #161  
Old 05-23-2015, 11:55 AM
SaharaTea is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: WY
Posts: 2,438
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceplace57 View Post
I just can't condem an Adult for something they did in childhood. That goes against everything our modern juvenile courts stand for. They even seal juvenile court records when the kid turns 18. Giving them a fresh start in life as an adult. How they use that second chance is up to them. Some troubled kids spend their adult lives in and out of prison. Some live responsible and productive lives. It's important they aren't stigmatized and condemned as adults for something they did as a juvenile. Getting a job for example, or joining the military. Their childhood court records are sealed for a reason.
In all your posts you've said absolutely nothing about the impact Josh's crimes had on his victims. It's like you have zero concern or even awareness of them. Josh's actions didn't exist in a vacuum, they had real and life-long consequences for at least five young girls. So forgive me if I'm not that worried about the stigma on poor Josh, because the impact on his victims is much, much worse.
  #162  
Old 05-23-2015, 12:02 PM
soonerblue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: 35N98W
Posts: 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnetennba View Post
Talk to anyone in child development -- they will tell you that some forms of curiosity are normal, and others, like feeling up your baby sister, are absolutely not normal, not youthful indiscretions, not misdeeds of a teen, but signs of serious trouble that need to be treated. The Duggars did NOT seek treatment, they did some random things that now look like an effort to stall so the molestations were too far back to prosecute.
I was curious about what age pedophilia could first manifest in a person, so I Googled a bit, found the following, but it only raised more questions.

"What the Josh Duggar Fiasco Can Teach Us About Pedophilia"

http://time.com/3894293/josh-duggar-...ms-pedophilia/

I did find this interesting:
"...All of this points either to the genes or prenatal womb environment, or both, meaning that pedophilia is innate, unchosen and as fixed as anyone else’s sexuality."

It also had a link to this:

"Arkansas Police Destroy Record of Josh Duggar Investigation"

http://time.com/3894843/josh-duggar-...ord-destroyed/

"...Duggar was accused of fondling five girls in 2002 and 2003."

So it was more than once.
  #163  
Old 05-23-2015, 12:09 PM
Baker is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tottering-on-the-Brink
Posts: 20,426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgenstern View Post
Well, a little bit of good news. The producer of the show claims the camera crews have left the Duggar home and whether or not they return has not been determined.
I posted yesterday about the show being pulled by TLC, but I hadn't heard your info above.
  #164  
Old 05-23-2015, 12:15 PM
silenus's Avatar
silenus is offline
Isaiah 1:15/Screw the NRA
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 51,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by soonerblue View Post
It also had a link to this:

"Arkansas Police Destroy Record of Josh Duggar Investigation"

http://time.com/3894843/josh-duggar-...ord-destroyed/

"...Duggar was accused of fondling five girls in 2002 and 2003."
A judge ordered the records destroyed? Cover-up much? The Duggars are so ingrained in Arkansas politics that I expect there will be quite a few records destroyed over the next few weeks.
  #165  
Old 05-23-2015, 12:21 PM
beagledave is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Davenport, IA
Posts: 5,590
More examples of the Duggar's attitudes towards sexual ASSAULT.

http://gawker.com/the-duggar-homesch...sex-1706406324
  #166  
Old 05-23-2015, 12:28 PM
monstro is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 20,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by beagledave View Post
More examples of the Duggar's attitudes towards sexual ASSAULT.

http://gawker.com/the-duggar-homesch...sex-1706406324
I hope one of the daughters breaks away from this crazy clan and explains how things really went down when the cameras stopped rolling. It's so terrible, yet fascinating at the same time.
  #167  
Old 05-23-2015, 12:29 PM
joyfool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Texas
Posts: 9,813
The most recent observation (?) holds that the alleged friend of Jim Bob, Officer Child Porn, was also some sort of licensing agent that allowed Josh to own a car lot. I have no idea if that's verifiable, but depending on the timing, could explain much. Also, apparently Josh was already being something (investigated?) for a purported $50,000+ in fraud. Just the laundry keeps piling up. All with good, old mom and dad pretending it didn't exist so they could whore their kids out.
  #168  
Old 05-23-2015, 12:35 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by bup View Post
Right, so her reasoning is flawed, self-hating and dangerous. Right?
I don't know.

But it's certainly inapplicable to sexual assault, and what the Duggars believe about sexual assault is the basis for Honey's claim and my attack on that claim.
  #169  
Old 05-23-2015, 12:42 PM
tnetennba is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,339
Maybe the Duggars never took Womens Studies in college and haven't learned the trope about sexual assault and so it does not figure into their ideology about sexual assault having to do with wanton sluts who are asking for it (while sleeping fully dressed in their beds at age five).
  #170  
Old 05-23-2015, 12:51 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
Guin, I've color-coded the contradiction in your post. However justified the rest of the post is, the contradiction kinda taints it, and makes the whole thing more easily attacked (or dismissed) by those who are inclined to do so.

Bricker, in my view, is generally honest enough to compartmentalize his objections to the specific contradiction, and not explicitly declare the entire post to be invalid (although he will allow his overall tone to invite the reader to do so); it might be wise to keep in mind that he's not the ONLY person who might be motivated to nitpick the controversy to death.

My point is that with a little more care, you could avoid handing Bricker ammunition like the bit I pointed out above.

As for you, Bricker, while BigT's comments in post 148 touched on it, I'd like to elaborate on a specific facet of your contributions to this thread. If we stipulate that every statement of condemnation leveled at young Master Duggar in this thread, and to which you have raised your objections is unproven, it still seems to me that unproven is the limit to the basis on which they can be legitimately impeached. And yet you freely and repeatedly* attack them as "inaccurate."

I submit that "inaccurate" is a descriptor which can be applied to a statement only when the statement's inaccuracy has been established. I'd be grateful if you would either walk back your claims of inaccuracy (and baselessness, if it's not too much trouble), or instruct me in how my observations are inadequate to the situation. Thanks very much, and I hope you and your family are enjoying the holiday weekend.


*Repeatedly: cite1, cite2
It's beyond cavil that they are unproven.

But I don't agree that it's incorrect to call them "inaccurate," as well.

When a gratuitous assertion is made, it may be equally gratuitously denied. The assertion is that the claims are accurate. When I call them "inaccurate," I am denying their accuracy. This is not a new claim on my part for which I bear the burden of persuasion. It's the gainsay of the gratuitous assertion. Substantiating a claim belongs to the person making it; denying an unsubstantiated claim is a freebie.

"Baselessness," should be obvious as well: without suitable evidence upon which to base a claim, it's a baseless claim.

And I remain genuinely baffled as to why it's necessary to pepper legitimate attacks against the Duggars and the FRC with these unsupportable claims. There's plenty of obvious, legitimate criticisms that can be leveled here. There are plenty of others that are debatable, and can at least be argued.

Why, in the midst of this wealth of ammunition, does anyone choose to use a crappy argument like Honey's? It's as though I walked into an armory, bypassed the full auto rifles, the large bore handguns, and the anti-personnel grenades and said "Ah ha! I shall attack them with this large soap bubble!"

It's almost as though the situation has created a feeding frenzy. You pointed out Guin's self-contradictory sentences -- what does through a person's mind to type out "I sought forgiveness from those I had wronged," and then three sentences later angrily proclaim "Not his victims!" It's almost like a hunger to get something out there, anything to show how...how....how WRONG those dang Duggars are.

Why does anyone tolerate that? Why are kaylasdad and I the only two to point out the absurdity of that type of criticism?

You have a teenager that sexually fondled his prepubescent siblings. Why isn't that enough outrage? It's a bizarre, disgusting revelation. It's not a nine year old playing doctor with his eight-year-old sister. It's a sexually mature teen seeking a sexual encounter with a prepubescent. Yuck.
  #171  
Old 05-23-2015, 01:42 PM
kaylasdad99 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,025
Thank you for your response, Bricker. I still maintain that "inaccurate" is an inappropriate term in this conversation, and here's my thinking:

A statement of fact has a truth value, whether that truth value has generally been established as apparent to the disinterested observer, or whether it has not. ISTM that there are three distinct categories that can be used to describe the truth value of any assertion: accurate, inaccurate, and of undetermined accuracy. One could arguably usefully substitute proven, disproven, and unproven as descriptors for these categories. In the context of an online debate (as opposed to, say, a jury trial), I do not agree that it is legitimate to conflate the second and third categories, any more than it is to conflate the first and third.

Similarly, our not being in a courtroom (once again, ISTM) suggests that the bar for "baselessness" could be raised a bit higher than "suitable evidence upon which to base a claim," particularly in the absence of anyone vested with the authority to decide what is and what is not "suitable." I might not be comfortable with innuendo, but extrapolation from what we know of Gothardite teaching materials, and the degree to which the family has already demonstrated strict adherence to Gothardite principles should move the assessment of some statements from "baseless" to AT LEAST "circumstantial."

Last edited by kaylasdad99; 05-23-2015 at 01:43 PM.
  #172  
Old 05-23-2015, 04:41 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,023
Bricker, you asked why it is “likely” that the Duggars may indulge in victim shaming. Here is why it seems likely to me:

The Duggars use the texts and materials from ATI and Institute in Basic Life Principles. They have, I believe, discussed these materials on their show.

They were speakers at a Gothard conference in 2014, and members of the family have reportedly spoken at several Basic Life Principles seminars. In fact, these seminars are promoted on their website.

After Gothard’s sex scandals, the Duggars did not appear to make much of an effort to distance themselves from the behavior of their buddy, Bill Gothard.

We have now seen two documents from said Institute that appear to put at least some of the blame for the abuse squarely on the victims’ narrow shoulders.

The documents make much of “defrauding” and the importance of “modesty.”
Those are two much used words in the Duggar lexicon;
Michelle actually had the show put black boxes over her KNEES to preserve her modesty in a shot that inadvertently showed them. (see previous article about Duggars and Bill Gothard)
She has referred to the fact that when she was younger, she dressed immodestly and this was defrauding men that saw her dressed that way.

The document also mentions that a victim may be to blame if she leaves the protection of her parents, and this appears to be related to the courtship practices highlighted on the show. A couple that is courting is never alone; family is always with them.

The daughters have said, in their book, how important it is to behave and dress modestly to avoid being in immoral or unsafe situations.

Does this all add up to evidence that would sway a jury? No, of course not. Does it definitively mean that the Duggars are inclined to victim blame? I hope not, for the sake of their girls. Does it make it likely, in my mind, that the family also embraces the sexual abuse counseling tactics promoted through the Institute they are immersed in? I would say yes, it is “likely.”

Your mileage may vary.

ETA: I believe most, if not all, of the linked cites have already been posted in this thread. I merely want to point out that when taken together, it paints a worrisome picture of the family in terms of blame and reactions to sexual abuse.

Last edited by raventhief; 05-23-2015 at 04:44 PM. Reason: Clarification
  #173  
Old 05-23-2015, 05:44 PM
Love Rhombus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The suburbs of Innsmouth
Posts: 4,439
It's also creepy that Josh (along with his brothers) basically had control over who his sisters could date and marry.
  #174  
Old 05-23-2015, 06:02 PM
alphaboi867 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: the Keystone State
Posts: 14,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baker View Post
I posted yesterday about the show being pulled by TLC, but I hadn't heard your info above.
TLC pulled reruns of the show from their schedule (the latest production season already ended), but haven't officially cancelled it yet. I wonder who ordered the crews to stop filming; TLC or Duggars. Also what rights does TLC have over the raw footage they already have; do the Duggars still have a say in how it's edited, or can TLC do whatever they want with it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by monstro View Post
I hope one of the daughters breaks away from this crazy clan and explains how things really went down when the cameras stopped rolling. It's so terrible, yet fascinating at the same time.
I've always the real entertainment will be in 10-20 yrs when the kids are adults and start breaking away and selling their own stories.
  #175  
Old 05-23-2015, 06:08 PM
salinqmind is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Liverpool NY USA
Posts: 10,147
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.

Last edited by salinqmind; 05-23-2015 at 06:09 PM.
  #176  
Old 05-23-2015, 06:09 PM
Honey is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Adirondacks ♀
Posts: 4,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by Love Rhombus View Post
It's also creepy that Josh (along with his brothers) basically had control over who his sisters could date and marry.
The father chooses the person his daughter courts, not her brothers. The father has control over his daughter, until he hands over control to her husband.

Why do you think the brothers have this responsibility?
  #177  
Old 05-23-2015, 06:16 PM
LavenderBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 6,635
Here's an article about their idiotic cult of purity and how it screws over just about everyone. For all we're told about what great parents they are the truth is that the Duggars are actually really shitty at it. The article makes the excellent point that the Duggars stupid cultish beliefs made a bad situation even worse. Josh and his sisters needed counseling. Instead they got a stinky pile of medieval bullshit that probably only made things much worse.
  #178  
Old 05-23-2015, 06:20 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Honey View Post
The father chooses the person his daughter courts, not her brothers. The father has control over his daughter, until he hands over control to her husband.

Why do you think the brothers have this responsibility?
Well, the brothers do have some influence:

http://www.today.com/parents/duggars...ing-2D79464674

Rule 3: Brothers know best.
All of the Duggar boys have been chaperones to Ben and Jessa, even the younger ones who will go along with them to a coffee shop or out to dinner. Jim Bob and Michelle say there is something special about the way brothers size up a potential suitor. “The brothers can see how they treat mom and dad, or see whether they show the sisters respect,” Michelle says, adding that each brother has given Jessa their opinion of Ben.


But it's ultimately the father's call.
  #179  
Old 05-23-2015, 06:46 PM
aceplace57 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: CentralArkansas
Posts: 26,289
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaharaTea View Post
In all your posts you've said absolutely nothing about the impact Josh's crimes had on his victims. It's like you have zero concern or even awareness of them. Josh's actions didn't exist in a vacuum, they had real and life-long consequences for at least five young girls. So forgive me if I'm not that worried about the stigma on poor Josh, because the impact on his victims is much, much worse.
It's a given that the girls were counseled and comforted. I'm a dad and can't imagine the horror of discovering that a trusted family member touched either of my daughters. Getting my daughters help to cope would be my first concern. Heck, my entire family would need counseling to deal with something this terrible.

Anytime a kid commits a serious crime rehabilitation is in society's best interest. A 14 year old still has an average of another 66 years to live. Do we want vengeance and throw him/her in a cell to rot for a few years? Then watch them get out and spend those 66 years committing more and more serious crimes? It's the taxpayers that foots the bill for the court cases and prison terms that person serves. Rehabilitate that 14 year old in prison or some outside court ordered program. Now, you have a productive and lawful member of society.

It was decided in America at least 80 to 100 years ago to focus the Justice System on rehabilitation. Not only to redirect a troubled and wasted life, but it's in society's long term, best interest.

I don't know for certain that Josh hasn't touched a kid since he was caught and talked to the State police. But, so far there's no indication that he has done anything but live an upstanding life as an adult.

Last edited by aceplace57; 05-23-2015 at 06:50 PM.
  #180  
Old 05-23-2015, 06:55 PM
LavenderBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 6,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceplace57 View Post
It's a given that the girls were counseled and comforted.
No it isn't. That's the problem. The comforting the girls likely received probably focused on blaming them. But we don't know because despite the spite the fact that they tell us everything, I'm pretty sure they haven't told us what exactly they did to help the girls after they were molested by their bro. The parents are smug, incompetent assholes with very little defense for their actions here.
  #181  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:04 PM
tnetennba is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,339
The parents say everybody involved got counseling, but the counseling the girls received most likely was the Gothard blame-and-shame cited above. It has been confirmed that it is where Josh went for his counseling.

Last edited by tnetennba; 05-23-2015 at 07:05 PM.
  #182  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:06 PM
Jeep's Phoenix's Avatar
Jeep's Phoenix is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 5,681
"Upstanding"? You do know what the Family Research Council is, right??
  #183  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:07 PM
aceplace57 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: CentralArkansas
Posts: 26,289
Typically a pastor does a lot of counseling for families in crises. I'd guess these days modern pastors have a list of health care professionals they can refer people to. My pastor has helped me through several difficult times in my life. A good pastor makes hospital visits, home visits, and makes himself available whenever a family is in crises.

I've heard the Duggars are in a more strict, maybe Pentecostal? Religion. You may be correct that their pastor doesn't use or refer people for professional counseling. That would be a mistake. Those girls certainly needed professional counseling to cope.
  #184  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:09 PM
tnetennba is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceplace57 View Post
Typically a pastor does a lot of counseling for families in crises. I'd guess these days modern pastors have a list of health care professionals they can refer people to. My pastor has helped me through several difficult times in my life. A good pastor makes hospital visits, home visits, and makes himself available whenever a family is in crises.

I've heard the Duggars are in a more strict, maybe Pentecostal? Religion. You may be correct that their pastor doesn't use or refer people for professional counseling. That would be a mistake. Those girls certainly needed professional counseling to cope.
The approach to counseling girls on sexual abuse is cited above. It is absolutely sickening.
  #185  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:16 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
Thank you for your response, Bricker. I still maintain that "inaccurate" is an inappropriate term in this conversation, and here's my thinking:

A statement of fact has a truth value, whether that truth value has generally been established as apparent to the disinterested observer, or whether it has not. ISTM that there are three distinct categories that can be used to describe the truth value of any assertion: accurate, inaccurate, and of undetermined accuracy. One could arguably usefully substitute proven, disproven, and unproven as descriptors for these categories. In the context of an online debate (as opposed to, say, a jury trial), I do not agree that it is legitimate to conflate the second and third categories, any more than it is to conflate the first and third.
OK, that's a fair approach.

I was using the term in response to a claim of certainty. That is, what justified my claim of "inaccurate" was as a gratuitous rebuttal to the claim that we know what the Duggars think.

But your assessment divorces my comment from a reply to Honey and treats it as a first-instance claim. I absolutely agree that it cannot stand in that context.

Quote:
Similarly, our not being in a courtroom (once again, ISTM) suggests that the bar for "baselessness" could be raised a bit higher than "suitable evidence upon which to base a claim," particularly in the absence of anyone vested with the authority to decide what is and what is not "suitable." I might not be comfortable with innuendo, but extrapolation from what we know of Gothardite teaching materials, and the degree to which the family has already demonstrated strict adherence to Gothardite principles should move the assessment of some statements from "baseless" to AT LEAST "circumstantial."
In what specific way does that differ from "innuendo?"
  #186  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:16 PM
aceplace57 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: CentralArkansas
Posts: 26,289
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnetennba View Post
The approach to counseling girls on sexual abuse is cited above. It is absolutely sickening.
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.

Last edited by aceplace57; 05-23-2015 at 07:17 PM.
  #187  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:17 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
The approach to counseling girls on sexual abuse is cited above. It is absolutely sickening.
There has been no showing at all that the approach to counseling girls cited above is what the girls got.

Has there?
  #188  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:19 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
The parents say everybody involved got counseling, but the counseling the girls received most likely was the Gothard blame-and-shame cited above. It has been confirmed that it is where Josh went for his counseling.
And you know this was "likely," because you are a mind reader, or were a fly on the wall when the events happened and have only recently reincarnated into human form, or were working for the NSA at the time and used the NSA's monitoring suite of tools to hear it all.

Or because "possible" plus "a target I don't like" combines to create "likely."

Mmmmmmm?

Last edited by Bricker; 05-23-2015 at 07:20 PM.
  #189  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:22 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
And you know this was "likely," because you are a mind reader, or were a fly on the wall when the events happened and have only recently reincarnated into human form, or were working for the NSA at the time and used the NSA's monitoring suite of tools to hear it all.

Or because "possible" plus "a target I don't like" combines to create "likely."

Mmmmmmm?
Does "likely" now mean "certainly"? Because fly on wall and NSA employment would "certainly" establish what happened, instead of what appears to be "likely" from everything else the Duggars have CHOSEN to broadcast about their lives and beliefs.
  #190  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:25 PM
tnetennba is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,339
http://gawker.com/the-duggar-homesch...sex-1706406324
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/foun...d-young-women/

There's a bunch more links that all indicate both the Gothard treatment plan for sexual abuse and the strong ties between the Duggars and the Gothard program. Your view that we should assume they didn't really believe the practices they preached or the programs they participated in has jumped the shark, adopted little Danny, stolen the kangaroo, and fired Smithers.

Last edited by tnetennba; 05-23-2015 at 07:25 PM.
  #191  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:27 PM
alphaboi867 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: the Keystone State
Posts: 14,413
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.
The only classmates a Duggar child has are their own siblings.
  #192  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:27 PM
jayjay is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 37,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceplace57 View Post
That's probably the victim. Or at least that's the person her schoolmates will assume is the victim.
One of the victims. There were 5 victims. Four of them were his sisters.
  #193  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:27 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
Does "likely" now mean "certainly"? Because fly on wall and NSA employment would "certainly" establish what happened, instead of what appears to be "likely" from everything else the Duggars have CHOSEN to broadcast about their lives and beliefs.
No, no -- both flies and NSA eavesdroppers have limits. The auditory processing power of the musca domestica is questionable at best. And the NSA is limited to phone conversations.

This is simply a case of "That's just what people like that WOULD do, isn't it?"
  #194  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:32 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
No, no -- both flies and NSA eavesdroppers have limits. The auditory processing power of the musca domestica is questionable at best. And the NSA is limited to phone conversations.

This is simply a case of "That's just what people like that WOULD do, isn't it?"
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?"

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.

ETA: and if by "people like that" you mean "people who follow the Gothard teachings" and by "WOULD do" you mean "use those teachings to deal with a horrific situation in their home," then yes, that's what I mean.

Last edited by raventhief; 05-23-2015 at 07:34 PM. Reason: Cause I just can't leave it alone.
  #195  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:37 PM
jayjay is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 37,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
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.
Newer models of the Litigatron 2000 emulate extra-courtroom thinking more deftly, I hear.
  #196  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:53 PM
SaharaTea is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: WY
Posts: 2,438
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceplace57 View Post
I don't know for certain that Josh hasn't touched a kid since he was caught and talked to the State police. But, so far there's no indication that he has done anything but live an upstanding life as an adult.
Then you and I have very different definitions of "upstanding." He worked for a conservative lobbying group which actively works against gay people, viewing them as sexual deviants and child predators. All while hiding behind the fact that he was a sexual predator to his own siblings. That's not my idea of an upstanding life.
  #197  
Old 05-23-2015, 07:59 PM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 52,903
kaylasdad99, you're right and I suppose I was too quick to condemn Duggar. HOWEVER, I still feel that he seems more concerned about his own image (his comment about ruining his own life, for example.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
Yes, but that doesn't seem to address sexual assault, which is not about sex but about power. Right?
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.

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.
  #198  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:19 PM
joyfool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Texas
Posts: 9,813
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.

God. Do you know nothing about what your spouting about? They don't go to school. They're all only stuck with each other, all the time. Even the most basic facts of the situation might help you understand how cultish, insular and damaging these groups are. And, you know, reading the links about the behaviors they engage in and the belief systems they purport to have and inflict on their children.

Also, for this sort of fundamentalism, there's no such thing as a "modern" pastor. If these girls were traded for goats and frankincense, I wouldn't be surprised.

On another note, either Gawker or Defamer (I've seen it at both) has now put out a call for people to start sharing their Duggar stories. One, if true, already paints another picture of just exactly how homophobic Michelle is by her getting a former crew member fired for being gay. I do believe the bloom will be off the rose soon, no matter how much TLC may try to drag their feet and still milk the dying cow.
  #199  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:30 PM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 52,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceplace57 View Post
But, so far there's no indication that he has done anything but live an upstanding life as an adult.
Really?

Quote:
Until Friday, Josh represented the Family Research Council, which claimed in a 1999 publication that “one of the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the ‘prophets’ of a new sexual order,” according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Apparently, you and I have a different idea of what living an "upstanding life" means.
  #200  
Old 05-23-2015, 08:32 PM
aceplace57 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: CentralArkansas
Posts: 26,289
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaharaTea View Post
Then you and I have very different definitions of "upstanding." He worked for a conservative lobbying group which actively works against gay people, viewing them as sexual deviants and child predators. All while hiding behind the fact that he was a sexual predator to his own siblings. That's not my idea of an upstanding life.
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.

Last edited by aceplace57; 05-23-2015 at 08:34 PM.
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 03:35 AM.

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