How 'bout them Duggars?

Armoured · May 24, 2015

Mayzoo said:
The only thing I have seen so far that indicates the parents may blame the victims is this story they frequently tell their children which states both it is the individual's responsibility to protect their purity from others wanting to steal it, and that once that purity is stolen, you become essentially used, and damaged:

“Imagine that your parents are going to surprise you and give you a brand-new bike for Christmas. Two weeks before Christmas, they buy your bike and hide it in the storage shed in the backyard. But then the boy next door sneaks into the shed and borrows your new bike; he stunt-rides it up and down the back alley.

“On Christmas morning your parents lead you out to the shed to reveal the special gift they bought for you, and as they open the door and say, ‘Surprise!’ they’re just as surprised as you are. You’re all shocked to see that the bike looks like it’s been thrown off a cliff. The front fender is missing, and the front tire is warped so it rubs on the frame. It’s dirty, the paint is all scratched and chipped, and the seat has a big rip in it. It looks worse than something you would have bought at a garage sale.

“I’m sure you would still be grateful for the bike, and you would have fun riding it, but it won’t be in the condition your parents had hoped and dreamed it would be when you received it. You would miss out on a lot of the enjoyment they meant for you to have.

“In that same way, we don’t want any boy (or girl) to come and steal your purity.”

This story is found in their book "A Love That Multiplies"

Because a person's worth is totally comparable to the shininess of a bike.

LinkH · May 24, 2015

Hetta said:
I have no idea what this means. Do you mean "not to show cleavage" - seriously?

Sometimes the site is slow and I type faster than the message box for posting will accept and things get omitted. Yes, I meant cover up.

Little girls generally don't have cleavage,

A teen might. But why would you say you heard they bandaged them if they didn't have them? It is your story.

and how disgusting to tell your daughters to bandage their breasts. Perhaps they should practice foot binding too.

I didn't know you were talking about something like foot binding. What is your source? That would be strange indeed, so strange that I would believe it just based on "I heard that..."

The tame policeman they got involved was later himself jailed for child inappropriate contentography so he was a great choice. Perhaps they knew he would keep it quiet. Could have even been a quid pro quo. The whole thing is disgusting.

I agree that it is disgusting. It would be unrealistic to think they knew about the policeman's illegal activities. Most people don't advertise that sort of thing. If the police was required to report it and didn't, he was at fault legally. I don't know that parents have to report these things in Arkansas. Some states haver people required to report.

Then those parents are shameful. Parents have no right to keep their kids sheltered from the consequences of their actions - that's how potential rapists are born.

You don't know that they did. They could have 'whooped' him, punished him, etc. in ways not shown on the show. I don't know what happens to teens who go to the state for this sort of thing. I wouldn't be surprised if some people in the state would consider this 'normal childhood sexual exploration'. Some so-called experts think it's normal for kids to 'play doctor'. Of course, he was 14 the girl were asleep, which is pretty messed up. I don't think there should be any acceptance of this sort of thing. The state could also just go for the most extreme cases, which could be why this case went to further. We don't know.

I don't think reporting things like this to the police is always THE right thing to do. What are they going to do with the child? Put him somewhere where he will learn to be a real menace to society when he comes out? Can the parents fix the situation? If the child needs to 'pay for it', why does the state have to dole it out instead of the parents? If he needs counseling, why does it have to go through the state, through some judge-- when you don't know what he will do. Many judges have shown themselves to be untrustworthy on matters of basic sexual morality these days. If it goes to the state, then there is a record, and anyone can find out that the other kids have been molested and probably could guess which ones-- especially in this case where the kids are celebrities.

LinkH · May 24, 2015

Hetta said:
Yes. Both he and his parents have repeatedly slandered LGBT's by saying they are perverts and are dangerous around children. The parents continued to say this after they knew that their son was dangerous around children. I can't even begin to express my disgust.

People living a homosexual lifestyle are perverts, but so are those in incest. Is Josh Duggar no longer allowed to say that thieves and murderers re doing wrong?

evoeth · May 24, 2015

LinkH said:
People living a homosexual lifestyle are perverts, but so are those in incest. Is Josh Duggar no longer allowed to say that thieves and murderers re doing wrong?

This is why I have a problem with the concept of sin. Sin makes a moral equivocation of many different issues. Some of those issues, people don't even find to be a problem.

Sure Josh is allowed to call murders and thieves as moral wrong doers. But he, and the Duggar family, are no longer allowed to make the (implicit or explicit) claim that extreme "Christian" living by retreating from the world and demonizing pop culture and sexuality, are some sort of shield against moral wrongs. They did not raise better kids than most parents and they sure get a lot of credit for it though.

Blue Wren · May 24, 2015

Must you be married, to participate in this thread? I'd like to post here, but I'm unclear on the rules.

Armoured · May 24, 2015

LinkH said:
People living a homosexual lifestyle are perverts, but so are those in incest. Is Josh Duggar no longer allowed to say that thieves and murderers re doing wrong?

Pretty sure Christ was pretty specific about this, actually. Something about motes and beams?

Hetta · May 24, 2015

LinkH said:
A teen might. But why would you say you heard they bandaged them if they didn't have them? It is your story.

If Josh was 14 and the five girls were younger, four of them sisters, it's literally impossible that they all be teens. So even assuming they are each a year apart, we are talking about 13, 12, 11 and 10. I have no idea of the ages or genders of the children but this is all I can come up with. But even if the kids had cleavage, why are they to bandage their breasts? Does it really have to go to such extremes to stop a BROTHER lusting after his sisters? I was raised in a mixed gender family, my mom never made any of us girls bandage up our breasts. And yet somehow our brothers weren't tempted to grope us. By putting the only emphasis for sexual behavior on the girls (don't arouse your brothers) this family is in fact encouraging a rapist mentality.

I didn't know you were talking about something like foot binding. What is your source? That would be strange indeed, so strange that I would believe it just based on "I heard that..."

Okay, the foot binding comment was a kind of joke, but based upon the reality that patriarchal China was all about keeping women as repressed as possible, hence the binding of the feet.

I agree that it is disgusting. It would be unrealistic to think they knew about the policeman's illegal activities. Most people don't advertise that sort of thing. If the police was required to report it and didn't, he was at fault legally. I don't know that parents have to report these things in Arkansas. Some states haver people required to report.

Nobody knows what they did or didn't know. However, when the person who found out about what had been going on (remember that the Duggars did not "confess" until they were outed), the police immediately interviewed the girls. Because it's a serious risk. Because if your kids are molested under your roof, typically they will be taken away to a safe place. Because it's important that the kids be safe. This shouldn't be complicated to understand. These parents failed their kids by allowing the boy back into the house after nothing more than a couple of weeks spent working with a family friend.

You don't know that they did. They could have 'whooped' him, punished him, etc. in ways not shown on the show. I don't know what happens to teens who go to the state for this sort of thing. I wouldn't be surprised if some people in the state would consider this 'normal childhood sexual exploration'. Some so-called experts think it's normal for kids to 'play doctor'. Of course, he was 14 the girl were asleep, which is pretty messed up. I don't think there should be any acceptance of this sort of thing. The state could also just go for the most extreme cases, which could be why this case went to further. We don't know.

I don't think reporting things like this to the police is always THE right thing to do. What are they going to do with the child? Put him somewhere where he will learn to be a real menace to society when he comes out? Can the parents fix the situation? If the child needs to 'pay for it', why does the state have to dole it out instead of the parents? If he needs counseling, why does it have to go through the state, through some judge-- when you don't know what he will do. Many judges have shown themselves to be untrustworthy on matters of basic sexual morality these days. If it goes to the state, then there is a record, and anyone can find out that the other kids have been molested and probably could guess which ones-- especially in this case where the kids are celebrities.

No it's not normal childhood sexual exploration when an older brother molests four sisters and a family friend. If kids are playing at "doctor" together, although I would as a parent talk to them both and discourage the exploration, (but do it in a way that wouldn't cause any psychological damage i.e. shame.) However, if parents knew that their son had touched their daughters and a female friend sexually, while they slept, both on the breasts and vagina (this is according to police reports) then they would be irresponsible in the extreme. The risk of permanent damage to their daughters (and I'm not talking about their "marriageable value", I'm talking about PTSD amongst other side effects) is extreme, and the risk of raising their son/s as future rapists is equally as high. If the truth does come out, then the parents risk losing all of their kids.

It doesn't matter what Christians think about judges, Romans 13: 1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-17 spell out specifically that Christians must be subject to the authorities. There's no getting around that.

LinkH · May 24, 2015

Armoured said:
Pretty sure Christ was pretty specific about this, actually. Something about motes and beams?

Armoured, Christ said to remove the beam from your own eye so that you may see clearly to remove the mote from your brother's eye. Do you have a reason to believe that Josh Duggar has not done that?

Also, do you think it is wrong to molest children? If you say 'yes' and agree that it is wrong, then are you violating the words of Christ? If calling sin sin is what Jesus is talking about, then you should not call murder or child molestation sins. But that is not what Jesus is talking about.

Armoured · May 24, 2015

LinkH said:
Armoured, Christ said to remove the beam from your own eye so that you may see clearly to remove the mote from your brother's eye. Do you have a reason to believe that Josh Duggar has not done that?

Also, do you think it is wrong to molest children? If you say 'yes' and agree that it is wrong, then are you violating the words of Christ? If calling sin sin is what Jesus is talking about, then you should not call murder or child molestation sins. But that is not what Jesus is talking about.

evoeth · May 24, 2015

Hetta said:
If Josh was 14 and the five girls were younger, four of them sisters, it's literally impossible that they all be teens. So even assuming they are each a year apart, we are talking about 13, 12, 11 and 10. I have no idea of the ages or genders of the children but this is all I can come up with. But even if the kids had cleavage, why are they to bandage their breasts? Does it really have to go to such extremes to stop a BROTHER lusting after his sisters? I was raised in a mixed gender family, my mom never made any of us girls bandage up our breasts. And yet somehow our brothers weren't tempted to grope us. By putting the only emphasis for sexual behavior on the girls (don't arouse your brothers) this family is in fact encouraging a rapist mentality.

You don't have to assume. Four out of the five victims were Duggar girls and there were only five Duggar girls alive during the incidents.

4, 8, 9, 11 and 13. And from what I've read, a few sources have ruled out the oldest. So Josh molested 4, 8, 9, and 11 year olds. As a 15 year old. In their sleep.

LinkH · May 24, 2015

Hetta said:
I have no idea of the ages or genders of the children but this is all I can come up with. But even if the kids had cleavage, why are they to bandage their breasts?

Maybe someone had an injury.

I did not read what you read. How reliable is it? How does your source have reliable information about a mother's comments about her daughter's breasts? That seems far-fetched.

Okay, the foot binding comment was a kind of joke, but based upon the reality that patriarchal China was all about keeping women as repressed as possible, hence the binding of the feet.

I read an account of a missionary woman who would unbind Chinese girl's feet. It was an awful practice. But I seem to recall something about women promoting the practice. Often, practices that are bad for women's health that promote some idea of beauty are promoted by women. In our culture, high heels are an example of footwear that are bad for women's health. But which gender propagates the wearing of high heels more? I'd venture to guess that most men don't tell their daughters to wear high heels. Maybe some men are fashionista metrosexuals who tell their wives to wear heels. A lot of us men don't. If my wife wore flats all the time, I wouldn't give her a bit of grief out of it. If she wants to wear heels, it is because she has seen other women wearing them and promoting a culture that teaches that high heels are fashion. Chinese men may have considered small feet to be beautiful. I don't quite get that if they ever saw their wive's toes curled under their feet. But I suspect women kept the tradition going. I doubt men in the 1800's were the one's tightening their daughter's corsets.

Nobody knows what they did or didn't know. However, when the person who found out about what had been going on (remember that the Duggars did not "confess" until they were outed), the police immediately interviewed the girls. Because it's a serious risk. Because if your kids are molested under your roof, typically they will be taken away to a safe place.

Or they could be taken away to a foster home or state facility where they would have an even greater chance of being molested again.

Because it's important that the kids be safe. This shouldn't be complicated to understand. These parents failed their kids by allowing the boy back into the house after nothing more than a couple of weeks spent working with a family friend.

Apparently, they had some kind of counseling, probably something acceptable in their subculture but not conducted by someone who had studied abnormal psychology at a university who had state certification.

No it's not normal childhood sexual exploration when an older brother molests four sisters and a family friend. If kids are playing at "doctor" together, although I would as a parent talk to them both and discourage the exploration,

I don't think so either. But if it were my kids, I wouldn't want them to be counseled by someone who thought any kind of sexual exploration between children was acceptable.

(but do it in a way that wouldn't cause any psychological damage i.e. shame.)

The guilty child should feel shame.

It doesn't matter what Christians think about judges, Romans 13: 1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-17 spell out specifically that Christians must be subject to the authorities. There's no getting around that.

Do you have any evidence that parents are required to report their children? Social workers and teachers may be required to report. I don't know what Arkansas requires of parents.

They may not have believed the state would have provided the best solutions to the problem.

LinkH · May 24, 2015

Armoured said:
They've lost income and respect! Oh noes!

These sorts of offenses are significant gaol term worthy, IMHO.

Edit: One can't help but wonder if similar offences by a noted homosexual or left wing activist were brought to light if there would be the same calls of "they've suffered enough", and for "Christian compassion"

A commentor on the forum on Facebook where I first read about Josh Duggar's indiscretion commented that if a liberal lesbian did such a thing, it was dismissed as normal sexual exploration, and cited the name of an individual (that I'd never heard of and had to look up.)

When ultra-liberals do sexually immoral things, I don't see posts about them in these forums. They don't make for good news items eithers from the journalists perspective.

Hetta · May 24, 2015

evoeth said:
You don't have to assume. Four out of the five victims were Duggar girls and there were only five Duggar girls alive during the incidents.

4, 8, 9, 11 and 13. And from what I've read, a few sources have ruled out the oldest. So Josh molested 4, 8, 9, and 11 year olds. As a 15 year old. In their sleep.

Wow. That is just so sad.

Thunder Peel · May 24, 2015

If they're going to pull that off the air then I suppose HBO will also be pulling Lena Dunham's show. After all, she wrote about sexually exploring with her sister when she was younger, yet no one seems interested in going after her for that. If Josh were a progressive or atheist I doubt this would be getting as much attention as it is. It seems like an easy way to target a successful Christian family while giving a pass to others. What he did was wrong but if they're going to pull The Duggars off the air then every child molester should be held to the same standard.

Hetta · May 24, 2015

Of course. Just like that Honey Boo show was pulled. Child abusers have no place on television.

ImaginaryDay · May 25, 2015

Thunder Peel said:
It seems like an easy way to target a successful Christian family while giving a pass to others. What he did was wrong but if they're going to pull The Duggars off the air then every child molester should be held to the same standard.

I agree. In the real world beyond TLC and the Duggars, I had a significant other in the past whose son was 16. Well, he was charged with sexual assault and found guilty. He was on Probation and went to a REAL detention center (not just a family friend that did construction). He realized what he did was wrong and completed his probation, albeit with a few violations. So - if "every child molester should be held to the same standard", then Mr. Duggar (both of them) should have faced criminal offenses and consequences, the one for the act, and dad for covering it all up.

Hetta · May 25, 2015

LinkH said:
Maybe someone had an injury.

I did not read what you read. How reliable is it? How does your source have reliable information about a mother's comments about her daughter's breasts? That seems far-fetched.

If all the girls in the family have injured breasts, there's something else going on.

I read an account of a missionary woman who would unbind Chinese girl's feet. It was an awful practice. But I seem to recall something about women promoting the practice. Often, practices that are bad for women's health that promote some idea of beauty are promoted by women. In our culture, high heels are an example of footwear that are bad for women's health. But which gender propagates the wearing of high heels more? I'd venture to guess that most men don't tell their daughters to wear high heels. Maybe some men are fashionista metrosexuals who tell their wives to wear heels. A lot of us men don't. If my wife wore flats all the time, I wouldn't give her a bit of grief out of it. If she wants to wear heels, it is because she has seen other women wearing them and promoting a culture that teaches that high heels are fashion. Chinese men may have considered small feet to be beautiful. I don't quite get that if they ever saw their wive's toes curled under their feet. But I suspect women kept the tradition going. I doubt men in the 1800's were the one's tightening their daughter's corsets.

Women did not have the power to control 'fashion' until the 19th century, so it's silly to pretend otherwise. Women didn't decide that tiny feet were desirable, men made that decision. Women just did as they were told. If mothers didn't bind their daughter's feet, they would be cast out. Women in China weren't exactly in a position of power.

Or they could be taken away to a foster home or state facility where they would have an even greater chance of being molested again.

Do you have any evidence that parents are required to report their children? Social workers and teachers may be required to report. I don't know what Arkansas requires of parents.

They may not have believed the state would have provided the best solutions to the problem.

You keep making these statements as though you think you can pick and choose which scripture to follow. So these parents don't follow the Bible after all, I guess, and you think that if you have a family problem, you can ignore scripture? So much for other people "cherry picking". I always find it hilarious when people insist that the Bible should be followed word for word - except for when they want an exception. Not every child is molested in care, and honestly, these girls had already been molested, by their brother, and their parents covered it up. They cared about their reputation and their tv show more than their kids. Allowing that man to be around other kids is wrong. Anyone else would have been placed on the sexual offenders registry, which would have protected other kids. Anyone else might have actually had proper counseling and overcome their predilections. There is no evidence JD did - and these offenders rarely just "get over it" by undertaking a little manual labor. There is a very high rate of recidivism.

I did actually read the transcripts - they're out there - and one thing that I did notice, and has been remarked upon, is that those statements look as though the kids have been coached. They're so identical that I had to keep checking I had actually turned the page, and wasn't reading the same statement again. With the proper procedures, the girls would have been interviewed before any coaching could have taken place. I honestly hope that the girls' memories of the abuse is as vague as it seems to be.

grandvizier1006 · May 25, 2015

I'm a bit intrigued as well as horrified and saddened. What will happen to the family as a whole now? With no show, they can drop any disguises and make the kids do whatever they had them doing before they had their show.

Armoured · May 25, 2015

grandvizier1006 said:
I'm a bit intrigued as well as horrified and saddened. What will happen to the family as a whole now? With no show, they can drop any disguises and make the kids do whatever they had them doing before they had their show.

Using them to build pyramids, one assumes.

LinkH · May 25, 2015

Hetta said:
If all the girls in the family have injured breasts, there's something else going on.

You did not give me enough information in your first reference to binding their breasts to know what you are talking about exactly. And I still don't know what you are talking about. IMO, it is unlikely that you have a credible source for something private like what a mother told her daughter about 'bandaging' their breasts.

Women did not have the power to control 'fashion' until the 19th century, so it's silly to pretend otherwise. Women didn't decide that tiny feet were desirable, men made that decision.

Are you an expert on pre-Communist Chinese culture? Did women bind their feet or did the men? I think it is more likely that women primarily perpetuate most female 'beauty rituals' in any culture. Maybe Daoist authors were male, but women are a large part of any culture when it comes to these things.

Women just did as they were told. If mothers didn't bind their daughter's feet, they would be cast out.

Maybe. Maybe not. Do you have a source for this?

You keep making these statements as though you think you can pick and choose which scripture to follow. So these parents don't follow the Bible after all, I guess, and you think that if you have a family problem, you can ignore scripture? So much for other people "cherry picking". I always find it hilarious when people insist that the Bible should be followed word for word - except for when they want an exception.

Ignore what scripture? There is scripture that says that if you have a matter against a brother or sister, you shouldn't take it before unbelievers. Are you aware of an Arkansas law that requires parents to report these things to the state?

Where does the Bible say, "And thou must turn thy children over to the state, and they shall put them in a foster home?"

Not every child is molested in care, and honestly, these girls had already been molested, by their brother, and their parents covered it up.

Of course not, but it is a risk. I spoke with a couple that are trying to start a foster care ministry and one of their concerns is that 90+% of girls who turn 18 in foster care end up in prostitution at some point in their lives. Part of that is from being turned out on the streets at 18, but I suspect being put in foster homes with kids with rough pasts when it comes to sexuality is a part of it.

They cared about their reputation and their tv show more than their kids.

This is a really, really bad comment. You are judging their hearts and motivations. Not going to the state may have been the best things in their mind for their kids, given their philosophy of life. They don't send their kids to public school. The removed their son from the home and tried to find some way to deal with him that was consistent with their own beliefs. You don't know their reasoning behind it. The documentary that led to the show aired two years after the event in question. So why would they have cared about the show?

Allowing that man to be around other kids is wrong. Anyone else would have been placed on the sexual offenders registry, which would have protected other kids. Anyone else might have actually had proper counseling and overcome their predilections. There is no evidence JD did - and these offenders rarely just "get over it" by undertaking a little manual labor. There is a very high rate of recidivism.

Do you have stats on what percent of 'fondlers' do this sort of thing later on in life? I'd imagine there is a correlation between how extreme the molestation was and how likely the person is to be a danger to society. Btw, do they put minors on sexual offender registries?

How 'bout them Duggars?

So is America great again yet?

Regular Member

Regular Member

Man trying to figure things out

Well-Known Member

So is America great again yet?

I'll find my way home

Regular Member

So is America great again yet?

Man trying to figure things out

Regular Member

Regular Member

I'll find my way home

You don't eat a peacock until it's cooked.

I'll find my way home

We Live Here

I'll find my way home

I don't use this anymore, but I still follow Jesus

So is America great again yet?

Regular Member

Similar threads