Duggar son allegedly molested girls including sisters

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I view the 14-year-old as much of a victim as his sisters. He was hardly raised in a healthy household.

I also wonder what people think should happen to a 14 year old who does this. There life should just be over in your book? 14 is still a child. 15 is still a child.

They should suffer consequences and be counseled. They should also be monitored so no one else becomes their victims... you know, like we do with sexual predators.

What consequences should a 14-year-old CHILD suffer?

How should they be monitored? Put on a sex offender list, where they will never be able to hold a job or maybe even find a place to live?

I would not want this to happen to my brother because he touched my breast. Total overkill.

+1

I also think if a 14 year old molested/raped (whatever to that whacky pp and their semantics) their child they wouldn't be crying out that the predator was a CHILD.

So, what do you want done to him? Be specific. And are you willing to have that punishment done to your own son if he touched someone's breast?

He didn't just touch someone's breast once. He REPEATEDLY fondled genetalia on MULTIPLE victims when they were sleeping. I assume they woke up at some point during the fondling and were too shocked to do anything. And these are much younger girls, ages 5-12. He had reached puberty and was turned on by prepubescent children. This isn't "oh, he touched a breast". He did far more, to young children, when they are at the most vulnerable.
Sick. Yes, he should have to register for his entire life.

And to be clear: This is also what you would demand for your 14-year-old son?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I view the 14-year-old as much of a victim as his sisters. He was hardly raised in a healthy household.

I also wonder what people think should happen to a 14 year old who does this. There life should just be over in your book? 14 is still a child. 15 is still a child.

They should suffer consequences and be counseled. They should also be monitored so no one else becomes their victims... you know, like we do with sexual predators.

What consequences should a 14-year-old CHILD suffer?

How should they be monitored? Put on a sex offender list, where they will never be able to hold a job or maybe even find a place to live?

I would not want this to happen to my brother because he touched my breast. Total overkill.

+1

I also think if a 14 year old molested/raped (whatever to that whacky pp and their semantics) their child they wouldn't be crying out that the predator was a CHILD.

So, what do you want done to him? Be specific. And are you willing to have that punishment done to your own son if he touched someone's breast?

My own son would not touch his sister's breasts (or vulva or vagina). I can also talk about what I want done to murderers without worrying endlessly about what punishment I would advocate if my own son was the murderer. I am not sure why you are perseverating thinking about the molester instead of the victims. Funny angle to keep pursuing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yep. Homosexuals and pro-choice advocates are bad, but it's totally cool to molest your sisters when Jesus is on your side.

This family is fucking gross. I'm torn between feeling satisfied that some of their skeletons are finally falling out of the closet and feeling really, really sad for those kids. The girls, obviously, but also a tiny bit for josh. Not a child therapist, but you usually don't start fondling your sisters unless something was going on with you first.

Agree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, learn to read. The poster had a link with a definition of rape included. That was a definition from the FBI, NOT the poster you keep saying is trying "redefine" the word.

If he did indeed insert his fingers into them, then, yes, it was rape...according to the FBI. Not just some internet loon.

The problem is I think the PP who keeps making light of rape and splitting hairs on semantics is an internet loon.

"She was in a short skirt, she asked for it" "We were out on a date, she owed me" "We are married, so it isn't rape."

I'm not making light of anything. I've been the victim of sexual assault before. I think it does a huge disservice to actual victims when you try to insert untrue facts and definitions for embellishment. There was no rape. Stop making stuff up. It makes you look overly dramatic and not in touch with reality.

Actual victims, eh?

Rape culture at its finest.

Yes, actual rape victims. Breast touching is not rape. Vulva touching is not rape. Ass grabbing is not rape.

I've experienced groped and fondled in crowd settings. It was gross, but it wasn't rape.

This makes me sad.

Why does a distinction make you sad? I've been raped, and it isn't the same as being fondled. I find it incredibly offensive that you insist on lumping them together.

Do you know they weren't digitally penetrated, which would make it rape by the FBI's definition, even if it's not PIV rape? I bet that having live with and serve the incestuous freak brother who molested or raped you and the cuckoo clock religious nutjob parents who blame you for seducing your brother and keep you in harm's way is no picnic. "Fondled" almost makes this sound light and happy.

+100

I also don't think the pp has experienced sexual assault, there is no way they would be spouting this shit if they had. If I am wrong then wow, do they need some more therapy and I am sorry for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, learn to read. The poster had a link with a definition of rape included. That was a definition from the FBI, NOT the poster you keep saying is trying "redefine" the word.

If he did indeed insert his fingers into them, then, yes, it was rape...according to the FBI. Not just some internet loon.

The problem is I think the PP who keeps making light of rape and splitting hairs on semantics is an internet loon.

"She was in a short skirt, she asked for it" "We were out on a date, she owed me" "We are married, so it isn't rape."

I'm not making light of anything. I've been the victim of sexual assault before. I think it does a huge disservice to actual victims when you try to insert untrue facts and definitions for embellishment. There was no rape. Stop making stuff up. It makes you look overly dramatic and not in touch with reality.

Actual victims, eh?

Rape culture at its finest.

Yes, actual rape victims. Breast touching is not rape. Vulva touching is not rape. Ass grabbing is not rape.

This makes me sad.

Why does a distinction make you sad? I've been raped, and it isn't the same as being fondled. I find it incredibly offensive that you insist on lumping them together.

Do you know they weren't digitally penetrated, which would make it rape by the FBI's definition, even if it's not PIV rape? I bet that having live with and serve the incestuous freak brother who molested or raped you and the cuckoo clock religious nutjob parents who blame you for seducing your brother and keep you in harm's way is no picnic. "Fondled" almost makes this sound light and happy.

+100

I also don't think the pp has experienced sexual assault, there is no way they would be spouting this shit if they had. If I am wrong then wow, do they need some more therapy and I am sorry for them.

I've been fondled and groped in crowd settings. I viewed it as gross, but not rape. I didn't call the cops -- I just moved away from the scene.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I view the 14-year-old as much of a victim as his sisters. He was hardly raised in a healthy household.

I also wonder what people think should happen to a 14 year old who does this. There life should just be over in your book? 14 is still a child. 15 is still a child.

They should suffer consequences and be counseled. They should also be monitored so no one else becomes their victims... you know, like we do with sexual predators.

What consequences should a 14-year-old CHILD suffer?

How should they be monitored? Put on a sex offender list, where they will never be able to hold a job or maybe even find a place to live?

I would not want this to happen to my brother because he touched my breast. Total overkill.

+1

I also think if a 14 year old molested/raped (whatever to that whacky pp and their semantics) their child they wouldn't be crying out that the predator was a CHILD.

So, what do you want done to him? Be specific. And are you willing to have that punishment done to your own son if he touched someone's breast?

My own son would not touch his sister's breasts (or vulva or vagina). I can also talk about what I want done to murderers without worrying endlessly about what punishment I would advocate if my own son was the murderer. I am not sure why you are perseverating thinking about the molester instead of the victims. Funny angle to keep pursuing.

And what does it say about you that you keep making this young teen who grew up in an incredibly unhealthy household as a monster?

The girls definitely have always needed help. Anyone who knows anything about this family knows they were brought up in a terrible environment. And it's not hard to imagine very bad things happened to those boys as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I view the 14-year-old as much of a victim as his sisters. He was hardly raised in a healthy household.

I also wonder what people think should happen to a 14 year old who does this. There life should just be over in your book? 14 is still a child. 15 is still a child.

They should suffer consequences and be counseled. They should also be monitored so no one else becomes their victims... you know, like we do with sexual predators.

What consequences should a 14-year-old CHILD suffer?

How should they be monitored? Put on a sex offender list, where they will never be able to hold a job or maybe even find a place to live?

I would not want this to happen to my brother because he touched my breast. Total overkill.

+1

I also think if a 14 year old molested/raped (whatever to that whacky pp and their semantics) their child they wouldn't be crying out that the predator was a CHILD.

So, what do you want done to him? Be specific. And are you willing to have that punishment done to your own son if he touched someone's breast?

He didn't just touch someone's breast once. He REPEATEDLY fondled genetalia on MULTIPLE victims when they were sleeping. I assume they woke up at some point during the fondling and were too shocked to do anything. And these are much younger girls, ages 5-12. He had reached puberty and was turned on by prepubescent children. This isn't "oh, he touched a breast". He did far more, to young children, when they are at the most vulnerable.
Sick. Yes, he should have to register for his entire life.

And to be clear: This is also what you would demand for your 14-year-old son?

Not the PP but YES.

Also what I would want to keep my daughters safe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I've been fondled and groped in crowd settings. I viewed it as gross, but not rape. I didn't call the cops -- I just moved away from the scene.

Apples and fucking oranges.

[Anonymous]

If my child did wrong while I would support them and ensure that they got every benefit of the doubt and every bit of legal advice they could I would not protect them in the way the Duggar's did.

The fact that the Duggar's did this for and to Josh mean they failed him as parents and because of that and only that I feel sorry for Josh. The rest is on him and I don't feel sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, learn to read. The poster had a link with a definition of rape included. That was a definition from the FBI, NOT the poster you keep saying is trying "redefine" the word.

If he did indeed insert his fingers into them, then, yes, it was rape...according to the FBI. Not just some internet loon.

The problem is I think the PP who keeps making light of rape and splitting hairs on semantics is an internet loon.

"She was in a short skirt, she asked for it" "We were out on a date, she owed me" "We are married, so it isn't rape."

I'm not making light of anything. I've been the victim of sexual assault before. I think it does a huge disservice to actual victims when you try to insert untrue facts and definitions for embellishment. There was no rape. Stop making stuff up. It makes you look overly dramatic and not in touch with reality.

Actual victims, eh?

Rape culture at its finest.

Yes, actual rape victims. Breast touching is not rape. Vulva touching is not rape. Ass grabbing is not rape.

This makes me sad.

Why does a distinction make you sad? I've been raped, and it isn't the same as being fondled. I find it incredibly offensive that you insist on lumping them together.

You do realize you are replying to different people and not all the same right?

I haven't insisted that anything be lumped together.

Then why would a distinction between rape and fondling make you sad?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I've been fondled and groped in crowd settings. I viewed it as gross, but not rape. I didn't call the cops -- I just moved away from the scene.

Apples and fucking oranges.

+1
Let's review: being fondled/groped/ground against in a public place as an adult vs. your teenaged brother - who, as a male you have been explicitly taught you are to be subservient to - coming into your room in your home, the place where you are supposed feel safe above all else, entering your room while you sleep and possibly digitally penetrating you? I repeat, WTF is wrong with you? Yeah, those little girls should totally have moved away from the scene!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I've been fondled and groped in crowd settings. I viewed it as gross, but not rape. I didn't call the cops -- I just moved away from the scene.

Apples and fucking oranges.

Exactly. Some guy gropes you at a bar or wherever, you set him straight and move on. Your brother does it to you, in your house and in your bedroom, that's very different. That's a huge violation of trust.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, learn to read. The poster had a link with a definition of rape included. That was a definition from the FBI, NOT the poster you keep saying is trying "redefine" the word.

If he did indeed insert his fingers into them, then, yes, it was rape...according to the FBI. Not just some internet loon.

The problem is I think the PP who keeps making light of rape and splitting hairs on semantics is an internet loon.

"She was in a short skirt, she asked for it" "We were out on a date, she owed me" "We are married, so it isn't rape."

I'm not making light of anything. I've been the victim of sexual assault before. I think it does a huge disservice to actual victims when you try to insert untrue facts and definitions for embellishment. There was no rape. Stop making stuff up. It makes you look overly dramatic and not in touch with reality.

Actual victims, eh?

Rape culture at its finest.

Yes, actual rape victims. Breast touching is not rape. Vulva touching is not rape. Ass grabbing is not rape.

This makes me sad.

Why does a distinction make you sad? I've been raped, and it isn't the same as being fondled. I find it incredibly offensive that you insist on lumping them together.

Do you know they weren't digitally penetrated, which would make it rape by the FBI's definition, even if it's not PIV rape? I bet that having live with and serve the incestuous freak brother who molested or raped you and the cuckoo clock religious nutjob parents who blame you for seducing your brother and keep you in harm's way is no picnic. "Fondled" almost makes this sound light and happy.

The statute of limitations for fondling and rape are different. Also, it has not been reported as a rape.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I've been fondled and groped in crowd settings. I viewed it as gross, but not rape. I didn't call the cops -- I just moved away from the scene.

Apples and fucking oranges.

+1
Let's review: being fondled/groped/ground against in a public place as an adult vs. your teenaged brother - who, as a male you have been explicitly taught you are to be subservient to - coming into your room in your home, the place where you are supposed feel safe above all else, entering your room while you sleep and possibly digitally penetrating you? I repeat, WTF is wrong with you? Yeah, those little girls should totally have moved away from the scene!

WTF is "wrong" with me apparently is I'm able to take a multifaceted view of the issue, instead of just lighting up my torch and hauling out my pitchfork.

[Anonymous]

I just can't believe we're debating the definition of what TYPE of assault he committed...

what the fuck does it matter? He sexually assaulted his own damn sisters!