Duggar son allegedly molested girls including sisters

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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!

Let's just go ahead and call it "sodomy" from here on.

While this is certainly not a fact this is a heads up FYI, when you begin to defend (and split hairs) molestation and pedophilia most people think or at least wonder if you are a pedophile yourself, or have some other skeleton in your closet that makes you sympathetic.

Just a PSA

Who is defending molestation? I'm asking people not to replace, create, or subtract the facts of what actually happened. Honesty shouldn't be so complicated.

NP: Okay, but you continue to do it ad nauseam, we get it. Shoving your view down a persons throat isn't going to make them agree with you and you cannot control what people post in this thread.

Also it does look a bit like you are defending molestation or making light of it, hence why people are having a bit of fun at your expense because you are getting on their nerves.

I say this kindly are you a bit socially awkward or on the spectrum, because you are not taking social clues very well. We get it.

I've been called gross, a liar and a defender of molesters because I am asking posters to not make things up. I'm not the one with social problems, honey. Too many of you guys are just hateful.

I havent called you any of those things, I was just responding to you and trying to explain to you why this might be happening - another thing that seems to be lost on you.

[Anonymous]

Seriously, he did something disgusting to his sisters. We don't know for certain the extent of it. Yes, we all get that there is a slight difference in the term rape vs. other terms. But, i agree with the poster who says something isn't right with you continuing to parse words.

It's sick and fucked up no matter how you slice it. Get a clue and stop caring whether he touched his little sisters over or under their undies. That just makes you seem like a perv.

[Anonymous]

I've been called gross, a liar and a defender of molesters because I am asking posters to not make things up. I'm not the one with social problems, honey. Too many of you guys are just hateful.

I wonder how you'd feel if YOUR OWN CHILD had been molested.

I doubt you'd be less hateful than the rest.

social problems? You have problems in general, hon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seriously, he did something disgusting to his sisters. We don't know for certain the extent of it. Yes, we all get that there is a slight difference in the term rape vs. other terms. But, i agree with the poster who says something isn't right with you continuing to parse words.

It's sick and fucked up no matter how you slice it. Get a clue and stop caring whether he touched his little sisters over or under their undies. That just makes you seem like a perv.

*applause*

Can we get back to actually talking about the Duggars now that we've gotten our semantics lesson?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think when you set rules like no opposite sex siblings alone, no hugging your opposite sibling you sort of force your children to sexualize their siblings. So nasty.

I cannot imagine if as a child I had to give my brother some lame side hug and was never able to hang out with him alone... because I might stir up something sexual in him.

Barf. Duggars can kiss my grits too.

Seriously. And the fact that these poor girls were dressing like little house on the prairie characters all to avoid stirring up those desires that "cannot be righteously fulfilled" and they were still being raped at home by their brother tells you how successful their parents' strategy was.

Please don't use the word "rape" when you mean something that isnt rape. If you did mean that, please provide a source.

This is the quote that started the argument. Maybe some of you should wonder why you were so bent on trying to discredit me when you could have just provided a source.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think when you set rules like no opposite sex siblings alone, no hugging your opposite sibling you sort of force your children to sexualize their siblings. So nasty.

I cannot imagine if as a child I had to give my brother some lame side hug and was never able to hang out with him alone... because I might stir up something sexual in him.

Barf. Duggars can kiss my grits too.

Seriously. And the fact that these poor girls were dressing like little house on the prairie characters all to avoid stirring up those desires that "cannot be righteously fulfilled" and they were still being raped at home by their brother tells you how successful their parents' strategy was.

Please don't use the word "rape" when you mean something that isnt rape. If you did mean that, please provide a source.

This is the quote that started the argument. Maybe some of you should wonder why you were so bent on trying to discredit me when you could have just provided a source.

How long are you going to keep this up? I'd like to know so I can go do something else and come back when you are done.

[Anonymous]

If anyone would like to ignore Mr/Ms. Beatadeadhorseinthepants and get on topic this is an interesting article with a bit more information about the "treatment" Josh had.

http://www.people.com/article/inside-josh-duggar-treatment-

Interesting bit from the ATI teaching on handling abuse cases from within:

The passage goes on to warn of the potential consequences of such a scandal: "The damage to the younger children, the ridicule to the cause of Christ, the shame of detailed publicity, and the scars to the life and reputation of the boy were indescribably painful to the family and their friends."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

NP: Okay, but you continue to do it ad nauseam, we get it. Shoving your view down a persons throat isn't going to make them agree with you and you cannot control what people post in this thread.

Also it does look a bit like you are defending molestation or making light of it, hence why people are having a bit of fun at your expense because you are getting on their nerves.

I say this kindly are you a bit socially awkward or on the spectrum, because you are not taking social clues very well. We get it.

Unnecessary and unkind.

Don't expect kindness from the majority of the people posting on here about the duggars. They are HAPPY that this family is going through this right now because of their irrational hatred of this family. I say irrational because they hated them before this scandal became exposed, and now they hate them even more, instead of having some empathy and acknowledging that they are human beings and that many of them are still CHILDREN! Sick, crazy people on here, and I hope I don't know any of you in real life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think when you set rules like no opposite sex siblings alone, no hugging your opposite sibling you sort of force your children to sexualize their siblings. So nasty.

I cannot imagine if as a child I had to give my brother some lame side hug and was never able to hang out with him alone... because I might stir up something sexual in him.

Barf. Duggars can kiss my grits too.

Seriously. And the fact that these poor girls were dressing like little house on the prairie characters all to avoid stirring up those desires that "cannot be righteously fulfilled" and they were still being raped at home by their brother tells you how successful their parents' strategy was.

Please don't use the word "rape" when you mean something that isnt rape. If you did mean that, please provide a source.

This is the quote that started the argument. Maybe some of you should wonder why you were so bent on trying to discredit me when you could have just provided a source.

How long are you going to keep this up? I'd like to know so I can go do something else and come back when you are done.

Not the pp you are talking to, BUUUUUTTTT, guess what???? YOU don't get to dictate who posts on this thread and what they want to discuss! Anyone can talk about the duggars, and sorry to tell you, not everyone is going to post stuff that you want to read! Oh well! Some of us think the duggars are good people and if you don't like it, you can GET OVER IT!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not the pp you are talking to, BUUUUUTTTT, guess what???? YOU don't get to dictate who posts on this thread and what they want to discuss! Anyone can talk about the duggars, and sorry to tell you, not everyone is going to post stuff that you want to read! Oh well! Some of us think the duggars are good people and if you don't like it, you can GET OVER IT!

And you seem to think that because you get to talk that what you says is worth listening to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think when you set rules like no opposite sex siblings alone, no hugging your opposite sibling you sort of force your children to sexualize their siblings. So nasty.

I cannot imagine if as a child I had to give my brother some lame side hug and was never able to hang out with him alone... because I might stir up something sexual in him.

Barf. Duggars can kiss my grits too.

Seriously. And the fact that these poor girls were dressing like little house on the prairie characters all to avoid stirring up those desires that "cannot be righteously fulfilled" and they were still being raped at home by their brother tells you how successful their parents' strategy was.

Please don't use the word "rape" when you mean something that isnt rape. If you did mean that, please provide a source.

This is the quote that started the argument. Maybe some of you should wonder why you were so bent on trying to discredit me when you could have just provided a source.

How long are you going to keep this up? I'd like to know so I can go do something else and come back when you are done.

Not the pp you are talking to, BUUUUUTTTT, guess what???? YOU don't get to dictate who posts on this thread and what they want to discuss! Anyone can talk about the duggars, and sorry to tell you, not everyone is going to post stuff that you want to read! Oh well! Some of us think the duggars are good people and if you don't like it, you can GET OVER IT!

The PP didn't say they had to stop posting, just asked how long they were going to continue arguing. Keep up.

Also if you think the Duggars are good people - yuck, please reevaluate your definitive of good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think when you set rules like no opposite sex siblings alone, no hugging your opposite sibling you sort of force your children to sexualize their siblings. So nasty.

I cannot imagine if as a child I had to give my brother some lame side hug and was never able to hang out with him alone... because I might stir up something sexual in him.

Barf. Duggars can kiss my grits too.

Seriously. And the fact that these poor girls were dressing like little house on the prairie characters all to avoid stirring up those desires that "cannot be righteously fulfilled" and they were still being raped at home by their brother tells you how successful their parents' strategy was.

Please don't use the word "rape" when you mean something that isnt rape. If you did mean that, please provide a source.

This is the quote that started the argument. Maybe some of you should wonder why you were so bent on trying to discredit me when you could have just provided a source.

How long are you going to keep this up? I'd like to know so I can go do something else and come back when you are done.

Not the pp you are talking to, BUUUUUTTTT, guess what???? YOU don't get to dictate who posts on this thread and what they want to discuss! Anyone can talk about the duggars, and sorry to tell you, not everyone is going to post stuff that you want to read! Oh well! Some of us think the duggars are good people and if you don't like it, you can GET OVER IT!

Oh, hai Michelle! :::waves::: hows the empty womb treating you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Not the pp you are talking to, BUUUUUTTTT, guess what???? YOU don't get to dictate who posts on this thread and what they want to discuss! Anyone can talk about the duggars, and sorry to tell you, not everyone is going to post stuff that you want to read! Oh well! Some of us think the duggars are good people and if you don't like it, you can GET OVER IT!

I know, right? They're a model family, to be emulated. Clearly, their extreme focus on sex, purity, headship, etc., is the best protection for vulnerable children. Oh, wait...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

NP: Okay, but you continue to do it ad nauseam, we get it. Shoving your view down a persons throat isn't going to make them agree with you and you cannot control what people post in this thread.

Also it does look a bit like you are defending molestation or making light of it, hence why people are having a bit of fun at your expense because you are getting on their nerves.

I say this kindly are you a bit socially awkward or on the spectrum, because you are not taking social clues very well. We get it.

Unnecessary and unkind.

Don't expect kindness from the majority of the people posting on here about the duggars. They are HAPPY that this family is going through this right now because of their irrational hatred of this family. I say irrational because they hated them before this scandal became exposed, and now they hate them even more, instead of having some empathy and acknowledging that they are human beings and that many of them are still CHILDREN! Sick, crazy people on here, and I hope I don't know any of you in real life.

You know what I find sick and crazy? Parents who continue to expose their children to child molesters. Parents that teach their children two loving same sex people cannot parent a child, but your big brother that touched you? Father of the year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not the pp you are talking to, BUUUUUTTTT, guess what???? YOU don't get to dictate who posts on this thread and what they want to discuss! Anyone can talk about the duggars, and sorry to tell you, not everyone is going to post stuff that you want to read! Oh well! Some of us think the duggars are good people and if you don't like it, you can GET OVER IT!

And you seem to think that because you get to talk that what you says is worth listening to.

And the same could be said about you! Let me ask you something. Did you used to watch the duggars tv show when it was on tlc? And if so why did you watch it?