Dugger vs Dunham

[Midnightrider]

Are you seriously arguing about this for this long and you don't know what the charge or allegation made was?

He is just arguing to argue.

I absolutely do. "Forcible Fondling". Not rape, not pedophilia, not sexual assault, not molestation.

I wanted to know if MR knew.

You obviously haven't read the report, and maybe not even a full article on the subject.

 

[rdytogo]

I absolutely do. "Forcible Fondling". Not rape, not pedophilia, not sexual assault, not molestation.

I wanted to know if MR knew.

So you don't think forcible fondling is a sexual assault?

 

[This_person]

So you don't think forcible fondling is a sexual assault?

I do. Not morally equivalent to an adult raping a thirteen year old, but an assault of a sexual nature of course.

I also know that when you go to the police three years before a report is filed, you've actually gone to the police.

I also know that all involved received counseling, and that the child who perpetrated the actions received additional punishment as well.

I also know that the victims forgave the perpetrator, moved on with their lives, and then we're traumatised by the city and the tabloids and then the rest of the media for gross violation of their privacy, which is an entirely new and different trauma than the original act.

No matter how many times it is falsely placed on me to the contrary, I believe that the original act was a big deal. I also know that it is not hypocritical to have had problems in your own family and yet speak of the ills you see in others. Believing in your own understanding of the Bible doesn't mean that your family has never made a mistake. It means that you recognize and acknowledge the mistake and take repentant actions.

"These are the facts, and they are indisputable."

 

[Bann]

Now, that right there is funny! Especially using the words ad nauseam.

One question. Why does your forum time have anything to do with what people post on this forum? Actually, two questions. Doesn't this forum's livelihood depend on how much people use it whether it be the forums, the news, the classifieds, etc. ? Just askin'. :shrug:

Are you daft? MY forum time is MY forum time. I couldn't care less what other people do with their forum time. I participate in treads I wish to participate in and don't participate in reads I find unworthy of my time. And I'm not interested in re-hashing the Duggar story ad nauseam. Your mileage may vary. :shrug:

 

[littlelady]

Are you daft? MY forum time is MY forum time. I couldn't care less what other people do with their forum time. I participate in treads I wish to participate in and don't participate in reads I find unworthy of my time. And I'm not interested in re-hashing the Duggar story ad nauseam. Your mileage may vary. :shrug:

No, not daft, just posting my opinion. That is what makes the world go round and this forum go round. And, you are right about the mileage. Soooo, if you are not interested, why did you post again? I guess that is a third question. As all in life, you can't have it both ways. :shrug:

 

[rdytogo]

I do. Not morally equivalent to an adult raping a thirteen year old, but an assault of a sexual nature of course.

Could you tell me what level of morally reprehensible sexually assaulting a five year old is compared to the morally reprehensible act of an 18 year old raping a thirteen year old? I didn't know there were different degrees of immoral acts. I'm looking forward to learning though.

I also know that when you go to the police three years before a report is filed, you've actually gone to the police.

Ok. I'm certain I don't know why you are bringing this up, but ok.

I also know that all involved received counseling, and that the child who perpetrated the actions received additional punishment as well. I also know that the victims forgave the perpetrator

You do? Are you certain ALL of the victim's have forgiven him? Have you heard from ALL the victims? What punishment was the perpetrator given? Jail sentence? Chain gang? No ice cream for a week? Please enlighten me.

then we're traumatised by the city and the tabloids and then the rest of the media for gross violation of their privacy, which is an entirely new and different trauma than the original act.

On this I will agree. Someone's head should roll for causing further abuse to these victims.

No matter how many times it is falsely placed on me to the contrary, I believe that the original act was a big deal.

Ok. What are you trying to argue then? The guy sexually assaulted multiple victims. If someone in your family sexually assaulted multiple children when he wa fourteen, would you allow him to watch your children?

 

[Bann]

No, not daft, just posting my opinion. That is what makes the world go round and this forum go round. And, you are right about the mileage. Soooo, if you are not interested, why did you post again? I guess that is a third question. As all in life, you can't have it both ways.

You weren't posting an opinion, you asked questions. If you weren't such an idiot, you would have understood what I meant, as I was pretty clear that the DUGGAR STORY wasn't worth re-hashing ad nauseam.

Sooo, Littlelady - go back into your hidey hole and stay there like a good little troll. Oh, wait - it's after 10:00 when you come out drunk posting. Time for me to go to bed now. That is all. Nite Nite.

 

[littlelady]

You weren't posting an opinion, you asked questions. If you weren't such an idiot, you would have understood what I meant, as I was pretty clear that the DUGGAR STORY wasn't worth re-hashing ad nauseam.

Sooo, Littlelady - go back into your hidey hole and stay there like a good little troll. Oh, wait - it's after 10:00 when you come out drunk posting. Time for me to go to bed now. That is all. Nite Nite.

This is what I am talking about. Anything to explain away your venom. You and your soap box, holier than thou comments; and you can't have it both ways. Did I hit the Bann nerve? No one should question you, and you feel untouchable? You posted that you were sick of the Duggar subject, but posted again. That says it right there. I never had a hidey hole, I am not a troll, and I am not drinking, and you know that. I have always posted what I think and was honest as mamatutu. Did you celebrate the day I got banned? Do I bother you that much that you want to consistently tear into me?Does the truth hurt? According to you, you don't have time for members like me. Live with the fact that you are a hypocrite. I feel sorry for you. Carry on, Bann.

And, I am surprised you used the word 'idiot' to describe me considering you consider yourself a lady, and all that. The thing is you and I are not anon, and I remain the lady. You go, Bann!

 

[Bann]

Original post at 10:32

this is what i am talking about. You and your soap box, holier than though comments, and you can't have it both ways. Did i hit the bann nerve? No one should question you, and you feel untouchable? You posted that you were sick of the duggar subject, but posted again. That says it right there. I never had a hidey hole, i am not a troll, and i am not drinking, and you know that. I have always posted what i think and have been honest as mamatutu. I am sure you celebrated the day i got banned. Do i bother you that much that you want to tear into me, once again? I think i do and the truth hurts. Live with it. I feel sorry for you. Carry on, bann.

Amended post at 11:17

this is what i am talking about. anything to explain away your venom. you and your soap box, holier than thou comments; and you can't have it both ways. Did i hit the bann nerve? No one should question you, and you feel untouchable? You posted that you were sick of the duggar subject, but posted again. That says it right there. I never had a hidey hole, i am not a troll, and i am not drinking, and you know that. I have always posted what i think and was honest as mamatutu. Did you celebrate the day i got banned? do i bother you that much that you want to consistently tear into me?does the truth hurt? According to you, you don't have time for members like me. live with the fact that you are a hypocrite. I feel sorry for you. Carry on, bann.

and, i am surprised you used the word 'idiot' to describe me considering you consider yourself a lady, and all that. The thing is you and i are not anon, and i remain the lady. You go, bann!

 

[officeguy]

You make obvious that you really don't read what people post. I have posted numerous times that NO ONE - ME INCLUDED - approves of what Josh Duggar did. No one gives him a pass. I'm certainly not going to put what a 14 year old on the same plane as what an adult does. The family dealt with it. It's over. Yet you haters just want to stir #### up in peoples' lives to ruin their lives - things that happened 14 years ago; the family has long since moved past this - all because you have a problem with their lifestyle. The kid screwed up. The family dealt with it. Josh has long since married and has kids. Two of the girls are now married and have kids. They all seem to be well-adjusted despite the incidents. No evidence of this ever happening again since he got help. The show has been pulled and you're still not happy. Let it go for crying out loud.

From the interview with the girls it is pretty clear that for them this is not the distant past.

 

[This_person]

From the interview with the girls it is pretty clear that for them this is not the distant past.

Not any more... not since they've been traumatized again, this time by the police, attorney, and media.

I heard them repeatedly say they've forgiven him and moved on, but that this current-day violation devastates them.

 

[Bann]

This is what I am talking about. Anything to explain away your venom. You and your soap box, holier than thou comments; and you can't have it both ways. Did I hit the Bann nerve? No one should question you, and you feel untouchable? You posted that you were sick of the Duggar subject, but posted again. That says it right there. I never had a hidey hole, I am not a troll, and I am not drinking, and you know that. I have always posted what I think and was honest as mamatutu. Did you celebrate the day I got banned? Do I bother you that much that you want to consistently tear into me?Does the truth hurt? According to you, you don't have time for members like me. Live with the fact that you are a hypocrite. I feel sorry for you. Carry on, Bann.

And, I am surprised you used the word 'idiot' to describe me considering you consider yourself a lady, and all that. The thing is you and I are not anon, and I remain the lady. You go, Bann!

You remain a raving, freakazoid lunatic whackadoodle cucamonga.

Out of this entire thread, you picked my post to "question", so don't go around crying about it when I reply to you.

 

[This_person]

Could you tell me what level of morally reprehensible sexually assaulting a five year old is compared to the morally reprehensible act of an 18 year old raping a thirteen year old? I didn't know there were different degrees of immoral acts. I'm looking forward to learning though.

Do you believe there is a difference between a father stealing a loaf of bread to feed a starving family and the guy who tortured a little kid and then murdered the family after getting somewhere around $40,000? Those are both immoral acts, but I would not consider them being the same degree.

By the way, Polanski was not eighteen.

 

[PsyOps]

From the interview with the girls it is pretty clear that for them this is not the distant past.

And you get this where? Have you seen the interview with Megyn Kelly? Go to 17:10 where they said dredging this whole thing up is a "re-victimization that is a 1000 times worse. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS ALREADY DEALT WITH. WE'VE ALREADY FORGIVEN JOSH. WE'VE ALREADY MOVED ON." She said the InTouch story wasn't true, that everything was distorted. They're all angry that this has been publicized.

Seems to me it was the 'distant past'. They had moved on from it, and now people with a desire to ruin lives dredge up what children did, and portray this family as a bunch of out-of-control sexual predators. The whole media frenzy is really pretty sick.

 

[Hijinx]

And you get this where? Have you seen the interview with Megyn Kelly? Go to 17:10 where they said dredging this whole thing up is a "re-victimization that is a 1000 times worse. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS ALREADY DEALT WITH. WE'VE ALREADY FORGIVEN JOSH. WE'VE ALREADY MOVED ON." She said the InTouch story wasn't true, that everything was distorted. They're all angry that this has been publicized.

Seems to me it was the 'distant past'. They had moved on from it, and now people with a desire to ruin lives dredge up what children did, and portray this family as a bunch of out-of-control sexual predators. The whole media frenzy is really pretty sick.

Most media frenzies are. Unless you are a liberal, then there is no frenzy.

 

[Midnightrider]

And you get this where? Have you seen the interview with Megyn Kelly? Go to 17:10 where they said dredging this whole thing up is a "re-victimization that is a 1000 times worse. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS ALREADY DEALT WITH. WE'VE ALREADY FORGIVEN JOSH. WE'VE ALREADY MOVED ON." She said the InTouch story wasn't true, that everything was distorted. They're all angry that this has been publicized.

Seems to me it was the 'distant past'. They had moved on from it, and now people with a desire to ruin lives dredge up what children did, and portray this family as a bunch of out-of-control sexual predators. The whole media frenzy is really pretty sick.

Who is portraying the family "as a bunch of out of control sexual predators"?

 

[tblwdc]

You're makingthe same mistake MR made. No one is suggesting it is not a serious crime. Everyone is suggesting that the perpetrator should be both properly disciplined and given psychological help, as should the victims as needed. But let's be realistic, it is not rape. The charge of fondling is the word on the report, not someone here.

You seriously consider a 14 year old boy copping a feel to be "mindless debauchery"?

I am unimpressed with his level of perversion. A 14 year old boy copping a feel of his sisters' friends - big whoop. At least one of the encounters is reported to be consensual and reciprocated, but nobody seems to care about that part.

Show me a boy at 16 who hasn't tried to feel up a girl and I will show you a man who has a problem with his sexual identity.

Could you define no one and everyone?

 

[vraiblonde]

Could you define no one and everyone?

In general, according to the media and assorted internet sources. No, I didn't take a poll and get the opinion of every living person in the universe. Sorry about that.

 

[tblwdc]

In general, according to the media and assorted internet sources. No, I didn't take a poll and get the opinion of every living person in the universe. Sorry about that.

That has nothing to do with what he said. He said no one is saying this wasn't a serious crime. YOU would be at least one person who has said that.

 

[vraiblonde]

That has nothing to do with what he said. He said no one is saying this wasn't a serious crime. YOU would be at least one person who has said that.

I am the lone voice crying in the wilderness. Do not pity me, for I am used to it.

I have said that I don't think a teenage boy groping his sisters is a serious crime. I stand by that assessment. But I am pretty much alone (meaning "in the extreme minority") in my opinion, and therefore TP's statement that "no one" is suggesting it isn't a serious crime gets to stand because by "no one" it was presumed that he meant "in general and for the most part".

Again, it's rare that someone takes a poll of every human being in the universe and determines definitively that "no one" or "everyone" has exactly the same opinion. That shouldn't have to be specified in casual English conversation.