It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Duggar Defenders Spotlight Their Own Failure At Thinking

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 28 2015 @ 12:14 AM
link   
Those familiar with the whole Duggar molestation scandal are probably familiar with different aspects of what is going one and what is being said. This topic isn't about Duggar himself but some of the outrageous excuses that some of his friends and sympathizers are saying in his defense. Keep in mind these people are major figures in the Creationist Camp. One of them is even a Presidential Candidate for America. They are all leaders and/or members of the Christian Religion in some way as well but may or may not represent the typical member. What follows will be direct quotes from them along with a brief description of who they are.

Starting with Ray "BananaMan" Comfort. Christian minister, evangelist, creationist and author from New Zealand.


Standing by my friend Josh Duggar, as a brother in Christ. This was in his BC days. Such were some of us.


This btw turned out to not only be completely stupid but incorrect as well. Josh accepted Christ at age 7 apparently and was 14 when he molested the girls. Way to go Ray. Guess you don't know much about your friends after all.

Next is Eric Hovind. Activist and Son of Kent Hovind, Evangelist, Young Earth Creationist, creator of Creation Science Evangelism in 1989 and Dinosaur Adventure Land and many other things including convicted felon.


If evolution is true, then there is no absolute right and wrong. If evolution is true Josh should not have admitted his faults over a decade ago because what one evolved bag of molecules does to another bag of molecules just doesn’t really matter. If evolution is true there is no ultimate Judge on the bench who will hold every man, woman, and child responsible for their actions. And if evolution is true you will not give an account for every idle word you speak.



This is really stupid in so many different ways it's hard to even sum them up quickly. But I will say that idiots like this are not who I'd want coming to my defense should I ever find myself in a similar position as Josh Duggar.

Last but not Least is Presidential Hopeful Mike Huckabee. I won't bother with a discription of Mr. Huckabee as I'm sure most of you already know who he is.


"He and his family dealt with it and were honest and open about it with the victims and the authorities. No purpose whatsoever is served by those who are now trying to discredit Josh or his family by sensationalizing the story. Good people make mistakes and do regrettable and even disgusting things. The reason that the law protects disclosure of many actions on the part of a minor is that the society has traditionally understood something that today’s blood-thirsty media does not understand—that being a minor means that one's judgement is not mature."


Obviously after writing this the public blow back from his supporters didn't go as he expected and will most likely end any chance he had at president, if he ever had one to begin with.

Now, you should also know that this isn't all the examples I can show of prominent figure heads within the Creationist camp but it does display a very big crack in their pristine image and moral facade they have established over time. Like many of you I expect stupid things to be said by the average person about issues on social media and elsewhere. But when I see people that should know better, people that actually have a following, people that are actually presidential hopefuls for this nation, it needs extra attention. If you are part of this camp or follow any of these people, or think that they or perhaps one of their organizations have the moral high ground, you need to rethink where you're going in life.

This is of course my take on it and you may not agree.
edit on 28-5-2015 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 28 2015 @ 12:25 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

What Huckabee said is far.....far less repugnant. I do not agree with everything he said but it is not even in the same league crazy wise.



posted on May, 28 2015 @ 12:33 AM
link   
a reply to: SubTruth

But what he said isn't actually correct. Neither the family or Josh have been open and honest about it with authorities. Rather, they hid it from view as much as possible, never got proper counseling for Josh and I'm not sure about the victims and basically there was almost no responsibility taken at all and it is now too late for it to matter.

Other than that though, you are correct. Huckabee's comments are far less crazy than the others. However, the others aren't possible American Presidents either which is why I included him.

I suppose I should have given more detail about Huckabee and his comment and why it was included in my post to make it more clear. I shouldn't assume everyone knows the details. So it's good that you bring that up.



posted on May, 28 2015 @ 01:09 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Like I said before.....True or not it is not bat "you know what" crazy like the other comments. He does make some good points about Josh being a kid himself when this happened.....Does that excuse his actions......NO. Personally I find the parents repugnant and morally bankrupt on many levels and think the way they handled this was nuts and negligent.



I also wanted to add good thread OP the other comments are flat out crazy and shows how religion can corrupt your mind and soul. Mind you the people making these comments think men rode on dinosaurs.....YA.
edit on 28-5-2015 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2015 @ 01:42 AM
link   
a reply to: SubTruth

I totally agree, his comments aren't as bad as the others. However this isn't about rating which comments are better or worse than others. It's about making such comments at all when compared to the comments these same people make on a normal basis.

They are hypocrites and liars. They head organizations and speak publicly against everyone being sinful and promote the idea that they know and live and preach God's Moral law. Nothing could be further from the truth, but as I said they are hypocrites and liars.

Some of them have organizations with massive lobbying power. Some have schools, ministries, youth groups, TV shows, Radio Shows and pal around with policy makers. They have millions of followers who believe in what they say and do what they are told. Does this not concern you??? It does me, very much I might add.

It's one thing to have powerful opponents in life who you don't agree with or like their policies. This is obviously a concern but as long as you're both rational individuals some basic respect can usually be upheld. However, when dealing with Fanatics, Zealots and similar irrational, uncompromising types things can be much more unstable and dangerous.

They are typically ignorant of the actual facts and have no desire to know them if they oppose what they want to "believe". Their "pride" in their "beliefs" and opinions cannot be reasoned with on any level either because they simply don't care about what is true versus how they think things should be. People in power with such a mentality are dangerous and when looking through history it's easy to see that every abuse levied against humanity has at least one of these people behind it. Whether it's war, economic crashes, serial killings, whatever. None of those things has a spokesman or leader behind it that allowed for a difference of opinion or rational thinking. If they did, their actions and atrocities would never have happened.

They were all wrong, refused to accept they could be wrong out of ignorance and pride and caused so much damage that we should all know better than to listen to these people after so many examples.



posted on May, 28 2015 @ 01:51 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

So the guy did these things when he was 14? Then why is he being crucified? When someone underage seduces an older person, the underage person doesn't get in trouble. They're considered innocent and "unable to make those kinds of decisions". So should this guy. It only makes sense, if this is how the system is going to be.

edit on 5/28/2015 by ItCameFromOuterSpace because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2015 @ 02:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: ItCameFromOuterSpace
a reply to: mOjOm

So the guy did these things when he was 14? Then why is he being crucified? When someone underage seduces an older person, the underage person doesn't get in trouble. They're considered innocent and "unable to make those kinds of decisions". So should this guy. It only makes sense, if this is how the system is going to be.


Again, this thread isn't about what Josh Duggar did. There are threads about that already. This is about his sympathizers and Defenders. Of which you have now included yourself apparently and I'll address your comment like I did theirs.

Your comment is about someone underage seducing someone older and how they don't get in trouble. So why is it that Josh got in trouble. Like the other comments in defense of Josh your position also lacks many other facts either because you choose not to include them or that you don't know them. Your example doesn't represent a comparable situation in this case. Plus, he didn't get in trouble in the typical sense and at the time he wasn't held accountable for what he did and consideration to his age was also at play.

Him being "crucified" as you put it now has to do with much more than just what he did all those years ago. It has to do with what he's done since, the other people involved in this and their actions, the double standard surrounding these events and people and other issues. I reject the term "crucified" as well as it's hardly accurate.

But you see, this is typical of what this topic is about. There is a lot of hyperbole used and irrational ideas and opinions thrown around without any consideration for new information. The reason for it is the same reason you see it in other debates as well. It comes from the fact that it's almost impossible to defend an indefensible position without using such illogical methods. You must omit facts and refuse to use basic reason because facts and reason are directly opposed to that position.



posted on May, 28 2015 @ 02:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: ItCameFromOuterSpace
a reply to: mOjOm

So the guy did these things when he was 14? Then why is he being crucified? When someone underage seduces an older person, the underage person doesn't get in trouble. They're considered innocent and "unable to make those kinds of decisions". So should this guy. It only makes sense, if this is how the system is going to be.


Let's be clear about something here. Josh was the older person in this scenario which is why he is at fault. While he may still be under the age of consent, at 14 he should certainly know better than to sexually assault girls as young as 6, who are also his sisters and on more than one occasion.

Now, if he was in fact the younger person in the situation then it would be the fault of the older person involved. So right away you should be able to see why your example or excuse you're trying to use doesn't even apply correctly.

Even if we just accept your example as being applicable it still doesn't matter because his age was a consideration back when it happened. His punishment wouldn't be the same as someone who is an adult for doing the same thing he did. Consideration for him being 14 would have been a factor. However, it doesn't completely absolve him from what he did, nor should it.



posted on May, 28 2015 @ 03:11 AM
link   
a reply to: SubTruth

Let's look at Huckabee once again shall we??

I submit this as an example of what I'm talking about when I say that Irrational, Zealots who have complete Pride in their Beliefs can be dangerous by ignoring facts and using common sense.

Wayne DuMond



Wayne Eugene DuMond (September 10, 1949[1] – August 31, 2005[2]) was an American criminal convicted of murder and rape.

DuMond's case received intense nationwide attention in late 2007, when his parole became an issue for presidential candidate Mike Huckabee during the 2008 presidential campaign.

DuMond's case resurfaced during the 2008 Presidential election when questions were raised on the conduct of Republican candidate Mike Huckabee in securing DuMond's parole while Huckabee was governor of Arkansas.

The DuMond case:

"...became a cause celebre among some evangelical Christians in Arkansas after DuMond claimed to have undergone a religious conversion. DuMond's supporters argued that he was not being treated fairly because one of his alleged victims was a distant cousin of Bill Clinton. They accused Clinton, then governor of Arkansas, of preventing DuMond's release from prison in defiance of the wishes of his own parole board."


This isn't all there is to the story either and I suggest you read it all for the details and Huckabee's part in all of this. Hopefully some of you are starting to see how my position in all of this has some credibility.



posted on May, 28 2015 @ 04:52 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

What Duggar did in the past is unquestionably wrong, on so many levels that it does not bare thinking about in overmuch detail. However, what his friends, family, and his other defenders and supporters fail to recognise, is that what he did AFTERWARD is ALSO wrong.

He decided to allow himself to draw about him veils of apparent decency and piousness, gathered about himself elements of wealth and a certain degree of fame, and has exposed himself to the rest of the world. A man who is genuinely in repentance for the sins of his past, would have done none of these things. A man who is sincere in his repentance of a sin like that, would have ensured that he never once benefited from a veneer, a mask across his history as he has worn all the years in between.

If he and his family honestly believe that they have acted openly and transparently all this time, about the events which Duggar enacted in his youth, then they are fooling themselves. The fact that they have not been open and honest about these matters, the fact that it is only recently that these things came into the public understanding, leads one, reasonably in my view, to the conclusion that there is nothing remotely sincere about Duggars attitude toward this matter, that things have been omitted from his biographical data deliberately, so as not to effect the appearance of legitimacy that the family has as a whole, so that they can continue to benefit from public admiration and the opportunities that come with it.

I feel sure that if this family had been frank about Josh's behaviour from the outset, if nothing had been left unsaid about his history, and about whatever path he had to walk to unpick the threads of whatever psychosis or malady lead to his outlandish behaviour toward the young girls involved, then the public would not have taken to the Duggars nearly as well as they have, and it seems clear to me that this was understood in no uncertain terms by the family, and that they decided to bury or at least omit the details because they realised that they stood to gain fame and wealth, as long as those details remained under wraps.

The whole mess is appalling.
edit on 28-5-2015 by TrueBrit because: grammatical improvements.



posted on May, 28 2015 @ 06:08 AM
link   
a reply to: ItCameFromOuterSpace

Are you effing kidding me? He sexually molested his siblings and we're supposed to be like "eh, kids will be kids"?


When someone underage seduces an older person, the underage person doesn't get in trouble.


The implications of what you're saying are all kinds of effed up.
edit on 28-5-2015 by GetHyped because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2015 @ 07:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: ItCameFromOuterSpace
a reply to: mOjOm

So the guy did these things when he was 14? Then why is he being crucified? When someone underage seduces an older person, the underage person doesn't get in trouble.


Wow...what a ludicrous comparison. When someone underage "seduces" an older person, who gets in trouble for it? The older party. In this case who was the older party? Oh right... josh duggar was. He wasn't a 25 year old teacher sleeping with a high school student, he was a teenage pedophile sexually assaulting girls against their will. Girls as Young as 6, girls who were his sisters and close family friends who were supposed to be able to trust him and had NO recourse to even be allowed to know it was wrong let alone go to the police and file charges. That you really are trying to imply that a sleeping child seduced a 14 year old boy is nearly as disgusting as duggars actions and at least as reprehensible as the actions of his defenders.



They're considered innocent and "unable to make those kinds of decisions". So should this guy. It only makes sense, if this is how the system is going to be.


Bottom line here is that Josh Duggar is a pedophile. He wasn't seduced by his 6 year old sisters. You're disgusting in your attempt to downplay what he did. Not only were the actions of Josh Duggar beyond vile, he faced zero consequences for his deplorable violation of trust. These girls weren't even allowed to know that what he did was wrong, they were denied a voice of outrage and an outlet of justice. But that's OK... he was 14. His 6 year old sister should have known better right?


To address your question regarding his "crucification" though... It's not just Josh who should be crucified for this whole mess. His parents are at least as guilty as he is in this scenario. The entire hierarchy of this family should be on the chopping block(metaphorically). Let's look a little deeper into this. In 2002, the father, Jim Bob, ran for U.S. Senate. Part of his campaign platform was that rapists and pedophiles should be eligible for the death penalty. Aside for the rather non Christian stance of executing people instead of forgiving them, it reeks of putrid hypocrisy that pedophiles should be given the needle yet when his own son is shown to be a pedophile himself, not only is he shielded from legal consequences, he's merely shipped off to a family friend for some bible studies while the S# storm at home blows over and then his actions are excused, rationalized and worse, defended with some of the most vile religious B.S. I've seen since The Inquisition. All blame is eschewed from Josh and placed instead on the victims.

Here is some literature from the home schooling institution promoted and used by the Duggars(see below). The very same one where the institutes founder, 79-year-old Bill Gothard, resigned last year after accusations that he had sexually assaulted more than 30 women. The Duggar family have long been associated with Gothard and his teachings. So much so, that their daughter Jinger, spoke at one of their conferences in 2014. The Duggars are being "crucified" because they used their influence in their community to keep all investigations at bay and make sure no charges were filed so that their son maintained a squeaky clean image. There wasn't even an attempt at an investigation until at least 3 years after these events occurred. Prior to that, Josh was ":given a stern talking to" by a state trooper who was later arrested on child pornography charges. One heck of a circle of friends the Duggars have eh? They keep saying that Josh "made mistakes". Sexual abuse is NOT a mistake. It's a felony. Anybody defending this really needs to question their own moral compass. Josh not only never had to suffer any consequences, he was brought back into the same home where some of these crimes occurred and then given a little bit of limelight that led to him eventually getting into a career as a Christian apologist. Not bad for a pedophile!





posted on May, 28 2015 @ 07:46 AM
link   
Here's the headline... Hillary Clinton sends emails from her server, Mike Huckabee defends child molestation as long as it's a Christian who molests.



posted on May, 28 2015 @ 08:08 AM
link   
It is just unbelievable that it's always victims fault, when it comes to religion...


4. Why did God let it happen?

Result of defrauding by:

Immodest dress
Indecent exposure
Being out from protection of our parents
Being with evil friends.


This ignorance is just mind-blowing... he actually never was supposed to feel guilt, but pass it on victims...

As for topic, it makes me wonder if their friend and supporter Ken Ham made any statements in their defense.

Thank you for topic with lots of information.
edit on 28-5-2015 by SuperFrog because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2015 @ 09:13 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

The very act of "accepting religion" is relinquishing critical thought and free will.

So you are really missing the point.

Unconditional forgiveness and acceptance is one of the benefits of Religion that really improves quality of life for the operative in this life. Kind of rational for a human when you think about it.

Excuses, forgiveness and less to think about, fewer books to read. Plus you get to judge people to make yourself feel better. It's clear to me why hoards of people end up as operatives.



posted on May, 28 2015 @ 10:00 AM
link   
Excellent thread OP - it's time to do away with people who harm children for their own personal gain!

Hey religious folks - read your bible! Didn't YOUR Jesus dude say protect the children - why are you going against YOUR ordained savior's proclamation???

I'm against organized religion but I do know if what you read in the bible doesn't jive with the Ten Commandments - then the biblical stories go AGAINST God's Ten Commandments!

Wake up religious folks..read the Ten Commandments and stop following false Prophets!!!



posted on May, 28 2015 @ 10:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass

The very act of "accepting religion" is relinquishing critical thought and free will.


Well, I'd agree that critical thought is relinquished, that is for sure. As for their free will, not so much. They are still very much in charge of their own actions even though they like to attribute them to invisible forces outside themselves when convenient. This is especially nice when they do something wrong as they get to push that responsibility onto something else.


So you are really missing the point.

Unconditional forgiveness and acceptance is one of the benefits of Religion that really improves quality of life for the operative in this life. Kind of rational for a human when you think about it.

Excuses, forgiveness and less to think about, fewer books to read. Plus you get to judge people to make yourself feel better. It's clear to me why hoards of people end up as operatives.


I'd say you're partially correct in this. They do enjoy the judgement of other people and thinking and learning less certainly applies. However, the unconditional forgiveness I'd say applies to only a select group of other like minded individuals making their forgiveness very conditional actually. While those conditions do vary quite a lot they most always include Not Being Gay and Not Being an Atheist. In fact I'd say "Unconditional Forgiveness" and "Judgement" are two attributes that by definition cannot actually exist together as one cancels the other. You can really only choose to do one or the other but never both.



posted on Jun, 3 2015 @ 07:46 PM
link   
a reply to: SubTruth

It isn't religion that makes people poor thinkers. It is any groupthink environment.

I get to see it on full display, in all its glory, daily in the political discussions across the web. Everyone has to either be Team Edward or Team Jacob.

Someone asked me who i was rooting for during the Super Bowl. When I answered "the game of football", they looked at me like i had answered in Chinese. If you aren't picking sides, you aren't behaving like the other humans.



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 03:42 PM
link   
a reply to: ItCameFromOuterSpace

The family knew that he molested his sister and other little girls. He did it repeatedly, and they knew that as well. The Duggar family then put themselves out into the world on TELEVISION to preach the superiority of their family model. They pushed hard in their communities against LGBT people claiming that those people were a threat to children and the family. This is preposterous to the point of almost disbelief. The whole family is sick and in need of serious counseling. Anyone who fails to understand this is simply stupid.



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 03:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexanSomeone asked me who i was rooting for during the Super Bowl. When I answered "the game of football", they looked at me like i had answered in Chinese. If you aren't picking sides, you aren't behaving like the other humans.


Full agreement. I have said exactly the same thing in regard to the Stanley Cup.

Americans are particularly egregious in regard to this bizarre us vs. them "competition is King and winning is everything" attitude. It is evident in their outlook on every subject, from sports to education to politics and beyond. For a country that has such national pride, they have an amazing amount of infighting and compartmentalization in their thinking. i.e. a liberal cannot be a real American because he is "on the left". Nonsense. Yet many Americans think that way.

If you don't pick a side, you are not normal. If you show signs of having a hybrid of beliefs, you are not normal. You must be completely polarized and founded in one mode or the other, or you are rejected as some kind of nut job.
edit on 6-6-2015 by JRCrowley because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join