Did Jim Bob Duggar admit that fundamentalist families have a sibling molestation problem?

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 10:49 am

ost in the many revelations and and explanations in the Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar interview with Fox’s Megyn Kelly was a bombshell comment made by Jim Bob Duggar stating that parents they spoke with had experienced “similar situations” within their own families. As the Duggars explained why they didn’t seek professional help for teenaged son Josh after he admitted to molesting five young girls – four of them his sisters, including one who was reportedly only 5 at the time — they said they reached out to their church and friends for advice. That was when Jim Bob offhandedly mentioned the feedback he received from other parents –presumably from within their inner circle — as they attempted to keep the potential scandal under wraps.

“It was a very difficult situation,” Jim Bob explained. “But as we talked to other parents and different ones since then, a lot of families have said that they have had similar things that happened in their families.”

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/06/did-jim-bob-duggar-admit-that-fundamentalist-families-have-a-sibling-molestation-problem/

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 10:52 am

Another religion-bashing thread.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:06 am

Raggamuffin wrote:Another religion-bashing thread.

So you do not think child abuse clearly going on not being reported is not an isssue then when religious families are involved it should thus be swept under the carpet?

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:10 am

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:Another religion-bashing thread.

So you do not think child abuse clearly going on not being reported is not an isssue then when religious families are involved it should thus be swept under the carpet?

I think you care more about bashing Christianity than you do about child abuse. This must be at least the fifth thread you've started about this particular family.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:14 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

So you do not think child abuse clearly going on not being reported is not an isssue then when religious families are involved it should thus be swept under the carpet?

I think you care more about bashing Christianity than you do about child abuse. This must be at least the fifth thread you've started about this particular family.

Poor deflection again. If there is a problem within a religious community like we saw in the catholic church it is an issue that needs to be dealt with and not some pathetic excuse to claim Christian bashing. I get tired of Christians trying to defend christianity where child abuse happens by claiming Christianity is under attack, it is the worst form of apologist action you will find.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:22 am

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

I think you care more about bashing Christianity than you do about child abuse. This must be at least the fifth thread you've started about this particular family.

Poor deflection again. If there is a problem within a religious community like we saw in the catholic church it is an issue that needs to be dealt with and not some pathetic excuse to claim Christian bashing. I get tired of Christians trying to defend christianity where child abuse happens by claiming Christianity is under attack, it is the worst form of apologist action you will find.

There's no deflection. You are completely obsessed with this family, and it's clearly more to do with their religion than anything else.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:25 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

Poor deflection again. If there is a problem within a religious community like we saw in the catholic church it is an issue that needs to be dealt with and not some pathetic excuse to claim Christian bashing. I get tired of Christians trying to defend christianity where child abuse happens by claiming Christianity is under attack, it is the worst form of apologist action you will find.

There's no deflection. You are completely obsessed with this family, and it's clearly more to do with their religion than anything else.

Pathetic apologist reply again trying to deflect where clearly there is a problem of child abuse to pathetically claim Christians being attacked.
Lets just ignore the victims of abuse here because of religious insensitivities according to Rags.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:27 am

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

There's no deflection. You are completely obsessed with this family, and it's clearly more to do with their religion than anything else.

Pathetic apologist reply again trying to deflect where clearly there is a problem of child abuse to pathetically claim Christians being attacked.
Lets just ignore the victims of abuse here because of religious insensitivities according to Rags.

It's more a question of why you're obsessed with this particular family rather than talking about child abuse in general.

Nobody could accuse you of ignoring this family anyway.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:28 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

Pathetic apologist reply again trying to deflect where clearly there is a problem of child abuse to pathetically claim Christians being attacked.
Lets just ignore the victims of abuse here because of religious insensitivities according to Rags.

It's more a question of why you're obsessed with this particular family rather than talking about child abuse in general.

Nobody could accuse you of ignoring this family anyway.

Deflection yet again and from an apologist Christian, where at no point have I directly even mentioned the family.
I am going off their own admission to where they claim this has happened in many families and how clearly there is a case of covering up abuse.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:29 am

Not once have you actually spoken of whether there is a problem of child abuse being covered up, instead you play the apologist victim card to bury your head in the sand to the abuse going on.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:35 am

Belatucadros wrote:Not once have you actually spoken of whether there is a problem of child abuse being covered up, instead you play the apologist victim card to bury your head in the sand to the abuse going on.

It's a pity you don't bury your head somewhere. Your obsession with this particular family is tedious in the extreme.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:37 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:Not once have you actually spoken of whether there is a problem of child abuse being covered up, instead you play the apologist victim card to bury your head in the sand to the abuse going on.

It's a pity you don't bury your head somewhere. Your obsession with this particular family is tedious in the extreme.

You are an obnoxious little brat trying to derail the thread as per usual and ignore child sex abuse by playing the victim card.
Now unless you have anything to add instead of trying to defend child abuse, I suggest you jog on, because nobody except other Christian apologists is buying your bullshit here

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:41 am

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

It's a pity you don't bury your head somewhere. Your obsession with this particular family is tedious in the extreme.

You are an obnoxious little brat trying to derail the thread as per usual and ignore child sex abuse by playing the victim card.
Now unless you have anything to add instead of trying to defend child abuse, I suggest you jog on, because nobody except other Christian apologists is buying your bullshit here

Where have I said anything about being a victim? I'm talking about your obnoxious and boring obsession with this family.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:43 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

You are an obnoxious little brat trying to derail the thread as per usual and ignore child sex abuse by playing the victim card.
Now unless you have anything to add instead of trying to defend child abuse, I suggest you jog on, because nobody except other Christian apologists is buying your bullshit here

Where have I said anything about being a victim? I'm talking about your obnoxious and boring obsession with this family.

So you think a family who covered up child abuse is an obsession now, who have been seen as a model family as portrayed on TV.
At no point arfe you talking about the issue here of child sex abuse being covered up by such fundementalist Christian families.
You may want to ignore this, but clearly there is a major issue going on. You can keep posting your apologist bullshit, but you are not going to derail this thread no matter how poorly you try.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:47 am

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Where have I said anything about being a victim? I'm talking about your obnoxious and boring obsession with this family.

So you think a family who covered up child abuse is an obsession now, who have been seen as a model family as portrayed on TV.
At no point arfe you talking about the issue here of child sex abuse being covered up by such fundementalist Christian families.
You may want to ignore this, but clearly there is a major issue going on. You can keep posting your apologist bullshit, but you are not going to derail this thread no matter how poorly you try.

I think you starting several threads about the same family is obsessive.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:49 am

That is now your 7th comment on this thread without ever talking about the issue being stated.
What further proof does anyone need that you are poorly trying to derail the thread.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:57 am

Belatucadros wrote:That is now your 7th comment on this thread without ever talking about the issue being stated.
What further proof does anyone need that you are poorly trying to derail the thread.

You haven't actually commented on the article either. You just copied some of it and linked to it.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:59 am

That is now comment number 8 with nothing debating the actual admission from the article.
lol wonder how many Rags can make off topic?

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:02 pm

Belatucadros wrote:That is now comment number 8 with nothing debating the actual admission from the article.
lol wonder how many Rags can make off topic?

So where is your comment about the actual situation?

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:04 pm

That is now comment number 9 lol not debating the actual topic.
I have pointed out there is a problem with covering up child abuse, that is relevant to the article, you have tried to derail the thread at every turn because it is Christian families involved. In other words you wish to cover up this problem by playing the victim card.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:10 pm

Belatucadros wrote:That is now comment number 9 lol not debating the actual topic.
I have pointed out there is a problem with covering up child abuse, that is relevant to the article, you have tried to derail the thread at every turn because it is Christian families involved. In other words you wish to cover up this problem by playing the victim card.

The fact that you omitted the rest of the article clearly shows that you are only obsessed with this family - because of their religion - and that you have no real interest in the issue of child abuse. The fact that you did not make one comment of your own also shows that.

The answer to the question in the thread title is yes, assuming that the man has not been misquoted, and that he is actually talking about the same thing. Always check with another source, and make sure that the man is talking about what you think he's talking about.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:11 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:That is now comment number 9 lol not debating the actual topic.
I have pointed out there is a problem with covering up child abuse, that is relevant to the article, you have tried to derail the thread at every turn because it is Christian families involved. In other words you wish to cover up this problem by playing the victim card.

The fact that you omitted the rest of the article clearly shows that you are only obsessed with this family - because of their religion - and that you have no real interest in the issue of child abuse. The fact that you did not make one comment of your own also shows that.

The answer to the question in the thread title is yes, assuming that the man has not been misquoted, and that he is actually talking about the same thing. Always check with another source, and make sure that the man is talking about what you think he's talking about.

Has he been misquoted?
If you think so put up or shut up, is that simple.
So it took you 10 comments before you offered more feeble excuses.
One word to sum that up
Pathetic.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:14 pm

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

The fact that you omitted the rest of the article clearly shows that you are only obsessed with this family - because of their religion - and that you have no real interest in the issue of child abuse. The fact that you did not make one comment of your own also shows that.

The answer to the question in the thread title is yes, assuming that the man has not been misquoted, and that he is actually talking about the same thing. Always check with another source, and make sure that the man is talking about what you think he's talking about.

has he been misquoted?
If you think so put up or shut up, is that simple.
So it took you 10 comments before you offered more feeble excuse.
One word to some that up
Pathetic.

Still no comment from you about the actual article or the situation.

Let's assume that the man is saying that in other families he knows, one sibling abused another. He didn't mention "fundamentalist families" by the way, so I will correct my own previous post. The answer is not necessarily yes.

So what is your view on this?

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:19 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

has he been misquoted?
If you think so put up or shut up, is that simple.
So it took you 10 comments before you offered more feeble excuse.
One word to some that up
Pathetic.

Still no comment from you about the actual article or the situation.

Let's assume that the man is saying that in other families he knows, one sibling abused another. He didn't mention "fundamentalist families" by the way.

So what is your view on this?

They are fundamentalists, which shows you do not understand what a fundamentalist is:

fundamentalis
noun
a form of a religion, especially Islam or Protestant Christianity, that upholds belief in the strict, literal interpretation of scripture.

So best you educate yourself on the meaning of words, because they are fundamentalists these Christians.
If many families have suffered the same issue's why have these not come to light?
Clearly they went off what they were advised by other families at the time which clearly shows others covered up such abuse, because they did the same. That is appalling and clearly many of these families need investigating.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:22 pm

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Still no comment from you about the actual article or the situation.

Let's assume that the man is saying that in other families he knows, one sibling abused another. He didn't mention "fundamentalist families" by the way.

So what is your view on this?

They are fundamentalists, which shows you do not understand what a fundamentalist is:

fundamentalisnoun
a form of a religion, especially Islam or Protestant Christianity, that upholds belief in the strict, literal interpretation of scripture.

So best you educate yourself on the meaning of words, because they are fundamentalists these Christians.
If many families have suffered the same issue's why have these not come to light?
Clearly they went off what they were advised by other families at the time which clearly shows others covered up such abuse, because they did the same. That is appalling and clearly many of these families need investigating.

Are you assuming that he only ever talks to other "fundamentalist families"? I'm not saying that he doesn't, but one shouldn't make that assumption.

The best thing for you to do is find the original source of the interview so it can viewed in full. Do I have to do everything for you? Starting a thread with a partial quote from an article, and making no comment on it yourself is lazy.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:24 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

They are fundamentalists, which shows you do not understand what a fundamentalist is:

fundamentalisnoun
a form of a religion, especially Islam or Protestant Christianity, that upholds belief in the strict, literal interpretation of scripture.

So best you educate yourself on the meaning of words, because they are fundamentalists these Christians.
If many families have suffered the same issue's why have these not come to light?
Clearly they went off what they were advised by other families at the time which clearly shows others covered up such abuse, because they did the same. That is appalling and clearly many of these families need investigating.

Are you assuming that he only ever talks to other "fundamentalist families"? I'm not saying that he doesn't, but one shouldn't make that assumption.

The best thing for you to do is find the original source of the interview so it can viewed in full. Do I have to do everything for you? Starting a thread with a partial quote from an article, and making no comment on it yourself is lazy.

I think its very safe to assume many of their friends are from the same church and religious views they have.
That is a no brainer and again a poor deflection on your part
I have no need to do anything, if you have issue's with the article then the onus is on you to challenge.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:24 pm

You see, the suggestion is that only these "fundamentalist families" cover up such situations. I would suggest that in any family where one sibling has done something like that, the parents would hesitate to report their own child to the police.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:25 pm

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Are you assuming that he only ever talks to other "fundamentalist families"? I'm not saying that he doesn't, but one shouldn't make that assumption.

The best thing for you to do is find the original source of the interview so it can viewed in full. Do I have to do everything for you? Starting a thread with a partial quote from an article, and making no comment on it yourself is lazy.

I think its very safe to assume many of their friends are from the same church and religious views they have.
That is a no brainer and again a poor deflection on your part
I have no need to do anything, if you have issue's with the article then the onus is on you to challenge.

I have challenged it, and I've challenged you for omitting part of it, not commenting on it, and being lazy.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:29 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

I think its very safe to assume many of their friends are from the same church and religious views they have.
That is a no brainer and again a poor deflection on your part
I have no need to do anything, if you have issue's with the article then the onus is on you to challenge.

I have challenged it, and I've challenged you for omitting part of it, not commenting on it, and being lazy.

You never challenged anything and I am onto your childish antics to derail threads, which you are not going to get away with anymore.
I do not have to comment on the first post, that is not forum rules or for you to decide and is again you trying to deflect.
Its immature, childish and utterly pathetic and your game is backfiring, because I am not buying.
Now it seems all you are doing is trying to ignore a potential problem.
If anyone wanted to know what is dangereous about some Christians, then this is the evidence they need, ion how they defend the indefensible

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:31 pm

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

I have challenged it, and I've challenged you for omitting part of it, not commenting on it, and being lazy.

You never challenged anything and I am onto your childish antics to derail threads, which you are not going to get away with anymore.
I do not have to comment on the first post, that is not forum rules or for you to decide and is again you trying to deflect.
Its immature, childish and utterly pathetic and your game is backfiring, because I am not buying.
Now it seems all you are doing is trying to ignore a potential problem.
If anyone wanted to know what is dangereous about some Christians, then this is the evidence they need, ion how they defend the indefensible

I suggest that you merely googled "Jim Duggar" because of your obsession with this particular family. Posting random links and copying and pasting from them is hardly starting a debate.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:31 pm

So then Didge, are you suggesting that only "fundamentalist families" contain children who abuse their siblings?

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:32 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

You never challenged anything and I am onto your childish antics to derail threads, which you are not going to get away with anymore.
I do not have to comment on the first post, that is not forum rules or for you to decide and is again you trying to deflect.
Its immature, childish and utterly pathetic and your game is backfiring, because I am not buying.
Now it seems all you are doing is trying to ignore a potential problem.
If anyone wanted to know what is dangereous about some Christians, then this is the evidence they need, ion how they defend the indefensible

I suggest that you merely googled "Jim Duggar" because of your obsession with this particular family. Posting random links and copying and pasting from them is hardly starting a debate.

You are making poor assumptions with yet again trying to deflect the topic of the article of which there is only one reason that you, because you are a Christian apologist who tries to derail threads that shows any wrongs done by Christians.
The game is up big time and no matter how poorly you try, you are not going to win here.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:34 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:So then Didge, are you suggesting that only "fundamentalist families" contain children who abuse their siblings?

Nope it happens in many religions, in America there has been the covering up with Jewish orthordox families as well for example.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:35 pm

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

I suggest that you merely googled "Jim Duggar" because of your obsession with this particular family. Posting random links and copying and pasting from them is hardly starting a debate.

You are making poor assumptions with yet again trying to deflect the topic of the article of which there is only one reason that you, because you are a Christian apologist who tries to derail threads that shows any wrongs done by Christians.
The game is up big time and no matter how poorly you try, you are not going to win here.

Why don't you just admit that's what you did? Maybe the words differed, but you just googled and copied and pasted from an article with no comment of your own.

I'm laughing at your own assumptions with absolutely nothing to back them up. Razz

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:35 pm

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:So then Didge, are you suggesting that only "fundamentalist families" contain children who abuse their siblings?

Nope it happens in many religions, in America there has been the covering up with Jewish orthordox families as well for example.

Are you suggesting that it only happens in religious families then?

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:37 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

You are making poor assumptions with yet again trying to deflect the topic of the article of which there is only one reason that you, because you are a Christian apologist who tries to derail threads that shows any wrongs done by Christians.
The game is up big time and no matter how poorly you try, you are not going to win here.

Why don't you just admit that's what you did? Maybe the words differed, but you just googled and copied and pasted from an article with no comment of your own.

I'm laughing at your own assumptions with absolutely nothing to back them up.

Laugh away, I am laughing have even now you have offered nothing but the poorest attempts to derail the thread and where an omission from the family implicates others to child abuse covering up.
So I can contionue this all day, where you will never win, even no matter how much you troll this thread with your apologist christian bullshit.

Razz

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:37 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

Nope it happens in many religions, in America there has been the covering up with Jewish orthordox families as well for example.

Are you suggesting that it only happens in religious families then?

Nope.

Next

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:38 pm

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Why don't you just admit that's what you did? Maybe the words differed, but you just googled and copied and pasted from an article with no comment of your own.

I'm laughing at your own assumptions with absolutely nothing to back them up.

Laugh away, I am laughing have even now you have offered nothing but the poorest attempts to derail the thread and where an omission from the family implicates others to child abuse covering up.
So I can contionue this all day, where you will never win, even no matter how much you troll this thread with your apologist christian bullshit.

Win what?

I think you have just admitted that your whole existence revolves around "winning" on a forum, even though you can't actually debate anything - you just copy and paste stuff and then accuse everyone of being "childish".

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:38 pm

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Are you suggesting that it only happens in religious families then?

Nope.

Next

So why pick on this particular family?

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:39 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

Laugh away, I am laughing have even now you have offered nothing but the poorest attempts to derail the thread and where an omission from the family implicates others to child abuse covering up.
So I can contionue this all day, where you will never win, even no matter how much you troll this thread with your apologist christian bullshit.

Win what?

I think you have just admitted that your whole existence revolves around "winning" on a forum, even though you can't actually debate anything - you just copy and paste stuff and then accuse everyone of being "childish".

No its out smarting your poor attempts to derail threads you do not like, because you wish to defend bad Christians.
That is very important to win a battle of wills against an onboxious little brat

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:40 pm

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Win what?

I think you have just admitted that your whole existence revolves around "winning" on a forum, even though you can't actually debate anything - you just copy and paste stuff and then accuse everyone of being "childish".

No its outsamrting your poor attempts to derail threads you do not like, because you wish to defend bad Christians.
That is very important to win a battle of wills against an onboxious little brat

So now "outsamrting" people on a forum is your aim in life.

How sad.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:41 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

Nope.

Next

So why pick on this particular family?

You seriously are simple it seems.
Is it picking on someone there might be a cover up of child sex abuse?

Take your time

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:42 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

No its outsamrting your poor attempts to derail threads you do not like, because you wish to defend bad Christians.
That is very important to win a battle of wills against an onboxious little brat

So now "outsamrting" people on a forum is your aim in life.

How sad.

No just out smarting a troll who deliberatly tries to derail threads because she is a pathetic Christian apologist.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:46 pm

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

So now "outsamrting" people on a forum is your aim in life.

How sad.

No just out smarting a troll who deliberatly tries to derail threads because she is a pathetic Christian apologist.

You couldn't outsmart a dead slug Didge.

Anyway, you're just using this thread to abuse me, and you clearly have absolutely no interest in child abuse at all.

Next!

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:47 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

No just out smarting a troll who deliberatly tries to derail threads because she is a pathetic Christian apologist.

You couldn't outsmart a dead slug Didge.

Anyway, you're just using this thread to abuse me, and you clearly have absolutely no interest in child abuse at all.

Next!

Did Jim Bob Duggar admit that fundamentalist families have a sibling molestation problem? Victim

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 2:13 pm

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

So why pick on this particular family?

You seriously are simple it seems.
Is it picking on someone there might be a cover up of child sex abuse?

Take your time

It's hardly been covered up - it's out there in the open. You seem to be all over the story like a rash.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 2:15 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

You seriously are simple it seems.
Is it picking on someone there might be a cover up of child sex abuse?

Take your time

It's hardly been covered up - it's out there in the open. You seem to be all over the story like a rash.

You keep offering feeble excuses on this.
How is it out in the open if he states other families have had the same issues with no names of these famillies and also how long this has been going on for?

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 2:23 pm

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

It's hardly been covered up - it's out there in the open. You seem to be all over the story like a rash.

You keep offering feeble excuses on this.
How is it out in the open if he states other families have had the same issues with no names of these famillies and also how long this has been going on for?

The original story is out there. Don't pretend that your only interest is in what other families are doing - you already started several threads on this particular family before you even read that bit.

The problem is that you're trying to make this into a religious issue. I have no particular liking for this family. I'd never heard of them until recently. I'm not a fan of reality TV, and I'm not a fan of people being famous for the sake of being famous.

If you had bothered to read the rest of the article and the comments from John Caffaro, you will see that he's saying the issue of sibling abuse is pretty common, and he doesn't mention religion.

I asked you before whether people who realise that one of their children had abused another would go to the police, but you didn't reply. Perhaps you could comment about that now.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 2:31 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

You keep offering feeble excuses on this.
How is it out in the open if he states other families have had the same issues with no names of these famillies and also how long this has been going on for?

The original story is out there. Don't pretend that your only interest is in what other families are doing - you already started several threads on this particular family before you even read that bit.
Waffle and pure deflection attempts at derailing the thread. This has now gone from one family to the potential of many and at every turn you are refusing to discuss a potential problem within a religious community of fundamentalists only because they are Christian. That is the worst form of apologist bullshit.

The problem is that you're trying to make this into a religious issue. I have no particular liking for this family. I'd never heard of them until recently. I'm not a fan of reality TV, and I'm not a fan of people being famous for the sake of being famous.
It is a religious problem if those who are covering this are doing so because of their beliefs. At every turnt they have tried to down play the abuse, make no due care for the actual victims and have seeked the advice within their religious circle.

If you had bothered to read the rest of the article and the comments from John Caffaro, you will see that he's saying the issue of sibling abuse is pretty common, and he doesn't mention religion.
Yes sibling abuse is common, in fact over here in the UK most victims aof child abuse is from a member of the family. That is not the issue here though. The issue is of where these families are covering up the offenses and even worse trying to down play them with the most pathetic reasoning of which you are poorly attempting to do the same with your stance because they are Christians it should be excused

I asked you before whether people who realise that one of their children had abused another would go to the police, but you didn't reply. Perhaps you could comment about that now.

If any parent does not go to the Police about their own child being involved in such abuse, they should also be arrested to for trying to cover up a crime.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 2:34 pm

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

The original story is out there. Don't pretend that your only interest is in what other families are doing - you already started several threads on this particular family before you even read that bit.
Waffle and pure deflection attempts at derailing the thread. This has now gone from one family to the potential of many and at every turn you are refusing to discuss a potential problem within a religious community of fundamentalists only because they are Christian. That is the worst form of apologist bullshit.

The problem is that you're trying to make this into a religious issue. I have no particular liking for this family. I'd never heard of them until recently. I'm not a fan of reality TV, and I'm not a fan of people being famous for the sake of being famous.
It is a religious problem if those who are covering this are doing so because of their beliefs. At every turnt they have tried to down play the abuse, make no due care for the actual victims and have seeked the advice within their religious circle.

If you had bothered to read the rest of the article and the comments from John Caffaro, you will see that he's saying the issue of sibling abuse is pretty common, and he doesn't mention religion.
Yes sibling abuse is common, in fact over here in the UK most victims aof child abuse is from a member of the family. That is not the issue here though. The issue is of where these families are covering up the offenses and even worse trying to down play them with the most pathetic reasoning of which you are poorly attempting to do the same with your stance because they are Christians it should be excused

I asked you before whether people who realise that one of their children had abused another would go to the police, but you didn't reply. Perhaps you could comment about that now.

If any parent does not go to the Police about their own child being involved in such abuse, they should also be arrested to for trying to cover up a crime.

Well at least you having mentioned "fundamentalist families" this time, so well done for that.

Do you not think it would be difficult for a parent to grass their own kid up to the police? They may well think they can manage the situation themselves, which is what the Duggars tried to do. I don't think that's particularly dreadful - I think it's natural.

by Sponsored content