Everything Josh Duggar, Child Molester - Part 7

[happy atheist]

I'm sorry I pissed you off. I'm a little pissed off too. I have members of your forum jumping down my back for things that have more to do with how this forum is set up then anything. Don't take the criticism personally. People are basically calling me a jerk because I didn't read through 5000 pre-existing posts, I was defending myself because I'm new here and the welcome I've received so far in asking for help has been really rude and condescending. I don't understand why you are acting this way towards me

!

{TEXT1}:

Because you didn't read the first post in the thread. The one from me with the special formatting to make it look all official and important and shit. The one that specifically says not to speculate about the 5th victim. And then you had the gall to say that it would super fucking helpful if we were to post an announcement at the top of a thread. Which you would, apparently, not read anyway. Nobody said you had to read everything on the site. Nobody even said you had to read everything in the Josh threads. But you do need to read the mod announcements, and you do need to read a few pages before you post. Just like everybody else.

[ApologistsBeDamned]

Thank you for helping me out. So basically, if you get enough people together, call yourself a 'church', you can have your local home church basically 'call' you ordained. What would be the point of that? Tax breaks? If your running for office, do you get to double dip tax breaks? Just curious.....honestly asking....I don't know the US laws.

How does that hold up with the laws, regarding mandatory reporting? If the 'minister' has never received proper training, how on earth is he going to know about 'mandatory reporting' when the long standing belief has been, 'confidentiality' among minister and client? Good gravy......this stinks!

Ignorance of the law is nonexcuse. If someone wants to be in the position where they might know of abuse they better get their ducks in a row to keep themself from getting in trouble with the law.

Businesses only make sure their employees know of the requirement to mitigate litigation.

[armedandlazy]

Says the person who doesn't take the time to read the first post in the thread

Jesus Christ what is your problem? Are you that offended that I made a criticism about your site? I was just making a suggestion that other sites use, very effectively I might add. Whether I see personally see a post at the top of a page is irrelevant, I was just showing you what works for other sites.

Anyway, you are seriously just getting nastier and nastier. There's really no need for it. I never came on here barking at the members, I was nice and polite. I only defended myself after your members started sh*tting on me because I asked a question. You really need to stop. You're just proving the unwelcoming nature of this site. I just don't understand why you feel like being such a dick to me, really....what have I done to YOU?

[lostfemme]

I'm sorry I pissed you off. I'm a little pissed off too. I have members of your forum jumping down my back for things that have more to do with how this forum is set up then anything. Don't take the criticism personally. People are basically calling me a jerk because I didn't read through 5000 pre-existing posts, I was defending myself because I'm new here and the welcome I've received so far in asking for help has been really rude and condescending. I don't understand why you are acting this way towards me

Don't let attitude dissuade you from solid information. This is a difficult community to monitor. A whole bunch of stuff is repeated, ad nauseum, when new people join. Don't take it personally if someone has a condescending attitude and try to find your own access to the information in through the links. I've lurked here, off and on, since the beginning. I've only posted once in the past, to a real time fundie who was making excuses for Doug Phillips. Now, I've been reading all things Duggar for a week and finally registered again.

If you are here for info, try to find it yourself on the site first. If all else fails, apologize for all your newbie mistakes and ask questions. Usually on these popular threads, the information is only a few pages back. I think the regulars are only getting testy because so many people are asking rather than flipping through a few pages for their answers. Just roll with it. They aren't wrong, you aren't wrong. The information is more important that anything.

[ApologistsBeDamned]

' :angry-banghead:

Unless the poster was "ATI learned" she probably gets it.

[VelociRapture]

Jesus Christ what is your problem? Are you that offended that I made a criticism about your site? I was just making a suggestion that other sites use, very effectively I might add. Whether I see personally see a post at the top of a page is irrelevant, I was just showing you what works for other sites.

Anyway, you are seriously just getting nastier and nastier. There's really no need for it. I never came on here barking at the members, I was nice and polite. I only defended myself after your members started sh*tting on me because I asked a question. You really need to stop. You're just proving the unwelcoming nature of this site. I just don't understand why you feel like being such a dick to me, really....what have I done to YOU?

You can make suggestions based off other sites if you want. However, at the present moment in time, FJ works by having Mod announcements at the beginning of each new part of this thread. It is the responsibility of every poster to read those warnings themselves. Otherwise they run the risk of being called out.

You aren't wrong. There may be better ways to run the site. But HappyAtheist isn't wrong either. As a poster, you have a responsibility to follow the rules of the forums. That's what you agreed to when you signed up.

I suggest people move on. Others are attempting to discuss the topic of the thread and I think it would be great if everyone in this conversation (myself included) could offer their opinion on that.

[VelociRapture]

Ignorance of the law is nonexcuse. If someone wants to be in the position where they might know of abuse they better get their ducks in a row to keep themself from getting in trouble with the law.

Businesses only make sure their employees know of the requirement to mitigate litigation.

Completely agree with you. If you want to be in a position of power then you need to know about these laws. Not only could you wind up helping to stop an abusive situation, it'll also protect you from getting into trouble if you find out about an abusive situation.

I have no clue whether or not the circle the Duggars run in would take that seriously though. I mean, these are the people who encourage parents to beat their kids for getting off a blanket.

[armedandlazy]

Holy shit, 15 pages back I acknowledged my mistake. I am so fucking god damn sorry I didn't read your post, will please fucking forgive me for my awful sins against your forum. I also have spent days on here READING posts, which was my fucking point to begin with. Even if you read hundreds of posts one will never get through EVERYTHING that was posted. I know I'm a fucking idiot who missed your specially fucking formatted post, but I also know most people aren't as fucking stupid as me, which is why I made a suggestion that is successful on other sites. Sorry I offended you SO MUCH by telling you what works well on other sites. I see now how horribly I offended you with that. Anyway you people are fucking awful.

[SassyPants]

Read red box at the top of this subforum

Use search engine

Do not ask questions

PM people who have volunteered to help find info/ask questions if needed. {halcionne}

Thank God it's Friday

[halcionne]

Posted here per request of Happy Athiest from the People magazine thread:

I'm not sure how excluding information from a story is somehow "standing with the girls." There was quite literally nothing about the girls in the article except that five underage girls were Josh's victims. The rest focused on Josh, his parents, and their version of events without a shred of critical thinking. Nowhere does People magazine bother to even address the potential affects of having a serial offender live under the same roof as the girls. If People magazine has a relationship with the Duggars, it only strengthens my suspicions that People magazine has deliberately withheld information from their readers.

People has always been and will always be celebrity and publicist friendly; it's why celebs and their PR people cooperate with them and why People is generally regarded as less sensational than other Hollywood magazines.

[VelociRapture]

Holy shit, 15 pages back I acknowledged my mistake. I am so fucking god damn sorry I didn't read your post, will please fucking forgive me for my awful sins against your forum. I also have spent days on here READING posts, which was my fucking point to begin with. Even if you read hundreds of posts one will never get through EVERYTHING that was posted. I know I'm a fucking idiot who missed your specially fucking formatted post, but I also know most people aren't as fucking stupid as me, which is why I made a suggestion that is successful on other sites. Sorry I offended you SO MUCH by telling you what works well on other sites. I see now how horribly I offended you with that. Anyway you people are fucking awful.

I said it before, I'll say it again. Move on. The conversation here is about Josh Duggar admitting to the molestation of five girls years ago. We tried explaining to you before about the posts - many of us did so very politely and calmly. Calm down, take a breath, and then tell us what you think about mandated reporters:

Do you think people like Holt, who may or may not be an officiated Baptist Minister, have an obligation to report suspected abuse to authorities? Do you think if he is a Minister that he fell down on the job because he didn't immediately report Josh's actions to the police?

[apple1]

From The Southern Baptist Church Website (Holt's Wiki Page says he's an Ordained Southern Baptist Minister):

What is the procedure for ordination in the SBC?

Actually, there is no standard process or policy concerning ordination in the SBC. In fact, the SBC cannot ordain anyone. The matter of ordination is addressed strictly on a local church level. Every Southern Baptist church is autonomous and decides individually whether or not to ordain, or whether to require ordination of its pastor. When a church senses that God has led a person into pastoral ministry, it is a common practice to have a council (usually of pastors) review his testimony of salvation, his pastoral calling from the Lord, and his qualifications (including theological preparation and scriptural qualifications according to 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:7-9) for pastoral ministry. Based upon that interview the church typically decides whether or not ordination would be appropriate.

Some SBC churches require seminary training from an SBC seminary, while others may not, such a requirement is entirely up to the church.

Of course, every SBC church is free to approach ordination in the manner it deems best.

I'm sure it's true that different churches do ordination differently. But it's not true that no Baptists (IFB or SBC or American Baptists or other) have requirements. My Dad is ordained IFB. He completed seminary (a Bachelor's degree program - in his case he also already had a college degree in a secular professional field), after which he and some other ordination candidates were questioned by ordained ministers who were also professors at the seminary, to determine/verify their Biblical knowledge and beliefs. Upon passing that questioning/examination, the ordaining ministers had a ceremony in which they had hands laid upon them and prayer for them. At this point, they received ordination papers from the seminary and the church associated with it. (This was many years ago).

[Rescinded and Mended]

Call the police for a boy having his hands tied together? While that is a bad and stupid punishment I would be surprised if it rose to the level of abuse the state would get involved with.

Maybe not, but then, I don't know if it even really happened that way. If it did, I would just hope that someone would have said something to Jim Bob to make him stop, even if the police weren't ever involved. But then, look where we're posting right now - on a thread about Josh Duggar, who admitted to molesting his sisters and another girl. Apparently, this was an open secret for years, but we are all just now finding out the proof of it.

I get the feeling that someday we're going to get a tell-all from crew members who worked on the show, and the stories they tell will be even worse than this one.

[VelociRapture]

People has always been and will always be celebrity and publicist friendly; it's why celebs and their PR people cooperate with them and why People is generally regarded as less sensational than other Hollywood magazines.

Honestly, I don't think People excluding their names has anything to do with them standing with the girls. I think its just their way of making sure to cover their asses. None of the alleged victims have stepped forward to publicly say they were assaulted - identifying them when they don't want that attention could be making People's Attorneys pretty nervous.

Not to mention that most publications try to avoid naming victims of sexual assault unless they come forward and give them permission.

[armedandlazy]

You aren't wrong. There may be better ways to run the site. But HappyAtheist isn't wrong either. As a poster, you have a responsibility to follow the rules of the forums. That's what you agreed to when you signed up.

agreed I made a mistake, which I admitted to. So why is a mod still following around everything I post just so they can post a nasty response? I made a mistake but must I be vilified by a mod of all people??? Why is HappyAtheist still sh*tting on me, the rule that I broke happened HOURS ago. I get it. Does not explain the behaviour of the mod now though, it's just petty and personal now. I will move on when the MOD stops responding nasty things to everything I post

[skulduggery]

A Quiverfull author has spoken his peace:

rawstory.com/2015/05/quiverfull-author-delivers-melodramatic-defense-of-duggars-against-pagans-and-gullible-christians/

Oh. my. god. :wtf:

[ApologistsBeDamned]

We know at some point Jim HOLT was ordained enough to perform a marriage as he did so for his own daughter.

Since he claimed 1996 I have no reason to doubt that since someone in Arkansas would have asked about his certification during his election campaigns. Or I sure hope they would have if there was no proof of this godliness.

[Hera]

Do you think people like Holt, who may or may not be an officiated Baptist Minister, have an obligation to report suspected abuse to authorities? Do you think if he is a Minister that he fell down on the job because he didn't immediately report Josh's actions to the police?

Morally? Absolutely. I think any adult morally has an obligation to report suspected sexual abuse of a child (or children, as the case is here) to the authorities. And, if Holt was an ordained minister, then I also believe he probably had a legal obligation to report, regardless of whether he went to seminary school or just downloaded a certificate from Ministers-R'-Us. And, if he was unordained, but appointed himself in the role of minister, then I think he had a moral obligation to report. If he helped cover this up, then he's just as morally culpable as Michelle, the Boob, the kiddie porn cop and anyone who may (note: may, since we don't know for sure) have looked the other way in the Arkansas DHS.

[ApologistsBeDamned]

agreed I made a mistake, which I admitted to. So why is a mod still following around everything I post just so they can post a nasty response? I made a mistake but must I be vilified by a mod of all people??? Why is HappyAtheist still sh*tting on me, the rule that I broke happened HOURS ago. I get it. Does not explain the behaviour of the mod now though, it's just petty and personal now. I will move on when the MOD stops responding nasty things to everything I post

Happy Atheist probably just now made itnto this thread. She isn't following you around. You will notice she is cleaning up posts.with unbroken links etc... all while answering you.

She will move on to another thread. It js what she does.

Now please can we forget this happened and discuss these crazy duggars?

[skulduggery]

Honestly, I don't think People excluding their names has anything to do with them standing with the girls. I think its just their way of making sure to cover their asses. None of the alleged victims have stepped forward to publicly say they were assaulted - identifying them when they don't want that attention could be making People's Attorneys pretty nervous.

Not to mention that most publications try to avoid naming victims of sexual assault unless they come forward and give them permission.

Okay, did you read my original post back at the People magazine thread? Obviously not.

My post here is a continuation of a response that was posted to me after I mentioned the fact that People magazine left out Josh's incest joke, Gothard's connection to Hobby Lobby, and the fact that the judge that ordered the destruction of Josh's records was connected to Huckabee. Never once did I mention that their names should be made publicly available, and never once did I say the lurid details about what happened to them should be rehashed in front of the public.

I'd appreciate it if you read what I said before arguing a point I never made. Thank you.

[VelociRapture]

agreed I made a mistake, which I admitted to. So why is a mod still following around everything I post just so they can post a nasty response? I made a mistake but must I be vilified by a mod of all people??? Why is HappyAtheist still sh*tting on me, the rule that I broke happened HOURS ago. I get it. Does not explain the behaviour of the mod now though, it's just petty and personal now. I will move on when the MOD stops responding nasty things to everything I post

You would have to ask HappyAtheist that yourself. I suggest you send a private message. You can figure things out much more quickly that way and the rest of the board can continue discussing the issue at hand.

[apple1]

Admittedly off topic.

I wouldn't want to be a mod on this board right now. No way, no how. AFAIK, they don't receive any remuneration, either. (?) But for sure, it's a no-win job right now.

[PlaidFrumper]

Regarding People and other sites not mentioning that some of the victims are his sisters.....I'm actually surprised that the names of the victims' parents weren't redacted in the police report. If the point of the redactions was to protect the identity of the victims or even Precious Josh they did a piss poor job of it. Having it be more out in the open may help or hurt the girls in the long run, who knows how this will play out, but that info really probably shouldn't be out there.

That being said, if I put my tinfoil hat on I have to wonder if the redactions weren't done the way they were done on purpose, either because they wanted to brign the duggars down or because they felt justice hadn't been served. Knowing that some of the victims were his sisters puts a much bigger and more scandalous WTF on the whole thing.

[Flyinthesoup]

We know at some point Jim HOLT was ordained enough to perform a marriage as he did so for his own daughter.

Since he claimed 1996 I have no reason to doubt that since someone in Arkansas would have asked about his certification during his election campaigns. Or I sure hope they would have if there was no proof of this godliness.

You do not need to be ordained in order to perform a marriage ceremony.

[skulduggery]

People has always been and will always be celebrity and publicist friendly; it's why celebs and their PR people cooperate with them and why People is generally regarded as less sensational than other Hollywood magazines.

Are you seriously suggesting that asking People magazine to present facts is "sensationalism?"