RE: rightwing family values. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


CreativeDominant -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/26/2015 3:22:09 PM)

And Blue Nation Review might as well be funded by the DNC.

Proof that any of the items...other than your defamation of the author...is untrue?




mnottertail -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/27/2015 12:04:41 PM)

Oh, you dont know how to google? You have any proof of anything at all yourself? Using shitbreather citations by known felchers is not argumentation (which is a reason to believe) and in fact the rabid rightwing can only take in the feeble minded, because most people check their propaganda and without any effort at all find out that it is insane asswipe.

Did you see that Obama invaded Texas? You know, clean water, shelters....and the like?

Anyway, here is one to get you started on the old shitbreather nobody that feeble minded people felch:

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/04/20/clinton-cash-author-peter-schweizers-long-histo/203209




Lucylastic -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/27/2015 2:54:11 PM)

The Church, Sexual Abuse and the Epidemic of Silence


Particularly over the past decade, story after story of alleged sexual abuse within the Catholic church surfaced, sparking conversations that needed to happen and inciting cries for justice.

But now the spotlight is on the evangelical world, with high profile sexual abuse cases gaining national attention. Last year, the nation read about sexual harassment allegations toward Bill Gothard and reports of Bob Jones University rape victim shaming and the mishandling of several cases.

And just last week, reality television star Josh Duggar admitted to the molestation of five young girls and resigned from his post at the Family Research Council.

The good news: the truth is getting exposed. The bad news: statistics tell us these stories are only the tip of the iceberg.

Statistics: The State of the Church and Sexual Violence

Many studies have concluded that around one in four women and one in six men have been victims of sexual violence at some point in their lives. Combined, that equates to just over 20 percent of the Church.

The findings of a June 2014 IMA World Health survey revealed that nearly three quarters of church leaders are not aware of the level of sexual violence victimization experienced within their congregations.

This same study showed that slightly more than half of pastors surveyed were not familiar with local resources available to victims. However, more than 80 percent of them would take the action necessary to help prevent cases of abuse if they had the resources and training to do so.

Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, has been vocal about the need for dialogue around this subject from our pulpits and though church life, in general.

He wrote a blog post in response to the Duggar scandal—not specifically about the scandal itself. Rather, the purpose of the post was to ask the question: What should the Duggar scandal teach the church?

“We cannot assume that we can avoid this topic simply by making sure our doctrines are right, our values conservative, and our people sheltered from the world. If we are not addressing this issue, it is only because we are ignoring what is going on in our communities, and all too often in our pews,” Moore explained in the blog post.

“This requires that churches come with conviction to this question preemptively, before any specific situation arises, with a word from God.”

Boz Tchividjian agrees. He is the founder of GRACE (Godly Response to Abuse in the Christian Environment), a Christian-based organization whose mission is to recognize, prevent and respond to child abuse.

Tchividjian believes that an understanding of the subject within the church lays the foundation for protection and healing from sexual abuse.

“Most people in the church don’t know enough about the subject. We need to start conversations by reaching outside of our world to understand the issue. When we have a better grasp of the dynamics of sexual abuse, this will help the church develop and transform a culture that is safer for children and a safe place for abuse survivors,” he said.

“The more that issue becomes part of the DNA of the church, the less safe the offenders will be in those environments. And the less safe an offender feels in that environment, the more likely he will go elsewhere. The key is: do we have leadership in churches that acknowledge that we need to be teachable on this issue?”

Why the Silence?

There is growing anecdotal information that points to silence on the issue of sexual abuse within the church. While Jesus offers forgiveness to all who ask, Tchividjian points out that justice is too often forgotten when these cases surface.

“Often, when they (the offenders) confess, cry, and ask for forgiveness, we run to embrace that. And it’s much nicer to embrace the narrative of forgiveness and transformation,” he explained.

“And then, we see the Christian community say, ‘We need to move on. God can forgive him. Why can’t you?’ There need to be consequences, even if it has been hidden for years. Otherwise, what we are doing is leaving the victims behind.”

Other reasons for silence simply can be chalked up to a public relations issue—a means of saving face.

More specifically, Tchividjian said he hears an excuse in the form of not wanting to damage Jesus’ reputation.

“I’ve heard leaders say, ‘We don’t want to get this out into the open because it will hurt the image of Jesus.’ Well, Jesus doesn’t need us. This statement places too much focus on ‘we’ and not on Jesus,” he said. “It’s really just a pious way of protecting our own reputations, but it sounds more spiritual to say we are protecting the reputation of Jesus.”

Another reason, Moore believes, sexual abuse is swept under the rug in churched contexts is because it is often mistaken for sexual morality.

“Sexual abuse is immoral, but it is far more than just sexual. Sexual abuse is an act of violence, in which one leverages power to sexually violate the helpless. The resulting aftermath is not just a guilty conscience awaiting judgment on the part of the perpetrator, but a victim who has been assaulted,” he wrote.

“Sexual abuse is not just a sin but also a crime, not just a matter of personal unrighteousness on the part of the perpetrator but also a matter of public injustice.”

What Should Be Done?

Can the love of Jesus extend to the life if a sexual predator?

“Yes,” Tchividjian said. “But it doesn’t mean the predator is not dealt the earthly consequences of his or her actions.”

And to both Moore and Tchividjian, that means church discipline and civil discipline.

“The state has been given the sword of justice to wield against those who commit crimes (Rom. 13:1-7). The church has no such sword (Matt. 26:51-53). This means that the immediate response to allegations of sexual abuse is to call the civil authorities, to render unto Caesar the responsibility that belongs to Caesar to investigate the crime,” explained Moore.

“The church may or may not know the truth of the allegations, but it is the God-ordained prerogative of the civil authorities to discover such matters and to prosecute accordingly. When faced with a question of potential sexual abuse, call the authorities without delay.”

When civil justice is brought as well as ecclesiastical justice, the gospel is on display.

“The gospel is all about light and truth. When you don’t bring something into the light, you are in direct conflict with the gospel,” said Tchividjian. “The gospel is also about a God who sacrificed himself to save and redeem the individual. But when churches and Christian organizations sacrifice the individual to save and redeem themselves, they are doing the complete opposite of what the gospel calls them to do.




CreativeDominant -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/27/2015 3:00:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Oh, you dont know how to google? You have any proof of anything at all yourself? Using shitbreather citations by known felchers is not argumentation (which is a reason to believe) and in fact the rabid rightwing can only take in the feeble minded, because most people check their propaganda and without any effort at all find out that it is insane asswipe.

Did you see that Obama invaded Texas? You know, clean water, shelters....and the like?

Anyway, here is one to get you started on the old shitbreather nobody that feeble minded people felch:

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/04/20/clinton-cash-author-peter-schweizers-long-histo/203209
Yes, I do know how to Google. But you're the one who said that Schwrizer is a liar. Therefore, I asked you to bring proof that any of the statements made about the people in my post were lies.

You didn't.

Instead, you come on with your repetitive insults and a link to a left wing source that calls the author a liar. That proves nothing, no matter how much you want it to. Talk about shitbreathing.

But lets look at your source:

From a liberal source:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/chatterbox/2002/03/david_brock_liar.html

From a psychiatrist. An M. D. A man of science (know how much some on the left love science)

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/02/17/whats-wrong-with-media-matters-founder-david-brock.html

The group operates in regular coordination with the highest levels of the Obama White House, as well as with members of Congress and progressive groups around the country.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/12/inside-media-matters-sources-memos-reveal-erratic-behavior-close-coordination-with-white-house-and-news-organizations/




Lucylastic -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/27/2015 3:26:51 PM)


http://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/tv/19-kids-josh-duggars-politico-dad-advocated-death-rapists-n365031

The father of Josh Duggar, the "19 Kids and Counting" star accused of child molestation, suggested in a 2002 political campaign that rape should be punished by the death penalty, campaign materials revealed Tuesday.

The comments by Jim Bob Duggar, which were first reported by the Gawker site Defamer, were made in a Q&A section of the web site his campaign put up for his 2002 run for the U.S. Senate from Arkansas.

http://web.archive.org/web/20030210014933/http://www.jimbob.info/position.html

Asked whether abortion should be permitted in cases of rape and incest, Jim Bob Duggar, a Republican, says not if it's possible to save the unborn child. Then he adds: "Rape and incest represent heinous crimes and as such should be treated as capital crimes."

Josh Duggar, 27, last week admitted that he "acted inexcusably" after a 2006 police report emerged alleging that he's fondled five underage girls in 2002 — the same year his father made the rape comment. The police report was destroyed over the weekend on orders from an Arkansas court.

Jim Bob Duggar and his wife, Michelle, haven't commented beyond describing the last few days as "one of the most difficult times of our lives" and acknowledging that Josh "made some very bad mistakes and we were shocked."

The TLC network has stopped airing episodes of the reality show but hasn't formally canceled it, even as major advertisers continue to abandon the series.




mnottertail -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/28/2015 7:47:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Oh, you dont know how to google? You have any proof of anything at all yourself? Using shitbreather citations by known felchers is not argumentation (which is a reason to believe) and in fact the rabid rightwing can only take in the feeble minded, because most people check their propaganda and without any effort at all find out that it is insane asswipe.

Did you see that Obama invaded Texas? You know, clean water, shelters....and the like?

Anyway, here is one to get you started on the old shitbreather nobody that feeble minded people felch:

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/04/20/clinton-cash-author-peter-schweizers-long-histo/203209
Yes, I do know how to Google. But you're the one who said that Schwrizer is a liar. Therefore, I asked you to bring proof that any of the statements made about the people in my post were lies.

You didn't.

Instead, you come on with your repetitive insults and a link to a left wing source that calls the author a liar. That proves nothing, no matter how much you want it to. Talk about shitbreathing.

But lets look at your source:

From a liberal source:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/chatterbox/2002/03/david_brock_liar.html

From a psychiatrist. An M. D. A man of science (know how much some on the left love science)

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/02/17/whats-wrong-with-media-matters-founder-david-brock.html

The group operates in regular coordination with the highest levels of the Obama White House, as well as with members of Congress and progressive groups around the country.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/12/inside-media-matters-sources-memos-reveal-erratic-behavior-close-coordination-with-white-house-and-news-organizations/



Uh, no its more than that, and of course you cant read. It shows many of his retractions and his errors, and outright lies (all public and in the media). You can not change those facts. He is more of a shitbreather than the average rightwinger.





CreativeDominant -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/28/2015 8:11:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Oh, you dont know how to google? You have any proof of anything at all yourself? Using shitbreather citations by known felchers is not argumentation (which is a reason to believe) and in fact the rabid rightwing can only take in the feeble minded, because most people check their propaganda and without any effort at all find out that it is insane asswipe.

Did you see that Obama invaded Texas? You know, clean water, shelters....and the like?

Anyway, here is one to get you started on the old shitbreather nobody that feeble minded people felch:

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/04/20/clinton-cash-author-peter-schweizers-long-histo/203209
Yes, I do know how to Google. But you're the one who said that Schwrizer is a liar. Therefore, I asked you to bring proof that any of the statements made about the people in my post were lies.

You didn't.

Instead, you come on with your repetitive insults and a link to a left wing source that calls the author a liar. That proves nothing, no matter how much you want it to. Talk about shitbreathing.

But lets look at your source:

From a liberal source:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/chatterbox/2002/03/david_brock_liar.html

From a psychiatrist. An M. D. A man of science (know how much some on the left love science)

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/02/17/whats-wrong-with-media-matters-founder-david-brock.html

The group operates in regular coordination with the highest levels of the Obama White House, as well as with members of Congress and progressive groups around the country.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/12/inside-media-matters-sources-memos-reveal-erratic-behavior-close-coordination-with-white-house-and-news-organizations/



Uh, no its more than that, and of course you cant read. It shows many of his retractions and his errors, and outright lies (all public and in the media). You can not change those facts. He is more of a shitbreather than the average rightwinger.


I agree...David Brock IS more than just your average shitbreather.

I'll keep waiting for something definitive...and not just the words of your more than average, paranoid shitbreather's claims...that Schweizer lied in the instances given in my post.




mnottertail -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/28/2015 9:37:42 AM)

Yeah, he was a 'republican' and you know those are shitbreathers. Just more Alinsky asswipe like the 'republican' goons and thugs are known for.




CreativeDominant -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/28/2015 12:40:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Yeah, he was a 'republican' and you know those are shitbreathers. Just more Alinsky asswipe like the 'republican' goons and thugs are known for.

Actually...as pointed out by many...
he's proven to be a paranoid loon whose politics are paid for. Once a darling of the right, he is NOW a darling of the left.

And your source.




Sanity -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/28/2015 12:56:24 PM)


Yep

quote:

A Clinton loyalist who first earned the family’s trust as an aggressive combatant in the political battles of the 1990s, Blumenthal continues to work as a paid consultant to two groups supporting Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign — American Bridge and Media Matters — both of which are run by David Brock, a close ally of both Clinton and Blumenthal.




mnottertail -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/28/2015 1:05:37 PM)

ERIC HANANOKI is the one of many I chose. But you argue the hallucination of yours.

Now the fact that Schweitzer was a W speechwriter and a Breitbart felcher sort of makes it all the worse, because if we go with the Brock lied but didnt write the article, we now have absolute proof W lied and Schweitzer wrote the speech.


LIAR. OH OH, how AWKWARD for you to make such an idiotic argument without basis.





JVoV -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/28/2015 8:02:24 PM)

Kinda figured this was coming... Somebody interviewed the cop




BamaD -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/28/2015 8:11:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

Kinda figured this was coming... Somebody interviewed the cop

Not to defend Josh Duggar but the cop is in jail for distributing child porn making him a less that reliable source and from looking at the other stories they covered they will accept anything if it makes a conservative look bad.
Again, I am in no way defending Duggar, and I don't think anyone has. But that doesn't stop this thread from pretending that conservatives are defending him. This whole thread is based on a lie.




JVoV -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/28/2015 8:44:04 PM)

I think the real issue is the cover-up. And that has a lot more to do with Jim Bob than it does Josh.




CreativeDominant -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/28/2015 8:44:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

ERIC HANANOKI is the one of many I chose. But you argue the hallucination of yours.

Now the fact that Schweitzer was a W speechwriter and a Breitbart felcher sort of makes it all the worse, because if we go with the Brock lied but didnt write the article, we now have absolute proof W lied and Schweitzer wrote the speech.


LIAR. OH OH, how AWKWARD for you to make such an idiotic argument without basis.


Youre delusional.

I said nothing about Schwezer making a speech or writing a speech. But if you want something, here you go...every speechwriter for every President for the last 50 years has helped his President lie. You weren't aware of that?

Interesting how you keep deflecting from what you were asked for...proof that any of the instances that Scwetzer wrote about and that I noted were wrong...other than your proof from a left wing source (Media Matters)...started by a whore paid for his political fealty (Brock)...written by one of the hacks who may or may not be worried about his job (Hananoki).

You bring proof other than "he lied!"...fuck, they all do at one time or another to varying degrees...And I'll listen. For now, I'm getting back to the thread.

As Bama said, the whole thread is based on conservatives believing in Duggar. I've yet to see one conservative on here step up and defend the guy. Haven't heard too much in the way of defense of his actions by conservatives in the political arena either.






Lucylastic -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/29/2015 4:40:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


As Bama said, the whole thread is based on conservatives believing in Duggar. I've yet to see one conservative on here step up and defend the guy. Haven't heard too much in the way of defense of his actions by conservatives in the political arena either.





CD Truly, go back to the beginning of this thread.
Tell me how many "conservative, repubs rw leaning" leaning posters have even discussed Josh Duggar or his father, let alone the molestations?
The only one that called him scum is DS oh and Bama is not standing for the guy, otherwise its been deathly quiet.

Oh and that he was a minor at the time....that came up in three peoples conversations(nobody responded to my question about letting out all minors out of the prison system)
Everyone else, including yourself deflected from the "duggar shit fan scandal" but went to clinton, obama, and lena dunham (Im not saying that is not ok. ...the political arguments are always, "but hes worse than yours")


Nobody has defended the guy, ....why on earth would they. outloud on a public forum?
WHile the scandal is pissing off a lot of people, it will go away it will be ignored by the talibangelicals. There will be new outrage, people will carry on, and nothing will change.
Sadly





CreativeDominant -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/29/2015 6:16:49 AM)

O.k. lucy...I'll state it right out as I did above. I believe that Josh is guilty of a crime. The fact that he was 14 makes little difference to me. Just as it makes little difference to me that someone who is 14 commits murder. If you...at age 14...don't know that killing someone or fiddling littlittle girls is wrong, then something is seriously wrong with you.

What could be wrong in this case? The closed environment. The fact that his parents helped cover up a crime. What posses me off about that? The fact that his father, while running for political office, got elected partially because...however minor the factoring in...of his stance on incest and rape. He called for them to be considered as capital crimes. That belief was guided by his faith...so he says...And yet, when something happened to shake his faith, he stepped away from it and did what many people of/not of faith believe you should do and took steps to protect his son. I don't agree with that. If my kid came to me and confessed a crime, I would not cover. My oldest knows that. While the other kids got their license at 16, she waited til 18 because I wouldn't cover for her when she took my car joy-riding at 15 and clipped a parked car. If you truly believe in right and wrong and you know that something is a crime, then you don't cover it up.

But...if you go back to the O.P., it was stated that incest is part of the right wing family values because right leaning politicians had their pictures taken with a guy before they KNEW that he was just "talking the talk" and not "walking the walk".




mnottertail -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/29/2015 6:22:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

ERIC HANANOKI is the one of many I chose. But you argue the hallucination of yours.

Now the fact that Schweitzer was a W speechwriter and a Breitbart felcher sort of makes it all the worse, because if we go with the Brock lied but didnt write the article, we now have absolute proof W lied and Schweitzer wrote the speech.


LIAR. OH OH, how AWKWARD for you to make such an idiotic argument without basis.


Youre delusional.

I said nothing about Schwezer making a speech or writing a speech. But if you want something, here you go...every speechwriter for every President for the last 50 years has helped his President lie. You weren't aware of that?

Interesting how you keep deflecting from what you were asked for...proof that any of the instances that Scwetzer wrote about and that I noted were wrong...other than your proof from a left wing source (Media Matters)...started by a whore paid for his political fealty (Brock)...written by one of the hacks who may or may not be worried about his job (Hananoki).

You bring proof other than "he lied!"...fuck, they all do at one time or another to varying degrees...And I'll listen. For now, I'm getting back to the thread.

As Bama said, the whole thread is based on conservatives believing in Duggar. I've yet to see one conservative on here step up and defend the guy. Haven't heard too much in the way of defense of his actions by conservatives in the political arena either.





What proof have you offered that he was right? But you did note that Schweitzer was wrong? Good for you.




Lucylastic -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/29/2015 6:33:50 AM)

im didnt ask you to justify why you claimed he was 14, I understand you were responding to ET's post....
Just because you have justified your posts....sorta....I asked you specifically to look at other right leaning posters.

quote:

Tell me how many "conservative, repubs rw leaning" leaning posters have even discussed Josh Duggar or his father, let alone the molestations?


I did also mention the political shit...Im specifically asking ONLY about Duggar comments.







CreativeDominant -> RE: rightwing family values. (5/29/2015 7:03:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

ERIC HANANOKI is the one of many I chose. But you argue the hallucination of yours.

Now the fact that Schweitzer was a W speechwriter and a Breitbart felcher sort of makes it all the worse, because if we go with the Brock lied but didnt write the article, we now have absolute proof W lied and Schweitzer wrote the speech.


LIAR. OH OH, how AWKWARD for you to make such an idiotic argument without basis.


Youre delusional.

I said nothing about Schwezer making a speech or writing a speech. But if you want something, here you go...every speechwriter for every President for the last 50 years has helped his President lie. You weren't aware of that?

Interesting how you keep deflecting from what you were asked for...proof that any of the instances that Scwetzer wrote about and that I noted were wrong...other than your proof from a left wing source (Media Matters)...started by a whore paid for his political fealty (Brock)...written by one of the hacks who may or may not be worried about his job (Hananoki).

You bring proof other than "he lied!"...fuck, they all do at one time or another to varying degrees...And I'll listen. For now, I'm getting back to the thread.

As Bama said, the whole thread is based on conservatives believing in Duggar. I've yet to see one conservative on here step up and defend the guy. Haven't heard too much in the way of defense of his actions by conservatives in the political arena either.





What proof have you offered that he was right? But you did note that Schweitzer was wrong? Good for you.
I don't have to prove he's right. You claimed as lies...prove it. Or keep deflecting.




Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625