Everyone else is driven away!
Did I bore or offend?
Did I bore or offend?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Yeah, I think so. Them and there way too big family that should be scorned for having so many kids rather than glorified on TV.That was some kind of tv show right? Man I'm glad I don't have a tv.
That was some kind of tv show right? Man I'm glad I don't have a tv.
That's a lot of information.
How does it support your claim that the inclination does not
go away in juveniles as they mature into adults?
I don't disagree regarding adults who commit such offenses.
(Their minds are fully formed.)
But I'm skeptical that this applies to juvenile offenders.
I argue that they should be treated differently from adults,
with far more emphasis on rehabilitation than punishment.
No argument here....even if the statistics tell me a different story.The COSM does advocate rehab for adolescents. However, as the statistics state, there is still a propensity for them to continue this behavior due to history of abuse, etc. I agree they should be treated differently than adult offenders but they still need to be monitored closely to ensure they don't recommit.
I don't typically watch TV or the news so I had to google this and I honestly don't see any comparison. Now perhaps I missed something here but I don't see her being accused of being a deviant or have I missed that as well?No argument here....even if the statistics tell me a different story.
What did you think of the Lena Dunham controversy?
I ran across it in the news. (I can't take TV news either....too slow & inefficient.)I don't typically watch TV or the news so I had to google this and I honestly don't see any comparison. Now perhaps I missed something here but I don't see her being accused of being a deviant or have I missed that as well?
To be honest, it sounds like your saying, "I'm just trying to protect children, and oh well, if I..."Hmm..well, the fact that I am a survivor of rape, as is my daughter, I consider keeping admitted sexual deviants away from children a prudent measure. The inclination does not simply 'go away' as one ages. If one is attracted to children and that was the case with this man, is it not prudent to restrict him in this manner? We don't know whether or not he has recommitted his inclinations. He may have found, as many pedophiles do, a more private or secretive way to abuse. As did my grandfather and my daughter's rapist. The latter was jailed and the minute he was released, he did the same thing to another, younger child. This time she was 5 and damaged by this man for life. I would much prefer to protect children than this man. If that makes me biased, so be it.
Edited for missing information as noted above.
Demand accountability is a great start. Insisting that one Josh (I'd use Joshua but that may not be his actual name; just as many people assume my name is a shortened form but it's not) Duggar face the consequences of his actions, undergo therapy, and action be taken to reduce the likely hood of him attacking another victim.I certainly do not know all the details of the case, I am assuming you do not either. We do have a huge red flag, but what are we to do?
Pretty much what Shadow said. This man did do this. And the accountability at the time was a literal joke. As a APRN, I have more than my share of kids brought to the ER that were beyond damaged by abuse, regardless of the type. And until you have seen a child with no soul, you cannot know the damage it can cause. Given that, ANY person who does this needs to have serious and long term counseling with a professional who is versed in sexual abuse.To be honest, it sounds like your saying, "I'm just trying to protect children, and oh well, if I..."
While I understand your inclination, I am explaining that this is more complicated. If you want to advocate effectively, you cannot shy away from the hard issues. But if you want to stick to the case at hand, fine.
Taking the popular hardline stance of shouting "throw the book at 'em" doesn't really get us anywhere.
I certainly do not know all the details of the case, I am assuming you do not either. We do have a huge red flag, but what are we to do?
Quite frankly, I hate the media. IMO, given the coverage of the police doing harm to Black Americans just because they can is another example of how biased it is. I suspect, unfortunately, that because, if I am not mistaken, Ms. Dunham is gay that one side of this is spun by media like Fox which I loathe. This is a HUGE part of this issue, IMO.I ran across it in the news. (I can't take TV news either....too slow & inefficient.)
What's interesting is disparate coverage of her.
TruthRevolt has an expose', while Huff Po offers her defense.
A big difference is where the perps lie in the political spectrum, & how the media spin the controversy.
Lena Dunham Describes Sexually Abusing Her Little Sister | Truth Revolt
Lena Dunham Slams 'Disgusting' Allegations She Molested Her Little Sister (UPDATE)
Or is it that because she's sympathetic to the left, sources like Huff Po will defend her?Quite frankly, I hate the media. IMO, given the coverage of the police doing harm to Black Americans just because they can is another example of how biased it is. I suspect, unfortunately, that because, if I am not mistaken, Ms. Dunham is gay that one side of this is spun by media like Fox which I loathe. This is a HUGE part of this issue, IMO.
So what I hear is that you think there should be no statute of limitations when dealing with sexual assault?Demand accountability is a great start. Insisting that one Josh (I'd use Joshua but that may not be his actual name; just as many people assume my name is a shortened form but it's not) Duggar face the consequences of his actions, undergo therapy, and action be taken to reduce the likely hood of him attacking another victim.
Yes it should be. If she admits to molestation, then she is guilty. I am not all that vested in reading this account of this woman. If true, she is as guilty as Duggar.Or is it that because she's sympathetic to the left, sources like Huff Po will defend her?
By Dunham's own account, she sexually molested her sister. But the left is silent,
except to defend her. Shouldn't molestation be wrong simply because it's wrong,
& not because the perp is seen as conservative or liberal?
I'd be reluctant to equate guilt.Yes it should be. If she admits to molestation, then she is guilty. I am not all that vested in reading this account of this woman. If true, she is as guilty as Duggar.
Why should there be? For the safety of others, it must be assumed that someone who has committed a sexual assault will attack again. And pressing charges can be a very difficult thing to do.So what I hear is that you think there should be no statute of limitations when dealing with sexual assault?
Because we believe in fairness.Why should there be? For the safety of others, it must be assumed that someone who has committed a sexual assault will attack again. And pressing charges can be a very difficult thing to do.
Agreed. There are clear differences in this and a discussion of that would be of interest revolting. Perhaps you start a new thread addressing this?I'd be reluctant to equate guilt.
I'll say only that both were guilty of sexual offenses.
One difference is that she considers what she did as normal for children.
There should be lengthy discussion about appropriate vs inappropriate sexual behavior for kids at different ages.