Pedophiles don't change their spots

[DomWackTroll]

Well sure, Bayly's hindsight is 20/20 but is that really the position he took BEFORE it was clear they all helped created a ready made victim in this innocent child?

Yeah, he claims he found out "details" that he didn't know before, but what? Surely he already knew that Wilson had married them when he wrote his defense.

[SpoonfulOSugar]

Looking at the Idaho court records and the court documents on the page linked above:

Apparently a concern existed that Sitler was viewing pornography on the family computer. That lead to the issues in December 2014. (Which included an arrest.)

If I am reading the elements correctly, ultimately that concern was deemed unfounded and at some point, his defense expressed frustration about the seizure and examination of the computer.

Also, a status hearing was held yesterday, sealed records were ordered released, and someone paid a whole lot ($173) for copies of court documents.

I hope that means more context for what's happening will be available soon on a website.

[Howl]

Things are heatin' up. CPS is looking into the Sitler family.

From today's (Wednesday) Moscow-Pullman Daily News

CPS opening investigation into Sitler family

Latah County Prosecuting Attorney Bill Thompson said his office has been contacted by the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare Child Protection Services and was informed that it will be opening an investigation into the family of Steven Sitler.

[chaotic life]

Well, that's exactly what I said, if the courts and probation officer were so concerned why the heck wasn't CPS called in. You are not innocent until proven guilty with CPS but danger versus not danger to the best interest of the child.

[hoipolloi]

Well, that's exactly what I said, if the courts and probation officer were so concerned why the heck wasn't CPS called in. You are not innocent until proven guilty with CPS but danger versus not danger to the best interest of the child.

Re: bolded. Well, yes, most people would find having a pedophile father who is sexually aroused by his infant son to be a DANGER, especially when that infant's mother seems to be incapable of either "chaperoning" the father or protecting her son.

[DomWackTroll]

I guess David Bayly decided that his brother isn’t being crazy/cruel/irrational enough, so he dropped in to write this:

…according to Guttmacher Institute figures, fifty percent of women receiving abortions between the ages of 15 and 44 have had at least one previously. Recidivism among mothers who murder by abortion is close to fifty percent. Are the critics of Pastor Wilson truly motivated by concern for victims of abuse? If so, do they stand equally against churches extending mercy and hope to mothers who have had abortions? Against churches accepting such women into membership? Against churches performing marriages of women with abortions in their past? Against churches permitting mothers who have had abortions to become pregnant?

baylyblog.com/blog/2015/09/responding-heinous-sins-pastors-and-elders

[chaotic life]

WTF??? Yes, pedophilic father gets sexually turned on by his infant son is exactly on par with abortions. And he's definitely gotten his associations all wrong. Most condemning the pedophile are going to be more liberal, and thus more likely to think women who have abortions should have privacy and no condemnation and certainly no expectation that it should condemn them to not be mothers when they are ready.

He erroneously assumes that those who condemn a pedophile also equate abortion to murder, no, not really those that conservative fail to see pedophilia as dangerous and encouraged a marriage and procreation in the first place.

[Cleopatra7]

I guess David Bayly decided that his brother isn’t being crazy/cruel/irrational enough, so he dropped in to write this:

baylyblog.com/blog/2015/09/responding-heinous-sins-pastors-and-elders

Well, I knew the abortion comparison was coming. Bayly is probably thinking that legalized abortion is so bad than it cancels everything else out. Thus, in his mind, it's unimportant that a baby may have been molested or is at the very least in a very dangerous situation because at least the baby wasn't aborted. :roll:

[DomWackTroll]

In his latest clarifications post, Tim first gets in a dig at homeschooling (something he and Wilson agree on):

We have done much counseling and much work of exposure of sex abuse in the home, as well as incest between siblings of the same and radically different ages (often homeschoolers)

…and then seems to ban marriage for the severely disabled and anyone above child-bearing age:

I believe marriage must always be between a man and woman who both are capable of having sex with their intended. If for some reason, they are incapable, it precludes Christian marriage regardless of whether or not their intended knows about it and is willing to live with it. Marriage without one-body oneness is not and cannot be marriage. In the same way, one-body oneness in which the agreement or requirement prior to marriage is that it can never issue in children is, again, a marriage I believe to be Biblically unlawful. God's Word says He makes us one for "the propagation of a godly seed" and so we must be open to that in order to marry Biblically. Historically, the Protestant and Reformed church has always listed this as one of the three purposes of marriage and we cannot accede to a marriage which removes this purpose, whether by choice or decree of courts. I know others will disagree with me on this, and yet it is my own firm conviction.

baylyblog.com/blog/2015/09/sex-abuse-church-some-clarifications

Can't wait to see the comments on this one!

[Olive Plant]

Tim Bayly is a complete nut. And yet even he can see that you don't marry off child molestors to nice Christian girls.

[Anonymousguest]

Is "propagation of a Godly seed" an actual Bible quote? I searched for it breifly and only got something close about Godly offspring. "Propagation of a Godly seed" only showed up in the text of another book.

Anyway, what a wacky thing to say, but at least he's consistent in his belief. Lots of people say gay marriage isn't marriage because it can't result in natural children, but then they stumble with the barren or elder question.

[Howl]

…and then seems to ban marriage for the severely disabled and anyone above child-bearing age:

I believe marriage must always be between a man and woman who both are capable of having sex with their intended. If for some reason, they are incapable, it precludes Christian marriage regardless of whether or not their intended knows about it and is willing to live with it. Marriage without one-body oneness is not and cannot be marriage. In the same way, one-body oneness in which the agreement or requirement prior to marriage is that it can never issue in children is, again, a marriage I believe to be Biblically unlawful. God's Word says He makes us one for "the propagation of a godly seed" and so we must be open to that in order to marry Biblically. Historically, the Protestant and Reformed church has always listed this as one of the three purposes of marriage and we cannot accede to a marriage which removes this purpose, whether by choice or decree of courts. I know others will disagree with me on this, and yet it is my own firm conviction.

baylyblog.com/blog/2015/09/sex-abuse-church-some-clarifications

Which closes the door on women who are no longer able to conceive through age, surgery or medical conditions, but leaves it open for guys (with some help from a little blue pill) no matter how old they are. Convenient for him, eh, and a good excuse to marry a MUCH younger woman if his wife predeceases him. He's cruel and utterly lacking in compassion, among other things. I can't think of anyone else I've ever read or heard of who hews to this extreme view of who is eligible to marry.

On those same grounds, I wonder if he considers "barrenness" a valid cause for divorce or annulment? Bet he'd probably have a different line of thinking if the guy is shooting blanks.

[2xx1xy1JD]

Is "propagation of a Godly seed" an actual Bible quote? I searched for it breifly and only got something close about Godly offspring. "Propagation of a Godly seed" only showed up in the text of another book.

Anyway, what a wacky thing to say, but at least he's consistent in his belief. Lots of people say gay marriage isn't marriage because it can't result in natural children, but then they stumble with the barren or elder question.

It's not a quote I ever remember reading. Yes, Genesis says "be fruitful and multiply", but it also says that it is not good for humans to be alone.

I suspect that Bayly may get around the barren/elder question by saying that it's fine if a couple is "open" to having children, since God could theoretically perform a miracle and open the womb of an older woman. It would, however, be an issue for anyone with a serious medical issue that would make pregnancy unsafe, or that would make PIV sex almost impossible.

[DomWackTroll]

You just know that Spanky is secretly like

[Howl]

Sorry, edited and ended up with a double post. Mods can remove.

[Howl]

I just read a few posts by the Bayly Brothers. Da fuq™ I just read?

Father headship is NOT a problem in spousal abuse; it is, don't cha know, ABUSIVE WIVES who are at least equally the problem in general in domestic violence situations.

Because he and his wife lived in subsidized housing at one point and he saw (among drugs, fights, drunkenness and whatever mayhem was going on) instances of women whooping it up on men.

These guys are all over the place with everything. It makes my brain hurt trying to deconstruct their arguments because they take information from here and there and torture it to fit into the point they are making, which is "feminists can't be right because I believe in the Bible". Or something.

I don't do alcohol, but these guys make me feel like buying a bottle of Night Train and drinking to the point of oblivion. I could wake up in a gutter, covered in my own vomit, with the worst hangover in the history of the world and wearing only one shoe and it would STILL be a more edifying experience than reading their blog. Sheesh.

[Howl]

doug wilson is likely doing what doug wilson does best: endless obfuscation through blowing theological smoke out his ass, never admitting to making a mistake, flinging various red herrings into the crowd, and never, never, ever acknowledging, must less apologizing to, the victims who were members of his church (Jamin Wright's victim, Katie Sitler and her infant son) as well as all those children who were molested by Steven Sitler....

For those not familiar with the Jamin Wight case, homeschoolers anonymous coverage is here:

homeschoolersanonymous.wordpress.com/2015/09/08/the-jamin-c-wight-story-the-other-child-molester-in-doug-wilsons-closet/

Link not broken because HA.

Correcting a horrible error in my original post -- corrected with red text above: Jamin Wight is the perpetrator, NOT the victim. Jamin Wight was 24 and the victim was 13 when the grooming and abuse began and she, of course, has not been identified in the Homeschoolers Anonymous post linked above. Same deal, though. Jamin Wight was in Doug Wilson's New Saint Andrews seminary (Grayfriars Hall) and boarding with the family of the victim.

[Howl]

Sorry, don't know how these edits are getting posted twice. Mods, please remove this post.

[Olive Plant]

Oh my god. did you see this yet? kbotkin.com/2015/09/10/the-letter-on-christ-church-stationary/

It's a letter from Doug Wilson to the father of the Jamin Wight's victim. Dougie (the other Dougie, Doug Wilson Supports Child Rapists) tells him that he's gotta be NICE ("merciful") to Jamin and so much other bullshit it's unreal.

[DomWackTroll]

That Katie has no fear! I love her!

[hoipolloi]

Doug Wilson said he tried to respond to Katie Botkin's post but couldn't (dougwils.com/s7-engaging-the-culture/the-only-kind-of-gospel-there-is.html#comment-2247558449):

Sarah Anne, I tried to reply at that blog but could not. I will say it here. She says that Gary and Natalie both gave permission to print that letter. If she posted that in writing, with permission from Gary, Pat, and Natalie for me to answer questions about the letter, I would be happy to do so. Delighted in fact. Just be prepared -- it will shut down the party, which you might not want.

Natalie Rose, the daughter & victim in the letter posted by Katie Botkin, has also written a powerful commentary: natalierose-livewithpassion.blogspot.com/2015/09/when-doug-wrote-to-my-father.html

[FundieWatcher]

He is a another lying liar who lies. Let's pretend that he really can't comment on her blog. So post your reply on your own blog Doug. :liar:

[Howl]

What an ass -- still as arrogant and threatening as ever:

Just be prepared -- it will shut down the party, which you might not want.

Natalie Rose, on the other hand, writes about her abuse with honesty and grace, and with deep compassion for other victims.

Not sure, but I'm starting to think that Katie Botkin attended Christ Church for at least part of her life, so knows Doug Wilson up close.

[DomWackTroll]

James McDonald at his passive-aggressive best (worst?): “True friendship is honest friendship, a friendship that inspires and yet also challenges. We can never grow to be those who we want to be if we surround ourselves with those who never tell us the truth. True friends will always tell us the truth because they love us.â€

facebook.com/james.mcdonald1/posts/10207276991101550?pnref=story

[chaotic life]

Absolutely disgusting that even now Wilson threatens to blame victims to justify his accomplice behaviors with pedophiles! The man should be charged as an accessory.