Doug Phillips is a Tool & Vision Forum is Dead - Part 7

[Curious]

1) Knowing what I know now? Of course I wouldn't. But that supposes I would have allowed her to work for him in the first place, and I wouldn't, not because it's Doug, but because, among other things, all of my older children help us in our family business.

2) My children do not lie and make up fanciful stories (okay, the little ones do sometimes, as all little ones do), so if one of my older daughters came home and gave me a story like that, yes, I would believe her and I would immediately investigate.

3) No, I would not sue Doug for everything he has. I ask again - how does $ help heal emotional scars? If he did something criminal, I would definitely be looking into bringing criminal charges.

This might be news to you, but YOU would have very little say in whether criminal charges were brought or not. That is up to a DA. A case like this would be pretty hard to take to court, so I'd be surprised if there would be charges initially. After a civil trial though, quite possibly there could be since any evidence from that civil trial could be used in a criminal trial (or vice versa). As a parent (rather than the victim) you would still have pretty much no say in anything to do with criminal charges being brought or not, though.

[Curious]

Suggest you do a little deeper study on that particular scripture to see if perhaps there is some context necessary to fully understand/interpret that scripture. My guess is yes. Otherwise, Jesus himself would be condemned to hell fire, as He said in Luke 24:25, "He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken!"

Oh so NOW we need to do deeper study and have context? Actually, we just need to understand that words have meaning. Calling someone a fool is not the same as saying something is foolish. :roll:

[twin2]

Context? A need to interpret? You heard it here first, folks.

But, but, but I thought the Bible was the literal word of God? From his lips to my ears! You mean I'm supposed to read it in context?!?!?!!??!

My head explodes.

[danvillebelle]

Suggest you do a little deeper study on that particular scripture to see if perhaps there is some context necessary to fully understand/interpret that scripture. My guess is yes. Otherwise, Jesus himself would be condemned to hell fire, as He said in Luke 24:25, "He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken!"

Perhaps you should take your own advice. The words used for "fool" in Matthew 5:22 and Luke 24:25 are two completely different words in the Greek, with different meanings. Never mind that it's two different gospels, written by different authors, from completely different times in the life and ministry of Christ, and He was using them in completely different contexts.

[westchamps]

But so much of what he teaches *is* extrabiblical! Or at the very least he's spinning a passage to mean something that it doesn't, never did and certainly won't in this cultural context. I believe Scripture is inspired, but can't you see that much of Scripture is operative within a cultural context that we don't have today? The law concerning rapists and their victims being forced to marry is a prime example. In that cultural context, that essentially saved the woman's life (she'd be ostracized and left to starve otherwise; now at least she is provided for), but today that seems horrific. Then why do we have to bring in similar instances, that dehumanize women—good ol' Doug didn't believe women should vote. Are they persons, or, like the early American compromise, 3/5ths, like a slave was counted? Nevermind, he'd probably defend that too.

These men, if given the opportunity, would reestablish a Calvin-in-Geneva scenario. Would you support them? Again, I reiterate, why then do you defend them?

Again, I've never heard Doug preach on a Sunday, so I don't know what he taught in church.

Obviously, one's view of many things in the Bible has to do with where they occur in the Bible and yes, context, if there is a specific one. No shocker, all Christians are not in consensus agreement about such things. Most of those things are in the Old Testament.

I would certainly not be in favor of a "Calvin-in-Geneva" scenario. From what I've read about Calvin, I'm inclined to think he was more or less a Theocratic Dictator in Geneva. I am definitely not a Christian Reconstructionist. I know that Calvin is widely revered among Calvinist Fundamentalist Christians (primarily Reformed Presbyterians), although I know Fundamentalist Christians like myself, also, who think very low of Calvin. I've never heard Doug discuss recreating such a Calvin-in-Geneva scenario, maybe he has. He certainly wasn't expressing such thoughts to me when I was close with him many years ago and took much guidance from him, nor was he at that time anything like Geoff Botkin, Scott Brown, John Thompson, etc. in terms of the militancy (to an excess and Un-Biblical nature, in my opinion) of their "patriarchal" vision.

[congusto]

I'm sorry to be overly pedantic here, but this thread is moving quickly and I feel every word following sums it up:

I do understand the gut level "I/she/whomever should have done X" BT, DT.

What I don't understand is how, in the wake of tins like Elizabeth Smart's discussion of how she felt, etc, that people *really* don't get that the human psyche is more complicated than "I should tell an adult and say 'no'."

Pretending that victims of sexual abuse/spiritual abuse/etc should have reacted differently seems like it's the land of the intentionally obtuse.

If Elizabeth Smart, an intelligent, articulate young woman whose attack fits the 'popular narrative' of rape (stranger abduction, all that jazz) can't see her way out because she's 'chewed up gum', then how hard is it to imagine that a more patriarchal, less black and white (not a stranger) situation, one that deals w/ the power differential of employee/employer, pastor/church-goer that followed years of grooming would not leave the young woman in question finding an easy way out?

And if you don't speak up time #1, it becomes that much harder time #2, #3, #4, because she'd be going into the situation with the knowledge that DPiaT could say "oh, well, I thought she liked it because she didn't get upset before when we....(which announces to the world that the woman's character is besmirched)" or use some plausible deniability condescension ("I must have brushed against her and being a hysterical young lady, she interpreted that as something else, I'm so sorry for the misunderstanding, I'll make sure it doesn't happen again"), etc.

Speaking out is hard. Very hard.

If I work under the assumption, for the sake of argument that there's a mitigating story from Doug Phillips' side that makes the report be 25% less awful (I'm not saying there is, FWIW), it's still something I can understand a young woman being paralyzed by and finding herself deeper and deeper in a shit filled hole, trying to claw her way out--until it's at that awful end point.

After reading that, I just don't understand the lack of compassion for the victim(s). Jesus wept - but the best the "Doing-it-Right-Christian" contingent can come up with is a "Yeah but - ***insert out of context crap here***?!?!

Where is the love or charity for the oppressed and abused? WTFWJD? Not what some of His "elect" have done, I would be willing to wager.

[Arete]

She needs to sue Doug for money because bottom line he is a crafty bastard who knew exactly how far to go with her to skirt the definition of rape as outlined by the laws of Texas. He is trying to skirt the definition of clerical sexual abuse in Texas by trying to erect an artificial distinction between "pastor" and "elder".

For those of us who live in the real world and not evangelical la-la land, we understand that victims cannot bring criminal charges against a perpetrator. That is done at the discretion of the duly appointed prosecutor of each jurisdiction. Furthermore, in the real world, prosecutors prioritize what crimes go to court and in which order based on budgets, danger to the greater community at large, and physical damage. That means, westchamps, that Lourdes doesn't get to decide if DP undergoes criminal prosecution.

What she does get to decide is if she brings civil charges. Civil charges will will result in Doug having to be accountable for and justify his actions. If she gets a monetary judgement, not only will she have compensation for the free labor she gave, she will have the ability to pay for therapy and further her education. It will NEVER mitigate her emotional pain, but in the real world where the rest of is live it will help her secure her future.

Also, down here in the real world a monetary judgement will send a collective shudder through a lot of these church organizations. They will learn to take the warning signs that Doug was definitely demonstrating a lot more seriously. Nothing teaches a lesson better than a hit in the pocketbook to an organization.

[cindyluvs24]

Westchamps:

You said you've never heard Doug preach. Isn't he a preacher? How well do you know him? What was the nature of your relationship when you knew him?

[watching_rapture]

Having a potty mouth vs Committing sexual abuse

Let's weigh the sins to figure out which is worse.

Nice try Westchamps.

[MrsFoxx]

Perhaps you should take your own advice. The words used for "fool" in Matthew 5:22 and Luke 24:25 are two completely different words in the Greek, with different meanings. Never mind that it's two different gospels, written by different authors, from completely different times in the life and ministry of Christ, and He was using them in completely different contexts.

Bwahaha! This warmed the cockles of this Greek reader's soul. Hats off to you for pulling out the original language on his ass.

[Arete]

CnD

I'm never sure quite what to think of you, but for the Harvey Dent reference, the only thing I have to say is, "High five!'" :mrgreen:

[ILoveJellybeans]

Old enough to enlist in the military and kill people or be killed, but not old enough to take responsibility for letting someone know if she was being sexually harrassed against her will? For 5 years? On a regular basis?

I don't think you understand just what it is like to be a woman in such a patriarchal culture, let alone be a woman who is being sexually abused by someone who has such a position of power over her. Or even someone who is being abused in any other culture-there are millions of people who are being abused right now, and have been for years, but they haven't told anyone.

Doug Phillips is a tool. He is also a very powerful tool, who has a lot of influence over the members of his cult. Everyone looks up to him and worships him, pretty much everyone who Lourdes knew. It takes courage to tell people, knowing that most people would not believe her and blame her for it. This kind of courage takes time, especially when you are beaten down from being regularly abused.

The purity culture doesn't help. It says that all men like women who are completely pure and have never had any form of sexual contact. If you aren't pure, no man will want you, you are filthy, used and will never marry (and in fundie culture, that is a very big thing, the thing that every woman is trained for from birth). Also, there is so much responsibility placed on women for men's lust. Whenever a woman gets sexually assaulted, it is always "She shouldn't have been wearing that skirt", "She should never have gone out alone", "She was drinking too much". What Doug did was degrading and probably made Lourdes feel dirty and used. She might even have been blaming herself for some of it, Doug did tell her that if it was wrong, it was all her fault. She might worry that if she told anyone, they would see her as dirty and impure, and then everyone will know and no man would ever want to go near her. They might also blame her for moving out from under her father's umbrella of authority, that if she hadn't moved out of her parents home and lived with Doug to work as their nanny, he wouldn't have had the chance to get her alone and rape her. Did she even understand what was happening to her, with the way that her culture doesn't seem to teach sex ed? I imagine that she didn't really have words to describe what was going on, or understand what it was, other than that it was something dirty.

She was also groomed to be his victim for years before he started molesting her. Doug is a narcissist, he is charming and manipulative, and knows just how to keep his victims around. As well as raping her, he was nice to her, and told her that he loved her and wanted to marry her when his wife died. She trusted him, and had known him for years as a father figure. Its confusing, to have someone say he loves you, and then come into your bedroom and molest you. Abusers are good at that, the perfect mixture of love and fear. He could ruin her life, and she knew that. Its also scary standing up to someone who is abusive, he is bigger and stronger than she is, and he has done plenty of horrific stuff to her already. There are many victims of abuse who are afraid to leave or to tell anyone because they are afraid of what their abuser would do to them if they did.

It takes a lot of courage to come forward with all of that. Especially when it is going on and on. By the time the first incident of abuse happens, the abuser usually has his victim sucked in enough that they wont have the courage to tell anyone. It takes years to gain the strength necessary to overcome all of this fear and finally do something to get yourself out of an abusive situation.

There are many people who stay around in abusive situations longer than five years. I know someone who was in one for 20 years. People don't stick around and be abused because they want to be abused, but from the psychological factors from having been manipulated and beaten down for so long, and the fear of their abuser that keeps them in.

Im glad Lourdes got out of this. I don't know what finally made it possible for her to get the confidence to tell someone (I suspect it had something to do with Nolan, I have no idea how long they've been together, I only knew they were involved with eachother romantically when I heard they had gotten married, but he is a seriously awesome guy and has proved to her that just because she has been abused, doesn't mean she is never going to be loved, that she is more than just the sex acts that were performed on her).

I have no problem with her getting money from this. In fact, good for her. She deserves something good to happen to her. Also the therapy she will need to deal with the issues she has from Doug isn't cheap, and seeing as it is Doug's fault, he should be made to pay for this.

[thoughtful]

Where is the love or charity for the oppressed and abused? WTFWJD? Not what some of His "elect" have done, I would be willing to wager.

If I remember correctly, a comment under one of the articles about this whole mess read:

"WWJEO -- who would Jesus ejaculate on?"

Pretty much makes the point.

Of course, Doug never seemed to care much about Jesus, or what he taught or did.

[congusto]

If I remember correctly, a comment under one of the articles about this whole mess read:

"WWJEO -- who would Jesus ejaculate on?"

Pretty much makes the point.

Of course, Doug never seemed to care much about Jesus, or what he taught or did.

At the end of the day, we all have to accept that Jesus didn't really have the glamour 'wow' factor for DPIAT. He wore fairly plain, seamless tunics, with flip flop type sandals. No cosplay points.

[thoughtful]

At the end of the day, we all have to accept that Jesus didn't really have the glamour 'wow' factor for DPIAT. He wore fairly plain, seamless tunics, with flip flop type sandals. No cosplay points.

Not to mention that 'cellos hadn't even been invented yet.

[Tesseract]

Poor thing is so far out of his depth here. Bless his lil ole heart.

[patsymae]

"Abusers are good at that, the perfect mixture of love and fear."

'Nuff said

[lawfulevil]

Are we in for a flowery-prose-off? :lol:

A duel, knave! A duel, I do declare it -- sesquipedalia at 20 paces!

:popcorn2:

I made enough popcorn for the whole class.

[congusto]

Not to mention that 'cellos hadn't even been invented yet.

Let's face it, there can be no twinkle, and absolutely NO wonder without CELLOS!

[SamuraiKatz]

I don't think you understand just what it is like to be a woman in such a patriarchal culture, let alone be a woman who is being sexually abused by someone who has such a position of power over her. Or even someone who is being abused in any other culture-there are millions of people who are being abused right now, and have been for years, but they haven't told anyone.

Doug Phillips is a tool. He is also a very powerful tool, who has a lot of influence over the members of his cult. Everyone looks up to him and worships him, pretty much everyone who Lourdes knew. It takes courage to tell people, knowing that most people would not believe her and blame her for it. This kind of courage takes time, especially when you are beaten down from being regularly abused.

The purity culture doesn't help. It says that all men like women who are completely pure and have never had any form of sexual contact. If you aren't pure, no man will want you, you are filthy, used and will never marry (and in fundie culture, that is a very big thing, the thing that every woman is trained for from birth). Also, there is so much responsibility placed on women for men's lust. Whenever a woman gets sexually assaulted, it is always "She shouldn't have been wearing that skirt", "She should never have gone out alone", "She was drinking too much". What Doug did was degrading and probably made Lourdes feel dirty and used. She might even have been blaming herself for some of it, Doug did tell her that if it was wrong, it was all her fault. She might worry that if she told anyone, they would see her as dirty and impure, and then everyone will know and no man would ever want to go near her. They might also blame her for moving out from under her father's umbrella of authority, that if she hadn't moved out of her parents home and lived with Doug to work as their nanny, he wouldn't have had the chance to get her alone and rape her. Did she even understand what was happening to her, with the way that her culture doesn't seem to teach sex ed? I imagine that she didn't really have words to describe what was going on, or understand what it was, other than that it was something dirty.

She was also groomed to be his victim for years before he started molesting her. Doug is a narcissist, he is charming and manipulative, and knows just how to keep his victims around. As well as raping her, he was nice to her, and told her that he loved her and wanted to marry her when his wife died. She trusted him, and had known him for years as a father figure. Its confusing, to have someone say he loves you, and then come into your bedroom and molest you. Abusers are good at that, the perfect mixture of love and fear. He could ruin her life, and she knew that. Its also scary standing up to someone who is abusive, he is bigger and stronger than she is, and he has done plenty of horrific stuff to her already. There are many victims of abuse who are afraid to leave or to tell anyone because they are afraid of what their abuser would do to them if they did.

It takes a lot of courage to come forward with all of that. Especially when it is going on and on. By the time the first incident of abuse happens, the abuser usually has his victim sucked in enough that they wont have the courage to tell anyone. It takes years to gain the strength necessary to overcome all of this fear and finally do something to get yourself out of an abusive situation.

There are many people who stay around in abusive situations longer than five years. I know someone who was in one for 20 years. People don't stick around and be abused because they want to be abused, but from the psychological factors from having been manipulated and beaten down for so long, and the fear of their abuser that keeps them in.

Im glad Lourdes got out of this. I don't know what finally made it possible for her to get the confidence to tell someone (I suspect it had something to do with Nolan, I have no idea how long they've been together, I only knew they were involved with eachother romantically when I heard they had gotten married, but he is a seriously awesome guy and has proved to her that just because she has been abused, doesn't mean she is never going to be loved, that she is more than just the sex acts that were performed on her).

I have no problem with her getting money from this. In fact, good for her. She deserves something good to happen to her. Also the therapy she will need to deal with the issues she has from Doug isn't cheap, and seeing as it is Doug's fault, he should be made to pay for this.

Lourdes was friends with Jens daughter when the Epsteins attended the Church of Doug. She saw up close and personal what happens when you run afoul of Doug and his inner circle. The Epsteins--Jen in particular was pilloried by Doug and his gang o bullies. The Epstein chidren were treated badly by Church of Doug members at Dougs command. I am sure there are other former Church of Doug members who have received similar treatment when they fell out of favor. Lourdes knew she would be treated the same way if she told any one in the VF circle what DPIAT was doing to her. DPIAT is trying to rally the troops for another Destroy the Victim campaign. Only it seems as though there aren't any troops to be had except for his skeevy lawyers and channel 5 news in San Antonio.

Disclaimer: I do not personally know Jen. Just read her account of her bad treatment by DPIAT and company.

[westchamps]

Perhaps you should take your own advice. The words used for "fool" in Matthew 5:22 and Luke 24:25 are two completely different words in the Greek, with different meanings. Never mind that it's two different gospels, written by different authors, from completely different times in the life and ministry of Christ, and He was using them in completely different contexts.

Guess that just goes to show that's it not the word f-o-o-l itself, but the meaning behind it that is important. I did mention "context" in my previous post.

[westchamps]

Actually, it is. It is about how each Christian INTERPRETS the Bible and how that interpretation leads them to live his or her life. For instance, some families believe that women should literally wear a head covering, whether for worship only or all the time; while others believe a literal head covering is not ordered. Some believe that "covering" means the metaphorical protective covering of a husband or father.

I am sure your interpretation of "submit" is much different than that of other Christian men. There are many passages in the Bible that even you have said are not relevant to your daily walk. What men like you have a hard time accepting is that there are many Christians in the world who happen to interpret the Bible differently. I do not live my life based on what a man like you expects. I life my life based on what I believe the words in the Bible tell me - how I interpret those words.

I've no problem with the idea that different Christians may interpret more "nuanced" passages in Scripture differently. What gives me pause is when people want to take Scripture passages that are quite clear in meaning and change their plain meaning into something contorted or extra-Biblical that better fits their own personal point of view.

[DarkAnts]

Westchamps, this is a song just for you.

VsMcdEswK8k

[westchamps]

Thank you - you took the words out of my mouth. The fact that this man can come here to smug-brag on his own precious, brilliant, always-testing-above-grade-level home-schooled daughters, then accuse Ms. Torres-Manteufel of sticking around too long for the abuse/lying/only being interested in money, makes for some serious cognitive dissonance. At the risk of stating the obvious - she's somebody's daughter, too.

ETA: I sincerely hope that Westchamps' daughters are never, ever subjected to the sort of emotional, sexual and spiritual abuse that Doug inflicted on Lourdes - but if that did happen, I think he'd be singing a very different tune.

I only brought that up in response to others on here who claimed that most Fundamentalist Christian homeschoolers are basically a bunch of dumb, uneducated country bumpkins.

[Marian the Librarian]

I only brought that up in response to others on here who claimed that most Fundamentalist Christian homeschoolers are basically a bunch of dumb, uneducated country bumpkins.

Methinks the gentleman doth protest too much.