Duggars by the Dozen 30 - On a Mission from GOD!

[cptbailey]

14 hours ago, JMO said:

Who's seen the post for their conference? They have that ridiculous picture of her mooning up at him while he talks.  

I have!! Vomit inducing. 

[JesusCampSongs]

2 hours ago, Sister Mozz said:

I found this: http://www.wonderwall.com/news/duggar-sisters-dont-want-sit-next-josh-duggar-court-3009862.article

 

No one else is reporting it, but I find it fascinating if true.

Yes, they're so traumatized by his presence that they invited him to their weddings and continue to see him and his family regularly. 

More like, they're concerned this blatant money grab will be less effective if they look like one big happy family in the courtroom.

[Bad Wolf]

oh, poor little Joshy boy. (Sarcasm font needed.)

[nst]

It's somewhat shocking that Michelle and JB could hide their awful views and secrets for years and in short amount of time their son in laws and son can't seem to hid anything.

 

[karen77]

On 9/5/2017 at 11:04 PM, SadieJane said:

Maybe I will have some gyros tomorrow. That sounds amazing 

It's greek fest here at our local greek orthodox church... gyros and baklava galore!!

38 minutes ago, nst said:

It's somewhat shocking that Michelle and JB could hide their awful views and secrets for years and in short amount of time their son in laws and son can't seem to hid anything.

 

No twitter back then.

[onekidanddone]

4 minutes ago, karen77 said:

t's greek fest here at our local greek orthodox church... gyros and baklava galore!!

Spanakopita, souvlaki, avgolemeno?

[karen77]

1 minute ago, onekidanddone said:

Spanakopita, souvlaki, avgolemeno?

I know they have souvlaki and spanakopita, not sure on the other, but then again, they try to have a limited menu for this weekend event.

[WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?]

2 hours ago, karen77 said:

It's greek fest here at our local greek orthodox church... gyros and baklava galore!

You're killing me here!  Our Greek food festival isn't until spring, right before Deli Days at the synagogue.

[SassyPants]

Sitting around the table in the TTH:

Jill: POPs, which way will get us more money, 2 lawsuits or one with Josh joining ours?

JB: Well, Jill, I think 2 is better than 1. Yes, let's do 2 lawsuits.

Jill: Thanks, POPs

[SadieJane]

Greek food is my weakness. I'm jealous 

[PainfullyAware]

The 4 girls actually filed court documents against Josh, to prevent him from joining their lawsuit. 

http://m.eonline.com/news/878543/josh-duggar-s-sisters-want-court-to-deny-his-request-to-join-their-privacy-lawsuit

"Deciding claims based on protecting victims of sex crimes from disclosure, while at the same time, having those claims consolidated with the perpetrator of those crimes will be confusing to the jury," the documents state. "It would be next to impossible for a jury to ignore the perpetrator sitting next to the victims, yet decide the different issues, different claims and different damages that apply for victims as compared to perpetrator. Consolidation would undoubtedly give the false impression that the victims and the perpetrator are 'in this together.'""

[JMO]

Well shit, that makes for some awkward family dinners. 

1 hour ago, PainfullyAware said:

The 4 girls actually filed court documents against Josh, to prevent him from joining their lawsuit.

"It would be next to impossible for a jury to ignore the perpetrator sitting next to the victims, yet decide the different issues, different claims and different damages that apply for victims as compared to perpetrator. Consolidation would undoubtedly give the false impression that the victims and the perpetrator are 'in this together.'""

 

[Lurky]

I am genuinely confused about the Duggars' approach to this lawsuit.  Do they really think the defending lawyers haven't got staff sifting through every social media post and public statement that talk about the victims having forgiven Josh AND sitting/standing next to him at any given opportunity?

I mean, if this was a standard case, I'd completely understand the victims not wanting the perpetrator anywhere NEAR their courtcase.  But 2 of the 4 have said, on national TV no less, that the abuse was no big deal, not that bad, happens in most families they know etc and it's clear they're not shunning Josh in any meaningful way, and weren't (or weren't allowed to) in the years between the abuse and the revelation.

[Knight of Ni]

15 hours ago, karen77 said:

It's greek fest here at our local greek orthodox church... gyros and baklava galore!!

 

Our Greek festival is next weekend. I'm excited for all the food.

unfortunately I had to miss the Latin festival the city had a few weeks ago. Mexican food is my favorite. I wish I could learn how to cook authentic Mexican food. 

[SassyPants]

@PainfullyAware...So it truly is all about winning and the money. How many times have the Duggars preached forgiveness????? Shouldn't they forgive and move on?

 

3 hours ago, Lurky said:

I am genuinely confused about the Duggars' approach to this lawsuit.  Do they really think the defending lawyers haven't got staff sifting through every social media post and public statement that talk about the victims having forgiven Josh AND sitting/standing next to him at any given opportunity?

I mean, if this was a standard case, I'd completely understand the victims not wanting the perpetrator anywhere NEAR their courtcase.  But 2 of the 4 have said, on national TV no less, that the abuse was no big deal, not that bad, happens in most families they know etc and it's clear they're not shunning Josh in any meaningful way, and weren't (or weren't allowed to) in the years between the abuse and the revelation.

That's how you know it's just a money grab. If they want to sue anyone, it should be JB/M- Can't bite the hand that feeds you.

 

[sunshine]

I thought they were suing because they were expose and they shouldn't have. Or, did something changed? I get the feeling they don't beleive themselves are reality star celebrities. 

[Four is Enough]

The Duggar girls can forgive JOSH and move on. But they were victimized by the deep pockets TABLOIDS. The tabloids must be punished. To be forgiven, they must PAY. Millions.

[December]

6 hours ago, PainfullyAware said:

The 4 girls actually filed court documents against Josh, to prevent him from joining their lawsuit. 

I'm sure there's some legal reason behind it, but it seems strange at this point. 

19 hours ago, nst said:

It's somewhat shocking that Michelle and JB could hide their awful views and secrets for years and in short amount of time their son in laws and son can't seem to hid anything.

Well, having the TV show and social media probably makes it easier now. But they weren't exactly hiding it before. The anti-trans robocalls were a couple of years ago. I can't find it now, but I remember some discussion on here around the time of the Josh scandal about some eye-catching  campaign stance from Jim Bob's political career. Any softening of their views on the shows could also be a choice of the producers/channel. 

[SamiKatz]

I think the lawsuit has merit.  I've said this before, but I don't think victims of crimes - especially crimes that were committed against them when they were minor childeren - should ever be identified unless it is their choice to do so, and the 4 women in question did not chose to do so. That is also irrespective of the way you chose to live your life afterwards, including becoming a television personality.  The fact that they are widely known, and have troublesome ideologies,  should not negate their right to privacy in that regard.

If it is not a law that any documentation relating to a crime be redacted to a point that it would be impossible to identify the victims of that crime when publically released,  it should be.  Nor should that be negated by the fact that upon being identified as a victim, one chose to speak out it about it publically.

In Touch printed the article to enact a grudge against Jim Bob and Michelle ,and Josh, and in doing so, they threw Jill, Jinger, Jessa and Joy under the bus.  There is nothing honourable in what they did.  

I think people need to look at this issue a step away from the Duggars, and think of what their reaction would be if this was happening to a random people

 

[RoseWilder]

21 hours ago, SamiKatz said:

 

I think people need to look at this issue a step away from the Duggars, and think of what their reaction would be if this was happening to a random people

 

My feelings about this aren't colored by the fact that it's the Duggars. My feelings are colored by 1) the fact that they're famewhores who sell every moment of their private lives, including their births, doctors appointments and funerals. So their claim that they feel their privacy was violated rings a little hollow for me and 2) they went on national television and claimed the abuse was no big deal and that they've forgiven Josh and everything is great now. They didn't hunker down and try to find some privacy when the story broker. They went all over TV talking about the story in a desperate and pathetic attempt to save their show. Because they don't care about privacy. They care about fame and money and this lawsuit is about furthering both those causes. 

I'm sickened on behalf of victims who truly do want privacy that they're pretending like that's what this lawsuit is about. 

[SamiKatz]

10 minutes ago, RoseWilder said:

My feelings about this aren't colored by the fact that it's the Duggars. My feelings are colored by 1) the fact that they're famewhores who sell every moment of their private lives, including their births, doctors appointments and funerals. So their claim that they feel their privacy was violated rings a little hollow for me and 2) they went on national television and claimed the abuse was no big deal and that they've forgiven Josh and everything is great now. They didn't hunker down and try to find some privacy when the story broker. They went all over TV talking about the story in a desperate and pathetic attempt to save their show. Because they don't care about privacy. They care about fame and money and this lawsuit is about furthering both those causes. 

I'm sickened on behalf of victims who truly do want privacy that they're pretending like that's what this lawsuit is about. 

Irrespective of your dislike for them, you don't know why they filed this lawsuit, only why you think they did.

As I said - the law about public disclosure of victims names in legal documentation should be encompassing enough that it is impossible to determine who the victims are, and if that is impossible, they should not be released.  The rights of crime victims should not take a back seat to public curiousity, ever. 

I also have an issue with people deciding how other people should react to their abuse, and that abuse becoming public knowledge.  I wonder in the case of the Jill, Jessa, Jinger and Joy,  how much choice they had in going public, both from a family,  and a general perspective given that they are public figures.  And as for saying they have forgiven Josh?  Sometimes it takes a very, very long time to come to terms with being abused and how that affects your life, and the Duggar females have been to taught to "keep sweet", and that they are subjugated to males their whole lives.    

In order to protect the rights of crime victims whose life styles and reactions you do approve of, you have to recognize the rights of those who you do not. 

[RoseWilder]

38 minutes ago, SamiKatz said:

Irrespective of your dislike for them, you don't know why they filed this lawsuit, only why you think they did.

As I said - the law about public disclosure of victims names in legal documentation should be encompassing enough that it is impossible to determine who the victims are, and if that is impossible, they should not be released.  The rights of crime victims should not take a back seat to public curiousity, ever. 

I also have an issue with people deciding how other people should react to their abuse, and that abuse becoming public knowledge.  I wonder in the case of the Jill, Jessa, Jinger and Joy,  how much choice they had in going public, both from a family,  and a general perspective given that they are public figures.  And as for saying they have forgiven Josh?  Sometimes it takes a very, very long time to come to terms with being abused and how that affects your life, and the Duggar females have been to taught to "keep sweet", and that they are subjugated to males their whole lives.    

In order to protect the rights of crime victims whose life styles and reactions you do approve of, you have to recognize the rights of those who you do not. 

As I've already stated, my opinions about this have nothing do with whether I like or dislike them. It has to do with the way they've handled issues of privacy. So please stop trying to act like my post is saying something it doesn't. 

The documents were redacted enough that no one would have been able to figure out who the Duggar children in question where if not for the fact that their family exploited them for fame and money. That's on the parents. Not on InTouch. 

And this is not an issue of me trying to decide how the Duggar women should react. I don't care how they react privately. Forgive Josh. Don't forgive him. That's none of my business. But I have every right to be appalled that they went on TV and tried to minimize the abuse that happened. They did such a disservice to other abuse victims by doing that. I will continue to be appalled by anyone who claims abuse isn't a big deal whether you approve of it or not. 

Also, the Duggar women are grown adults, so they "they might not have had a choice about going on TV" excuse does not fly with me. They are in their mid-20s and if they're choosing to still let their parents or TLC or anyone else control them then they're to blame for that. They can choose to walk away. 

And it's really amazing that you're lecturing me about how I'm making assumptions about why the Duggars are doing what they're doing WHILE your making assumptions about why the people who disagree with you feel the way you do. You keep trying to decide why people are siding against the Duggars when you really don't know other people's reasons. And, even when I explained my reasons, you're still insisting it's just because I dislike the Duggars. But hey, don't let my reasons interfere with you explaining to us all why everyone with a different opinion than you is just basing it on petty dislike of the Duggars. 

[sawasdee]

2 hours ago, SamiKatz said:

In order to protect the rights of crime victims whose life styles and reactions you do approve of, you have to recognize the rights of those who you do not. 

I can't like this comment enough.

Their address was shown in the redacted documents, if I remember correctly. That meant that even though their names were obscured, their identities were not. They did not choose to be public figures: that decision was made for them long before they reached adulthood. If they had not been nationally known, that information was still there to be used - oh, by a local political opponent when they ran for the school board?

And yes, they scrambled to save their show. It was the only life they'd known for years.

I actually do not have much sympathy for them, but as @SamiKatz said, to protect those who need protection, you sometimes have to accept that those you feel don't deserve it are protected too.

[jwash1894]

Anyone else notices the effects of the cult on the girls, as of late?

[closetcagebaby]

2 hours ago, sawasdee said:

I can't like this comment enough.

Their address was shown in the redacted documents, if I remember correctly. That meant that even though their names were obscured, their identities were not.

Wouldn't the fact they identified the victims as related to him be more identifying than their address?