It doesn't actually matter what they're putting themselves out there as, again, you're moralizing over the issue as if it had bearing, it doesn't.  Moralizing is exactly the problem.  The most immoral (as decided by you and I, lol), fuck in the world is still one of us, and the plights that can befall them could, tomorrow, befall us....because......to someone out there, and perhaps many someones...currently holding the majority of power....you are incredibly immoral Aroura.

You don't give up that right to privacy (not the right I'm referencing, of course.....but whatevs) to some randos on the internet (at least not here, in the US) when you break the law or are suspected of breaking the law..it's law enforcements job to handle that.....and law enforcement doesn't seem to be particularly interested in tracking down cheaters.  So their being cheaters, like their being immoral, is irrelevant with regards to what I'm discussing.

I'll keep hammering at this until I stop hearing variants of the "well, they're cheaters/immoral/scum/criminals anyway" refrain. None of that matters, and while I've offered many of my own opinions in this thread -that- isn't one of them, it's a brute fact, here, in the US.

(August 25, 2015 at 4:20 pm)Rhythm Wrote: It doesn't actually matter what they're putting themselves out there as, again, you're moralizing over the issue as if it had bearing, it doesn't.  Moralizing is exactly the problem.  The most immoral (as decided by you and I, lol), fuck in the world is still one of us, and the plights that can befall them could, tomorrow, befall us....because......to someone out there, and perhaps many someones...currently holding the majority of power....you are incredibly immoral Aroura.

You don't give up that right to privacy (not the right I;m referencing, of course...but whatev) to some randos on the internet (at least not here, in the US) when you break the law..it's law enforcements job to handle that.....and law enforcement doesn't seem to be particularly interested in tracking down cheaters.  This is how it affects you and I personally, though, it leads to statements like that.

(bold mine)

No one is saying you do!

What are you reading???

(August 25, 2015 at 3:55 pm)Neimenovic Wrote:

(August 25, 2015 at 3:55 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Eh, I don't think it's appropriate for us to diagnose his molesting behavior as the outcome of his upbringing... 

My siblings and I were brought up with the same principles regarding sexual morality. I think some people just really struggle with sexual temptation because of who they are, like it's in their genes, not necessarily because of how they were brought up.

No, but it is up to professional psychologists, all of whom would more than likely tell you it was a huge factor in what he did. Think what you like, it is widely known and well documented that sexual repression is damaging and causes aggression and abuse.

Regarding the second part.....I doubt it was equally messed up. They're not allowed front hugs with the opposite sex, they can't go to the beach or read romance novels, girls must wear skirts and a family member must be present at all times if they are with the opposite sex. Say what you want, that is very unhealthy and I would be extremely surprised if it didn't negatively affect all of their kids in some way.

If Josh's psychologist came forward and said his parent's upbringing were to blame for his molestation, I'd believe it. Until then, I think it's best not to blame the parents when we don't actually know.

(August 25, 2015 at 4:10 pm)Aroura Wrote: I am not a legal expert, but if I break the law, even online, then I've giving up my right to the privacy of that law breaking action.

There you are Rox. Amusingly, I had this same discussion with Napo last night, despite the fact that I'm not talking about any right to privacy in the first place - as I explained, at length. Its a right to equal protection under law, clause of the 14th, which prohibits the actions taken, which many of us, from one side of our mouths..in this very thread have decried, while offering variants of that excusing refrain out of the other. The sort of duplicity we seem to find abhorrent in the cheaters case but for whatever reason ameliorative in our own or in the situation itself. In any case irrelevant, entirely, with regards to what I've been saying...as I keep saying....because people just keep saying it.......

This little group, because of it's perceived immorality, is not being offered the hearty and robust support we would offer some other, positively valued group. That shit is heinous...from an american perspective, even though these people might be complete dicks. Agreed? I think, personally, that it's far more important to stick to those sorts of guns when the people involved make it difficult.....it;s easy to defend grannies knitting sweaters, but it's not the best indicator of how well we live up to our promise, or how close to the people we want to be we actually are. This sort of thing, imo, is much better for that.

(August 25, 2015 at 3:41 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Sure, just wondering why, in this specific instance.  The difference between planning an affair and finding oneself in an affair...I don't think that many of us accept that -any- affair is totally automatic.  Seems like some sort of planning/decision making might have gone down.  5 months or 5 seconds worth.  I'm wondering if maybe it's the implication of long standing continuous deceit prior to, rather than the act itself.

Deceit prior to, during, and after, are all extra things that may be added to the mere act of infidelity.  So if one values honesty, then the preplanning stages will matter to one.

(August 25, 2015 at 4:32 pm)Rhythm Wrote:

(August 25, 2015 at 4:10 pm)Aroura Wrote: I am not a legal expert, but if I break the law, even online, then I've giving up my right to the privacy of that law breaking action.

There you are Rox.  Amusingly, I had this same discussion with Napo last night, despite the fact that I'm not talking about any right to privacy in the first place - as I explained, at length.  Its a right to equal protection under law, clause of the 14th, which prohibits the actions taken, which many of us, from one side of our mouths..in this very thread have decried, while offering variants of that excusing refrain out of the other.  The sort of duplicity we seem to find abhorrent in the cheaters case but for whatever reason ameliorative in our own or in the situation itself.  In any case irrelevant, entirely, with regards to what I've been saying...as I keep saying....because people just keep saying it.......

And you edited it too.  I replied but the forum ate my post.

If I am wrong, it would be great if you could talk to me about it, like a person, and not quote me and address it to someone else as if I'm a particularly dense 5 year old.

I am willing to listen, my mind can be changed.  But generally you have to, oh you know, make your point to that person, instead of being a talking around them.  You come off as a total condesending ass.

But...I get that you are frustrated that everyone does not understand this subject the way you do. So really, I'm listening.

(August 25, 2015 at 3:55 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(August 25, 2015 at 3:47 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: No, they preach extreme sexual repression, and that takes its toll.

Eh, I don't think it's appropriate for us to diagnose his molesting behavior as the outcome of his upbringing... 

My siblings and I were brought up with the same principles regarding sexual morality. I think some people just really struggle with sexual temptation because of who they are, like it's in their genes, not necessarily because of how they were brought up.

I could hand you the messenger name of a woman raised in the same sort of homeschooling environment and religious environment as those kids, which was NOT Catholicism.

She could tell you a few things about how fucking ridiculous they were.

It's safe to say that you could not blame the parents, simply because they were likewise raised in that environment. It's all they know, so of course they fucked up, as their parents before them.

It's the religion and the religious leaders. It's pervasive and it's pernicious and it's disgusting - to the point that some of these families don't even allow the boys and girls in the same family to hug each other, because they might get nasty thoughts about their own siblings. Can you imagine that? Not even being able to hug your own brother?

My brother and I often sit on the couch reading where he's facing forward and I'm facing sideways with my legs on top of his. Usually a dog is cuddling with us somewhere. Not once has either one of us thought that we were going to fuck because of it, yet I ALSO sit that way with men I do fuck. But then again, my brother and I weren't raised to wait until marriage or pretend that sex didn't exist or couldn't touch each other or have bodily contact from other family members - things that children NEED.

Fundamental Christianity is the closest thing to a manufactured mental illness that I can conceive of, except maybe fundamental Islam or Judaism. It's disgusting.

(August 25, 2015 at 4:29 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(August 25, 2015 at 3:55 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: No, but it is up to professional psychologists, all of whom would more than likely tell you it was a huge factor in what he did. Think what you like, it is widely known and well documented that sexual repression is damaging and causes aggression and abuse.

Regarding the second part.....I doubt it was equally messed up. They're not allowed front hugs with the opposite sex, they can't go to the beach or read romance novels, girls must wear skirts and a family member must be present at all times if they are with the opposite sex. Say what you want, that is very unhealthy and I would be extremely surprised if it didn't negatively affect all of their kids in some way.

If Josh's psychologist came forward and said his parent's upbringing were to blame for his molestation, I'd believe it. Until then, I think it's best not to blame the parents when we don't actually know.

The relation between sexual repression and violence is a fact. A teenaged boy, not allowed contact with the opposite sex or any expression of his sexuality in a house full of girls roughly his age is a recipe for disaster. It's apparent.
And seeing how his father was not a sex offender, the genetic factor you talked about is excluded, and even then its significance is rather overstated. The explanation is quite obvious.

Sure, I'll try a more succinct description.  Our moral support or tacit acceptance of the situation these people have found themselves in erodes the foundational support, ensconced by our constitution, state...and federal laws, for those very same liberties and protections we would hope to possess ourselves.  

We cannot refer to the fact that they are cheaters and that cheating is illegal to explain or justify this behavior, no ones been convicted of cheating.
We cannot refer to their immorality to explain or justify this behavior, our moral judgements are irrelevant in this context.

Our behavior, in this moral support, in this tacit approval, in these implied justifications, in that small amount of joy - is plainly, simply, -against- our own best interests, in contradiction with who we claim to be, and in glaring defiance of how we handle other, similar situations - even on these boards (leaving the US behind for a moment, as it were).  That the situation makes it difficult for us to see that clearly, or immediately, is what makes it such an interesting situation, to me.

(August 25, 2015 at 4:49 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: My brother and I often sit on the couch reading where he's facing forward and I'm facing sideways with my legs on top of his. Usually a dog is cuddling with us somewhere. Not once has either one of us thought that we were going to fuck because of it,

Your brother may disagree with that... haven't you heard that men think about sex every 7 seconds?