Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events


Recommended Posts

This is probably true but also super stupid. Is Josh really being faithful if he can only keep away from these activities by taking all the ability to do so away? If my husband only not cheating on me because he is being watched 24/7, then he might as well be cheating on me.

It's stupid, but this is exactly how this family has structured their entire life. Look at the rules they put on the kids: "NIKE!"; no going anywhere without an "accountability partner"; no dancing; etc. etc.

  • Love 5

You know, I don't expect everyone to be familiar with Shakespeare's English. I do consider OKC questions like this to be important in deciding whether someone's worth your time, but maybe not in the way that people would assume.

I'm guessing that Josh has never had any experience whatsoever with Shakespeare. Shakespeare probably wasn't addressed in the Wisdom Booklets. The Duggar family does not read. (Well, anything except the Bible and "Christian" YA novels.) He also probably thinks Google searches are a waste of his big brain as well.

 

Heads-up to Smuggar: If you want to lie about being a college graduate, MOST college grads (and even a few who did not graduate) have some familiarity with Shakespeare and his works.

  • Love 6

This is why I hope that by JimChelle being pissed off with Josh they understand Anna's situation and support her. Her own parents are far too deep into a "hair shirt" martyr lifestyle to help her.

They're not going to help Anna. They have NO compassion for her situation. Helping Anna will not get them back on TV right now, either, and I'm sure every waking hour is consumed with strategies on how to accomplish that feat.

 

They have already shown they don't care about collateral damage re: Smuggar. HE'S the one that needs help; they've shown it repeatedly.

 

These are not people that have the normal amount of compassion for another person in trouble or any caring at all about their grandchildren. It's all about them. Always has been, always will be, and let's hope the other kids in the family have taken note enough to realize they need to GET OUT.

  • Love 14

Go girl! You say it like it is.  Mail to Anna, personal and confidential to be opened by addressee only.

 

i wonder if Anna has the ability to open anything personally. I fear she has no confidentiality in her life. I suspect the Duggars and Kellers are rallying around her under the pretense of "support" but in reality are making sure no seeds of questioning Josh begin to root. That could even be why her brother chose to be public in his slams of Josh. I wouldn't be surprised if they are trying to keep him from speaking to Anna.

  • Love 12

I meant more along the lines of making your spouse and their sexual needs important in your life. My husband and whatever he needs (sex, help with work, a date night, taking care of the XYZ) is a priority for me. Not an obsession but a priority. I know I am his priority also...that includes regular life stuff, sex and making sure sex is good for both of us. 

The minister was aiming at that you should not deny your spouse sex, use it as a weapon in an argument, withold etc. His basic thoughts were not crazy but the TIMING???  There is a time and place for everything...this was neither the time nor the place. 

 

I think the idea that the sermon itself was somehow insensitive of Anna Duggar is based on some misapprehensions.

 

 Cross Church is a huge institution, with multiple campuses, tons of people. It is not, in fact, the Duggars' church in any way shape or form. Its pastor, Ronnie Floyd, is the current president of the Southern Baptist Convention, and Jim Bob's clan -- and Anna's clan -- are emphatically not Southern Baptists and do not now nor ever have had a connection of any kind to that church, and they're not even members of the denomination.

 

Derick has gone there (although I don't know for how long) as has Jill, but Derick and Jill are a tiny drop in a giant congregational bucket of people who have zero to do with the Duggars. And this Sunday's sermon was the opening to a five-week series that's been planned, announced and advertised for at least weeks, and likely for months. And Josh's new ill-doing became public knowledge on, what, Wednesday?  Asking that a big institution with virtually no relation to the Duggars change a long-held plan at a moments' notice to spare Anna's feelings doesn't make any sense, it seems to me. She certainly isn't a member, and she wouldn't have gone looking for broadcasts of their sermons. They have nothing to do with her and had no reason whatsoever to be changing their plans on her account. She never would have known that sermon happened except for her brother-in-law.

 

If anything, maybe Derick shouldn't have posted the thing. He is closely allied with the Duggars and knows Anna, so maybe he should have thought about sparing her feelings. But he certainly didn't.

 

If there is a problem, the problem is Derick's, not the pastor's.

Edited by Churchhoney
  • Love 20

Unfortunately for Anna, there is a very fine line between being disappointed for someone and being disappointed in them. She has public support right now (outside the confines of Gothard and the Duggars) to leave her husband. Nobody thinks it would be easy either logistically or emotionally. However, there are two things she needs to think about in regard to staying with Josh.

 

1. What message is she sending to Josh? Is her staying giving him a green light to cheat again? That's clearly the message he got on the molestation issue. He "confessed" as a teenager and nothing much changed for him. Now he's been caught cheating - he didn't confess; he was caught. Her staying with him without major changes in his behavior and the way he is treated is nothing more than her handing him the credit card next time. 

 

2. What message is she sending to her children? How does she explain any of this to them when they are older? No matter how sheltered the M-kids might be with homeschooling and lack of interaction, someone will spill the beans at some point. Is forgiveness more important than self-respect? Is forgiveness more important than the safety of her daughters? I've had those conversations with my parents (not the cheating but the sex abuse by a neighbor). I wouldn't wish them on anyone. It took a long time and a lot of therapy to get to the point that I could realize my parents were just as much victims.

 

I'm not saying that Josh would or could hurt his own daughters - I am not qualified to make that statement. I'm just saying that Anna - as the good parent - has to be ready to answer some questions if her children raise them in the future. How comfortable is she that her husband won't do something similar or worse next time? 

 

I think that, unfortunately, we already know that for the Duggars -- and maybe also for the Keller parents if they indeed pushed for the Anna-Josh marriage after they knew the entire molestation story -- the answer to the bolded questions is an emphatic "yes."

 

Which I guess kind of suggests that for Anna to do any of the things that most everybody here and in the world at large thinks she ought to do -- even the mildest of them, such as take a break and think things through -- she'd really have to leave this whole belief system she's enmeshed in.

 

I don't believe she'll do that.

  • Love 2

With regards to the "rules", doesn't she still have to submit to her husband? Like if Josh came to her on Saturday night and wanted sex, would she be able to use the rules as an out?

  I would think that a decent and sympathetic husband would not demand it at a time like this, but we're talking about Josh Duggar here.  

Edited by bigskygirl
No proof of rape.

This is probably true but also super stupid. Is Josh really being faithful if he can only keep away from these activities by taking all the ability to do so away? If my husband only not cheating on me because he is being watched 24/7, then he might as well be cheating on me.

 

That's sort of the whole Duggar "philosophy" (and Gothard's as well), though, isn't it? They don't seem to allow anything to go on without the promise of some kind of "accountability partner" or "Nike shouter." They don't seem to believe that anyone can control their own impulses regarding anything. I guess I chalk that up to Gothard and Jim Bob and maybe Michelle being so bad at controlling their own impulses that they simply believe it's true for everyone -- and that it can't be fixed. What an appalling and terrifying world view. Also explains why they think education is meaningless, too, I guess. We're all just Pavlov's dogs. ... Horrible

Edited by Churchhoney
  • Love 3

I'm not sure which thread this should go on, really, but this is a sample of some conversation on the Sweet Fellowship thread, back in April before Joshgate 1.0 broke. Funnily enough, we were speculating on which one of these guys was likely to have the first scandal. (Posting it on the Josh and Anna thread because Josh turns out to be our guy.) Props to Fostermom who called it correctly!

***

I would not be surprised at all if one of these paragons of manhood takes a fall eventually, a much harder fall than Gothard's. They're so impressed with themselves, eventually they'll believe they're unassailable -- and that's when one of them will get caught with a prostitute (either sex) or a baby on the side (that'll be Jim Bob). My money's on TFDW because no one can contain that much frustration forever, and I suspect he's a very angry person, deep down. Second choice, Jim Bob, who will obviously need to prove his masculinity to himself now that the baby factory is shut down. Josh as a dark horse contender. Smug and stupid and famous, an excellent recipe for an off-the-rails disaster.

 

 

He would actually be my leading contender. Anna has gone over the edge with the baby obsession. Josh obviously loves his kids and I think he's a good dad, but i also think he's more than done with the constant "blessings" Anna is looking to catch. Sex on the side could be his out in the future. I could see him having a mistress, one who does everything  possible to NOT get pregnant every 15 months.

  

Don't forget Derrick. He's a nice guy, so I can't see him sleeping with another woman. He'd probably love to pay a prostitute to sit quietly, and let him finish a few sentences without interruption. That'd be better than sex, for him.

 

 

Hmmm....first of these guys to stray. And someone will. Statistics alone say so. I'll think about it and get back to you...

  

That would mean there most be another person willing to have sweet fellowship with Joshua. While he might have the fundy girls fawning over him, I can't see him attracting many mainstream ladies. And the fundy girls might covet him, but would they actually do it?

***

  

One of the concrete things I learned from my ex-husband is that there is someone out there that wants the person you have difficulty imagining being desired.

***

*** Quotes edited for length.
  • Love 15

They're not going to help Anna. They have NO compassion for her situation. Helping Anna will not get them back on TV right now, either, and I'm sure every waking hour is consumed with strategies on how to accomplish that feat.

 

They have already shown they don't care about collateral damage re: Smuggar. HE'S the one that needs help; they've shown it repeatedly.

 

These are not people that have the normal amount of compassion for another person in trouble or any caring at all about their grandchildren. It's all about them. Always has been, always will be, and let's hope the other kids in the family have taken note enough to realize they need to GET OUT.

I tend to agree--any so-called compassion Anna gets will be wholly contingent on her cooperation with the Duggar machine. No matter how much lip service gets paid to supporting her, there is going to be this icky question about whether her sex life with Josh is a contributing factor. The reality is that, no matter what rules Anna and Josh espouse or what general impressions the rest of the world may have, absolutely NO ONE can make the least speculation about Anna and Josh's sex life. And the fact is, the nature of their sex life (whether it is/was pallid and infrequent or nightly swinging from the chandeliers) has Z.E.R.O. to do with Josh's choice to cheat. He's a lying, hypocritical cheater who cheats, and I'm convinced that would be true no matter what.

 

True story: way back in the late 1970s, one week before my wedding day (1st husband), we were telephoned by church elders and notified that the man who was supposed to be marrying us had been caught cheating on his wife. Not only would we need to choose someone else to officiate our wedding, but that night at church the whole mess was going to be put up on stage so "Bob" could confess before the congregation. We got to church that night, sick at heart, and ended up sitting right behind the woman "Bob" had been cheating with. We sat through the entire service, then came the big confession. Well, not only did "Bob" have to come to the microphone and confess, but they made his sweet wife--who was EIGHT MONTHS PREGNANT--stand up there with him and "confess" her part in his infidelity. I can't even remember what she said...it was perfectly awful, and so obvious that she was absolutely not responsible in any way for the despicable thing "Bob" had done. Oh, and the homewrecker "Bob" had slept with didn't have to go up on stage at all. Isn't that special?

  • Love 19

They wouldn't be considered illegitimate through annulment. This is what I've been told by Catholics, though.

That makes no sense; an annulment means that the two were never married.  But whatever, I don't want to get too far off topic.  At the end to the day it does not matter because Anna could not get an annulment under Arkansas law.  And it really, really does not matter because Anna won't leave that creep.  

  • Love 2

They wouldn't be considered illegitimate through annulment. This is what I've been told by Catholics, though.

 

It's not necessary in the Baptist church, because the Baptist church recognizes divorce as valid, in most cases.  The Catholic Church doesn't consider divorce a sin at all; remarrying without an annulment is adultery, because the Church doesn't recognize civil divorce as having done anything at all spiritually.  You might as well still be married, as far as they're concerned.  In most Baptist churches I've attended, the divorce itself is treated as an act of adultery, but it is recognized as spiritually valid.  In the strictest churches, you might have to repent for your divorce.  In my church, it is treated like every other sin, between you and God, and in most cases, you're allowed to remarry without any real trouble.   It's hard to say anything about what "the Baptist church" teaches, though, because Baptist churches are only associated by choice; there is no real hierarchy, session, presbytery, whatever to appeal to.  You can be dropped from an association if your church goes way off, but you can still call yourself Baptist.

 

Keep in mind that ATI is a parachurch organization, and that the members belong to different churches.  My friend is a member of a Reformed Presbyterian church, and they've dealt with Gothardites.  Her church is WAY more conservative than mine, but even they think ATI is weird.  And the non-denominational Bible church I attended in college had ATI members as part of the church.  Josh and Anna aren't really Baptist in the sense that say, I am.  I belong to, and pay tithes to, and work in ministries at, a Baptist church.  The Duggars don't seem to have any accountability outside of their own family. 

Edited by not2serious
  • Love 4

I have to wonder. When the door is closed and it's just Anna and her ball and chain, does she keep on staring at him adoringly? Just how deep does this pathos go? Having been married myself for a very long time to a very big douche (although it must be said, Josh Duggar makes my ex look like...um...some guy famous for being a terrific husband...?...mind is blank), it's impossible for me not to put myself in her situation. I know Anna and I are two very, very different girls, but good lord, she has to have SOME sense of self, doesn't she? Like when Josh comes walking in with mustard stains on his shirt and crumbs around his mouth with his doughboy muffin top spilling over his belt buckle, does she at least roll her eyes when she thinks he can't see?

  • Love 17

I have to wonder. When the door is closed and it's just Anna and her ball and chain, does she keep on staring at him adoringly? Just how deep does this pathos go? Having been married myself for a very long time to a very big douche (although it must be said, Josh Duggar makes my ex look like...um...some guy famous for being a terrific husband...?...mind is blank), it's impossible for me not to put myself in her situation. I know Anna and I are two very, very different girls, but good lord, she has to have SOME sense of self, doesn't she? Like when Josh comes walking in with mustard stains on his shirt and crumbs around his mouth with his doughboy muffin top spilling over his belt buckle, does she at least roll her eyes when she thinks he can't see?

Absolutely! I think she should sue him for fraud among a list of others.

That's sort of the whole Duggar "philosophy" (and Gothard's as well), though, isn't it? They don't seem to allow anything to go on without the promise of some kind of "accountability partner" or "Nike shouter." They don't seem to believe that anyone can control their own impulses regarding anything. I guess I chalk that up to Gothard and Jim Bob and maybe Michelle being so bad at controlling their own impulses that they simply believe it's true for everyone -- and that it can't be fixed. What an appalling and terrifying world view. Also explains why they think education is meaningless, too, I guess. We're all just Pavlov's dogs. ... Horrible

 

Very true. Gothared, Jim Bob,  and Michelle assume it's true for everyone because they view themselves as so superior to everyone else that there is no way they have a problem everyone else doesn't have. 

Edited by 3girlsforus
  • Love 3

If I'm doing the math right, even if you don't count the postpartum time out (WTF with twice as long after giving birth to a daughter? I don't even want to know...) that's two weeks out of every month and every Saturday night that's a no-sex zone.

I don't give two shits. It still doesn't excuse anything.

A woman is dirty after having a girl; versus a boy. 

 

That is why it's twice the time; it represents her impurity. 

  • Love 1

I want to know why Josh (or whomever it was) changed the wording of his original "apology" or whatever that statement was supposed to be.  

 

Specifically, why were the references to pornography and the Devil setting up shop in Josh's heart (or his underpants or wherever) removed? What purpose was served ... other than making Josh look dumb for rushing to post something he regretted, then dumber for thinking he could magically suck it back up from cyberspace when he changed his mind? 

 

The guy is an admitted night-creeping sister-fondler and he's acknowledging being unfaithful to his wife.  Who cares about a little porn at this point? And anyone who even knows who Josh Duggar is probably already knows he and his family blame everything on the Devil, so it's hardly a shock to hear them claiming this latest debacle is all Satan's doing, as usual.  

 

I just don't see the great need for his original statement to be edited in the way it was.  Maybe someone thought he shouldn't try to claim "the Devil made me do it" because it was weak and not owning what he did.  Maybe. But why eliminate the admission about being obsessed with porn?  Is that like .. supposed to be worse than groping your sleeping sister or stepping out on your wife with some 'ho from the internet?   Because, I will tell you this ... I would damn sure rather find out my man was peeping at porn than either of those other two other things, lol.  Or was Josh saving up his porn addiction admission for his next mea culpa, after god knows what is revealed about him? 

 

The whole editing thing is just goofy and odd, and seems so purposeless.  Even for the Duggars. 

  • Love 10

I want to know why Josh (or whomever it was) changed the wording of his original "apology" or whatever that statement was supposed to be.  

 

Specifically, why were the references to pornography and the Devil setting up shop in Josh's heart (or his underpants or wherever) removed? What purpose was served ... other than making Josh look dumb for rushing to post something he regretted, then dumber for thinking he could magically suck it back up from cyberspace when he changed his mind? 

 

The guy is an admitted night-creeping sister-fondler and he's acknowledging being unfaithful to his wife.  Who cares about a little porn at this point? And anyone who even knows who Josh Duggar is probably already knows he and his family blame everything on the Devil, so it's hardly a shock to hear them claiming this latest debacle is all Satan's doing, as usual.  

 

I just don't see the great need for his original statement to be edited in the way it was.  Maybe someone thought he shouldn't try to claim "the Devil made me do it" because it was weak and not owning what he did.  Maybe. But why eliminate the admission about being obsessed with porn?  Is that like .. supposed to be worse than groping your sleeping sister or stepping out on your wife with some 'ho from the internet?   Because, I will tell you this ... I would damn sure rather find out my man was peeping at porn than either of those other two other things, lol.  Or was Josh saving up his porn addiction admission for his next mea culpa, after god knows what is revealed about him? 

 

The whole editing thing is just goofy and odd, and seems so purposeless.  Even for the Duggars. 

My guess is that Michelle and Jim Bob helped him write it, and they changed it only after they immediately got a bad reaction online from it.  When I read the very first one I thought, what a turd; he is blaming the devil and porn.  No doubt a lot of other people said that too.  Then when it was just porn (for several hours), even more people were livid that this guy was essentially blaming porn.  The thing with the Duggars is that because they all have low character, they were not able to grasp the idea that people with good character would find blaming the devil and porn to be repugnant.  It was only after they got the bad reaction that they knew they had fucked up, and that is why they changed it.  They don't actually know what it means to be a good person, and so they can only go by the cues they get from others and adjust their words accordingly.  

  • Love 20

I'm glad Anna has a brother who wants to support her, and as interesting as it is for us to get the perspective from a sibling, I think he's an asshole for putting this on social media. The tabloids will get ahold of this and it'll get more media attention. Her parents certainly may be (selfishly) concerned about how it would reflect on them if she ever left Josh, but I think her brother is a jerk to be disrespectful to his parents by putting this out there. It's not a good look for the brother, IMO.

Wow.

What's right is right. There is no "disrespect" if what someone is doing is calling attention to parents who have thrown their children to the wolves.

I hope Daniel keeps posting. Also, my sympathy for Anna has run out.

  • Love 6

I love the cover of that People Magazine, featuring Jessa and Jill with the headline "Life After Scandal."  Yeah, right, lol.  Just as another scandal breaks, ha.  

 

Obviously a tad premature with that particular caption, I would say.  

 

Perhaps they should have gone with the title "Life Amidst the Scandals" or something similar. 

  • Love 8

I'm glad that Anna's brother Daniel spoke publicly. I'm sure the postings will be pulled but at least a lot of people will know that not all of Anna's family supports Josh's actions. The news article did quoted Daniel as being the oldest, but it's not true, their sister Esther with a missionary husband in Africa is and they have 9 children, I think. She's in her mid thirties.

My guess is that Michelle and Jim Bob helped him write it, and they changed it only after they immediately got a bad reaction online from it.  When I read the very first one I thought, what a turd; he is blaming the devil and porn.  No doubt a lot of other people said that too.  Then when it was just porn (for several hours), even more people were livid that this guy was essentially blaming porn.  The thing with the Duggars is that because they all have low character, they were not able to grasp the idea that people with good character would find blaming the devil and porn to be repugnant.  It was only after they got the bad reaction that they knew they had fucked up, and that is why they changed it.  They don't actually know what it means to be a good person, and so they can only go by the cues they get from others and adjust their words accordingly.  

I kind of like version 1 the best with everything included.  Satan, porn, his past.  Version 2 kept the porn and got rid of Satan and I thought they may have done that because they didn't want people to actually think that Satan built a fortress in his heart after all, it might scare away their faithful friends and make him look like Satan. Version 3 removes any mention of his past, porn, and Satan, and he's just some run of the mill unfaithful guy.   Version 1 counters Michelle's fox interview where she defends Josh with his 'soft heart'.  

  • Love 1

I only glanced at part of the minister's sermon, but the focus shouldn't be about making sex a priority it should be about making communication a priority. I get that sex can get lost in the hustle & bustle of work and raising a family, but some times it needs to take a back seat. My hubby & I have been together 33 years and at different times during those years we were dealing with a lot of issues that took top priority.

 

The Duggar theory on sex is whacked. A wife (and husband, in the real world) need flexibility in their relationship to allow sex to take a back seat at times without hurt feelings, or worries of cheating.

 

And personally I ain't nobody's pin cushion nor would I ever be.

 

IMHO cheating usually has very little to do with sex anyway.

  • Love 17

I have to wonder. When the door is closed and it's just Anna and her ball and chain, does she keep on staring at him adoringly? Just how deep does this pathos go? Having been married myself for a very long time to a very big douche (although it must be said, Josh Duggar makes my ex look like...um...some guy famous for being a terrific husband...?...mind is blank), it's impossible for me not to put myself in her situation. I know Anna and I are two very, very different girls, but good lord, she has to have SOME sense of self, doesn't she? Like when Josh comes walking in with mustard stains on his shirt and crumbs around his mouth with his doughboy muffin top spilling over his belt buckle, does she at least roll her eyes when she thinks he can't see?

I've met Anna. It's not all sweetness, I assure you. She drops the milk and honey act when there's not a camera stuck in her face.

  • Love 15

My guess is that Michelle and Jim Bob helped him write it, and they changed it only after they immediately got a bad reaction online from it.  When I read the very first one I thought, what a turd; he is blaming the devil and porn.  No doubt a lot of other people said that too.  Then when it was just porn (for several hours), even more people were livid that this guy was essentially blaming porn.  The thing with the Duggars is that because they all have low character, they were not able to grasp the idea that people with good character would find blaming the devil and porn to be repugnant.  It was only after they got the bad reaction that they knew they had fucked up, and that is why they changed it.  They don't actually know what it means to be a good person, and so they can only go by the cues they get from others and adjust their words accordingly.  

 

Good GAWD. They seriously ran that shit up the flagpole to see who would salute it, and then they edited it based on the response they got?  I am astonished.  I know I shouldn't be.  This is the Duggars we are talking about. Yet I am stunned by the .... gargantuan stupidity ... of such a choice.  Don't they know that once out there, the original statement will never go away? And by changing the original statement, they create a whole new story about what they removed and what they added and why they changed what they did.   

 

I agree, the whole "blame it one the Devil and porn" rationale is extremely turdish .... very weak.  But changing the statement after it received a bad response pushes it into a whole new realm of insincerity.  I mean, you either believe the evil force known as pornography caused it or you think Satan was in control or... you don't.   Eliminating references to either factor because they were poorly received is patently manipulative.  I know, it's the Duggars and no one should be surprised. Their whole existence is one big lie. 

 

I just wish they would decide if they are going to hide behind their religion (and blame everything on the Devil) or hide their religion ( and not admit they blame everything on the devil).  Pick a side, people, pick a side!  

Edited by Celia Rubenstein
  • Love 10

I think the idea that the sermon itself was somehow insensitive of Anna Duggar is based on some misapprehensions...

 

If there is a problem, the problem is Derick's, not the pastor's.

I see your point, except, I wonder,

Because up to this point, Derick has been extraordinarily cagey about who they're on a mission for, and hasn't really, that I noticed, put anything on social media specifically making reference to this church. When the molestation scandal hit, they quietly got the Dillards out of Dodge on very short notice. Would Derick, who publicizes himself heavily on social media, have publicized the mission arm of their home church if asked? Sure he would. But he didn't, and I have to think there were conversations about that.

Now, Josh up and gave his faith community (and let's face it, I'm sure there are doctrinal differences between the Dillard's church and what the Duggars practice which make them extremely distinct theologically to someone inside that community, but this is a way bigger scandal than that, and a lot of people are going to tar with a very broad brush) and activist conservative christianity in general a big fat black eye by being a lying whoremonger who allowed a bunch of people of respect to vouch for him and then endorse his reformation when he knew there was another shoe left to drop and he was in no way reformed.

Now, this week, is the time Derick chose to publicly associate himself specifically to introduce this particular sermon? And somehow he knew ahead of time that this long-planned sermon was going to say something he thought people really needed to hear right now about sex? And the head of an entire denomination gave a sermon where he blamed the culture and the spouse who's not putting out and didn't find time to address personal responsibility for sin and the damage done by the straying spouse or maybe say that he held the victims in his heart when he knew all eyes were on a sinner and his victims right down the road?

Yeah, I'm afraid I really do think that this is an attempt to talk away a huge public embarrassment by blaming the victim. I'm open to the possibility that it was intended to be directed at victims in general, but I really question if it it was publicized quite this way by accident.

Also, really, leaving aside whether or not he had any thought of Anna at any point here (and I'd like to know why the hell not), I find it kind of horrifying that someone who thinks this little of the strength of the human soul is running a megachurch, much less a denomination.

Edited by Julia
  • Love 6

I'm just wondering, suppose Josh had done something in which he was arrested and had to serve time in prison....let's say a significant amount of time, 20 years or so. Would Anna then be allowed to divorce him or would she be forever stuck standing by her man...a man who can no longer support her financially or emotionally ?

  • Love 1

I 100% believe that Anna fakes her "sweetness" for the cameras. She's said some snide comments on the show and you can tell she thinks she's a speshul snowflake. It doesn't mean she deserves this shitstorm though. As for Josh, I can guarantee he will never ever change, even after being caught. He'll just find something equally devious and move onto that. My own Minister cheated on his (now ex) wife with some fugly ass woman in our church. He confessed in front of the entire congregation (on Christmas Eve!) with tears and swore he would never do it again. His wife agreed to stay with him until she found out he had a porn addiction. He swore up and down he wouldn't look at porn, but she caught him again. I can see this happening over and over with Josh and Anna. If Anna won't leave Josh due to child molestations and cheating, then I'm afraid this will keep happening.

So sad considering she's putting her kids and her health in harm's way. What if he gave her an STD? Would Anna even know the symptoms? If she did know, would she stay with Josh anyways and pray about it?

  • Love 13
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...