Deleted Comments: Leave The Duggars Alooooooone

Hey, we promised you a Duggars ShitFerBrains, and then last week we had to go and write about that children's book about Hell instead, so here we finally are with the best of the worst of our deleted Duggars comments, whee! Yr Wonkette is always servicey! Also, most of this week's deleted comments were just tedious. Trolls need to up their game. (Oh, there's no way we'll come to regret saying that ...)

[contextly_sidebar id="bF7A5POwCIGq1wQzioEG4gO6OHpo1t2M"]

These comments are drawn from a whole bunch of Duggar Horrorshow Stories -- see the linkies at the end -- and they all fall into a few simple categories, mostly "Nobody's perfect," "You just hate the Duggars because they're Christian conservatives," and "What Josh Duggar did was bad but The Gays are waaaay worser." For starters, there's the deleted account known now only as "Guest," who really didn't like how we were so judgmental about a little sexual molestation and coverup, especially since we unkindly found a link between Josh's "therapy" and Hobby Lobby:  

There are so many issues in this article that are blown out of proportion that I would like to comment on but I will just say that anyone who his trying to dig up mud will certainly do so. Not any one of us can say that we have lived perfect lives and none of us would like the bad choices of our teen years printed in People magazine for all to read and have our lives destroyed by the stupid things we did when we were young. Trying to link people together just because they have worked together in the past does not mean they agree with each other's philosophies or actions.

We're going to go out on a limb here and predict that, no, even if you sicced an investigative journalist on most people, you wouldn't find youthful sister-diddling in their pasts.

Then there was "advancedatheist," whose comment was too long to reproduce in full; advancedatheist assures us that she or he has family in Springdale, Arkansas, who occasionally see the Duggars around town. Despite being nonreligious themselves, AA's family really "feels respect and admiration for them." AA's sister works at a Walmart, and reports that when the older Duggar boys come to the store, they "stare goggle-eyed at the relatively scantily clad women they see at Walmart who don’t dress like the girls and women they see in their home and at their church." We think that's supposed to be a comment on the sluttiness of the women at Walmart, but we're not sure. In any case, AA just wants to remind us that not everyone who admires the Duggars is an evangelical Christian -- a lot of very secular rightwingers think they're cool too:

So this suggests a reason for why the Duggars’ existence and success drive progressives nuts: They show the failure of the progressive project to reshape the human mind like clay and create something similar to the Bolsheviks’ fantasy in the last century of the New Soviet Man. Progressives hold huge institutional advantages in education, academia, government, the law and the media and Hollywood. Yet here and there pockets of effective resistance keep appearing to demonstrate the workability of traditional social models. And progressives simply can’t let these resisters go unpunished, hence the efforts to discredit the Duggars, Phil Robertson, Hobby Lobby founder David Green and similar people who clearly have their lives better organized and managed than the majority of Americans.

I have to wonder how much of the disdain shown towards the Duggars derives from envy of their greater vitality. The future, demographically speaking, belongs to the people who show up for it. Well, guess what? The future belongs in part to Michelle Duggar's descendants, and not to the nonexistent descendants of sterile feminist heroines like, say, Lena Dunham.

See? Even a Genuine Atheist thinks that all those rightwing Christians are pretty terrific, and liberals are failing in their commie agenda, which is the only reason anyone cares about some harmless five-year-old sister-fingering by an adolescent. Also, when Lena Dunham was seven, she looked at her baby sister's vag, which is exactly the same, because 7-year-olds and 15-year-olds have exactly the same moral accountability, and only a dirty liberal would try to suggest there's a difference. Besides, Josh was only a child. (We got a lot of other "Oh yeah, well what about Lena Dunham, you hypocrites?" comments, and they were too repetitive to include here. We won't run them because we're cowards.)

The bestest defense of Josh Duggar's sister-molesting, of course, came from folks who simply wanted to point out that no one who does, condones, or fails to condemn buttsex has any moral standing to condemn Josh Duggar -- although apparently people who write long comments in which they obsess about P-E-N-I-S in the ANUS are exempt from that rule.

"Michael Smith" -- don't assume it's that nice Mike Smith who you work with, it could be any Mike Smith -- had a whole bunch of thoughts on this theme. See if you can detect the common thread in his thinking!

• The Duggar family is a great family and Josh Duggar included. Josh made mistakes when he was a teenager, does that make him anything close to the evil acts committed by the LGBT members? NO, NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!

• The Duggar family are attacked only because they reject EVIL sexual acts that the members of the LGBT do daily in their lives.

• Who cares about the mistakes of a teenager? NO ONE! But when it relates to Josh Duggar, then suddenly the LGBT members are in arms, claiming hypocrisy when these LGBT members are the only ones who are hypocrites.

• I support fully the Duggar family because of their values and especially because they are against EVIL, in particular against the evil "sexual" acts committed by the LGBT members.

• The mistakes of a teenager, no matter who he is (Josh or else), does not change the fact that the LGBT members do EVIL SEXUAL ACTS that are not only highly disgusting, they are EVIL and should be banned in many ways.

• Recently, I read an article about a dad who is going to marry his son! That is one example of the evil LGBT members have managed to produce.

• To be supportive of the LGBT members, it is not achieved by taping them on the back and telling them how proud you are of their EVIL sexual acts, it is to tell them that their EVIL sexual acts are just that, EVIL, and that they can change their evil ways if first they understand that their evil sexual acts are evil and then second if they act upon this truth and stop doing these evil sexual acts.

Michael Smith's ideas are intriguing to us, and we wish to subscribe to his newsletter. In particular, we're taken with the idea that LGBT members do EVIL sexual acts, and we would like to know more about the many ways they should be banned. Are there actually more than just a couple of ways to ban sexual acts? Also, what should be taped on an LGBT member's back? A sign reading "Kick Me"? A sign reading "Ban Me In Many Ways"? A sign reading "I am proud of my EVIL sexual acts"? And finally, we're delighted to see how well rightwingers understood the story about a "man marrying his own son" -- why pay attention to the details when the headline proves that The Gays all want to do incest as if they were Duggars?

[contextly_sidebar id="c1TjQcL5OUKATUslPc2STyej18zacy0h"]

Also, too, speaking of weird, we were the lucky recipients of a cut-and-paste bit of spam that you'll find on lots of articles about child molestation, at least at places that don't moderate their comments so good. "Emperical1" is out to cure the internet of "the mass hysteria and moral panic that currently surrounds sexually expressed child/older person relationships." To support his perfectly legitimate claims, he links to a website that has a whole bunch of Serious Academic Research proving that kiddy-diddling is actually quite healthy and wonderful when it's consensual -- and by coincidence, all the articles are by one guy, the seriously icky David L. Reigel, though we have no idea whether Emperical1 is Reigel or (yecch) a disciple.

Also, too, when another commenter replied, "Hi, Nambla," Emperical1 got pretty darn ticked off, because while "sexually expressed child/older person relationships" are often just peachy, improper capitalization is OFFENSIVE:

NAMBLA (with which I have nothing to do whatsoever) is intrinsically an acronym, and is written in ALL CAPS.

Ad hominem attacks, insults, and other such rants are the refuge of those who cannot defend their views logically. But there are also intelligent and rational readers out there who are capable of considering opposing points of view; the original post is for them

So now you know!

And finally, there was "jobbikcelo," who replied to our very first story on L'Affaire Duggar  with a whole lot of thoughts on why Josh Duggar was bad, but that's nothing compared to buttsex, which is the worstest thing ever:

• I thought it was going to be a gay, a fecal eater in the FRC would be funny.

  You can cure horny sister humpers but the only cure for the gay is 1500 degrees in an oven

• It's bad but nowhere near a man having "sex" with another mans filthy exit hole. that's death penalty stuff

•  [In reply to someone who asked "Who even watches that show anymore?"] We know dudes who have sex with other dudes digestive systems don't

• You guys can never up with anything remotely new, 3 comments and all the same exact tired "you must be gay" pyscho babble. The story is ABOUT the FRC , I comment on the filthy animal niggarz too , does that mean I secretly want to be a pavement ape? what a bunch of queers

Kind of makes you proud to be an American, doesn't it? And yet for all his EVIL trolling, we must grudgingly confess that "jobbikcelo" actually made one genuinely funny comment, one which we urge Wonketteers to adapt for their own uses despite its tainted origins. When another commenter speculated, "Dude, I would just lurve to see what's in your secret porn stash... On second thought, ew, no I wouldn't," jobbikcelo replied,

you like Brazilian fart porn too?

Sure, he's an evil troll. But "Brazilian fart porn" has the ring of brilliance to it...and wouldn't you know it, his best line isn't even original-- it's more or less a 4chan thing (link is semi-SFW). That's gotta be the biggest disappointment since we found out that "ambien walrus kill your parents" wasn't a brilliant bit of randomly-generated pharmaceutical spam, but an SEO-hiccuppedwebcomic reference. 

[contextly_sidebar id="HTTMV3moY7nmtPZFTxxBWtvtn5fUBDFy"]