Dr. Hager's Family Values

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
I read this story in The Nation in total shock. Not at the "activities" themselves but at the absolute depraved hypocrisy of a person who would abuse their wife this way then have the nerve to stand in the pulpit and use the resulting divorce which was caused by his own sexual perversions, as a prop in a sermon.

These people are absolutely the worst people on the planet and yet they cloak themselve in glory.

What a bunch of hypocritical freaks.

Read on.

Dr. Hager's Family Values

Ayelish McGarvey

Late last October Dr. W. David Hager, a prominent obstetrician-gynecologist and Bush Administration appointee to the Advisory Committee for Reproductive Health Drugs in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), took to the pulpit as the featured speaker at a morning service. He stood in the campus chapel at Asbury College, a small evangelical Christian school nestled among picturesque horse farms in the small town of Wilmore in Kentucky's bluegrass region. Hager is an Asburian nabob; his elderly father is a past president of the college, and Hager himself currently sits on his alma mater's board of trustees. Even the school's administrative building, Hager Hall, bears the family name.

That day, a mostly friendly audience of 1,500 students and faculty packed into the seats in front of him. With the autumn sunlight streaming through the stained-glass windows, Hager opened his Bible to the Old Testament Book of Ezekiel and looked out into the audience. "I want to share with you some information about how...God has called me to stand in the gap," he declared. "Not only for others, but regarding ethical and moral issues in our country."

For Hager, those moral and ethical issues all appear to revolve around sex: In both his medical practice and his advisory role at the FDA, his ardent evangelical piety anchors his staunch opposition to emergency contraception, abortion and premarital sex. Through his six books--which include such titles as Stress and the Woman's Body and As Jesus Cared for Women, self-help tomes that interweave syrupy Christian spirituality with paternalistic advice on women's health and relationships--he has established himself as a leading conservative Christian voice on women's health and sexuality.

CONTINUED BELOW
And because of his warm relationship with the Bush Administration, Hager has had the opportunity to see his ideas influence federal policy. In December 2003 the FDA advisory committee of which he is a member was asked to consider whether emergency contraception, known as Plan B, should be made available over the counter. Over Hager's dissent, the committee voted overwhelmingly to approve the change. But the FDA rejected its recommendation, a highly unusual and controversial decision in which Hager, The Nation has learned, played a key role. Hager's reappointment to the committee, which does not require Congressional approval, is expected this June, but Bush's nomination of Dr. Lester Crawford as FDA director has been bogged down in controversy over the issue of emergency contraception. Crawford was acting director throughout the Plan B debacle, and Senate Democrats, led by Hillary Clinton and Patty Murray, are holding up his nomination until the agency revisits its decision about going over the counter with the pill.

When Hager's nomination to the FDA was announced in the fall of 2002, his conservative Christian beliefs drew sharp criticism from Democrats and prochoice groups. David Limbaugh, the lesser light in the Limbaugh family and author of Persecution: How Liberals Are Waging Political War Against Christianity, said the left had subjected Hager to an "anti-Christian litmus test." Hager's valor in the face of this "religious profiling" earned him the praise and lasting support of evangelical Christians, including such luminaries as Charles Colson, Dr. James Dobson and Franklin Graham, son of the Rev. Billy Graham.

Back at Asbury, Hager cast himself as a victim of religious persecution in his sermon. "You see...there is a war going on in this country," he said gravely. "And I'm not speaking about the war in Iraq. It's a war being waged against Christians, particularly evangelical Christians. It wasn't my scientific record that came under scrutiny [at the FDA]. It was my faith.... By making myself available, God has used me to stand in the breach.... Just as he has used me, he can use you."

Up on the dais, several men seated behind Hager nodded solemnly in agreement. But out in the audience, Linda Carruth Davis--co-author with Hager of Stress and the Woman's Body, and, more saliently, his former wife of thirty-two years--was enraged. "It was the most disgusting thing I've ever heard," she recalled months later, through clenched teeth.

According to Davis, Hager's public moralizing on sexual matters clashed with his deplorable treatment of her during their marriage. Davis alleges that between 1995 and their divorce in 2002, Hager repeatedly sodomized her without her consent. Several sources on and off the record confirmed that she had told them it was the sexual and emotional abuse within their marriage that eventually forced her out. "I probably wouldn't have objected so much, or felt it was so abusive if he had just wanted normal [vaginal] sex all the time," she explained to me. "But it was the painful, invasive, totally nonconsensual nature of the [anal] sex that was so horrible."

Not once during the uproar over Hager's FDA appointment did any reporter solicit the opinion of the woman now known as Linda Davis--she remarried in November 2002 to James Davis, a Methodist minister, and relocated to southern Georgia--on her husband's record, even though she contributed to much of his self-help work in the Christian arena (she remains a religious and political conservative). She intermittently thought of telling her story but refrained, she says, out of respect for her adult children. It was Hager's sermon at Asbury last October that finally changed her mind. Davis was there to hear her middle son give a vocal performance; she was prepared to hear her ex-husband inveigh against secular liberals, but she was shocked to hear him speak about their divorce when he took to the pulpit.

"In early 2002," Hager told the churchgoers that day, "my world fell apart.... After thirty-two years of marriage, I was suddenly alone in a new home that we had built as our dream home. Time spent 'doing God's will' had kept me from spending the time I needed to nourish my marriage." Hager noted with pride that in his darkest hour, Focus on the Family estimated that 50 million people worldwide were praying for him.

CONTINUED BELOW
Linda Davis quietly fumed in her chair. "He had the gall to stand under the banner of holiness of the Lord and lie, by the sin of omission," she told me. "It's what he didn't say--it's the impression he left."

David Hager is not the fringe character and fundamentalist faith healer that some of his critics have made him out to be. In fact, he is a well-credentialed doctor. In Kentucky Hager has long been recognized as a leading Ob-Gyn at Lexington's Central Baptist Hospital and a faculty member at the University of Kentucky's medical school. And in the 1990s several magazines, including Modern Healthcare and Good Housekeeping, counted him among the best doctors for women in the nation.

Yet while Hager doesn't advocate the substitution of conservative Christianity for medicine, his religious ideology underlies an all-encompassing paternalism in his approach to his women patients. "Even though I was trained as a medical specialist," Hager explained in the preface to As Jesus Cared for Women, "it wasn't until I began to see how Jesus treated women that I understood how I, as a doctor, should treat them." To underscore this revelation, Hager recounted case after case in which he acted as confidant, spiritual adviser and even father figure to his grateful patients. As laid out in his writings, Hager's worldview is not informed by a sense of inherent equality between men and women. Instead, men are expected to act as benevolent authority figures for the women in their lives. (In one of his books, he refers to a man who raped his wife as "selfish" and "sinful.") But to model gender relations on the one Jesus had with his followers is to leave women dangerously exposed in the event that the men in their lives don't meet the high standard set by God Himself--trapped in a permanent state of dependence hoping to be treated well.

In tandem with his medical career, Hager has been an aggressive advocate for the political agenda of the Christian right. A member of Focus on the Family's Physician Resource Council and the Christian Medical and Dental Society, Hager assisted the Concerned Women for America in submitting a "Citizen's Petition" to the FDA in August 2002 to halt distribution and marketing of the abortion pill, RU-486. It was this record of conservative activism that ignited a firestorm when the Bush Administration first floated his name for chairman of the FDA's advisory committee in the fall of 2002. In the end, the FDA found a way to dodge the controversy: It issued a stealth announcement of Hager's appointment to the panel (to be one of eleven members, not chairman) on Christmas Eve. Liberals were furious that they weren't able to block his appointment. For many months afterward, an outraged chain letter alerting women to the appointment of a man with religious views "far outside the mainstream" snaked its way around the Internet, lending the whole episode the air of urban legend.

Back in Lexington, where the couple continued to live, Linda Hager, as she was still known at the time, was sinking into a deep depression, she says. Though her marriage had been dead for nearly a decade, she could not see her way clear to divorce; she had no money of her own and few marketable skills. But life with David Hager had grown unbearable. As his public profile increased, so did the tension in their home, which she says periodically triggered episodes of abuse. "I would be asleep," she recalls, "and since [the sodomy] was painful and threatening, I woke up. Sometimes I acquiesced once he had started, just to make it go faster, and sometimes I tried to push him off.... I would [confront] David later, and he would say, 'You asked me to do that,' and I would say, 'No, I never asked for it.'"


There are four more pages at the link, if you can stomach four more pages.

 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
So is it your opinion that sodomy is ok or is it a "sexual perversion"?

CsG

Did you read the OP? If you did I think even you can deduce the correct answer.

Forcing your wife to engage in non-consentual sodomy and using the resulting divorce in a sermon is about as perverted as one can get. Not to mention hypocritical. But I wouldn't expect you to understand.

 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
So is it your opinion that sodomy is ok or is it a "sexual perversion"?

CsG

Did you read the OP? If you did I think even you can deduce the correct answer.

Forcing your wife to engage in non-consentual sodomy and using the resulting divorce in a sermon is about as perverted as one can get. Not to mention hypocritical. But I wouldn't expect you to understand.

The force was alleged. However, I'm talking about the act of sodomy which you clearly called a sexual perversion. So is it a perversion or is it ok - sodomy that is.

CsG
 

EatSpam

Diamond Member
May 1, 2005
6,423
0
0
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
So is it your opinion that sodomy is ok or is it a "sexual perversion"?

CsG

Nonconsensual sodomy is rape, which is disgusting and should be punished.

Consensual sodomy is none of my business.
 

kogase

Diamond Member
Sep 8, 2004
5,213
0
0
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
However, I'm talking about the act of sodomy which you clearly called a sexual perversion.
CsG

To quote OP:

"Not at the 'activities' themselves but at the absolute depraved hypocrisy of a person who would abuse their wife this way then have the nerve to stand in the pulpit and use the resulting divorce which was caused by his own sexual perversions, as a prop in a sermon."

BBond mentions nothing of sodomy there.

However, to quote his response to your first post:

"Forcing your wife to engage in non-consentual sodomy and using the resulting divorce in a sermon is about as perverted as one can get."

He clearly did not state that sodomy was a perversion in his OP, and then clearly clarified what he meant by "sexual perversion" in his response. In fact, you could have simply reread what he said, rather than have somebody come along and quote something for you from the very thread we are now talking in! Sheesh.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Cad has to distinguish between forced sodomy and consensual sodomy. I think BBond was saying forced sodomy was the perversion.
 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
I think it's very clear and I think "csg" only brought up this canard to keep the focus off of the serial hypocrisy of the "religious" right.

 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Cad has to distinguish between forced sodomy and consensual sodomy. I think BBond was saying forced sodomy was the perversion.


Again, the "forced" part is only alleged, but ofcourse people will run with that and believe it no matter what.

So with the forced part only being alleged - what sexual perversion is there? None? If there is none, then what is the deal? Just an excuse to whine about religious people? Figures.

CsG
 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Cad has to distinguish between forced sodomy and consensual sodomy. I think BBond was saying forced sodomy was the perversion.

Clearly "bbond" would have answered my question in such a fashion if that were the case. He did not.

Again, the "forced" part is only alleged, but ofcourse people will run with that and believe it no matter what.

CsG

"I would be asleep," she recalls, "and since [the sodomy] was painful and threatening, I woke up. Sometimes I acquiesced once he had started, just to make it go faster, and sometimes I tried to push him off.... I would [confront] David later, and he would say, 'You asked me to do that,' and I would say, 'No, I never asked for it.'"

Alleged? What are you going to say next? The same thing her "husband" said? The same thing rapists have said since there have been rapists?

SHE ASKED FOR IT!!!

That is sheer depravity.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: BBond
"I would be asleep," she recalls, "and since [the sodomy] was painful and threatening, I woke up. Sometimes I acquiesced once he had started, just to make it go faster, and sometimes I tried to push him off.... I would [confront] David later, and he would say, 'You asked me to do that,' and I would say, 'No, I never asked for it.'"

Alleged? What are you going to say next? The same thing her "husband" said? The same thing rapists have said since there have been rapists?

SHE ASKED FOR IT!!!

That is sheer depravity.

So it's a he said/she said thing.

*shrug*

CsG
 

kogase

Diamond Member
Sep 8, 2004
5,213
0
0
It is simply alleged at this point, and will remain so unless some... conclusive evidence is presented. It's enough to sully his reputation at any rate, especially unless anyone can demonstrate that this woman has any motivation to slander him.

Of course, none of this changes the fact that BBond was referring to "forced sodomy" as the sexual perversion rather than simply "sodomy".
 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: BBond
"I would be asleep," she recalls, "and since [the sodomy] was painful and threatening, I woke up. Sometimes I acquiesced once he had started, just to make it go faster, and sometimes I tried to push him off.... I would [confront] David later, and he would say, 'You asked me to do that,' and I would say, 'No, I never asked for it.'"

Alleged? What are you going to say next? The same thing her "husband" said? The same thing rapists have said since there have been rapists?

SHE ASKED FOR IT!!!

That is sheer depravity.

So it's a he said/she said thing.

*shrug*

CsG

You are simply devoid of any acceptance of fact. You do it with Iraq. You do it with Social Security. And you're doing it again here.

Why bother?
 

Riprorin

Banned
Apr 25, 2000
9,634
0
0
"I would be asleep," she recalls, "and since [the sodomy] was painful and threatening, I woke up. Sometimes I acquiesced once he had started, just to make it go faster, and sometimes I tried to push him off

Huh? Can someone explain how this is physically possible.

 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
Honestly, read how long these people were married. This woman is by all accounts what some people would refer to as "a good Christian woman".

THEY GOT DIVORCED!

Do you think she took that lightly? Do you think she made this all up? Or do you believe the rapist's story about spending so much time doing God's work that his he neglected his family and lost his happy home?

Ridiculous.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: BBond
"I would be asleep," she recalls, "and since [the sodomy] was painful and threatening, I woke up. Sometimes I acquiesced once he had started, just to make it go faster, and sometimes I tried to push him off.... I would [confront] David later, and he would say, 'You asked me to do that,' and I would say, 'No, I never asked for it.'"

Alleged? What are you going to say next? The same thing her "husband" said? The same thing rapists have said since there have been rapists?

SHE ASKED FOR IT!!!

That is sheer depravity.

So it's a he said/she said thing.

*shrug*

CsG

You are simply devoid of any acceptance of fact. You do it with Iraq. You do it with Social Security. And you're doing it again here.

Why bother?

What "fact" am I missing "bbond"? That's right, the only fact that's missing is you not understanding that the forced part is only alleged. But hey, with your track record of presenting "facts" - it's not surprising you try to present this situation as fact.

BTW - I think the whole situation is disgusting - regardless of wether or not the sodomy was forced.

CsG
 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
Originally posted by: Riprorin
"I would be asleep," she recalls, "and since [the sodomy] was painful and threatening, I woke up. Sometimes I acquiesced once he had started, just to make it go faster, and sometimes I tried to push him off

Huh? Can someone explain how this is physically possible.

Maybe that's why she said, "TRIED to push him off"??? :confused:
 

kogase

Diamond Member
Sep 8, 2004
5,213
0
0
Originally posted by: Riprorin
"I would be asleep," she recalls, "and since [the sodomy] was painful and threatening, I woke up. Sometimes I acquiesced once he had started, just to make it go faster, and sometimes I tried to push him off

Huh? Can someone explain how this is physically possible.


Well, there are several different sexual positions that modern sexual deviants make regular use of.

The most well known of these is the "missionary position", in which the man and woman lie facing each other, breast to breast. I believe that is a misnomer however, and that the only good, Christian position is the following...

Doggy style, so named because dogs mate in this fashion. The man thrusts from a position behind the kneeling or prostrate woman. I belive that all God fearing couples should make exclusive use of this position, as one can observe from our natural surroundings that not only dogs, but all beasts mate in this fashion. Therefore, one can only assume that this is the natural position for the animal known as "man" as well.

There are hundreds, perhaps thousands of other positions, but I have neither the time nor expertise to go into them here. However, if we consider the first position (missionary) we can readily see how the bottom could push the top off (or attempt). With the second position (doggy style) it becomes a little more complex. However, one must assume that somebody who is sleeping will not be in an optimal position necessary to initiate the doggy style sexual position. Therefore, one must assume that the position used in most cases would be "missionary", or a variant, and the possibility therefore for the bottom to push the top away is clearly present.
 

Riprorin

Banned
Apr 25, 2000
9,634
0
0
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: Riprorin
"I would be asleep," she recalls, "and since [the sodomy] was painful and threatening, I woke up. Sometimes I acquiesced once he had started, just to make it go faster, and sometimes I tried to push him off

Huh? Can someone explain how this is physically possible.

Maybe that's why she said, "TRIED to push him off"??? :confused:

She alleging that he's entering her from the rear and she's "pushing him off"?

Again, HUH?
 

Riprorin

Banned
Apr 25, 2000
9,634
0
0
Originally posted by: kogase
Originally posted by: Riprorin
"I would be asleep," she recalls, "and since [the sodomy] was painful and threatening, I woke up. Sometimes I acquiesced once he had started, just to make it go faster, and sometimes I tried to push him off

Huh? Can someone explain how this is physically possible.


Well, there are several different sexual positions that modern sexual deviants make regular use of.

The most well known of these is the "missionary position", in which the man and woman lie facing each other, breast to breast. I believe that is a misnomer however, and that the only good, Christian position is the following...

Doggy style, so named because dogs mate in this fashion. The man thrusts from a position behind the kneeling or prostrate woman. I belive that all God fearing couples should make exclusive use of this position, as one can observe from our natural surroundings that not only dogs, but all beasts mate in this fashion. Therefore, one can only assume that this is the natural position for the animal known as "man" as well.

There are hundreds, perhaps thousands of other positions, but I have neither the time nor expertise to go into them here. However, if we consider the first position (missionary) we can readily see how the bottom could push the top off (or attempt). With the second position (doggy style) it becomes a little more complex. However, one must assume that somebody who is sleeping will not be in an optimal position necessary to initiate the doggy style sexual position. Therefore, one must assume that the position used in most cases would be "missionary", or a variant, and the possibility therefore for the bottom to push the top away is clearly present.

"I would be asleep," she recalls, "and since [the sodomy] was painful and threatening, I woke up. Sometimes I acquiesced once he had started, just to make it go faster, and sometimes I tried to push him off

So he got on top of her in the missionary position and she didn't wake up until he entered her anally?

And you buy that?
 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
Maybe she was sleeping on her stomach and he snuck in from behind while she was sleeping awakening her (I would imagine) then she would turn at the waist and attempt to push him off with her forearm. That's one scenario.

Why don't you address the "meat" of the article, so to speak? Why was this hypocritical abuser doing this to his wife against her will then trying to tell her she asked for it? Sounds like a really screwed up puppy to me.

Maybe he was afraid to go out and find someone who would fulfill his desires consentually. Maybe he was afraid he'd wind up like Jerry Baker of that other guy, you know, "I HAVE SIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNED!"

What's his name? The other hypocrite?
 

kogase

Diamond Member
Sep 8, 2004
5,213
0
0
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Again, HUH?

No idea. Some people are heavy sleepers. I could link you to some more enlightening descriptions (including pictures) to better help you understand the possibilities, but I have a feeling that would be against some kind of rule here...
 

Riprorin

Banned
Apr 25, 2000
9,634
0
0
Originally posted by: BBond
Maybe she was sleeping on her stomach and he snuck in from behind while she was sleeping awakening her (I would imagine) then she would turn at the waist and attempt to push him off with her forearm. That's one scenario.

So she's lying face down and he's on top of her entering her anally and she's pushing him off?

Uh huh.

 

kogase

Diamond Member
Sep 8, 2004
5,213
0
0
Originally posted by: BBond
Maybe she was sleeping on her stomach and he snuck in from behind while she was sleeping awakening her (I would imagine) then she would turn at the waist and attempt to push him off with her forearm. That's one scenario.

Why don't you address the "meat" of the article, so to speak? Why was this hypocritical abuser doing this to his wife against her will then trying to tell her she asked for it? Sounds like a really screwed up puppy to me.

Maybe he was afraid to go out and find someone who would fulfill his desires consentually. Maybe he was afraid he'd wind up like Jerry Baker of that other guy, you know, "I HAVE SIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNED!"

What's his name? The other hypocrite?

Grahaha, that really made me laugh. Right Here!
 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Originally posted by: BBond
Maybe she was sleeping on her stomach and he snuck in from behind while she was sleeping awakening her (I would imagine) then she would turn at the waist and attempt to push him off with her forearm. That's one scenario.

So she's lying face down and he's on top of her entering her anally and she's pushing him off?

Uh huh.

again for those too thick to comprehend -- that's why she said TRIED ;)

why don't you stop obfuscating and address the real issue here???