Dr. Hager's Family Values

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Try impossible.

You push somone when they're facing you, not whne they are behind you.

Leave it to you to try and defend a sodomizing rapist just because he's a Religious Wing Nut like yourself.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: kogase

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!

Tom DeLay pulled something similar the other day.

Many of these self-righteous right-wingers are sexual deviants. Remember the Franklin Cover up?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Lay on floor face down on your stomach and see how much you can bend at your waist

Ever watch Cops?

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
So is it your opinion that sodomy is ok or is it a "sexual perversion"?

CsG

So it is your opinion that anally raping your wife is "OK"?

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

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

The "sexual perversion" is forcing yourself on your wife - raping her - I would have thought.

Odd that you focus on the sodomy aspect, and appear to overlook or escuse the rape.

 

[aidanjm]

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.

What do you mean? Of course it is physically possible.

 

[aidanjm]

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

Well, sure. And so you need to assess the credibility of the wife, versus the husband.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

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"???

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

Again, HUH?

If someone is fvcking you up the a$$, you don't suddenly lose mobility in your upper body. if she was lying on her stomach, with him on top of her (on her back), pinning her down, she would be able to reach her arms behind her back to try and push him off. Of course, from that position/ angle, she would not be able to leverage much strength at all.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: Riprorin
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?

I buy it.

 

[aidanjm]

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.

I don't find anything it hard to believe, I find it perfectly plausible, I've been in that exact situation on occasion myself.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Try impossible.

You push somone when they're facing you, not whne they are behind you.

Leave it to you to try and defend a sodomizing rapist just because he's a Religious Wing Nut like yourself.

There are no facts here, just allegations and the woman's statements don't make any sense.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

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

Well, sure. And so you need to assess the credibility of the wife, versus the husband.

It's physically impossible to push someone off you when they're behind you. You push someone one when they're in front of you. The woman's statements aren't credible.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: Riprorin

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"???

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

Again, HUH?

If someone is fvcking you up the a$$, you don't suddenly lose mobility in your upper body. if she was lying on her stomach, with him on top of her (on her back), pinning her down, she would be able to reach her arms behind her back to try and push him off. Of course, from that position/ angle, she would not be able to leverage much strength at all.

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

Uh huh.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Try impossible.

You push somone when they're facing you, not whne they are behind you.

Leave it to you to try and defend a sodomizing rapist just because he's a Religious Wing Nut like yourself.

There are no facts here, just allegations and the woman's statements don't make any sense.

No you are just defending a sodomizing rapist because you have the same beliefs as him. Religion, especially in your case, makes for strange bedfellows.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Try impossible.

You push somone when they're facing you, not whne they are behind you.

Leave it to you to try and defend a sodomizing rapist just because he's a Religious Wing Nut like yourself.

There are no facts here, just allegations and the woman's statements don't make any sense.

No you are just defending a sodomizing rapist because you have the same beliefs as him. Religion, especially in your case, makes for strange bedfellows.

I hadn't even heard of his before this thread and I have no idea what he believes.

I don know that the woman's statements don't make any sense.

Show me the proof that he's a sodomizing rapist.

Look at other articles by this author. She had a penchant for bashing Evangelicals.

If you're gullible enough to believe everything you read without critical thought or analysis, be my guest.

 

[conjur]

Exactly, Red. Rip sees nothing wrong with the MAN raping his wife up the ass. Women are inferior objects and only serve as temptations. But, then again, Rip prefers the man-sex but just won't admit it.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: conjur
Exactly, Red. Rip sees nothing wrong with the MAN raping his wife up the ass. Women are inferior objects and only serve as temptations. But, then again, Rip prefers the man-sex but just won't admit it.

Of course there's something wrong with it, if it's true.

The woman's statements don't stand up scrutiny so I seriously question her allegations.

Can we stay on topic here and dispense with the personal attacks?

 

[conjur]

Here's more on Hager's "values":

Sometime between the births of Neal and Jonathan, Hager embarked on an affair with a Bible-study classmate who was a friend of Davis's. A close friend of Davis's remembers her calling long distance when she found out: "She was angry and distraught, like any woman with two children would be. But she was committed to working it out."

Money was an explosive issue in their household. Hager kept an iron grip on the family purse strings. Initially the couple's single checking account was in Hager's name only, which meant that Davis had to appeal to her husband for cash, she says. Eventually he relented and opened a dual account. Davis recalls that Hager would return home every evening and make a beeline for his office to balance the checkbook, often angrily summoning her to account for the money she'd spent that day. Brenda Bartella Peterson, Davis's friend of twenty-five years and her neighbor at the time, witnessed Hager berate his wife in their kitchen after one such episode. For her part, Davis set out to subvert Hager's financial dominance with profligate spending on credit cards opened in her own name. "I was not willing to face reality about money," she admits. "I thought, 'Well, money can't buy happiness, but it buys the kind of misery you can learn to live with.'"

These financial atmospherics undoubtedly figured into Linda's willingness to accept payment for sex. But eventually her conscience caught up with her. "Finally...I said, 'You know, David, this is like being a prostitute. I just can't do this anymore; I don't think it's healthy for our relationship,'" she recalls.

"My sense is that he saw [my narcolepsy] as an opportunity," Davis surmises. Sometimes she fought Hager off and he would quit for a while, only to circle back later that same night; at other times, "the most expedient thing was to try and somehow get it [over with]. In order to keep any peace, I had to maintain the illusion of being available to him." At still other moments, she says, she attempted to avoid Hager's predatory advances in various ways--for example, by sleeping in other rooms in the house, or by struggling to stay awake until Hager was in a deep sleep himself. But, she says, nothing worked. One of Davis's lifelong confidantes remembers when Davis first told her about the abuse. "[Linda] was very angry and shaken," she recalled.

As Hager began fielding calls from the White House personnel office in 2001, the stress in the household--and, with it, the abuse--hit an all-time high, according to Davis. She says she confronted her husband on numerous occasions: "[I said to him,] 'Every time you do this, I hate your guts. And it blows a bridge out between us that takes weeks, if not months, to heal.'" She says that Hager would, in rare instances, admit what he had done and apologize, but typically would deny it altogether.

According to the Kentucky Supreme Court's decision in 1992 in Yarnell v. Commonwealth, a climate of abuse involving "constant emotional, verbal, and physical duress" is tantamount to forcible compulsion. In that case, the victims submitted to the sex acts to avoid a loss of financial security, as well as to maintain peace in the household.

As it turned out, when the dust settled after their divorce, nearly everyone in the Hagers' Christian and medical circles in Lexington had sided with Hager, who told people that his wife was mentally unstable and had moved in with another man (she moved in with friends).

No wonder Rip and other extremists love this guy so much. Keep that b*tch back in her cave where she belongs!

 

[Riprorin]

Was everything that your wife said about during your divorce accuarate?

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: kogase

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.

Jesus, Jesus, you really are grasping at straws here. Do I really have to link a bunch of intraweb pr0n for you before you get it? I dunno how to explain this to you really, because I have no idea what sort of concepts of sexuality run through your mind...

Riprorin only knows about sex because its mentioned in the bible, otherwise, he's asexual.

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: BBond
What a hypocritical self righteous POS this clown Hager is. Fits right in with the Bush administration.

You're clearly willing to suspend disbelief to make that statement based on the woman's own non-sensical statements.

I'm sure there are a lot of other lemmings who will do the same.

So you're saying its not possible, ever, to be anally raped. Tell that to the "b*tches" in prison.

 

[Riprorin]

I never said that.

 

[BarneyFife]

You ever notice how rip is real into anal sex whether it is by a rapist or by homos? He's such a pervert.

 

[Riprorin]

I see that the trolls are out in force.

 

[Jhhnn]

Hager's alleged sexual proclivities aside, the whole problem with Fundie "science" is that it functions on a level that's pre-Galilean. For guys like him, faith defines and limits science, rather than vice-versa. His stance wrt emergency contraception isn't scientific, at all, but emotional, based on his religious beliefs.

The safety of the medication isn't really in question, even though he claims, and may even believe that's the reasons for his objections. His headset is illustrative of how science was set back for hundreds of years, and why many scientists question the results of any so-called Christian scientists- their conclusions are often twisted by faith, purely ontological in character.

It's kinda like quoting a DEA sponsored study on the merits of Cannabis legalization- the conclusion is foregone, and everybody involved knows that, but they'll lend their "credentials" to anything that reinforces their belief structure. Research becomes a tool in pursuit of a predetermined outcome, the authors merely self-righteous grant whores...

As for the whole "war" routine, modern fundies flip it over rather nicely, claiming tha they are the victims, when, in truth, it was they who have made the declaration with their assault on secular government... Secularists aren't trying to tell them how to worship, but they are trying to tell the rest of us how to run the country...