Linda's employment post 3ABN, and other miscellaneous issues Options

[BrotherBill]

Also, your last point involved efforts to keep Linda from seeking employment (you did say seeking, but to clarify - do you mean seeking or gaining). Isn't she continuing with her musical ministry? Of course 3ABN claims they haven't stood in her way of pursuing her ministry or gaining employment. To date, what employment has she lost as a direct result of 3ABN stepping in the way and keeping her from seeking employment.

- fallible

She has been kept from speaking in a great number of Churches. In my own, our Pastor was told by the Conference that she could not speak. I don't know the specifics in the others as to why she was told she could not speak. The same is true for camp meetings.

[PrincessDrRe]

Linda was not permitted legal counsel if she wanted any kind of severence package. It was handled differently. The gag order is not over. As to Linda's willingness to sign documents, she did. Were there extenuating circumstances? Yes. Remember, she was also being divorced at the time.

...and if she wanted any money to live on she had to sign.

[Fstpicker]

She has been kept from speaking in a great number of Churches. In my own, our Pastor was told by the Conference that she could not speak. I don't know the specifics in the others as to why she was told she could not speak. The same is true for camp meetings.

I don't fully understand why she is not allowed to speak. What are some possible reasons that would explain this? As an outsider who has no access to any "inside" information into their thinking in this, other than on this forum, here are some possible reasons that I can think of right now:

1) They are afraid of what she might say when she has an audience that could be negative about them or at least not exactly positive.

2) They don't want her to build an "audience" of supporters and/or her sphere of influence by any means, and therefore don't want to give her a platform in which she could do it.

3) They feel that she should not be allowed to speak because she is a sinner (an adulterous) and at fault here, and they (sinners) should have no voice or power in the church.

4) They feel that as a part of, or a side effect of her gag order, that she shouldn't be allowed to speak up front...that this was included (of which it was not if I understand the "gag" order correctly).

Can't think of any other reason right now. What do you guys think could be some possible reasons?

And thanks for the welcome! I've been reading posts and posts and posts for almost 2 weeks now, trying to absorb all of it and make sense of it all. Some things have become clearer to me, but others are still in the process.

Fstpicker

This post has been edited by Fstpicker: Aug 22 2006, 03:07 AM

[PrincessDrRe]

I don't fully understand why she is not allowed to speak. What are some possible reasons that would explain this? As an outsider who has no access to any "inside" information into their thinking in this, other than on this forum, here are some possible reasons that I can think of right now:

1) They are afraid of what she might say when she has an audience that could be negative about them or at least not exactly positive.

2) They don't want her to build an "audience" of supporters and/or her sphere of influence by any means, and therefore don't want to give her a platform in which she could do it.

3) They feel that she should not be allowed to speak because she is a sinner (an adulterous) and at fault here, and they (sinners) should have no voice or power in the church.

4) They feel that as a part of, or a side effect of her gag order, that she shouldn't be allowed to speak up front...that this was included (of which it was not if I understand the "gag" order correctly).

Can't think of any other reason right now. What do you guys think could be some possible reasons?

And thanks for the welcome! I've been reading posts and posts and posts for almost 2 weeks now, trying to absorb all of it and make sense of it all. Some things have become clearer to me, but others are still in the process.

Jeff

Excellent points - and again...that's all we want here - we want people to honestly read everything before formulating an opinion either here or there...then be able to discuss both sides.

You keep on a readin'...and any questions you ask will be answered - as long as you don't have a problem with others asking you questions too ...... We like to use a quote here...."This ain't Sabbath School - we listen here!" - and it is true. We (the collective of BSDA) do listen and enjoy dialogue, asking questions, and answering questions.

[Panama_Pete]

She has been kept from speaking in a great number of Churches. In my own, our Pastor was told by the Conference that she could not speak. I don't know the specifics in the others as to why she was told she could not speak. The same is true for camp meetings.

One can imagine what the Seventh-day Adventist conferences must have been told about Linda Shelton for them to respond that way.

To me, that sort of sounds like that "P" word that's been floating around here.

What was it? Persecution?

[lurker]

I don't fully understand why she is not allowed to speak. What are some possible reasons that would explain this? As an outsider who has no access to any "inside" information into their thinking in this, other than on this forum, here are some possible reasons that I can think of right now:

1) They are afraid of what she might say when she has an audience that could be negative about them or at least not exactly positive.

2) They don't want her to build an "audience" of supporters and/or her sphere of influence by any means, and therefore don't want to give her a platform in which she could do it.

3) They feel that she should not be allowed to speak because she is a sinner (an adulterous) and at fault here, and they (sinners) should have no voice or power in the church.

4) They feel that as a part of, or a side effect of her gag order, that she shouldn't be allowed to speak up front...that this was included (of which it was not if I understand the "gag" order correctly).

Can't think of any other reason right now. What do you guys think could be some possible reasons?

And thanks for the welcome! I've been reading posts and posts and posts for almost 2 weeks now, trying to absorb all of it and make sense of it all. Some things have become clearer to me, but others are still in the process.

Jeff

Sure I can think of a reason. If Linda is in a visible place of service in the church, it will become apparent that she is not "shacking up somewhere with the doctor" but is living a chaste christian life.

[calvin]

I don't fully understand why she is not allowed to speak. What are some possible reasons that would explain this? As an outsider who has no access to any "inside" information into their thinking in this, other than on this forum, here are some possible reasons that I can think of right now:

1) They are afraid of what she might say when she has an audience that could be negative about them or at least not exactly positive.

2) They don't want her to build an "audience" of supporters and/or her sphere of influence by any means, and therefore don't want to give her a platform in which she could do it.

3) They feel that she should not be allowed to speak because she is a sinner (an adulterous) and at fault here, and they (sinners) should have no voice or power in the church.

4) They feel that as a part of, or a side effect of her gag order, that she shouldn't be allowed to speak up front...that this was included (of which it was not if I understand the "gag" order correctly).

Can't think of any other reason right now. What do you guys think could be some possible reasons?

And thanks for the welcome! I've been reading posts and posts and posts for almost 2 weeks now, trying to absorb all of it and make sense of it all. Some things have become clearer to me, but others are still in the process.

Jeff

Another reason is that this is a routine business practice corporations require as a condition for a severance package with executives that are dismissed for cause or without cause. Corporations don’t want the distraction of dealing with a possible disgruntled ex-employee that could have damaging or embarrassing truthful information but also out of vengeance can spread untruths. 3ABN is just using what leverage it has to protect its name and business interest, nothing unethical in that, I would expect any business to do the same.

Linda did not have to take the money. If she felt if was more important to talk, then she could have done what the rest of have to do when we loose a job. Go and get another one. Don’t mean to make light of the situation. It is unfortunate for anyone to loose there job especially a business that you helped create. But that is business and those are always the risk. Can’t feel too too sorry for somebody that walks away with two years of salary as severance payment.

I don’t buy the story that Linda was prohibited to have an independent legal counsel. This is a free country, you can talk to anybody.

As I have said before about 1,000 post ago; Linda severance/gag order and the jet plane make for weak petty arguments against 3abn.

[Uncle Sam]

Another reason is that this is a routine business practice corporations require as a condition for a severance package with executives that are dismissed for cause or without cause. Corporations don’t want the distraction of dealing with a possible disgruntled ex-employee that could have damaging or embarrassing truthful information but also out of vengeance can spread untruths. 3ABN is just using what leverage it has to protect its name and business interest, nothing unethical in that, I would expect any business to do the same.

Linda did not have to take the money. If she felt if was more important to talk, then she could have done what the rest of have to do when we loose a job. Go and get another one. Don’t mean to make light of the situation. It is unfortunate for anyone to loose there job especially a business that you helped create. But that is business and those are always the risk. Can’t feel too too sorry for somebody that walks away with two years of salary as severance payment.

I don’t buy the story that Linda was prohibited to have an independent legal counsel. This is a free country, you can talk to anybody.

As I have said before about 1,000 post ago; Linda severance/gag order and the jet plane make for weak petty arguments against 3abn.

I don't understand why everybody is so against 3ABN and Danny's lifestyle and pro Linda. Did she not have the same perks that Danny has/had? Did she not have the jet, house, etc? I have issues with how things were handled with Linda and the divorce. Now that Danny is taking a some time off to "soul search" does that make a difference to anyone? What if anything can he do to make things right?

[sister]

Sure I can think of a reason. If Linda is in a visible place of service in the church, it will become apparent that she is not "shacking up somewhere with the doctor" but is living a chaste christian life.

Good point Lurker! As recently as the last few months rumors have been circulated that Linda is wearing a large diamond ring given to her by “the Doctor”. Of course this is easy to verify and has no shred of truth in it. Interesting, when the rumor mill is traced to it’s original source, it is none other than Danny Shelton. As long as there is a gag order silencing Linda and she is kept from public ministry, the desired effect is for people to believe that every accusation Danny has made against Linda is true and that is why she is banned from speaking appointments within the SDA chruch. That of course is false reasoning, based upon the fact that both the accusations and the mandate to remove Linda from ministry in the SDA church comes from the same source: Danny Shelton.

A little background for this situation: When Linda moved to Springfield Illinois the man filling in as interim pastor was Lee Grady, a retired SDA pastor in good standing. Lee Grady had also worked at 3ABN in the pastoral department and was a member of the Thompsonville church. The reason Pastor Grady originally came to 3ABN was to support the ministry where his son, Scott, worked as a director. (Since leaving 3ABN Scott and his family are working in ministry with David Gates in South America, having grown up as the child of missionary parents, Scott is fluent in Spanish.) Pastor Grady took a stance against Danny Shelton on a certain issue and for refusing to acquiesce to Danny, that was the end of his service in the Pastoral Department. Sooner or later every SDA pastor with a conscience grounded in the Word of God has a similar experience with Danny.

When Linda arrived in Springfield Pastor Grady, a man of experience with both 3ABN and the SDA church, had no difficulty with Linda’s involvement in the ministry of the church. Of course one can only imagine the result this had on Danny. This resulted in the associate pastor, John Stanton, from the Thompsonville church (Danny’s 3ABN church) and also an on air personality, quickly being dispatched to replace Pastor Grady in Springfield. One of Stanton’s first duties was to remove Linda Shelton from functioning in any position in the Springfield SDA church other than pew warming. He claimed the authority to do so came directly from Ken Denslow, the Illinois Conference President.

This is where the story become interesting: what possible reason would Ken Denslow have for this action? Linda was neither under church discipline or disfellowshiped from the church where her membership was held. She had caused no problems in the Springfield church and was accepted by the local congregation and the pastor where she now resided. Well, lets look a little closer at Ken Denslow’s relationship with 3ABN: he is a member of their board, his parents are full-time volunteers who spend their time traveling around the country promoting 3ABN (recently Danny has given them a beautiful brand new RV for their travels. This does not exactly make him an independent observer in this situation.

I am sure, if contacted, Pastor Grady would be willing to confirm the situation in Springfield. And could give addtional first person tsetimony in regard to 3ABN.

Lurker you’ve hit the nail on the head. Considering this background, your explanation is by far the most plausible.

[sonshineonme]

Another reason is that this is a routine business practice corporations require as a condition for a severance package with executives that are dismissed for cause or without cause. Corporations don’t want the distraction of dealing with a possible disgruntled ex-employee that could have damaging or embarrassing truthful information but also out of vengeance can spread untruths. 3ABN is just using what leverage it has to protect its name and business interest, nothing unethical in that, I would expect any business to do the same.

Linda did not have to take the money. If she felt if was more important to talk, then she could have done what the rest of have to do when we loose a job. Go and get another one. Don’t mean to make light of the situation. It is unfortunate for anyone to loose there job especially a business that you helped create. But that is business and those are always the risk. Can’t feel too too sorry for somebody that walks away with two years of salary as severance payment.

I don’t buy the story that Linda was prohibited to have an independent legal counsel. This is a free country, you can talk to anybody.

As I have said before about 1,000 post ago; Linda severance/gag order and the jet plane make for weak petty arguments against 3abn.

I long for the day Calvin, when you can know the why's of why things were done the way they were. I can tell you that you can't think in "normal" terms with regard to this situation. I know that if it were known, it would no longer be seen as "petty arguments".

I know, it's just my words, but, it's just isn't as simple as you state. Now, hind sight?? I'm sure she would go back and redo things - but then again, if you understand emotional abuse, pressure and more pressure and MORE PRESSURE, along with fear, control and more of same, you can see why a person would not think "normal" in an "abnormal" situation. Things happened VERY fast, and in a shocking manner. It's called "railroaded". When it's all happening, you are in shock as well as everything coming at you - shutting you out and closing you in all at once.

And Uncle Sam,
What people are against is the misleading way that things are "alluded" too from the 3abn menagerie. Though I am not God, and thank goodness for that, I have my SERIOUS doubts that Danny is doing soul searching. It's called, lay low, regroup, not show the stress to the whole world that your world is coming in on you and some serious change is about to occur. I'm sure he thinks, and probably got it on good "advice" that if you are out of the immediate picture, people will somehow stop thinking about you and your true deeds coming out. Out of sight, out of mind thinking. As if there are people that actually are minipulated this way (who'd of thought??!!).

Good point Lurker! As recently as the last few months rumors have been circulated that Linda is wearing a large diamond ring given to her by “the Doctor”. Of course this is easy to verify and has no shred of truth in it. Interesting, when the rumor mill is traced to it’s original source, it is none other than Danny Shelton. As long as there is a gag order silencing Linda and she is kept from public ministry, the desired effect is for people to believe that every accusation Danny has made against Linda is true and that is why she is banned from speaking appointments within the SDA chruch. That of course is false reasoning, based upon the fact that both the accusations and the mandate to remove Linda from ministry in the SDA church comes from the same source: Danny Shelton.

A little background for this situation: When Linda moved to Springfield Illinois the man filling in as interim pastor was Lee Grady, a retired SDA pastor in good standing. Lee Grady had also worked at 3ABN in the pastoral department and was a member of the Thompsonville church. The reason Pastor Grady originally came to 3ABN was to support the ministry where his son, Scott, worked as a director. (Since leaving 3ABN Scott and his family are working in ministry with David Gates in South America, having grown up as the child of missionary parents, Scott is fluent in Spanish.) Pastor Grady took a stance against Danny Shelton on a certain issue and for refusing to acquiesce to Danny, that was the end of his service in the Pastoral Department. Sooner or later every SDA pastor with a conscience grounded in the Word of God has a similar experience with Danny.

When Linda arrived in Springfield Pastor Grady, a man of experience with both 3ABN and the SDA church, had no difficulty with Linda’s involvement in the ministry of the church. Of course one can only imagine the result this had on Danny. This resulted in the associate pastor, John Stanton, from the Thompsonville church (Danny’s 3ABN church) and also an on air personality, quickly being dispatched to replace Pastor Grady in Springfield. One of Stanton’s first duties was to remove Linda Shelton from functioning in any position in the Springfield SDA church other than pew warming. He claimed the authority to do so came directly from Ken Denslow, the Illinois Conference President.

This is where the story become interesting: what possible reason would Ken Denslow have for this action? Linda was neither under church discipline or disfellowshiped from the church where her membership was held. She had caused no problems in the Springfield church and was accepted by the local congregation and the pastor where she now resided. Well, lets look a little closer at Ken Denslow’s relationship with 3ABN: he is a member of their board, his parents are full-time volunteers who spend their time traveling around the country promoting 3ABN (recently Danny has given them a beautiful brand new RV for their travels. This does not exactly make him an independent observer in this situation.

I am sure, if contacted, Pastor Grady would be willing to confirm the situation in Springfield. And could give addtional first person tsetimony in regard to 3ABN.

Lurker you’ve hit the nail on the head. Considering this background, your explanation is by far the most plausible.

Now, where is fallible human being when you need him-slash-her??

[BrotherBill]

I don't fully understand why she is not allowed to speak. What are some possible reasons that would explain this? As an outsider who has no access to any "inside" information into their thinking in this, other than on this forum, here are some possible reasons that I can think of right now:

1) They are afraid of what she might say when she has an audience that could be negative about them or at least not exactly positive.

2) They don't want her to build an "audience" of supporters and/or her sphere of influence by any means, and therefore don't want to give her a platform in which she could do it.

3) They feel that she should not be allowed to speak because she is a sinner (an adulterous) and at fault here, and they (sinners) should have no voice or power in the church.

4) They feel that as a part of, or a side effect of her gag order, that she shouldn't be allowed to speak up front...that this was included (of which it was not if I understand the "gag" order correctly).

Can't think of any other reason right now. What do you guys think could be some possible reasons?

And thanks for the welcome! I've been reading posts and posts and posts for almost 2 weeks now, trying to absorb all of it and make sense of it all. Some things have become clearer to me, but others are still in the process.

Jeff

3 ABN has been, and continues to minimize Linda because Danny has clearly defined the sides. You are either with him, or against him. The moment he decided he was done with Linda, she was the enemy and did not deserve to have a job. If Linda were able to speak, the truth might would come out while she still had the following she did. Now, the truth is coming out, but her supporters have been bombarded for 2 + years with one side of the story.

Her gag order did not prohibit Linda from speaking at any meeting, convention, or other function. She just was not allowed to speak negatively about 3ABN. However, she has been prohibited from speaking just the same, presumably because of the assumption of what she would say.

One can imagine what the Seventh-day Adventist conferences must have been told about Linda Shelton for them to respond that way.

To me, that sort of sounds like that "P" word that's been floating around here.

What was it? Persecution?

Frankly, I have not seen the documentation from the Conferences, but all of the Pastors in my conference got one that suggested she was too controversial to have speak at the Churches. Of course, probably more consequential is the number of average SDA's who get 3ABN, watch it all the time, and assume she is guilty of adultery. They just don't know any better, and they will not let her come to the Church either.

[sonshineonme]

3 ABN has been, and continues to minimize Linda because Danny has clearly defined the sides. You are either with him, or against him. The moment he decided he was done with Linda, she was the enemy and did not deserve to have a job. If Linda were able to speak, the truth might would come out while she still had the following she did. Now, the truth is coming out, but her supporters have been bombarded for 2 + years with one side of the story.

Her gag order did not prohibit Linda from speaking at any meeting, convention, or other function. She just was not allowed to speak negatively about 3ABN. However, she has been prohibited from speaking just the same, presumably because of the assumption of what she would say.

Not just because she might say something, but because she would be active. It's easier to keep a person under your thumb and out of sight and then carry on looking like the "good guy" in the situation. This has evolved as desperation grew - this is why the letters and attempts have gotten worse and worse against her. If you make a person feel helpless, and then they realize they are not helpless, because they are trusting God to make sense of it all and vindicate you, you continue to do what you love, or try to, in spite of the threats. This is where Dan has come ahead of her and made the calls to threaten people not to take her. There are many stories.

Also, Dan talks out of both sides of his mouth. He will tell one person "i love linda and want her back" and then tell another one the same day "she's this and this and such and such and I never want her in my life again". Tell me, what kind of SANE person would behave this way? A NON-sane one, that's who.

[Clay]

Another reason is that this is a routine business practice corporations require as a condition for a severance package with executives that are dismissed for cause or without cause. Corporations don’t want the distraction of dealing with a possible disgruntled ex-employee that could have damaging or embarrassing truthful information but also out of vengeance can spread untruths. 3ABN is just using what leverage it has to protect its name and business interest, nothing unethical in that, I would expect any business to do the same.

Linda did not have to take the money. If she felt if was more important to talk, then she could have done what the rest of have to do when we loose a job. Go and get another one. Don’t mean to make light of the situation. It is unfortunate for anyone to loose there job especially a business that you helped create. But that is business and those are always the risk. Can’t feel too too sorry for somebody that walks away with two years of salary as severance payment.

I don’t buy the story that Linda was prohibited to have an independent legal counsel. This is a free country, you can talk to anybody.

As I have said before about 1,000 post ago; Linda severance/gag order and the jet plane make for weak petty arguments against 3abn.

and thats just it Calvin... it should NOT have been business as usual... how are you going to use shaky grounds to get a questionable divorce and then cut off all means, for the woman you said you loved and had been married to for over 20 yrs, for her to make a living... did she have access to the money or the bank accounts or was she given an allowance? Did he control the money and if so then what recourse did she have save sign an agreement that would give her some money until she could get on her feet....

3ABN is not the issue to me, he did not treat her as a christian should..... that is my issue....

This post has been edited by Clay: Aug 13 2006, 01:10 AM

[Panama_Pete]

Frankly, I have not seen the documentation from the Conferences, but all of the Pastors in my conference got one that suggested she was too controversial to have speak at the Churches. Of course, probably more consequential is the number of average SDA's who get 3ABN, watch it all the time, and assume she is guilty of adultery.

It would be good to see a copy of that memo or document. Maybe some pastor in the Conference could supply a copy.

This post has been edited by Panama_Pete: Aug 12 2006, 08:14 PM

[BrotherBill]

Another reason is that this is a routine business practice corporations require as a condition for a severance package with executives that are dismissed for cause or without cause. Corporations don’t want the distraction of dealing with a possible disgruntled ex-employee that could have damaging or embarrassing truthful information but also out of vengeance can spread untruths. 3ABN is just using what leverage it has to protect its name and business interest, nothing unethical in that, I would expect any business to do the same.

I agree completely. In my work we issue non-disclosures and non-competes. That is standard business practice. However, if I were to seek to prohibit that person from gaining employment, that is a competely different story. That is the problem I have.

Linda did not have to take the money. If she felt if was more important to talk, then she could have done what the rest of have to do when we loose a job. Go and get another one. Don’t mean to make light of the situation. It is unfortunate for anyone to loose there job especially a business that you helped create. But that is business and those are always the risk. Can’t feel too too sorry for somebody that walks away with two years of salary as severance payment.

Linda had VERY LIMITED CHOICES. This was a complicated time. She was accused of adultery, betrayed by some of her closest friends, dismissed by her husband, and dismissed by a ministry which she helped to create. She had very limited time to make major decisions, some of which were tied to other major decisions she had to make. It was not just the separation from 3ABN, it was also the separation from her husband. It is easy to second guess her now. I did then, and I sometimes still do now. But none of us will know what she really went through during this embarrassing, hurried, frustrating time.

I don’t buy the story that Linda was prohibited to have an independent legal counsel. This is a free country, you can talk to anybody.

As in the case of my business and yours, any "deal" you strike is negotiable. If 3ABN made their deal contingent upon not seeking legal counsel, or at least not having a lawyer negotiate the deal, then in order to accept the deal, she could not have legal cousel. That, in fact, is what happened. Now people can judge whether that was a good deal or a bad one, but it IS what happened during this troubling time.


As I have said before about 1,000 post ago; Linda severance/gag order and the jet plane make for weak petty arguments against 3abn.

I long for the day Calvin, when you can know the why's of why things were done the way they were. I can tell you that you can't think in "normal" terms with regard to this situation. I know that if it were known, it would no longer be seen as "petty arguments".

I know, it's just my words, but, it's just isn't as simple as you state. Now, hind sight?? I'm sure she would go back and redo things - but then again, if you understand emotional abuse, pressure and more pressure and MORE PRESSURE, along with fear, control and more of same, you can see why a person would not think "normal" in an "abnormal" situation. Things happened VERY fast, and in a shocking manner. It's called "railroaded". When it's all happening, you are in shock as well as everything coming at you - shutting you out and closing you in all at once.

You hit it on the head. PRESSURE, MORE PRESSURE, MORE PRESSURE. Like none of us will know. That is the best word to describe that time