Privacy Policy Violation Options

[Nuggie]

Wake up, Nuggie!! Trantrum over! I dont' know what he was thinking........

Thank you...they're really a tiresome bunch...and not too bright either ...

[Bystander]

[quote name='princessdi' date='Feb 2 2007, 10:16 AM' post='174657']
I'm really not sure if I already violated this or not as I posted, a reference to being able to question one party but not the other, before seeing this notice?? If so I apologise.

But in any case just so I understand.

How does this apply to the allegations against Tommy Shelton which is posted here in almost every recent topic? and what can be posted here in regards to that?

As we have victims letters, etc. as prrof to Tommy's actions, and as Calvin says, he is a public figure. He is fair game.



Cindy a preference for both young men and boys would still make him homosexual. That is not in question. Evidence, thus far shows he prefers young and male. What is in question is whether he is a pedohpile.
Wow that is some heavy accusations Di. A court of law would require a lot more proof than a few letters ,to convict someone...Oh, but I forgot....this court has it's own set of rules that constitutes conviction...After reading what's going on in the "lawsuit thread" I hope that your set of rules, of labeling someone a homosexual and/or child molester will somehow "match up" with the laws set of rules...I have a feeling that it won't but hey, good luck with that.

Right on, PrincessDi! Keep reminding us of the real issues!
Now that does sound like an 3ABN administrator -- Mollie or Dan, maybe? That lawsuit reference is a dead giveaway! Now that they've alerted Gailon, more threats are likely on the way.

Hey, Calvin, please be kind to the poor beleaguered 3ABN administrators and let them keep posting! We really do want to hear their side. And Mollie is in a good position to drop some "insider" dope now & then, as is Dan.

Inga maybe you haven't seen Calvins warnings about trying to guess identities. It's against the rules. As far as the "lawsuit" being a dead giveaway...not hardly when we are all reading the "lawsuit" thread. That is how we know about it.

Give it a rest with the lawsuit silliness... we're not buying it.

That last thing you people want is to have to do discovery deposition after discovery deposition and everything you say is on the record and under oath... and unless there is a grand jury involved... that stuff can be plastered all over...

Yeah... real genius move on your part...

In His service,
Mr. J

In all fairness, whether it is "genius" or not, remains to be seen. Don't ya think?

[calvin]

Inga maybe you haven't seen Calvins warnings about trying to guess identities. It's against the rules. As far as the "lawsuit" being a dead giveaway...not hardly when we are all reading the "lawsuit" thread. That is how we know about it.
In all fairness, whether it is "genius" or not, remains to be seen. Don't ya think?

You can have fun guessing all you want too. Yall going to do it anyway. Can’t kick everybody out. Just don’t badger someone to identify themselves….and BTW, I am not telling anybody anything. So don’t ask. Neither is Clay or PrincessDi.

[Bystander]

Thank you...they're really a tiresome bunch...and not too bright either ...

Who is bright or not, remains to be seen as we follow the lawsuit threads

[princessdi]

That is no accusation. As I said even you have been implying the the advances were made to young men who are of consenting age. So, the question of his homosexuality is moot, even for you. What you are trying to get us to buy is that he is not a pedophile. I came to that conclusion from your(wwjd, and Aletheia, etc.) posts. Plus it is just a statement of fact in answer to Cindy's statement here:

How does this apply to the allegations against Tommy Shelton which is posted here in almost every recent topic? and what can be posted here in regards to that?
His sexual orientation has been questioned as to whether he is into little boys or men...

Now, she may have mispoken, but there is no question as to a man's sexual orientation if he prefers with young men or little boys. What is in question is his pedophilia. Once again, even by your own statements, he was approaching at the very least, very young men, barely of consenting age. That has been established, that makes him at the very least bi-sexual, as he is married for many years, corect? So I make no assumptions here. This is what your and yours friends are inferring when you attempt to make these unfortunate encounters, consenting homosexual relationships. Now, you may want to rethink your strategy at this point.

As quoted by Princessdi:
Cindy a preference for both young men and boys would still make him homosexual. That is not in question. Evidence, thus far shows he prefers young and male. What is in question is whether he is a pedohpile.

[Observer]

If my memory of time is correct, in the 1980s, a member of the Religion faculty at what is now Southern Adventist University wrote the book: HOMOSEXUALITY IN SCRIPTURE AND HISTORY. In my mind I consider that book to be very vaulable. It is out of print, but can be purchased on the Internet.

Anyway, the mere defination of "homosexuality" is not agreeed upon by the people who work in the field. (That is the reason people argue as to whether or not homosexuals can change their orientation.) As there is no one defination upon which all can agree I will suggest that we ought not to call one a homosexual who has not identified him/her-self as such.

I support the decision of the Administration of this forum to tell us to quit calling people homosexual.

If my memory of time is correct, in the 1980s, a member of the Religion faculty at what is now Southern Adventist University wrote the book: HOMOSEXUALITY IN SCRIPTURE AND HISTORY. In my mind I consider that book to be very vaulable. It is out of print, but can be purchased on the Internet.

Anyway, the mere defination of "homosexuality" is not agreeed upon by the people who work in the field. (That is the reason people argue as to whether or not homosexuals can change their orientation.) As there is no one defination upon which all can agree I will suggest that we ought not to call one a homosexual who has not identified him/her-self as such.

I support the decision of the Administration of this forum to tell us to quit calling people homosexual.

Re: " . . . but there is no question as to a man's sexual orientation . . . "

I will suggest that his total sexual orientation has not been estaablished. Until one knows another's total sexual orientation, one should be very careful in the statements made about that person.

This post has been edited by Observer: Feb 2 2007, 02:38 PM

[PrincessDrRe]

I'm really not sure if I already violated this or not as I posted, a reference to being able to question one party but not the other, before seeing this notice?? If so I apologise.

But in any case just so I understand.

How does this apply to the allegations against Tommy Shelton which is posted here in almost every recent topic? and what can be posted here in regards to that?

His sexual orientation has been questioned as to whether he is into little boys or men...

There is also an issue of whether these things even happened and if they did whether it was assualt or consentual.

If we can't mention someones sexual orientation, how are these things to be discussed, or proved true or false?

I do agree that members shouldn't as a rule have their private lives questioned, but if their private life is relevant to a discussion where they themselves are testifying about someone elses private life???
Thanks in advance for clarifying this issue so all know what can and cannot be said.

I don't question/or wonder if he's gay/homoseuxal or even "bi-sexual" - what I know is that he is a molestor and a Pedophile. He has been "off the hook" for many a years and had sex with children (legally not of the age of "legal consent")...although we have discussed him (Tommy) being "gay/homosexual" that is not the true question/answer that anyone really is moreso in arms about....

Sure we are perturbed about the homosexual sex; as a Pastor; that is married...but the bigger picture that folks are not seeing is..... TOMMY SHELTON HAD SEX WITH A CHILD, WHO WAS NOT OF THE "LEGAL AGE OF CONSENT"!!! POINT BLANK

[ex3ABNemployee]

Sure we are perturbed about the homosexual sex; as a Pastor; that is married...but the bigger picture that folks are not seeing is..... TOMMY SHELTON HAD SEX WITH A CHILD, WHO WAS NOT OF THE "LEGAL AGE OF CONSENT"!!! POINT BLANK

Now, haven't you been paying attention? It hasn't been proven. We could all be lying. All us victims could have gotten together and made these disgusting stories up just to get our names out there.

Just thought I'd say it before Aletheia, Bystander, task force or eye witness did.

[PeacefulBe]

Now, haven't you been paying attention? It hasn't been proven. We could all be lying. All us victims could have gotten together and made these disgusting stories up just to get our names out there.

Just thought I'd say it before Aletheia, Bystander, task force or eye witness did.

They may just do so anyway, but it is worth a try!

Anybody think to take group pictures while you were all together getting your stories straight?!



This post has been edited by PeacefullyBewildered: Feb 2 2007, 09:14 PM

[Ozzie]

Who is bright or not, remains to be seen as we follow the lawsuit threads

Truly are tiresome, these people.

Maybe, Bystander needs to go and have a hair transplant? They are probably pulling their hair out over the allegations coming to the surface - at last!

[inga]

Now, haven't you been paying attention? It hasn't been proven. We could all be lying. All us victims could have gotten together and made these disgusting stories up just to get our names out there.

Just thought I'd say it before Aletheia, Bystander, task force or eye witness did.

Hey, Duane, I'm glad you have a sense of humor. That's God's gift to help us over the rough places in life.

[Bystander]

Truly are tiresome, these people.

Maybe, Bystander needs to go and have a hair transplant? They are probably pulling their hair out over the allegations coming to the surface - at last!

Let me explain something to you. Read the lawsuit. It is over copyrights and slander. This case will have nothing whatsoever to do with allegations being thrown at 3abn. Even if Gailon counter sues on some point of law, still, it will have nothing to do with 3 abn having to provide any kind of evidence on their finances, ect ect. They only people that can request a court order to go through finances, minutes, ect ect are the FBI or the IRS. Other than that, Gailon can do nothing but make a complaint which would, most likely, be thrown out of court. Regardless, either way, this lawsuit is a seperate issue entirely and 3abn will not be required to air any laundry.

[erik]

Let me explain something to you. Read the lawsuit. It is over copyrights and slander. This case will have nothing whatsoever to do with allegations being thrown at 3abn. Even if Gailon counter sues on some point of law, still, it will have nothing to do with 3 abn having to provide any kind of evidence on their finances, ect ect. They only people that can request a court order to go through finances, minutes, ect ect are the FBI or the IRS. Other than that, Gailon can do nothing but make a complaint which would, most likely, be thrown out of court. Regardless, either way, this lawsuit is a seperate issue entirely and 3abn will not be required to air any laundry.

Bystander,

if you are going to make a slander case you are going to have prove that he was falsely stating facts about 3abn. Sorry it might stay has tightly focused has you would like.

Secondly on the copy right issue you are going to have to go after every one else on the net that repost your broadcasts other wise you are get by the fair use act, i would think that you would also need to prove that mr. joy is or would in the future making a gain from the very limit use one part of one broadcast,.

as to the use of 3abn in the name save 3abn website he can quickly change the name to something like remove tommysheltonthechildmosleter.com what are you going to do then.

it is interesting that you think you can shut this whole legal mess on with out any hearing of the facts of the matter.

for that matter mr. joy can just help put class action lawsuit of all of tommy's victims together and use that has counter suit that does not directly address the slander and copy issues, if you think that
that would result int he whole financial thing coming out then you are crazy because the first thing the lawyers are going to do is ask the court to tie up the assets of tommy shelton and 3abn since the 3abn lawyers has been party to trying to suppress the victims get justice.

I think that the shelton's and 3abn will highly regret taking this to court it is going to get very ugly.


Erik

[sonshineonme]

Bystander,

if you are going to make a slander case you are going to have prove that he was falsely stating facts about 3abn. Sorry it might stay has tightly focused has you would like.

Secondly on the copy right issue you are going to have to go after every one else on the net that repost your broadcasts other wise you are get by the fair use act, i would think that you would also need to prove that mr. joy is or would in the future making a gain from the very limit use one part of one broadcast,.

as to the use of 3abn in the name save 3abn website he can quickly change the name to something like remove tommysheltonthechildmosleter.com what are you going to do then.

it is interesting that you think you can shut this whole legal mess on with out any hearing of the facts of the matter.

for that matter mr. joy can just help put class action lawsuit of all of tommy's victims together and use that has counter suit that does not directly address the slander and copy issues, if you think that
that would result int he whole financial thing coming out then you are crazy because the first thing the lawyers are going to do is ask the court to tie up the assets of tommy shelton and 3abn since the 3abn lawyers has been party to trying to suppress the victims get justice.

I think that the shelton's and 3abn will highly regret taking this to court it is going to get very ugly.
Erik

AND, if you look carefully at that letter, you'll note that 3ABN's attorney in Minneapolis never actually threatened to sue, so all of this speculation about them suing Gailon has no foundation at all. Read the letter again. They never actually threatened anything. Gerald Duffy makes no threat of any kind against Gailon Joy, Bob Pickle, or anyone else. He simply makes demands.
It was a simple cease and desist. You are right Erik - ds does NOT want this going to the court room, because he knows that Gailon can prove things, there are far too many witness and testimony that can be corraborated. tick, tick, tick...

[Bystander]

AND, if you look carefully at that letter, you'll note that 3ABN's attorney in Minneapolis never actually threatened to sue, so all of this speculation about them suing Gailon has no foundation at all. Read the letter again. They never actually threatened anything. Gerald Duffy makes no threat of any kind against Gailon Joy, Bob Pickle, or anyone else. He simply makes demands.
It was a simple cease and desist. You are right Erik - ds does NOT want this going to the court room, because he knows that Gailon can prove things, there are far too many witness and testimony that can be corraborated. tick, tick, tick...

Time will tell.....



I think that the shelton's and 3abn will highly regret taking this to court it is going to get very ugly.
Erik
[/quote]
Erik first, you keep saying "you" as in "you" think you can shut this whole mess up....I am not shutting anything up since I have no credentials or power to do so. You and sonshineonme are making huge assumptions as if you know more than the attorney involved. I am quite confident that he knows what he can or cannot do and will work the case accordingly.
I guess, in the end, we will all be educated as to what can and can't be done in a court of law.