Save3abn Website, who runs it? Options

[sonshineonme]

Di, you need to quit making accusing statements. If even one allegation was true concerning anyone underage, jail time would not be a factor anyway. I know. I asked an Illinois lawyer friend of mine. He explained that even though the statute of limitations was supposed to be extended, most cases it would not work in. He then went into a lot of attorney rhetoric that I don't even pretend to understand but the bottom line is no one in these particular circumstances (if true at all) would do any jail time.My point? Di is just one of many who make these statments that have no basis in fact.

Yes, your right...it's just not a big deal is it? And, whoever your atty is, I think you might check again with someone else....adding up all the evidence, I think it's likely it would go a very different direction. Look at the catholic chuch situations.

[princessdi]

One of you also claimed that the age of consent in Il ws 17 and that was not true either. Sorry Bytander, saying you had a discussion with a lawyer friend, much of which you didn't understand does not convince me. Why would the statute of limitations be extended in this particular case? Did you acquire this information recently? Before you all were trying to minizmize the pedophile factor, by saying these young men were of age? I actually think one of our members can help us out here. I'll ask her and see what she can find out and post in language we all can understand.

Plus, I keep telling you all the problem is that TS, a married pastor, was asking someone other than his wife for sex. Be they male, female, old young, whatever...he was/is wrong. Even if the courts don't do a thing, it is more than reprehensible that you and your friends were trying to rationalize this situation in the least. It is even more troubling that you don't see that.

Di, you need to quit making accusing statements. If even one allegation was true concerning anyone underage, jail time would not be a factor anyway. I know. I asked an Illinois lawyer friend of mine. He explained that even though the statute of limitations was supposed to be extended, most cases it would not work in. He then went into a lot of attorney rhetoric that I don't even pretend to understand but the bottom line is no one in these particular circumstances (if true at all) would do any jail time.
My point? Di is just one of many who make these statments that have no basis in fact.

[PeacefulBe]

Di, you need to quit making accusing statements. If even one allegation was true concerning anyone underage, jail time would not be a factor anyway. I know. I asked an Illinois lawyer friend of mine. He explained that even though the statute of limitations was supposed to be extended, most cases it would not work in. He then went into a lot of attorney rhetoric that I don't even pretend to understand but the bottom line is no one in these particular circumstances (if true at all) would do any jail time.
My point? Di is just one of many who make these statments that have no basis in fact.

I wouldn't be too sure that legal actions are not a possibility. If the person questioning the attorney minimized or downplayed the abuse that person could have gotten incorrect advice. If TS is not brought to accountability here in this world, there is still The Final Judgement to consider.

[PrincessDrRe]

Sorry....

He may never go to jail... but the good thing is that the word is out, people will be warned... so parents will never leave their kids alone with T.S. again.... and if that happens, he will never be able to harm another young person again..... so stand aside bystander.... that is a polite way of saying "get out of the way, you are in the way...."

Then again.... maybe Bystander's demonic presence finds children adorable in the exact same way as Tommy Shelton did. Bystander seems to be finding loopholes for Tommy Shelton akin to what most that are members of NAMBLA do for each other.

Those that make excuses and try to find loopholes for a sexual molester of children are assisting in the future assaults on children.

Those that make excuses and try to find loopholes for a sexual molester of children are assisting in them not paying for their crimes on earth.

Those that make excuses and try to find loopholes for a sexual molester of children are stating that the past crime does not merit punishment.

I know...I know...

BOT!

[inga]

Pickle your unwillingness to answer the question shows your are not a honest person. Period end of sentence.

You know, Lee, you display an awful lot of arrogance!

Just because Pickle does not respond to your demands, it "shows" that he is not an honest person?! You certainly know about your own honesty or lack of it. So maybe that's what was on your mind?

[Pickle]

Fallible,

Your comments (here and here) regarding WikiPedia and Vicarius Filii Dei reveal your ignorance, similar to your accusation on Maritime that I had posted a reply from Danny to me when it was really an email from Danny to Gailon.

Now please understand, I am rusty on some of the specifics, but anyone who chooses to look at the history back when I was editing that page will see something along the lines of a papal apologist belittling what ended up being a pre-1844 reference to Vicarius Filii Dei being on the miter, while he thought that it was a reference to the tiara. You will find some sort of discrepancy like that, and you will see the papal apologist totally unwilling to allow it to be corrected.

You will also find that WikiPedia requires that a neutral point of view be presented, and those papal apologists were not allowing that. For example, based on my rusty recollection, they were not allowing it to be clearly stated how important The Donation of Constantine has been in the history of the papacy, preferring rather to discard it as a forgery. Their viewpoint was clearly biased and one-sided, and was definitely derogatory toward Seventh-day Adventism.

As far as what the Bible teaches on the matter, see "The Meaning of 666." According to the symbols used in Revelation, symbols which are drawn from Exodus, the beast should be a counterfeit high priest who wears a miter with his name on it. Now if you want to argue with the Bible, that's another matter.

[Pickle]

Oops. That last post of mine was

Bystander,

I find your calling me Bobby boy to be highly offensive, discourteous, and unchristian, and I respectively ask you to stop, and to not do it again.

This post has been edited by Pickle: Mar 13 2007, 11:16 PM

[Observer]

Sorry....

Then again.... maybe Bystander's demonic presence finds children adorable in the exact same way as Tommy Shelton did. Bystander seems to be finding loopholes for Tommy Shelton akin to what most that are members of NAMBLA do for each other.

Those that make excuses and try to find loopholes for a sexual molester of children are assisting in the future assaults on children.

Those that make excuses and try to find loopholes for a sexual molester of children are assisting in them not paying for their crimes on earth.

Those that make excuses and try to find loopholes for a sexual molester of children are stating that the past crime does not merit punishment.

I know...I know...

BOT!

FYI: NAMBLA is the North American Man Boy Love Association. They advocate the legalization of adult males being allowed to have sex with minor males.

My knowledge of them comes from my professional training and experience.

[Aletheia]

Sorry....

Then again.... maybe Bystander's demonic presence finds children adorable in the exact same way as Tommy Shelton did. Bystander seems to be finding loopholes for Tommy Shelton akin to what most that are members of NAMBLA do for each other.

Those that make excuses and try to find loopholes for a sexual molester of children are assisting in the future assaults on children.

Those that make excuses and try to find loopholes for a sexual molester of children are assisting in them not paying for their crimes on earth.

Those that make excuses and try to find loopholes for a sexual molester of children are stating that the past crime does not merit punishment.

I know...I know...

BOT!

Personally I thought he was just referring to Di's false accusation about our motive and intent, and surmisings about what we are doiing:
"you and your friends are only intersted in keeping him out of prison, so you continue to victimize his victim by insinuation that they had a homosexual affair"



By saying that isn't true:
"Di, you need to quit making accusing statements. If even one allegation was true concerning anyone underage, jail time would not be a factor anyway.

Question: What alleged underage victims are you all referring to? What exactly do you know about them, or any circumstances, other then vague references that they exist? Yes I know that Pickle and Joy claim this, and they got it from Dryden, and they were all quoted in Adventist Todayy, but how do you know there are actually any underage victims?

Maybe you could give us some kinda "specific' details so we know what you all keep getting so upset about? But please do it in a thread near here where it is on topic.

It seems to me, if people could discuss this rationally, without all the strawman arguments, and acusations of being demons, or demonically inspired, or pedophiles, or unable to sympathise with victims of sexual abuse,(which is unnecessary, when we should just be able to discuss the facts and evidence without all that ) then we might get somewhere.

It seems to me too many who have been victims themselves here are allowing that to get in the way of objectively looking at the evidence and what is known, and what hasn't been proven or even supported.

My 2 cents...

[Aletheia]

You really need to quit, Cindy. TS was/is a married pastor. Him asking anyone but his wife for sex is wrong.

I have said that myself. In fact Seraphim asked that question specifically and I answered that it is wrong. Further, It is sin. And Bystander answered the same.

But here's the problem. Tommy was disciplined by his Church in Illinois, after they investigated and the police did as well, and no charges were filed. the Church in Dunn Loring Virginaia looked into all this before hiring him as their Pastor.

Tommy stated in his letter to Duane that he and his wife have long since worked through this themselves. He apologised to Duane, Duane says he's forgiven him. Tommy's wife has forgiven him. Tommy voluntarily gave up his ministerial liscence aftr this happened. Both Tommy and his wife Carol emphatically state nothing sexually immoral or inappropriate has happened at all for at least the past 12 years.It is my understanding he received counselling to help him regarding all this.

What else do you want Di?

Does the blood of Christ cover past confessed and forsaken sins, or not?

And like it or not, the community responded by spraypainting accusations of homosexuality NOT child molester or Pedophile on his house and vehicles etc.

Maybe they knew something you do not?

The truth is the accusations of being a pedophile and Child molester are claimed to be more recent, Dryden claims this was in Dunn Loring Virginia, and tries to tie it in with events in Illinois, in which he had no part, and which were already dealt with, Pickle claims, and tries to do the same, on Joy's and his save 3ABN website but zero evidence has been given to support these recent allegations.


Which are that Tommy Shelton is a child molester and pedophile, and that Danny knew, lied and covered for him, and endangered chldren.

But that is a different topic totally from what you are arguing about here.

It does raise the question of Pickles honesty though, and his claims and recent insinuations that he has nothing to do with that website.

For it is his "investigations", and only his writings, with his surmisings opinions and conclusions, and his accusations which only he has been posting here for months, which are published there.

Thus the subject, and question of this topic " save3ABN website, who runs it?"

I think it likely Pickle is the webmaster. It is registered to Gailon Joy, but on the same server as Pickle's own site, and the website is designed according to Pickles style and self proclaimed area of expertise, There's even some website, where pickle is giving lessons about his unique programming and web designing...

This post has been edited by Aletheia: Mar 14 2007, 06:00 AM

[awesumtenor]

Who runs the save3abn.com website is irrelevant, Cindy. Shooting the messenger doesn't alter the message. The testimony and accusations made by Duane, beartrap and others regarding Tommy's proclivities and predatory actions remain unchanged whether or not www.save3abn.com exists or not.

This is just the last rabbit hole you have tried to divert people down in an effort to distract and dissemble. Once you admitted his doing these things was sin and that he was wrong in doing them, the debate ends there; the rest of this foolishness is an attempt to create an extenuating circumstance to rationalize Tommy's sin and the subsequent attempts by DS, WT and 3ABN leadership to minimize it or pretend it was not as serious as it is.

He's a pervert, Cindy; one of the worst kind. He preys on children and cannot be 'cured' or 'fixed'. Despite your attempts to make it seem like this is something he 'used to do'... the fact is, as long as he is in a position that brings him in proximity with boys and young men, he will continue to do this.

As for Tommy's confessing his sin... I am sure I am not the only one who sees Achan in such. If he had true contrition and repented, this conversation wouldn't even exist. He hasn't even fully admitted the extent of his malfeasance; he has not attempted to 'make it right' to those he has victimized... and he continues to be in a position where it's just a matter of time before he molests someone else's child.

And your calling his victims homosexuals, saying they were consenting partners and the like is just pouring salt in the wounds Tommy has made... not to mention it's being shameless on your part.

In His service,
Mr. J

[awesumtenor]

Question: What alleged underage victims are you all referring to? What exactly do you know about them, or any circumstances, other then vague references that they exist? Yes I know that Pickle and Joy claim this, and they got it from Dryden, and they were all quoted in Adventist Todayy, but how do you know there are actually any underage victims?

Maybe you could give us some kinda "specific' details so we know what you all keep getting so upset about? But please do it in a thread near here where it is on topic.

This has been asked and answered... not only by thouse repulsed by your scandalous arguments in support of Tommy... but by duane and beartrap (who was married to Tommy's niece, and was being supervised by Tommy at 3ABN when Tommy propositioned him.. and that wasn't 30 years ago) and others. And your response to even first hand accounts has been to attack the one giving the report... and then claim you need more evidence.

That, Cindy, is, frankly, sick.

It seems to me, if people could discuss this rationally, without all the strawman arguments, and acusations of being demons, or demonically inspired, or pedophiles, or unable to sympathise with victims of sexual abuse,(which is unnecessary, when we should just be able to discuss the facts and evidence without all that ) then we might get somewhere.

It seems to me too many who have been victims themselves here are allowing that to get in the way of objectively looking at the evidence and what is known, and what hasn't been proven or even supported.

Tommy propositions and solicits sex from teenage boys ergo he is a pedophile. There are enough first hand accounts of his misdeeds in that regard to make that appellation stick. His propositioning young men who have to work for him is a textbook instance of sexual harassment by creating a 'hostile work environment'. Both are criminal acts in every jurisdiction in this country.

Any examination of 'the evidence and what is known' that omits these points is not objective.

In His service,
Mr. J

[Pickle]

Pickle your unwillingness to answer the question shows your are not a honest person. Period end of sentence. But no matter because I have my answer very plainly. Thanks.

I "backtrack" on nothing! The post you are speaking about that has to do with minors were just questions Pickle....HONEST questions which is more than what you can possibly do. Any "reasonable" inteligent person reading my post could see that.

Have you never read ...

And when he was come into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came unto him as he was teaching, and said, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority? And Jesus answered and said unto them, I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell me, I in like wise will tell you by what authority I do these things. The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men? ... And they answered Jesus, and said, We cannot tell. And he said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.

(Matthew 21:23-27)

Surely you aren't saying that the Lord's Anointed was showing Himself to be a dishonest person in the gospel of Matthew, are you? Are you sure you never backtrack?

We all have to backtrack if we want to be saved. That's what repentance and confession are all about. If you can't backtrack over insinuating that a minor being consenting makes a difference in the Tommy Shelton child molestation allegations, I'm not sure the Judge of all the earth will take too kindly to that when you stand before the great white throne. But that's between you and Him.

I see you made no comments about my request for a list of fabrications that you were accusing me of.

By the way, I'm curious about the fact that "Lee" is the sound of the last syllable of MolLee.

[Observer]

But here's the problem. Tommy was disciplined by his Church in Illinois, after they investigated and the police did as well, and no charges were filed. the Church in Dunn Loring Virginaia looked into all this before hiring him as their Pastor.

Tommy stated in his letter to Duane that he and his wife have long since worked through this themselves. He apologised to Duane, Duane says he's forgiven him. Tommy's wife has forgiven him. Tommy voluntarily gave up his ministerial liscence aftr this happened. Both Tommy and his wife Carol emphatically state nothing sexually immoral or inappropriate has happened at all for at least the past 12 years.It is my understanding he received counselling to help him regarding all this.

What else do you want Di?

Does the blood of Christ cover past confessed and forsaken sins, or not?

Aletheia, As I understand your comment above, you are telling us:
1) Tommy did something that was serious enough to result in discipline by his local Chruch.
2) It was serious enough to require an apology to Duane.
3) It was serious enough for him to apologize to his wife.
4) It was serious enough for him to surrender his ministerial license.

In context, it appears to me to be some kind of unspecified sexual miscoundect. [See the thought that nothing sexually immoral has happened for at least the past 12 years.]

Then you ask what more one would want, and whether or not the blood of Christ covers sin.

My posiiton on that is: The blood of Christ, shed on Calvery, covers any sins that Tommy may have committed. To me that is unquestioned. I do not challenge that he has confessed whatever sins he may have committed. That is between he and God. I am not involved in that. I am quite willing to say that Christ's blood covers his sins, whatever they may be.

Your question as to what more might be wanted is not such a simple answer. Christ's blood may cover one's sin. But, that does not necessarly releave one from the consequences. Forgiveness does not remove the lung cancer. Forgiveness does not release a person from prison. A person who steals chruch funds, may be forgiven, but should not be places into the position of congregational treasurer. In Tommy's case, whatever his prior sin may be, the alligations are such that his past should be considered in relation to the present. If it is true that his prior sin involved sexual misconduct, society, and the church, has an obligation to consider that in relation to how he is used today in ministry. As an example: One who has sexually molested children, should not work agian in children's ministry. One who has raped a woman should not be working in women's ministry.

I am a professionally trained counselor. If I become sexually involved with a counselee, I should not counsel again. I am a clergyperson. If I become sexually involved with a member of my congregation, I should forfit my ministry. If I molest children, I should not work again with children. I may be forgiven in all of the above. But, my failure is of sufficient magnatude that ther are major consequences that come to me. And, they should.

Those consequences should come regardless of criminal conviction. I may not have violated the law if I become sexually involved with a congregational member. But, I still should forfit my ministry. The forfituature of my ministry to children should not depend upon my criminal conviction. I should happen if the allligations are there, regardless of criminal conviction. Society owes those (children) helpless to defend themself, much in the way of protection.

[PeacefulBe]

Aletheia, As I understand your comment above, you are telling us:
1) Tommy did something that was serious enough to result in discipline by his local Chruch.
2) It was serious enough to require an apology to Duane.
3) It was serious enough for him to apologize to his wife.
4) It was serious enough for him to surrender his ministerial license.

In context, it appears to me to be some kind of unspecified sexual miscoundect. [See the thought that nothing sexually immoral has happened for at least the past 12 years.]

Then you ask what more one would want, and whether or not the blood of Christ covers sin.

My posiiton on that is: The blood of Christ, shed on Calvery, covers any sins that Tommy may have committed. To me that is unquestioned. I do not challenge that he has confessed whatever sins he may have committed. That is between he and God. I am not involved in that. I am quite willing to say that Christ's blood covers his sins, whatever they may be.

Your question as to what more might be wanted is not such a simple answer. Christ's blood may cover one's sin. But, that does not necessarly releave one from the consequences. Forgiveness does not remove the lung cancer. Forgiveness does not release a person from prison. A person who steals chruch funds, may be forgiven, but should not be places into the position of congregational treasurer. In Tommy's case, whatever his prior sin may be, the alligations are such that his past should be considered in relation to the present. If it is true that his prior sin involved sexual misconduct, society, and the church, has an obligation to consider that in relation to how he is used today in ministry. As an example: One who has sexually molested children, should not work agian in children's ministry. One who has raped a woman should not be working in women's ministry.

I am a professionally trained counselor. If I become sexually involved with a counselee, I should not counsel again. I am a clergyperson. If I become sexually involved with a member of my congregation, I should forfit my ministry. If I molest children, I should not work again with children. I may be forgiven in all of the above. But, my failure is of sufficient magnatude that ther are major consequences that come to me. And, they should.

Those consequences should come regardless of criminal conviction. I may not have violated the law if I become sexually involved with a congregational member. But, I still should forfit my ministry. The forfituature of my ministry to children should not depend upon my criminal conviction. I should happen if the allligations are there, regardless of criminal conviction. Society owes those (children) helpless to defend themself, much in the way of protection.

Greg,
You are right on target here in your answer to Aletheia's posts about Tommy's "sins".

I think we need to go one step further. A person whose sin has victimized another has the responsibility to make restitution to that victim. Look at the example of David. He did some horrible things. When he got to the point that he desired to be forgiven for those sins, he made things right as far as possible. He couldn't bring back the man he caused to be killed, but he restored things as much as he could as a part of his repentence. We know he received the forgiveness he sought and still is know as beloved of God.

Private sins, those which only work to separate you from God, can be forgiven just between you and God. Public sins, those which have negatively affected others, have the consequences you spoke of but there is also the need to tend to the damage done to those victimized.

PB