Reason For Divorce, Is lusting grounds for divorce? Options

[PrincessDrRe]

Linda Shelton publically requested to prove that she had committed adultery.

The requested proof, that Danny Shelton claimed to have, has never been provided.

I believe that if you can prove that someone has lusted, the lusting has caused problems in the marraige, and the offending party is not asking "pardon"/forgiveness then yeah....you can divorce for lusting....per the Bible

Would I?

Probably not...after all...when do you know if someone is "truly" lusting?

[mystery- man]

I believe that if you can prove that someone has lusted, the lusting has caused problems in the marraige, and the offending party is not asking "pardon"/forgiveness then yeah....you can divorce for lusting....per the Bible

Would I?

Probably not...after all...when do you know if someone is "truly" lusting?

That is a very interesting perspective "per bible" where is that found I miss that text.
Here is a senario, you tell me what you think. A man is watching James Bond, Haley Berry comes on and the man lust after her, is that grounds for divorce if he doesnt repent of his lust for her? I would think that a few ladies need to ask for forgiveness especially if they are married. because on one topic there was a picture of a lady and a man put on this site and I got the feeling that some of the ladies and men in this forum were lustin, just my opinion. Lets follow that concept to its natural conclusion---lets go there. Or how about you wake up from dreaming and there is no doubt that you have been lusting, is that grounds for divorce?

This post has been edited by mystery- man: Aug 27 2007, 12:36 AM

[Johann]

That is a very interesting perspective "per bible" where is that found I miss that text.
Here is a senario, you tell me what you think. A man is watching James Bond, Haley Berry comes on and the man lust after her, is that grounds for divorce if he doesnt repent of his lust for her? I would think that a few ladies need to ask for forgiveness especially if they are married. because on one topic there was a picture of a lady and a man put on this site and I got the feeling that some of the ladies and men in this forum were lustin, just my opinion. Lets follow that concept to its natural conclusion---lets go there. Or how about you wake up from dreaming and there is no doubt that you have been lusting, is that grounds for divorce?

Good point, m-m! Worth considering. Can you get a divorce when you figure your spouse has been figuring? An un-spiritual math game?

[Johann]

Linda Shelton publically requested to prove that she had committed adultery.

The requested proof, that Danny Shelton claimed to have, has never been provided.

Shortly after the divorce Danny Shelton wrote to me stating that this was all a spiritual warfare, and he claimed I did not understand this.

I have a hunch, Daryl, that neither one of the two of us are on his side in this spiritual warfare. Therefore we do not see his spiritual proofs, but we behold the great army of God beyond the horizon. May His Spirit open the eyes of His servants to see the power of truth in this battle.

This post has been edited by Johann: Aug 27 2007, 08:50 AM

[ex3ABNemployee]

That is a very interesting perspective "per bible" where is that found I miss that text.
Here is a senario, you tell me what you think. A man is watching James Bond, Haley Berry comes on and the man lust after her, is that grounds for divorce if he doesnt repent of his lust for her? I would think that a few ladies need to ask for forgiveness especially if they are married. because on one topic there was a picture of a lady and a man put on this site and I got the feeling that some of the ladies and men in this forum were lustin, just my opinion. Lets follow that concept to its natural conclusion---lets go there. Or how about you wake up from dreaming and there is no doubt that you have been lusting, is that grounds for divorce?

This is classic Shelton. When you can't refute the message, attack the messenger.

You've been trained well.

[princessdi]

Spiritual adultery is what the COI were committing against God whent hey would waunder after and worship the gods of the neighboring countries. It CANNOT be an offense between husband and wife, and has absolutely nothing to do with lust.


Yes, Danny is aboslutely living in sin with Brandy at this moment, because he "put away his wife" for something other than adultery. He played a hunch and won for the most part. Those who closely follow and/or support 3ABN heard the term "spiritual adultery" didn't understand the "spiritual" aspect, but latched onto the "adultery" portion and ran with it. Not even considering that Danny used the term cause he was mad that his Linda on the phone, probably for the first time in their marriage putting her son before him(HUGE red flag), and to make matters worse the Dr. was not bad looking( happened, quite by accident on a picture of the good Dr. between being short and having to be a member in the Hair Club for Men, and having a form of Napoleon complex, I can see why Danny had a problem. However, it was his problem to get over, not Linda's).


****The highlighted portion of this post is from the Book of Princess, Chapter entitiled, "If it Walks like a Duck"******

What is "spiritual adultery" that Danny accused Linda with? I just never knew that was biblical grounds for a divorce, if that were true; then could it be that every wife has biblical grounds to divorce their husbands? What man hasn’t lusted?

[appletree]

Spiritual adultery is what the COI were committing against God whent hey would waunder after and worship the gods of the neighboring countries. It CANNOT be an offense between husband and wife, and has absolutely nothing to do with lust.
Yes, Danny is aboslutely living in sin with Brandy at this moment, because he "put away his wife" for something other than adultery. He played a hunch and won for the most part. Those who closely follow and/or support 3ABN heard the term "spiritual adultery" didn't understand the "spiritual" aspect, but latched onto the "adultery" portion and ran with it. Not even considering that Danny used the term cause he was mad that his Linda on the phone, probably for the first time in their marriage putting her son before him(HUGE red flag), and to make matters worse the Dr. was not bad looking( happened, quite by accident on a picture of the good Dr. between being short and having to be a member in the Hair Club for Men, and having a form of Napoleon complex, I can see why Danny had a problem. However, it was his problem to get over, not Linda's).
****The highlighted portion of this post is from the Book of Princess, Chapter entitiled, "If it Walks like a Duck"******

Wow, I will be very interested to see you prove the statement above. After all the burden of proof is on the one that makes the accusation. In this case, you.

BTW surprising I haven't seen the results posted about the latest marital property court date, last Friday. It was an appeal for the last ruling that Linda did not tell the truth in court and must pay Danny's attorney's fees. As is usual, Laird never showed up but called in on a phone conference with the judge and opposing attorney. He ask for yet another continuance which was denied. After hearing both sides the appeal was also denied. The sanctions stick and Linda must pay for the opposing attorney's.

Oh wait, what am I saying??? Of course that kind of incident wouldn't be posted here.

[erik]

Wow, I will be very interested to see you prove the statement above. After all the burden of proof is on the one that makes the accusation. In this case, you.

BTW surprising I haven't seen the results posted about the latest marital property court date, last Friday. It was an appeal for the last ruling that Linda did not tell the truth in court and must pay Danny's attorney's fees. As is usual, Laird never showed up but called in on a phone conference with the judge and opposing attorney. He ask for yet another continuance which was denied. After hearing both sides the appeal was also denied. The sanctions stick and Linda must pay for the opposing attorney's.

Oh wait, what am I saying??? Of course that kind of incident wouldn't be posted here.

Appletree,

Well then how does that proof that linda had an affair??

It would just mean that linda had bad lawyers happens every day.


or it might mean that the judge does not care for lawyers that fail to show up in his court room.

Erik

[lurker]

It was scheduled to be a conference call, not a court appearance. I noticed it as soon as it was scheduled and was watching for the outcome. It is annoying to see an implication that it had to be anything other than just a conference call.

[PeacefulBe]

Wow, I will be very interested to see you prove the statement above. After all the burden of proof is on the one that makes the accusation. In this case, you.

BTW surprising I haven't seen the results posted about the latest marital property court date, last Friday. It was an appeal for the last ruling that Linda did not tell the truth in court and must pay Danny's attorney's fees. As is usual, Laird never showed up but called in on a phone conference with the judge and opposing attorney. He ask for yet another continuance which was denied. After hearing both sides the appeal was also denied. The sanctions stick and Linda must pay for the opposing attorney's.

Oh wait, what am I saying??? Of course that kind of incident wouldn't be posted here.

Appletree,

Since you state that "After all the burden of proof is on the one that makes the accusation" I guess that means that you and Danny will need to prove the case that, 1) spiritual adultery is a divorcable sin in God's eyes and 2) that Linda committed such against Danny which made it biblically allowable for him to put her away. He did claim that to all of the viewing audience so it seems like he should be proving his case to those same folk.

By the second paragraph of your post we can establish some points.
1. There was a "marital property court date last Friday, (August 24th? Right?)
2. It was an appeal by Linda to a ruling that she didn't tell the truth in court and must pay Danny's attorney fees.
3. Laird never showed up.
4. But he did call in on a phone conference with the judge and opposing attorney.
5. He asked for a continuance.
6. It was denied.
7. After hearing both sides, the appeal was denied (sounds almost like a court appearance, but I could be wrong)
8. Linda must pay Danny's attorney fees.

So, what you are saying is that Laird did not show up for the scheduled court date last Friday?
Was this court date supposed to be at the court house?
Was the conference call put together after the fact, since Laird never showed up, as usual?
When did the conference call take place?
Is lurker telling the truth that it was supposed to be a conference call and not a court appearance?
Did you misstate or add a bit of untruthful spin to the facts in this particular situation?
Do you maintain that what you "claimed" in your second paragraph is 100% truthful?
If so, Appletree, that means the burden of proof is on you so I would humbly ask you, in the interest of establishing the truth, to prove it please.

It was scheduled to be a conference call, not a court appearance. I noticed it as soon as it was scheduled and was watching for the outcome. It is annoying to see an implication that it had to be anything other than just a conference call.

Lurker, could you post a link to the schedule so we can all see the documentation?

[princessdi]

My purpose of saying m comments were from the "Book of Princess" was to let those who are paying attention and without reading and comprehension issues that my comments were my own speculation. However, I know that among Danny's supporters comprehension is severely lacking.

Carry on..........

Wow, I will be very interested to see you prove the statement above. After all the burden of proof is on the one that makes the accusation. In this case, you.

[Dona]

Appletree,

Well then how does that proof that linda had an affair??

It would just mean that linda had bad lawyers happens every day.
or it might mean that the judge does not care for lawyers that fail to show up in his court room.

Erik

A judgment is upheld against Linda Shelton for not telling the truth, and that "would just mean Linda had bad lawyers" or it "might mean that the judge does not care for lawyers that fail to show up in his court room" to you?

Lies bother me, I think perjury bothers Judges also.

Could it mean that?

[beartrap]

Lies bother me, I think perjury bothers Judges also.

I wonder what the judge will think about statements made by 3ABN in the Pickle/Joy suit that say 3ABN has no affiliation with any denomination and its programming is non denominational, considering the FACT that 3ABN certainly does have affiliations with the SDA denomination and most of its programming is VERY denominational. People who purport to represent inside knowledge of 3ABN on this site have said that 3ABN didn't say those things, their lawyers did.

This post has been edited by beartrap: Aug 28 2007, 03:14 PM

[lurker]

http://tinyurl.com/tsd7n is the link. Look at the bottom of the page. It has read this way for a week or two.

[Johann]

Wow, I will be very interested to see you prove the statement above. After all the burden of proof is on the one that makes the accusation. In this case, you.

BTW surprising I haven't seen the results posted about the latest marital property court date, last Friday. It was an appeal for the last ruling that Linda did not tell the truth in court and must pay Danny's attorney's fees. As is usual, Laird never showed up but called in on a phone conference with the judge and opposing attorney. He ask for yet another continuance which was denied. After hearing both sides the appeal was also denied. The sanctions stick and Linda must pay for the opposing attorney's.

Oh wait, what am I saying??? Of course that kind of incident wouldn't be posted here.

Just wondering, Appletree, how much of this is written in legal language, and how much of it written so that the average person understands it? To me it seems like you are mixing up some of the issues involved. You state that Linda lied. What did she state that was not the truth? That should be the least you could tell us, since you claim she lied.

You are the one who presents an accusation, so the burden is on you, according to your own statement above.

This post has been edited by Johann: Aug 28 2007, 12:32 PM