Tom Chantry: What Does Guilty and Not Guilty Really Mean?

“Let us not underestimate how hard it is to be compassionate. Compassion is hard because it requires the inner disposition to go with others to place where they are weak, vulnerable, lonely, and broken. But this is not our spontaneous response to suffering. What we desire most is to do away with suffering by fleeing from it or finding a quick cure for it.” ― Henri J.M. Nouwen link

I have long contended that the bizarre and somewhat deranged attack by Mr Nobody and the infamous anti-Dee letter had everything to do with specific situation. A review of that letter, along with disgusting tweets by Frank Turk (one of Phil Johnson’s original sidekicks on Pyromaniacs) shows a particular concern about Tom Chantry, an ARBCA pastor who had been credibly accused of child abuse. TWW believes the victims in this situation.

There seems to be a friendly tie between Phil Johnson and Frank Turk with Tom Chantry. Frank Turk admitted this to be true. 

Yesterday, Phil Johnson, after leaving Twitterverse as he said, returned. I did an update to my original post on Johnson and Howse which you can read here. In my Twitter exchange with Johnson, he attacked TWW which is to be expected. However, he got down to business in this tweet.

I believe that he was alluding to the Tom Chantry situation and I even said so.


Tom Chantry is a protected™ pastor within the Phil Johnson, Frank Turk and Fred Butler, Grace to You (John MacArthur) firmament. That means we are not allowed to discuss his pending trial until “all the facts are known” per Phil Johnson.

Do the outcomes of court trials (or even ecclesiastical courts) definitively determine guilt or innocence?

Scenario 1: Does a *not guilty* finding in a court trial mean the person is innocent? Is OJ Simpson *innocent* in the death of his wife and her boyfriend?

We all remember the “If the glove doesn’t fit, you must acquit” moment during the Simpson trial. Simpson was acquitted but does this mean he is innocent? Of course not. It merely means the evidence that was submitted by the prosecution was not enough to convince the jury to convict him of the crime. Interestingly, most people believe that Simpson was guilty. He is simply *not guilty* the eye of the law. That doesn’t mean he is innocent.

Most incidents of child sex abuse occur behind closed doors. That means there are usually no witnesses. Since most children and teens are so shocked and intimidated by molestation, they rarely report what happened in sufficient time to collect physical evidence. Therefore, all that is left is victim outcry (Yes- a child’s testimony is valid evidence) as well as before and after the fact observations of involved individuals.

TWW tends to believe the victims for two reasons.

  1. Child sex abuse statistics readily show that most children do not lie about such occurrences. TWW wants to be one of the 66% of places which believe the victims.

2. Why would anyone want to go through the pain of, and be re-traumatized by, the police reporting and court proceedings which dredge up each little disgusting detail of the molestation? To top it off, many friends and church members associated with the accused often sit in the court room, glaring at the victim. No wonder so many adults and children refuse to testify in these situations.

Scenario 2: Does a verdict of *guilty* mean that the defendant is conclusively guilty?

Jesus was declared guilty and put to death for his supposed crimes. Nuff said.

I get it. It’s hard to admit that your friend could also be a molester. The difficulty for many people is reconciling that a person that is a friend or a family member could also be guilty of a serious crime. This is especially true when it involves *men of the cloth.* Some individuals pride themselves in *knowing* people. When they realize that they were wrong (and all of us can be,) their default mode is to deny it. Sadly, child sex abuse is the easiest thing to deny because it happens behind closed doors.

I wrote a post about Barnabas Piper and his divorce. He appeared to be blaming his wife for the demise of the marriage. I received a lot of pushback on that post. One person wrote me and said that Piper was the *most transparent and honest* person he had ever met. However, in that post, I also documented that Piper had been fired from a job for lying and had been thrown out of his home for lying. Yep-This is John Piper’ son. I told the person who wrote me that he had absolutely no idea what went on behind closed doors. He was merely choosing which version of the story in which to believe.

The best, most recent example of this is the Iain Campbell’s story. This is another guy that was beloved by Frank Turk and many other Reformed leaders. He was an expert on the Bible and hypocrisy. All those who knew this man and claimed that Anne Campbell was making this up have had their comeuppance. It appears no one saw the flagrant lies of a sexual predator.

I was excoriated for believing the initial reports on Campbell. One individual accused me of *jumping the gun* and said he would speak out when the *facts* were knows. When those facts were known, I asked this individual for his response. He said “So what do you want me to say?” He had no intention of ever speaking out.

Brent Detweiler’s update on Tom Chantry. Will Chantry work out a *Nolo contendere* deal? Is he being persecuted like Jesus?

Chantry was due to go trial in 2 weeks but that has been postponed. Here is what Brent Detweiler has learned. He has linked to all 14 police reports. Warning: They are difficult to read. Ask yourself the following question. Why in the world would anyone make up a report like this and then subject themselves to difficult cross examination in a trial?

Be sure to read the addendum at the end of the post.


ARBCA stands for the Association of Reformed Baptist Churches of America.  See http://www.arbca.com/.

ARBCA also stands for a new website called Awareness in Reformed Baptist Churches of America.  See http://arbca.org/.  It is operated by Anthony Battaglia.  He is a straight shooter – literally and figuratively.  He is the owner and president of TactiPac – Tactical Solutions Provider.

Mr. Battaglia is also a deacon at First Baptist Church in Clinton, Louisiana which is an ARBCA church.  He is very concerned the association is covering up for one its former pastors, Tom Chantry.  The other day, he posted some very helpful information.  More in a minute.

Tom Chantry was arrested on five counts of sexual molestation and two counts of aggravated assault concerning five victims on July 25, 2016.

He was jailed and denied bond after a hearing by The Honorable Bradley H. Astrowsky.  The Judge withheld bail based upon this statute.

“A person charged with a felony may be held without bail if, after a hearing, the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the proof is evident or the presumption great that the person committed the offense, that the person poses a substantial danger to another person or the community or engaged in conduct consisting a violent offense, and that no condition or combination of conditions of release may be imposed that will reasonably assure the safety of the other person or the community.”

Chantry’s lawyer appealed the ruling on technical grounds and prevailed on May 5, 2017.  Chantry was released from jail on a $250,000 secured bond under the following conditions as reported by Maz Efrein in The Daily Courier.

“He may not have contact with children except for his own – and even that contact must be supervised by another adult.  He is not to come within 100 feet of where children are.  He must surrender his passport and check in with pre-trial services in Yavapai County [in Arizona] once a week.”

These are very strict requirements because Judge Astrowsky believed Chantry posed a “substantial danger.”  Therefore, he did his best under the circumstances to “assure the safety of the other person or the community.”  That is, potential victims of Chantry.

Chantry is not allowed to have contact with children or be within 100 feet of children except his own and then only if he is supervised by an adult.  Practically, that means he is confined to his home.  He had to surrender his passport so he could not flee the country.  He also checks in with court officials on a weekly basis that monitor his compliance and whereabouts.

I have written about Chantry on five previous occasions.

Tom Chantry, Well Known Reformed Baptist Pastor, Charged on Multiple Counts of Child Molestation & Aggravated Assault with Serious Injury
Tuesday, December 6, 2016 at 3:51 PM

Did Reformed Baptist Leaders Cover Up Tom Chantry’s Alleged Sex Crimes & Serious Physical Injury of Children?
Saturday, December 10, 2016 at 4:06 PM

My Letters to All Lead Pastors in ARBCA to Investigate the Past Cover Up of Tom Chantry’s Sins & Alleged Crimes
Friday, December 30, 2016 at 4:12PM

Thomas Chantry Trial for Sexual Molestation & Aggravated Assault Set for March 27, 2017
Monday, January 9, 2017 at 5:40 PM

Tom Chantry Could Have Been Out of Jail this Week for Child Abuse Charges if He Showed Up for Trial
Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 5:17 PM

On the other hand, Tom Chantry’s wife, Karen; members from his and her family at large, and top officials in the Association of Reformed Baptist Church in America (ARBCA) have claimed Chantry is innocent of all charges, the alleged victims are lying, and the police are making something out of nothing.  They have embraced the abusive tactic of discrediting everyone while they extol Chantry as a paragon of virtue.

For example, Karen Chantry and her father, Al Huber (an influential pastor in ARBCA) have claimed Tom is being persecuted like Jesus Christ, suffering a great trial like righteous Job and being mistreated like Joseph by his brothers.  Moreover, pastors throughout ARBCA are claiming Chantry is innocent of all charges and passing on this reckless assessment to their church members despite the testimony of multiple victims and witnesses, the work of numerous detectives that led to his arrest and incarceration, and the ruling of the Judge who denied him bail.  Of course, none of these people know what they are talking about or doing according to Chantry supporters!

They have also set up a Legal Defense Fund for Chantry and asked people to give money based upon his innocence.  Furthermore, I have read ARBCA documents, interacted with ARBBA pastors, and listened to messages by ARBCA leaders regarding Chantry.  In all I have read or heard, no one has expressed care or concern for the well-being of the alleged victims of physical and sexual abuse.

I’ve had most of the 14 police reports for a long time but never posted them.  Instead, I typed up some of the charges for past articles about Chantry.  Anyway, Anthony Battaglia has provided clean copies of all the reports which amounts to 48 pages.  You can find them here.  Remember, according to family, top officials, pastors, and elders throughout ARBCA, none of what you read in the police reports is true!  Yikes.  This is one diabolical conspiracy to cover up the physical and sexual abuse of children – IMO!

Battaglia also had an important phone discussion on August 14, 2017 with Jessica Belling, the lead detective on Chantry’s case, regarding his alleged crimes not being reported to law enforcement by ARBCA officials when his physical abuse of children was discovered and documented in 2000.  You can listen to the entire conversation here.  It is 11:05 minutes long.  Here are some important excerpts.

Battaglia explained his situation to Detective Belling.

“We are dealing with a situation to where The Association of Baptist Churches has pretty much denied that any of their Baptist’s ministers, the ones who investigated, or the ones from the Committee.  They are denying, I guess from the original 2000 report that any of them had knowledge of physical or sexual abuse in such a way that they felt compelled to actually call law enforcement.  So they are saying from the original documentation they cite from a Miller Valley Baptist Church report, that was apparently sealed from the eyes of the association; they are saying that their ministers as they met, and the three men who were tasked to investigate at Miller Valley, that essentially all their investigation contained in the original 2000 report that was submitted for evidence, I believe, said none of those guys had knowledge of physical or sexual abuse so they did not deem it necessary to call law enforcement at that time back in 2000.”

Miller Valley Baptist Church (MVBC) in Prescott, AZ is the church Chantry pastored from 1995-2000.  The alleged victims of molestation and aggravated assault were children in the church.

“The ones who investigated” on behalf of MVBC were Eric Owens and Richard Howe.  Both were elders in the church.  Their testimony is found in the police reports.  They worked with the three-man investigative committee from ARBCA.

“The ones from the Committee” were Tedd Tripp, an author and pastor of Grace Fellowship Church of Hazleton, PA; Richard Jensen, a former police officer and pastor of Hope Reformed Baptist Church on Long Island; and Mike McKnight, a lawyer and elder from Grace Baptist Church in Carlisle, PA.

These three men were chosen by coordinator Bob Selph and the Administrative Council for the Association of Reformed Baptist Churches.  I am not certain who was on the Administrative Council in 2000 but they “sealed from the eyes of the association” the report written by Tripp, Jensen, and McKnight.  In other words, they refused to release the investigative report to the pastors and churches in ARBCA.  The current Administrative Council has done the same.  The men on this council are typically the most powerful and influential in the association.

Detective Belling responds to Battaglia’s inquiry and says the MVBC elders, ARBCA investigative committee, and ARBCA Administrative Council knew “the physical abuse” was “actually child abuse” but “did not report it” based on “documentation” in her possession.

Here is what she says about the matter.

“I can’t speak on behalf of what they were thinking, obviously back then, I can just go based off of what documentation I have. … In one of those documents it states that what they were investigating was in fact child abuse and that it could have been reported to law enforcement. … So to me, that shows they did have enough to report it to law enforcement and that they didn’t.  Whether they knew about the molest or not at that time, I don’t know … but the physical abuse, I believe they did know, was actually child abuse and they did not report it.  I’d say they probably had their suspicions of other things that were going on because the pastor was spanking these kids bare bottomed in private but I don’t believe any of the kids had made full disclosures at that time.”

Battaglia responds,

“That makes perfect sense.  That is our, that is the general felling across the board and that’s our general feeling why information is not being released to us.”

He is correct.  The Administrative Council is not going to release the 2000 report by Tripp, Jensen and McKnight or any other potentially incriminating documentation unless compelled by the court.

I remain skeptical Chantry’s case will be tried.  I hope I am wrong!  I think he will plea no contest if the court allows to avoid a jury trial that likely results in a guilty verdict given the abundant evidence against him.

“A no contest plea is a plea used in criminal proceedings as an alternative to a guilty or not guilty plea, whereby the defendant neither disputes nor admits to doing the crime.  This type of plea, also known as nolo contendere, literally means ‘I do not wish to contend.’” (Wikipedia)

By doing so he does not admit guilt and none of the incriminating evidence against him is put forward in court.  For instance, the 2000 Report which documents his physical abuse and includes photos from what I have been told.  This also prevents evidence from coming out that could later be used against them in a civil lawsuit(s).

Is Pleading ‘No Contest’ Different from ‘Guilty’?
Legal Advantages

By pleading no contest, a defendant can avoid going to trial on the criminal charge. This can be advantageous if a trial’s outcome is uncertain or if a defendant doesn’t want facts in the case to be aired out in public.

Also, a no contest plea cannot be used as evidence against a defendant in a civil lawsuit for the same act.  So if a defendant pleads no contest to a criminal assault, that plea can’t be used to prove her guilt in a civil lawsuit by the victim later on.

Pleading no contest also allows everyone to spin the outcome.  His lawyer, the Chantry clan and ARBCA officials can say Tom had no choice but to plead no contest because he was damned by false accusations, discriminatory police work and a biased justice system with animus against alleged abusers.  He didn’t have a fair chance.  He was doomed.  Or so the story goes.

Furthermore, if Chantry is sentenced and sent off to prison, I suspect they will continue to say what they have been saying since his arrest 15 months ago – he is suffering like Jesus – a man falsely accused and unjustly sentenced.  I don’t see their story changing.

Chantry’s trial was originally set for March 27, 2017.  His lawyer keeps getting it delayed.  I don’t know why if his client is so clearly innocent.  Anyway, there is an evidentiary hearing on November 8.  We should find out more then.

Anthony Battaglia is paying a price for asking hard questions about Tom Chantry and ARBCA leaders.  So are other men and women in the Association of Reformed Baptist Churches.  These are the true heroes of the faith.  They are the ones who have suffered for the cause of justice, not Tom Chantry.

I hope more and more church members in ARBCA study the evidence and challenge the official line that Chantry is innocent of physically and sexually abusing children.

Postscript – October 20 at 7:00 PM

Mr. Battaglia just contacted me and said “Great article!  If you can update the article, I resigned as a deacon and terminated my membership as of October 15th.”  I respect his decision though I am sure it was a hard one.  I know other men and women in ARBCA who have done the same out of godly conviction even though it was costly.


Comments

Tom Chantry: What Does Guilty and Not Guilty Really Mean? — 86 Comments

  1. First?

    Luke 6:45. A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For the mouth speaks what the heart is full of.

  2. @ ishy:
    I am waiting to see if the creepsters start sending out more letters about my *sin* in writing about child sex abuse and the church.

  3. dee wrote:

    @ ishy:
    I am waiting to see if the creepsters start sending out more letters about my *sin* in writing about child sex abuse and the church.

    I hope nobody has to go through that ever again. It’s hard to believe people do things like any of the stuff you have to write about, but they do. And a lot of other people knowingly let them.

  4. Remember Boz T.
    In all his years as a prosecutor specializing in child sexual abuse, he NEVER saw a church take the side of the victim. ALWAYS “RALLY ROUND THE PERP, BOYS! GOD SAITH!”

  5. Tom Chantry: What Does Guilty and Not Guilty Really Mean?

    Depends how you want to spin it.
    Spin, Spin, Spin, Spin, Spin, Spin, Spin, Spin, Spin…

  6. ishy wrote:

    Chantry’s creepiness was well known in Prescott when he was a pastor, so I do not believe the ARBCA one bit.

    I got a creepy feeling just reading some of his comments on pyro. but most of those folks gave/give me the creeps. I’m sure they feel the same way which is just fine. I read through the police reports, that was hard.

  7. If I was accused of such a heinous crime and was innocent, I would take my day in court.

    For Chantry it’s the best option to protect those who will help him later. Because he will get out of prison some day & he’ll need a job.

    The mixed blessing is his victims won’t have to testify. But the full extent of Chantry’s crimes will never come to light, nor will the cover up.

    I hope TWw will stay on the case with this one.

  8. “Tom Chantry is a protected™ pastor within the Phil Johnson, Frank Turk and Fred Butler, Grace to You (John MacArthur) firmament. That means we are not allowed to discuss his pending trial until “all the facts are known” per Phil Johnson.”

    We are not allowed?

    John 3:19-20 Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.
    Genesis 37:26
    Joshua 7:19
    Proverbs 28:13
    Job 31:33
    Proverbs 10:18
    Psalm 19:12
    Jeremiah 16:17
    Proverbs 20:5
    Isaiah 29:15 Woe to those who deeply hide their plans from the LORD, And whose deeds are done in a dark place, And they say, “Who sees us?” or “Who knows us?”

  9. Read the Chantry case files, and listened to the detective audio recording. 5 counts child molest and 2 of aggravated assault.

    The behavior of Chantry has similarities to that of John Smyth. A social scientist or behavioralist could shed light on this.

    The circumstances or covers of Smyth and Chantry were also similar: religious, evangelical, under the guise of education, discipline, tutoring, camps, solo access to children.

  10. My husband was on a jury that convicted a pedophile based only on the testimonies of the victims. It was a very hard thing for him to go through but he was happy to help get one more pedophile off the streets. If Chantry does the “no contest plea” will he still go to jail?

  11. If so many in ARBCA are certain that Chantry is innocent, then doesn’t it make sense that he should go to trial? Shouldn’t they have confidence that God will cause the truth to prevail? After all, as Calvinists they stress all the time that “God is sovereign” over all.

    I am not certain who was on the Administrative Council in 2000 but they “sealed from the eyes of the association” the report written by Tripp, Jensen, and McKnight. In other words, they refused to release the investigative report to the pastors and churches in ARBCA. The current Administrative Council has done the same.

    Something is rotten in Denmark, as the adage goes. This sounds like a cover up. How can these men have such power as to hide evidence that might reveal a child molester in their association of churches? Because I’m inclined to think that if there was exculpatory evidence in that investigative report by the Administrative Council, they’d have no problem releasing it. Further, if the Administrative Council refuses to release their report, how can all those pastors and members of ARBCA be so certain that Chantry is innocent? In my opinion, the pastors and congregants in ARBCA churches should insist that the AC release that information on Chantry so that the truth will be out in the open. After all, shouldn’t knowing the truth be the most important goal here?

    I find it odd that so many in ARBCA are willing to defend Chantry with all the reports on his case that are available as well as the judge’s ruling against him. If he is so innocent, why can’t he be found anywhere near children? I also find it disturbing that those in ARBCA who support Chantry aren’t bothered that their leadership in the Administrative Council is hiding information on this case from the investigation in 2000. If Chantry is innocent then why not reveal the information from that that report?

  12. ishy wrote:

    Chantry’s creepiness was well known in Prescott when he was a pastor, so I do not believe the ARBCA one bit.

    Ishy, what do you mean by this? Are you from Prescott?

  13. While all sexual molestation is wrong and deplorable, I find it even more strange that these “conservative” churches don’t even care that it was same-sex molestation. If two adult men in their congregation were alleged to have engaged in CONSENSUAL same-sex sexual activity, I’m sure they would be brought up for church discipline, if not kick out. Yet, a preacher accused of molesting boys, which should be viewed as a greater crime and sin, is treated like the victim and compared to Christ.

    I think there seems to be too much Preacher worship and not enough Jesus worship going on. I’m not Catholic, for several theological reasons but mainly because I refuse to believe that there is one man atop a hierarchy meant to rule over the Earthly Church. However, sadly, it seems that many Evangelical churches have replace one Supreme Pontiff with millions of little ones, many of whom resemble Alexander VI(Rodrigo de Borja) much more than Saint Peter.

  14. Darlene wrote:

    ishy wrote:
    Chantry’s creepiness was well known in Prescott when he was a pastor, so I do not believe the ARBCA one bit.
    Ishy, what do you mean by this? Are you from Prescott?

    I had family there. And I remembering visiting there one time while he was a pastor when my aunt strongly warned me about never going there and how bad that church was.

  15. Jarrett Edwards wrote:

    While all sexual molestation is wrong and deplorable, I find it even more strange that these “conservative” churches don’t even care that it was same-sex molestation. If two adult men in their congregation were alleged to have engaged in CONSENSUAL same-sex sexual activity, I’m sure they would be brought up for church discipline, if not kick out. Yet, a preacher accused of molesting boys, which should be viewed as a greater crime and sin, is treated like the victim and compared to Christ.

    Denial is almost always the response of everyone in sexual abuse, but particularly if that someone is important in the social hierarchy. Some of that is lack of training in identifying it, but most of it, I think, is a willful disbelief or a fear that they will get the backlash.

    I also don’t believe that many people really base their beliefs around their theology no matter how much they talk about being more biblical than everyone else; they just use it to get what they want. In some of these churches, women and children have a very low to no status. Many believe that the purpose of women and children is to serve the wants of the men in charge. I think they form their theology around that. And sometimes I wonder if the ones who protest the loudest against something they call a sin are the ones doing exactly what they protest against. As Chantry did himself online with the Pyro guys…

    As an association, they have to go with complete denial that it never happened or they’d probably be in legal trouble because they covered it up. Whether it’s because they didn’t want to look bad or because they didn’t believe it, I don’t know.

  16. Jarrett Edwards wrote:

    If two adult men in their congregation were alleged to have engaged in CONSENSUAL same-sex sexual activity, I’m sure they would be brought up for church discipline, if not kick out. Yet, a preacher accused of molesting boys, which should be viewed as a greater crime and sin

    Child molestation is repugnant crime whether it’s a boy or girl. Equally. Just like adult rape is a crime whether committed against a man or woman – equally.
    A consensual same sex relationship is not a crime.

  17. Mary27 wrote:

    If Chantry does the “no contest plea” will he still go to jail?

    If he pleads no contest, it will be entered as a guilty plea by the judge. The judge would determine sentence according to Arizona state law. Most likely, he would get jail time, how much (if any) is up to the judge.

  18. Jarrett Edwards wrote:

    I find it even more strange that these “conservative” churches don’t even care that it was same-sex molestation. If two adult men in their congregation were alleged to have engaged in CONSENSUAL same-sex sexual activity, I’m sure they would be brought up for church discipline, if not kick out.

    Maybe because they’re children they’re not REALLY male so it ISN’T REALLY HOMOSEXUALITY?
    (“LOOPHOLE! LOOPHOLE!”)

    I remember reading that same-sex pedophiles identify as Straight. That pre-pubescent boys’ primary & secondary sexual characteristics are more feminine than masculine — no facial hair, inconspicuous genitalia, smooth soft skin — and these pseudo-feminine characteristics are what same-sex pedos key on.

    However, same-sex Ehebephiles (who go after post-pubescent but legally-underage “Jail Bait”) DO identify as “gay”.

    Yet, a preacher accused of molesting boys, which should be viewed as a greater crime and sin, is treated like the victim and compared to Christ.

    RANK HATH ITS PRIVILEGES.

  19. Ken P. wrote:

    Mary27 wrote:

    If Chantry does the “no contest plea” will he still go to jail?

    If he pleads no contest, it will be entered as a guilty plea by the judge. The judge would determine sentence according to Arizona state law. Most likely, he would get jail time, how much (if any) is up to the judge.

    But with a Nolo, everything can be hushed up.

  20. In the OP, you mention that most child abuse victims wait to report, and many delay many years or do not report at all. I can attest to that. After I waited twenty year to ask my brother about his experience, I found out that we were not the only ones, and that no one, to my knowledge, ever told anyone at the time.

    The fact that these things are done in secret, and then handled, if at all, by the church in secret, pretty much take the Matthew 18 process out of the equation, imo. For a child to confront his abuser in private would be insanity. In our case, we were threatened with physical violence by the perp, and being children we were simply unaware that there even was a so-called process to deal with these matters.

    I find it ridiculous to blame the children for not being adult enough to follow a secret policy that they had no idea existed. I would go so far as to say that the vast majority or under age children & teens (in our churches) don’t even know what to do in these situations, and have never been trained about them in any way. They are simply easy prey.

    Good article. I hope that he is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and that his case remains as a black stain upon that church body, the associated churches, and the people who supported him for a very long time.

  21. A.Tumbleweed wrote:

    In the OP, you mention that most child abuse victims wait to report, and many delay many years or do not report at all. I can attest to that. After I waited twenty year to ask my brother about his experience, I found out that we were not the only ones, and that no one, to my knowledge, ever told anyone at the time.

    I am so sorry for what happened to you and your brother. How are you both doing today? Di you get the counseling and support that you needed?

  22. dee wrote:

    I am so sorry for what happened to you and your brother. How are you both doing today? Did you get the counseling and support that you needed?

    Thank you for your kind words. Yes, I got the help I needed, have support, and I am doing fine. Thanks for asking. 🙂

  23. @ Jarrett Edwards:
    They don’t care about sexual molestation if it involves one of their protected people. Because they have declared him to be *just an all around good guy,* the rest of us need to keep our wits off.

    They went after me because I had the unmitigated gall to say that I believed the victims of Tom Chantry. I bet you they have all would speak out agains Harvey Weinstein. They do not care about evidence. They only care that he is one of their own and is therefore untouchable. They are no different than those who have protected the likes of Jerry Sandusky and Harvey Weinstein.

  24. dee wrote:

    @ Jarrett Edwards:
    They don’t care about sexual molestation if it involves one of their protected people. Because they have declared him to be *just an all around good guy,* the rest of us need to keep our wits off.
    They went after me because I had the unmitigated gall to say that I believed the victims of Tom Chantry. I bet you they have all would speak out agains Harvey Weinstein. They do not care about evidence. They only care that he is one of their own and is therefore untouchable. They are no different than those who have protected the likes of Jerry Sandusky and Harvey Weinstein.

    I will forever wonder what Bible these people read as they sure seem to apply it as it fits their causes.

  25. This whole situation makes me ill….. How mant time have we heard preacher similarto these clowns rall against another flavor of christainty… yet they protect somone with these serious charges?

  26. dee wrote:

    They are no different than those who have protected the likes of Jerry Sandusky and Harvey Weinstein

    No they’re not. And they wouldn’t think twice about ranting against those who protected the Sanduskys and Weinsteins of the world.

    My thoughts – I believe the protectors of abusers abd abusers in the Church ARE WORSE than the above abusers ad protectors because they have the gall to use the name of Christ to do their dark deeds, including trying to shut people up!!

  27. “On the other hand, Tom Chantry’s wife, Karen; members from his and her family at large, and top officials in the Association of Reformed Baptist Church in America (ARBCA) have claimed Chantry is innocent of all charges, the alleged victims are lying, and the police are making something out of nothing.”

    But everyone knows that such alleged victims are always lying, McMartin proved it!

  28. NJ wrote:

    “On the other hand, Tom Chantry’s wife, Karen; members from his and her family at large, and top officials in the Association of Reformed Baptist Church in America (ARBCA) have claimed Chantry is innocent of all charges, the alleged victims are lying, and the police are making something out of nothing.”

    But everyone knows that such alleged victims are always lying, McMartin proved it!

    Yes, that was sarcasm.

  29. brian wrote:

    I got a creepy feeling just reading some of his comments on pyro.

    There was an article linked a while back that was pretty awful knowing what he’s been arrested for. It might have been the one one of his buddies took down and then yelled at everyone for reading…

  30. I guess eventually the people will either get in line with these men, who think they hold any authority or the people are going to scatter at some point! Take away Mr. Johnson’s and the rest of these so called celebrity pastor’s money and I believe they would find some other scheme to jump into! I find it difficult to believe that any of them are truly in the ministry for service! In order to become leaders one must be a servant. I don’t see any servants do you?

  31. Jarrett Edwards wrote:

    I find it even more strange that these “conservative” churches don’t even care that it was same-sex molestation. If two adult men in their congregation were alleged to have engaged in CONSENSUAL same-sex sexual activity

    It’s not really about ‘sin’. It’s about hierarchy. Children (even boy children) are lower on the hierarchy than men. Women are lower than men. I guess gay men are lower than straight men? Parishioners lower than pastors. If you look at it like that, all their ‘logic’ makes sense. Otherwise, nothing makes sense.

    And they seem to have no concept that ‘consent’ is important.

  32. ishy wrote:

    And I remembering visiting there one time while he was a pastor when my aunt strongly warned me about never going there and how bad that church was.

    Informal lines of communication are so important when formal ones are closed. This happened in Hollywood too, people warning each other on the sly, but if you didn’t have anyone to warn you, you got caught in it. Of if the people who should have been protecting you (for instance, parents) fell down on the job or had other priorities.

  33. @ Lea:
    I had a professor in college who openly warned all the women in his class not to go to a particular TA for office hours. And yet, the guy was still a TA. That’s the problem.

  34. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Ken P. wrote:
    Mary27 wrote:

    If Chantry does the “no contest plea” will he still go to jail?

    If he pleads no contest, it will be entered as a guilty plea by the judge. The judge would determine sentence according to Arizona state law. Most likely, he would get jail time, how much (if any) is up to the judge.

    But with a Nolo, everything can be hushed up.

    Wouldn’t this usually be part of a plea deal, where the outcome is (mostly) predetermined? So he would plead no contest, knowing he was getting X penalty. Or non-penalty.

  35. Lea wrote:

    I had a professor in college who openly warned all the women in his class not to go to a particular TA for office hours. And yet, the guy was still a TA. That’s the problem.

    That’s atrocious!

  36. Lea wrote:

    And they seem to have no concept that ‘consent’ is important.

    This This This!

    They loathe the word and thought of consent. Consensual sex bad, rape, no-big-deal.

  37. ishy wrote:

    Lea wrote:
    I had a professor in college who openly warned all the women in his class not to go to a particular TA for office hours. And yet, the guy was still a TA. That’s the problem.

    That’s atrocious!

    Right? I mean, don’t get me wrong, I liked that professor and appreciated that he warned people off. But WHY was that guy still a TA? Why was his behavior not corrected?

    Instead of putting the onus on a bunch of 19 year old girls to avoid someone who was supposed to be in a position to work with students, FIX THE PROBLEM. Sheesh.

  38. @ ishy:
    To be fair, I’m not saying he was assaulting anyone – I honestly don’t remember what exactly was said but probably not that. At the least he was harassing the people who came to learn, or asking them for dates, or something, to the point where the professor felt the need to warn us off.

  39. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    But with a Nolo, everything can be hushed up.

    I’ve seen where someone will accept a plea agreement that includes a severe sentence. When this happens, I wonder if there are other charges that could be brought and that the defendant is simply avoiding the whole truth coming out.

  40. @ Muff Potter:
    Moore appears to be a dying fish gasping for air. That constitutional boat has sailed. Up here our “conservatives” threw in the towel on gay marriage a long time ago.

    But it does highlight how these clowns think. The problem is what their followers will do.

    Look what happened to Dee with “Mr. Nobody”.

    Threatened animals are the most dangerous.

  41. Lea wrote:

    To be fair, I’m not saying he was assaulting anyone – I honestly don’t remember what exactly was said but probably not that. At the least he was harassing the people who came to learn, or asking them for dates, or something, to the point where the professor felt the need to warn us off.

    I had a TA in seminary who took over a class for a professor when the professor had some sort of family emergency. The guy seriously could not have a normal conversation. He spoke like an academic journal all the time. It was a 101 first-level class. And he got really frustrated and started blaming us for not understanding what he was talking about. I got a D in that class studying 6 hours a day on it (like I didn’t have other classes at the time). I talked with a few other students at the end of the semester who all said they wrote complaints on his performance review.

    He became a professor, or so I hear.

  42. Jack wrote:

    But it does highlight how these clowns think. The problem is what their followers will do.

    His followers may very well elect him to the U.S. Senate on 12 December of this year.

  43. What does guilty and not guilty mean to the clowns that are the subjevt of this post? Apparently a sematics game… the NT speaks of leaders being of good reputation…. news alert… being charged with molestation is not of good reputation, and wise leaders would not put themselves in such positions to start with….

  44. Jeffrey J Chalmers wrote:

    the NT speaks of leaders being of good reputation

    Yeah…it certainly doesn’t say ‘consider a leader above reproach until convicted in a court of law by a jury of 12’.

  45. Ken P. wrote:

    See section 61-15-120 in particular.

    It seems the intent of the law is to apply to a non consensual act, as it refers to beasts which can’t provide consent. That’s how I’d challenge it.
    Either way, if it came to court, what consenting adults do would be upheld by the constitution.
    I think it was Louisiana where the anti miscegenation laws were only removed around the year 2000.
    Meaning my marriage would have been illegal in that state. Those laws were declared unconstitutional back in the sixties.
    I stand by my statement.

  46. Muff Potter wrote:

    His followers may very well elect him to the U.S. Senate on 12 December of this year.

    And may do it. But society is more pluralistic. Moore would have no more real influence than a barking dog. One thing I’ve noticed about Americans, a lot of things get said but when push comes to shove, they do value their freedoms.

  47. Ken P. wrote:

    And yet the law stands.

    It’s either not been challenged or they haven’t gotten around to removing it. I’m pretty sure there are gay men in relationships in South Carolina, just as I’m sure that there were mixed marriages in Louisiana before the year 2000.
    Statement still stands.

  48. Jack wrote:

    It’s either not been challenged or they haven’t gotten around to removing it.

    This is my point: I haven’t seen any grassroots movement to repeal it.

    South Carolina voted to change the state constitution to allow interracial marriage.

    The year was 2000.

    33% voted against the change.

  49. Ken P. wrote:

    South Carolina voted to change the state constitution to allow interracial marriage.

    Thanks for the info & my apologies to the good folks of Louisiana.

    And this is my point. The principles of the constitution were put in place to protect the minority from the majority.

    The civil rights movement used this to great effect.

    Now I’m going to go out on a limb and say that a majority of Americans stand by those principles.

    I don’t consider myself in an interracial marriage. If my wife and I weren’t of the same race we wouldn’t be able to have the offspring we have.

    I have heard the bible cited to justify why people of different ethnicities can’t marry. Remember, the loving God had the Israelite men had to send their foreign wives & children away? Tantamount to a death sentence in antiquity.

    True story, I was told my children were inferior because of their “mixed blood”.

    Society changes over time and to get back to the point of this post, Chantry et al still hold to a theology that reveres that barbarity and they use it justify their actions/compulsions.

    In their world, women and children have lesser value. This issue is as much about power as it is about sex.

  50. Jack wrote:

    Jarrett Edwards wrote:
    If two adult men in their congregation were alleged to have engaged in CONSENSUAL same-sex sexual activity, I’m sure they would be brought up for church discipline, if not kick out. Yet, a preacher accused of molesting boys, which should be viewed as a greater crime and sin
    Child molestation is repugnant crime whether it’s a boy or girl. Equally. Just like adult rape is a crime whether committed against a man or woman – equally.
    A consensual same sex relationship is not a crime.

    That’s why I started my post with, “While all sexual molestation is wrong and deplorable”

    My point is that if they were intellectually honest and as consistent as they claim to be, then even if the child aspect and non-consensual aspects doesn’t bother them(though of course IT SHOULD), then the fact that it is same sex molestation should still lead them to condemn Chantry, not protect him. Because in their eyes any same-sex activity IS a “crime” or sin.

    My broader point, really is this, by protecting him, they are abdicating ANY claim they thought they had to regulate or pronounce judgment on ANY member of their congregations or the wider world. How can they claim any standing to judge same-sex partners, co-cohabiting straight couples, or people engaging in illicit sexual activity when they are covering and protecting a molester?

    Again, I want to reiterate, I ABSOLUTELY HATE child molestation, regardless of the genders involved. But, furthermore I also hate hypocrisy and people creating loopholes to protect the powerful and the elite, and being intellectually dishonest and inconsistent with their followers.

  51. mot wrote:

    dee wrote:
    @ Jarrett Edwards:
    They don’t care about sexual molestation if it involves one of their protected people. Because they have declared him to be *just an all around good guy,* the rest of us need to keep our wits off.
    They went after me because I had the unmitigated gall to say that I believed the victims of Tom Chantry. I bet you they have all would speak out agains Harvey Weinstein. They do not care about evidence. They only care that he is one of their own and is therefore untouchable. They are no different than those who have protected the likes of Jerry Sandusky and Harvey Weinstein.
    I will forever wonder what Bible these people read as they sure seem to apply it as it fits their causes.

    Evidently one that leaves out Matthew 7:21-23!

  52. Ken P. wrote:

    I beg to differ.
    http://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t16c015.php
    See section 61-15-120 in particular.

    I’d just like to point out that statute is unconstitutional under Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003). It does not matter that the state of South Carolina has not repealed it; it is unconstitutional. This is similar to how so many states didn’t repeal their anti-miscegenation statutes until years after Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967). Alabama did not repeal its anti-miscegenation statute until November 2000.

  53. Ken P. wrote:

    Jack wrote:
    It’s either not been challenged or they haven’t gotten around to removing it.
    This is my point: I haven’t seen any grassroots movement to repeal it.
    South Carolina voted to change the state constitution to allow interracial marriage.
    The year was 2000.
    33% voted against the change.

    As a South Carolinian, who majored in Political Science and Minored in Southern Studies, at the University of South Carolina, let me speak to this. There are many problems with the Constitution and Laws on the books in SC. Many of us who studied the problems in my classes, along with most of our professors, agreed that the only way to fix the problems would be to rewrite everything. We also make it a crime for unmarried couples to live together or to commit adultery,SECTION 16-15-60, but there sure are alot of them around here, many receiving state funding. There are plenty more even stranger laws, as well. I had one professor say that he thinks there are more laws invalidated by the courts in our code than enforceable laws. The problem is that no one has the political will to take on the task of removing them, as it is much more popular to add laws than to clean up the old ones that aren’t even enforceable anymore. Why rile up the anti-gay voters, if the laws doesn’t even apply anymore? It is much more politically safe to just let it be, until at some point in the future our grandkids become so embarrassed that they change it.

    My suggestion which I wrote in a term paper in one class was simple, pass a law that requires an annual audit of the code to discover any laws that have been declared un-constitutional by the Supreme Court of either the state or US, and then the legislature can vote to accept the audit and those sections would be repealed automatically, without them having to take individual votes on each section. I remember the Professor wrote on my paper, “That makes total sense, so that means the legislature would never pass it.”

    Also of note is a quote that is very popular among the political class in South Carolina, from one of our 18th Century statesmen James L. Petigru, “South Carolina is too small for a republic and too large for an insane asylum.” And, I’m certain he would have something to say about the current state of the invalidated laws still on our books, as he was the one who first codified our state’s laws and was also against the idea of nullification.

  54. Below is a comment I recently received in response to an article I wrote quite some time ago on Tom Chantry. The author is not quite accurate when he stated that I have removed his comment four times. The truth is I never approved it. I did some research on this author and found he is an older man that has an investment business in Carlisle, PA. Carlisle is the town where Walter Chantry, father of Tom Chantry, pastored Grace Baptist Church from 1963-2002. I would guess that the author of this comment likely attends Grace Baptist Church and is friends with Walt Chantry. I believe this comment is illustrative of the mindset of those who blindly support their pastor, and, as has been mentioned previously about other Chantry supporters, evidence of any compassion for the victims is non-existent.

    “This website is a very clear example of trying to convict someone, Tom Chantry, by slander, innuendo, and unproved allegation. It repeats assertion after assertion without proof. It attempts to have others accept the slander no matter what the legal situation is. It completely tries to overturn the principle that everyone is INNOCENT until proven guilty. It totally ignores the reality that a disgruntled person, e.g., a spanked person may lie about the situation to get back at the person responsible. This site attempts to slander & insult anyone standing up for the truth, calling them “bullies, etc.” A clear evidence of the distinct bias of this site is they have removed my comments 4 times!”

  55. From my very soul, “I just want to die well”. My meaning I want what time I have on this Earth to echo in eternity and bring Glory to God. I don’t know why God needs Glory nor do I understand His preoccupation with such but I want to die well. I tend to believe in a Transcendent God, He (I loathe using that “pronoun”) because Women have been the backbone of the church from, well day one. There would not be the Christian faith of any kind if it was not for women. What did the politically established church, and any honest rendition of history is much of “orthodoxy” was accomplished at the point of the secular sword. I think God saves everyone because I cannot find an intellectually honest way some of the folks I work with gaining salvation apart from Universalism. I don’t know if God will save me, personally, I don’t expect it but that is another post.

    I just want to see them fly. I agree this is pathetic even disgusting but I had one rapture dream where I was flying in the air with some of the folks I worked with unfettered by the physical and cognitive limitations. It did not give me much comfort as I did my evangelical duty and I castigated myself with a profound vengeance because of such rank evil vile emotionalism. A follower of the prince of Hope should not need such hope. Try pondering that for a few years. Most of my “end time” dreams/nightmares were basically everyone I knew burning in the lake of fire and the deaths of their souls were on my soul because I did not preach the pure “Gospel” good enough. Their eternal blood was on my hands. I dont get the Christian faith to be honest but that too is another post.

  56. Muslin, fka Dee Holmes wrote:

    I’d just like to point out that statute is unconstitutional under Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003). It does not matter that the state of South Carolina has not repealed it; it is unconstitutional. This is similar to how so many states didn’t repeal their anti-miscegenation statutes until years after Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967). Alabama did not repeal its anti-miscegenation statute until November 2000.

    To all of you constitutional lawyers out there:

    I do not dispute that the law is constitutional or enforceable, I only point out that the law is still on the books and no one has taken steps to repeal it.

  57. Jarrett Edwards wrote:

    Why rile up the anti-gay voters, if the laws doesn’t even apply anymore? It is much more politically safe to just let it be, until at some point in the future our grandkids become so embarrassed that they change it.

    Very true.

  58. Ken P. wrote:

    I do not dispute that the law is constitutional or enforceable, I only point out that the law is still on the books and no one has taken steps to repeal it.

    For me this illustrates how the constitution protects those in a minority group from being unfairly targeted by a majority.

    The South Carolina laws were put in place during a very different time in history, when many in the world, never mind the U.S. held views that we would consider antiquated at best.

    So no one has taken steps to repeal them. As Jarret mentioned in his comment above, it may be a “pick your battles” scenario.

    But the truth is that two people engaged in a consensual relationship (same or opposite sex, married or common-law) is not a crime in the United States.

    Part of why Chantry has supporters is that these folks use the rationalization that all sin is sin. They look to the Old Testament and see that homosexuality carries a death penalty, being disobedient to parents (and they probably infer this to be any authority) is also punishable by death.

    These are strictures that the civilized world considers barbaric, and I have always contended that this is the elephant in the room for every single church service held.

    But Christianity is supposed to have a focus on the ministry of Jesus – the four canonical gospels. The old testament leads up to it, the new testament books look back to it – including that acid trip known as the Revelation.

    Jesus never mentions homosexuality, he has compassion for women who commit adultery and prostitution (and this is very telling – in the first century, women had very few rights and a woman had very few options to put food on the table for her children) and he’s very blunt about what happens to those who despoil the innocence of children. My personal belief is that the admonition regarding divorce is a call to first century men to honour their commitments knowing that the options for women in that society were few.

    Christians could go a long way to addressing the elephant by focusing on the example of the gospels rather than the reality of bronze age morality (a morality that was also bolted on to the faith by Paul who educated in Jewish law)

  59. Jack wrote:

    Christians could go a long way to addressing the elephant by focusing on the example of the gospels rather than the reality of bronze age morality (a morality that was also bolted on to the faith by Paul who educated in Jewish law)

    I absolutely agree with you. And I think that churches losing their focus on Jesus is exactly why the church has so many problems.

    But I think their targeting is intentional, because they don’t want people to focus on the sins of those leaders, like pride, greed, and sexual abuse. I think many of these men are wolves and they know they are wolves. They were never Christians to begin with. Hold up a trophy “sin” issue and use it to distract people from the rampant sin in their own ranks while keeping the peons paying their tithes. Plus, it works with the social conditioning of many men in the church. These leaders look nothing like what Jesus said His followers were supposed to be.

  60. ishy wrote:

    But I think their targeting is intentional, because they don’t want people to focus on the sins of those leaders, like pride, greed, and sexual abuse. I think many of these men are wolves and they know they are wolves. They were never Christians to begin with. Hold up a trophy “sin” issue and use it to distract people from the rampant sin in their own ranks while keeping the peons paying their tithes. Plus, it works with the social conditioning of many men in the church. These leaders look nothing like what Jesus said His followers were supposed to be.

    So they cut and paste the bible into some sort of “Frankenfaith”. A monster bolted together out of a bunch of dead bits.

  61. Jack wrote:

    So they cut and paste the bible into some sort of “Frankenfaith”. A monster bolted together out of a bunch of dead bits.

    Yeah. I don’t think the theology is really important to them, because they’re really setting up themselves as gods. Hence the extreme focus on authoritarianism. But creating a narrative about the theology is important, because there are a lot of gullible people that will follow if they make it sound like it’s from the Bible.

  62. ishy wrote:

    But I think their targeting is intentional, because they don’t want people to focus on the sins of those leaders, like pride, greed, and sexual abuse.

    Yes. It’s so much easier to focus on that stuff than to actually try to fix the sins in your own life. And it deflects attention away from you as well when you’re doing the wrong thing.

    As to whether they know they’re wolves? I think it varies. Some people have convinced themselves they are in the right. That is why LOVE is supposed to be the predominate value, because without it to balance everything gets screwed up. That’s what we see in churches that abuse.

  63. Jack wrote:

    So they cut and paste the bible into some sort of “Frankenfaith”. A monster bolted together out of a bunch of dead bits.

    A vivid and yet very telling metaphor.
    Fundamentalism originally started off in the late 19th and early 20th centuries as a push back to the higher criticism of the German theological school which denied the virgin birth and Jesus’ bodily resurrection from the dead.
    But like ‘Topsy’* it just ‘growed’ over the decades into the Frankenfaith you’ve described.
    Wahhabi Islam followed a similar trajectory with their Qur’an.

    *with apologies to Harriet Beecher Stowe

  64. From the OP: “… the pastor was spanking these kids bare bottomed in private…”

    Q: How many red flags to Tom Chantry’s defenders need?

    Makes one want to rap on their forehead to see if anyone is at home. (insert expression of disgust here)

  65. Ken P. wrote:

    I do not dispute that the law is constitutional or enforceable, I only point out that the law is still on the books and no one has taken steps to repeal it.

    There’s a LOT of obsolete laws and ordinances on the books that “no one has taken steps to repeal”. A lot of these just get forgotten in the paper blizzard over time, until someone digs them up and uploads them for a laugh.

  66. Jack wrote:

    So they cut and paste the bible into some sort of “Frankenfaith”. A monster bolted together out of a bunch of dead bits.

    If a “bolted together bunch of dead bits” is a Flesh Golem, what kind of Golem is a “Frankenfaith”?

  67. ishy wrote:

    Hold up a trophy “sin” issue and use it to distract people from the rampant sin in their own ranks while keeping the peons paying their tithes.

    Repeat after me:
    GOD H8S FAGS
    GOD H8S FAGS
    GOD H8S FAGS
    (And Trans is the new Fag.)

    I recently discovered I have a niece who’s Trans.
    As in Serious Gender Dysphoria from birth (or close as makes no difference).
    And apparently she’s going to do a full “transition” to male in the future.

    (Gender Dysphoria is one bizarre phenomenon. That you can be anatomically and genetically of one sex but everything in your mind and emotions tells you you’ve always been the other. I heard a theory that as the brain starts to develop in the womb, it wires up as male or female based on the androgens and estrogens of the developing body. If the androgen/estrogen receptors get Boolean “flipped” so they respond to androgens as if estrogens and estrogens as if androgens, you could actually have the brain get wired up and OS kernel booted in the opposite sexual development as the rest of the body. I’m NOT going to get into today’s fight over difference between “Sex” and Gender”. Just that in Classical English, “Sex” is a property of animate nouns and “Gender” of inanimate nouns.)

  68. brian wrote:

    Most of my “end time” dreams/nightmares were basically everyone I knew burning in the lake of fire and the deaths of their souls were on my soul because I did not preach the pure “Gospel” good enough. Their eternal blood was on my hands.

    “Wretched Urgency” by way of Ezekiel 33.
    http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/64264
    That way lies Madness.

  69. Jarrett Edwards wrote:

    “South Carolina is too small for a republic and too large for an insane asylum.”

    GREAT LINE!

    Right up there with John Adams’ “One useless man is a Disgrace; Two are a Law Firm, and Three or more constitute a Congress.”

  70. Uhhh… A comment I have in moderation was intended as TWO separate subjects. Put together as they were when I hit “Post Comment”, they give a very wrong impression.

    The first part is just reiterating the Fred Phelps shtick you find so often among God’s Chosen. And how it’s being retargeted to the next target now that they’ve lost the first.

    The second is a statement that’s only related by the term “Trans”. Yes, I have a niece who’s Trans. That does NOT mean I’m going to go Fred Phelps on her. I’ve been on the receiving end of similar accusations for unrelated reasons, so I know what it’s like.

  71. Guest wrote:

    Lea wrote:
    And they seem to have no concept that ‘consent’ is important.
    This This This!
    They loathe the word and thought of consent.

    Because “Consent” stands directly in the way of “I WANNA!” and Kim Jong-Un has heard the word “NO” more times in his life than these MoGs.

  72. Deb, Dee, Guy Behind the Curtain?

    I’ve got two comments in moderation.
    It might be better for all concerned if you just delete them.

  73. Tom Chantry: What Does Guilty and Not Guilty Really Mean?

    “JUST BECAUSE YOU DID IT DOESN’T MEAN YOU’RE GUILTY!”
    — actual billboard ad for a criminal defense lawyer

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *