tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3650607416501633022.post2090244408782332784..comments2023-04-03T08:43:13.238-07:00Comments on Christian School Confidential: on second thought. . .Mr6http://www.blogger.com/profile/10726923838417573949noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3650607416501633022.post-80175426449861727302009-12-11T06:05:33.245-08:002009-12-11T06:05:33.245-08:00Great points made here. I still think more needs t...Great points made here. I still think more needs to be done... but I see exactly what you're saying.Meganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13465951012394161705noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3650607416501633022.post-68845519057091753562008-06-17T08:57:00.000-07:002008-06-17T08:57:00.000-07:00I understand that feeling, but if talk is so cheap...I understand that feeling, but if talk is so cheap why is it so difficult to get Messer, etc, to even address half the issues stated in that report?<BR/><BR/>All I can say is the bulk of my problems began to get solved upon the recognition of them. If recognition of your problems helps on an individual basis, I'm hoping that helps on a corporate level as well.<BR/><BR/>Even if the SBC decided to start a database, I think they would still be criticized. Either for not putting 'the right people' in charge, or probably having high standards for those who qualify for this list.<BR/><BR/>For instance, would the database include those who have been simply accused? Or only those who have gone through a full trial and have been found guilty? I have the scary thought that some want those who have been 'credibly accused' to be on this database, and that is something I'd disagree with.<BR/><BR/>If you remove the police and investigative authorities, anybody can be 'credibly accused'. <BR/><BR/>I'm not even sure I know what the term 'credibly accused' means. We trust some accusers more than we trust other accusers? Either way, it's easier to make unsubstantiated claims within the context of a religious organization moreso than it is to actually file a report with the police.<BR/><BR/>What exactly qualifies a person to be listed on this database? That's a question I'd like to see answered. <BR/><BR/>I already have a dim view of the integrity of religious organizations. I have seen exaggerations, and outright lies, from those claiming to be christians. If a SBC database allows those who have been accused, without the benefit of a court trial, to be listed, they open themselves up to lawsuits from those who have been falsely accused by opportunists.<BR/><BR/>And those opportunists are out there! I have experienced some of them, and their blatant lies and exaggerations, within the last two years! It's easy to accuse people within the context of a religious organization. Quite a different matter to take 'em to court!Mr6https://www.blogger.com/profile/10726923838417573949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3650607416501633022.post-34335490035934472542008-06-15T08:02:00.000-07:002008-06-15T08:02:00.000-07:00I applaud them for taking a step. But talk is chea...I applaud them for taking a step. But talk is cheap as the saying goes. There reasoning falls flat about the database. Seeing as how they have thrown churches out of the SBC because of equal treatment granted to persons of all sexual orientations they could have simply ruled that any local church wanting to participate in the convention would have to participate in a sexual predator database, or else be removed from the convention. Period.<BR/><BR/>My skeptisim comes on strong when I see them say <I>"The database idea also is undermined by the fact that the convention cannot require churches to report instances of sexual abuse to local, state or national conventions, the report said."</I> I see so homosexual issues we can force them, protecting children we can not. <BR/><BR/>I think the FindLaw article did a good job talking about this: http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20080612.htmlJ. Davidsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11877632554459535665noreply@blogger.com