Innuendo, “whispers,” and “abundant suspicions”, but essentially no evidence — plus an "investigation" that investigated nothing — demonized innocent people to pull off a giant power grab.
"But here’s something Downen ignored completely: In a March 25, 2023, decision of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division, Judge Sean D. Jordan ordered that “all of Plaintiff Jane Doe’s negligence and gross negligence claims against defendants Patterson and SWBTS are dismissed with prejudice.”"
It could be Sean D. Jordan is actually part of (cue the theme from Jaws) THE PLOT!
Wonder why so many (all?) institutions are no longer trusted (or so we are constantly informed)? Just a thought, putting on my Tin Foil Hat (Always use tin foil, aluminum will not provide complete protection!), could this be part of The Long March Though The Institutions? Now obviously many were/are ripe for this distrust.
My underlying theory is The Goal of the Progressives is the destruction of western civilization, and replacing it with some form of Marxism.
I sympathize with your defending against some of the allegations against the SBC and bemoaning the progressive creep in the organization. But the final exoneration you trumpet seems largely on procedural grounds, not substantive. Moreover, Pressler's misdeeds and abuse are well-documented in Rollins' years-long civil lawsuit that he and SBC delayed but which was eventually settled via hefty payments. That he was not criminally charged may owe more to the statute of limitations and prosecutorial discretion.
No they aren’t. We still have the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” in this country and in the Bible — which all these people not only ignored but pretended was pro-abuse — and Rollins never offered any evidence worthy of the word. But people hated Paul Pressler and were happy to demonize him after he was too old to defend himself.
I'm not gonna change the mind of someone with a vested interest or an axe to grind. But the undecided should read the reams of publicly available evidence about Pressler's perfidy. It wasn't just one person, but many. And none of it was ever refuted. And, BTW, Rollins did not sue Pressler when he was "too old to defend himself": the suit was filed in 2017, but SBC, Pressler, et al. dragged it out for years with one procedural delay after another until they finally settled (when trial was inevitable) in 2023-24.
Again--I sympathize with the goal of keeping the SBC conservative and not woke. But that does not make it blameless. For instance, the evidence showed that 1st Baptist Church in Houston was aware of Pressler's predelictions years before, but still let him continue as a youth minister until he was forced out. Those who refuse to learn from history are, as they say, doomed to repeat it...
Well, if you don’t believe in the Bible, that’s on you. Because that standard comes from the Bible, which also requires two or three witnesses. Now, if you would like for us to accuse you of something and ruin your life over it, we can certainly do that, but I think suddenly you would discover that you thought the Bible was right after all, as it was in the case of Joseph.
Also, there are no “reams of evidence“. Not unless you believe, as Rollins’ testimony requires you to believe, that an 80 year-old man in a diaper forcibly raped a 45 year-old man in his prime.
Unfortunately we as humans are fallible and Satan will use that to sow lies and distrust. Fortunately we serve a just God who will guide us to the truth, if we let him.
"But here’s something Downen ignored completely: In a March 25, 2023, decision of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division, Judge Sean D. Jordan ordered that “all of Plaintiff Jane Doe’s negligence and gross negligence claims against defendants Patterson and SWBTS are dismissed with prejudice.”"
It could be Sean D. Jordan is actually part of (cue the theme from Jaws) THE PLOT!
Wonder why so many (all?) institutions are no longer trusted (or so we are constantly informed)? Just a thought, putting on my Tin Foil Hat (Always use tin foil, aluminum will not provide complete protection!), could this be part of The Long March Though The Institutions? Now obviously many were/are ripe for this distrust.
My underlying theory is The Goal of the Progressives is the destruction of western civilization, and replacing it with some form of Marxism.
You can't have a revolution without destroying belief in what you seek to replace.
I sympathize with your defending against some of the allegations against the SBC and bemoaning the progressive creep in the organization. But the final exoneration you trumpet seems largely on procedural grounds, not substantive. Moreover, Pressler's misdeeds and abuse are well-documented in Rollins' years-long civil lawsuit that he and SBC delayed but which was eventually settled via hefty payments. That he was not criminally charged may owe more to the statute of limitations and prosecutorial discretion.
No they aren’t. We still have the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” in this country and in the Bible — which all these people not only ignored but pretended was pro-abuse — and Rollins never offered any evidence worthy of the word. But people hated Paul Pressler and were happy to demonize him after he was too old to defend himself.
That criminal standard--requiring proof "beyond a reasonable doubt" and subject to the criminal statute of limitations--does not define the truth. The civil suit against Pressler & SBC did not have the same limitations. (See, e.g., the Texas First Court of Appeals February 2021 opinion at https://search.txcourts.gov/SearchMedia.aspx?MediaVersionID=5deb5549-87c9-4197-a301-15cd5dceda7b&coa=coa01&DT=Opinion&MediaID=9d5b48cc-5b0b-4279-b821-f7a742b7308a). Did OJ Simpson kill his wife? The criminal jury found him "not guilty" but the civil jury held him responsible. Which do you believe?
I'm not gonna change the mind of someone with a vested interest or an axe to grind. But the undecided should read the reams of publicly available evidence about Pressler's perfidy. It wasn't just one person, but many. And none of it was ever refuted. And, BTW, Rollins did not sue Pressler when he was "too old to defend himself": the suit was filed in 2017, but SBC, Pressler, et al. dragged it out for years with one procedural delay after another until they finally settled (when trial was inevitable) in 2023-24.
Again--I sympathize with the goal of keeping the SBC conservative and not woke. But that does not make it blameless. For instance, the evidence showed that 1st Baptist Church in Houston was aware of Pressler's predelictions years before, but still let him continue as a youth minister until he was forced out. Those who refuse to learn from history are, as they say, doomed to repeat it...
Well, if you don’t believe in the Bible, that’s on you. Because that standard comes from the Bible, which also requires two or three witnesses. Now, if you would like for us to accuse you of something and ruin your life over it, we can certainly do that, but I think suddenly you would discover that you thought the Bible was right after all, as it was in the case of Joseph.
Also, there are no “reams of evidence“. Not unless you believe, as Rollins’ testimony requires you to believe, that an 80 year-old man in a diaper forcibly raped a 45 year-old man in his prime.
You really expect me to believe that?
Unfortunately we as humans are fallible and Satan will use that to sow lies and distrust. Fortunately we serve a just God who will guide us to the truth, if we let him.