(( Would You File Charges on this Holiness Cop? ))

[missourimary]

If there is nothing wrong with splits, then there is no defamation case. Discrimination maybe depending on what was said along with the postings. However, he could call freedom of speech and also state that it is a private forum. If it is the one I'm thinking it may be, I understand there are requisites to being allowed to join and it is a pretty closed forum. Although I am unsure how the information leaked out... several people are going to need to be forgiving in this situation.

It is ashame that he felt he should do this. What blows my mind is that there was probably no real purpose other than throw mud, because most UCs are very close knit and only fellowship others that they've already checked out anyway. For one conservative to go to a meeting alone, and come back with pictures to "prove" their point that other churches' ladies are wearing slits... well, duh. Everyone who thinks like him and everyone that was there already know or think they know-without pics.

[OnTheFritz]

Originally Posted by missourimary

If there is nothing wrong with splits, then there is no defamation case. Discrimination maybe depending on what was said along with the postings. However, he could call freedom of speech and also state that it is a private forum. If it is the one I'm thinking it may be, I understand there are requisites to being allowed to join and it is a pretty closed forum. Although I am unsure how the information leaked out... several people are going to need to be forgiving in this situation.

Which frankly makes it all the more creepy to me.... Just sayin'.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by missourimary

... For one conservative to go to a meeting alone, and come back with pictures to "prove" their point that other churches' ladies are wearing slits... well, duh. Everyone who thinks like him and everyone that was there already know or think they know-without pics.

Yeah but thanks to this good brother they get to share pictures of certain body parts that were exposed. Things that they missed by not being there.

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by missourimary

If there is nothing wrong with splits, then there is no defamation case. Discrimination maybe depending on what was said along with the postings. However, he could call freedom of speech and also state that it is a private forum. If it is the one I'm thinking it may be, I understand there are requisites to being allowed to join and it is a pretty closed forum. Although I am unsure how the information leaked out... several people are going to need to be forgiving in this situation.

It is ashame that he felt he should do this. What blows my mind is that there was probably no real purpose other than throw mud, because most UCs are very close knit and only fellowship others that they've already checked out anyway. For one conservative to go to a meeting alone, and come back with pictures to "prove" their point that other churches' ladies are wearing slits... well, duh. Everyone who thinks like him and everyone that was there already know or think they know-without pics.

You know...women just get no let up on these issues. Slits are put into skirts so you can walk and not trip as well as to keep it from appearring too tight/revealing.

Lets just get out the safety pins and the sewing needles and pin/sew these slits up so we can preach on skirts so tight they make women trip

Blessings, Rhoni

[coadie]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

It is alarming!

Funny though, we've had this type discussion before and were slammed for saying the minister had a problem for doing this type thing.

Isn't there some law of guilty for looking?
Someone posted a picture of Obama checking some one out. I guess if this guy is applying his lust of the eyes, then he is guilty.

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by coadie

Isn't there some law of guilty for looking?
Someone posted a picture of Obama checking some one out. I guess if this guy is applying his lust of the eyes, then he is guilty.

Someone has the right picture

[Stephanas]

Originally Posted by OnTheFritz

It's not about disagreement, it's about inappropriate behavior based on highly questionable motives. Maybe someone should invite him on here to defend his motive for posting photos of young women on a predominately male-oriented message board. Maybe he can explain why he didn't just state the facts without showing the "proof". Did he think the other men would not be able to visualize what he was describing?

Originally Posted by Sam

I'm sure some of them did a lot of visualizing.

Brother Sam, you need to step back and think about these posts. The dirty little insinuations are not reflecting well on you at all.

[coadie]

And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Am I the only one goin' to the bible for the solution? "the presenting problem" is his eyes. The woman's legs are not the problem.

[missourimary]

Originally Posted by Rhoni

You know...women just get no let up on these issues. Slits are put into skirts so you can walk and not trip as well as to keep it from appearring too tight/revealing.

Lets just get out the safety pins and the sewing needles and pin/sew these slits up so we can preach on skirts so tight they make women trip

Blessings, Rhoni

Not arguing for or against slits here. I have an opinion, you have one, everyone else has their own too. However, the fact here is that someone took pics of something he disagreed with and then posted them on a closed site, but word of the posted pics got out (surprise, surprise).

[KWSS1976]

Why don't someone post a name or link on this so we can stop all the assumptions.....