UPC Pastor Convicted of Slander in Pulpit! - Page 62

Pressing-On · #**611** 07-13-2010, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pelathais

She "appears" to have been if we make certain assumptions that we have no evidence to maintain. For example, if we assume that the "bikini" thing happened at a private pool with just the woman and the "mutual friend" present. However, it may well have been a public pool with hundreds present and the two were seen in passing. Also, since everything else has been exaggerated, why must we assume that it even was a "bikini?"

And you are correct to object to the insinuations of listing the sins and saying, "... she did one of these..." That's just plain daft behavior for any public speaker.

Pel, dear friend, I am a conservative woman. I'm not going to strut around in a bikini. If I did, I would certainly have some moral issues to deal with. It's just that simple. I don't give a rat's tail feathers, what the world is doing. Bikinis are not modest and should not be something a decent, Christian woman would wear in public.

pelathais · #**612** 07-13-2010, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charnock

Oh sweet niblets, people!

Are you honestly saying you see nothing wrong with this chick strutting her stuff with a guy she's not married to? Nothing at all? Really? Honestly? truly? Verily?

You don't even think it was sinful, unwise, deceitful, and lascivious?

We haven't really received any information that she was "strutting her stuff..."

It seems that this event may have occurred after the couple had separated and after the lady had left the church in question. We don't have anything but the word's of the pastor concerning the "bikini" - and he equated the "bikini" with bestiality. I really don't think the information we have available is sufficient to condemn the lady out of hand.

And again - she and her attorneys bet $500,000 dollars that her statement and claim to not having committed adultery would stand up in court - and it did.

I can't judge her thoughts, intentions nor her soul. But I can observe what happened when an awful lot of money was on the line.

MissBrattified · #**613** 07-13-2010, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I didn't take it that way when I read what the pastor said. I took it that he listed nine things that included fornication, teaching moment, and said she had committed one of them. If everyone's imagination was running wild, then they are just stupid. LOL!

No, PO, they're just being people. That's what people do when you give them 9 possibilities and don't tell them which one is the correct one.

He defined fornication, then stated that Ms. Driver was guilty of one of those things he had listed, then further stated that his daughter and the ex were going to be "romantically involved." This statement was made 3 months after the divorce was final and 4 months before the new couple were wed.

You would think that if a statement really needed to be made to the church regarding Ms. Driver, it would have been made upon discovery of her indiscretion, in the form of an open rebuke. Nope--it was reserved for later, when the Pastor *discovered* that his daughter was going to be involved with the ex. You HAVE to concede that the timing is suspect.

missourimary · #**614** 07-13-2010, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pelathais

She "appears" to have been if we make certain assumptions that we have no evidence to maintain. For example, if we assume that the "bikini" thing happened at a private pool with just the woman and the "mutual friend" present. However, it may well have been a public pool with hundreds present and the two were seen in passing. Also, since everything else has been exaggerated, why must we assume that it even was a "bikini?"

And you are correct to object to the insinuations of listing the sins and saying, "... she did one of these..." That's just plain daft behavior for any public speaker.

Don't know how long it's been since any of you have been in the swimwear section or have been to a public pool... but "bikini" no longer is just defined as the skimpiest of skimpy. There are "bikinis" and "tankinis" now that cover more skin than my one piece.

Pressing-On · #**615** 07-13-2010, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by missourimary

PO, it isn't funny. It is sad at best and despicable at worst. You didn't read the article, and you slandered the woman you didnt even know as badly-or even worse-than the pastor who faced a jury. There is very much wrong with that.

The article said:

"James Driver once found his then-wife Angela Driver wearing a bikini at a swimming pool while with the husband of a mutual friend."

You'll have to prove that he was lying. I'm not slandering the woman. Her husband is the one that said it!

Pressing-On · #**616** 07-13-2010, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

No, PO, they're just being people. That's what people do when you give them 9 possibilities and don't tell them which one is the correct one.

He defined fornication, then stated that Ms. Driver was guilty of one of those things he had listed, then further stated that his daughter and the ex were going to be "romantically involved." This statement was made 3 months after the divorce was final and 4 months before the new couple were wed.

You would think that if a statement really needed to be made to the church regarding Ms. Driver, it would have been made upon discovery of her indiscretion, in the form of an open rebuke. Nope--it was reserved for later, when the Pastor *discovered* that his daughter was going to be involved with the ex. You HAVE to concede that the timing is suspect.

Well, now you are backing up from your earlier post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

When I first read the thread, I did the same thing you did--I put myself in her shoes. And with ME in her shoes, I can't imagine EVER being with another woman's husband at a pool, wearing only a bikini. Even if other people were around, that would be out of line for me. I wouldn't, couldn't do that without some serious motives in mind that would include great disregard for my husband and potentially the aim to attract the other man. Ergo, it's hard for me to identify with her having some sort of innocent motive. And I found myself immediately annoyed with her. LOL!!!

RandyWayne · #**617** 07-13-2010, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pelathais

She "appears" to have been if we make certain assumptions that we have no evidence to maintain. For example, if we assume that the "bikini" thing happened at a private pool with just the woman and the "mutual friend" present. However, it may well have been a public pool with hundreds present and the two were seen in passing. Also, since everything else has been exaggerated, why must we assume that it even was a "bikini?"

And you are correct to object to the insinuations of listing the sins and saying, "... she did one of these..." That's just plain daft behavior for any public speaker.

That is my thought. As we have already seen here, a UC could very well call a woman wearing t-shirts and shorts a "bikini", and others picking up the baton turn around and ad to his definition calling her "naked". Suddenly we have a woman wearing a t-shirt a shorts who just happened to meet a man she knows (along with his wife) engaged in a sexual orgy at the hotel pool at midnight under the stars.

missourimary · #**618** 07-13-2010, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

No, PO, they're just being people. That's what people do when you give them 9 possibilities and don't tell them which one is the correct one.

He defined fornication, then stated that Ms. Driver was guilty of one of those things he had listed, then further stated that his daughter and the ex were going to be "romantically involved." This statement was made 3 months after the divorce was final and 4 months before the new couple were wed.

You would think that if a statement really needed to be made to the church regarding Ms. Driver, it would have been made upon discovery of her indiscretion, in the form of an open rebuke. Nope--it was reserved for later, when the Pastor *discovered* that his daughter was going to be involved with the ex. You HAVE to concede that the timing is suspect.

How many preachers' daughters, marrying for the first time (as I can only assume she must have been) can we name that are married within four months of starting to date? Four months after engagement, yes. But even that is pushing it. Four months after starting to date? Probably not.

MissBrattified · #**619** 07-13-2010, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Well, now you are backing up from your earlier post.

No, I'm not. How am I backing up? I have agreed repeatedly that her actions were inappropriate. However, the timing of the pastor's announcement of her actions, and his characterization of those actions are suspect and that's why I have also said repeatedly that her lawsuit was justified.

There's enough bad judgment to go around here. Just because I'm picking apart the pastor's statement doesn't mean I'm suddenly in favor of wearing bikinis and spending quality time with men I'm not married to.

missourimary · #**620** 07-13-2010, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

The article said:

"James Driver once found his then-wife Angela Driver wearing a bikini at a swimming pool while with the husband of a mutual friend."

You'll have to prove that he was lying. I'm not slandering the woman. Her husband is the one that said it!

You've said more than enough in the last 60 pages, PO.