What they wore

[Josh]

Often when churches attempt to handle abuse themselves without law enforcement, they end up protecting and enabling perpetrators, especially when they are charismatic, well-liked leaders. The consequences of failing to act effectively — both legally and spiritually — can be severe.

To add to that, so often the survivors are made to feel like trash over and over again. Its a messed up system.

It really is. I’ve talked to a number of survivors who have struggle with faith or have completely rejected religion because of their experiences in the church.

Churches handling abuse without any outside involvement is how situations like with the Catholic Church and the Southern Baptist Convention get started.

This is analogous to rejecting eating because you had a bad experience in restaurants. It is not a valid reason to reject God.

[ABC 123]

Has it ever occurred to you that law enforcement handles such things poorly as much as the church does, or is sometimes indeed part of the coverup?

Has it ever occurred to you that people have gone through things you have not but are not able or willing to divulge every detail in order to get your stamp of approval?

[KirkDaniel]

Such a fascinating (and typically MennoNet) discussion. I have but two things to add:

1. I was raised in the world and sexually abused by multiple people. And I can tell you that it positively made zero difference whether I was in shorts or long pants at the time. They want what is under the clothes, folks. Stop lying to your people.

2. Is the same person commenting on this thread who once said that if MennoNet turns into a survivor's site, they are done with it? Because, if you are, you have ZERO credibility to comment on this subject at all.

Other than that, you all go on and have yourselves a lovely Menno knock down and drag out session.

[Josh]

Has it ever occurred to you that law enforcement handles such things poorly as much as the church does, or is sometimes indeed part of the coverup?

Has it ever occurred to you that people have gone through things you have not but are not able or willing to divulge every detail in order to get your stamp of approval?

That has precisely nothing to do with what I said.

This idea law enforcement is sacrosanct is ridiculous. We have liberals here simultaneously cheering on BLM and claiming the police are violent and unjust. Then simultaneously they demand Christians immediately run and report everything to the police.

So which is it, resident forum leftists? Should we trust the police and imbue them with absolute authority or not?

[Ken]

Has it ever occurred to you that law enforcement handles such things poorly as much as the church does, or is sometimes indeed part of the coverup?

Has it ever occurred to you that people have gone through things you have not but are not able or willing to divulge every detail in order to get your stamp of approval?

That has precisely nothing to do with what I said.

This idea law enforcement is sacrosanct is ridiculous. We have liberals here simultaneously cheering on BLM and claiming the police are violent and unjust. Then simultaneously they demand Christians immediately run and report everything to the police.

So which is it, resident forum leftists? Should we trust the police and imbue them with absolute authority or not?

I think we should expect and demand the highest level of competence and professionalism from the police in everything they do. Do you not agree?

[steve-in-kville]

I had plans to start a thread on the Anabaptist perception towards birth control, but after seeing the jack-wagoning of threads as of late, I may hold off

[barnhart]

Such a fascinating (and typically MennoNet) discussion. I have but two things to add:

1. I was raised in the world and sexually abused by multiple people. And I can tell you that it positively made zero difference whether I was in shorts or long pants at the time. They want what is under the clothes, folks. Stop lying to your people.

2. Is the same person commenting on this thread who once said that if MennoNet turns into a survivor's site, they are done with it? Because, if you are, you have ZERO credibility to comment on this subject at all.

Other than that, you all go on and have yourselves a lovely Menno knock down and drag out session.

I am sorry you experienced that. I can't even imagine the emotional, spiritual and relational fallout of such abuse of power. Mennonet is a lot like the real world, people say all kinds of things. I find it best to ignore a lot of it. There is some wisdom in your observations.

[Josh]

Has it ever occurred to you that people have gone through things you have not but are not able or willing to divulge every detail in order to get your stamp of approval?

That has precisely nothing to do with what I said.

This idea law enforcement is sacrosanct is ridiculous. We have liberals here simultaneously cheering on BLM and claiming the police are violent and unjust. Then simultaneously they demand Christians immediately run and report everything to the police.

So which is it, resident forum leftists? Should we trust the police and imbue them with absolute authority or not?

I think we should expect and demand the highest level of competence and professionalism from the police in everything they do. Do you not agree?

As we should from church, church leaders, and so forth as well.

[Josh]

Such a fascinating (and typically MennoNet) discussion. I have but two things to add:

1. I was raised in the world and sexually abused by multiple people. And I can tell you that it positively made zero difference whether I was in shorts or long pants at the time. They want what is under the clothes, folks. Stop lying to your people.

2. Is the same person commenting on this thread who once said that if MennoNet turns into a survivor's site, they are done with it? Because, if you are, you have ZERO credibility to comment on this subject at all.

Other than that, you all go on and have yourselves a lovely Menno knock down and drag out session.

I believe it was Robert who said this is not a survivor’s forum, and there are very valid reasons for that. If someone wants to make a separate survivor’s site they are welcome to do so.

A public Internet forum with anonymous participation is not an appropriate survivor’s forum.

[KirkDaniel]

Such a fascinating (and typically MennoNet) discussion. I have but two things to add:

1. I was raised in the world and sexually abused by multiple people. And I can tell you that it positively made zero difference whether I was in shorts or long pants at the time. They want what is under the clothes, folks. Stop lying to your people.

2. Is the same person commenting on this thread who once said that if MennoNet turns into a survivor's site, they are done with it? Because, if you are, you have ZERO credibility to comment on this subject at all.

Other than that, you all go on and have yourselves a lovely Menno knock down and drag out session.

I believe it was Robert who said this is not a survivor’s forum, and there are very valid reasons for that. If someone wants to make a separate survivor’s site they are welcome to do so.

A public Internet forum with anonymous participation is not an appropriate survivor’s forum.

No, it was NOT Robert. And you know positively nothing about survivors, most of whom would rather remain anonymous in a forum of any kind.

Please, Josh. Learn a little about something before you condescend to open your mouth on the subject. It is painful to read your comments when it is so obvious they are based upon protecting institutions instead of caring for the legitimately hurt. Is this the way all Holdeman's behave?