Cartoonist Brian McFadden aptly captures my thoughts on recent attempts by major American cities to attract Amazon to their community. Amazon plans to build a second headquarters, and city officials are falling all over themselves as they chase after Amazon’s promise of 50,000 jobs and millions of dollars of tax revenue.
This post could also be titled, Why Pastor Shane Idleman Hates LBGTQ People but Loves Shrimp and Pork Chops.
Evangelicals are fond of saying that they are Bible-believers; that they believe every word of the Protestant Bible is true, straight from the mouth of God. Shane Idleman, pastor of Westside Christian Fellowship in Leona Valley, California, is one such Evangelical. According to Idleman, the Bible is the inspired, inerrant, infallible Word of God. As a sold-out, on-fire, sanctified follower of Jesus, Idleman purports to believe and practice all the teachings of the Bible. However, much like ALL Evangelicals, Idleman is a hypocrite, choosing instead to select some verses to believe, while ignoring others. Evangelicals are what I call Buffet Christians®. Buffets offer all sort of food, giving diners an opportunity to eat foods they like and skip those they don’t like. So it is with Idleman and Company. There are hundreds and hundreds of commands, teachings, laws, and precepts in the Bible. I actually set out one time to write down all the commands found in the Bible. I developed paralysis in my left hand from writing, so much so that I had to stop. This exercise taught me that the commands of God can wear a person out, especially if you take each of them literally and diligently attempt to live your life according to what they say.
Recently, Idleman wrote a post for Charisma News titled 10 Things You Need to Know About the LGBT Agenda. Idleman, as most Evangelical pastors are wont, has an obsession with human sexuality — especially unmarried/LGBTQ people. Idleman has frequent compulsive urges to write and preach about sex, so much so that it makes me wonder about what is hiding in the deepest, darkest corners of his closet. Idleman has convinced himself, along with his disciples, that preaching at/against LGBTQ people is an act of LOVE. That’s right, LOVE! Much like child molesters who convince their victims that being sexually violated is an act of love, Idleman has convinced himself that verbally attacking gays is his way of showing them how much he loves them. Imagine for a moment a husband who beats his wife every day, and when he is finished with his physical assault he smiles and says, Honey, I love you. Absurd, right? So it is when Idleman harangues LGBTQ people. When called out on his hateful speech, Idleman is puzzled. Referencing a recent speaking engagement at a local community college that was protested by gay activists, Idleman wrote “My wife and I were perplexed—when did a message of love become a message of hate? We love the LGBT community….”
In Idleman’s aforementioned post, he lists ten things everyone should know about the LGBTQ agenda. None of his ten things, by the way, mentions civil rights and equal protection under the law, except to deny that such arguments are valid. Idleman’s “loving” solution for same-sex attraction is, in this order: Jesus, non-sexual singleness, or heterosexual marriage. Why? Because the B-I-B-L-E — yes, that’s the book for me — says so. Idleman writes:
3. The Creator made His plan obvious. Jesus said that since the beginning of creation, God created them male and female in order that they would be joined together and become one flesh—to be fruitful and to multiply. He adds, “What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder” (Mark 10:9). Males and females were created purposely and are complementary by design.
….
5. There is no scriptural support for homosexuality. Some argue, “The Bible is not an ethical textbook—culture changes and so does truth.” Not so. Not one moral law that God gave is obsolete, from adultery to fornication to homosexuality. Things that were harmful then are harmful now. They are never painted in a positive light. They caused deep pain then as they do now. Some have even suggested that Naomi and Ruth and Jonathan and David had same-sex relationships. This gives the phrase “grasping for the wind” new meaning. This is exegesis in its purest form—reading things into the text that are not there.
Some parents change their view when they find their son or daughter in an LGBT lifestyle; confused, they “accept” the lifestyle, but feelings are not a gauge for truth. Instead, offer hope and remind them that we all struggle with something. If a child sins in the area of anger, infidelity or addiction, we don’t change the Scriptures to fit their behavior; we offer hope in the midst of the struggle. Why should homosexuality or transgenderism be any different? No matter how many laws are passed in favor of gay marriage, it will not change God’s mind. Times change; truth does not.
6. The Bible is crystal-clear on the issue of sexual sin. As a famous teacher once said of the Bible, “If the plain sense makes good sense seek no other sense lest it result in nonsense.” I cringe every time I hear misguided statements in an attempt to support homosexuality, such as misinterpreting “abandoning natural relations” in Romans 1:26-28. Or that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was only neglecting the poor. Or that Corinthians is outdated and Leviticus is talking about rape. Indeed, neglecting the poor is/was a sin, but it was not the only sin. In addition to rampant homosexuality, they were drunkards, gluttons, covetous, profane and wicked. The context of Sodom and Gomorrah’s destruction was much more than neglecting the poor: “they were haughty and committed abominations.” (See Ezekiel 16 and Jude 1:5-8.) Additionally, early church fathers, as well as creeds and confessions and Reformers, all echoed the same truth.
Idleman appeals to the Bible (and history) as his final authority. God has spoken, now shut the hell up and get back to having Evangelical-approved, missionary-position, married heterosexual intercourse that hopefully brings a lot of new potential Christians into the world. According to Idleman’s bio:
Today, as we continually drift away in a current of moral decline and relativism, many believe that the battle is too advanced and that we cannot make a difference. Shane, however, believes that we can, and offers his books as contributions to that commitment. He stresses: “If we encourage truth, yet fail to relate to our culture, the church can seem formal and dead. This fact fuels the postmodern movement. But when truth is sacrificed for the sake of relating to the culture, as we see today, the very foundation is destroyed. Truth, the foundational beliefs clearly outlined in Scripture, must remain unmoved and unchanged. Times change, but truth does not!” (emphasis mine)
The “foundational beliefs clearly outlined in Scripture, must remain unmoved and unchanged. Times change, but truth does not!” Sounds like Idleman is a committed, true-blue, one hundred percent Jesus-all-the-time Bible believer. Yet, right after saying the unalterable, eternal, unchanging Bible condemns adultery/fornication/homosexuality, Idleman writes:
7. God can advise against eating shellfish as well as homosexuality. Although the dietary laws of the Old Testament do not apply today, they are still beneficial. For example, we now know why things like pork and shellfish were forbidden—they are unhealthy. God’s wisdom is sound and purposeful in guiding relationships as well.
Idleman says the dietary laws found in the Bible DO NOT APPLY TODAY! Shades of outrage, man! Is Idleman saying that some parts of the Bible are no longer applicable (binding, in force)? I thought the big man upstairs said, I am the Lord Thy God and I change not. I thought the Bible said of Jesus — who is also the big man upstairs (figure that one out) — that he was the SAME yesterday, today, and forever. I thought Jesus said in Matthew 5:17,18:
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Have the heavens and earth passed away? Has Jesus returned to earth and made a new heaven and earth? No! So this means that God’s law — all of it — is still valid and in force. This means that Pastor Shane Idleman, along with all of his Evangelical colleagues, are double-minded hypocrites. And we all know what the Bible says about double-mindedness: A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways (James 1:8)
Shane Idleman despises LGBTQ people, despite saying otherwise. His behavior tells the truth about the man. Idleman is preoccupied with who does it with whom, when, where, why, and how. This makes me wonder if Idleman is afflicted with a malady commonly found among the species Evangelicus preacherus homoerectcus — sex addiction. Evangelical men, taught that women are Jezebel’s out to fuck them, are known for being unable to withstand even the slightest bit of exposure to female flesh. Let a woman’s cleavage, legs, or erect nipples show, and Evangelical men are reduced to dogs running wild, sniffing for bitches in heat. These poor weak and helpless men, already aroused by worldly slutty women, can’t even surf the world-wide web without being accosted by scantily (boner-producing) clad women.
Instead of owning their sexuality and acting like normal, healthy humans, Evangelical men such as the good pastor, condemn, attack, and rail against those who “cause” them to lust. Perhaps Idleman should practice — in totality — the teachings of Jesus; you know the verified words of the son of God found in red in the Bible. Jesus told his lustful followers how to cure their horniness:
Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire. (Matthew 18:8,9)
Have a problem with lust? Pluck out your eye. Still have a problem with lust? Pluck out your other eye. Have a problem with masturbation? Cut off your hand. Have a problem typing youporn.com (I did not make this a link lest any of the Idlemans of the world reading this post be tempted to click, look, and masturbate) into your internet browser? Cut off your other hand. Why not take Jesus’ words to their logical conclusion? Have a problem with anything related to sex? Cut off your penis. Still have lustful thoughts? Get a lobotomy. How far are you willing to go to show your loving devotion and commitment to Jesus?
Idleman hates the very idea of LGBTQ people having sex because the very idea of man-on-man sex disgusts him. Many gay haters loathe the very thought of two men doing it (though far fewer of them have the same loathing for woman-on-woman sex). Other gay haters preach against homosexuality, same-sex marriage, and the LGBTQ agenda, because, — deep down in their heart-of-hearts where the Holy Spirit supposedly lives — they have gay inclinations — à la Ted Haggard. Instead of admitting and acting upon their same-sex/bisexual attractions, Evangelical men of God holler and scream, hoping to use their sermons and blog posts as distractions from the real issue — their unBiblical sexuality
I have no idea what Shane Idleman is or isn’t sexually. I do know, however, that he is a buffet Christian, choosing what Bible verses to believe and not believe. Another word for this behavior is hypocrite. If Idleman can pick and choose which verses to believe, why can’t the rest of us?
This is the one hundred and sixtieth installment in The Sounds of Fundamentalism series. This is a series that I would like readers to help me with. If you know of a video clip that shows the crazy, cantankerous, or contradictory side of Evangelical Christianity, please send me an email with the name or link to the video. Please do not leave suggestions in the comment section. Let’s have some fun!
Today’s Sound of Fundamentalism is a video clip of Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty fame, speaking at the 2017 Value Voters Summit.
Transcript:
I’m almost tempted to ask the Democratic Party four little words: “Do y’all love Jesus?” The reason I’m asking you, Democratic Party, is I’ve never heard you say one way or the other! Do you love Him? And I’m waiting on an answer.
I want to ask CNN that. CBS. MSNBC. Do you folks love Jesus, because I’ve never heard you say, one way or the other, or maybe, do you hate Him? Do you love Him or do you hate Him? I unashamedly say I love Him. I will tell anybody that.
HT: Friendly Atheist
Unfortunately, nudity has come to the beaches, lakes, and pools of America and we shouldn’t be surprised. Many women don’t seem to have any problem with men of all ages lusting after them and seeing them as objects. God commands that we be modest and shamefaced, not drawing attention to ourselves, but as we, as a culture, grow farther away from God’s principles, we can see that women have no shame with being naked.
On our walks on the beach, I have seen a troubling trend; more and more women are wearing thong bathing suits and when they are laying on a towel or are seen from the backside, they look naked. Is there NO concern for children these days??? Where has common human decency gone? Do all these women care about is themselves, their ego, and what they want to wear?
Yes, these women are absolutely 100% being stumbling blocks to all of the men around them. I read what others write against me for saying this as if women are completely innocent concerning men’s lust but they aren’t! We are called to love others and be unselfish but when women are wearing thongs they are only loving themselves and being selfish. They aren’t thinking at all of the effect they are having on the young to old men around them and the children who are seeing their nakedness.
Aren’t their laws against nudity in our land? Shouldn’t there be beaches that are “family friendly” and we don’t have to see naked women all around us? Yes, I know that bikinis have been around a long time but at least they covered up the most private parts of the female body even though they are still extremely immodest. When women are actually showing off their entire backside, they have become naked which is continually associated with shame all throughout the Bible.
The majority of women desire men and their attention. I remember when I was 16 or 17 years old and deeply wanting a young man in my life. I wanted the strength, love, affection, protection, and attention of a man. I believe it’s a normal desire that God has given to us after puberty. Our culture uses this desire in a twisted way called serial dating. We want the attention and love of a man so we try different men out since we’re “way too young” to be married even though our bodies tell us otherwise. We show off our bodies in hopes of attracting men to us to fulfill the longing we have for a man then do things that should only be saved for the marriage bed unless we’ve been taught otherwise. We pretend marriage.
Many young people get into a lot of sexual trouble during these years because of this trend of putting off marriage for so many years after puberty. Most parents aren’t teaching their children about modesty, waiting for a godly man in God’s timing, purity, abstinence, and all the things that God requires from us who want to live lives pleasing to Him. It’s imperative, mothers, to teach your children from a young age the goodness of God and His ways!
— Lori Alexander, The Transformed Wife, Nudity on Our Beaches, October 12, 2017
Earlier today I posted the following observation to Facebook:
“If a woman wears sexually suggestive clothing around a man is that not also sexual assault? Men are visually stimulated and unwanted stimulation should meet the basic definition of assault. I am not condoning bad behavior by men but women need to understand that by walking around in their little sister’s skirt they are guilty of indecent visual assault on a man’s imagination which does cause mental anguish and torment especially on men who really are trying to live in harmony and respect toward women; something made more difficult when every ripple and curve are exposed to the men around you. Something to think about.”
Needless to say this caused a flurry of comments both in agreement and disdain. Many – too many – concluded I was fabricating an excuse for sexual assault against women by men. But those people, men and women, willing to wade into the deep end of the pool got it, thankfully
Many married women also feel assaulted and infuriated by the provocative dress of other women in part because they know what it’s doing to their husbands. And what, exactly, does it “do” to their husbands?
When a man sees a naked or partially dressed woman a chemical reaction happens in his brain. Neurotransmitters like dopamine and serotonin are released, giving him an involuntary surge of pleasure… involuntary!
It does also appear that women know this affect they have on men. This is likely due to cultural conditioning over several decades. From the sexual revolution of the sixties to Hollywood’s push for more and more sexual imagery in movies girls have been conditioned to accept the normalization of using their bodies as tools to gain acceptance in society. The “look at me” addiction has led to smaller and smaller bathing suits on beaches with modesty having all but disappeared. The porn scenes made in private studios have gone public. Men are in a state of constant sexual assault by women who either don’t understand the severity of what they are doing because it’s cute and they like the attention, or worse – they do know the feelings it stirs and like the control they have over men.
There are literally millions – nay – billions of pictures we could post here but again, soft porn. Do the women know what they are doing? Yes, of course. But are they aware that it fits the definition of “sexual assault?”
….
Finally let me say, for your own sake and ours, please put some clothes on. Stop the sexual assault against men. Yes, you have the power. Yes, you are pretty. But also yes, you are assaulting us.
— Michael Shoesmith, PNN News and Media Network, The Woman-on-Man Sexual Assault Epidemic! More Serious Than You Might Think! October 19, 2017
James Johnson, associate pastor of Mountain Valley Baptist Church in Martinsville, Virginia, was convicted and sentenced to eleven years in prison for sexual battery and distributing child pornography.
Paul Collins, a writer for the Martinsville Reporter, reports:
A former Henry County associate pastor will spend 11 years in prison, as his sentence in a child pornography case.
James Arthur Johnson, who had previously served as associate pastor at Mountain Valley Baptist Church, had been convicted June 30 of the charges, including four counts of aggravated sexual battery and one count of distributing child pornography. At the time, the 58-year-old entered an Alford plea in Martinsville Circuit Court. In an Alford plea, a defendant maintains his innocence but admits that sufficient evidence exists with which the prosecution likely could convince a judge or jury to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecution nolle prossed (dropped but could reinstate) five other charges of aggravated sexual battery against Johnson at that time.
The charges stem from incidents that took place between April 2014 and February 2015 at Johnson’s residence in the 200 block of Martinsville and then in the 200 block of Pine Street, after he moved. The victim, who was 12 to 13 years old at the time, said Johnson would inappropriately touch her when she visited his house. Johnson was a friend of the girl’s family and their neighbor for part of that time. Johnson would also have neighborhood boys visit him at times and, according to the testimony, would instruct them to inappropriately touch the girl as well. The girl testified that at the time, Johnson said he would hurt her if she told anyone what was going on.
Johnson also filmed the girl touching herself and then showed the video to another person between Jan. 1, 2015 and July 28, 2015.
During Thursday’s sentencing hearing, the victim, now 16, read a letter she wrote about how she had been traumatized and suffered some mental health issues. She said she knows now not to trust people like Johnson and added that she hopes he burns in hell.
Keith Fender, testifying as an expert in sexual offender treatment, said one concern he had when evaluating Johnson is that the man is not convinced he needs treatment. The evaluation, Fender said, showed that Johnson has pedophilic disorder. That refers to adults who have a sexual desire for young children.
Johnson’s lawyer, Roscoe Reynolds, called several people who testified as character witnesses for his client. They described Johnson as a good worker, reliable, of good conduct to their knowledge, someone who helped and encouraged other people, active in church and preached in nursing homes. Several of the witnesses said they were shocked to learn of the charges against him. Johnson’s sister also testified, saying that he has some serious health issues and asked the judge to take that into consideration. Prior to this case, Johnson also had no criminal record.
….
Greer sentenced Johnson to 85 years in prison, with 74 of those suspended under conditions including indefinite supervised probation and good behavior for life. Greer also ordered Johnson to register as a sex offender upon release from incarceration.
Olivier Uyttebrouck, a writer for the Albuquerque Journals details in the following excerpt the sordid thirty year story of Catholic priest and sexual predator Arthur Perrault:
St. Pius X High School leaders were hit with a “bombshell” in 1970 when they were told of allegations of sexual abuse against the Rev. Arthur Perrault, a teacher at the Archdiocese of Santa Fe’s flagship high school.
Those allegations remained secret for decades, but documents released this week pull back the curtain on how those school leaders and the archbishop responded.
And the documents show that, once again, a priest was simply moved to another post where he had access to new victims. They also show that Perrault was sent to St. Pius in the first place as a “good test period” to allow the archbishop to observe the 20-something priest after he was released from a Jemez Springs center that treated pedophile priests.
He was at the school four years and was later accused of molesting 11 victims during that period, from 1966-1970.
In 1970, St. Pius board members were approached by the father of a student, who asked to meet with them because “one of his sons that was at Pius had been involved with Father Perrault,” a board member recalled in a 1992 deposition. The father said that as a result of the abuse, his son “was so messed up that he had been thinking about suicide.”
The father, who is not identified in the deposition, said he discussed the abuse with then-Archbishop of Santa Fe James Davis. The allegations were electrifying, the board member said, because Perrault was chairman of the theology department at the archdiocese’s flagship high school.
“Look, we’ll take care of this but we can’t have any publicity,” Davis reportedly told the boy’s father. “We must be Christian about this.”
New details about the careers of Perrault and two other former New Mexico priests became public this week after a judge ordered the disclosure of nearly 1,000 pages of church records that had been sealed under a previous court order.
The records contain letters written by three archbishops of Santa Fe and other church officials, legal settlements, deposition transcripts, psychological reports and other records provided by the archdiocese to Albuquerque attorney Brad Hall, who has filed more than 70 lawsuits alleging sexual abuse of children by priests.
Among them is the deposition of a former St. Pius board member whose name was redacted from the transcript.
The board member said that Archbishop Davis wavered about how to respond. He at first agreed to remove Perrault, but later changed his mind. “It’s under our control and it’s our problem. Not yours,” Davis told four board members.
The father who made the allegation warned the board member that if Davis took no action, he would file a “sodomy suit” against the archdiocese, according to the deposition.
The threat prompted the board member to seek a private meeting with the archbishop, where he told Davis that the archdiocese faced a lawsuit if Perrault remained at St. Pius.
“I remember to this day what Archbishop Davis did,” the board member recalled. “He put his right arm on my shoulder and said, `We can’t have that. I’ll honor my commitment.’” Three days later, Perrault was dismissed from St. Pius.
Davis then authorized Perrault to work as chaplain to the student community the University of Albuquerque, a now-defunct Catholic college operated by the archdiocese.
The incident at St. Pius was not the first time, nor the last, that allegations of Perrault’s sexual attacks on boys would reach the ears of an archbishop of Santa Fe.
Perrault had been accused of sexual attacks before he arrived in New Mexico in January 1966.
The Archdiocese of Hartford, Conn., where Perrault was ordained in 1964, ordered him to undergo treatment at a facility in Jemez Springs operated by the Servants of Paraclete. The now-closed Via Coeli facility received priests from across the U.S. accused of sexually molesting children.
Perrault, then 28, was sent to Jemez Springs after “two alleged incidents of homosexual approaches to some of the young men with whom he was working,” in Connecticut, Via Coeli psychologist John Sanchez told Archbishop Davis in a 1966 letter.
….
Court records show that Perrault is accused of sexually abusing 38 children during his years in New Mexico.
Of those, 11 alleged attacks occurred during Perrault’s tenure at St. Pius High School from 1966 to 1970. The alleged attacks occurred at St. Pius, in Perrault’s home, or at two churches where he worked on weekends.
He has never been charged with a crime.
Letters written in the early 1980s show that later allegations against Perrault prompted then-Archbishop Robert Fortune Sanchez to order that he undergo a psychological evaluation.
That evaluation found that Perrault “acted out his homosexual orientation only with youngsters and has never had an ongoing, adult homosexual relationship,” psychologist Joseph VanDenHeuvel told Sanchez in a June 1981 report.
The psychologist said Perrault “made mention of the fact that he had `been in trouble’ because of illicit sexual activities with students,” VanDenHeuvel told the archbishop.
….
Just seven months after receiving the report, Sanchez assigned Perrault to a pastoral post at an Albuquerque parish.
“I am pleased herein to assign you to St. Bernadette Parish for weekend assignment to assist the pastor,” Sanchez told Perrault in a Jan. 6, 1982, letter.
“Thanking you, Father Arthur, for your service to the good people of St. Bernadette Parish, and to the Pastoral Center, while wishing you all the Lord’s Blessing throughout this New Year,” Sanchez wrote.
Perrault became the pastor at St. Bernadette in 1985 and remained there until he fled New Mexico in 1992, just days before an Albuquerque attorney filed a lawsuit alleging that he sexually assaulted seven children.
Perrault turned up last year in Morocco working at an English-language school for children, from which he was subsequently fired. It is not clear where he is now.
….
In early 2017, a judge handed down a $16 million judgment to one of Perrault’s victims. Olivier Uyttebrouck reports:
A judge handed down a $16 million judgment this week against a former New Mexico priest for failure to respond to a lawsuit filed by a man who alleges he was sexually abused by Arthur Perrault in the early 1990s.
Second Judicial District Judge Denise Barela-Shepherd handed down the default judgment Thursday after she found that Perrault had been properly served with the civil lawsuit, but failed to defend himself against the allegations.
She ordered Perrault to pay $1 million in damages and an additional $15 million in punitive damages. The Archdiocese of Santa Fe was not named as a defendant in the lawsuit.
Perrault, who vanished from his Albuquerque parish in 1992, was tracked last year to Tangiers, Morocco, where he was teaching at an English language school for children.
Perrault was fired in May when school officials learned of the allegations, the director of the American Language Center in Tangiers told the Journal .
Kenneth Wolter, 35, filed the civil lawsuit last year alleging he had been sexually abused by Perrault at least 40 times in the early 1990s. Wolter was 10 or 11 at the time, and serving as an altar boy at St. Bernadette Parish, where Perrault was the pastor.
Unknown is whether Wolter will be able to collect any portion of the $16 million judgment from Perrault, said Levi Monagle, one of three Albuquerque attorneys who represent Wolter.
“Money wasn’t the point of this for us,” Monagle said Friday. “Ken (Wolter) didn’t do this for the money. The message made on behalf of the victims was Ken’s main priority.”
Wolter testified at a hearing in January that he wanted to send Perrault a message on behalf of his 38 known victims “and the silent people who haven’t come forward.”
He asked Barela-Shepherd to award a total of $38 million in damages, or $1 million for each alleged victim. Barela-Shepherd did not explain in her order why she handed down a $16 million judgment.
Perrault, 79, sent Barela-Shepherd a letter in November denying that he had abused Wolter, court records show. He also said that he had no assets and could not afford to hire an attorney, or to return to Albuquerque to attend the January hearing.
….
I recently watched a news clip from the recent Value Voters Summit. One attendee interviewed said that Christians (Evangelicals) were being persecuted before Jesus-loving, pussy-grabbing, liar-in-chief Donald Trump became president. The woman’s proof of persecution? People said bad things about Christianity. The following graphic pretty well sums things up:
Please use the comment section below to list all the ways Evangelicals were persecuted under President Obama.
George Waddles Sr., a former president of the National Baptist Congress and pastor of Zion Hill Missionary Baptist Church in Chicago,Illinois, pleaded guilty today to sexually abusing a fifteen-year-old church girl. Astoundingly, Waddles Sr. will serve NO jail time for his crimes. Waddles was investigated in the 1990s over similar allegations. No charges were filed.
With little of the fanfare that surrounded his charismatic preaching career, one of Chicago’s most prominent churchmen pleaded guilty on Friday to sexually abusing a 15 year-old-girl, the I-Team has learned.
The Rev. George Waddles Sr., a former president of the National Baptist Congress and ex-pastor of Zion Hill Missionary Church on W. 78th St, appeared in Cook County criminal court. Since being charged two years ago Waddles has been fighting the allegation. On Friday he pleaded guilty to aggravated criminal sexual abuse.
However, despite having abused a minor girl, he will not go to jail.
Cook County Judge James Obbish sentenced Waddles to 30 months’ probation and the 69 year old minister must register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.
Prosecutors had asked for jail time, especially considering Waddles sexually assaulted the teenager during a counseling session at the church.
In court on Friday the young woman who was sexually abused presented an emotional victim impact statement, saying that the Rev. Waddles had tried to manipulate her family-who were longtime parishioners.
“You called my mom every Sunday to see if you could meet with me again, see if I forgave you, and not press charges” she said.
Although Waddles was charged with molesting only her, the victim told Judge Obbish that there were other girls abused by Waddles.
“I’m the only victim who has come forward since he’s been raping, molesting and assaulting minors. George thought I would give up by now, but little did he know, I can’t be suppressed” she said. “Even through my suicidal thoughts, self-loathing, dwelling, disappointments, anger, weakness, doubt and confusion, God is still so good.”
….
In September of 2015, Chicago Tribune writer Steve Schmadeke reported:
A longtime South Side pastor was charged with sexually abusing a 16-year-old girl in his office during a counseling session in 2014.
Prosecutors said the alleged victim and her mother confronted George Waddles, 67, who heads Zion Hill Missionary Baptist Church, and secretly recorded his admissions to inappropriately touching the teen.
Waddles turned himself in to Chicago police Tuesday and made “a positive disclosure” to a detective that was consistent with the girl’s story, said Assistant State’s Attorney Tara Pease-Harkin. He was charged with aggravated criminal sexual abuse, a Class 2 felony that carries a sentence of up to seven years in prison or probation on conviction.
Judge Donald Panarese Jr. ordered Waddles released on his own recognizance but barred him from any contact with minors.
Waddles’ wife, daughter and son attended the bond hearing at the Leighton Criminal Court Building along with other pastors and supporters.
Waddles’ attorney, Lewis Myers Jr., blasted the case, saying a Department of Children and Family Services investigation did not sustain the girl’s claims and that she and her mother continued to attend church and counseling after the alleged incident.
“These charges should never have been filed,” Myers later said outside the courtroom.
Myers said in court that Waddles has been preaching for 35 years and holds a master’s degree in social work. He founded a training conference for those involved in Christian education called the Biblical Exposition Conference, according to an online biography. He is past president of several Christian education groups, including the Baptist General State Congress of Christian Education in Illinois and the National Baptist Congress.
Pease-Harkin said that Waddles had been investigated in the 1990s on allegations he had sexually abused a young girl in his office but that no criminal charges were filed against him.
Prosecutors said the alleged victim has known Waddles since she was 3 and started to be counseled by him when she turned 13 in 2011.
A year later, he told her he had dreamed about her and asked her to lift her shirt up for him, but she refused, Pease-Harkin said.
He tried to give her a hug and kiss her neck on five to 10 other occasions when she was in his church office at 1460 W 78th St., according to the prosecutor.
Once, in 2014, Waddles asked the girl to sit on his lap, and when she did, he kissed her neck and touched her underneath her underwear, Pease-Harkin said. The girl then left his office and about a month later told her mother what had happened, she said.
The two then confronted Waddles in a meeting at the church. He allegedly confessed and apologized, according to the prosecutor.
At a second meeting between July 2014 and February 2015, the girl and her mother met with Waddles and his wife and recorded his alleged admission, Pease-Harkin said.
Waddles asked them not to contact police, the prosecutor said.
Matt McCall, also a writer for the Chicago Tribune, had this to say about Waddles and his latest victim:
For more than a decade the modest Gresham neighborhood church was the center of the family’s life.
The mother was a church council member, praise leader and Sunday school teacher. Her daughter was in the youth ministry.
They said they felt the Rev. George Waddles Sr., the charismatic pastor and leader of Zion Hill Missionary Baptist Church, was a true man of God. Three to four days a week, the family served the church in some way.
That ended in 2014 after the then 15-year-old daughter alleged Waddles had abused her during a counseling session in his office, according to court records.
Waddles was charged in September with aggravated criminal sexual abuse after turning himself in to police, a Class 2 felony that carries a sentence of up to seven years in prison. He later pleaded not guilty. Under Waddles’ bond conditions, he is allowed to preach at the church but is barred from contact with minors when adults are not present.
The victim’s family is concerned that Waddles is still at the church and a group that advocates for sexual assault victims is asking that he step down from his leadership position while the case is pending.
The family said they have been shunned by parishioners and receive intimidating phone calls at least once a week. Waddles still preaches at the 100- to 200-member church at 1460 W. 78th St., and a little more than a month after the charges were filed, church members threw an anniversary celebration in Waddles’ honor.
“Overall, you don’t need to be a Christian to understand right from wrong,” the girl said. The Tribune is not naming her or her parents because she is the alleged victim of a sexual assault. “That’s why I feel they are doing something wrong. When you’re so wrapped up in it, it’s hard to see the truth. They see him as God. They don’t do what God says. They do what he says.”
Hunched over in a chair, she stared at the door in the corner of a closet-size room at a Chicago public library recently, an earbud nestled in her left ear. Her father, who was at work, monitored the conversation on a phone placed on the table in front of her. It crackled when he could no longer contain his frustration.
“There was no sensitivity and care for my daughter at all,” he said. “You can imagine her, a 17-year-old girl, with the weight of this on her. As a father, it adds fuel to the fire.”
Her mother, who sat beside her daughter, said the teen has been shamed by the congregation when it should have applauded her.
….
Marc Pearlman, a veteran clergy sex abuse attorney providing legal counsel to the family, said the girl has been treated as a perpetrator for tarnishing the pastor’s reputation, rather than as a potential victim of abuse.
“Tell me any other responsible organization that, when authorities would have enough evidence to charge one of their employees with this crime, that would continue to allow them to work at their place of business,” Pearlman said. “Forget a parish. What about a 7-Eleven?”
….
Members of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests want the pastor removed “for the safety of other kids.” But unlike the hierarchal Catholic church, Baptist churches typically are independent and only parishioners or a church council can remove their pastor.
An official with the National Baptist Convention said Baptist policy states that each church is autonomous and not subject to management from a national or regional organization.
When Barbara Blaine, president and founder of SNAP, attempted to hand out leaflets at the church on the day of the anniversary service, security guards blocked her from talking to parishioners entering the church.
“We shouldn’t take a risk with any children ever,” Blaine said earlier this month. “So at the bare minimum he should step down while the case is pending.”
