Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake
Those are your specifics and basis for leveling criminal charges of rape and sexual abuse of girls in the local churches by local current church leadership? You rely on the testimony of a young sister coerced into testifying by Communist leaders in a public kangaroo court half a century ago? You extend the consensual immorality of PL decades ago as proof that local church leadership are engaging in flourishing sexual abuse of girls?
Those are not fair words, those are not logical words, and are not even standards that rise to basement level ...
|
Well, welll, well ... This is the closest
Drake has ever come to an honest admission of LSM's dark past.
Firstly, I would not call this "consensual" when Philip Lee, the most powerful man at LSM, is abusing the volunteer staff during working hours. Was he just a great looking guy who needed some stress relief after lunch? Hardly. Today this is called workplace sexual abuse. It is adultery. It is pathetic. And it included many more sisters who were not "willing consensuals."
And you then speak of "fairness." How about a little "fairness" for the victims? How about a little "fairness" for the other saints? How about a little "fairness" for John Ingalls and others who attempted to protect the victims?
Nope, no such fairness for them! John Ingalls and others were publicly shamed, tarred and feathered, and excommunicated from their own churches. Books were written to slander them. These ones still cry out, like Abel of old, for justice against the Lee family.
What about Philip Lee, the "Harvey Weinstein" of the Lord's Recovery? Did he suffer any consequences? None. As Ed Marks recently told poster ZNP, Philip Lee was restored to good standing because it "pleased" his Daddy. No such luck for brother John Ingalls though, or the other victims.