Statement re Gentle Spirit Magazine
Leslie Moyer
homeschooling community. Please, oh please, take the
time to read it. There are two posts here that explain
stuff really well. This involves a lawsuit against
several influential (previously, I hope) people in
homeschooling circles. --Leslie
Subject: Re: [AHA-Networking] State Organizations
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 09:36:49 EDT
From: Nari...@aol.com
Reply-To: AHA-Net...@onelist.com
To: AHA-Net...@onelist.com
In a message dated 6/16/99 10:35:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, san...@qn.net
writes:
> Oops! Carol, I know nothing about this. Got the scoopage?
Sandy, I'll tell this the best I can and as short as I can. The court
proceedings are all a matter of public record in Washington state.
Cheryl Lindsey Seelhoff is the publisher/editor of a magazine called Gentle
Spirit. It was pretty popular about 6 years ago with conservative Christian
homeschoolers and she was a popular speaker at conferences,. Gentle Spirit
recently came back into publication after a forced hiatus of about 5 years.
Seems Cheryl's very abusive husband left her and their 9 kids in some pretty
dire straights about 5 years ago. When she refused to take him back under
orders of some of the homeschool "pillars", they set out to put her out of
business. And did. They made sure she lost the sole support of herself and
her 9 children by calling her advertisers, columnists and subscribers and
telling them some pretty nasty tales. She was followed around online
and....it's hard to describe how badly some people will treat someone who was
highly respected and then disappointed them. It was awful to read the vitriol
people posted online about this woman. Even before I knew what any of it was
about, I was just appalled that people would act that way toward another
human being.
So she filed suit in United States District Court claiming, among other
things negligence, public disclosure of private facts, defamation, outrage,
antitrust violations, and violations of the Lanham Act. The defendants named
in the suit were Mary Pride, Sue Welch of Teaching Home, Gregg Harris
(HSLDA), Christian Life Workshops, Christian Home Educators of Tacoma,
Calvary Chapel of Tacoma, Calvary Chapel of Costa Mesa, and Christian Home
Educators of Ohio. Mary Pride, Gregg Harris, Calvary of Costa Mesa, and CHEO
settled out of court.
Sue Welch decided to let a jury hear the case. Probably not a good move on
her part, although she had some pretty big names in the conservative
Christian homeschool community testifying for her, including Michael Boutot,
former chair of CHEO, Mary Pride, Gregg Harris, and Robert Green, Editor of
Quit You Like Men.
The jury found Sue Welch guilty of conspiracy under the Sherman Anti-trust
Act and that she had damaged Cheryl under the Sherman Anti-trust Act. I
think the ones who settled out of court were probably pretty glad they did.
Whatever the jury gives in an anti-trust suit is automatically tripled, I
believe, and she had to pay Cheryl's legal fees as well.
When I heard about this, I was pretty surprised that I'd lived and
homeschooled in Ohio through the whole thing and didn't hear a word about it.
Seems like this would be something a support group wouldn't keep from its
membership. Maybe I just don't travel in the right circles though. Anybody
else from Ohio hear anything about CHEO's involvement? I'm sure there must be
records some where.
Carol
********************************************************************
Subject: [AHA-Networking] Statement re Gentle Spirit Magazine
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 12:27:47 -0800
From: American Homeschool Association <A...@home-ed-magazine.com>
Reply-To: AHA-Net...@onelist.com
To: AHA-Net...@onelist.com
From: American Homeschool Association <A...@home-ed-magazine.com>
Barb's right, we'll be featuring this case in the Sept/Oct issue of Home
Education Magazine.
Here's the official statement we recieved from Cheryl Lindsey Seelhoff:
Statement
In early spring of 1994, after having published Gentle Spirit Magazine for
five years, I experienced a crisis in my marriage which resulted eventually
in its dissolution. My ex-husband had moved to another state, and I had met
the man who is now my husband, Rick Seelhoff. At the time, I was a member
of Calvary Chapel of Tacoma. I asked to meet privately with my then-pastor
and his wife, Joe and Irene Williams, in April of 1994, for confession and
spiritual counsel. The pastor and his wife assured me they would keep my
family situation confidential. After I met with them, I stopped attending
their church and never attended their church again.
Months after I last attended church services at Calvary Chapel of Tacoma, in
the days shortly before and just after my last public speaking engagement at
the CHEO convention in Ohio, Pastor Williams and his wife received phone
calls from several leaders in the national conservative Christian
homeschooling community, asking for detailed, intimate information about my
personal life. Pastor Williams and his wife provided that information.
Among the leaders who called requesting personal information about me were
Gregg Harris, Sue Welch, and the then-chair of CHEO, Michael Boutot. I knew
these homeschooling leaders only very casually, in some cases, or not at all.
None was my mentor in publishing or had been involved with the publication
of my magazine. I had no idea any of these leaders had been made aware of
my family circumstances or that they were conducting any kind of
investigation of me. None of these leaders attended any Calvary Chapel
church, let alone my own church. Gentle Spirit was not a nonprofit,
religious organization, but a for-profit, private, family business concern.
After the Williams spoke with these leaders, calls were placed to other
prominent persons in the Christian homeschooling community. A decision was
made among some of these leaders that I be presented with a list of
ultimatums, which they called, "proofs of repentance," or have intimate
details of my personal life disclosed nationally and publicly. The "proofs
of repentance" I was to perform included not answering my telephone, turning
over the contents of my business and personal bank accounts to others, not
having a post office box, never going anywhere alone, stepping down from my
position as Editor and Publisher of Gentle Spirit, agreeing not to speak
publicly, agreeing not to defend myself, firing my attorneys, withdrawing
restraining orders I had obtained to protect my family and business, and
replacing Gentle Spirit with Teaching Home Magazine. At the time, I was the
sole support of my family of 11 people, and Gentle Spirit Magazine provided
all of our family's income.
When I failed to comply with the "proofs of repentance," the Williams
drafted a "letter of discipline." They discussed the contents of the letter
of discipline with Sue Welch and Michael Farris of HSLDA. The letter
stated, among other things, that I was guilty of unrepentant adultery with
lying, because I said I was repentant although I continued my relationship
with Rick, whom I married in 1995. They read this letter of discipline
publicly, against my will, at a Sunday morning church service months after I
had last attended the church. The pastor's wife, Irene Williams, read the
letter of discipline over the telephone to Sue Welch, Editor of Teaching
Home Magazine, who audiotaped the reading of the letter. Ms. Welch then
asked the Williams to write a letter to her requesting her help in
disseminating the contents of the letter of church discipline to leaders in
the homeschooling community. Ms Welch also offered to the Williams the
services of her attorney, Michael Farris, who spoke with the Williams
several times by phone. The Williams provided the letter Sue Welch
requested, along with a copy of the letter of discipline, and Sue Welch then
faxed and otherwise circulated the letter of discipline to the chairpersons
of more than 43 state homeschooling organizations as well as many other
leaders, publishers, business persons, and others in the homeschooling
marketplace. The information was circulated over a number of months by
facsimile, regular mail, telephone, and via the internet. In early 1995,
an "update" was provided in a newsletter sent out by Teaching Home staff to
all state homeschooling leaders. Another magazine publisher, Mary Pride,
whom I had never personally met and with whom I had never done business,
also paid a member of her staff to investigate my situation. This staff
member contacted the Williams, Sue Welch, and others and asked intimate
questions about my personal life. Gregg Harris also participated in the
early investigation of my family's crisis, discussing my personal life with
my ex-husband, the Williams, and Sue Welch. I did not become aware of Ms.
Welch's , Mr. Farris's, Mr. Harris's, Mary Pride's, Michael Farris's, or
other leaders' actions, in some instances, until years after the fact.
In the wake of the circulation of this information, I began receiving
letters from subscribers, columnists and advertisers who canceled their
subscriptions, resigned as columnists or canceled their advertisements.
Some of these people demanded refunds. Several different homeschooling
publications ran articles disclosing the contents of the Williams' letter of
discipline and other facts, some true, some untrue. Ms Welch reimbursed the
pastor and his wife for the costs of the many telephone calls they received
which resulted from the circulation of this letter. As the mother of nine
and sole provider for my family via Gentle Spirit, these actions were
devastating to me.
I subsequently attempted to do what I could to fulfill my obligations to
subscribers. I mailed refunds, sent out back issues, at one point attempted
to publish Gentle Spirit in an e-mail loop, and finally I established a
website. At each turn I was met with intense opposition, as long as three
years after the fact, so that I could not continue.
Finally I despaired of ever being able to fulfill my obligations to
subscribers or to lead a normal life absent legal action. At that point I
filed suit in Federal Court for the Western District of Washington against
several defendants: Calvary Chapel of Tacoma, Joe and Irene Williams,
Calvary Chapel of Costa Mesa, The Teaching Home and Sue Welch, Gregg Harris,
Christian Home Educators of Ohio and its then-chairperson, and Bill and Mary
Pride, alleging a number of causes of action, among them defamation, slander,
outrage, interference with commerce, and violation of the Sherman Antitrust
Act of the United States. We settled our claims with Gregg Harris, Calvary
Chapel of Costa Mesa, CHEO, and the Prides before trial for amounts which we
agreed to keep confidential. We did go to trial with Sue Welch, and after
eight days of trial, a unanimous jury found that Sue Welch and the Williams
had entered into an illegal conspiracy to restrain trade in violation of the
Sherman Antitrust Act. The jury found that I had been damaged in the amount
of $435,000. Because damages awards in antitrust actions are automatically
trebled, I was entitled to receive in excess of 1.3 million dollars from Sue
Welch. In addition, I was entitled to recover my attorneys' fees and costs.
Subsequent to the jury verdict, we settled our claims with Sue Welch for an
amount which we have agreed not to disclose.
We then proceeded to trial in one remaining cause of action, interference
with commerce. The sole defendants by this time were the Williams and
Calvary Chapel of Tacoma. Prior to trial, we settled with these remaining
defendants as well, so that all of our claims against all of the defendants
have now been resolved.
This information and the lawsuit are a matter of public record in Pierce
County Superior Court at Tacoma and in the US District Court for the Western
District of Washington at Tacoma.
End
Leslie Moyer
information (first hand) about the Seelhoff vs. Sue Welch et.al.
case:
Rhi...@aol.com wrote:
> << Well, they are available to anyone at the Tacoma Federal District Court in
> Tacoma, Washington. Unfortunately, the charge is fifty cents a page to copy
> them. When I was there the main stuff was in Judges chambers and I couldn't
> get to it. I should stroll down there next week. >>
>
> Sorry, I could've elaborated since I've gone and looked at the stuff. Case
> Number is:
>
> Docket Number C97-5383FDB, US District Court, Western District of Washington,
> at Tacoma.
>
> Case was heard on August 31, 1998.
>
> I must warn anyone that wants the documents though. The court case is at
> least 13 volumes last I looked. Which translated to thousands of documents.
> This doesn't include the trial transcript which is 8 volumes long. And the
> exhibits. At .50 a page it could be overwhelming.... So I can wait for a
> web site.
>
> Charlotte
****************************************
Sandy Barton wrote:
>
> From: "Sandy Barton" <san...@qn.net>
>
> > From: Rhi...@aol.com
> ,
> > RGSh...@AOL.COM writes:
> >
> > << Are any of these records available online anywhere? >>
> >
> > Oh, I'm sure they will be shortly. Somebody is bound to do it... I went
>
> > down to the courthouse and read what was available several months ago...
>
> > Some pretty stunning stuff in that file.
>
> I have been reading Cheryl Lindsay Seelhoof's account of what happened to
> her. It's horrifying. She does not specifically mention names of anyone
> (probably as a result of the settlement), however, she does mention a
> homeschooling organization in the midwest. I'm sickened to read this
> testamony and I putting on my writer's hat and contacting CHEO for comment.
>
> If you want to read it for yourself, grab a glass of tea and be prepared
> for a long read.
>
> http://members.aol.com/clseelhoff/ Click on About Gentle Spirit and then
> click on the link in the text called "This Month at Home".
>
> Sandy
****************************************************
RGSh...@aol.com wrote:
> > OK... I think I've found what's online from the court.. not much, just
> > verification that the suit was filed on such a date... no documents, no
> > indication of the status.
> >
>
http://www.wawd.uscourts.gov/wawd/caselist.nsf/d815069f07ea59f4882564ba0066f136/$searchForm?SearchView
>
> and then type in "C97-5383" ... the record on the case should come up..
>
> -Rob
**********************************************************
From: "Sandy Barton" <san...@qn.net>
> so where does one go to sign up for this magazine?
http://www.gentlespirit.com/orders.htm
*****************************************************************
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt
> Here is a compilation of places to go on the web to find more
> information (first hand) about the Seelhoff vs. Sue Welch et.al.
> case:
[]
I don't understand why Christians would want to find out more. My gut
reaction to this was that it sounded like gossip.
Jayne
Kangamaroo
>reaction to this was that it sounded like gossip.
Ditto. Reading the two posts felt a bit like wading through sewage. I
certainly wouldn't want to read more.
Blessings,
Kanga
If one child takes up all your time, than seven can't take anymore. Adapted
from Elizabeth Eliot's mother
Renee
personally want to be aware of massive attacks such as this. Imagine
how it felt for the publisher of GENTLE SPIRIT! I do not want my monies
going to people like the Prides and the Harrises, or HSLDA. As a
result, in fact, of this mess, several years ago I decided never to
support any of these individuals/organizations again. I don't even
belong to the local homeschool group here, as I find many of the members
have the Mary-Pride-mentality. Even in I Corinthians, Paul says, "It is
rumored among you" and he then goes on to describe a pretty devastating
situation, and to recommend the remedy for it. Sometimes things must
"out" in order for the community at large to be aware, and to decide on
their own resultant actions.
Renee
How can I miss you if you won't go away?
http://www.meginc.com/personal/users/reneeb/index.
html
http://www.meginc.com/reba
In article <19990618094053...@ng-cj1.aol.com>,
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
John Gilmer
Leslie Moyer <moye...@wiltel.net> wrote in message
news:3769A7DB...@wiltel.net...
> This is kinda long, but very important info. for the
> homeschooling community. Please, oh please, take the
> time to read it. There are two posts here that explain
> stuff really well. This involves a lawsuit against
> several influential (previously, I hope) people in
> homeschooling circles. --Leslie
Could you just insert a 100 word summary of the issues here?
JLG
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt
> >I don't understand why Christians would want to find out more. My gut
> >reaction to this was that it sounded like gossip.
>
> Ditto. Reading the two posts felt a bit like wading through sewage. I
> certainly wouldn't want to read more.
When Kanga agrees with me I feel like I just got the right answer.
<g>
Jayne
Joi Ramey
Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt) wrote:
>Leslie Moyer <moye...@wiltel.net> writes:
>
>> Here is a compilation of places to go on the web to find more
>> information (first hand) about the Seelhoff vs. Sue Welch et.al.
>> case:
>[]
>
>I don't understand why Christians would want to find out more. My gut
>reaction to this was that it sounded like gossip.
>
>Jayne
It most certainly is NOT gossip. You can read (first hand) this womans
account of the wrong done to her by so-called Christian leaders. She
mentions no names nor does she openly condemn anyone. She merely tells
her story. That is NOT gossip.
Joi Ramey
wrote:
>>I don't understand why Christians would want to find out more. My gut
>>reaction to this was that it sounded like gossip.
>
>Ditto. Reading the two posts felt a bit like wading through sewage. I
>certainly wouldn't want to read more.
>Blessings,
>
>Kanga
>
>If one child takes up all your time, than seven can't take anymore. Adapted
>from Elizabeth Eliot's mother
So you would stick your head in the sand and go merrily on your way?
What was done to this woman by people in leadership was WRONG. I'm not
saying you should go out and shout it from the rooftops every intimate
detail. But this woman deserves a chance to tell her side of the story
after years of people slandering, backbiting and actively trying to
destroy her life.
Honestly, when are we supposed to stand up for what's right? Only when
we are attacked? Or are we supposed to stand up for those who are
weaker, who are bullied, who are attacked and beset from all sides? I
thought her story a beautiful testimony to God's provision in her
life. Or is it only those who've never done anything wrong who are
entitled to have a beautiful testimony?
"I never did anything bad, and no one ever really bothered me, but
Praise the Lord, he saved me anyway!"
I am glad that she is speaking out. I am glad that I now know what
sort of things happen to those who don't conform the the 'norm' of
Chrsitan families.
I have no interest in reading what these people said about her. If I
went and looked up all the malicious details and scurrilous lies that
were spread about her, then I would be participating in and promoting
gossip. But to read the story of one woman's life, of how God moved in
it, even in the midst of the fire, is something we should embrace, not
shun.
Renee
*truth* in love, *not* trying to pass judgment on a woman who had, by
all accounts, followed Scriptural methods for dealing with problems in
her *private* life. She was attacked for no other reason but jealousy;
it was unjust, it was hellish in its motivation, and it was punished,
too. Nowhere are we told to hide from truth. Spreading the news
unecessarily is another matter; but IMO, it *is* necessary for
homeschoolers to have the facts, so they can decide where their money
should be going. I refuse to support so-called homeschool "ministries"
that are in the business of destroying the competition. One of those
involved in this debacle is well-named, and the pride involved in the
attack on this woman has been paid for, and will continue to be paid
for, as others realize how dangerous these "ministries" are.
Renee
--
How can I miss you if you won't go away?
http://www.meginc.com/personal/users/reneeb/index.
html
http://www.meginc.com/reba
In article <37748470...@news.matnet.com>,
Stretrat
writes:
>One of those
>involved in this debacle is well-named, and the pride involved in the
>attack on this woman has been paid for, and will continue to be paid
>for, as others realize how dangerous these "ministries" are.
Effectively doing the same thing to them.
-----------------------------
Stainless Steel Streetrat
"Go not to the elves for advice, for they will say both no and yes"
-------------
Ultimate Guide to Christian Resources: Homeschooling
http://members.aol.com/stretrat/homeschool/index.html
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt
[]
> It most certainly is NOT gossip. You can read (first hand) this womans
> account of the wrong done to her by so-called Christian leaders. She
> mentions no names nor does she openly condemn anyone. She merely tells
> her story. That is NOT gossip.
This does not seem like a black and white situation in which some
people are completely right and others completely wrong. There are two
sides to the story. In order for me to be fair I would have to sort
through everything that everybody has to say for themselves and then
reach a judgement. My question is then, "why should *I* be judging any
of these people?"
I was not saying that the publisher of Gentle Spirit was gossiping.
I was saying that I would feel like I was gossiping if I talked about
(or listened to others talk about) this situation.
Jayne
Scott Bryce
>
> You go, Joi! The Christian faith embraces the idea of speaking the
> *truth* in love, *not* trying to pass judgment on a woman who had, by
> all accounts, followed Scriptural methods for dealing with problems in
> her *private* life. She was attacked for no other reason but jealousy;
> it was unjust, it was hellish in its motivation, and it was punished,
> too. Nowhere are we told to hide from truth. Spreading the news
> unecessarily is another matter; but IMO, it *is* necessary for
> homeschoolers to have the facts, so they can decide where their money
> should be going. I refuse to support so-called homeschool "ministries"
> involved in this debacle is well-named, and the pride involved in the
> attack on this woman has been paid for, and will continue to be paid
> for, as others realize how dangerous these "ministries" are.
We really don't know why the people who took action against Cheryl did
so. It appears from her own story that she may have been living in
adultery, while acting as a leader in the HS community. (Again, we don't
know. I am not saying that this is what happened, I'm only proposing a
possible explanation.) It would appear that these HS leaders felt that
they had some reason to pressure Cheryl into stepping down from her
position of leadership, but things got out of hand. Sue Welch felt
confident enough in her own actions to allow a jury to hear the case
when others were settling out of court. She must have felt that her
actions were appropriate, given the circumstances.
My point is, we don't have all the facts. We shouldn't rush to judgment,
either against Cheryl, or against any of the other people involved in
this matter. If Renee's allegations are true, then perhaps there would
be a reason to speak the truth about certain people. The apostle Paul
wasn't afraid to name names. In this case, we really don't know what the
truth is. We do have some facts, but we need to be careful about
spreading rumors as though they were facts, or we will be doing no
different than what Cheryl claims was done to her.
--Scott
bunn...@my-deja.com
>
> I was not saying that the publisher of Gentle Spirit was gossiping.
> I was saying that I would feel like I was gossiping if I talked about
> (or listened to others talk about) this situation.
>
> Jayne
The rule of thumb I have been taught is: if I am not a part of the
problem, or part of the solution, then I don't need to be discussing
it...however my take on this is, since it's public, what can be learned?
We all need to guard our hearts and our motives-it may be that the
people who were sued thought they were warning people away from what
they THOUGHT was a problem-playing right into the adversary's
plan
....sadly, this is not the first case of this sort of thing that I have
heard of...why are we Christians so intent on shooting our wounded?
And why must so many people suffer under spiritual abuse....how Jesus
must weep for His hurting sheep.....
Bunnyfire
Susan
bunn...@my-deja.com wrote:
> ....sadly, this is not the first case of this sort of thing that I
have
> heard of...why are we Christians so intent on shooting our wounded?
> And why must so many people suffer under spiritual abuse....how Jesus
> must weep for His hurting sheep.....
>
> Bunnyfire
We are good at that, aren't we bunny... All in the name of
discipline...
--
Susan @}-`-,-- robysatmydashdeja.com
ICQ #39572982 AOL IM "WfeofAl"
Kanga C.
>>for, as others realize how dangerous these "ministries" are.
>
Exactly, Stretrat. Very perceptive.
Julie A. Pascal
Scott Bryce wrote:
>
> We really don't know why the people who took action against Cheryl did
> so. It appears from her own story that she may have been living in
> adultery, while acting as a leader in the HS community. (...)
The homeschool community isn't a church.
Besides which, according to scripture, it is not our
place to separate the sheep and the goats.
I'm not interested in listening to dirt about the people
who she sued and who were found to have broken the law.
But then, I wouldn't have listened to the original
dirt digging and mud slinging either.
I didn't ask for details when our support group
split. I really didn't want to know. I was happy
with the original group and that was enough for me.
It *does* all come down to gossip in the end.
--Julie
Leslie Moyer
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt wrote:
>
> Leslie Moyer <moye...@wiltel.net> writes:
>
> > Here is a compilation of places to go on the web to find more
> > information (first hand) about the Seelhoff vs. Sue Welch et.al.
> > case:
> []
>
> reaction to this was that it sounded like gossip.
My pet peeve is when people follow their gut reactions without
any knowledge of the truth or reality and no apparent interest
in such.
The stuff I posted included things from Cheryl herself first
hand....that is most assuredly not gossip. I also posted a
web site of the FEDERAL court that hosted this lawsuit where
ALL records are completely open and public (the exception
being the specific amount of money awarded to Cheryl that
exceeds the 1.3 million dollars specified) and anyone willing
to pay for a few copies can get BOTH sides of the story--
complete and unabridged.
This is not a "Christian vs. non-Christian" story and it should
not be viewed as such. It is not a victory or defeat for
religious faith--it is a victory for truth and over unbridled
greed and power that we should all rejoice about.
We have a sincere need to know this stuff as it affects the
entire homeschooling community. This lawsuit is about some
of the most influential and powerful and visible people in
our community. They frequently speak for us and represent
us in the government and the media. It is essential that
we know the truth. Sticking our heads in the sand does
not make it any less true. Or less despicable. Or less
unChristian.
Leslie
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt
[in another thread]
> ....sadly, this is not the first case of this sort of thing that I have
> heard of...why are we Christians so intent on shooting our wounded?
> And why must so many people suffer under spiritual abuse....how Jesus
> must weep for His hurting sheep.....
These comments of yours triggered a thought for me. Are you currently
feeling hurt and wounded? You've mentioned in other posts that you
are feeling burnt out lately. Would you mind sharing about burn out?
I don't want to pry or make you uncomfortable, but I think this could
be very helpful for some of us.
Jayne
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt
>
> Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt wrote:
>> I don't understand why Christians would want to find out more. My gut
>> reaction to this was that it sounded like gossip.
>
> My pet peeve is when people follow their gut reactions without
> any knowledge of the truth or reality and no apparent interest
> in such.
[]
I hope that I did not imply that people ought to thoughtlessly follow
their gut reactions. I was seeking to understand the position of
people who feel we should get involved in this. I will try to be more
clear in the future.
Jayne
Joi Ramey
wrote:
>>>attack on this woman has been paid for, and will continue to be paid
>>>for, as others realize how dangerous these "ministries" are.
>>
>>Effectively doing the same thing to them.
>
>Exactly, Stretrat. Very perceptive.
>Blessings,
>
Welll...no. Not exactly. No one is posting malicious, made-up lies
about these people. What these people did is a matter of public
record. One of them, at least, was held accountable in a court of law
for her part in it. It's one thing to withhold support from an
organization because you don't like what they do or did. It's quite
another to maliciously and with malice-aforethought set out to destroy
someone's life and livelihood.
If these people end up in the same dire circumstances as Cheryl
Lindsay did, it will be their own hand that brought them there.
Something along the lines of casting their bread upon the waters, I
believe, and also their actions coming home to roost. I think you
could also say they would reap what they sowed.
Do you not see the difference? I was so angry about this I stayed up a
large part of the night praying about it. I don't belong to any
national homeschool organization, I haven't even bought books written
by any of the people mentioned in the lawsuit. If I had, I probably
would have burned them. I'm still toying with the idea of a few
strongly worded letters, but I don't know if that would be appropriate
or not. Mainly, I'm trying to understand what exactly made these
people think they could sit in judgement on her.
I certainly hope the reticence I'm seeing here in supporting Ms.
Lindsay does not stem from the fact that those here agree with what
was done to her. I really don't think so, and I'm certainly not
accusing anyone, but I don't get how you can't see the difference
between withdrawing support from people who are cruel and vindictive,
and actively planning to destroy one woman for trying to protect
herself and her children from an abusive husband.
Joi Ramey
>We really don't know why the people who took action against Cheryl did
>so. It appears from her own story that she may have been living in
>know. I am not saying that this is what happened, I'm only proposing a
>possible explanation.)
Which she confessed to her pastor, removed herself from the fellowship
of the church she was attending, and also stopped speaking at
homeschool engagements. She willing removed herself (according to her)
as a leader.
It would appear that these HS leaders felt that
>they had some reason to pressure Cheryl into stepping down from her
>position of leadership, but things got out of hand. Sue Welch felt
>confident enough in her own actions to allow a jury to hear the case
>when others were settling out of court. She must have felt that her
>actions were appropriate, given the circumstances.
If this was all there was too it, then perhaps I could see their
motivations as altruistic. However, it one of these people demanded
she turn over her remaining funds to her abusive husband, allow him to
come back home (putitng herself and children at risk), give control of
her finances to her pastor, etc. These demands were from a person she
didn't even know! If she didn't conform to his demands, then he
expected her to die in an accident as proof she was an unrepentent
Christian. If she didn't die, then he would conclude she was never a
Christian to begin with.
Ms. Lindsay did make mistatkes, and she says she did what was
biblically required to correct them. I see no evidence to support that
she didn't. However, these people moved against her like she deserved
to be stoned to death. One woman even told her she would have to stop
publishing her magazine, and replace it with the magazine this woman
published. Then, they published malicious gossip, outright lies, and
excruciatingly intimate details about her personal life on the
internet for all and sundry to read. Meanwhile, she waited until
everything was over before she said a word about what was being done
to her. I can draw a conlusion based on these facts, and those facts
tell me that everyone she trusted betrayed her, and even people she
didn't know but respected on their reputation alone cruelly betrayed
and violated her trust.
>
>My point is, we don't have all the facts. We shouldn't rush to judgment,
>either against Cheryl, or against any of the other people involved in
>this matter. If Renee's allegations are true, then perhaps there would
>be a reason to speak the truth about certain people. The apostle Paul
>wasn't afraid to name names. In this case, we really don't know what the
>truth is. We do have some facts, but we need to be careful about
>spreading rumors as though they were facts, or we will be doing no
>different than what Cheryl claims was done to her.
I'm not saying we should spread lies. But there are facts, facts that
area a matter of public record, and that one should read these before
blindly supporting either side. I have no reason yet to doubt them,
but since I'm not a memeber of any homeschooling association or HSLDA
or even own books written by these people, there's not a lot I can do
to withhold my support except to bang the gong very loudly in defense
of what I see is a greivious wrong.
Joi Ramey
Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt) wrote:
>bill...@bellsouth.net (Joi Ramey) writes:
>
>[]
>> It most certainly is NOT gossip. You can read (first hand) this womans
>> account of the wrong done to her by so-called Christian leaders. She
>> mentions no names nor does she openly condemn anyone. She merely tells
>> her story. That is NOT gossip.
>
>This does not seem like a black and white situation in which some
>people are completely right and others completely wrong. There are two
>sides to the story. In order for me to be fair I would have to sort
>through everything that everybody has to say for themselves and then
>reach a judgement. My question is then, "why should *I* be judging any
>of these people?"
>
>I was not saying that the publisher of Gentle Spirit was gossiping.
>I was saying that I would feel like I was gossiping if I talked about
>(or listened to others talk about) this situation.
>
>Jayne
Okay, I understand that. However, when do we, as Christians draw the
line between gossipping and burying our heads in the sand? I don't
want to recommend someone's books or materials if they've been
actively involved in something like this. I want to know the truth. If
I have to wade through a little mud before I get to the truth, I'll do
it. I won't sling the mud, and I won't repeat the malicious details,
but I will do what I can to uncover the truth. What you don't know can
hurt you and those you love!
Here is what I thought about a great deal yesterday...I want to
publish (eventually) a series of homeschooling books. If these people
who persecuted Cheryl knew I was divorced and remarried, that I got
pregnant before I was married to my second husband but while
seperated but not divorced from my first husband, and that I am
manic-depressive (which everyone knows is of the devil :), along with
other really, really stupid things I did in the past (and believe me,
I did some really stupid things) would they attack me and tell
publishers not to publish my books because, according to their
standards, I'm an unrepentant Christian? Cause I gotta be honest...if
the one person came to me with a list of 'proofs' to prove that I had
truly repented and demanded that I leave my husband and reconcile with
my first husband, they would come away with a blistered ear and a
rolled up list of proofs shoved where the sun doesn't shine. Someone
has to stand up so that what happened to Cheryl doesn't keep happening
just because the people in postions of prestige and leadership think
you're a reprobate sinner because you made bad choices in your past.
Unknown
>Cheryl Lindsey Seelhoff is the publisher/editor of a magazine called Gentle
>Spirit. It was pretty popular about 6 years ago with conservative Christian
>homeschoolers and she was a popular speaker at conferences,. Gentle Spirit
>recently came back into publication after a forced hiatus of about 5 years.
>Seems Cheryl's very abusive husband left her and their 9 kids in some pretty
>dire straights about 5 years ago. When she refused to take him back under
>orders of some of the homeschool "pillars", they set out to put her out of
>business. And did. They made sure she lost the sole support of herself and
>her 9 children by calling her advertisers, columnists and subscribers and
>telling them some pretty nasty tales. She was followed around online
>and....it's hard to describe how badly some people will treat someone who was
>highly respected and then disappointed them. It was awful to read the vitriol
>people posted online about this woman. Even before I knew what any of it was
>about, I was just appalled that people would act that way toward another
>human being.
This really is gossip.
On what grounds did the husband want to return? Had he a conversion experience?
On what grounds did Cheryl refuse to allow him back? Two become one in a
marriage, and save a very few excptions, this bond is unbreakable.
Was Cheryl under the authority of a church? Was she responsible to any Elders,
Pastor, Bishop, etc, or acting on her own.
We do not know these answers and certainly cannot evaluate any right or worng
based on this post.
>
>So she filed suit in United States District Court claiming, among other
>things negligence, public disclosure of private facts, defamation, outrage,
>antitrust violations, and violations of the Lanham Act. The defendants named
>in the suit were Mary Pride, Sue Welch of Teaching Home, Gregg Harris
>(HSLDA), Christian Life Workshops, Christian Home Educators of Tacoma,
>Calvary Chapel of Tacoma, Calvary Chapel of Costa Mesa, and Christian Home
>Educators of Ohio. Mary Pride, Gregg Harris, Calvary of Costa Mesa, and CHEO
>settled out of court.
>
>Sue Welch decided to let a jury hear the case. Probably not a good move on
>her part, although she had some pretty big names in the conservative
>Christian homeschool community testifying for her, including Michael Boutot,
>former chair of CHEO, Mary Pride, Gregg Harris, and Robert Green, Editor of
>Quit You Like Men.
>
>The jury found Sue Welch guilty of conspiracy under the Sherman Anti-trust
>Act and that she had damaged Cheryl under the Sherman Anti-trust Act. I
>think the ones who settled out of court were probably pretty glad they did.
>Whatever the jury gives in an anti-trust suit is automatically tripled, I
>believe, and she had to pay Cheryl's legal fees as well.
I am sure Church discipline in general would not stand the test of the Sherman
Annti-Trust Act. The Amish discipline of "shunning" is a conspiracy to lave some
out side the Church. St. PAul's exhoration to cut off the opena and nortorius
sinner would also be anit-trust" if (or when) the government applies it to
churches. The fact that the actions were taken by businesses and not churches
would seem to allow the govenment intervention. Intervention we generally
opposed, except when it suits our fancy. (Albeit, acting a businesses, the
organizations may not have been too wise to try to exercise discipline - not
their responsibility. But, if the party involve was not under any church
discipline, they may have felt it was required.)
>
>When I heard about this, I was pretty surprised that I'd lived and
>homeschooled in Ohio through the whole thing and didn't hear a word about it.
>Seems like this would be something a support group wouldn't keep from its
>membership. Maybe I just don't travel in the right circles though. Anybody
>else from Ohio hear anything about CHEO's involvement? I'm sure there must be
>records some where.
>
>Carol
>
Just not enough information. I can see how the actions of the other homeschool
groups could be justified in their minds, if certain conditions were there. I do
not know if they were there or not, but would caution jumping on the bandwagon
either way.
I was once involve in counselling with a couple with marital problems. Since the
husband was a friend prior to marriage, I heard his story first. This plus the
fact that the wife at one time deliberately ran into my car with hers (because I
was his friend), and admittedly smashed a stick of butter on his head at the
dinner table convinced me she was off the deep end and at fault. However, as
more and more facts came out, it was also plain that while her actions were not
justified, and in fact she needed help, he knew just what buttons to push and
when to evoke these reations when ever he wanted and for his own purposes. I
learn from that experience that getting all teh facts in very importanat and
difficult, but necessary to make an evaluation.
Joe Busfield
>********************************************************************
Scott Bryce
> but I don't get how you can't see the difference
> between withdrawing support from people who are cruel and vindictive,
> and actively planning to destroy one woman for trying to protect
> herself and her children from an abusive husband.
It has been suggested in this thread that we should go beyond
withdrawing support and that we should take action that could
potentially destroy the lives of some of the leaders in the HS movement.
All this while the secular and public school community looks on. I don't
like this situation either, but I don't think that doing even more
damage to more people will resolve anything.
--Scott
Leslie Moyer
> This really is gossip.
>
> On what grounds did the husband want to return? Had he a conversion experience?
>
> On what grounds did Cheryl refuse to allow him back? Two become one in a
> marriage, and save a very few excptions, this bond is unbreakable.
>
> Was Cheryl under the authority of a church? Was she responsible to any Elders,
> Pastor, Bishop, etc, or acting on her own.
yada, yada, yada. Joe, I posted all the places to go to find out
the answers to these and all the rest of your questions. I'm
not going to spoon feed it to you...it would just be my words,
then, and you have every reason to be sceptical. Go to the SOURCE
please and read it for yourself.
Leslie
HMSCLMom
robysatmydashdejanews.com <_spam...@excite.com> writes:
>
>We are good at that, aren't we bunny... All in the name of
>discipline...
>
Not to mention that it is churches who are to discipline within, not
para-church ministries. Jesus didn't give the instructions for church
discipline for every Tom, Dick and Harry to use. They were specific to local
congregations (else how could the unrepentant be brought before two, then
elders, then the entire church???), and there is not a lot of leeway on how to
do it right.
The fact that her local church took it outside proved that the local church
pastor was ignorant of, or rebellious against, the Biblical model for church
discipline.
The fact that outsiders were carrying on with it shows they are ignorant of, or
rebellious against the fact that they are not a local church and had no
authority to be disciplining anyone. Prudency and a respect for God's Word
should have warned them off. I wonder about the discernment of these people.
Paula
"God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power, and of love, and of a
sound mind."
McCartney Family Home Page (http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Prairie/4889/)
Welcome to Berean Baptist Church (http://www.berean-houston.org/)
Stretrat
<sbr...@coastlink.com> writes:
> I don't
>like this situation either, but I don't think that doing even more
>damage to more people will resolve anything.
That says it better.
Unknown
And of course, Internet postings are always factual and honest. Just go to Steve
Winters place for an example!
JTB
In article <376BC55C...@wiltel.net>, Leslie says...
>
>"joe...@itw.com" wrote:
>
>> This really is gossip.
>>
>>On what grounds did the husband want to return? Had he a conversion experience?
>>
>> On what grounds did Cheryl refuse to allow him back? Two become one in a
>> marriage, and save a very few excptions, this bond is unbreakable.
>>
>>Was Cheryl under the authority of a church? Was she responsible to any Elders,
>> Pastor, Bishop, etc, or acting on her own.
>
julie woolfolk
>
> On 18 Jun 1999 13:40:53 GMT, kanga...@aol.comWA.rez. (Kangamaroo)
>
> >>I don't understand why Christians would want to find out more. My gut
> >>reaction to this was that it sounded like gossip.
> >
> >certainly wouldn't want to read more.
> >Blessings,
> >
> >Kanga
> >
So we just ignore this and let HSLDA continue to say they speak for
Christian homeschoolers. We continue to buy the publications of Pride
and Welch, that Ohio homeschoolers should not know that funds in their
organization were used to pay a settlement and why.
How can it be gossip when we a talking about a court case where
Christian Homeschoolers ended up looking like the worst sort of folks in
fromyt of a jury of non homeschoolers. Their actions
(HSLDA,PRIDE,WELCH,ect.) hurt all of us.
Julie W
pauldanaher
somebody please explain their importance/prominence in homeschooling at the
state and/or national level?
Leslie Moyer <moye...@wiltel.net> wrote in message
news:3769A7DB...@wiltel.net...
> This is kinda long, but very important info. for the
> homeschooling community. Please, oh please, take the
> time to read it. There are two posts here that explain
> stuff really well. This involves a lawsuit against
> several influential (previously, I hope) people in
> homeschooling circles. --Leslie
>
>
> Subject: Re: [AHA-Networking] State Organizations
> Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 09:36:49 EDT
> From: Nari...@aol.com
> Reply-To: AHA-Net...@onelist.com
> To: AHA-Net...@onelist.com
>
>
> In a message dated 6/16/99 10:35:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
san...@qn.net
> writes:
>
> > Oops! Carol, I know nothing about this. Got the scoopage?
>
> Sandy, I'll tell this the best I can and as short as I can. The court
> proceedings are all a matter of public record in Washington state.
>
> Cheryl Lindsey Seelhoff is the publisher/editor of a magazine called
Gentle
> Spirit. It was pretty popular about 6 years ago with conservative
Christian
> homeschoolers and she was a popular speaker at conferences,. Gentle Spirit
> recently came back into publication after a forced hiatus of about 5
years.
> Seems Cheryl's very abusive husband left her and their 9 kids in some
pretty
> dire straights about 5 years ago. When she refused to take him back under
> orders of some of the homeschool "pillars", they set out to put her out of
> business. And did. They made sure she lost the sole support of herself and
> her 9 children by calling her advertisers, columnists and subscribers and
> telling them some pretty nasty tales. She was followed around online
> and....it's hard to describe how badly some people will treat someone who
was
> highly respected and then disappointed them. It was awful to read the
vitriol
> people posted online about this woman. Even before I knew what any of it
was
> about, I was just appalled that people would act that way toward another
> human being.
>
> So she filed suit in United States District Court claiming, among other
> things negligence, public disclosure of private facts, defamation,
outrage,
> antitrust violations, and violations of the Lanham Act. The defendants
named
> in the suit were Mary Pride, Sue Welch of Teaching Home, Gregg Harris
> (HSLDA), Christian Life Workshops, Christian Home Educators of Tacoma,
> Calvary Chapel of Tacoma, Calvary Chapel of Costa Mesa, and Christian Home
> Educators of Ohio. Mary Pride, Gregg Harris, Calvary of Costa Mesa, and
CHEO
> settled out of court.
>
> Sue Welch decided to let a jury hear the case. Probably not a good move on
> her part, although she had some pretty big names in the conservative
> Christian homeschool community testifying for her, including Michael
Boutot,
> former chair of CHEO, Mary Pride, Gregg Harris, and Robert Green, Editor
of
> Quit You Like Men.
>
> The jury found Sue Welch guilty of conspiracy under the Sherman Anti-trust
> Act and that she had damaged Cheryl under the Sherman Anti-trust Act. I
> think the ones who settled out of court were probably pretty glad they
did.
> Whatever the jury gives in an anti-trust suit is automatically tripled, I
> believe, and she had to pay Cheryl's legal fees as well.
>
> When I heard about this, I was pretty surprised that I'd lived and
> homeschooled in Ohio through the whole thing and didn't hear a word about
it.
> Seems like this would be something a support group wouldn't keep from its
> membership. Maybe I just don't travel in the right circles though. Anybody
> else from Ohio hear anything about CHEO's involvement? I'm sure there must
be
> records some where.
>
> Carol
>
>
Calvary
Leslie Moyer
"joe...@itw.com" wrote:
>
> Just not that interested!
>
> And of course, Internet postings are always factual and honest. Just go to Steve
> Winters place for an example!
>
> JTB
Joe Ostrich,
One of the sites is the FEDERAL COURTHOUSE IN TACOMA WASHINGTON!!!
How can you possibly say it is not factual and honest????????
You SHOULD be interested....these people who were CONVICTED of
a FEDERAL CRIME are representing you in Washington D.C. and to
the media.
Leslie
>
> In article <376BC55C...@wiltel.net>, Leslie says...
> >
> >"joe...@itw.com" wrote:
> >
> >> This really is gossip.
> >>
> >>On what grounds did the husband want to return? Had he a conversion experience?
> >>
> >> On what grounds did Cheryl refuse to allow him back? Two become one in a
> >> marriage, and save a very few excptions, this bond is unbreakable.
> >>
> >>Was Cheryl under the authority of a church? Was she responsible to any Elders,
> >> Pastor, Bishop, etc, or acting on her own.
> >
Leslie Moyer
Scott Bryce wrote:
>
> Joi Ramey wrote:
>
> > but I don't get how you can't see the difference
> > between withdrawing support from people who are cruel and vindictive,
> > and actively planning to destroy one woman for trying to protect
> > herself and her children from an abusive husband.
>
> It has been suggested in this thread that we should go beyond
> withdrawing support and that we should take action that could
> potentially destroy the lives of some of the leaders in the HS movement.
I think I missed this part and I can't find what you're referring
to even when I look. Can you point it out?
> All this while the secular and public school community looks on. I don't
> like this situation either, but I don't think that doing even more
> damage to more people will resolve anything.
Yes it surely will. (I don't desire to damage the people, but
I do hope it will damage the grip of unbridled and unquestioned
power they hold--self-proclaiming themselves the "Pillars" of
homeschooling.) The people involved in this lawsuit have
systematically destroyed the cooperative relationship that
homeschoolers of many shapes and colors had. They are actively
working to segregate us now and to "Ravage Home Education By
Exclusion by Religion." (Anyone read the Moore's?)
SOMEONE has to shout: The Emperor Has No Clothes!!!!!
Leslie
Scott Bryce
>
> Joe Ostrich,
>
> One of the sites is the FEDERAL COURTHOUSE IN TACOMA WASHINGTON!!!
>
> How can you possibly say it is not factual and honest????????
>
> You SHOULD be interested....these people who were CONVICTED of
> a FEDERAL CRIME are representing you in Washington D.C. and to
> the media.
One of them was convicted. The rest settled out of court. Settling out
of court does not imply guilt. It is often done to avoid the trouble and
expense of a trial.
My concern is that these people are being convicted on this newsgroup.
--Scott
Bill & Joi Ramey
>....sadly, this is not the first case of this sort of thing that I have
>heard of...why are we Christians so intent on shooting our wounded?
>And why must so many people suffer under spiritual abuse....how Jesus
>must weep for His hurting sheep.....
I think perhaps the biggest tool the devil uses against us the lie
that we can not be of use to God unless we are perfect. If we examine
the Bible, we see that all the great men of God sinned in a big way at
one point of their life. Noah was a drunkard and had incestuous
relationships with his daughters. Abraham tried to force God's hand,
committed adultery with his wife's servant, and then threw her and the
baby out on thei ear. Moses committed murder and left Pharoah's court
in disgrace. King David committed adultery, impregnanted the woman,
then murdered her husband to cover it up. Solomon had hundreds of
wives and live-in mistresses and allowed them to bring idol worship
into God's people. There is no one person in the Bible who lived a
sinless life, except for Jesus Christ.
Which leads us to ask, How did Christ deal with sinners?
Did he take the woman at the well, drag her out in to the city streets
and tell all and sundry that she was a divorcee, living in sin with a
man not her husband, and then chastise her for what she'd done? No. He
offered her forgiveness, then admonished her to change her life.
When the woman caught in adultery was brought before Jesus, did he
drag her out to the city gates, have scribes write down all that she'd
done and post it on the gates so that all going and coming could read
of her sins, and then ask everyone to shun her? No. He reminded
everyone that they were not sinless, forgave the woman her sins and
told her to sin no more.
Based on examples from the Bible, how are we to treat those among us
who sin? We should not turn a blind eye, but neither is iit up to us
to discipline or punish. Only God knows if someone is truly repenent.
What is left for us is to believe when the person claims to have
changed and then watch their life for those changes. If they don't
change, then we do not have to fellowship with them, but we don't have
the right to darken their name or character.
Scott Bryce
>
> Scott Bryce wrote:
> >
> > Joi Ramey wrote:
> >
> > > but I don't get how you can't see the difference
> > > between withdrawing support from people who are cruel and vindictive,
> > > and actively planning to destroy one woman for trying to protect
> > > herself and her children from an abusive husband.
> >
> > It has been suggested in this thread that we should go beyond
> > withdrawing support and that we should take action that could
> > potentially destroy the lives of some of the leaders in the HS movement.
>
> I think I missed this part and I can't find what you're referring
> to even when I look. Can you point it out?
Uh, sure. It is near the end of your post, two paragraphs down from
here.
>
> > All this while the secular and public school community looks on. I don't
> > like this situation either, but I don't think that doing even more
> > damage to more people will resolve anything.
>
> Yes it surely will. (I don't desire to damage the people, but
> I do hope it will damage the grip of unbridled and unquestioned
> power they hold--self-proclaiming themselves the "Pillars" of
> homeschooling.) The people involved in this lawsuit have
> systematically destroyed the cooperative relationship that
> homeschoolers of many shapes and colors had. They are actively
> working to segregate us now and to "Ravage Home Education By
> Exclusion by Religion." (Anyone read the Moore's?)
>
> SOMEONE has to shout: The Emperor Has No Clothes!!!!!
>
> Leslie
Where are you getting this crap? "unbridled and unquestioned power they
hold" "self-proclaiming themselves the "Pillars" of homeschooling"
"systematically destroyed the cooperative relationship that
homeschoolers of many shapes and colors had" 'They are actively
working to segregate us now and to "Ravage Home Education By Exclusion
by Religion.'"
I don't suppose it is all documented on the Federal Courthouse In Tacoma
Washington web site?
Just to satisfy my own curiosity, can you share with us a little about
your religious background? You sound like the real problem you have with
these people is the fact that they are evangelicals. I see this sort of
thing here in Utah quite a bit.
--Scott
Mike Marlow
Bill & Joi Ramey <bill...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:377e5009....@news.cha.bellsouth.net...
> On Sat, 19 Jun 1999 03:54:30 GMT, bunn...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>
> >....sadly, this is not the first case of this sort of thing that I have
> >heard of...why are we Christians so intent on shooting our wounded?
> >And why must so many people suffer under spiritual abuse....how Jesus
> >must weep for His hurting sheep.....
>
>
> I think perhaps the biggest tool the devil uses against us the lie
> that we can not be of use to God unless we are perfect. If we examine
> the Bible, we see that all the great men of God sinned in a big way at
> one point of their life. Noah was a drunkard and had incestuous
> relationships with his daughters.
Zat so? I don't recall Noah being characterized that way in Scripture.
There's a big difference between having done something and calling one's
character on that.
-Mike-
mike....@usa.net
pauldanaher
suit) involving anti-trust provisions? Crimes are something else.
Leslie Moyer <moye...@wiltel.net> wrote in message
news:376D2253...@wiltel.net...
>
>
> "joe...@itw.com" wrote:
> >
> > Just not that interested!
> >
> > And of course, Internet postings are always factual and honest. Just go
to Steve
> > Winters place for an example!
> >
> > JTB
>
> Joe Ostrich,
>
> One of the sites is the FEDERAL COURTHOUSE IN TACOMA WASHINGTON!!!
>
> How can you possibly say it is not factual and honest????????
>
> You SHOULD be interested....these people who were CONVICTED of
> a FEDERAL CRIME are representing you in Washington D.C. and to
> the media.
>
> Leslie
> >
> > In article <376BC55C...@wiltel.net>, Leslie says...
> > >
> > >"joe...@itw.com" wrote:
> > >
> > >> This really is gossip.
> > >>
> > >>On what grounds did the husband want to return? Had he a conversion
experience?
> > >>
> > >> On what grounds did Cheryl refuse to allow him back? Two become one
in a
> > >> marriage, and save a very few excptions, this bond is unbreakable.
> > >>
> > >>Was Cheryl under the authority of a church? Was she responsible to any
Elders,
> > >> Pastor, Bishop, etc, or acting on her own.
> > >
Michael Moy
>
> On Sun, 20 Jun 1999 20:29:53 -0700, "Mike Marlow"
Noah was a drunkard and had incestuous
> >> relationships with his daughters.
> >
> >Zat so? I don't recall Noah being characterized that way in Scripture.
> >There's a big difference between having done something and calling one's
> >character on that.
>
> accounts of his drunkeness. And what do you mean...calling one's
> character on it? Did Jesus call one's character when he met the woman
> at the well? Or the adulterous woman being stoned for her sins? It's
> not our place to call anyone's 'character.'
Genesis 9:
21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered
within his tent.
22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father,
and told his two brethren without.
23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their
shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their
father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their
father's nakedness.
24 And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had
done unto him.
25 And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be
unto his brethren.
This is the only account of drunkeness that I recall. And I don't recall
an incestuous relationship with his daughters. Perhaps you're thinking
of
Lot (Genesis 19:30-36).
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt
news:377e5009....@news.cha.bellsouth.net...
[]
> If we examine
> the Bible, we see that all the great men of God sinned in a big way at
> one point of their life. Noah was a drunkard and had incestuous
> relationships with his daughters.
Joi,
You are conflating two stories here. Noah got drunk (Gen 9:21) and Lot
had sex with his daughters while drunk (Gen 19:30-38). In neither of
these stories is the man involved portayed as committing a sin. In the
Noah story, the son who looks on Noah's nakedness is cursed, but there
is no hint that Noah has done anything wrong. In the Lot story, the
daughters get Lot drunk and he is not even aware that he had sex with
them. When we read the Biblical account there is nothing to indicate
that even the daughters who planned getting impregnated by their
father did anything wrong. The rules against incest were introduced
after this happened. Perpetuating the family line was extremely
important in this culture and their actions were probably viewed as
praiseworthy.
I'm not disagreeing with your main point that God uses imperfect
people. However, you have chosen a poor example to make this point.
"Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation." (Gen 6:9) The
book of Jonah would be a better illustration. Excuse me for being
picky, but I have a thing about gettting Bible stories right.
Jayne
Leslie Moyer
Scott Bryce wrote:
>
> Leslie Moyer wrote:
> > Joe Ostrich,
> >
> > One of the sites is the FEDERAL COURTHOUSE IN TACOMA WASHINGTON!!!
> >
> > How can you possibly say it is not factual and honest????????
> >
> > You SHOULD be interested....these people who were CONVICTED of
> > a FEDERAL CRIME are representing you in Washington D.C. and to
> > the media.
>
> One of them was convicted. The rest settled out of court. Settling out
> of court does not imply guilt. It is often done to avoid the trouble and
> expense of a trial.
You're wrong, Scott. Some settled out of court, one was convicted
in federal court and others were convicted in state court.
You're right, though, sometimes it is done to avoid the trouble and
expense of a trial....and other times it is done because they know
they'd be convicted despite the money. Just like Sue Welch. She
was found guilty of conspiring....she didn't conspire alone. In
fact, of all the people named in the suit, she was one of the
less-guilty ones, IMO. Guilty enough for a unanimous decision on
one of the most difficult kinds of charges to prove (anti-trust).
> My concern is that these people are being convicted on this newsgroup.
No one is being convicted here. That has already happened elsewhere.
I just would like some of the automatrons to take their head
out of the sand and TRY to learn the truth for themselves. I am
not interested in "convicting" them. I do not want to do to them
what they did to Cheryl Seelhoff....I don't want to destroy them
or their businesses--I just want them to quit being so self-
righteous. Have you noticed that they (all of them) have been
so silent on this matter? No one has apologized for what
they did to Cheryl. This case was settled last October. Don't
you wonder why no one said anything until now?
There will be actual court documents from this trial (with official
federal court seal) available for viewing on the Internet soon. I
am going to post the URL for these when they are available--like
it or not.
Leslie
Leslie Moyer
lives of...." I said "I don't desire to damage the people, but
I do hope it will damage the grip of unbridled and unquestioned
power they hold--self-proclaiming themselves the "Pillars" of
homeschooling."
I still don't get where you think I said I wanted to destroy
anyone's life.
If you mean their life will change if they do not have this
degree of power, then, yes, I suppose you are correct. But
I see this as a good thing for both them AND all the rest of
us....I do not see it as destroying their lives at all but
repairing it to be in tune with their desire for a Biblical
walk with God.
Was this the part of my statement you were pulling out?
If it was, I wrote this AFTER you wrote that someone wanted
to "destroy lives"--can you show me where--before your post
anyone said they wanted to do this?
Leslie
Scott Bryce wrote:
>
> Leslie Moyer wrote:
> >
Scott Bryce
> There will be actual court documents from this trial (with official
> federal court seal) available for viewing on the Internet soon. I
> am going to post the URL for these when they are available--like
> it or not.
That's not a problem.
What is a problem is that we have only heard about this from Cheryl's
point if view, plus your ranting. Your own information has not been
consistant with itself, and Cheryl's story only makes me wonder what
information she isn't telling anyone. There are two sides to every
issue, and we aren't hearing both sides.
I did take a quick look at the two URL's you posted. One of them only
says that the case was filed, and the other locked up my browser.
Just cuz I'm curious... Is this really the best way to deal with this
problem? Do you have any scriptural basis for taking this approach (or
does that even matter to you?) How did you come to be in a position of
leadership in this matter, or were you self-appointed?
--Scott
Bill & Joi Ramey
>
>Bill & Joi Ramey <bill...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>news:377e5009....@news.cha.bellsouth.net...
>> On Sat, 19 Jun 1999 03:54:30 GMT, bunn...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> >....sadly, this is not the first case of this sort of thing that I have
>> >heard of...why are we Christians so intent on shooting our wounded?
>> >And why must so many people suffer under spiritual abuse....how Jesus
>> >must weep for His hurting sheep.....
>>
>>
>> I think perhaps the biggest tool the devil uses against us the lie
>> that we can not be of use to God unless we are perfect. If we examine
>> the Bible, we see that all the great men of God sinned in a big way at
>> one point of their life. Noah was a drunkard and had incestuous
>> relationships with his daughters.
>
bunn...@my-deja.com
I guess this particular letter came out of things I have seen in the
Church Universal...I have been a Christian since 1980 and i have seen
some things,and experienced some things....I am in a very healthy church
right now and that is helpful....other than that I am in the place where
I am struggling to learn how to rest in God...there is more to say but I
am not exactly sure what to say just yet...thanks for asking.
Bunnyfire
>
> > ....sadly, this is not the first case of this sort of thing that I
have
> > heard of...why are we Christians so intent on shooting our wounded?
> > And why must so many people suffer under spiritual abuse....how
Jesus
> > must weep for His hurting sheep.....
>
> These comments of yours triggered a thought for me. Are you currently
> feeling hurt and wounded? You've mentioned in other posts that you
> are feeling burnt out lately. Would you mind sharing about burn out?
> I don't want to pry or make you uncomfortable, but I think this could
> be very helpful for some of us.
>
> Jayne
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt
> Hi Jayne...
> I guess this particular letter came out of things I have seen in the
> Church Universal...I have been a Christian since 1980 and i have seen
> some things,and experienced some things....I am in a very healthy church
> right now and that is helpful....other than that I am in the place where
> I am struggling to learn how to rest in God...there is more to say but I
> am not exactly sure what to say just yet...thanks for asking.
> Bunnyfire
If and when you are ready to talk about it, this would be a good place
for it. I believe that we all benefit when we talk about our
weaknesses and struggles. Some days I feel so inadequate as a
homeschooler and a mother. The house is a mess, the children are
fighting and I can't think of what to make for supper. The only thing
that keeps me going is thinking that school would be worse. I like
reading about all the great things that other people do. It is
encouraging and inspiring, but also sometimes overwhelming. I find it
reassuring to know that others struggle too.
I am blessed with a sort of "automatic shut-off" that keeps me from
getting totally burned out. Whenever my stress level gets to a certain
point, my lupus symptoms start flaring up. The rashes and the aches
are the sign that I've got to change what I am doing.
Jayne
Michael Moy
> Excuse me for being
> picky, but I have a thing about gettting Bible stories right.
This is particularly easy to do today with search engines that
can search multipl versions, hand-held electronic Bibles and
Bible studies available online. Of course, you can always just
use the book form.
Mike Marlow
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt <jay...@spambait.guild.org>
wrote in message news:990620.212044...@mmalt.guild.org...
> I'm not disagreeing with your main point that God uses imperfect
> people. However, you have chosen a poor example to make this point.
> "Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation." (Gen 6:9) The
> book of Jonah would be a better illustration. Excuse me for being
> picky, but I have a thing about gettting Bible stories right.
>
> Jayne
A better response than my own Jayne.
-Mike-
mike....@usa.net
- but don't get a big head yet - that's not such a difficult
accomplishment.
Mike Marlow
> On Sun, 20 Jun 1999 20:29:53 -0700, "Mike Marlow"
> <mike....@usa.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Bill & Joi Ramey <bill...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >news:377e5009....@news.cha.bellsouth.net...
> >> On Sat, 19 Jun 1999 03:54:30 GMT, bunn...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >>
> >>
have
> >> >heard of...why are we Christians so intent on shooting our wounded?
> >> >And why must so many people suffer under spiritual abuse....how Jesus
> >> >must weep for His hurting sheep.....
> >>
> >>
> >> that we can not be of use to God unless we are perfect. If we examine
> >> the Bible, we see that all the great men of God sinned in a big way at
> >> one point of their life. Noah was a drunkard and had incestuous
> >> relationships with his daughters.
> >
> >Zat so? I don't recall Noah being characterized that way in Scripture.
> >There's a big difference between having done something and calling one's
> >character on that.
>
> Umm...it's in the Bible for all to read. There are at least two
> accounts of his drunkeness. And what do you mean...calling one's
> character on it? Did Jesus call one's character when he met the woman
> at the well? Or the adulterous woman being stoned for her sins? It's
> not our place to call anyone's 'character.'
Precisely. I was responding to the way you referred to Noah as a drunkard.
I have never seen in Scripture where he was referred to that way. Now, I
have seen where different people were referred to by their actions -
harlots, etc. - you know - women that hung out at the well and all that
stuff. I was basically posing a leading question...well ok, a leading
statement, to suggest that your particular wording of the above paragraph
served the purpose of generalizing the character of Noah by virtue of a very
specific reference or two. A dangerous thing for us to do, as you so well
point out at the end of your reply. I see a real parallel between that type
of thing and what I see going on in other thread areas re: the Gentle
Spirit/Let's Hang HSLDA threads. Not accusing you of this - but rather an
observation at large.
-Mike-
mike....@usa.net
Mike Marlow
>
> You're wrong, Scott. Some settled out of court, one was convicted
> in federal court and others were convicted in state court.
>
> You're right, though, sometimes it is done to avoid the trouble and
> expense of a trial....and other times it is done because they know
> they'd be convicted despite the money. Just like Sue Welch. She
> was found guilty of conspiring....she didn't conspire alone. In
> fact, of all the people named in the suit, she was one of the
> less-guilty ones, IMO. Guilty enough for a unanimous decision on
> one of the most difficult kinds of charges to prove (anti-trust).
>
Obsolutely not true. Most corporate attorneys are very concerned for
ant-trust litigation, because the grounds for it are so inclusive, and the
potential for loss is so great. It is definately not on of the most
difficult kinds of charges to prove.
> > My concern is that these people are being convicted on this newsgroup.
>
> No one is being convicted here. That has already happened elsewhere.
> I just would like some of the automatrons to take their head
> out of the sand and TRY to learn the truth for themselves. I am
> not interested in "convicting" them. I do not want to do to them
> what they did to Cheryl Seelhoff....I don't want to destroy them
> or their businesses--I just want them to quit being so self-
> righteous. Have you noticed that they (all of them) have been
> so silent on this matter? No one has apologized for what
> they did to Cheryl. This case was settled last October. Don't
> you wonder why no one said anything until now?
Precisely why this whole thing does not smell right. The only flags I see
being raised are by the Cheryl zealots, who indeed are clamoring for the
demise of these other organizations. There's a definate banner waving going
on here. There could well be more truth to what these claims hold than what
I want to believe. I tend to look at the overall nature of an organization
or even a person before casting my judgement, and I personally find the
nature of these claims to be inconsistent with the history of Michael Farris
and some of the others, as I have seen them. That's why I have posted a
desire to see more of these supposed "facts", which by the way, have not
been put forward. From my little corner of the world, right now this is
just static.
-Mike-
mike....@usa.net
Bill & Joi Ramey
wrote:
>Bill & Joi Ramey wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 20 Jun 1999 20:29:53 -0700, "Mike Marlow"
>Noah was a drunkard and had incestuous
>> >> relationships with his daughters.
>> >
>> >Zat so? I don't recall Noah being characterized that way in Scripture.
>> >There's a big difference between having done something and calling one's
>> >character on that.
>>
>> Umm...it's in the Bible for all to read. There are at least two
>> accounts of his drunkeness. And what do you mean...calling one's
>> character on it? Did Jesus call one's character when he met the woman
>> at the well? Or the adulterous woman being stoned for her sins? It's
>> not our place to call anyone's 'character.'
>
>Genesis 9:
>
>21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered
> within his tent.
>22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father,
> and told his two brethren without.
>23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their
> shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their
> father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their
> father's nakedness.
>24 And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had
> done unto him.
>25 And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be
> unto his brethren.
>
>This is the only account of drunkeness that I recall. And I don't recall
>an incestuous relationship with his daughters. Perhaps you're thinking
>of
>Lot (Genesis 19:30-36).
yes, you are absolutely right! I posted an apology, saying that I was
wrong about Noah, but i forgot to post it to both groups. Boy, was my
face red!!! I do apologize for the mis-information. That particular
story wasn't a popular one in Sunday School, so it's not as firmly
engrained as others! I never would have known about it if I didn't try
to read the Bible through occaisionally. Again, I apologize!
Joi
pauldanaher
homeschooler lions, it seems. First, who are the people who matter to us?
(We'll let the Christians worry about the rest.) Second, what have *these
people* been accused of and either denied or settled for or been found
guilty) of?
Mike Marlow <mike....@usa.net> wrote in message
news:7kldu1$cji$1...@birch.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> Bill & Joi Ramey <bill...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:376d8cb5...@news.cha.bellsouth.net...
> > On Sun, 20 Jun 1999 20:29:53 -0700, "Mike Marlow"
> > <mike....@usa.net> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >Bill & Joi Ramey <bill...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > >news:377e5009....@news.cha.bellsouth.net...
> > >> On Sat, 19 Jun 1999 03:54:30 GMT, bunn...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> >....sadly, this is not the first case of this sort of thing that I
> have
> > >> >heard of...why are we Christians so intent on shooting our wounded?
> > >> >And why must so many people suffer under spiritual abuse....how
Jesus
> > >> >must weep for His hurting sheep.....
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I think perhaps the biggest tool the devil uses against us the lie
> > >> that we can not be of use to God unless we are perfect. If we examine
> > >> the Bible, we see that all the great men of God sinned in a big way
at
> > >> one point of their life. Noah was a drunkard and had incestuous
> > >> relationships with his daughters.
> > >
> > >Zat so? I don't recall Noah being characterized that way in Scripture.
> > >There's a big difference between having done something and calling
one's
> > >character on that.
> >
> > Umm...it's in the Bible for all to read. There are at least two
> > accounts of his drunkeness. And what do you mean...calling one's
> > character on it? Did Jesus call one's character when he met the woman
> > at the well? Or the adulterous woman being stoned for her sins? It's
> > not our place to call anyone's 'character.'
>
Bill & Joi Ramey
>
>
>> > My concern is that these people are being convicted on this newsgroup.
>>
>> No one is being convicted here. That has already happened elsewhere.
>> I just would like some of the automatrons to take their head
>> out of the sand and TRY to learn the truth for themselves. I am
>> not interested in "convicting" them. I do not want to do to them
>> what they did to Cheryl Seelhoff....I don't want to destroy them
>> or their businesses--I just want them to quit being so self-
>> righteous. Have you noticed that they (all of them) have been
>> so silent on this matter? No one has apologized for what
>> they did to Cheryl. This case was settled last October. Don't
>> you wonder why no one said anything until now?
>
>Precisely why this whole thing does not smell right. The only flags I see
>being raised are by the Cheryl zealots, who indeed are clamoring for the
>demise of these other organizations. There's a definate banner waving going
>on here. There could well be more truth to what these claims hold than what
>I want to believe. I tend to look at the overall nature of an organization
>or even a person before casting my judgement, and I personally find the
>nature of these claims to be inconsistent with the history of Michael Farris
>and some of the others, as I have seen them. That's why I have posted a
>desire to see more of these supposed "facts", which by the way, have not
>been put forward. From my little corner of the world, right now this is
>just static.
Perhaps you should do a bit more reading on HSLDA and find out what is
motivating some of the people who are 'leading' the Christian
Homeschooling movement. I thought the same thing as you at one time.
And it's not that Mike Farris isn't a Christian, or doesn't have
strong morals. It's where he wants to take them and what he wants to
do with them that bothers me. I am by no means decided for or against
on that subject, but I find some of the things I've read disturbing
and they have given me lots to think about. Had I read about Cheryl a
year or so ago, I might have been more inclined to disbelieve her.
Now, I'm not in the least surprised. Outraged, but not surprised.
Perhaps the reason these people have not spoken up or apologized lies
in the terms of their settlement with Cheryl Lindsay Seelhoff. Perhaps
they are forbidden to ever speak about it again, under a court-ordered
'gag', so to speak.
The reason why the website concerning the federal case had no more
information on it is because the information has not been put out yet,
and what there is of it (court records) is about 13 volumes long. It
may take awhile to get it out on the net.
Mike Marlow
pauldanaher <wa...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:7klku2$qn5$1...@oak.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> Let's not worry about Noah. There are just two issues here for the
secular
> homeschooler lions, it seems. First, who are the people who matter to us?
> (We'll let the Christians worry about the rest.) Second, what have *these
> people* been accused of and either denied or settled for or been found
> guilty) of?
I do agree with the latter part of this. What's of concern (if that's
really the right word) to me is exactly that there does seem to be some
significant degree of jumping to conclusions based upon one woman's account
(Cheryl's) - which by any definition is going to be biased, also based upon
court proceedings - which do indeed have some merit, but as we all have seen
in settlements and jury awards, are not absolute truths - and are not even
fully disclosed at this time(!).
-Mike-
mike....@usa.net
I think I'm agreeing with you here. You'd better be concerned about
that....
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt
> Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt wrote:
>
> > Excuse me for being
> > picky, but I have a thing about gettting Bible stories right.
>
> This is particularly easy to do today with search engines that
> can search multipl versions, hand-held electronic Bibles and
> Bible studies available online. Of course, you can always just
> use the book form.
I don't have any electronic helps. I just have a Bible, a
concordance, and take the time to use them. Accuracy when speaking
about the Bible is important to me. On the other hand, I don't want
to beat up on people for making mistakes either. I've got some work
to do on learning to make *gentle* corrections.
Jayne
Bill & Joi Ramey
Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt) wrote:
> Bill & Joi Ramey <bill...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:377e5009....@news.cha.bellsouth.net...
>
>[]
>> If we examine
>> the Bible, we see that all the great men of God sinned in a big way at
>> one point of their life. Noah was a drunkard and had incestuous
>> relationships with his daughters.
>
>Joi,
>
>You are conflating two stories here. Noah got drunk (Gen 9:21) and Lot
>had sex with his daughters while drunk (Gen 19:30-38). In neither of
>these stories is the man involved portayed as committing a sin. In the
>Noah story, the son who looks on Noah's nakedness is cursed, but there
>is no hint that Noah has done anything wrong. In the Lot story, the
>daughters get Lot drunk and he is not even aware that he had sex with
>them. When we read the Biblical account there is nothing to indicate
>that even the daughters who planned getting impregnated by their
>father did anything wrong. The rules against incest were introduced
>after this happened. Perpetuating the family line was extremely
>important in this culture and their actions were probably viewed as
>praiseworthy.
>
>I'm not disagreeing with your main point that God uses imperfect
>people. However, you have chosen a poor example to make this point.
>"Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation." (Gen 6:9) The
>book of Jonah would be a better illustration. Excuse me for being
>picky, but I have a thing about gettting Bible stories right.
>
>Jayne
Yes, Jayne, you are absolutely right, and I have posted somewhere that
I was wrong about that story. I forgot about Jonah...good example,
though! My apologies for being misinformed!
Bill & Joi Ramey
>
>Bill & Joi Ramey <bill...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>news:377e5009....@news.cha.bellsouth.net...
>> On Sat, 19 Jun 1999 03:54:30 GMT, bunn...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> >....sadly, this is not the first case of this sort of thing that I have
>> >heard of...why are we Christians so intent on shooting our wounded?
>> >And why must so many people suffer under spiritual abuse....how Jesus
>> >must weep for His hurting sheep.....
>>
>>
>> I think perhaps the biggest tool the devil uses against us the lie
>> that we can not be of use to God unless we are perfect. If we examine
>> the Bible, we see that all the great men of God sinned in a big way at
>> one point of their life. Noah was a drunkard and had incestuous
>> relationships with his daughters.
>
>Zat so? I don't recall Noah being characterized that way in Scripture.
>There's a big difference between having done something and calling one's
>character on that.
>
OOOPS! My slip is really showing this time. After I posted my last
reply to you, I had a niggling little doubt about the Noah part, so I
went and looked it up. I was wrong, it wasn't Noah who had an
incestuous relationship, it was Lot. I apologize. One more reason to
check my facts before I spout off, I guess. I am sorry for sounding so
sure of myself when I knew not of that I spoke!
Michael Moy
> >
> > > Excuse me for being
> > > picky, but I have a thing about gettting Bible stories right.
> >
> > can search multipl versions, hand-held electronic Bibles and
> > Bible studies available online. Of course, you can always just
> > use the book form.
>
> I don't have any electronic helps. I just have a Bible, a
> concordance, and take the time to use them. Accuracy when speaking
> about the Bible is important to me. On the other hand, I don't want
> to beat up on people for making mistakes either. I've got some work
> to do on learning to make *gentle* corrections.
We have Bibles and Concordances too but I don't carry multiple
versions of these things around with me. The Bible Gateway site
allows you to search 7 versions or all at the same time and provides
support for 10 other languages.
It's also handy if you want to cut and paste as a response in an
email or newsgroup or if you are putting together your own study
or research.
michael
pauldanaher
at least to secular homeschoolers here, and the thread in its current form
isn't getting us any further towards resolving it. Given the volume of
documentation (exhibits, transcripts etc), putting excerpts on a web site
won't help. Perhaps the court's ruling might be informative? In any event,
I'm still no wiser about who belongs to which organisation and what their
official positions are.
pauldanaher
read things for themselves.
Bill & Joi Ramey <bill...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:377257d7...@news.cha.bellsouth.net...
Belinda Augustus
> leadership in this matter, or were you self-appointed?
>
> --Scott
Ahhh Geeze. Do you NEED a leader to follow? God's plan was not for a
KING. That was Israel's doing. My advice to many would be to use what
God gave you between the ears and stop looking for LEADERS.
Belinda
Stretrat
jay...@spambait.guild.org (Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt)
writes:
>Perpetuating the family line was extremely
>important in this culture and their actions were probably viewed as
>praiseworthy.
>
>
Actually that line died out.
-----------------------------
Stainless Steel Streetrat
"Go not to the elves for advice, for they will say both no and yes"
-------------
Ultimate Guide to Christian Resources: Homeschooling
http://members.aol.com/stretrat/homeschool/index.html
Scott Bryce
>
> Scott, I still do not see what you mean. You said "destroy the
> lives of...." I said "I don't desire to damage the people, but
> I do hope it will damage the grip of unbridled and unquestioned
> power they hold--self-proclaiming themselves the "Pillars" of
> homeschooling."
>
> I still don't get where you think I said I wanted to destroy
> anyone's life.
>
> If you mean their life will change if they do not have this
> degree of power, then, yes, I suppose you are correct. But
> I see this as a good thing for both them AND all the rest of
> us....I do not see it as destroying their lives at all but
> repairing it to be in tune with their desire for a Biblical
> walk with God.
>
> Was this the part of my statement you were pulling out?
> If it was, I wrote this AFTER you wrote that someone wanted
> to "destroy lives"--can you show me where--before your post
> anyone said they wanted to do this?
Actually, it was a post from someone else that I was thinking of when I
wrote that, and after re-reading the post, I can see that I probably
over-stated things. But I still don't like this being spread around
without a balanced perspective. That can potentially destroy lives, and
that is what I was referring to.
There are two sides to this issue. I can see how some of what these
people did was probably for a good reason. I can also see the person on
the receiving end of this could exaggerate the facts, or make
speculations about what people were doing based on what she was able to
see. I'd like to know what Sue Welch, Mary Pride, Gregg Harris, et al
have to say before jumping to conclusion and spreading gossip.
If it all happened the way the you and Cheryl contend, them God will
deal with these people more effectively than you and I will. In our zeal
to make things right, let's not make the same mistakes these folks did.
--Scott
Who has been on both sides of this kind of mess and thinks there has to
be a better way to deal with these things.
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt
[]
> We have Bibles and Concordances too but I don't carry multiple
> versions of these things around with me.
I write from home so I have my books available.
> The Bible Gateway site
> allows you to search 7 versions or all at the same time and provides
> support for 10 other languages.
Does it have the Greek and Hebrew? I was looking at the Bibleworks
program, which has the original languages as well as many versions,
but it costs around $500 (Canadian).
> It's also handy if you want to cut and paste as a response in an
> email or newsgroup or if you are putting together your own study
> or research.
I would appreciate being able to cut and paste. Thanks for the info.
Jayne
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt
> Yes, Jayne, you are absolutely right, and I have posted somewhere that
> I was wrong about that story. I forgot about Jonah...good example,
> though! My apologies for being misinformed!
You don't have to apologize for being misinformed, just become
informed. <g>
Really, it's okay.
Jayne
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt
> In article <990620.212044...@mmalt.guild.org>,
> jay...@spambait.guild.org (Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt)
> writes:
>
>>Perpetuating the family line was extremely
>>important in this culture and their actions were probably viewed as
>>praiseworthy.
>>
>>
>
> Actually that line died out.
Perhaps it did eventually, but it says in Gen 19:37,38
"The first-born bore a son and called his name Moab; he is the father
of the Moabites to this day. The younger also bore a son, and called
his name Benammi; he is the father of the Ammonites to this day." This
shows that their efforts to perpuate the line were considered
successful.
In the earlier period of Judaism, they did not have a concept of
immortal souls. As far as they were concerned, death was the end,
except for leaving behind descendants. You can see this motivation at
work throughout the OT. It is a key feature in the story of Tamar and
in the story of Ruth.
Jayne
Michael Moy
>
> mg...@netscape.net (Michael Moy) writes:
>
> []
> > We have Bibles and Concordances too but I don't carry multiple
> > versions of these things around with me.
>
> I write from home so I have my books available.
>
> > The Bible Gateway site
> > allows you to search 7 versions or all at the same time and provides
> > support for 10 other languages.
>
> Does it have the Greek and Hebrew? I was looking at the Bibleworks
> program, which has the original languages as well as many versions,
> but it costs around $500 (Canadian).
No it doesn't.
> > It's also handy if you want to cut and paste as a response in an
> > email or newsgroup or if you are putting together your own study
> > or research.
>
> I would appreciate being able to cut and paste. Thanks for the info.
What would really be nice is being able to move the cursor on a
reference
and then seeing it pop up or being able to right-click on a word to do
a search.
Mike Marlow
> >
> Maybe we both should! But seriously, there is something of potential
concern
> at least to secular homeschoolers here, and the thread in its current form
> isn't getting us any further towards resolving it. Given the volume of
> documentation (exhibits, transcripts etc), putting excerpts on a web site
> won't help. Perhaps the court's ruling might be informative? In any event,
> I'm still no wiser about who belongs to which organisation and what their
> official positions are.
>
>
Yup - my feelings exactly. I'd like to know more just because I never trust
outward appearances, and these types of cases are always so complex. The
risk in assuming what appears to be obvious is quite high. But frankly, I
doubt I'll have to patience to pursue it much more. Guess it's just not the
biggest issue I have to deal with in my life right now.
-Mike-
mike....@usa.net
don't know what good I could really do with any information I discovered
anyway, so in the end, what's it really matter?
pauldanaher
the table ("charity begins at home, but shouldn't stop there"). But I was
horrified to see that the only magazine link on the HSLDA homepage was to
TH, which has a very strong fundamentalist position. I regard this as
inimical to education, and I'm very unhappy that a major homeschooling
organisation is apparently favouring this position. Getting secular
homeschoolers organised is almost certainly a lost cause, though. However, I
do have some friends in the media, and the forthcoming article in the
home-ed magazine could be interesting.
Leslie Moyer
> Perhaps the reason these people have not spoken up or apologized lies
> in the terms of their settlement with Cheryl Lindsay Seelhoff. Perhaps
> they are forbidden to ever speak about it again, under a court-ordered
> 'gag', so to speak.
No, actually Joi, there is NO gag order for either party about
the case--only about the specific amount of money that is
involved in the settlement. But be assured that it was the
DEFENDANTS, not the plaintiff, who asked for the gag order.
Cheryl refused to sign one and that is how it stands.
Part of the time delay was "terms of settlement." Though
the case was won back in October, "terms" were settled, I
*believe* in February. It could be that some of the state
charges were being settled after that--I'm not totally sure.
> The reason why the website concerning the federal case had no more
> information on it is because the information has not been put out yet,
> and what there is of it (court records) is about 13 volumes long. It
> may take awhile to get it out on the net.
This is correct. However please be assured that THIS WEEK one
or more people are headed to that courthouse to obtain official
photocopies of many court documents and they WILL be available on
the Internet very soon.
Leslie
Leslie Moyer
> Obsolutely not true.
Obsolutely? That a new word? <g> Definition, please? If you
mean "absolutely" then we'll have to disagree...one might only
look at recent Microsoft case for confirmation.
> > No one has apologized for what
> > they did to Cheryl. This case was settled last October. Don't
> > you wonder why no one said anything until now?
>
> Precisely why this whole thing does not smell right.
You are right--it does not smell right. Mike, you are gonna
feel sooooooooo stupid when those court documents are finally
revealed. I suppose you know that anyone can walk in to the
WA federal courthouse right now and see the evidence for
themselves. I personally know someone who did just that--and
others I know personally who testified at the trial. This
is all true whether you want to believe it or not.
> The only flags I see
> being raised are by the Cheryl zealots, who indeed are clamoring for the
> demise of these other organizations.
Ooooo...."zealot"..... I don't even know Cheryl, for your
information and I am not "clamoring" for anything. The reason
you only see "flags being raised" by zealots (I am not a "Cheryl
zealot, but a zealot for the truth, perhaps), is that the OTHER
side has things to hide...much to hide, in fact.
> There could well be more truth to what these claims hold than what
> I want to believe.
Now THAT is an obvious understatement. I am glad you finally
made a distinction between the TRUTH and what you WANT to believe
is the truth. We're finally getting somewhere.....
> I tend to look at the overall nature of an organization
> or even a person before casting my judgement, and I personally find the
> nature of these claims to be inconsistent with the history of Michael Farris
> and some of the others, as I have seen them.
Like Joi has hinted....that is because you are not looking
closely enough. This event IS the "history of Michael Farris
and some of the others." Will you ignore it as you may have
ignored other things that didn't "fit" with your perspective
of them......or would it make more sense to CHANGE your
perspective of them? Have you read "Homeschooling Freedoms
At Risk" or the Moore's White Paper: "The Ravage of Home
Education by Exclusion By Religion?" In other words, have
you ever READ anything that is written by anyone OTHER than
the people whose character you are assessing?
If you were evaluating me and all you ever did was read
stuff by me and my supporters, would it surprise you if the
image was a positive one? What about if you then met one
of my critics....would you ignore them because what you
*previously* knew about me was positive? Or would you listen
with your heart and THEN make a judgement?
I don't really have a problem with you and others like you
here deciding that you think Welch, Pride, Farris, Harris, et.
al. were right. But I *do* have a problem with you saying
you are not *interested* in the truth because you trust them.
That makes no rational sense.
> That's why I have posted a
> desire to see more of these supposed "facts", which by the way, have not
> been put forward. From my little corner of the world, right now this is
> just static.
Mike, there are THOUSANDS of pages down at the Tacoma Federal
Court house.....they will on the Internet soon, but will you
even care to LOOK at them?
Leslie
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt
[]
> I don't really have a problem with you and others like you
> here deciding that you think Welch, Pride, Farris, Harris, et.
> al. were right. But I *do* have a problem with you saying
> you are not *interested* in the truth because you trust them.
> That makes no rational sense.
[]
I have not decided that I think that anyone is right. My current
position is that there are two sides to every story and I don't see why
it is my business to sort this one out. You are not a convincing
spokesperson for your views. I find it difficult to take seriously
people who insult and belittle those who disagree with them, as you have
done throughout this thread.
Jayne
Mike Marlow
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>
> > Obsolutely not true.
>
> Obsolutely? That a new word? <g> Definition, please? If you
> mean "absolutely" then we'll have to disagree...one might only
> look at recent Microsoft case for confirmation.
Leslie you need to do more than quote the problem of one complex trial whcih
is being built upon many many complex points before you can make this claim.
Do you even know what the Sherman Anti Trust Act addresses, details and
allows for? Clearly you do not.
>
> > > No one has apologized for what
> > > they did to Cheryl. This case was settled last October. Don't
> > > you wonder why no one said anything until now?
> >
> > Precisely why this whole thing does not smell right.
>
> You are right--it does not smell right. Mike, you are gonna
> feel sooooooooo stupid when those court documents are finally
> revealed.
No Leslie - I'm not. I don't expect perfection out of either side of this,
nor do I from any person. Likewise I don't climb on bandwagons or raise
causes. I've got enough to keep me occupied in my life without trying to
find my fulfilment in the lives of others.
I suppose you know that anyone can walk in to the
> WA federal courthouse right now and see the evidence for
> themselves. I personally know someone who did just that--and
> others I know personally who testified at the trial. This
> is all true whether you want to believe it or not.
Gee thank you for pointing that out to me. What would I ever have done
without your insight?
>
> > The only flags I see
> > being raised are by the Cheryl zealots, who indeed are clamoring for the
> > demise of these other organizations.
>
> Ooooo...."zealot"..... I don't even know Cheryl, for your
> information and I am not "clamoring" for anything.
You need to go back to the archives and read your own posts Leslie.
>
> > There could well be more truth to what these claims hold than what
> > I want to believe.
>
> Now THAT is an obvious understatement. I am glad you finally
> made a distinction between the TRUTH and what you WANT to believe
> is the truth. We're finally getting somewhere.....
No Leslie - *we* aren't going anywhere. I'm a lot more selective about the
company I keep than that.
>
> > I tend to look at the overall nature of an organization
> > or even a person before casting my judgement, and I personally find the
> > nature of these claims to be inconsistent with the history of Michael
Farris
> > and some of the others, as I have seen them.
>
> Like Joi has hinted....that is because you are not looking
> closely enough. This event IS the "history of Michael Farris
> and some of the others." Will you ignore it as you may have
> ignored other things that didn't "fit" with your perspective
> of them......or would it make more sense to CHANGE your
> perspective of them? Have you read "Homeschooling Freedoms
> At Risk" or the Moore's White Paper: "The Ravage of Home
> Education by Exclusion By Religion?" In other words, have
> you ever READ anything that is written by anyone OTHER than
> the people whose character you are assessing?
Yes, I've read them all - thank you. Guess what - I found them to be the
most poorly written diatribes of sour grapes that I've found on the net yet.
Lots of acusations, even more unsubstantiated allusions, nothing to back it
all up. But it worked - it got people like you fired up for the cause. Let
me ask - just how critically did you read any of that stuff? Clearly not
very. Why do you make the mistake of assuming that I ever ignored anything
that I didn't like? Foolish girl - you don't know me, so you should never
make a silly assumption like that. There simply was nothing in the entire
web site to condem these "oh so evil" people as the authors would have us
do.
>
> If you were evaluating me and all you ever did was read
> stuff by me and my supporters, would it surprise you if the
> image was a positive one?
Guess what? You come across exactly like that. As if you've been
brainwashed by the "other side". Now when someone questions the issue you
get explosive. Let's see, now what might one draw as a conclusion to that?
What about if you then met one
> of my critics....would you ignore them because what you
> *previously* knew about me was positive? Or would you listen
> with your heart and THEN make a judgement?
You've apparently not read any of the other posts I've sent on this topic.
Leslie - if you want to make a credible argument, you need to be more
diligent.
>
> I don't really have a problem with you and others like you
> here deciding that you think Welch, Pride, Farris, Harris, et.
> al. were right. But I *do* have a problem with you saying
> you are not *interested* in the truth because you trust them.
> That makes no rational sense.
Now let me figure this wonderful piece of logic out. I have some
experiences with someone. I then build an image of them based upon those
experiences. Someone else comes along and spouts stuff that is 180 degress
out of phase with the image I had built - based upon my experiences.
According to you I'm supposed to simply jump into total committed belief in
what you have to say - even though I have no reference to go on? OK, I
think I see the logic to that. Wierd logic, but I think I'm begining to see
it. Yeah, I recognize it now. It's that thing that I'm trying to teach my
kids not to grow up doing.
>
>
> > That's why I have posted a
> > desire to see more of these supposed "facts", which by the way, have not
> > been put forward. From my little corner of the world, right now this is
> > just static.
>
> Mike, there are THOUSANDS of pages down at the Tacoma Federal
> Court house.....they will on the Internet soon, but will you
> even care to LOOK at them?
It will be interesting to see just what does come out. So far you've
mounted a heavy crusade based upon documents which are not readilly
available - suggesting folks take a walk to your courthouse. Boy I gotta
tell ya - you sure speak assertively for someone working off of third hand
information. Rest assured I will look at some of the stuff. Not because
you encouraged it - but because I don't form finalized opinions on matters
like this until I've been able to exercise due diligence. Clearly unlike
you - who has done so in the absence of the documents - per your own words.
Will it change anything for me? I don't know - it depends on what the
documents say. The mere size that you continually mention is of no
consequence - other than to make this a tedious task.
-Mike-
mike....@usa.net
Mike Marlow
this to me. If you insist on posting replies like this, I'm going to have
no choice but to email you a copy of my sig file.
-Mike-
mike....@usa.net
danged woman just don't know her place. geeze....second time she's posted a
better reply than me. just don't know her place. that's all, she just
don't know her place.
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt <jay...@spambait.guild.org>
wrote in message news:990621.171939...@mmalt.guild.org...
> Leslie Moyer <moye...@wiltel.net> writes:
>
> []
> > I don't really have a problem with you and others like you
> > here deciding that you think Welch, Pride, Farris, Harris, et.
> > al. were right. But I *do* have a problem with you saying
> > you are not *interested* in the truth because you trust them.
> > That makes no rational sense.
Mike Marlow
'Cause He liked what them Israelites came up with on their own?
-Mike-
mike....@usa.net
awe don't be gettin' your bowels in an uproar now. I really agree with you,
but I'm not s'pposed to be real obvious about it.
Belinda Augustus <bau...@infinet.com> wrote in message
news:376E3FE3...@infinet.com...
Leslie Moyer
> Getting secular
> homeschoolers organised is almost certainly a lost cause, though.
Paul,
There is, in fact, an effort to organize (not in a hierarchical
way, but in a networking way) all homeschoolers right
now....secular, religious, unschoolers, school-at-homers, unit
studiers, etc. The hope is to tear down the walls built by
HSLDA, Sue Welch and Mary Pride in dividing homeschoolers into
two distinct camps. You may be right that it is a "lost cause"
but I hope you're wrong...I'm betting a lot of time that you are,
in fact. For more information, head on over to Onelist and look
for "NOSC"--"National Organization Steering Committee".
Leslie
Scott Bryce
> Ahhh Geeze. Do you NEED a leader to follow? God's plan was not for a
> KING. That was Israel's doing. My advice to many would be to use what
> God gave you between the ears and stop looking for LEADERS.
>
> Belinda
If I recall correctly, God spoke through Moses about that, not that he
was any kind of a leader.
No leader... I believe Webster calls that "anarchy."
--Scott
Who is trying to decide if he meant this tongue in cheek.
Susan
"Mike Marlow" <mike....@usa.net> wrote:
> Jayne - stop it please. This is the second time in as many days
you've done
> this to me. If you insist on posting replies like this, I'm going to
have
> no choice but to email you a copy of my sig file.
>
> -Mike-
> mike....@usa.net
>
> danged woman just don't know her place. geeze....second time she's
posted a
> better reply than me. just don't know her place. that's all, she
just
> don't know her place.
Maybe Mike you just need to step aside and let Jayne handle this...
Clearly she is better qualified for the job...
:)
@}-`-,-- @}-`-,-- @}-`-,-- @}-`-,-- @}-`-,--
Susan @}-`-,-- robysatmydashdeja.com
ICQ #39572982 AOL IM "WfeofAl"
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Agente Especial Anaranjado
Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt) wrote:
>This does not seem like a black and white situation in which some
>people are completely right and others completely wrong. There are two
>sides to the story.
Interesting. Not that I'm taking sides, or even care to, but a
$435,000 judgment times three plus attorneys fees != equal blame, at
least as I understand objectivity and mathematics.
Mis antepasados se colgaron por el cuello, no por la cola.
I suport publick skool
Agente Especial Anaranjado
>You SHOULD be interested....these people who were CONVICTED of
>a FEDERAL CRIME are representing you in Washington D.C. and to
>the media.
Nadie es perfecto.
Jamie Cole-Simon
Scott Bryce wrote in message <376E876E...@coastlink.com>...
>There are two sides to this issue. I can see how some of what these
>people did was probably for a good reason. I can also see the person on
>the receiving end of this could exaggerate the facts, or make
>speculations about what people were doing based on what she was able to
>see. I'd like to know what Sue Welch, Mary Pride, Gregg Harris, et al
>have to say before jumping to conclusion and spreading gossip.<<
It would certainly be helpful to hear what the other side has to say.
Unfortunately, they've been conspicuously silent about this.
>If it all happened the way the you and Cheryl contend, them God will
>deal with these people more effectively than you and I will. In our zeal
>to make things right, let's not make the same mistakes these folks did.<
Yes, let's not. Let's simply make sure the facts are available to all, as
the facts will speak for themselves. Then, people can make their own
decisions as to who can be trusted.
Jamie
Jamie Cole-Simon
Mike Marlow wrote in message <7kk07l$drr$1...@oak.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
>>Noah was a drunkard and had incestuous
>> relationships with his daughters.
>
>Zat so? I don't recall Noah being characterized that way in Scripture.
>There's a big difference between having done something and calling one's
>character on that.
>
>-Mike-
>mike....@usa.net
>
EXACTLY! Why was this distinction not taken into consideration when
Cheryl's character was being slimed all over the place?
Jamie
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt
[]
> Maybe Mike you just need to step aside and let Jayne handle this...
>
> Clearly she is better qualified for the job...
>
> :)
Hey, Susan, don't you think I can make enough enemies without your
help? <g>
BTW, thanks for the White Paper address.
Jayne