Alumni Meeting
- Thread starter Fresh Air
- Start date
BALAAM said:
Yes, if his wife would not have been willing to wear exclusively dresses and skirts he would not have been given this job, but have a prior sex offense - no problem! Welcome aboard!
Talk about screwed up priorities.
IIRC, Schaap did not make him a mere employee, but an OFFICER. He is a vice-president (emphasis on vice), is he not?
Binaca Chugger said:
Thank you for clarifying that the Jorgensen who was VP is not the same person.
Bravo said:
That is very disturbing. I wouldn't want my kid on a team where the coach was convicted of a sex offense.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2013
- Messages
- 4,336
- Reaction score
- 89
- Points
- 48
Bravo said:
Go to any kid's sports league in the nation. Parents help out. There is not a background check for parent helpers. If there was, and his record is expunged (as some have claimed), nothing would show. Thus, there is no liability on any part. If the dad made a mistake in the past, paid his dues, and is now trying to be an involved parent and providing husband......sounds like reconciliation.
So......the question must be asked. Are you really "Amazed by Grace?" Or are you "Angered by Grace?"
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2013
- Messages
- 4,336
- Reaction score
- 89
- Points
- 48
AmazedbyGrace said:
This is a "duh" for any HACker. Obviously you aren't a HACker.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2013
- Messages
- 4,336
- Reaction score
- 89
- Points
- 48
Bravo said:
My response was based upon your statement that he "helped coach" a little league team.
My kids have been in church sports, city sports and private league sports (Sports and other such groups) and worked with both church and private schools. I believe head coaches go through a background check. I don't think that the parent who shows up at practices and helps coach does get the check. Private schools do not allow parents to drive for field trips without background checks. Parents who show up to help with events are not screened. In my experience, church schools are more lax than others because they feel that they already know the parents and their history, though some churches are different. One church I attended required every one who worked in any aspect of the church to have an annual background check.
Even still, if the group runs a background check and it comes back clean.....they cannot prevent him from being involved. We may have our opinions on the law, but the law is the law and as citizens, we have to abide by it. For whatever reason, judging from the posts here, the judicial system heard all sides of the case and decided that his record should be expunged (completely eradicated - dare I say - justified?). If you know something that the courts don't - go to the courts. If you think the law should change, write a law. This is what Joy Evans Rider is doing - she didn't like the law that prevented her abuser from prosecution, so she is petitioning the government to change the law.
Mocking the grace of God!?! Not a good idea in my opinion. In his book, The Cross Centered Life, CJ Mahaney writes along these lines: Why should we be shocked when we hear the depths of sin which some Christian has backslidden? He has already admitted he was a vile sinner deserving of hell when he testified of his salvation. If the cross be enough to redeem us from our initial transgressions, it is enough to restore us to a relationship with Christ after another sin.
People who are living in violation of 1 Tim 3, should be disallowed from leadership in ministry. I believe there are some sins that would prevent one from being restored to any position of leadership in ministry and have been very vocal about that fact on this forum. We must treat a non-repentant Christian as a heathen after our sincerest efforts of restoration go unchecked. However, when we seek to restore a Christian brother or sister, and the individual turns back to God.....is not this the main purpose of Jesus Christ? Calling sinners to repentance? Should a Christian with a certain past be permitted in leadership, or positions to publicly admonish another? NO! Should they be allowed to have a job and the opportunity to now spend time with their family, loving his wife as Christ loved the church and rearing his children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord? I think so.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2013
- Messages
- 4,336
- Reaction score
- 89
- Points
- 48
Myself, I have a much bigger problem with people like EL who publicly lied to the congregation to hopefully hide sin and has a history among those in his youth groups of being incredibly to froward with teen girls in public. This guy was rewarded by the system with a trip to Hawaii for his transgressions.
This is why most people are looking for our home church or alma mater to have a shake-up in the leadership level. If you wwant to keep the guy employed - give him some low-level maintenance job where he is never seen, or, stick him in the basement shipping books for Mrs. Chalifoux. Just stop promoting the same guy who was part of the DH, JH, JS mess as a great leader who we should blindly follow.
This is why most people are looking for our home church or alma mater to have a shake-up in the leadership level. If you wwant to keep the guy employed - give him some low-level maintenance job where he is never seen, or, stick him in the basement shipping books for Mrs. Chalifoux. Just stop promoting the same guy who was part of the DH, JH, JS mess as a great leader who we should blindly follow.
Binaca Chugger said:
Three Things:
1. Help Coach meant he is a coach on the team.
2. I didn't mock God's grace, just mocked your comment,... There is a difference.
3. You'll get no argument from me about the whole Eddie situation and your take on it.
My children attended a christian school, everyone whether a parent helping or a coach had to have a background check, not paid for by the school. Our little league is big time here, and run like a company, people get checked out. Which I am glad for. You can not work with kids or teens at our church unless they run a background check on you. I still dont live in a false security, I did keep a good eye on my children. EXCEPT for the one time I thought my husband was bringing my son home from the game and he was there without us for an hour!!! That was many moons ago and I still feel bad about it.
Binaca Chugger said:
Should a sex offender be allowed to have a job?
Sure. Just not one in ministry. Shouldn't the average church member be able to assume a person who has been deemed qualified to work for a church does not have a prior sex offense? He should get a secular job that does not have him working with youth in any capacity.
Grace of God.
God's grace is more than sufficient. That does not mean Jorgensen has gone through restoration at the church level. Has he taken responsibility for his behavior and publicly repented in front of the church? Were the parents of youth made aware of his offense?
I would bet that has never happened, as it was not typical in a Hyles-type church.
People at the church need to know not to allow their kids to do overnights at his house or to accept rides from him. He should not be allowed to be a camp counselor when his kids are old enough for camp.
As for community leagues, I know Little League requires background checks even for those who do ground maintenance and run the snack bar. AYSO is also strict about checking backgrounds. I know of a case where LL was aware of a person currently being tried for a sex offense and that person was not even permitted to sit in the dugout to help, or to even do a shift at the snack bar. Parents on the team were made aware. Their policies reflect that they take child safety seriously...as they should.
I wholeheartedly agree laws should be changed when it comes to allowing convicted sex offenders to get their crime reduced to a misdemeanor after the fact, and to then get the record expunged. This is a loop hole that needs to be closed for the safety of the public, and I will certainly start writing letters to the gov't representatives in my state. I encourage others to do the same. Time to make some noise.
Binaca Chugger said:
Bravo said:
I am double quoting since this may answer Bravo's question as well.... I wanted to get on a real computer to do this, otherwise I would have done this much earlier to address Bravo's statement.
When a record is expunged, it is quite an interesting process. I am familiar with it since in recent years, Indiana has broadened the ability for individuals to have a record expunged and technically there are a couple types of expungements in this state.
Although I would not go as far as saying someone is "justified", I do understand what you are trying to say. I know a lot of mopes that have had their record expunged of incidents. When a case is expunged, all elements of that case are sealed. This would include incident reports at the police department relating to the case (as well as tickets/warnings, etc). The case is removed from the court system, as well as all elements of the proceedings. It is basically as if it never happened, despite the fact that people were there, testified, there was a trial, and a ruling. When a court expunges the case, they in all practical purposes, vacate the judgement by the court. Documentation is sent to all parties involved that there was an expungement and that they are to seal all information related to the case. They can not "confirm or deny" the existence of that information. The person can legally state they were not arrested/charged/convicted of said crime (with some exceptions where they must disclose that they have an expunged charge or conviction).
If someone is denied employment, promotions, etc as a result of someone finding out about an expunged record, they can be civilly sued (expungement is a civil process as well). In addition, those that harass, intimidate, or annoy an individual of an expunged charge can also be charged in a civil litigation.
It is kind of a slippery slope at times, especially in the age where information is so readily available at the fingertips.