View Full Version : Texas Pastor Arrested in Sex Sting
rickP
May 17, 2008, 09:26 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/16/minister.sex.sting.ap/index.html?eref=rss_latest
Shock and surprise. Who'da thunk it? I visited that church once many years ago. Typical huge megachurch with the rock band and praise song lyrics on the wall.
dettus
May 17, 2008, 09:41 AM
Not surprising but IMO if those stings are anything like what is seen on Dateline they are bullshit.
Szkeptik
May 17, 2008, 01:01 PM
I suspect the guy was vehemently opposed to extramarital sex..
AtheistVirus
May 17, 2008, 02:20 PM
This is almost becoming explicitly predictable...
apatura_iris
May 17, 2008, 03:20 PM
There really needs to be a study done about how common it is for fundie pastors to have compulsive sexual behavior, and why!
A poster here who had been involved in a fundie church (in the "why do priests molest little boys" thread) hypothesized from what he had witnessed is that people with problems tend to get involved in religious leadership with the belief that it will "cleanse" them and make their problems go away. But the problems remain with them, regardless.
xaxxat
May 17, 2008, 03:59 PM
Well, they're praying for him so everything should turn out just fine...
:rolleyes:
GenesisNemesis
May 17, 2008, 04:00 PM
Why is sex so popular with pastors? :rolleyes:
pete
May 17, 2008, 04:27 PM
Why is sex so popular with pastors? :rolleyes:
Lots of people like it.... most folk dont get on the news though.
MrTunaFace
May 17, 2008, 05:14 PM
That sickens me. I'm a Christian and this type of thing irritates the hell out of me (no pun intended) These people give the good and well mannered Christians a bad name. Please don't think all Christians are like that people, not that you guys do.
I just want to beat the crap out of people like that. But the Bible says "love thy neighbor" (no matter how stupid or disgusting)
temporalillusion
May 17, 2008, 06:00 PM
So this person wasn't a Christian? (EDIT: in your opinion MrTunaFace?)
MrTunaFace
May 17, 2008, 06:46 PM
So this person wasn't a Christian? (EDIT: in your opinion MrTunaFace?)
???...... I never said that did I? I don't recall ever saying that. What I'm saying is, is that people like this guy (who is a Christian) is giving the good ones a bad name for doing disgusting stuff like that.
I. C. Unicorns
May 17, 2008, 07:56 PM
Now, now, hate the sin not the sinner.
MrTunaFace
May 17, 2008, 08:28 PM
Now, now, hate the sin not the sinner.
I don't hate anyone. Thanks for assuming something about me that isn't true.
temporalillusion
May 17, 2008, 08:48 PM
???...... I never said that did I? I don't recall ever saying that. What I'm saying is, is that people like this guy (who is a Christian) is giving the good ones a bad name for doing disgusting stuff like that.
Sorry, I should have worded more as a question, I honestly wanted to find out, given that you thought that this individual wasn't representative of Christians.
Of course I agree, I don't think this person "represents" Christianity... although I do think that the active suppression that the churches do on their members does exacerbate the situation.
Here's what gets me about this situation...
The man was a minister.. presumably someone or group of someones along the way made a decision about them being in the position they were in. Presumably some prayer went into that decision. And presumably nothing came up during this prayer to indicate the person would be a problem.
This causes a few problems.
Possibly God didn't know the person would be a problem, which throws a wrench into the whole omniscience thing.
Possibly God knew, but chose not to tell the people making the decision (maybe not wanting to interfere with their free will? :D), which at best makes God a poor judge of what maintains a good appearance, at worst guilty by association.
Or possibly God either doesn't exist or doesn't interact with religious people the way those people think He does.
It's situations like this that convince me that God (if it exists) doesn't take an active personal role in the lives of us earth dwellers.
peanutaxis
May 17, 2008, 09:02 PM
I'm not convinced that these occurrences are more probable from within churches.
Are they? Any stats?
Toto
May 17, 2008, 09:31 PM
Bank robbers rob banks because that's where the money is. Pedophiles are attracted to professions that bring them in contact with kids, and which are noted for laxity in supervision and a certain unhealthy amount of trust that the lord will take care - i.e., church workers.
Some of them may also think that their impulses are evil, and the church will help them control that.
temporalillusion
May 17, 2008, 10:20 PM
I agree, I don't think that religious people are "more likely" to be pedophiles by any stretch, but as you say, they maybe join up because they think they're screwed up and want help..
Of course they don't actually get healed, but now they're doubly damned.. first they're in a family environment that as you say is inherently trusting. Second they're constantly reminded of how evil they are, of what they're supposed to do to receive deliverance, but never receive it... Even God's forsaken them, what's left to stop them from giving into temptation?
I. C. Unicorns
May 17, 2008, 10:38 PM
Now, now, hate the sin not the sinner.
I don't hate anyone. Thanks for assuming something about me that isn't true.
I just want to beat the crap out of people like that. But the Bible says "love thy neighbor"
Ahhh, I can feel the "love".
Unleavened Jesus
May 18, 2008, 12:00 AM
It was my local PD that caught him. Rock on BPD!
Brion
May 18, 2008, 05:38 AM
Bank robbers rob banks because that's where the money is. Pedophiles are attracted to professions that bring them in contact with kids, and which are noted for laxity in supervision and a certain unhealthy amount of trust that the lord will take care - i.e., church workers.
Some of them may also think that their impulses are evil, and the church will help them control that.
This is the big problem. How to weed out the predators!
pete
May 18, 2008, 06:19 AM
Pedophiles are attracted to professions that bring them in contact with kids,
There is no evidence for that..... also, the 'girl' in this case was 13... so pedophilia is not a factor here.
Clivedurdle
May 18, 2008, 11:23 AM
Pedophiles are attracted to professions that bring them in contact with kids,
There is no evidence for that..... also, the 'girl' in this case was 13... so pedophilia is not a factor here.
Sorry?
It looks as if it is a central factor, he will of course be having all his computer records searched.
Is it not normal for someone charged with these sorts of matters to be suspended from work?
Are that church's child protection policies publicly available?
And being very careful about people's motivations is critical in people work.
pete
May 18, 2008, 01:28 PM
....... the 'girl' in this case was 13... so pedophilia is not a factor here.
Sorry?
It looks as if it is a central factor .....
Pedophilia is the attraction to pre-pubescents .... nothing in the article points to that.
crispy
May 18, 2008, 01:51 PM
I really dislike the way you guys catch these guys ;<
Clivedurdle
May 18, 2008, 03:47 PM
Rapist a better term then? We are looking at an attempted abuse of power - possibly violent physically and sexually - between an adult male and someone unequal. For the attempted meeting to have worked he would have had to pretend to be someone else.
From wiki
The term "pedophile" is sometimes used to describe those accused or convicted of child sexual abuse (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse) under sociolegal definitions of child (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_%28law%29) (including adolescents younger than the local age of consent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent) in addition to prepubescent children (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children)).[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia#cite_note-ames-10)
Some researchers have described this usage as improper and suggested it can confound two separate types of offenders, child molestors and rapists, thereby obscuring results of ongoing research
Wiki to me feels to be attempting to be too nice and neutral on this - it has not used the concept of abuse of power,
pete
May 18, 2008, 04:59 PM
Rapist a better term then? nope
We are looking at an attempted abuse of power ... That is one of many possible interpretations - possibly violent physically and sexually -possibly not... between an adult male and someone unequal. :huh: For the attempted meeting to have worked he would have had to pretend to be someone else. it was a sting .. it was the cops pretending to be someone else.
From wiki
<<The term "pedophile" is sometimes used to describe those accused or convicted of child sexual abuse (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse) under sociolegal definitions of child (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_%28law%29) (including adolescents younger than the local age of consent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent) in addition to prepubescent children (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children)).[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia#cite_note-ames-10)
Some researchers have described this usage as improper and suggested it can confound two separate types of offenders, child molestors and rapists, thereby obscuring results of ongoing research>>
Wiki to me feels to be attempting to be too nice and neutral on this - it has not used the concept of abuse of power,
Wiki is a populist resource reflecting the views of contributors.... not a source of definitions.
With the information we have from the article posted... pedophilia is not a factor in this case.
Clivedurdle
May 18, 2008, 05:16 PM
Other reports put things slightly differently
Texas: Plano man Joe Barron, 52, a minister at Prestonwood Baptist Church near Dallas, was arrested after driving nearly 200 miles to Bryan to meet who he thought was a 13-year-old girl he had been chatting with sexually online for roughly two weeks.
The girl was actually an undercover agent leading police to Barron and his car, inside of which they found condoms and a web-cam. He had been with the 26,000-member church for 18 months; they said this was the first incident of this type with Barron.
It sounds like a classic case of someone getting themselves involved in the church for grooming purposes and getting impatient.
I wonder if the Police had been watching him previously.
temporalillusion
May 18, 2008, 10:34 PM
Ephebophilia is attraction to adolescents, and the supposed girl was 13, is that what you mean pete? I think most of the time when people say pedophiles they generally mean underage rather than pre-adolescent.
peanutaxis
May 19, 2008, 03:44 AM
What about the fact that Ephebophilia is actually normal in nature!
Perhaps this is a derail into Morality, though.
pete
May 19, 2008, 03:55 AM
Ephebophilia is attraction to adolescents, and the supposed girl was 13, is that what you mean pete? I think most of the time when people say pedophiles they generally mean underage rather than pre-adolescent.
Thats a more accurate term yes...
Colloquial use of the term pedophile to include attraction to adolescents is a minor irritation.... I was objecting to Clivedurdle asserting that pedophilia was a "central factor" in the case ... and then adding further groundless factors.... "Rapist a better term then? We are looking at an attempted abuse of power - possibly violent physically and sexually - between an adult male and someone unequal.....none of which is supported by the information in the report.
I believe most men would jump at the chance of having sex with a 13yr old girl but for the societal condemnation and law involvement that would follow. And it has nothing to do with pedophilia.
J842P
May 19, 2008, 04:33 AM
Rapist a better term then? We are looking at an attempted abuse of power - possibly violent physically and sexually - between an adult male and someone unequal. For the attempted meeting to have worked he would have had to pretend to be someone else.
From wiki
The term "pedophile" is sometimes used to describe those accused or convicted of child sexual abuse (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse) under sociolegal definitions of child (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_%28law%29) (including adolescents younger than the local age of consent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent) in addition to prepubescent children (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children)).[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia#cite_note-ames-10)
Some researchers have described this usage as improper and suggested it can confound two separate types of offenders, child molestors and rapists, thereby obscuring results of ongoing research
Wiki to me feels to be attempting to be too nice and neutral on this - it has not used the concept of abuse of power,
What? Pedophilia is the sexual attraction of an adult to pre-pubescent persons. Its a pretty simple definition. It is commonly used incorrectly amongst lay persons, but it has a very clear definition psychologically (it is considered a psychological disorder).
roddyb
May 19, 2008, 04:36 AM
What's the betting that he claims "demons made me do it"? Tearful admissions to "weakness" and claims that "Prayer has made me strong", etc, etc.
It will play with the sheeple but in my book he is a paedophile. Alright, there wasn't really a 13 year old girl involved but he thought that there was and he went off to see her prepared.
I am 52 and I wouldn't want sex with a 13 year old. When I was 13, things were different but now..no. Societal condemnation might play a part but I think it would be just..wrong. The only way I could have sex with a 13 year old would be to pay for it or to force her, either of which strike me as oppressive and wrong.
pete
May 19, 2008, 05:01 AM
I am 52 and I wouldn't want sex with a 13 year old..... ..... ... Societal condemnation might play a part but I think it would be just..wrong. The only way I could have sex with a 13 year old would be to pay for it or to force her, either of which strike me as oppressive and wrong.
If there was no paying and no force.... would it still be 'just wrong'?
Wolfie
May 19, 2008, 08:21 AM
I am 52 and I wouldn't want sex with a 13 year old..... ..... ... Societal condemnation might play a part but I think it would be just..wrong. The only way I could have sex with a 13 year old would be to pay for it or to force her, either of which strike me as oppressive and wrong.
If there was no paying and no force.... would it still be 'just wrong'?
It's not 'just wrong' it is out and out illegal.
The age of consent in the state of Texas is 17. This (http://www.moraloutrage.net/staticpages/index.php?page=Texas) gives a run down of what you cannot do to a person under the age of consent. It basically says that to stay legal you need to stay at least a yard away from them.
I do volunteer work in support of an organisation that is dedicated to unmasking online child molester wannabes. I have seen transcripts of online conversations between these sickos and what they have taken to be 12, 13 1nd 14 year old girls and boys that made me want to hurl - and my gastric equilibrium is not easily disturbed.
For legal reasons, I cannot publish these in open forum, but for the morbidly curious, PM me and I can display a sample - just to give a vile flavour.
Wolfie
May 19, 2008, 08:46 AM
I can't help it...
Plano holy man, Pastor Joe
One day off to Bryan did go
It seems that a demon
Required his semen
In an underage hole to flow.
But now he's a guest of The Man
In ruins his ephebophilic plan
Now his life's hell
As he's sharing a cell
With 'Homo Erectus' Gay Stan.
pete
May 19, 2008, 10:55 AM
I do volunteer work in support of an organisation that is dedicated to unmasking online child molester wannabes.
Is that 'Perverted justice' ?
rickP
May 20, 2008, 07:27 AM
I just watched a video of the head pastor at Prestonwood BC talking to the congregation on sunday after Joe Barron was arrested. He was, of course, mortified by what Barron had done and the church had asked for and received his resignation. Then the spin began. You see, this was God purifying the church by exposing and removing sin, just like God did with the Israelites. The Israelites lost a battle because there was sin amongst the people. God exposed the sin, removed it and sanctified his people. I don't know which event that was, but I'm pretty sure it's one of the incidents where God's "removal" was to kill several thousand Israelite sinners. I guess the church should prepare for more purifications.
He also wanted to assure everyone that the staff of Prestonwood was of the highest moral and Godly standards. Of course, he would have said the same thing the day before one of his pastors was arrested for soliciting a young teenage girl. Well maybe he means the ones that will be left after God finishes purifying the staff.
What was missing was any sense of forgiveness. No talk of how Satan had attacked Joe Barron, but plenty about how Satan was attacking the poor church. No request to pray for Joe Barron, but plenty to pray for the church. No healing, just purification. They're gonna kick all them sinners out of the church. We don't want no sinners in our church. Churches are for holy people, not sinners. You don't see Jesus sitting down with sinners and forgiving sinners and...oh, wait....nevermind.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.