dizzydog

Organization isn't the point; people aren't the point either, an identity in Christ is. Tom's point to the body of Christ is a good one. In fact the more we recognize how utterly lost we were without Christ and just how far God went to save us the more we realize that it isn't about the organization, or men or our past it's about Christ. I don't know that there is anything inherently spiritual or good to an organization, or anything inherently evil about an organization either. It's just a group of people, all of them very flawed. The thing thats inherently evil is the world around us. Should we choose to fellowship with one another we should recognize these truths first and foremost. That Christ is the key to the whole thing. Everything else is just a meeting in a hotel room or living room or tent. The organization had no power, something missed by many. Once Christ is relegated to second fiddle then the whole thing unravels, if it was ever truly knitted to begin with. Far too many people have a focus on other people, that's the problem we had with The Way, and it's still the same problem. You focus on me and I'd give you about 5 minutes before you started finding many things I'm none to proud of. But if we both want to learn Christ then we've got something to look at and fellowship together about. We all needed Christ. We were all dead in trespasses and sins, none more than any other. Like it or not.

whatever...

MJ, You wrote: You assume that all involved in all such groups are completely ignorant of what caused so many problems in The Way. You further assume that the folks in these "groups" have evil intentions. You also assume that all in such groups haven’t taken any steps to correct these bad behaviors and more specifically bad doctrine from The Way. These groups are as varied as religion itself, you shouldn’t paint with such a broad brush. There are plenty of these groups that do no harm. It would seem that anyone who continues to fellowship together who also might have had a similar background with The Way shouldn’t be together in your world. Perhaps you should reread what I wrote before you continue to reply. You ask: “Why would it bother anyone if they are happy campers to hear what another may have had to go through in the same type of group as a negative?” For one – Who are you to determine if the group is the “same type”? The people involved in the “group” may have worked very hard to correct the problems they saw in The Way. And along comes some busybody who has no clue what these folks have done to correct the very things you comment on. These folks may have worked very hard to remove themselves from the identity of The Way, in some cases getting additional training in the scriptures from sources other than Way based material and education. And along comes some old burned out PFAL grad with an agenda who simply looks at nametags and recognizes an old identity from way days and all of sudden their "group" is under the inquisition. I’ve seen it happen and it’s a crying shame. For all the rhetoric on this site about moving on from the bad experiences in The Way it’s remarkable that you are so unwilling to give the benefit of a doubt to those who actually may have done so. As I said perhaps one of these groups isn’t for you, your choice, God Bless. But if you want to bring a bunch of venom that has no current relevance to my church - please stay away.

I know one splinter or offshoot if you will where the folks who attend spend many hours griping, stewing and wondering about what happened and what’s currently happening in The Way international. The content of their endless diatribe could fill volumes, and the dialogue is almost always negative. This bunch is brought together by one common theme, not Christ or a common set of belief's but rather a visceral hatred for The Way International. In some cases they fight incessantly with each other and at times seem to relish the opportunity to make their personal tragedies more horrific than anyone else’s. There is a curious aspect to the discord among this bunch, they proclaim loudly how severely they were affected by The Way and sometimes blame The Way for their ongoing problems, sometimes 20 years or more after they ended their relationship with the organization. The thing that’s curious is that while they blame The Way, the board of trustees, the leadership and the twig, branch, limb coordinators they will rarely turn that same microscope on themselves and admit what they might have done to hurt someone else. They are quick to point the bony finger of accusation but slow to say how sorry they were for their own behavior. I for one have many regrets about my behavior while I was involved with The Way. And while I readily acknowledge that I was doing some of those things because I had been taught it was OK to do those things I do not lay the responsibility at anyones elses feet. It's me oh Lord! This bunch does something else that is remarkably similar to the behavior of those in The Way. They declare loudly what someone else should be doing in their lives, how they should be conducting their lives, fellowships, finances and spiritual growth, always with scripture to back up their positions. You’d be amazed at some of the things this bunch has to say about other people. This is not to say that much of what’s declared isn’t truthful or deserved, I know much of it is, but I wonder how this would compare to a group of people who simply want to maintain a fellowship with some people who they grew to love at one point in their lives. What’s wrong with a group who loves each other, stands with each other, shares the scriptures with one another and attempts in their own limited way to stand together in Christ? Perhaps what they do isn’t for all people, but it is for them. Why do they deserve to be impugned? Given the choice between the two I’ll take the latter.

This whole topic reminds me of a joke I once heard. A man had been marooned on a deserted island for ten years. One day a ship passed by the island and the captain noticed signs of life on the island. Upon further investigation they discovered that indeed a man was living on the island and they rescued him. The captain asked the man to show him how he’d survived so long on the island so the man showed him around the island. “Here’s where I found the best fishing. Here’s where I found the best place to build a hut. Over there is where I cooked my meals, and over here is where I built a church so I could worship God.” The man told the captain. The captain noticed another building on the other side of the island. “What is that building for?” He asked. The man said, “That’s my old church but I didn’t agree with the doctrine”. The morale of the story is, as with many things we used to take as unique to TWI this subject similarly is not unique to a post TWI experience. Many people change their denominations dramatically over the course of their lives, many times for good reasons. Indeed, what we now consider traditional religious institutions were once themselves offshoots of sorts. Can anyone say Martin Luther? His whole movement could have been considered an offshoot of the Catholic Church. I’m sure most of the people who he reached where formerly in the Roman Catholic Church. It stands to reason that there would be some similarities between the early Lutherans and the Catholic Church of that day. Call one of them a Catholic and I’m sure they would have indignantly explained to you why they were actually Lutheran (or whatever they called themselves at this point). Having a common background or common structure doesn’t make a church simply a clone of the former institution. The point has been well made that each group should measured on it’s own merits. Having a superior attitude isn’t unique to TWI either. I suspect that if you're looking for specific things (i.e. a strict adherence to the doctrine, or a common set of belief’s, or a specific interpretation of the scriptures, etc.) in a religion there are plenty of organizations you could join. After all isn’t this one of the great complications with religion in general? I don’t have a problem with a group of people clinging to one another after they get out of a bad situation like TWI. I think that’s probably what started many of these groups, measure them on their own merits. Even if the structure seems similar the people involved are just like all of us, flawed. The grace of God will still cover provided we don’t completely remove it (or him) from our thinking.

What you really need is a Great Dane. No really... They're great dogs once they grow up.

MJ, Recognizing the depths of sin that man is in doesn't reflect negatively on God's goodness. In fact it shows the lengths that God went to to provide a way out for man. The devil made me do it wasn't a legitimate excuse for Adam & Eve and it isn't today. I'm well aware of the darker forces in this world but most of mankind has been in collusion with those forces since he was cast out of eden. All men have a choice, they are not simply pawns being pushed around by the devil. If so they would never be able to turn to God for help; the devil just wouldn't allow it. They have to choose to allow God's grace in their lives. If you don't want to see things this way that's your choice but you're ignoring overwhelming scripture to the contrary.

MJ, I respond to you with what the Bible says and you respond with your emotions. Jesus Christ himself said in Luke 11:13 that even evil men could give good gifts to their children. Romans goes one step further, it says there is none that doeth good, no not one. __________________ Romans 3:10 – 12 As it is written, there is none righteous, no not one. There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. ______________________________ Should I not be quoting Paul because he was probably a murderer? If so then we will have a short conversation. What is your resistance to this? We were all in the same boat and it was going nowhere without God. If God throws a person a life raft and they choose not to get into it that's their fault, not God's. He doesn't save beyond what we will allow him to. I knew some inmates including a couple of muderers, who accepted Christ after they were convicted, wonderful believers. Just because we choose to accept God’s invitation to grace doesn’t mean everyone in the world will. Jesus Christ made it clear in John 13-17 that the world will not accept what God offers and will even hate Gods people for accepting Christ. God didn't create mankind as it is in its current unrenewed state. To hold God responsible for whatever goodness may dwell in a murderers heart is disrespectful to God and the sacrifice he offered in his son. Doing so means that God is somehow responsible for all that the murderer does. Unless that individual accepts Christ he is evil, just as we all were. Not Gods fault, man's. God did more than he had to to save us from the evil who we were. The bible says we were without God and without hope, children of wrath, enemies to God and dead in our sins. We were called enemies of God before the new birth. If God is good and we were his enemies than what does that make us if not evil? You’re proving my point; if we are unwilling to confront the destructiveness of these people then their behavior is going to make our communities more dangerous than ever. You commented on my bitterness. Without knowing me you’ve directed more anger, judgment and disregard toward me than you have toward the murderers who you think have so much good in them. It’s unfortunate that I don’t deserve the same benefit of a doubt that you so willing give to a woman who would kill her own children. Matthew 12:35 A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. This makes it pretty clear where these things come from. Based on what we know from the epistles Jesus Christ was the only good man. The rest of us fell into the second category. The behavior of a murderer is evil, whether you like it or not. Yes salvation is available to all men, murderer or not. But we're not talking about salvation we're talking about what it will take to protect our communities and children. We have to be willing to recognize what causes this behavior and people like you will never acknowledge the real problem. Yes this is becoming a doctrinal debate.

MJ, Your response shows a clear lack of understanding of what God thinks of mans basic nature. We didn't read much of Romans 1-3 in The Way but its still in the bible and clear regarding Gods opinion of the nature of man, without Christ. Jesus Christ himself used analogies of the evil nature of man; Luke 11:13. He sent his son Jesus Christ because we weren't good, we had to have a savior. What you call good the bible calls enemies of God; Romans 5:10. I pray you never encounter some of the people who I’ve been writing about.

MJ, I’m not sure what your resistance to my posts is other than perhaps you don’t like me having called these offenders evil. I also don’t know what your experience is in these situations. I’m going to give you the benefit of a doubt and believe you’ve had as much exposure to these situations and people as I have. As such you will probably understand my reticence to focus on the unique and isolated situations when defining the majority of what I have seen. Being a Christian I also know that forgiveness is available even for these but I won’t refrain from calling the darkness, dark. All of the women I previously wrote about were found to be in their right minds at the time of the crime. I know this from the court documents I saw. I can name case after case that doesn’t fall into the category you present. Not every crime that’s committed is the result of drugs or some other circumstance. Just as not every crime falls into the categories I’ve detailed. The crimes are as varied as the people who committed them. Many (most) violent crimes are committed by people who know exactly what they are doing. The cases I was referring to were women who did terrible, selfish and yes, evil, things to their children – FOR NO GOOD REASON. And unfortunately there are far too many of these cases. I know the women of whom you speak and they are to be most pitied. I had a woman who did just what you described to her newborn. I don’t remember writing about these cases. Here’s an example. We had a woman in the reception center, locked up on drug charges. Short sentence, 9-12 months for possession. The family smuggled a small bag of heroin WITH A HYPODERMIC NEEDLE into the visitors hall in her baby's diaper, one of the few places not searched at that time. She injected herself that evening and had a bad trip; she completely flipped out. She stripped down to her panties, weaved her hair tight to her head, greased herself from head to toe with baby oil and was ready to fight. Believe me this is not something out of a “B” grade women’s prison movie. It was a bad situation. It took three of us to restrain her between the oil and the drugs. Pepper spray did nothing. Not to mention she was swinging the needle around like she was Luke Skywalker, no joke that's who she thought she was. That none of us got stuck is fortunate. She spent the remainder of her time in isolation for assaulting an officer, me. I had nothing but pity for her and contempt for her family for using the baby the way they did. They lost custody of the child in part because of my testimony. She did get out of prison and 6 weeks later they found her floating face down in a pond. Presumably killed by her drug supplier (pimp). The whole situation is “evil” by its very nature. Was she a victim in this? Absolutely, but that doesn’t change the definition of what’s going on. We had a pregnant woman in prison. She told us she would kill the child once it delivered, to this day I don't know why. When she went into labor I had to restrain her to keep her from doing harm to the child. The squad came and two officers had to travel with the inmate to keep her from doing what she'd threatened. I still have the letter of commendation someplace. She wasn't on drugs when she made the threat or when she went into labor. I know all the excuses, all the hopelessness, I've heard it all. I worked special duty supervising final visits for a while. Do you know what that is? The state takes charge of a child and allows the child to have a final visit with her mother. They don't even allow the child to bring a gift to her mother. Her presence is the only thing they allow. Once the visit is over that's the last time the two see each other, perhaps ever. Hopeless? The word has a new meaning when you witness this. I could go on and on, but what’s the point? The statistics you site are witnessed and dealt with every day by someone like me. As long as we as a society are not willing to confront these things for what they are then we will always be addressing them from a weakened position. Evil is not a dark figure in a helmet on the movie screen. It’s a part of man’s nature, drugs and other circumstances may serve as catalysts for the lower parts of our nature but make no mistake; plenty of people have the propensity to do horrific things for no other reason than they can.

Hi MJ, I appreciate and respect your point, I can only agree with it in a very limited amount. It’s easier to accept the behavior of people like this if we try to find some social or economic impetus for their actions because this puts this behavior in a category that we might be able to find some way of changing. We can’t change the evil nature of a murderer because that nature doesn’t manifest itself until it’s too late. Indeed the nature may have developed over time from a number of external influences, but make no mistake about it once a person commits an act like this it goes beyond hopelessness or depression or any other psychological disorder, unless the person is an outright paranoid schizophrenic, and even then… I can count on one hand the number of murderers I knew who might have fallen into such a hopeless category. Once again we don’t want to call murder what it is, particularly when it comes to children. It’s heinous and there’s no other way to describe it. Hopelessness may be a part of the overall condition of a person such as this but hopelessness alone never drove anyone to murder his or her own children, at least in the murderers I’ve known. I’ve had more experience in these things than I usually like to admit. I’ve felt the hopelessness you mentioned. I worked third shift for nearly two years. In the middle of the night I sat alone in a room with 90 inmates sleeping around me and felt an oppression the likes of which few people have any idea. I know the hopelessness you describe. To murder requires an aggression and violence that goes beyond anything most people have ever seen, even with the movies and television being as real life as they are. I had to restrain an inmate who trying to kill another inmate once. The aggression required to take someone’s life, particularly when they kill with their hands, is remarkable. I can only imagine, reluctantly, what must go through a persons mind when they get to the point of killing a child. Granted, my view may be a little skewed here. I’m just more convinced than ever that some things in life are black and white. There’s no other way to explain these things. My time as a correction officer had a profound effect on me and I have a hard time viewing the world and others the same way I used to. They say the prison staff does time as well as the residents, I think there is some truth to that.

I’m going to weigh in on a couple of things here. I worked in a maximum-security prison for women for a number of years. I was a member of the “goon squad” and I was responsible for removing violent inmates from their cells when they wouldn’t want to come out. I was so good with the worst cases that I was regularly assigned to the highest level of lock down. Keep one thing in mind; I didn’t work in the clinical side of the system. I had clinical training in so far that I was trained to decelerate a situation without having to get physical. I regularly was able to talk an inmate into my handcuffs without having to resort to physical force, a desirable outcome if for nothing else than to avoid the paperwork associated with a use of force situation. I regularly worked with well over fifty women who had either killed their own children or someone else’s. I never met one that I didn’t think was just plain evil. I agree that many of them had psychological problems, before and after the crime. I knew plenty of inmates who had psychological problems and didn’t show the same tendencies as those who’d killed children. We got to the point where we knew who the many of the child murderers were when they would come into the pod, before we would ever learn their crimes. As I said, I am not a therapist and I have no training to diagnose a disorder. What I have seen, however, are inmates who have a different personality for every situation. The psyche doctor would come in and the inmate would do a little dog and pony show and the doctor would prescribe some anti depressants and the minute the shrink leaves the inmate is back to her old warm and fuzzy self. The psyche students who would intern in the prisons were the worst. They would get played every time an inmate visited them. In short this is a problem that has gone on for a very long time and there is a surprising number of incidents of women attacking their own children. The specific murders have very unique characteristics that you rarely find in the male populations. Not to say men don’t commit these crimes, there are plenty of men who’ve done horrible things to children. It’s just that the characteristics of what these women do are so very specific. I don’t even want to use the word motive, there rarely is one. These women just snap, drowning seems to be a big way they do it. Many cases are drowning. I had at least ten different women who’d drowned their children. One who lined up her kids in the bathroom and drowned all five of them, one after another. She had a terrible personality and could provoke an officer to rage in a matter of minutes. She even hit my nerve one day and I wanted to open the door and strangle her. We had an elderly woman who was the sweetest thing you’ve ever met. They sold her knitting in the entrance building. She'd drowned her grandchild trying to baptize him when her daughter refused to have him baptized. Once a year on the anniversary of her grandson’s death she would flip out and we’d have to confine her and tie her down because she was so violent, a real life Dr Jeckle and Mrs. Hyde. We had a woman who killed her boyfriend’s three-year-old daughter because she was jealous of his affection for the girl. She cooked the child and fed her to him for dinner one night. He later went nuts and killed himself. I listened to five different voices, three of them male voices, come out of her cell one night at about two in the morning, and she was in there alone. Almost every case was like these, no logic and no reason, little in the way of motive. These women are just plain mean. The point of all of this is I wonder why we find it so necessary to define and find the reasons for these actions. I am more convinced now than ever that there is evil in this world and there is no other way to define these things. I realize we want to avoid these crimes whenever possible. You would be hard pressed to find someone more determined to stop crime from occurred than me. Having worked in the “industry” I am acutely aware of what violent crime does to a society. It is perpetuated from parent to child. I just don’t think clinical studies have accomplished much. Particularly when there is no category for simple evil. From these experiences I’ve also learned to accept my own failings as a father. If I yell at my kids or make mistakes those are things I work to improve in but those things aren’t the worst things I could do to them. If I love my children, no matter what they do, no matter how mad they make me if I still love them I won’t screw up that bad. The love I have for them will keep me in check and give me that extra little bit of patience I need to NOT pound my son’s rear end into the next county when he almost broke his sisters leg. I know that loving them is 95% of the battle. The other mistakes will always fall into the last 5% as long as we love them. If the kids grow up and know they were loved they will forgive the mistakes. Evil cannot love. That’s the real common denominator in all of these crimes, a lack of love for the victims.

You're right Peahead. It is a forum, where ideas are exchanged. That's all I see happening here. You don't have to respond. Hissy fit? Hmmm... That's witty.

Peahead, Are you that calloused that you cannot simply look at the actions of someone else and say whether their actions are good or not? You keep trying to impugn based on motive. And yet you don’t know the motive in any of these situations. I did indeed bring up soldiers. I might remind you that our military has been a part of many conflicts over the course of our history not just the one we are currently in. Do you impugn all in the military, past and present because you disagree with our current policy? If you want to filibuster with an irrelevant statement that’s your privilege but it makes you look like a fool. You wrote: “Do you think you are competent to define what is good for another human being or even yourself? I do not believe I am. If you are capable of telling me what is good for me to do maybe I should worship you.” Yes I do think I am competent to define what is good for another human being, at least in some things. I do it every day to the best of my ability when I teach my children. You’re not fighting with me on this Peahead. You’re fighting some of the most basic tenets of society. As far as worshipping me, that would not be good for you so you shouldn’t do it. See how this works? What now Peahead? Give me another moment of brilliance.

Peahead, You wrote: “You used a lot of words and definition but you failed to say anything. I think what the solders are doing democratizing the middle east is just plain wrong no matter how many new power plants they build or schools they open. The war is unjustified therefore the people who fight in it are also unjustified and murderers when they kill someone. You said, quote “Did anyone do anything good while they were involved with the way? Then you answered yourself with, “Of course.” That made me dizzy dizzydog, of course I would disagree with you since good is a subjective opinion.” In other words you’d rather throw around a lot of pompous hogwash than actually respond specifically to what I posted. I never said anything about the Middle East. And we could discuss the Middle East in another forum, I might actually agree with you, on some points. Is the military that offensive to you? All right lets pick another profession. How about the police? They have many examples of altruistic behavior. Perhaps we could look at the medical community or fire fighters. How many people in our society lay their lives on the line in just such a behavior. Perhaps you should define what you mean by “good”. It seems your idea of good is different from mine. Or would you rather just throw around more irrelevant statements? I realize it’s difficult to actually formulate your thoughts into something coherent but give it a try, you might make some sense. As far as my statement about good happening in the way, I think I already explained what I meant by that statement. I know many people who benefited from the good that someone else did for them, and yes they were in The Way. Do you want an example? How about a fellowship collecting money to help a homeless woman with children get an apartment? How about another fellowship helping a man in the hospital pay for his medical bills? I know many such stories. Do we ignore the benefits of these actions because the organization was flawed? That is a remarkably narrow view. You still haven’t answered my question Peahead.

Peahead, As I read your comments regarding these girls and your subsequent responses to different posters here I think perhaps we should look at what is really being defined by these girls actions. You assert that the motivations of these girls are religious based, that may well be true but I challenge you to find the facts to support this in the details that have been posted here. I don’t think anyone has written this about these girls in any other media either. I heard one of the girls interviewed and she never once mentioned her faith or religion. You’ve continued to make comments about religion despite your assertions that you aren’t interested in discussing religion. I think perhaps what’s really being displayed here isn’t religion but altruism. Perhaps the motivation for what they did came from a strong sense of religion or faith but the effect was something altruistic. Websters defines Altruism as: 1 : unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others 2 : behavior by an animal that is not beneficial to or may be harmful to itself but that benefits others of its species While it defines Religion as: 1 a : the state of a religious b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance 2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices 3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS 4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith - re·li·gion·less adjective As you say, only you (and I would add God) know whether you have anything good in your heart, this would probably include any manner of altruism. Indeed I’m sure you could live your whole life doing nothing bad, but also doing nothing altruistic. Many people live this way. If you have children I would venture to say you don’t fall into this category. You may not agree with religion but you cannot deny altruism or the results of it. If you live in the United States you have benefited from the altruism of others. The military has many examples of men and women who selflessly laid down their own lives for the benefit of others, no one ever questions their religious intent when this happens. I realize these girls didn’t do anything nearly so heroic so the example of what they did should be viewed in a different light. I can look at what they did and see altruism without knowing their motivations. Their religion on the other hand is only revealed when they choose to say this is why they did what they did. Denying goodness (or in this definition altruism) when viewed in this light is as ignorant as denying the world is round after seeing a globe. What’s there is there and saying it doesn’t exist doesn’t change the proof to the contrary. Even if my motives are selfish the benefit to someone else can still be seen and experienced by the recipient. Impugning religion in this context is as ignorant as saying the sacrifice of a soldier is of none effect because the military has some bad elements to it. You’re making an apples to oranges comparison. Did anyone do anything good while they were involved with the way? Of course, but we can only see this when we measure these actions against what’s altruistic and not against what’s religious. Of the three people people in this story, the 2 teens and the 49 year old woman who sued, who was being altruistic as Webster's defines altruism?

One other thing MJ - You wrote: "They refused, conisdered her a callous bitch as many here have and gained sympathy for their cause of making cookies and knocking and runnig in the night under the guise of innocence" Oh -- this is a cause now? This reads like a bad Monty Python sketch. --When teens go bad and leave cookies on their neighbors doorstep. Then they run... yes - run in the night under the guise of innocence. -- Tune in next week when the teens torment a cat under the guise of helping it out of a tree. I wonder how these videos would sell against the "Girls gone Wild" series.

MJ - you wrote: "It was not untill they refused to speak to her about the incident and completly disregarded what she had to say about how it affected her life that she decided to use the court to make them listen . I do not think it was about the money for her I really think she needed the girls to understand what they did and how it hurt her. They refused, conisdered her a callous bitch as many here have and gained sympathy for their cause of making cookies and knocking and runnig in the night under the guise of innocence" This is absolutely NOT the truth. I heard one of these girls interviewed on the radio, Taylor, I think. The jock that was interviewing her started running this lady down and the girl defended the woman. She made it very clear she wanted nothing negative said about this woman. And no she wasn't afraid of legal reprecussions. She simply didn't want anything negative being said. These girls have acted this way from the start. This kid was very respectful toward her and all she would say was decent things about this woman. From the article: "Taylor and Lindsey declined to comment Thursday, saying only that they didn't want to say anything hurtful." Your insistance on trashing these kids is telling of your own willingness to consider the worst about someone else without being willing to look at all the facts, just like this woman. The last thing that would come out of this kids mouth is a comment about this woman being a "callous bit**" as you have accused them of. I wouldn't let my kids near a nutcase like this on a bet. They offered her an apology before they ever knew she was bringing a civil case against them. She's the one who did the refusing. The judge himself said they didn't do anything malicious. As I said before, he may have had no choice but decide the case as he did because they had already offered to pay the medical bills. What more could you want from them? A written apology, and offer to pay the medical bills. If all she wanted was a face to face apology why did she try to sue for pain and suffering? She went after a lot of money over this and was disappointed in the judges decision. That's not trying to teach the kids a lesson. Perhaps you should move next door to this woman, it sounds like the two of you would hit it off grandly.

As I read the various responses to this article (not only here but also on another bulletin board) I am amazed that people have responded the way they have. I read at least two responses indicating that the girls were lucky they weren’t doing this in some parts of the country because they might get shot. Shoot first and ask questions later, right? Now I might not be a mensa student but this is insane. Having worked in various forms of law enforcement and corrections I can tell you that being scared doesn’t arbitrarily give you the privilege to use deadly force at any time of the day or night. There are plenty of people locked up who tried to use just such a defense and it rarely works. This woman stated that she hoped these teens learned a lesson. Yeah, not to cross her path. That anyone can look at this and think she was doing anything other than trying to line her pockets is crazy. These kids did nothing illegal. There were being cute, innocent teenage girls. They obviously thought they were doing something good for their neighbors and got a little carried away. Why penalize that kind of enthusiasm? I’ll tell you why, because that woman thought she could make money from the situation. Were they out a little late to be doing this? I’ll grant that. If it were my kids (or anyone else’s) I’d just tell them they should’ve waited until the next morning. All that aside the reaction from this woman is more than over the top, it’s downright mean. If these girls were pulling a prank, then this woman tried to pull an all out scam, and she used the courts to do it. The girls apologized to her and the families offered to pay the medical bills. What more could they have done? Even if these girls were being as malicious as some have suggested they were, this is what is supposed to happen. The civil courts exist for the purpose of resolving disputes between parties when they cannot resolve disputes themselves. They took responsibility (more than they needed to, in my opinion) for their actions and got slapped in the face for it. As long as we’re talking about the courts, I’ve seen some people critical of the judge for determining the case the way he did. He may have had no choice since the girl’s families had already stated in writing that they would pay the medical bills. Not sure about the laws there but this would seem germane given the details. This woman deserves to be the pariah she’s become in her community.

Can you believe this? ________ Cookie klatch lands girls in court Two Durango teens thought they'd surprise neighbors with nighttime deliveries of home-baked treats. But one woman was so terrified, she sued and has won. By Electa Draper Denver Post Staff Writer Durango - Two teenage girls decided one summer's evening to skip a dance where there might be cursing and drinking to stay home and bake cookies for their neighbors. Big mistake. They were sued, successfully, for an unauthorized cookie drop on one porch. The July 31 deliveries consisted of half a dozen chocolate-chip and sugar cookies accompanied by big hearts cut out of red or pink construction paper with the message: "Have a great night." The notes were signed, "Love, The T and L Club," code for Taylor Ostergaard, then 17, and Lindsey Jo Zellitti, 18. Inside one of the nine scattered rural homes south of Durango that got cookies that night, a 49-year-old woman became so terrified by the knocks on her door around 10:30 p.m. that she called the sheriff's department. Deputies determined that no crime had been committed. But Wanita Renea Young ended up in the hospital emergency room the next day after suffering a severe anxiety attack she thought might be a heart attack. A Durango judge Thursday awarded Young almost $900 to recoup her medical bills. She received nothing for pain and suffering. "The victory wasn't sweet," Young said Thursday afternoon. "I'm not gloating about it. I just hope the girls learned a lesson." Taylor's mother, Jill Ostergaard, said her daughter "cried and cried" after Judge Doug Walker handed down his decision in La Plata County Small Claims Court. "She felt she was being punished for doing something nice," Jill Ostergaard said. The judge said that he didn't think the girls acted maliciously but that it was pretty late at night for them to be out. He didn't award any punitive damages. Taylor and Lindsey declined to comment Thursday, saying only that they didn't want to say anything hurtful. Young said the girls showed "very poor judgment." But Taylor had asked her father's permission to bake cookies for the neighbors after livestock-tending chores were done. "I said, 'Go ahead, as long as I get some cookies,"' Richard Ostergaard said Thursday. Just as dusk arrived a little after 9 p.m., Taylor and Lindsey began their mad spree. They didn't stop at houses that were dark. But where lights shone, the girls figured people were awake and in need of cookies. A kitchen light was on at Young's home. Court records contain half a dozen letters from neighbors who said that they enjoyed the unexpected treats. The cookies were good. It was a nice surprise. They weren't scared. But Young, home with her own 18-year-old daughter and her elderly mother, said she saw shadowy figures who banged and banged at her door. When she called out, "Who's there?" no one answered. The figures ran off. She thought perhaps they were burglars or some neighbors she had tangled with in the past, she said. "We just wanted to surprise them," Taylor said. Young left her home that night to stay at her sister's, but her symptoms, including shaking and an upset stomach, wouldn't subside. The next morning she went to Mercy Medical Center. "We feel that knocking on a door and leaving cookies is a gesture of kindness and would not create an anxiety attack in the general public," Taylor's parents wrote to the court. The girls wrote letters of apology to Young. Taylor's letter, written a few days after the episode, said in part: "I didn't realize this would cause trouble for you. ... I just wanted you to know that someone cared about you and your family." The families had offered to pay Young's medical bills if she would agree to indemnify the families against future claims. Young wouldn't sign the agreement. She said the families' apologies rang false and weren't delivered in person. The matter went to court. Young said she believes that the girls should not have been running from door to door late at night. "Something bad could have happened to them," she said.

garth whatever... flame on

Garth, I had some choice words for you but I ain't gonna take the bait. You don't know the first thing about me so put your flame thrower away.

I made the decision a long time ago to stop posting here. The reason why? These threads wind up being endless diatribes of little relevance. Here is a perfect example. Mark Gluckin was a good man who loved God and loved God's people. Yet he has barely drawn his last breath and already the bickering starts. A nice thread to show the man some honor and regard has to turn into all of this, it's vulgar and is a disgusting way to remember him.

Don't go overboard here Mike. I also knew Mark, quite well. I don't think he would want this thread to even exist. While I defend you and see the respect you have for his life I don't think he would see this as an appropriate epitaph to his life. I don't think he would appreciate any comments about people who also loved Mark, people he loved in return. This is the wrong place for such commentary. He hated the damage left by division, in any form, and last twelve years of his life were spent trying repair that as much as possible.

You're right, he wouldn't.