Inconsistent Application of Church Discipline - Why?

[Tex]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

Nope. Not a lawyer. Good guess, though.

The point is that they were both involved, and they received completely different sentences, despite the fact that he was an older endowed RM EQ president and she was a lowly freshman in college. He was smart to keep his britches on while removing hers, I suppose.

Perhaps God revealed to both of them that the scriptures on chastity were only meant figuratively.

[FMCoug]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

The man didn't need to tell his side of the story. He barely got punished as things were.

Since we're engaged in wild specualtion here, how about this scenario:

Dutiful EQP goes to visit a smokin' hot semi-active sister in her home. Knows he should take a counselor with him but they are all busy and he's trying to do his duty. He gets to the house and they visit for while, then she offers him something to drink. He says sure ... she returns in here underwear an tries to seduce him. He tries to resist but she's smokin' hot after all. He finally gets out of there with only a standing up makeout session but feels terrible. He calls the Bishop immediately and meets with him that day to confess.

Bishop calls the sister in and she at denies it at first until she finds out the EQP confessed. She is hostile towards the Bishop and acts like it was "only a makeout session .. no big deal".

In those admittedly made-up circumstances, I could certainly see the "sentences" coming down as specified.

I'm sure we could come up with scenarios all day long for every possible story people have. The fact is, nobody knows the circumstances, the attitude of the people in question, the biases of the leader in question, or most importantly, the promptings the leader received. It's foolish to speculate IMO.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Perhaps God revealed to both of them that the scriptures on chastity were only meant figuratively.

Let's be reasonable here, Tex. There are no scriptures on making out in your underwear.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

Let's be reasonable here, Tex. There are no scriptures on making out in your underwear.

Don't take my statement so literally.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by FMCoug

I'm sure we could come up with scenarios all day long for every possible story people have. The fact is, nobody knows the circumstances, the attitude of the people in question, the biases of the leader in question, or most importantly, the promptings the leader received. It's foolish to speculate IMO.

Hey, I'm just stating the facts. This guy used and abused her for more than a year and then dumped her. She didn't even believe in french kissing. Very decent girl. Not the type to argue with authority.

[RC Vikings]

Originally Posted by FMCoug

Since we're engaged in wild specualtion here, how about this scenario:

Dutiful EQP goes to visit a smokin' hot semi-active sister in her home. Knows he should take a counselor with him but they are all busy and he's trying to do his duty. He gets to the house and they visit for while, then she offers him something to drink. He says sure ... she returns in here underwear an tries to seduce him. He tries to resist but she's smokin' hot after all. He finally gets out of there with only a standing up makeout session but feels terrible. He calls the Bishop immediately and meets with him that day to confess.

Bishop calls the sister in and she at denies it at first until she finds out the EQP confessed. She is hostile towards the Bishop and acts like it was "only a makeout session .. no big deal".

In those admittedly made-up circumstances, I could certainly see the "sentences" coming down as specified.

I'm sure we could come up with scenarios all day long for every possible story people have. The fact is, nobody knows the circumstances, the attitude of the people in question, the biases of the leader in question, or most importantly, the promptings the leader received. It's foolish to speculate IMO.

FM I think you're putting a little to much thought into this. Any more and you may have to run home to the wife for a nooner.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

Nope. Not a lawyer. Good guess, though.

The point is that they were both involved, and they received completely different sentences, despite the fact that he was an older endowed RM EQ president and she was a lowly freshman in college. He was smart to keep his britches on while removing hers, I suppose.

Maybe there was a miscarriage of justice. Maybe not. The problem is you aren't providing enough information for anyone here to comfortably come to the same conclusion you are trying to get them to conclude.

Just throwing out wild hypotheticals as to the difference in punishment, maybe:

1. She tried to seduce him
2. She's had run-ins before with this sort of thing
3. He confessed before she did and she lied about it when asked

and so on and so forth. It's very rarely as cut and dried as you seem to be attempting to make it here.

[Sleeping in EQ]

I'm still waiting for the argument that consistency is desirable.
Fairness? Yes.
Consistency? No.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

I'm still waiting for the argument that consistency is desirable.
Fairness? Yes.
Consistency? No.

What about being consistently fair?

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Maybe there was a miscarriage of justice. Maybe not. The problem is you aren't providing enough information for anyone here to comfortably come to the same conclusion you are trying to get them to conclude.

Just throwing out wild hypotheticals as to the difference in punishment, maybe:

1. She tried to seduce him
2. She's had run-ins before with this sort of thing
3. He confessed before she did and she lied about it when asked

and so on and so forth. It's very rarely as cut and dried as you seem to be attempting to make it here.

Come on, dude. He was an endowed, older, RM EQ President. She was a freshman. Do the math. He was the first guy she had ever even kissed. And I know for a fact that she went in first.