Pastors move to withhold/lessen SFC offerings in protest of NAYC

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

I will not battle with you, cause I don't like to loose.

But the whole point is not that the girl was immodestly dressed, though most cons feel she was. It was that she was set up as a roll model and her occupation contradicts what the org bylaws uphold. Since I am not UPC, I don't have a dog in the fight, but I have heard the voice of the conservative side. Now whether you or me agree or disagree with the governmental structure of the UPC, for an official to set up something that is contrary to that structure is to me very unethical, and shows little integrity on the part of said official.

She does a voice for a cartoon - - not sure that really contradicts what the org bylaws uphold.

What about the lady that works at Kroger and has to scan beer and cigarettes that others buy?

[SDG]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

I believe so. Whatever you all posted to start with. But please just provide links, and don't post them.

Pics of ministers in shorts have been posted on this site but pictures of an Apostolic female in a knee-length skirt are not acceptable?

[Sherri]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Pics of ministers in shorts have been posted on this site but pictures of an Apostolic female in a knee-length skirt are not acceptable?

Dan, I think it's the other pictures that were on here, not the one at the conference.

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Pics of ministers in shorts have been posted on this site but pictures of an Apostolic female in a knee-length skirt are not acceptable?

The issue AFF had was that she is a minor. That was the main reason for the pics being removed. Of course some of them were also inappropriate for a family forum such as this

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Sherri

Dan, I think it's the other pictures that were on here, not the one at the conference.

No ... I think they are YC pics also.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

The issue AFF had was that she is a minor. That was the main reason for the pics being removed. Of course some of them were also inappropriate for a family forum such as this

Thus, all pictures of children in clothing that is not knee-length have been edited from the site?

[Newman]

Originally Posted by Sherri

Newman, I'm a certified "lib" on here and I will testify that she was dressed way inappropriately in those pictures (NOT the ones from the conference, the other ones). I don't really care what the girl wears or doesn't wear, but it's just inconsistent with what UPC teaches is modest. For heaven's sake, it's inconsistent with what I believe is modest!! They are sending confusing messages to their young girls.

Well, I have no doubt she was probably dressed different than you and I would dress. But was she immodest for the avenue she has been called to?

[LadyCoonskinner]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Thus, all pictures of children in clothing that is not knee-length have been edited from the site?

Dan, why must you ALWAYS stir the pot?

[SDG]

Originally Posted by LadyCoonskinner

Dan, why must you ALWAYS stir the pot?

No ... I want to make sure because a few weeks ago I posted pictures of my children in their bathing suits ... I don't remember being reprimanded for indecent exposure ... or any outrage about their immodesty.

Does anybody know if its true that there will be a charge to get into conf. and if there is what is it? I was told the local pastors are protesting.