Are the Godairs leaving?

[RevBuddy]

Dan...

Obviously it useless to use simple common sense. And ethical behavior is being redefined by these men...just like they redefine biblical principles...

...their apologists have drunk the Kool-Aid...unfortunately.

They won't tolerate the "gnat" of the lack of personal appearance standards, but will swallow whole the "camel" of unethical, thoughtless personal behavior... go figure?????

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by RevBuddy

Dan...

Obviously it useless to use simple common sense. And ethical behavior is being redefined by these men...just like they redefine biblical principles...

...their apologists have drunk the Kool-Aid...unfortunately.

They won't tolerate the "gnat" of the lack of personal appearance standards, but will swallow whole the "camel" of unethical, thoughtless personal behavior... go figure?????

Kool aid kid that's me grape or orange. Dan and others have sung the praises of Elder Yadon and company as heros-visionaries because they followed their conscience. I have commended TB for his courage to follow his conscience and not to sign the AS. Are you guys saying none of these guys called or tried to influence their friends and disciples??? The only difference here is the 92 exodus was shortsighted and paid for it and these guys have foresight and not plunging in the dark but have a plan. That is the difference between leadership.

[MissBrattified]

Personally, I think some dissenters are acting like spoiled brats--AND some of those who *won* their resolution are crowing about it like...well...spoiled brats.

But...it is unfair to say that men are unprincipled or unethical simply because they cannot, in good conscience, remain in a group that no longer aligns with their convictions. Or, rather, a group whose stance lies so far outside of their convictions that to remain would be immoral, from the perspective of some.

As for mailing out letters...that's been done lots of times, and I don't think that it matters what for. If you're a member minister, I suppose you have the right to send out correspondence to all other members stating your views, whether positive or negative. Those other members are big boys (I hope), and can decide for themselves their own response without being unduly influenced by a negative piece of mail.

I WISH that everyone could be in the same organization, and those that want to use TV could do so, and those who don't want to...can just refrain, and everyone could live happily ever after. Obviously that isn't going to be the case. There must be walls between us. Not sure why, but it appears they are deemed necessary.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Kool aid kid that's me grape or orange. Dan and others have sung the praises of Elder Yadon and company as heros-visionaries because they followed their conscience. I have commended TB for his courage to follow his conscience and not to sign the AS. Are you guys saying none of these guys called or tried to influence their friends and disciples??? The only difference here is the 92 exodus was shortsighted and paid for it and these guys have foresight and not plunging in the dark but have a plan. That is the difference between leadership.

I also admire folks for following their conscience and convictions. I would rather see honesty and TRUE ethics, e.g., state your mind up front, instead of all this subversive junk, "I'll say one thing and do another privately."

I do NOT admire those who lie and deceive and omit the truth about what they believe and what they practice simply so they can remain in an organization for one reason or another.

[Straightline]

Originally Posted by TRIPLE E

Perhaps it was never used before in such an unethical manner! Just MHO of course!

What is unethical about a mass mailing?

When Hardwick withdrew from the UPC, he sent a letter out to the total constituency (I still have the letter..)

I receive mailings from the ACWF (Rowe in S. Bend) for years. He used the UPCI mailing list and included articles by S.Schmidt and others who were clearly (IMHO) bitter.

I receive mailings from the nutcases (IMHO) from Triumph Church in Nederland, TX. They don't know me except through the UPCI directory.

I have received various mailings from K. Phillips after he left the UPCI, all critical of UPCI direction (IMHO).

DeHart, Akers, Burr (sorry to lump all these together): my mailbox has been weighted down by all. If I didn't like it, I just threw it away. Didn't need an org to tell me what I could or couldn't read.
When has the UPCI ever accused these men of being unethical???
Why start now?????


If you want it built right,
start with a
Straightline

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

I WISH that everyone could be in the same organization, and those that want to use TV could do so, and those who don't want to...can just refrain, and everyone could live happily ever after. Obviously that isn't going to be the case. There must be walls between us. Not sure why, but it appears they are deemed necessary.

ME TOO!

[Encryptus]

Originally Posted by Straightline

What is unethical about a mass mailing?

When Hardwick withdrew from the UPC, he sent a letter out to the total constituency (I still have the letter..)

I receive mailings from the ACWF (Rowe in S. Bend) for years. He used the UPCI mailing list and included articles by S.Schmidt and others who were clearly (IMHO) bitter.

I receive mailings from the nutcases (IMHO) from Triumph Church in Nederland, TX. They don't know me except through the UPCI directory.

I have received various mailings from K. Phillips after he left the UPCI, all critical of UPCI direction (IMHO).

DeHart, Akers, Burr (sorry to lump all these together): my mailbox has been weighted down by all. If I didn't like it, I just threw it away. Didn't need an org to tell me what I could or couldn't read.
When has the UPCI ever accused these men of being unethical???
Why start now?????


If you want it built right,
start with a
Straightline

Mass mailings expressing your views are not unethical.

Mass mailings to attempt to effect change within your organization are not unethical.

Mass mailings within an organization to which you have pledged loyalty and unity for the purpose of promoting defection from that organization is beyond unethical.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Straightline

What is unethical about a mass mailing?

When Hardwick withdrew from the UPC, he sent a letter out to the total constituency (I still have the letter..)

I receive mailings from the ACWF (Rowe in S. Bend) for years. He used the UPCI mailing list and included articles by S.Schmidt and others who were clearly (IMHO) bitter.

I receive mailings from the nutcases (IMHO) from Triumph Church in Nederland, TX. They don't know me except through the UPCI directory.

I have received various mailings from K. Phillips after he left the UPCI, all critical of UPCI direction (IMHO).

DeHart, Akers, Burr (sorry to lump all these together): my mailbox has been weighted down by all. If I didn't like it, I just threw it away. Didn't need an org to tell me what I could or couldn't read.
When has the UPCI ever accused these men of being unethical???
Why start now?????


If you want it built right,
start with a
Straightline

Again the straightline. These folks forget.

[Esther]

Originally Posted by embonpoint

Some would contend that both have been or will be disruptive.

How do you think BOTT will be disruptive?

[James Griffin]

The issue is ethics. To sign a pledge to honor unity within your organization then to stay within that organization but attempt to draw others into a different assembly is totally unethical.

If this were a business situation it could easily result in a successful lawsuit for tortious interference. It is sad that business ethics would transcend those of ministers.

The men of ‘92 withdrew with honor, the issue is not whether or not they had leadership, it is how they conducted themselves while still members of the UPCI.

If some feel the need to form their own fellowship because they feel the UPCI no longer a holiness organization, they are to be commended for following their convictions.

If some feel that we need to use every technology available to reach the lost, they are to be commended for following their convictions.

As to the few who feel compelled to use all means at there disposal to draw away members from the organization they are still members of, and into a different organization, such actions are not only unethical, they are without honor.

IF the UPCI were a company and a current employee wished to form a new company, and covertly or overtly used company produced mailing lists, contacts, etc. to this end, they would be on the losing end of a lawsuit.

Lawyers, CPAs, and others have to take a course in ethics, and pass tests before licensure. It is becoming increasingly obvious something similar should be required of clergy.

And on the issue of ethics, neither side is void of blameless individuals. It is also unethical that many (if not most) ministers are signing pledges to uphold positions and standards which they have no intention of following or teaching. The rationale of I am just doing it because my DS says it does really mean anything is not worthy of a response.