Child Molestation Arrest: Tom Chantry

[DomWackTroll]

Tom Chantry is a Reformed pastor who was best known as an opinionated commenter at the Pyromaniacs blog. Here is a very informative post about it:

https://thouarttheman.org/2016/12/05/reformed-baptist-pastor-tom-chantry-indicted-multiple-counts-sexual-molestation-children/

And here is the reaction from Pyromaniacs:

http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2011/10/open-letter-to-james-macdonald.html

[closetcagebaby]

That is absolutely the strangest response I've ever seen to this sort of thing. Wtf. 

[DomWackTroll]

19 minutes ago, closetcagebaby said:

That is absolutely the strangest response I've ever seen to this sort of thing. Wtf. 

Right? "I abhor your curiosity!" Well, tough shit, Frank. 

[Palimpsest]

Yuck.  Double yuck.  But why am I not surprised?

So evil.

[Destiny]

That response is word salad with hypocrisy dressing. Oy.  

[Grimalkin]

1 hour ago, DomWackTroll said:

Right? "I abhor your curiosity!" Well, tough shit, Frank. 

       Asshole. Just draw more attention to yourself and look like you have something to hide.

[VaSportsMom]

Right? "I abhor your curiosity!" Well, tough shit, Frank. 

I read that "abhor your curiosity" line as being directed at those that were expecting a comment/response from the blogger before they were ready.

[hoipolloi]

Some more background from the indefatigable Wartburg Watch, including a link to the charges laid against Chantry by the State of Arizona.

 

 

 

[Lurky]

I can't get over that response - I've seen the classic "we need all the evidence, and can only comment on it until after the court, and anyway, does it actually matter, because God will judge and punish him" many, many times, but I've never seen something like his statement:

Quote

If my own daughter or son was making those charges against Tom, I would be both furious and distraught. But: until all the evidence was heard, I would not have any basis to say that Tom was already guilty.

 

and while he goes on to say

Quote

And in exactly the same way, I have no basis to say his accuser is a false accuser. What I have is an obligation to wait until both sides are heard in order to have a clean conscience.

there's no way to say "I'm assuming BOTH sides are telling the truth" - and the rest of his statement is completely "while I wait for the court case, I'm supporting him" - which is absolutely saying "until a judge says otherwise, I'm saying the victims are lying.   

He says "Who am I before God if I treat my innocent brother like a criminal? What have I done to him before God?" but not "Who am I before God if I treat someone who's already been betrayed by their abuser like a criminal?"

I mean, if his own children said they'd been sexually abused, he wouldn't believe them until a judge had agreed with them?  Does that mean he'd even report?    It doesn't make any sense

[DomWackTroll]

8 hours ago, hoipolloi said:

Some more background from the indefatigable Wartburg Watch, including a link to the charges laid against Chantry by the State of Arizona.

Damn, Frank Turk is really losing it. Total meltdown. Poor Dee, with these nuts stalking her on Twitter and harassing her. 

[Howl]

9 hours ago, hoipolloi said:

Some more background from the indefatigable Wartburg Watch, including a link to the charges laid against Chantry by the State of Arizona.

The Dees are tearing it up over at, yes, the truly indefatigable Wartburg Watch!  Sadly, this isn't the only thing related to sex abuse currently being reported at TWW, only the most recent. 

[Anonymousguest]

What is in that hidden post, and where is it linked? Why are people looking for it in response to this guy being charged? I don't understand.       

        2 

 

[hoipolloi]

In the following quote from his response to WW and others, Frank Turk reminds one of Bret Smith:

Quote

…From a perspective of God's eternal justice, if Tom did the things he is accused of, he is already convicted in his heart and before the true judge of what is right. God is the one to whom Tom owes an explanation — if he is guilty. To me? Tom has been a friend and a truth-teller in all manner of hard situations, and I cannot believe that his approach in those circumstances came from either a seared conscience or a false heart. This means there is another aspect of God's justice I need to consider: what if I accuse and convict Tom when he is, in fact, innocent? Who am I before God if I treat my innocent brother like a criminal? What have I done to him before God? So as God has and will judge Tom, God is judging me — and I seek to do what He would have me do in these circumstances, not what an angry mob is asking of me.

 

16 minutes ago, Anonymousguest said:

What is in that hidden post, and where is it linked? Why are people looking for it in response to this guy being charged? I don't understand.       

It appears to be a prior post by Tom Chantry -- no doubt chock full of moralizing & pontification. 

[Dandruff]

16 hours ago, DomWackTroll said:

Right? "I abhor your curiosity!" Well, tough shit, Frank. 

Interesting that curiosity is what he chooses to abhor.

Wonder what Ben Seewald's thoughts are (or would be) on this matter, given his experiences with Calvinism and a wife and in-laws who were molested.

[VaSportsMom]

Interesting that curiosity is what he chooses to abhor.
Wonder what Ben Seewald's thoughts are (or would be) on this matter, given his experiences with Calvinism and a wife and in-laws who were molested.

He would have to ask Jess's and get back to you on that.

[Soulhuntress]

Just not sure where to begin.   The behavior of the twits towards Wartburg just enrages me. 

[Grimalkin]

Well crap, why have prison at all?

[Walking Cat Bed]

14 hours ago, Grimalkin said:

Well crap, why have prison at all?

For all of the non-believing criminals to be forcibly converted told about Jesus, of course.