When I was in high school, I had a mentor.

[MineralMan]

He was the youth minister at the church I attended. He was very kind to me, and offered advice on many occasions that helped me to grow from being a typical, careless adolescent into someone who thought about things before doing them. Always available, he always had excellent advice to offer. I admired him a great deal, and thought he was an excellent youth minister. Other young people in that church also benefited from his mentoring, and he was very popular.

Then, one Saturday afternoon, the janitor at the church walked in on him getting oral sex from a 16-year-old girl who was also a church attendee. This was in the early 1960s, and he was never prosecuted for this, but he was gone from that church and from that small California town immediately. By all accounts, the girl was a more than willing participant, but it was absolutely wrong of him to have done that.

Despite his helpful mentoring, my opinion of this youth minister changed completely and instantly. Yes, he had done all the right things to help me. But, he chose to ignore a very basic ethical principle by engaging in sexual activity with an underaged girl. Never mind that it was consensual. It was simply wrong on its face. I, like everyone else, was outraged by his behavior, and was very glad to see him gone. Today, he'd probably have been prosecuted, and should have been then.

Despite all the good things he did, he disgraced himself by his unethical behavior, and that destroyed the respect people had for him. His character flaw and poor ethics destroyed his reputation. He had still given me good advice and helped me, but I deplored what he had done.

Many times, an otherwise good person who is admired for his many excellent qualities destroys himself through ethical lapses. So it goes. So it has always gone. A complete ethical system is important, since a single lapse in it can destroy a career and the respect for other actions.

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. One of the saddest things I have seen lately

Schumer was holding a press conference a week or so ago. Not sure what the topic was because I saw only a clip. Schumer was Weiner's mentor. Weiner worked for him for many years (I believe he was his chief of staff?) Anyhow, Schumer was answering questions and then one of the reporters asked him about Weiner. And Schumer teared up. It was really really sad.

[MineralMan]

2. Yes. I saw that, too.

Harm was done. Very sad and disappointing, overall.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MineralMan]

6. Where did I say that Weiner did that?

I did not say that at all. I described another person who did something unethical and stupid, and my reaction to that lapse of ethics.

Weiner didn't do anything illegal. He didn't engage in any direct sexual activity with anyone. I never said he did. However, he showed horrible judgment and had to resign for doing so. You're reading things into my story that I did not write. I'm spreading no lies at all. I supported Weiner vigorously, until he admitted that he lied. That was the primary ethical lapse that destroyed my respect for him.

Please read what I actually write, not what you read into it. I'm very precise with what I write.

[baldguy]

12. A double standard is no standard at all.

There are many elected officials at every level of govt who may, from time to time, show poor judgment. Sometimes in their public lives; sometimes in their personal lives.

Yet there only seems to be a requirement for them to resign when they're a Democrat who is engaged in forcing the GOP defend their indefensible policies.

Do you think Sherry Sherrod was correct to resign? Or Van Jones? Or that ACORN was hounded out of existence? Because they all faced similar scrutiny to Weiner (overblown & generally false), and from the same source too.

[MineralMan]

19. You know, I deal with one thing at a time.

I deal with that one thing, and then I deal with another thing.

Shirley Sherrod was railroaded out of her job based on incorrect information and manipulation of a speech. That was shameful. That has nothing to do with Anthony Weiner.

The others have nothing to do with Anthony Weiner, either.

All have to do with Breitbart, who I consider to be a complete scumbag. However, in the cases of Sherrod and ACORN, the information was false. In Weiner's case, it was not, and Weiner chose to lie about his stupidity.

Not equivalent.

[Fumesucker]

13. Clarence Thomas has shown horrible judgement..

And more than likely has broken ethical laws as well.

So when _must_ Thomas resign?

[MineralMan]

16. Clarence Thomas should resign.

I doubt he will. Therefore, I consider him doubly unethical. I think the House should impeach him and the senate should try him. They will not do that.

So, Clarence Thomas remains on the SCOTUS. Stuff sucks. I cannot remove him. I cannot force him to resign. I cannot fire him. So, there he sits. What does that have to do with Anthony Weiner? Different person; different set of circumstances.

[Fumesucker]

18. A different and far more troubling set of circumstances for Thomas..

In my opinion of course.

But you said that Weiner _had_ to resign.

There is post up on GD right now showing a search of CNN for "Clarence Thomas", his ethical lapses are nowhere to be found on that site.

[MineralMan]

21. No, he did not "have to resign."

But, he did resign. He could have stuck it out, lost all his committee positions, and given up any influence he might have had. He chose to resign, and it was probably the correct choice, given the situation.

Again, Clarence Thomas is a different person, in a different positions, and with a different set of circumstances. He should resign, but he doesn't have to, and nobody can force him to. So, he won't resign.

[sabrina 1]

48. This OP should be locked. What Weiner did was legal.

Your sly implication that this somehow relates to Weiner is simply disgusting. This 'person' in your OP commit a crime. Weiner did not. He is a Democratic Congressman and I thought it was against DU rules to smear Democrats this way??

The man engaged in legal fantasy cyber sex. A practice that is pretty popular in today's world. The same way Playboy was in the fifties.

I am so sick of this attempt to make what he did some kind of 'sin'. We are progressives here. We do not judge other people's personal sex lives.

Disgusting to see the so-called 'left' join the Party of Family Values when it comes to other people's personal sex lives.

[proud2BlibKansan]

7. You are going to have to show me where I said any such thing

Talk about spreading lies . .

[baldguy]

10. You did mention Weiner

and imply that his story was similar to MineralMan's. It's not.

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. I was commenting on the mentor aspect of his story

MM was telling about a mentor who disappointed him. I told about a mentor who was disappointed in his protege.

It was a valid comment. I also made no statement about Weiner's guilt or innocence or whether he should or should not have stepped down.

Please don't put words in my post that aren't there.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[baldguy]

24. Why did a story about statutory rape make you think of Anthony Weiner?

The connection is a non-sequiter.

[MineralMan]

27. It was not WHAT he did, exactly.

It was the fact that he lost my trust by his actions. He was never charged with anything. He should have been, but he wasn't.

His thing with that 16-year-old, who was someone I knew, wasn't the issue. It was wrong. It was illegal. Still not the point. The point was that someone I had once admired for his actions lost my trust by his actions as well. I did not defend him for doing really good things for me. He did something wrong. That wiped out my trust and support for him.

Parallel stories do not have to be identical to make their point.

[baldguy]

30. So, you point - such as it is - is that If Weiner did X then his doing A, B, C, D & E mean nothing?

Pretty much the same as Breitbart's "point" in bringing up the story in the first place.

Do you think Sherry Sherrod was correct to resign? Or Van Jones? Or that ACORN was hounded out of existence? Because they all faced similar scrutiny to Weiner (overblown & generally false), and from the same source too.

[proud2BlibKansan]

29. Once again - it's the MENTOR

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[proud2BlibKansan]

35. Alerted for your ridiculous accusation against me

I merely replied. And I have explained my reply. You need to take up your battle with someone other than me.

[baldguy]

39. And I guess you're going to keep posting Breitbart's accusations against fmr Rep Weiner.

As ridiculous, unfounded & false as they may be.

And instead of trying to answer honestly and apologizing for bringing his filth onto DU, you'll take the cowardly way out again.

[proud2BlibKansan]

40. I posted nothing remotely related to Breitbart's accusation

This is what I posted:

1. One of the saddest things I have seen lately

Schumer was holding a press conference a week or so ago. Not sure what the topic was because I saw only a clip. Schumer was Weiner's mentor. Weiner worked for him for many years (I believe he was his chief of staff?) Anyhow, Schumer was answering questions and then one of the reporters asked him about Weiner. And Schumer teared up. It was really really sad.

FYI, a few weeks ago, I posted several times a day for several days the details behind Breitbart's false accusations and war on a college professor who happens to be a dear friend of mine. So your accusations here are insane and my DU history proves that.

How many more posts do you intend to continue playing this stupid game?

[baldguy]

41. Yet here you are knowingly spreading some of his other false accusations.

You should take a page from Weiner's incident: You've done your stupid mistake bit, and you've spent some time denying it ever happened. Now it's your turn acknowledge your error, apologize to everyone, then depart from the stage.

[proud2BlibKansan]

42. WTF? Did you even bother to read my post?

Please. I am asking for a direct quote. What Breitbart accusations am I spreading? Which part of my post about Schumer tearing up at his press conference is a Breitbart accusation?

[baldguy]

43. You introduced Weiner to this thread...

...in response to a post that seemingly had nothing to do with him & his problems. It makes no sense UNLESS your object is to spread certain lies from a certain Republican operative about a certain former Representative.

Then it makes all the sense in the world.

[proud2BlibKansan]

44. How is that a Breitbart accusation?

We can't even talk about Weiner now? And if we bring him up we are repeating Breitbart's lies?

Is that what you are saying?

I want to make sure I am clear on abiding by your standards for posting here. :eyes:

[baldguy]

45. You can't falsely imply that someone is guilty of a crime, then deny that you did it.

Weiner did the right thing. Why can't you?

[proud2BlibKansan]

46. I implied that Schuster was sad

No mention whatsoever of a crime.

You are so reaching here your arm is going to fall off any minute now.

[sabrina 1]

49. Schumer, not 'Schuster'. And Schumer has me sad many times over the past

few years as my Senator. Far more sad than anything Weiner has done. Having met Schumer in person I am not at all impressed with him. Weiner otoh, is a great liberal democrat who will most likely be back in the political arena, since the American people appear not to be as prurient about people's personal sex lives as the media and the Dem Leadership.

This thread is a disgrace.

[FSogol]

15. Paging "Reading Comprehension," paging "Reading Comprehension."...

:shrug:

[baldguy]

17. I'm guessing you haven't been paying attention to the news for the last couple weeks.

[Bluenorthwest]

4. To expand a bit...

In the case of the minister, all the 'good things' might have been part of a lie to have a job that let him be a predator. So his disgrace is not in spite of the good things, but doubled for the use of good things for bad intention. If he was there to do what he got caught doing, then his every action was part of a fabric of lies. A reputation can be a ticket to many things. Sure his advice to you might have been useful, but that does not mean he did not give it as another bit of framework for the closet around his truth. The fact that a person who is below the age of consent can not be 'consensual' as you claim is the corner stone here. This is a story about a predator in a role of authority. This is not a story about some guy who had an ethical lapse. So in my view, if this is supposed to be a parable about someone else, that someone needs to be preying on those below the age of consent, while in close authority, with actual sex acts. Otherwise I have to call foul.

[MineralMan]

8. Parallel stories do not have to be identical stories.

As for the consent, 16 is the age of consent in many states. The lapse was in abusing his position. I cannot say why he took that job, and have no idea what his intent was. It was his actions that were his downfall.

[Bluenorthwest]

23. What State and year did this happen in? 'Many States'?

Many others have far higher ages of consent. You did not specify, yet you stated her age. If the age did not matter, why was it included at all? And now you are not denying that this was the case just saying 'in many states'. Why do this?
Identical? We are far afield from where such a word might apply. The question here is, is the parallel even applicable? Of course not, which is why this is 'not about Weiner'. The coy thing is best left to the 16 year old girls, no matter the age of consent in their states.

[MineralMan]

28. At the time, what he did was illegal. I stated as much in the OP.

I even said he should have been charged.

You're trying to shift the discussion to something else. I don't do that. This was an OP about a man who lost my trust.

[lunatica]

5. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I wonder if you would allow for any redemption at all? Any?

Did he lull you into a false feeling of security and then pounce on you sexually? Was he a pedophile in your opinion? Did you ever think he might need counseling too since he was young? Are you really so free of sin that you can cast those stones so readily?

What he did was wrong, but you are totally unforgiving to someone who made a difference in your life. That's sad.

[MineralMan]

9. He was not young. He was in his 40s. I didn't say he was young.

He also wasn't actually a pedophile, since pedophiles prey on pre-adolescents. In most states today, 16 is the age of consent.

I can say that I have never had any sexual contact with anyone under the age of 18 since I was under that age myself.

Yes, I am unforgiving of that youth minister. I do not apologize for that at all. Violations of trust are among the things I do not forgive, since they tend to, and usually do, re-occur. Once you lose my trust, you will probably never regain it. There are too many people out there who do not lose my trust for me to bother with those who do.

[uponit7771]

20. HE BROKE A LAW!!! When people don't break laws and do something YOU think is untoward then thats...

...totally something else. We should be allowed to run our lives the way we want within the laws and good reason.

[MineralMan]

22. He did break a law. Were it today, he would not be breaking

a law, since the age of consent is 16 in most jurisdictions. However, he still did a very, very wrong thing by exploiting his position to have sex with this young girl. My reaction was based on that more than his violation of the law. 40-something youth ministers should not be having sex with people who they are hired to help, laws or no laws. His doing that was more than enough to destroy my admiration for him completely.

You seem to be missing my point here.

[Bluenorthwest]

25. Unless he was in one of the 20 States where the age is higher

Not one of the 30 where it is 16. So today, in many places, he would still be breaking the law. This includes our most populous State of CA. Today, in CA, he'd be breaking the law. Also in 19 other states. So many Americans would read this as a tale of underage predation, particularly since you made the effort to state her age.

[MineralMan]

26. Yes, you're right. He broke the law, as I said in the OP.

I also said that I though he should have been charged with that crime.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Parallel stories needn't be identical. They seldom are.

[awoke_in_2003]

31. my spider senses...

started tingling when I read the words "youth minister". The ones I have ever known were quite seedy.

[XanaDUer]

33. Mine too.

nt.

[SaveNC]

34. Mine did with: "By all accounts, the girl was a more than willing participant,"

Whose accounts was the OP privy to? Hers? His? The janitor's?

[MineralMan]

36. I knew her. This was a small town. I had been in the same grade

as her and mostly the same classes since first grade. We went to Sunday school together. She told me. How's that? She was a good friend of mine.

Still is. We're Facebook friends now. I no longer live in that town. She still does. You're welcome to think whatever you want. This is a real story that really happened. I hope you have a very nice day.

[SaveNC]

38. Of course I'm welcome to think whatever I want.

I just find it a little too convenient in light of the Weiner nontroversy.

You have a very nice day as well.

[LaurenG]

37. Wow - reading through this thread makes my head spin

There are some ridiculous responses here, good luck trying to keep the discussion on target.


edit: typo

[snot]

47. Creationists lose respect for you when you propound evolution. That doesn't mean they're right.

Mineralman, I usually like your posts -- you've always been one of my fave DU'er's -- but I can't agree with you re- this particular controversy.