http://www.theiowachannel.com/news/3976822/detail.html

    A Des Moines youth pastor is charged with the sexual exploitation of a child.

    KCCI learned that the married father of four recently turned himself in to Johnston police.

    Rev. Mike Hintz was fired from the First Assembly of God Church, located at 2725 Merle Hay Road, on Oct. 30. Hintz was the youth pastor there for three years.

    Police said he started an affair with a 17-year-old in the church youth group this spring.

Figures.  As I said in another thread those who pray the loadest are the biggest sinners.  We couuld also look at the situation in the Catholic church, which given its stand on the election, should loose its tax-exempt status, especially since the IRS is investigation the NAACP for just critisizing Bush, but not endorsing Kerry.  The hypocracy among the religious right knows no bounds.

Mike Hintz, a First Assembly of God youth pastor,

That makes him a FAG, right?

Still, I wonder how much of his tax savings he spent on the 17-year-old... "Hell, I saved so much money, I got myself a mistress"

That makes him a FAG, right?

Still, I wonder how much of his tax savings he spent on the 17-year-old... "Hell, I saved so much money, I got myself a mistress"


Good one - very funny.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Oh yeah, that's getting shared all over. I love it when "religious" people fall flat on their face. Way to go, dude!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Oh yeah, that's getting shared all over. I love it when "religious" people fall flat on their face. Way to go, dude!


Oh yeah... nice one, dude....  ::)

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Oh yeah, that's getting shared all over. I love it when "religious" people fall flat on their face. Way to go, dude!


I love it when hypocrites fall on their faces and get exposed for the ......... that they are.

Personally, to me a pervert is a pervert.  I could not care less what political affiliation he/she follows at all.  I just see them as sick individuals who need help, and need to be kept away from decent people.

But one thing that does strike me here, is that the "child" is 17.  In a great many areas of the country, that is above the age of conscent.  That does not make it right or wrong, but it is something to look at.

And there are a lot of others who are on the other side politically who have faced the same charges.  But I will not mention this, because that is not the point to me.  But I can't imagine laughing with glee as some people in here seem to be doing when something like this happens.  I simply see a tragedy.

But one thing that does strike me here, is that the "child" is 17. In a great many areas of the country, that is above the age of consent. That does not make it right or wrong, but it is something to look at.

I didn't read it as paedophilia - 17 would be legal over here, of course - but of a pastor abusing his position with a "youth" from his grope.. er group, committing adultery... that sort of thing.

a pastor abusing his position with a "youth" from his grope.. er group, committing adultery... that sort of thing.


Funny.  You have a very quick wit.

Clearly there are hypocrits of every political stripe, but most of us admit that we are fallible puny humans and therefore willing to tolerate the foibles of others - unless they have claimed to be "holier than thou".  In that case I take great joy in seeing them exposed.

But one thing that does strike me here, is that the "child" is 17.  In a great many areas of the country, that is above the age of conscent.  That does not make it right or wrong, but it is something to look at.



Yeah, but regardless of the age of the girl, the guy was married, which means that he was committing adultery, which is still against traditional morality.

Yeah, but regardless of the age of the girl, the guy was married, which means that he was committing adultery, which is still against traditional morality.


Not just adultery since he was her spiritual leader.  Seductions of that sort are usually concidered blasphamy, and certainly constitute sexual harassment in a legal sense.

But one thing that does strike me here, is that the "child" is 17.  In a great many areas of the country, that is above the age of conscent.  That does not make it right or wrong, but it is something to look at.



Above the age of consent, true, but still legally a child. At least that's the law where I'm from. This would also be why the charge was "sexual exploitation of a child" and not rape, I'd imagine.