Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the News

[YOhio]

This is an interesting article. It seems like someone is doing something wrong or nefarious (not saying it isn't), but the article doesn't identify any clear wrongdoing by the Utah legislators other than the usual junkets and symbolic posturing. The Weber State prof does seem a bit sketch.

https://apnews.com/article/china-for...361488d20dd1b4

[MartyFunkhouser]

This Sanderson thing has been fascinating. I can't find anyone sympathetic to the Wired article and nothing but overwhelming support for Sanderson. I guarantee you this will result in a spike in book sales for him.

It has been fascinating. I guess you can't write an unnecessarily mean spirited article and get a positive reaction. Who knew. Also, I like this article about it as well.
https://news.yahoo.com/perspective-s...Voadm5Pt_ycC5h

[myboynoah]

Embedded Tweet

[Bo Diddley]

Embedded Tweet

Haha. I got a chuckle out of that. "Wow. You know Utah is desperate when they ask all faiths to join in prayer."

[All-American]

Arizona Supreme Court rules in favor of the Church in the case that made the rounds last year about the bishop not reporting confessions of child abuse to the authorities.

https://apnews.com/article/mormon-ch...source=Twitter

[frank ryan]

Arizona Supreme Court rules in favor of the Church in the case that made the rounds last year about the bishop not reporting confessions of child abuse to the authorities.

https://apnews.com/article/mormon-ch...source=Twitter

I have mixed feelings on this one.

[Maximus]

Arizona Supreme Court rules in favor of the Church in the case that made the rounds last year about the bishop not reporting confessions of child abuse to the authorities.

https://apnews.com/article/mormon-ch...source=Twitter

the church not doing all it can to report is very telling

[All-American]

the church not doing all it can to report is very telling

It’s actually not telling.

[Maximus]

what are good reasons to toe the line and not be proactive on this?

[All-American]

what are good reasons to toe the line and not be proactive on this?

First, it was mostly a joke. They are literally not telling.

Second, the policy reason is, if the bishop has to report it, then you discourage people from talking to the bishop in the first place, which means it tends to stay hidden. Whether or not that is what happens in practice is a question I couldn’t answer but I don’t think it is unreasonable to think that such a policy has a net positive effect for victims advocacy.

[Northwestcoug]

Someone help me out here. There is mandatory reporting in other states and countries. So the church abides by those laws in those jurisdictions. Given the negative publicity the Arizona case has attracted, why is the church fighting this in court? Why not get ahead of the ball and say you know what, our policy will now be if a member goes to a bishop/SP and confesses sexual abuse, they will be treated universally the same; i.e. reporting to authorities with the express understanding that no forgiveness will be granted until they go through the legal process. Why are they trying to cling to the clergy penitent privilege in jurisdictions where it is allowed?

the church got favorable press when they worked with the Utah legislature and compromised with the various gay issues. Why not take another easy win in the public's eye?

[SteelBlue]

Someone help me out here. There is mandatory reporting in other states and countries. So the church abides by those laws in those jurisdictions. Given the negative publicity the Arizona case has attracted, why is the church fighting this in court? Why not get ahead of the ball and say you know what, our policy will now be if a member goes to a bishop/SP and confesses sexual abuse, they will be treated universally the same; i.e. reporting to authorities with the express understanding that no forgiveness will be granted until they go through the legal process. Why are they trying to cling to the clergy penitent privilege in jurisdictions where it is allowed?

the church got favorable press when they worked with the Utah legislature and compromised with the various gay issues. Why not take another easy win in the public's eye?

If reporting is mandatory these people who confess, don't get reported and keep raping kids won't confess, not get reported and keep raping kids.

[tooblue]

Someone help me out here. There is mandatory reporting in other states and countries. So the church abides by those laws in those jurisdictions. Given the negative publicity the Arizona case has attracted, why is the church fighting this in court? Why not get ahead of the ball and say you know what, our policy will now be if a member goes to a bishop/SP and confesses sexual abuse, they will be treated universally the same; i.e. reporting to authorities with the express understanding that no forgiveness will be granted until they go through the legal process. Why are they trying to cling to the clergy penitent privilege in jurisdictions where it is allowed?

the church got favorable press when they worked with the Utah legislature and compromised with the various gay issues. Why not take another easy win in the public's eye?

The family is suing the church for "conspiracy and negligence." The family is seeking to place blame on the church through the courts for the abuse that occurred. They are looking for "compensatory and consequential damages in an amount to be determined at trial." Further, there are news headlines that declare the church "let the abuse happen." Consider all that carefully for a moment. Then ask, who truly is responsible for the abuse?

Is a Bishop (or other clergy) thus responsible for the actions of every individual who comes to them and confesses to a sin, that is also criminal in nature? In some parts of the world, legislative bodies have answered that question in context to this story by lawfully compelling clergy to report instances of abuse. One can argue this is a good thing. One can argue that in this situation in Arizona, the Bishop, or Bishops should have broken clergy-penitent privilege. But neither of those arguments, or lawfully compelling clergy to report, or the lawsuit address the originally stated question:

Who truly is responsible for the abuse?

If it is fair to criticize the church and their position then it is also fair to consider the totality of the circumstances. You have asked: "Why cling to the clergy penitent privilege in jurisdictions where it is allowed?" Because it is allowed in those jurisdictions, and there may well be unintended consequences if that privilege is disregarded. Such as, since one cannot seek further remedy from the perpetrator, then one can seek financial remedy from an institution.

The publicity is the publicity, and irrelevant because it only serves to draw eyeballs, so news outlets can make money. It's an awful situation. It is sad and miserable to think what the children suffered. That's the only thing that matters. Placing blame and receiving compensation isn't going to help the recovery. It's just not. The pretense that the lawsuit is designed to raise awareness, likely has raised awareness in the church, but again that is not what the lawsuit is really about.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Someone help me out here. There is mandatory reporting in other states and countries. So the church abides by those laws in those jurisdictions. Given the negative publicity the Arizona case has attracted, why is the church fighting this in court? Why not get ahead of the ball and say you know what, our policy will now be if a member goes to a bishop/SP and confesses sexual abuse, they will be treated universally the same; i.e. reporting to authorities with the express understanding that no forgiveness will be granted until they go through the legal process. Why are they trying to cling to the clergy penitent privilege in jurisdictions where it is allowed?

the church got favorable press when they worked with the Utah legislature and compromised with the various gay issues. Why not take another easy win in the public's eye?

When it comes to issues like this, I think "favorable press" is a pipe dream. No matter what path is pursued.

[Northwestcoug]

The family is suing the church for "conspiracy and negligence." The family is seeking to place blame on the church through the courts for the abuse that occurred. They are looking for "compensatory and consequential damages in an amount to be determined at trial." Further, there are news headlines that declare the church "let the abuse happen." Consider all that carefully for a moment. Then ask, who truly is responsible for the abuse?

A bunch of people share blame for the abuse. The church, mostly through faulty legal advice, shares a lot of the blame for the continued abuse once the father confessed.

Those surviving kids deserve everything that is legally available to them. Doesn't matter if the money will repair anything.