All Activity

Yeah, I can't see gloating being a thing that anyone does in Heaven. And it's not that I'm thinking those looking forward to gloating are going to be disappointed and therefore I'll get to secretly gloat about that! I just don't think we will be seeing through lenses that show us something to be gloated over. Imo we don't even have to wait until we die to see through a lense that shows us love and kinship rather than judgment and separation.

I dont know that we really need to put much guesswork into their salary. According to the memo posted above the "Base" (meaning there may be more) was $116,400 in 2013 and was increased to $120K. That is an approx three percent increase. Do they do that every year? Beats me but if it is increased according to inflation then the paycheck may look a lot closer like ~$171K today. Parsonage is likely increased at a similar rate. Another website (widow's mite) estimates salaries as well.

Agreed- they just need to be careful when they say "WE" have no paid clergy when clearly "WE" do have some paid clergy.

It makes sense that it would be at the prophet’s discretion and that not all would want to move into a new home just because.

No, about the contents of the Kansas State Constitution and the sensibilities of our State Supreme Court. The law didn't come about because a coalition of police officers, district attorneys, psychologists etc. explained that this law was necessary in order to better protect the vulnerable people of our society. It came about because the religious right watches Fox News and related hate-filled "news" sources and decided this was something to be angry about. Rather than having a full open debate on the issue that involved experts weighing in on the implications of the matter, they snuck it into law through a "gut and go" procedure. I totally agree. The Kansas legislature hates the Kansas Supreme Court and is always trying to do things like this to undermine it. That is your opinion. I asked the same question to ChatGPT and it said: My best prediction: strict scrutiny, under the Kansas Constitution. Hodes holds that infringements of the fundamental right of personal autonomy protected by §1 receive strict scrutiny. SB 244 directly dictates which intimate spaces individuals may use based on sex at birth and imposes penalties. If the Court treated it only as sex discrimination, intermediate scrutiny would be the conventional test. But given Hodes, I think the stronger Kansas constitutional analysis is personal autonomy → strict scrutiny. The State’s privacy interest is substantial, but the law’s categorical means-ends fit looks vulnerable. Note that "Hodes" is an abortion case. I didn't do anything to prompt GPT to relate this to abortion. GPT saw the same connection I did. When this goes to trial, the ACLU will show a huge number of real people who are harmed in specific ways because of this law, not the least of which State Representative Abi Boatman, who will explain how the law interferes with her ability to fulfill her responsibilities as a state representative. From the TL/DR article you didn't read, "One time there was a call of the House, a parliamentary procedure used to create a quorum. Boatman didn’t hear the call because she was on a different floor, awaiting her turn in the bathroom. Later, a fellow legislator called her out for having been absent. “I was using the only bathroom this Legislature has said I can use,” she said." In contrast, whoever is defending this law is going to have a hard time explaining why it furthers an important state interest.

FWIW, Most Mennonite bishops are also pastors of a church. They do get paid for their pastoral work and for travel expenses as a bishop (they may cover several states) as in the southeast USA. Moravian bishops don't receive any salary for the positions but get travel expenses paid as well. Every few years there is a worldwide meeting of Moravian bishops. Do the LDS bishops or stake presidents ever get together in a big Bishopric Conference somewhere? I knew many Southern Baptist pastors who were "bi-vocational." They held full-time jobs and pastored a church for very little, if any salary. I was a music and youth pastor in several Baptist churches. I received a small salary and in two cases, lots of vegetables and beef from the local Texas Baptist farmers in the churches. We ate well! I also was the English pastor of a Mandarin Baptist Chuch. My wife and I learned how to make awesome (he says humbly) Chinese food!

It's all so heartbreaking what happens with these families. Someone in my family had a baby with a gang member. What we have heard of his father (gang member in a high position) leads me to believe he would also hand his gun to his son. His poor grandma tried to raise him well, but the influence of his dad was just too much. And that affects many of my family even though they have never had contact with the dad. But we have not dealt with anything like happened in this story. I think that may be the double chapel building that I am familiar with so there are a lot of people that go there. Even people who don't know those involved in the shooting will likely be affected just going to church or attending more funerals.

Attempting to mediate here. Your pattern recognition of gang activity within a specific demographic subset, risks generalizing an entire ethnic demographic. What you seem to be proposing is racial profiling of entire congregations or communities to be treated as security threats, all based on the actions of specific criminal groups or individuals. If threat management is the goal, it could focus on known gang dynamics, specific family disputes, or rivalries rather than broad demographic-based security. Applying heavy security solely based on ethnic attendance creates significant legal and social friction without necessarily stopping targeted acts of violence. Like many other gangs, gangs sometimes utilize neutral community venues, such as funerals, weddings, or religious services for targeted retaliation, knowing the targets will be present and off-guard. This is an issue seen across various cultural gang networks. Rather than targeting Tongans, look for specific high-risk events, such as funerals involving individuals with known gang affiliations or recent violent conflicts. Your critique of church leadership assumes potential institutional apathy or a hesitation to act due to public relations concerns. The Church, like many organizations, generally relies on local law enforcement for active security threats rather than maintaining armed private security forces. Local leaders typically coordinate directly with local police. Working directly with local police gang units to identify high-risk events prior to scheduling, allowing for discreet or visible law enforcement presence during services. I believe there are more policy updates coming, like evaluating security guidelines for facility access, off-duty officer hiring for special events, and local leader training for threat de-escalation.

My thoughts. First, mortality tables are a model, and George Box’s warning about models applies: “All models are wrong, but some are useful.” When actuaries develop mortality tables, we look at a giant population of people, some of whom we have labeled as “male”, and some of whom we have labeled as “female”. We then look at how many people are alive at various ages, how many people die at each age, and calculate mortality rates. Then we’ll do some smoothing, and a mortality table results. Companies might then adjust industry tables based on their own data under the belief that their own population of insured individuals isn’t homogenous with the industry as a whole. Regarding regulations, there are non-discriminatory laws, but in general U.S. companies are free to ask people their birth sex or their chosen gender, and according to industry surveys, it’s about 50-50 on companies choosing one or the other. There is a study entitled "A long-term follow-up study of mortality in transsexuals receiving treatment with cross-sex hormones” that indicates that such people have a 50% higher mortality rate. Putting that into perspective, a 43-year old female non-smoker has a life expectancy of 44.5 years. Increase her mortality rate by 50%, and her life expectancy drops to 41.0 years. For a life insurance policy, that might mean the premium for the transexual with a 50% higher mortality rate would need a 20% higher premium. So if we assume 1% of an insured block is transgender and is paying a premium that is 20% too low, that would mean that in aggregate, the premium for the entire block is 0.2% too low. However, that is probably overstating it, because the base mortality rate probably already includes 1% transgender people with their higher mortality rate, which would mean the 1% who is getting a 20% discount is offset by the 99% who are paying, on average, 0.2% too much. Can you see how this gets very complicated and is marginal? There is also a study that says the difference of mortality between men and women is 20% biology, and 80% lifestyle. That is why I think most actuaries would agree with what Jonah von der Embse, FSA, CERA, MAAA said in an award-winning essay. He first explained, from a statistical point of view “Gender and sex are far from “binary, objectively determinable” characteristics, and there will never be a clean-cut way to sort them into two buckets.” He concluded that the most fair way to price insurance might be to just use unisex rates, he then said: “If actuaries (and regulators) decide to continue using sex or gender to assess risk, the next step would be to settle on consistent use – should actuaries use sex, gender, or sex assigned at birth? Gender expression would appear to be the most client friendly option, especially for transgender individuals. However, in a ‘male/female’ world, this option would not work for non-binary individuals. Sex assigned at birth is another logical option, but this may be a challenging data point to collect from a privacy standpoint, and it may be hard to justify, for example, the use of male rates for a fully transitioned transgender female.” Again, mortality differences between men and women are 20% biology and 80% lifestyle. Men are about 4 times more likely to be hit by lightening. That isn’t because XY chromosomes have subtle electromagnetic properties that attract lightening. It’s because men are 4 times more likely to be in places where lightening strikes: fishing, boating, swimming, the golf course, the construction site, etc.

Another article https://www.deseret.com/utah/2026/08/18/father-of-teen-shot-at-kearns-funeral-arrested-for-investigation-of-murder/ This one describes what the police think happened. What kind of dad hands a gun to his kid to shoot another person?

I know of at least one prophet (we knew his bishop) who lived in his own house for quite a few years. They wanted him to move to the place by Temple Square, but he wanted to live at home. They may have changed in later years. The prophet before him did live there though.

Technically, seminary teachers do, or at least did, get paid. This was quite a few years ago, so things may have changed, but my mom was called in to the bishop, similar to a calling, and asked to apply for the position. She got paid a very small amount, so small it was probably called something else rather than pay. Expense reimbursement was separate from that.

From what I understand it means that they all receive the same amount. I would guess that that is true even for the prophet and apostles (that they receive the same dollar amount as any other GA), but I do think that the prophet at least also receives a place to live next to temple square (and that the 15 get health care too, but that's just my assumption). I've also heard that plane tickets and those kinds of expenses are covered (not reimbursed but paid for outright) but that they fly business and never first class. When traveling they used to stay with the local leaders so rarely a need for a hotel room but I'm sure not sure if that's true anymore or not. Again though, I couldn't say how accurate the information is.

For the record, I do think general authority should be paid. As should seminary teachers. :)

Thanks for this. I wonder what the word "uniform" means? Does it mean the same amount, or for the same specific expenses, which could vary widely across the world? In my mind, uniform might mean a list of things for which they are paid: mortgage payment, rent, utilities, repairs, and ongoing maintenance. Or it could mean $10,000 a month for everyone. In that case, the general authority would have to prove with documents that they spent the money on its intended use (housing expenses) and nothing else. Travel expenses, could not come out of that, for example. They could deduct travel expenses for their ministry but not out of housing allowance. If the Church pays their travel expense (on a church credit card, for example), they would have to follow Church travel policy for travel expenses, whatever that might be. It might be $80 per night maximum or $100 per day for meals. Or only fly coach, or, or, or. I once worked for the Marriott corporation. They had fairly strict travel expense rules. I know that has nothing to do with the Church. So, if a GA has his house paid off, he would not be allowed to have a housing allowance that included any mortgage or rent purposes. I don't know if general authorities collect social security, but they would have to pay into that as does everyone. I don't think age matters, but I really don't know. Furthermore, I am no longer receiving any funds from a ministry allowance. Oh, and as an aside, I remember flying home from a conference in Boise (love the Bacon Restaurant in downtown Boise). I was in line, and two general authorities got in line behind me for the same flight. One, I believe, was Elder Cornish of the First Seventy. So I can testify that general authorities fly Southwest!! I would also suggest that a "living allowance" that doesn't follow the IRS rules for clergypersons, is a salary and taxable income, any way you slice it.

Video from the shooting scene. No blood or anything gory , just chaos. don’t know if fb links work. https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1DH5KeWuqu/?mibextid=wwXIfr

That's hard. Would it be appropriate to tell them that you trust them to be safe in the women's restroom but cannot predict how others will respond to them? Then the decision would be theirs. Not sure if that would work or not in a liability situation though. Are there laws in your state that dictate what restroom a person must use?

This is what it says on the church's website concerning General Authorities, for anyone interested: General Authorities leave their careers when they are called into full time Church service. When they do so, they are given a living allowance which enables them to focus all of their time on serving in the Church. This practice allows for far more church members on a worldwide basis to be considered for a calling to serve as a General Authority, rather than limiting considerations to only those who may be financially independent. The living allowance is uniform for all General Authorities. None of the funds for this living allowance come from the tithing of Church members, but instead from proceeds of the Church's financial investments.

No bishops receive any money or allowances (housing or otherwise). Same for stake presidents and all local leadership. It doesn't exist for anyone in those callings, no matter their circumstances because they are not expected to leave their jobs to fulfill their callings (and also, it wouldn't work very well since most will only serve in these callings for 5-10 years and then will be released through no decision of their own). Too often latter-day saints have had a snooty attitude about "paid clergy" but if someone is doing it as a full time job then it just makes sense. It's good for members to know that even though the vast majority of our clergy is unpaid, we also have paid clergy and so we can get off of our high horses about it.

tell us how to address it if the security and policing isn’t directed at who is murdering people. I suppose everyone else but the Tongans should get the additional security and police attention as we wouldn’t want them to get offended … or you for that matter. This is a Tongan-specific gang issue where the participants happen to be Mormon as well. Enforcement should be focused on the problem, not what makes you feel good. This should be interesting to watch how the church handles this. I predict they will do nothing and this will continue in some form…and that would be racism to not protect them and root out the troublemakers. Maybe there are a certain amount of casualties among the Tongan members the church leadership will be ok with.

Curious- how you would advise: A client in therapy who has never dressed trans in public shows up one day in session dressed trans. Dress, heels, wig, but has facial hair. Asks which restroom to use. You trust this client to be safe for others but cannot predict how safe the client will be in either situation. What do you recommend? I’m dealing with that this week.

Not a lie. The word lie suggests hiding. Context matters. That said, let’s be honest, splitting hairs to differentiate between a living wage and payment for services at the rate of 100k? I mean, arent most of us working and collecting basically enough for a living wage, and many just under 100? who cares what we label it. GAs get money. It’s their money to accept or reject. We are talking church policy here.

Well, I may be the only person on this forum who has actually pastored and who has received a housing allowance and/or parsonage for my ministry. What the LDS do is what virtually all denominations or churches do regarding clergy compensation. It is a bit complex, but not overly complicated. One must distinguish between income tax and self-employment tax (for social security purposes). This IRS rule is for ordained ministers regardless of faith affiliation. A church or denomination may provide a church-owned parsonage for their minister. The church may pay utilities and grass cutting, and even furnish the house. The value of this each year must be claimed by the minister for social security tax purposes. There are three formulas for calculating the amount of this "housing allowance." In the absence of a parsonage, the church may declare in advance (key concept) how much of a pastor's compensation is paid in housing allowance and how much in salary, if any. The salary is fully taxed for social security and for income tax. The amount of housing allowance is only taxed for social security. Some pastors don't pay into social security and usually (those who I know) have regretted that upon retirement. I spent some time as the director of a church owned retirement center. I was ordained in that church. I often spoke in chapel services and did counseling with the residents. The IRS will decide on an individual basis of the role of the minister meets that intended by the law. Ditto for an ordained professor teaching in a church university. The value of the housing allowance may not and should not exceed the actual cost of the housing, including everything from repairs, lawn maintenance, utilities, etc. It also may not exceed the amount designated “in advance” by the church or religious organization. I have no knowledge if an LDS bishop as an ordained minister is paid a housing allowance by the LDS or not. I have never been a bishop. It also could be up to the individual bishop whether to go that route, just as it is for any other minister of any other church. In addition, the minister can deduct his expenses in his ministry, just like any business or self-employed person can. It is not honest for any minister of any church to claim they have no income for their service if they accept any form of housing allowance. It also is not correct to simply say that housing allowance is not taxed. The only way it is not taxed is if the minister does not pay into social security, which is a possibility. I hope this helps. I once pastored in northern New Jersey; I lived in a church owned parsonage. I never could have afforded to rent or buy a house there. It was a blessing to have a nice (not fancy—but nice) home in which to live. When I moved on of course, I lost that benefit. Take care all.

Yes. Your racism is very sad.

https://www.deseret.com/utah/2026/08/17/1-dead-2-critically-injured-in-kearns-funeral-shooting/ https://www.fox13now.com/news/crime/police-investigate-possible-gang-connection-in-deadly-shooting-outside-church-funeral-in-kearns Interesting that the police were contacted before the shooting and they were there and heard the shots.