Fair, More Good Foundation And Church Money

[Dando]

Contrary to the idea tha the LDS Foundation of the LDS Church is a just some sort of moneygram service the church operates for donors.  From the Deseret News
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700019508/LDS-Foundation-donates-500000-to-Utah-Symphony-and-Opera.html?pg=all
 

 

The LDS Foundation receives its funding from the church's business entities and makes contributions to community nonprofit organizations.

 

 

 

From the Deseret Management Company's leadership page: http://deseretmanagement.com/about-us/leadership-team/

Roland A. Radack, VP Community Relations

Roland Radack currently serves as Vice President of Community Relations at Deseret Management Corporation (DMC), where he has worked in various capacities since September 1996. In connection with his current position, he also serves as Executive Director of the company’s charitable giving foundation, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Foundation. Prior to his work at DMC, he served as Vice President and Treasurer of Bonneville International Corporation, a national commercial broadcast and media communications company based in Salt Lake City, Utah, where he worked for almost fifteen years. Born and raised in Salt Lake City, Utah, Mr. Radack received his Bachelor of Arts degree in Accounting from the University of Utah.

 

 

The money came from the church's for-profit company's charitable division . . .ergo. . . the MGF received money from the church.

Edited September 20, 2013 by Dando

[Kenngo1969]

Contrary to the idea tha the LDS Foundation of the LDS Church is a just some sort of moneygram service the church operates for donors.  From the Deseret News

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700019508/LDS-Foundation-donates-500000-to-Utah-Symphony-and-Opera.html?pg=all

 

 

 

From the Deseret Management Company's leadership page: http://deseretmanagement.com/about-us/leadership-team/

 

The money came from the church's for-profit company's charitable division . . .ergo. . . the MGF received money from the church.

 

What's that I hear?

 

Streeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeetch!

 

SNAP!!!!!!!!!!!

 

(With that logic, no wonder so many people are ticked off about City Creek Mall! )

Edited September 20, 2013 by Kenngo1969

[Mark Beesley]

Love your ad hominem jabs...keep up the good work. 

Love is an awfully strong word . . .  Are you sure you know what it means?

 

THAT friend, was an ad hominem jab.  My remark to Tacenda was not.  It was merely an observation about how she may react to select Old Testament scripture based on a reaction to a modern publication

[Mark Beesley]

Contrary to the idea tha the LDS Foundation of the LDS Church is a just some sort of moneygram service the church operates for donors.  From the Deseret News

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700019508/LDS-Foundation-donates-500000-to-Utah-Symphony-and-Opera.html?pg=all

 

 

 

From the Deseret Management Company's leadership page: http://deseretmanagement.com/about-us/leadership-team/

 

The money came from the church's for-profit company's charitable division . . .ergo. . . the MGF received money from the church.

Have you contacted MGF directly yet, or are you intending to avoid seeking information from the source of what you perceive to be a problem?

[rpn]

When I read the documents, I found myself thinking that what I read is consistent with the LDS Foundation paying More Good for serrvices rendered in buying the internet URLs.    Perhaps More Good bought them first, and offered to sell them to the foundation.  If that were true, the hold argument about funding is silly as it was a simple purchase.

[Daniel Peterson]

I've seen a tiny bit of chatter on this elsewhere.  Perhaps as many as a half dozen there seem to believe that this confirms not only that the MoreGood Foundation has lied, and that the Church is indirectly funding FAIR, but that their own prior fantasies on related topics have now also been somehow confirmed.

 

I know essentially nothing about the finances of the MoreGood Foundation.  I've had relatively little contact with them, though I hope soon to change that.

 

I know something about the finances of FAIR, and I can testify that they're quite modest.  Moreover, I can say with considerable authority (as a long-time member of FAIR's board) that FAIR has never received any money that it regards as "funding from the Church."

 

Finally, just for the record (because the folks at the other place, or at least some of them, believe or claim to believe that FARMS and/or its successor organizations have received funding from the Church):  During the nearly quarter of a century that I was involved with FARMS and its successor organizations, they never received a dime from the Church.  Nor did they receive any direction from the Church.  I expect that that continues to be the case.

 

And, while I'm at it, I might as well publicly contradict a related claim that has come repeatedly from the same circles (and that has been mentioned, yet again, in this connection):  It's been claimed by my Malevolent Stalker that, for at least one year, I was paid $20,000 for my apologetic work with FARMS.  This is flatly untrue.  I was never paid, by the Church or anybody else, for doing apologetics.  Furthermore, while I was paid a fee for serving as chairman of the FARMS board (which involved a great deal of extra work on top of my full-time job), that fee never totaled anything remotely like $20K.  And, while I received an administrative bonus for serving as editor-in-chief/director of the Middle Eastern Texts Initiative, it also never totaled anything remotely like $20K.  Nor did the two of them together (for the brief time that they overlapped) total anything remotely like $20K.

 

These folks could ask the MoreGood Foundation directly.  But they probably won't.  And, I suppose, there would be little point:  In my case, at least, though I supplied clear and absolutely accurate explanations when the claims were first made, they insisted that I was lying.  Which left them free to weave their fantastic tales, unencumbered by fact or reality.  As, plainly, they're still doing.

[foster]

An overlooked issue with this "show me the money" sluething, is that in 2005 "LDS Foundation" was renamed "LDS Philanthropies"; LDS Philanthropies is a department of the Office of the Presiding Bishopric responsible for philanthropic donations to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its affiliated charities.

 

Whatever "LDS Foundation of the LDS Church" is a mystery. Some in Salt Lake could just go to address of "LDS Foundation of the LDS Church" and find out.

 

 

 

 

 

side note:

 

I know something about the finances of FAIR, and I can testify that they're quite modest.  Moreover, I can say with considerable authority (as a long-time member of FAIR's board) that FAIR has never received any money that it regards as "funding from the Church."   

That FAIR does not regard any money FAIR may have received as "funding from the Church", is not a statement that instills comfort. I know a man who was in an adulterous relationship, this man did not regard the relationship as adulterous. The list could go on and on about how one person regards a situation compared to how another regards the situations.  But it is really neither here nor there, just pointing out that a self promotional claim isn't really a strong claim.

Edited September 21, 2013 by foster

[canard78]

I'm a little confused. The critics complain that the church don't answer the issues around church history and instead abdicate responsibility to independent organisations like FairMormon. But now other critics are complaining that the church actually is funding an organisation that answers the issues?

Even if the church is funding FairMormon (which according to the replies it isn't), so what?

Having gone through the angst of discovery I want the church to take responsibility for its history, not leave it to be spun by third parties.

The other day I had a chat with my son about "where do babies come from." I read a book with him that we'd bought for such an occasion that is tastefully specific but also in the realms of religion that I want to teach him and that I believe is in line with God's perspective on it (it's from a non-denominational Christian perspective). I don't want him to get the first version from the kids on the playground or the teachers in the classroom. It's my job as his parent, no-one else's.

I celebrate the Joseph Smith Papers project and the apparent work being done by Givens on the official church history. It's long overdue. If the church is funding FairMormon, so what? If they took the content entirely and created fair.lds.org I'd be delighted.

[Daniel Peterson]

Foster:  "a self promotional claim"

 

I appreciate the insult.  I really do.  But it was undeserved.  (I don't know you; perhaps it's just your usual approach.)

 

I reasoned that, if I were going to make a statement about the viewpoint of FAIR on this matter, I should explain how I'm in a position to know what FAIR's viewpoint is.

Foster:  "That FAIR does not regard any money FAIR may have received as "funding from the Church", is not a statement that instills comfort. I know a man who was in an adulterous relationship, this man did not regard the relationship as adulterous. The list could go on and on about how one person regards a situation compared to how another regards the situations.  But it is really neither here nor there, just pointing out that a self promotional claim isn't really a strong claim."

 

I wasn't referring to moral judgments, nor even to moral self-deception, but to a question of fact.

 

Apparently, the critics who initiated this latest charge are claiming that a small sum of money was given to the MoreGood Foundation by a distinct organization that is owned by the Church (but is largely autonomous), and that another small sum of money was then given by the MoreGood Foundation to FAIR, and that this constitutes Church support of FAIR, and they're drawing from this the conclusion that not only the MoreGood Foundation but FAIR have been consciously deceptive.*

 

My response went to the idea of conscious deception.  I can flatly say that, in my dealings with the leadership of FAIR -- dealings that, in deference to your apparent sensibilities, I'll leave vague, mysterious, and unexplained from now on -- I've never heard the slightest whiff of a hint that FAIR had received money from the Church, let alone any discussion of concealing such support.  In other words, there's been no conscious deception on the part of FAIR, and, in my judgment, no deception or misrepresentation at all.

 

However, knowing that my critics believe I'm lying whenever my lips are moving or my hands are typing, I thought that I had better be very precise:  I can't trace the history of every single dollar ever given to FAIR.  That one or more of them might at one time have passed through the hands of the Church is conceivable.  (You may well, right now, be breathing an oxygen molecule that was once in the lungs of Galileo.)  But we've never regarded . . .  Sorry.  Excuse me.  Strike that.  The leaders of FAIR have never regarded FAIR as having received financial backing from the Church.  Nor, I would guess, does the Church see itself as subsidizing FAIR.  There has been, to the best of my mystically derived knowledge, no direct transfer of cash from the Church to FAIR.  And there has been, to the best of my inexplicable awareness, no indirect transfer of cash from the Church to FAIR that was designed by either FAIR or the Church to be a subsidy, let alone to conceal one.

 

 

* The actual situation may be, as Scott Gordon seems to explain it above, that the MoreGood Foundation gave some money to FAIR and then, some significant time later, received some money from a Church-owned organization -- money that might not even have been a donation but may, instead, have been payment for some service or other.  This would make the charge of Church support for FAIR far weaker still.  But it probably wouldn't dissuade certain critics, who even somehow regard the relationship of the Church to an organization that has some sort of relationship with the MoreGood Foundation, which has some sort of relationship with FAIR, as evidence about . . . the Maxwell Institute and, now, Interpreter.  No evidence is needed or relevant for such folks.

Edited September 21, 2013 by Daniel Peterson

[foster]

Canard, the issue the critics have is that for years and years "apologetic" sites have claimed that they are not funded by the LDS Church; just checked FAIRMORMON and it does not have the same or similiar funding disclaimer as More Good Foundation.

 

Also, you should take the OP with a grain of salt.  In 2005 "LDS Foundation" was renamed "LDS Philanthropies"; LDS Philanthropies is a department of the Office of the Presiding Bishopric responsible for philanthropic donations to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its affiliated charities. The article does not show a reasonable connection between "LDS Foundation of the LDS Church" and "LDS Philanthropies."

 

Whatever "LDS Foundation of the LDS Church" is a mystery. Some in Salt Lake could just go to address of "LDS Foundation of the LDS Church" and find out.

 

I think the critics would rather have the Church funding apologetics sites, I think the critics would want this so the critics could just say "You apologists are just paid lacky's, whose incentive is money." 

[The Nehor]

It is almost as if critics are afraid that if they get actual data on this it might topple the Jenga tower. Better to just stick with shadowy theories.

[Calm]

I think the critics would rather have the Church funding apologetics sites, I think the critics would want this so the critics could just say "You apologists are just paid lacky's, whose incentive is money." 

A goodly portion have said it anyways.....

[Calm]

 

Whatever "LDS Foundation of the LDS Church" is a mystery. Some in Salt Lake could just go to address of "LDS Foundation of the LDS Church" and find out.

 

More than likely they are just out of date and not keeping up...perhaps there hasn't been a legal name change if that is actually the name on the tax forms.

 

http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/LDS_Foundation

Edited September 21, 2013 by calmoriah

[foster]

More than likely they are just out of date and not keeping up...perhaps there hasn't been a legal name change if that is actually the name on the tax forms. http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/LDS_Foundation

The first instance of mgf receiving money from LDSFOLDSC was in 2009, which is 4 year after LDS FOUNDATION was renamed LDS Philanthropies. Not to mention one is located in SLC the other in Provo. My guess is LDSFOLDSC is not a department of the LDS Church.

[Calm]

The first instance of mgf receiving money from LDSFOLDSC was in 2009, which is 4 year after LDS FOUNDATION was renamed LDS Philanthropies. Not to mention one is located in SLC the other in Provo. My guess is LDSFOLDSC is not a department of the LDS Church.

Did you see who is also at the same address?

 

I agree with you someone should just attempt to contact the organization either by phone or better by foot.

 

So do tax forms have to include legal names of organizations?  I suppose there could be someone out there who named their foundation "of the LDS Church" simply because they were members.

 

I wonder how LDS Philanthropies and other Church organizations appear on tax forms.

Edited September 21, 2013 by calmoriah

[foster]

Did you see who is also at the same address?

 

I agree with you someone should just attempt to contact the organization either by phone or better by foot.

 

Ah, I did miss the last line from the 1992 article which indicated "main offices Salt City and Provo".

[foster]

Daniel Peterson, you are welcome. But you really shouldn't take things so personally; in this instance I was not speaking of you being self promotional; I was referring to the self serving nature of what you stated FAIR's position is. You stated FAIR does not regard itself as having received funding from the Church. You are very likely repeating a claim made by FAIR. FAIR making a self promotional claim or anyone for that matter making a self promotional claim, is well, self serving. But the self serving nature of statements really isn't the point of this thread.

Whether LDS Philanthropies - a department of the Church is "LDS Foundation of the LDS Church" is the pressing issue of this thread.

If LDS Philanthropies is not the same, then the whole argument of Mr. Twede is pointless and unsubstantiated.

Edited September 21, 2013 by foster

[Calm]

So how would you suggest FairMormon go about sharing the information it has not received cash from the Church if that is correct information.  After all, there are people who claim not to be adulterous who are recognized generally by society as not being adulterous by any standard.

 

PS:  if you look at the title of the thread, I think it suggests that it encompasses claims that FairMormon received "church money" and thus a response disputing this would be appropriate.

Edited September 21, 2013 by calmoriah

[foster]

An unqualified statement; "does not regard as" is qualified statement. I would also suggest that people here stop creating an argument that isn't offered. Who has claimed that the $2500 from mgf to FAIR is traced back to the Church, surely critics are more apt than to say "In 2006 mgf gave money to FAIR, said monies recieved from the Church in 2009." Arguing a claim that isn't made just makes everyone look crazy.

Twedes post suggests that the money received from "LDSFOTLDSC" covered salaries of MGF.

 

You offered the argument  "That FAIR does not regard any money FAIR may have received as "funding from the Church", is not a statement that instills comfort."     Either pony up the evidence or knock it off.  You are about to be removed.

[ERayR]

Contrary to the idea tha the LDS Foundation of the LDS Church is a just some sort of moneygram service the church operates for donors.  From the Deseret News

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700019508/LDS-Foundation-donates-500000-to-Utah-Symphony-and-Opera.html?pg=all

 

 

 

From the Deseret Management Company's leadership page: http://deseretmanagement.com/about-us/leadership-team/

 

The money came from the church's for-profit company's charitable division . . .ergo. . . the MGF received money from the church.

 

And that is unforgivable because . . .

[foster]

An unqualified statement; "does not regard as" is qualified statement. I would also suggest that people here stop creating an argument that isn't offered. Who has claimed that the $2500 from mgf to FAIR is traced back to the Church, surely critics are more apt than to say "In 2006 mgf gave money to FAIR, said monies recieved from the Church in 2009." Arguing a claim that isn't made just makes everyone look crazy.Twedes post suggests that the money received from "LDSFOTLDSC" covered salaries of MGF. You offered the argument "That FAIR does not regard any money FAIR may have received as "funding from the Church", is not a statement that instills comfort." Either pony up the evidence or knock it off. You are about to be removed.

Yes I made the argument that self serving claims are self serving.

I have never made the claim that FAIRMormon is funded directly or indirectly by the Church or its subsidiaries. I now specifically and unequivocally make the following claim:

I do not suggest or imply, either by commission or omission, that FAIRMormon is funded directly or indirectly by the LDS Church or its subsidiaries, I have looked at the tax records posted by twede, nothing in those records suggests money comes from the church and nothing suggests that FAIRMormon pays it executives.

While we are on the subject of my conduct, why is it that I am the only person presenting evidence that the "lds foundation of the lds church" is not the same "lds foundation" which was renamed "lds philanthropies" in 2005, 4 years prior to mgf receiving the funds twede claims are connected to the LDS Church.

Edited September 22, 2013 by foster

[Calm]

Social Hall Plaza is the office building at that site.
https://www.honestbuildings.com/buildings/9878/us/ut/salt-lake-city/social-hall-plaza/#.Uj5Bomt5mSM

Now to find a list of the tenants.

 

Google lists as those located at that address (no guarantee they are current tenants):

 

Deseret Mutual (Ste 170)

Wasatch Funds (Ste 400)

Beneficial Financial Group 

Name in front of the building is Wasatch Advisors.

Zions Securities Corporation (maybe)

Federal Employees Credit Union 

Deseret Barber Shop

A doctor's office (internal medicine but it lists the same suite as DM above...so who knows)

Lawyer's office

US Postal office

Department Of Health And Human Services (ste 310)

US Energy Dept. (Ste 300)

Cross Creek Capital, L.P.

Possibly an IRS office

 

 

Strange to say, white pages lists one individual with that address, maybe he owns one of the businesses.  I don't think I will list his actual name as there is no reason for him to be commented on as far as I can see, just to keep track though....his initials are GB just in case anyone else finds other information.

Edited September 22, 2013 by calmoriah

[Calm]

Also found this:

 

http://ut.bizdirlib.com/category/city/SALT_LAKE_CITY?page=2640

[Daniel Peterson]

And, while I'm at it, I might as well publicly contradict a related claim that has come repeatedly from the same circles (and that has been mentioned, yet again, in this connection):  It's been claimed by my Malevolent Stalker that, for at least one year, I was paid $20,000 for my apologetic work with FARMS.  This is flatly untrue.  I was never paid, by the Church or anybody else, for doing apologetics.  Furthermore, while I was paid a fee for serving as chairman of the FARMS board (which involved a great deal of extra work on top of my full-time job), that fee never totaled anything remotely like $20K.  And, while I received an administrative bonus for serving as editor-in-chief/director of the Middle Eastern Texts Initiative, it also never totaled anything remotely like $20K.  Nor did the two of them together (for the brief time that they overlapped) total anything remotely like $20K.

 

Just for the record:

 

Over on the board where my Malevolent Stalker holds court, this topic once again has them all abuzz.  And some of them feel quite justified because I myself brought it up out of the blue, for no reason.  Since I raised the topic, I'm fair game.

 

But, as you can see by looking at the language of the quote above (and at its accompanying time information and at the time for post #31 on this thread, from which it's excerpted), I was responding to my Malevolent Stalker.  It was he who actually brought it up out of the clear blue sky, at 12:31 PM on Thursday (19 September) -- nearly thirty-six hours before I responded to it -- in a thread entitled "More Good is a More LDS ($-laundering) Foundation?" over at his board.  Rather than being creeped out by his continuing efforts to delve into my personal finances and my employment compensation, my Stalker's disciples are praising him for having "fact-checked" a statement that I hadn't actually made until nearly a day and a half afterwards.

Edited September 22, 2013 by Daniel Peterson

[Daniel Peterson]

An unqualified statement; "does not regard as" is qualified statement. 

 

I haven't the faintest idea what that sentence means.