Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Tom Phillips Case Thrown Out


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Double post

Edited by Abulafia
Posted

I have friends from my old ward, who sat down and had lunch with Tom on the day of the first hearing. I appreciate from first hand sources what Tom is about.

Having said that, I do appreciate that there are people who think the church is so destructive that they want it to be destroyed. I'm not one of them, and I don't think Tom is either, but I could be wrong.

I think that we need to see the actions for the words. This action by tom did not show good intent for the lds church. The church should excommunicate him because he is attempting to lead people away. But more importantly, he attempted to bring the person who leads the church to court.

 

If not, it just may be difficult to understand why someone who cheats on a spouse can be exed but someone who attempts to lead people out of the church and who attempts to bring Monson to court gets a free pass. There needs to be some sense to it all.

Posted

Tom Philips was my stake president in Coventry England. For him to say "I didn't know about....." is rather interesting to say the least.

 

He was one of the more knowledgeable men in the stake at the time, and certainly knew about the Book of Mormon, tithing etc., as bishop and stake president, he would routinely ask about tithing to members seeking a temple recommend.

 

He has a boulder sized chip on his shoulder for some reason, and, rather than do his own study, has chosen to cry "Foul" publically.

 

The result being his 15 minutes of fame, and his nomination for Martyr of the Year, for his outstanding performance with the British Justice system.

 

He knows better and has chosen to have selective memory about the very doctrines that he once defended and publically taught.

Posted (edited)

Reuben, do you know what annoys me about this. I've heard at least 3 accounts of Tom's life now from his *friends*, that purportedly knew him. All basically demonizing the man.

Have you listened to his Mormon Stories interview with John Dehlin. If you want to know what he went through, from the horses mouth, then listen to him.

Edited by Abulafia
Posted

I thought the 6000 year old earth was a silly one for him to put on the list, but if you listen to the discussion with John Dehlin, then for him it was a real problem.

He went to people with questions and got short shrift. He takes the issues to his family and they can't cope.

Posted

The apostate narrative in the church can be incredibly damaging to families.

Posted (edited)

Tom Philips was my stake president in Coventry England. For him to say "I didn't know about....." is rather interesting to say the least.

 

He was one of the more knowledgeable men in the stake at the time, and certainly knew about the Book of Mormon, tithing etc., as bishop and stake president, he would routinely ask about tithing to members seeking a temple recommend.

 

He has a boulder sized chip on his shoulder for some reason, and, rather than do his own study, has chosen to cry "Foul" publically.

 

The result being his 15 minutes of fame, and his nomination for Martyr of the Year, for his outstanding performance with the British Justice system.

 

He knows better and has chosen to have selective memory about the very doctrines that he once defended and publically taught.

That may be why he put the names of two other individuals on the court document -- because he himself could not honestly claim he did not know about these things but allegedly they could.

 

To say it another way, he could not accurately or credibly cast himself as the victim in the prosecution he was bringing forward, so he attached their names as alleged victims.

 

I agree about the boulder-sized chip.

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Posted

Reuben, do you know what annoys me about this. I've heard at least 3 accounts of Tom's life now from his *friends*, that purportedly knew him. All basically demonizing the man.

Have you listened to his Mormon Stories interview with John Dehlin. If you want to know what he went through, from the horses mouth, then listen to him.

And, of course, we can rely on him not to give a self-serving account.

Posted (edited)

And, of course, we can rely on him not to give a self-serving account.

 

I don't know if it is the case, but if his family has kept quiet about all of this, I hope they remain so.   In my mind, that he's so public about how bad they are, speaks more about him than them.  Whatever the case, I could be way wrong about any of it.  I would say though, it seems incredibly stupid and heartless to make public family grievances like this.

Edited by stemelbow
Posted

I agree, why excommunicate him, let him face the judgement bar of Christ in full fellowship.

Both the NT and D&C require excommunication. I think most leaders would rather not.

Posted

I don't know if it is the case, but if his family has kept quiet about all of this, I hope they remain so.   In my mind, that he's so public about how bad they are, speaks more about him than them.  Whatever the case, I could be way wrong about any of it.  I would say though, it seems incredibly stupid and heartless to make public family grievances like this.

Which just indicates to me that you haven't listened to his podcast.

He obviously loves his family. He came to see the church as a wedge which divided them. This surely isn't an uncommon story when one partner loses faith.

Posted

Can you imagine

 

"Church excommunicates man for trying to imprison leader of church?"

Unless you can show me where, the only talk of imprisonment came from church lawyers and was aimed at Tom. The judge ( perhaps Sheilauk can weigh in on this) deferred.

I'm not trying to defend Tom's use of the court. It made me feel uneasy and I have been in two minds about it all along. But it was his decision, and he must have felt justified in taking the steps he took.

Posted

Unless you can show me where, the only talk of imprisonment came from church lawyers and was aimed at Tom. The judge ( perhaps Sheilauk can weigh in on this) deferred.

I'm not trying to defend Tom's use of the court. It made me feel uneasy and I have been in two minds about it all along. But it was his decision, and he must have felt justified in taking the steps he took.

I'm not acquainted with law in the UK. Is not imprisonment a possible penalty for criminal fraud (assuming the case had gone forward)?

Posted (edited)

Unless you can show me where, the only talk of imprisonment came from church lawyers and was aimed at Tom. The judge ( perhaps Sheilauk can weigh in on this) deferred.

I'm not trying to defend Tom's use of the court. It made me feel uneasy and I have been in two minds about it all along. But it was his decision, and he must have felt justified in taking the steps he took

When you detest something or somebody it's easy to feel justified about going after them. No surprise there. What is in question is whether he is right to feel justified.

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Posted (edited)

Unless you can show me where, the only talk of imprisonment came from church lawyers and was aimed at Tom. The judge ( perhaps Sheilauk can weigh in on this) deferred.

I'm not trying to defend Tom's use of the court. It made me feel uneasy and I have been in two minds about it all along. But it was his decision, and he must have felt justified in taking the steps he took.

 

He brought a criminal charge against a person 

 

the penalty for being found guilty is imprisonment.

 

Hence, tom was trying to send the prophet to prison.

 

It wasn't a civil lawsuit, it wasn't against the church, it was a criminal indictment against a person, the church was not indicted. 

Edited by Danzo
Posted

Which just indicates to me that you haven't listened to his podcast.

He obviously loves his family. He came to see the church as a wedge which divided them. This surely isn't an uncommon story when one partner loses faith.

It was he who changed, not they.

 

When one family member apostatizes and the others remain faithful, it's inevitable that there will be a divide.

Posted

Reuben, do you know what annoys me about this. I've heard at least 3 accounts of Tom's life now from his *friends*, that purportedly knew him. All basically demonizing the man.

Have you listened to his Mormon Stories interview with John Dehlin. If you want to know what he went through, from the horses mouth, then listen to him.

 

I haven't listened to the interview and know very little about the guy, minus what I've read from time to time. So I don't have enough to dive deep into his overall character. But What I do know and study are systems. And I would be extremely loathe to discredit multiple accounts of people that knew him for his own account. The way he word things, makes most things look like his problems just happen to him....there's little acknowledgment of his own capacity to work things out for himself. The lawsuit for something most find at least bordering as ludicrous, to me points out that at the very least he's got quite a skewed perspective on things. 

 

Though the apostate narrative can be damaging to families (ie. they must have wanted to do a,b, or c, etc.), I very much doubt that that's the bulk of what's causing his problems with past relationships. He's made a series of decisions that definitely would alienate him from his LDS family/friends, publicly. As well as leaves him to pariah status for probably a good number of LDS as well (don't have the highest opinion of the dude from what I've seen). I doubt that his behavior on a more personal basis has helped much if this is just the stuff we get to see in public.  After all, if this is his way of "trying to make the church more honest" then he's obviously got a problem with execution for betterment...that is beyond overkill. 

 

And personally, I wouldn't say Reuben's comments fit the definition for demonizing....they weren't all that awful. 

 

With luv,

BD

Posted

I haven't listened to the interview and know very little about the guy, minus what I've read from time to time. So I don't have enough to dive deep into his overall character. But What I do know and study are systems. And I would be extremely loathe to discredit multiple accounts of people that knew him for his own account. The way he word things, makes most things look like his problems just happen to him....there's little acknowledgment of his own capacity to work things out for himself. The lawsuit for something most find at least bordering as ludicrous, to me points out that at the very least he's got quite a skewed perspective on things. 

 

Though the apostate narrative can be damaging to families (ie. they must have wanted to do a,b, or c, etc.), I very much doubt that that's the bulk of what's causing his problems with past relationships. He's made a series of decisions that definitely would alienate him from his LDS family/friends, publicly. As well as leaves him to pariah status for probably a good number of LDS as well (don't have the highest opinion of the dude from what I've seen). I doubt that his behavior on a more personal basis has helped much if this is just the stuff we get to see in public.  After all, if this is his way of "trying to make the church more honest" then he's obviously got a problem with execution for betterment...that is beyond overkill. 

 

And personally, I wouldn't say Reuben's comments fit the definition for demonizing....they weren't all that awful. 

 

With luv,

BD

Very well said -- except that it wasn't a lawsuit, it was a criminal prosecution brought by a private party under the laws of the UK.

Posted (edited)

Which just indicates to me that you haven't listened to his podcast.

He obviously loves his family. He came to see the church as a wedge which divided them. This surely isn't an uncommon story when one partner loses faith.

 

I did not say he doesn't love his family.  I do believe I listened to the podcast.  Incidentally as I've tried to relocate it at Mormonstories I can't get it come up. 

 

There are always different perspectives.  Its a shame he seems to be the impetus that has made this all public.  Its a shame it's public at all. 

Edited by stemelbow
Posted

Both the NT and D&C require excommunication. I think most leaders would rather not.

 

I would also say that excommunication would be a mercy and the Church is in the business of providing mercy to others.

 

I wish he would repent instead. Thankfully the decision on excommunication isnt up to me.

Posted

Unless you can show me where, the only talk of imprisonment came from church lawyers and was aimed at Tom. The judge ( perhaps Sheilauk can weigh in on this) deferred.

I'm not trying to defend Tom's use of the court. It made me feel uneasy and I have been in two minds about it all along. But it was his decision, and he must have felt justified in taking the steps he took.

 

Why would you bring criminal charges against someone if you aren't trying to imprison them?

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...