Healing the Divide

[Johnnie Cake]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

On the other hand, there is nothing noble or praiseworthy about admitting wrongdoing when one is not wrong.

Scott, no one expects anyone to admit to wrongdoing when one is not wrong...but it does take a special person to be able to admit to being wrong after having first fought and defended a point but then realizing their error...

[flameburns623]

A bit on hearing aids, cochlear implants, and deafness.

Y'all ever heard a dog whistle?

Congratulations: I never have.

But I can imagine it: a shrill, high- pitched sound right on the periphery of what you can hear.

Someone's bratty little kid has ahold of that dog whistle and he's blowing on it, right now.

One long continuous note.

He never takes a breath, this kid.

And no one can make him stop.

Just. One. Long. Note.

I'm listening to that brat, right now.

He's been blowing on that cussed whistle, in my right ear, since a certain surgery back in 1982.

I'd strangle him, if I could, but I can't quite reach him.

The kid's name is Tinnitus, and he's destined to be the only sound I can hear from my right ear till I die. 

Certain things seem to make him blow that whistle louder or harder.

Certain over-the-counter medicines, certain loud noises, stress, anxiety, weariness.

Complex social situations.

Like Bishop's disciplinary courts and stuff like that.

I pretty much can ignore the kid, but he takes his toll. Wears me down.

Apart from the omnipresent brat with a whistle, when I take my hearing aids out: you'd be all a'hush and awe'd in my presence.

Like, removing 'em magically teleports us to an LDS temple, 

You, and me and your spouse and those drunk folks over yonder across the cafeteria, and that big old flat screen television.

All of us, inside an LDS temple.

In our street clothes.

Just standing around,  murmuring, in a stage whisper, in a Mormon temple.

With that brat with the dog whistle, blowing away.

You'd think it would be peaceful: but there are people in this temple, holding a Bishop's Court, saying meaningful things I' d really like to hear.

But I miss a lot and have to concentrate, sometimes quite hard, on one speaker.

Quite tiring.

You get used to it.

Sorta.

But it's still tiring. 

Heavens forbid someone tells a joke. 

What's that, Scott Lloyd? Why did the chicken cross the road?

I dunno, Brother: why? Srrompersoiyyersaia?

Oh, hahaha, yeah, I get it: srrompersoiyyersaia! Good one!

(Dang it will someone please take that whistle away from that kid!)

Hearing aids help me. They distort and they can be noisy and how well they work depends upon room accoustics, how well I feel, ear wax, and maybe the relative humidity.

But hearing aids DO work.

So well that people forget I am Hard-of-Hearing.

That I struggle a bit more than most folks in Sacrament Meetings and parties and Disciplinary Councils and such.

That I might need a little extra consideration. 

They're why I have been able to remain integrated into Hearing society, mostly unaware of a Deaf community, until my hearing declined enough to motivate me to try to learn American Sign Language back a year or so ago.

Which is hard work, and I don't know any Deaf people and I have to go out of my way to find any, and it's tough practicing just in front of a mirror, and excuses like these are why I not only never stuck with ASL, but struggle with losing weight, too. WILL someone PLEASE get that DOG WHISTLE away from that KID!!!

Cochlear implants are like hearing aids, but different. They help but not so much by amplifying sound as by converting sound to electrical impulses to the auditory nerve.

Not everyone can use them: surgery killed one of the auditory nerves God gifted me.

Since I only have one nerve to spare, and there are hazards to cochlear implants (as with any surgery), I'm unwilling to risk them. (Please o please pretty please stop the dog whistle. Please?).

And some people have degenerative nerve disorders, or tumors, or other things which cause cochlear implants to be of declining utility.

At some least-convenient crossroad in life.

While planning to marry or change jobs or attend a Bishop's Disciplinary Court or thus-and-so. (Whistle! Stop! Just! Stop!)

So one uses the tech but lives with it's limitations and compensates with lip reading and controlled social settings and whatnot.

Recognize that at certain times of day you're fresher and get on better.

So you try not to attend or schedule important events like Courts of Love for evenings, when you're apt to be tired and be cranky and/or miss a lot. 

Failing that, if you have no control over when something might get scheduled,  you may try to bring along a 'Terp or someone who can help.

And you plead God that the bratty kid with the dog whistle stays home.

He won't: but you can always hope.

Edited April 19, 2016 by flameburns623
Typos

[Scott Lloyd]

38 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Scott, no one expects anyone to admit to wrongdoing when one is not wrong...but it does take a special person to be able to admit to being wrong after having first fought and defended a point but then realizing their error...

Conceptually, I agree with this 100 percent.

 

[Jeanne]

1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Conceptually, I agree with this 100 percent.

 

Your wife must absolutely love you!

[Avatar4321]

7 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Your wife must absolutely love you!

well, she did marry him...

[Jeanne]

1 hour ago, Avatar4321 said:

well, she did marry him...

Marriage is wonderful when you don't have to admit you are wrong about anything.  I can just see my husband saying well..I conceptually agree with you.

Edited April 20, 2016 by Jeanne

[Avatar4321]

28 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Marriage is wonderful when you don't have to admit you are wrong about anything.  I can just see my husband saying well..I conceptually agree with you.

wouldn't you naturally endeavor not to be wrong so you don't have to admit to being wrong?

[Jeanne]

29 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said:

wouldn't you naturally endeavor not to be wrong so you don't have to admit to being wrong?

Well sure...I think this is what Scott means.  On all fronts, I am all for truthiness.  If I really don't know all the facts and I am proven wrong, I want to admit.  Not to you or anyone here..but to myself.  I don't know the Runnells SP's side of the story.  I have to admit that.  I would love to be wrong about just a shut down on an interpreter just to power up  I would love to know that a SP would not do something like this off hand.  All of us assume way too much.  But right now..I am holding on to the idea that in the case of Runnell's hearing disability, there was something wrong in Denmark. 

As for Scott and his wife...I don't know them.  But I am hoping she wears the pants in the family.

[JulieM]

2 hours ago, Jeanne said:

Marriage is wonderful when you don't have to admit you are wrong about anything.  I can just see my husband saying well..I conceptually agree with you.

I thought the same thing and laughed. Like, "oh wow he must be fun to live with".

But in all honesty, I doubt that Scott talks like that to his wife or children.  

I imagine Scott being a great husband and dad.  I read the letter (or parts of a letter) that he shared from his son who is on a mission.  It was touching and I could tell they were close with lots of love between them.  

Edited April 20, 2016 by JulieM

[Jeanne]

38 minutes ago, JulieM said:

I thought the same thing and laughed. Like, "oh wow he must be fun to live with".

But in all honesty, I doubt that Scott talks like that to his wife or children.  

I imagine Scott being a great husband and dad.  I read the letter (or parts of a letter) that he shared from his son who is on a mission.  It was touching and I could tell they were close with lots of love between them.  

Oh...I agree.  I was just jesting.  I can tell that what little bit he talks about his wife that it is with love,

[Guest]

To address the OP...I do not know a world in which this accomdation would be refused. Also every Sunday we transcend our differences in Church as we are a Church of coverts, and we all have differences. Every mission has someone called to provide sign language for any who are hearing impaired. Also, people may bring their own I'd that is more compfotable. We are all different, especially when new to the Church, and any effort that can be made will be made. Too many of our former member have though that issues with ne Ward, felt like the entire Church was the same, and fell away before they found out the whole story. Oh how I wish that so many had kept the faith, even more that they would come home. 

[mfbukowski]

7 hours ago, flameburns623 said:

A bit on hearing aids, cochlear implants, and deafness.

Y'all ever heard a dog whistle?

Congratulations: I never have.

But I can imagine it: a shrill, high- pitched sound right on the periphery of what you can hear.

Someone's bratty little kid has ahold of that dog whistle and he's blowing on it, right now.

One long continuous note.

He never takes a breath, this kid.

And no one can make him stop.

Just. One. Long. Note.

I'm listening to that brat, right now.

He's been blowing on that cussed whistle, in my right ear, since a certain surgery back in 1982.

I'd strangle him, if I could, but I can't quite reach him.

The kid's name is Tinnitus, and he's destined to be the only sound I can hear from my right ear till I die. 

Certain things seem to make him blow that whistle louder or harder.

Certain over-the-counter medicines, certain loud noises, stress, anxiety, weariness.

Complex social situations.

Like Bishop's disciplinary courts and stuff like that.

I pretty much can ignore the kid, but he takes his toll. Wears me down.

Apart from the omnipresent brat with a whistle, when I take my hearing aids out: you'd be all a'hush and awe'd in my presence.

Like, removing 'em magically teleports us to an LDS temple, 

You, and me and your spouse and those drunk folks over yonder across the cafeteria, and that big old flat screen television.

All of us, inside an LDS temple.

In our street clothes.

Just standing around,  murmuring, in a stage whisper, in a Mormon temple.

With that brat with the dog whistle, blowing away.

You'd think it would be peaceful: but there are people in this temple, holding a Bishop's Court, saying meaningful things I' d really like to hear.

But I miss a lot and have to concentrate, sometimes quite hard, on one speaker.

Quite tiring.

You get used to it.

Sorta.

But it's still tiring. 

Heavens forbid someone tells a joke. 

What's that, Scott Lloyd? Why did the chicken cross the road?

I dunno, Brother: why? Srrompersoiyyersaia?

Oh, hahaha, yeah, I get it: srrompersoiyyersaia! Good one!

(Dang it will someone please take that whistle away from that kid!)

Hearing aids help me. They distort and they can be noisy and how well they work depends upon room accoustics, how well I feel, ear wax, and maybe the relative humidity.

But hearing aids DO work.

So well that people forget I am Hard-of-Hearing.

That I struggle a bit more than most folks in Sacrament Meetings and parties and Disciplinary Councils and such.

That I might need a little extra consideration. 

They're why I have been able to remain integrated into Hearing society, mostly unaware of a Deaf community, until my hearing declined enough to motivate me to try to learn American Sign Language back a year or so ago.

Which is hard work, and I don't know any Deaf people and I have to go out of my way to find any, and it's tough practicing just in front of a mirror, and excuses like these are why I not only never stuck with ASL, but struggle with losing weight, too. WILL someone PLEASE get that DOG WHISTLE away from that KID!!!

Cochlear implants are like hearing aids, but different. They help but not so much by amplifying sound as by converting sound to electrical impulses to the auditory nerve.

Not everyone can use them: surgery killed one of the auditory nerves God gifted me.

Since I only have one nerve to spare, and there are hazards to cochlear implants (as with any surgery), I'm unwilling to risk them. (Please o please pretty please stop the dog whistle. Please?).

And some people have degenerative nerve disorders, or tumors, or other things which cause cochlear implants to be of declining utility.

At some least-convenient crossroad in life.

While planning to marry or change jobs or attend a Bishop's Disciplinary Court or thus-and-so. (Whistle! Stop! Just! Stop!)

So one uses the tech but lives with it's limitations and compensates with lip reading and controlled social settings and whatnot.

Recognize that at certain times of day you're fresher and get on better.

So you try not to attend or schedule important events like Courts of Love for evenings, when you're apt to be tired and be cranky and/or miss a lot. 

Failing that, if you have no control over when something might get scheduled,  you may try to bring along a 'Terp or someone who can help.

And you plead God that the bratty kid with the dog whistle stays home.

He won't: but you can always hope.

Yeah I got that too.

82 huh?  Had mine since 63

Give it another 20 years and it gets better.  Your brain turns it off unless you really want to hear it.  I seldom do unless I am tuning something to 5500 hz which doesn't happen all that often.

Here.  Find your right frequency and listen.  Drive your friends batty and make them listen. It's weird- when you hit the right tone you can't hear the tone in your ear because the one on the computer cancels it out.

This is mine, but you can have it if you like.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRGImRzcwDU

 

[sjdawg]

turns out an interpreter was provided.  Good on the Stake President for a wise decision

[flameburns623]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Yeah I got that too.

82 huh?  Had mine since 63

Give it another 20 years and it gets better.  Your brain turns it off unless you really want to hear it.  I seldom do unless I am tuning something to 5500 hz which doesn't happen all that often.

Here.  Find your right frequency and listen.  Drive your friends batty and make them listen. It's weird- when you hit the right tone you can't hear the tone in your ear because the one on the computer cancels it out.

This is mine, but you can have it if you like.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRGImRzcwDU

 

I was using some degree of hyperbole, since my tinnitus doesn't bother me unless I am way overtired.

My right ear is deaf. Except for the tinnitus I hear nothing in it 

My left ear has something around 55% function, almost none of that within the range of human speech.

Meaning that peoples lips move but no one is talking.

Without my crossover hearing aids I'd pretty well be functionally deaf.

Incidentally: that long little essay I composed is wholly irrelevant.

Jeremy Runnells has released a covert video of his disciplinary court. His Stake President did provide an interpreter. Something Runnells never made public until this video release:

 

This was the only issue I felt appropriate or competant to make any comment on, although I did and do believe that Jeremy's behavior has been provocative and defiant and was inevitably leading to somecsort of discipline.

Matter closed from where I sit.

 

Edited April 20, 2016 by flameburns623
Added a link and a clarification.

[Maedros]

On 4/19/2016 at 7:25 AM, Scott Lloyd said:

I can see how that might be the case if there were apt to be two or more people constantly talking at once or where there was a cacophony of ambient noise. I don't envision a disciplinary council being in any way like that. I see it as a model of orderliness and decorum. I have no reason to assume otherwise. 

It is in fact exactly like this - "a model of orderliness and decorum" - 

[Maedros]

20 hours ago, ALarson said:

Unfortunately, because Runnell's request was denied, this has become something negative to focus on and again reflects badly on the church.  And, I agree that Runnells is using the denial to do this  But, he wouldn't have this opportunity if he'd been granted his request.  A request that to most people appears to be reasonable.

I think that whether it was granted or not: he would've still found some reason to rant. When one is infected with the spirit of apostacy like Runnell's: it is like Laman and Lemuel who were past feeling; even seeing an angel wouldn't of changed his mind or stance. Also, a person who resigns his membership for something so silly as the want of an interpreter (which he never needed before) is not a lost sheep that needs to be nurtured but a black sheep who ran away. Good riddance!

 

 

[flameburns623]

32 minutes ago, Maedros said:

I think that whether it was granted or not: he would've still found some reason to rant. When one is infected with the spirit of apostacy like Runnell's: it is like Laman and Lemuel who were past feeling; even seeing an angel wouldn't of changed his mind or stance. Also, a person who resigns his membership for something so silly as the want of an interpreter (which he never needed before) is not a lost sheep that needs to be nurtured but a black sheep who ran away. Good riddance!

 

 

Check my earlier post. The SP relented at the Bishop's Court and had an interpreter present. (Runnell's own 'Terp was turned away).

Was never about not getting an interpreter, though your 8nsight about the spirit of apostasy is closr to the mark.

Runnells secretly recorded the Court proceedings. I linked to this. 

[Maedros]

46 minutes ago, flameburns623 said:

Check my earlier post. The SP relented at the Bishop's Court and had an interpreter present. (Runnell's own 'Terp was turned away).

Was never about not getting an interpreter, though your 8nsight about the spirit of apostasy is closr to the mark.

Runnells secretly recorded the Court proceedings. I linked to this. 

Lol, wow...geez so this entire thread is pointless. 

17 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

why the need to defend every inch of ground...until there's no ground left to defend?

 Well, Johnnie there you have it - there's no ground left to defend, Runnells is infected, so I hope you will now concede and agree and lets move on.

As you said flame: " Matter closed from where I sit.

Thanks for this post.

[stemelbow]

I will say there was something adorable about the way he handled it all.  Its not that tough to address his questions.  he kept saying everyone else is discrediting the Church, but little does he acknowledge is he never acknowledged his conclusions may be off.  The facts are the facts, sure, but the conclusions are personal.  If he doesn't believe it then he doesn't believe it. 

That was kind of pointless. 

And,oops for buying the hype of no interpreter.  He had one and we were all played for a couple days. 

[ALarson]

3 hours ago, Maedros said:

I think that whether it was granted or not: he would've still found some reason to rant. 

You're probably right.  He should have clarified after the court that in the end, there was an interpreter provided (even though it was initially denied).

3 hours ago, Maedros said:

Also, a person who resigns his membership for something so silly as the want of an interpreter (which he never needed before) is not a lost sheep that needs to be nurtured but a black sheep who ran away. Good riddance!

Wow.  I'm sure that's just what Christ would say     "Good riddance", is just a paraphrase, right?

That's the type of statement that is not necessary or right to make here.  I'd imagine that even his SP would love to see him repent and return.  

And he didn't resign his membership over the "want of an interpreter".   Whether he'd ever needed one before or not, he had a right to request one considering his hearing issues that seemed to have worsened over the last months.  I have no problem with that and I'm glad that one was provided.

.

Edited April 20, 2016 by ALarson

[RevTestament]

20 hours ago, Calm said:

Actually he did requested an interpreter several days before the council.  If he statedhe was going to bring his own (I can't remember the phrasing), the SP could have countered if concerned for privacy was an issue with the Church providing one.

If so then I agree with this, and said so - the Church should provide an interpreter in all fairness - but it appears to me the SP did according to Runnell's own recording - so it seems I was right, the public didn't know the full story.

20 hours ago, Calm said:

There are two separate issues here in the eyes of those who see it as appropriate for an interpreter to be present, the apostasy and the request for an interpreter to be present.

It could have been a baptismal interview for all I care.  I just think it should be SOP that if given a few days notice, the Church should provide an interpreter if at all possible for any church event, whether Deaf, Spanish, Russian (as we attempted to do for visiting teaching at one time) or whatever language is needed. 

I think publicity seems to be what Jeremy is about. He recorded the meeting for crying out loud, and started the recording with again bringing up his Letter. He wanted to make a recorded statement to try to illicit some response and had a prepared resignation letter he could have submitted without going to this level.

It is sad to me that he appears to have excommunicated Christ from his life. I hope one day he will see and feel the love of Christ.

Edited April 20, 2016 by RevTestament

[SeekingUnderstanding]

2 hours ago, Maedros said:

Lol, wow...geez so this entire thread is pointless. 

 Well, Johnnie there you have it - there's no ground left to defend, Runnells is infected, so I hope you will now concede and agree and lets move on.

 

I'm pretty sure that the point of the thread was that there was no reasonable basis not to allow Runnells to have an interpreter. It appears that after some thought the Stake President agreed and provided an interpreter. Many people on this thread and the other thread have argued against this point, arguing that there could be any number of reasons for not providing an interpreter for a legally deaf individual. The point of the thread still stands. 

From the OP:

Quote

Case in point, in another post today we were debating whether Jeremy Runnels was intitled to an interpreter at his church court.  Jeremy is deaf.  His hearing has degenerated and while somewhat functional he still has difficulty hearing what others in close proximity to himself often say.  Having an interpreter resolves this problem. His stake president, for reasons known only to himself, refused Jeremy's request for the interpreter.  This was one of the reasons Jeremy decided to resign rather than face his accusers, he felt rightly or wrongly that he wasn't being delt a fair hand.

Fair enough...we can debate Jeremy's actions, his claims or the justifications behind his court...what I couldn't understand was why we were debating IF he needed an interpreter.  Really?  Surely we could agree on that can't we?

 

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, stemelbow said:

I will say there was something adorable about the way he handled it all.  Its not that tough to address his questions.  he kept saying everyone else is discrediting the Church, but little does he acknowledge is he never acknowledged his conclusions may be off.  The facts are the facts, sure, but the conclusions are personal.  If he doesn't believe it then he doesn't believe it. 

That was kind of pointless. 

And,oops for buying the hype of no interpreter.  He had one and we were all played for a couple days. 

Far from feeling "played," I feel vindicated. My position all along has been that one should forebear passing judgment on the stake president unless and until one could be privy to the facts he had. 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

18 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Far from feeling "played," I feel vindicated. My position all along has been that one should forebear passing judgment on the stake president unless and until one could be privy to the facts he had. 

 

On 4/19/2016 at 9:45 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

"obviously hearing-disabled" seems to be the assumption in dispute here. 

 

On 4/19/2016 at 10:12 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

Rush Limbaugh, I understand, has cochlear implants. Does he ordinarily use interpreters? 

I'm asking, because I don't know. I heard some years ago that the implants had made a dramatic difference for him. 

And what I'm reading here is that Runnels has gotten by on prior occasions without interpretation. 

So pardon, but it does not seem so obvious to me. And saying he has cochlear implants does not suddenly make the matter crystal clear. 

It seems from your first two posts in this thread that your position was that it is not clear that Jeremy actually needed assistance even though he is legally deaf.

[ttribe]

39 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Far from feeling "played," I feel vindicated. My position all along has been that one should forebear passing judgment on the stake president unless and until one could be privy to the facts he had. 

You were neither played, nor vindicated, IMO.  I was one of the ones who was played by virtue of the fact that, ultimately, the SP did do the right thing and we weren't informed of that fact.  I don't see how that vindicates your position, though.