Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Sam Young is Excommunicated


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, lostindc said:

Get rid of worthiness interviews with minors.  Eliminate sexually charged questions with adults.  

What would do Scott?  I am genuinely curious based on years of reading your posts and your previous status with Deseret News.

So you believe the Church of Jesus Christ should not insist on worthiness standards or moral cleanliness at all then. How does that work exactly? Should adulterers, pedophiles, sexual predators, criminals, etc., be entitled to have any privilege in the Church without anyone giving a second thought to their behavior?

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Posted
4 minutes ago, Duncan said:

You clearly are not reading previous posts or understand what they say-you don't answer my questions I am not taking the time to answer your questions

Can you please answer the question I just asked?  Here it is again below.

"So you’re okay with rolling the dice on today’s LDS youth and keeping the status of worthiness interviews the same?"

Posted
1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

So you believe the Church of Jesus Christ should not insist on worthiness standards or moral cleanliness at all then. How does that work exactly? Should adulterers, pedophiles, criminals, etc., be entitled to have any privilege in the Church without anyone giving a second thought to their behavior?

No one said any of the fears you raised, obviously there's alternative ways of accountability.  Can you please answer the question I asked?  I answered your questions.

Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, lostindc said:

No one said any of the fears you raised, obviously there's alternative ways of accountability.  Can you please answer the question I asked?  I answered your questions.

What are these “alternate ways of accountability”? Please detail or at least outline them. 

As for the question you asked, I refer you to the post below from Hamba Tuhan, which I regard as a reasonable response. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Posted
8 minutes ago, lostindc said:

So you’re okay with rolling the dice on today’s LDS youth and keeping the status of worthiness interviews the same?

I'm ok with them being the same. Odds are that much good will be accomplished. I doubt removing worthiness interviews will stop a preditor if he really wants to abuse.

It will, however, stop people from getting the help they need. It is highly probable that it will make the problem you say you are concerned with even worse.

Talk about rolling the dice.

 

Posted
26 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

What are these “alternate ways of accountability”? Please detail or at least outline them. 

As for the question you asked, I refer you to the post below from Hamba Tuhan, which I regard as a reasonable response. 

Scott, what Hamba outlined is the best case scenario for worthiness interviews, I am not supportive of this method and I can detail later.  

You asked for an alternate way of accountability, a person's status in worthiness is between God and that person.  The Church can outline what's required, put the requirements in a pamphlet, and if a person has broken these rules, then the person can tell the leader they're not worthy of a recommend or whatever and then leave it at that...I know that we've grown up with leaders micromanaging for the Lord, but it's probably not necessary.    

 

I am asking you the same question I am asking Duncan, "So you’re okay with rolling the dice on today’s LDS youth and keeping the status of worthiness interviews the same?"

Posted
17 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I have. I've asked dozens of young people if they live the law of chastity. If they didn't recognise that language, I've reminded them that the Lord expects us to avoid sexual acts outside of marriage and therefore also things that lead in that direction. At that point, nearly everyone has always just gone, 'Oh yeah, no, I follow that'.

The one time I got a different response, it was a simple 'No'. I then asked, 'Is there anything you feel you need help with in relation to that from someone like me?' And the young person said yes and suggested some help he needed. I suggested he should follow up with our bishop to get that help, which he did.

None of this ever made me feel uncomfortable, and I have zero evidence that it ever made anyone else feel uncomfortable.

The reality is that young people who belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints already know that the Church has a number of important standards, including those that we would classify as 'chastity'. Being asked if one follows those standards comes as a surprise to no one.

Are you reading the accounts posted of those that went through really horrifying worthiness interviews?  Here is a site that is sharing stories.

http://protectldschildren.org/read-the-stories-2/

Posted
46 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

So you believe the Church of Jesus Christ should not insist on worthiness standards or moral cleanliness at all then. How does that work exactly? Should adulterers, pedophiles, sexual predators, criminals, etc., be entitled to have any privilege in the Church without anyone giving a second thought to their behavior?

Reductio ad Absurdum

Posted (edited)
53 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

So you believe the Church of Jesus Christ should not insist on worthiness standards or moral cleanliness at all then. How does that work exactly? Should adulterers, pedophiles, sexual predators, criminals, etc., be entitled to have any privilege in the Church without anyone giving a second thought to their behavior?

Let's take this apart. 

Paedophiles and sexual predators who abuse and rape minors and the vulnerable are criminal. They should be referred immediately to the proper authorities.

For children, there should be a non-partisan hotline of trained workers who will put their needs and safety first. Same for women.  No lawyers worried about liability.  

Adultery was a capital and criminal offence in Jesus's time, because it was seen as the theft of someone elses property. Today it is not a crime and is a matter between consenting individuals who are more than likely being dishonest with their own spouses. 

I've known here in the UK  of Bishop's and stake President's who have been in adulterous relationships. (One went on for 10 years I believe.)  

They continued to function in their  callings whilst acting as *judges in Israel*.

In arguing against adultery being a capital offence Jesus told the accusers, let him who is without sin cast the first stone. Are you without sin Scott? Have you ever committed adultery in your heart? See how that goes?

None of us are worthy when it comes to thoughts, masturbation,  fornication, adultery in deed. None of us. The temple was historically for the unworthy, not the worthy. Thus sin offerings.

Blue Dreams  you said that leaders are Judges in Israel. The term has been adopted in the church, but it in no way represents how Judges in Israel functioned.  It's taking a title and distorting it. Judges, like Deborah,  judged on legal matters. 

 

Edited by Abulafia
Spelling
Posted
38 minutes ago, Danzo said:

I'm ok with them being the same. Odds are that much good will be accomplished. I doubt removing worthiness interviews will stop a preditor if he really wants to abuse.

It will, however, stop people from getting the help they need. It is highly probable that it will make the problem you say you are concerned with even worse.

Talk about rolling the dice.

 

How would removing a worthiness interview make the problem worse?  

Removing situations where an adult male is asking youth sexual questions is a great way to take precautions to stop a predator, I am not sure how a person can disagree.

Arguing that you can't always stop a predator doesn't mean the Church should throw their hands up and not take any precautions.   

 

 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Abulafia said:

Let's take this apart. 

Paedophiles and sexual predators who abuse and rape minors and the vulnerable are criminal. They should be referred immediately to the proper authorities.

For children, there should be a non-partisan hotline of trained workers who will put their needs and safety first. Same for women.  No lawyers worried about liability.  

 

I hate to break it to you, but the government "system' doesn't really have a good track record of helping abused children. In my part of the world, much worse than anything the church is being accused of.

 

Posted
Just now, Danzo said:

I hate to break it to you, but the government "system' doesn't really have a good track record of helping abused children. In my part of the world, much worse than anything the church is being accused of.

 

How does that excuse the Lord's Church from taking precautions?

Posted
2 minutes ago, lostindc said:

How would removing a worthiness interview make the problem worse?  

I am aware of several cases of abuse being uncovered through worthiness interviews.  If you take away these interviews, these poor children might still be suffering from abuse.

Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, lostindc said:

Are you reading the accounts posted of those that went through really horrifying worthiness interviews?  Here is a site that is sharing stories.

Yes, I even read the account by the person whose grandfather was a member of a sadistic child trafficking network who made sure that her family always lived in wards where Church leaders were also part of this same underground sex ring. She grew up, apparently, in a ward where both the bishop and the stake president were a part of this network. They got her involved in killing at least one other child and also in committing acts of cannibalism. Later, as a teenager, she moved to a ward where the bishop, also part of the network, prostituted her out of his office three days a week, four to six hours per day. This bishop apparently used worthiness interviews to test this child's memory of all these depraved acts.

Edited by Hamba Tuhan
Posted
2 minutes ago, Danzo said:

I am aware of several cases of abuse being uncovered through worthiness interviews.  If you take away these interviews, these poor children might still be suffering from abuse.

Yet the predator is hunting from within and we aren't doing anything to stop the hunt. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, lostindc said:

How does that excuse the Lord's Church from taking precautions?

Who says the church isn't taking precautions.  The benefits of worthiness interviews far outweighs the risks.

The risks involved in stopping worthiness interviews are far greater than risks associated with them.

Posted
1 minute ago, Danzo said:

Who says the church isn't taking precautions.  The benefits of worthiness interviews far outweighs the risks.

The risks involved in stopping worthiness interviews are far greater than risks associated with them.

Leaders and previous leaders within the Church are saying the Church isn't taking precautions.  

Posted
11 minutes ago, lostindc said:

  

Removing situations where an adult male is asking youth sexual questions is a great way to take precautions to stop a predator, I am not sure how a person can disagree.

 

I disagree. It is a very poor way stop predators  there are much better ways.

Posted
1 minute ago, lostindc said:

Leaders and previous leaders within the Church are saying the Church isn't taking precautions.  

I am saying they are, and I have witnessed them.

Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, lostindc said:

Yet the predator is hunting from within and we aren't doing anything to stop the hunt. 

Are you aware of a predator hunting from within? Yet you are not doing anything about it?

You should report this person to the police.

That is what we do.

 

Edited by Danzo
Posted
Just now, Danzo said:

I am saying they are, and I have witnessed them.

I don't think anyone is going to accept your analysis over LDS leaders telling you that the Church isn't taking the precautions.  

Zero chance that worthiness interviews aren't dramatically changed or eliminated over the next year or so and the Church can spin the change as a new direction of a member's worthiness is now between God and the member and the member can let the leaders know if they shouldn't have a recommend, no details ever provided. 

Posted
Just now, lostindc said:

I don't think anyone is going to accept your analysis over LDS leaders telling you that the Church isn't taking the precautions.  

Zero chance that worthiness interviews aren't dramatically changed or eliminated over the next year or so and the Church can spin the change as a new direction of a member's worthiness is now between God and the member and the member can let the leaders know if they shouldn't have a recommend, no details ever provided. 

Well, I guess you are entitled to your opinion.

I am going to bed

Posted
1 minute ago, Danzo said:

Are you aware of a predator hunting from within? Yet you are not doing anything about it?

You should report this person to the police.

That is what we do.

 

Nice job Danzo making pedophilia a message board argument game, that's a pretty pathetic attempt.  Of course I do not know of an offender, if I did, I would put them on blast on every board, social media site, etc.  I am pretty chill right now, but I can easily turn the tables around on many of the posts you just made.  

 

Danzo, are you involved in asking worthiness questions?  What state are you from Danzo?

Posted
5 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

I have never heard anyone with an ounce of understanding that the Church or its leaders perceive that they have "silenced" an individual by excommunicating them. Excommunication does many things, but it never silences anyone. It removes the individual from the rolls of the Church; they no longer may claim membership in the Church of Jesus Christ.  It is a "get out of Church free" card and the individual is left to do whatever they want, whenever they want, and however they want.  

I get the feeling that when you see a post from me, your first instinct is to attack without even a small attempt to understand what I have actually posted.  This is a perfect example.  Where in my post did say that the church was trying to silence anyone?  In fact, the whole point of my post is that I don't think ANYONE thinks we have heard the last of Sam Young.  It is HIM that is going to use his excommunication status to further his cause as the martyr.  He is going to be the one to use his excommunication as a badge of honor for standing up against the church to protect the youth.  Perhaps the church just gave him more power.  Hence the comment that he may very well use his new martyrdom to expose every abuse possible.  He can then say, I warned the church and their response was to kick me out.

Your response to that is so far off the intent of my post, it makes me seriously wonder if you just skimmed my post and then jotted down the first thing that entered your head.  

Here is my post again.  Love to hear your ideas on what I actually wrote.

 

Quote

 

Does anyone think we have heard the last of Sam Young?  And who do you think will be there beating the drum when the next bishop/stake president is accused of sexual misconduct with a minor?  Yeah, the guy that was excommunicated from the church for speaking out against abuse.  

I don't agree with Sam Young's tactics, nor some of his statements.  But unlike some of the excommunications du jour, that seems to happen pretty regularly with the church, his cause may be something to consider more closely.  I am sure he will point out during the next abuse case that the church tried to silence him by excommunicating him, and now another child has been harmed. Perhaps the church just ended the flying under the radar on these issues.

Just a pragmatic view of how this will all play out.  Not meant to be a comment on the right or wrong of excommunicating Sam Young.


 

 

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

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