Church series on P*** use, 70 videos

[MustardSeed]

6 minutes ago, alter idem said:

I'm reminded of the story of Solomon and the baby that both women claimed.  I know it's a stretch, but I'll explain.  Just like the woman who was fine with cutting the baby in half, People like Sam Young and Changed demand Justice--changes to the church--even if it means destroying it in the process.  They see it as a false religion and wicked so they don't care if it's destroyed--they would think they are doing the world a favor by helping it along in it's demise.  But, Members; true believers with testimonies,  can't and will not support suggestions that would impede how the Lord has set it up or allow the world's influence to change it so that it no longer is the Lord's church.  We have a church which is not run by professionals, but instead, utilizes members to serve in callings, where they must learn to be guided by the spirit and the members are charged to look after one another.  I don't see how we can get rid of that model--we can and are trying to protect members from abuse and problems within the inspired system set up.

I certainly see that. 

Also, there are those of us who are neither woman.  I see myself as a rather open observer and I’m neither looking to hurt or destroy nor am I looking to save my baby.  I’m more like, hey this baby has a poopy diaper right now.  Am I the only one smelling this thing? And moms are like, Don’t you dare talk about my baby like that! And dissenters are like, you’re baby sucks. Get rid of that smelly baby. 

Meanwhile, God trusted us with His baby. We need to be more careful with it. Imo. 

 

[webbles]

6 hours ago, changed said:

 

Limited problems?  You did not read through the link did you...

https://archive.org/details/INSTANCESOFCHILDSEXUALABUSEALLEGEDLYPERPETRATEDBYMEMBERSOFTHECHURCHOFJESUSCHRIST

as you are reading, consider the small % of cases that actually are reported and prosecuted, so multiply what is in that book by 9 or 10.

I went backwards through that document and looked at 20 of the cases in the last decade.  I tried to annotate how many of the cases were caused by church leaders or where a background would have helped.

For church leaders, three of 20 cases were caused by a church leader: YM Leader, Sunday School Teacher, and "Youth Leader" (I think it would probably be Primary teacher based on the age of the victim).

For background checks, the number was harder to determine.  There were 5 instances where a background check could have found something.  But of those five, only 2 might have prevented the attacker.  The other 3 are only related to the church because the attacker or victim is a member.

Of the 20 cases, only 7 were actually church related.  The others were school, neighborhood, family, etc.  The only reason they are in that list is because either the perpetrator or the victim where member of the church.

After reading those cases, I don't see an epidemic in the church.  I've actually come away with a better view of how the church is handling abuse.

Edited July 1, 2019 by webbles

[changed]

18 hours ago, webbles said:

I went backwards through that document and looked at 20 of the cases in the last decade.  I tried to annotate how many of the cases were caused by church leaders or where a background would have helped.

For church leaders, three of 20 cases were caused by a church leader: YM Leader, Sunday School Teacher, and "Youth Leader" (I think it would probably be Primary teacher based on the age of the victim).

For background checks, the number was harder to determine.  There were 5 instances where a background check could have found something.  But of those five, only 2 might have prevented the attacker.  The other 3 are only related to the church because the attacker or victim is a member.

Of the 20 cases, only 7 were actually church related.  The others were school, neighborhood, family, etc.  The only reason they are in that list is because either the perpetrator or the victim where member of the church.

After reading those cases, I don't see an epidemic in the church.  I've actually come away with a better view of how the church is handling abuse.

 

Background checks do more than filter who is called into leadership positions - it sets up a cultural statement and stance against pedophiles and relays a loud and clear message to all "we care about the safety and well-being of our children, we do not tolerate abuse in any form, we are watching you, there will be consequences to anyone who hurts our children."

 

An organization with no background checks, no history of persecuting those who abuse, no actionable consequences - sends the loud and clear message "do what you want, tell lies in your priesthood interviews (like so many before you), there are no consequences or safe-guards in place within our organization, we love everyone, and forgive everything, so no worries - do what you want."

 

The policies an organization has in place reflect how serious that organization is about protecting and keeping everyone safe.  Saying "we do not tolerate it", vs. actually having a track record of going after abusers, putting people in jail, taking care of victims - actions speak much louder than words.  

 

 

Edited July 2, 2019 by changed

[Tacenda]

19 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

I certainly see that. 

Also, there are those of us who are neither woman.  I see myself as a rather open observer and I’m neither looking to hurt or destroy nor am I looking to save my baby.  I’m more like, hey this baby has a poopy diaper right now.  Am I the only one smelling this thing? And moms are like, Don’t you dare talk about my baby like that! And dissenters are like, you’re baby sucks. Get rid of that smelly baby. 

Meanwhile, God trusted us with His baby. We need to be more careful with it. Imo. 

 

Wow, this in a nutshell! I'm similar to you, when I read a few disillusioned or disbelievers put it as all bad things from the church, I tend to favor the church in some respects because it's not all or nothing. I see the wonderful and then I see a poopy diaper that needs to be changed!

Love your analogy MustardSeed! I believe the church is definitely aware of the poopiness as well and they appear to be trying to clean it up. 

[The Nehor]

59 minutes ago, changed said:

 

Background checks do more than filter who is called into leadership positions - it sets up a cultural statement and stance against pedophiles and relays a loud and clear message to all "we care about the safety and well-being of our children, we do not tolerate abuse in any form, we are watching you, there will be consequences to anyone who hurts our children."

 

An organization with no background checks, no history of persecuting those who abuse, no actionable consequences - sends the loud and clear message "do what you want, tell lies in your priesthood interviews (like so many before you), there are no consequences or safe-guards in place within our organization, we love everyone, and forgive everything, so no worries - do what you want."

 

The policies an organization has in place reflect how serious that organization is about protecting and keeping everyone safe.  Saying "we do not tolerate it", vs. actually having a track record of going after abusers, putting people in jail, taking care of victims - actions speak much louder than words.  

So you admit the actions are not that helpful but we should do them anyways for propaganda purposes?

Also I reject your caricature of the Church as a bunch of people who enable and protect abusers. Your horrible personal experience is an anecdote and not the Church writ large. The archive you presented of Church abuse is about members who have been abused or were abusers and many of them had nothing to do with any church activity.

Let go of your hatred and need to see everything in the church in hues of black malignancy.

 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, changed said:

no history of persecuting those who abuse

Do you mean prosecuting?

1 hour ago, changed said:

puttingpeople in jail, 

Explain how the Church can put people in jail please.

 

Edited July 2, 2019 by Calm

[The Nehor]

11 minutes ago, Calm said:

Do you mean prosecuting?

Explain how the Church can put people in jail please.

Inquisition Time!

[webbles]

1 hour ago, changed said:

 

Background checks do more than filter who is called into leadership positions - it sets up a cultural statement and stance against pedophiles and relays a loud and clear message to all "we care about the safety and well-being of our children, we do not tolerate abuse in any form, we are watching you, there will be consequences to anyone who hurts our children."

 

An organization with no background checks, no history of persecuting those who abuse, no actionable consequences - sends the loud and clear message "do what you want, tell lies in your priesthood interviews (like so many before you), there are no consequences or safe-guards in place within our organization, we love everyone, and forgive everything, so no worries - do what you want."

 

The policies an organization has in place reflect how serious that organization is about protecting and keeping everyone safe.  Saying "we do not tolerate it", vs. actually having a track record of going after abusers, putting people in jail, taking care of victims - actions speak much louder than words.  

 

 

Reading through those cases, it showed that the church (where it was actually involved and not just a school teacher who happened to be a member abusing a student) actually was involved in stopping the abuse.  And even in the cases where the church wasn't involved, when a church leader first heard about it, they notified the authorities.

The policies of the church are working.  Your document proved that to me.  Several of the cases had a notice that a lawyer from the church's law firm notified authorities.  The only reason that lawyer would contact the authorities is if the hotline was being used.  It is being used and it is actually working to stop abuse.

[changed]

2 hours ago, webbles said:

Reading through those cases, it showed that the church (where it was actually involved and not just a school teacher who happened to be a member abusing a student) actually was involved in stopping the abuse.  And even in the cases where the church wasn't involved, when a church leader first heard about it, they notified the authorities.

The policies of the church are working.  Your document proved that to me.  Several of the cases had a notice that a lawyer from the church's law firm notified authorities.  The only reason that lawyer would contact the authorities is if the hotline was being used.  It is being used and it is actually working to stop abuse.

That booklet did not include the case which recently aired on ABC's tonight show, nor did it include what happened in my case, or in so many other cases as reported by Sam Young...  sorry, but personal experience trumps the written views of others.... I will change my view when experiences change.

[MiserereNobis]

10 minutes ago, changed said:

sorry, but personal experience trumps the written views of others

Such delicious irony...

10 minutes ago, changed said:

I will change my view when experiences change.

CFR

😉

[The Nehor]

9 minutes ago, changed said:

That booklet did not include the case which recently aired on ABC's tonight show, nor did it include what happened in my case, or in so many other cases as reported by Sam Young...  sorry, but personal experience trumps the written views of others.... I will change my view when experiences change.

No, personal experience is not a trump card to demand anything you want done. I mean you can demand but the demand will not compel anyone to make it happen.

[The Nehor]

Just now, MiserereNobis said:

Such delicious irony...

Thank you, I was trying to put that feeling into words but failed. Well done.

[webbles]

21 minutes ago, changed said:

That booklet did not include the case which recently aired on ABC's tonight show, nor did it include what happened in my case, or in so many other cases as reported by Sam Young...  sorry, but personal experience trumps the written views of others.... I will change my view when experiences change.

This makes me wonder if you even read your own document.  Yes, the document doesn't include everything.  I don't doubt that abuse happens in the church.  Abuse happens all over the world and is in every aspect of our society, from schools, to government, to churches, to community, to jobs.  Abuse happens and it is absolutely horrible.

But as you yourself said: "actually having a track record of going after abusers, putting people in jail, taking care of victims - actions speak much louder than words".  Based off that document, the church does have an "actual track record of going after abusers, putting people in jail, taking care of victims".

Obviously, it didn't do that in your cases.  And that is a sad thing.  But that is years ago (unless I'm misjudging when it happened).  The church (and society) was a lot different.  The hotline was only added in the 90s.  The "believe women" happened just last year.  To say that the church is failing victims because of what it did or did not do in the past is ignoring all of what it is doing now.

[Storm Rider]

23 hours ago, webbles said:

I went backwards through that document and looked at 20 of the cases in the last decade.  I tried to annotate how many of the cases were caused by church leaders or where a background would have helped.

For church leaders, three of 20 cases were caused by a church leader: YM Leader, Sunday School Teacher, and "Youth Leader" (I think it would probably be Primary teacher based on the age of the victim).

For background checks, the number was harder to determine.  There were 5 instances where a background check could have found something.  But of those five, only 2 might have prevented the attacker.  The other 3 are only related to the church because the attacker or victim is a member.

Of the 20 cases, only 7 were actually church related.  The others were school, neighborhood, family, etc.  The only reason they are in that list is because either the perpetrator or the victim where member of the church.

After reading those cases, I don't see an epidemic in the church.  I've actually come away with a better view of how the church is handling abuse.

The sky is falling, the sky is falling. Well, actually the sky really isn't falling, but it hails. Well, it really doesn't hail, it rains. Okay, okay, it did not really rain today, but when I woke up it was misty out. Oh heck, okay, the sun is shining, but I was sure it was going to be cloudy. 

[changed]

The news stories just keep rolling in...
https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900077869/utahn-accused-in-sextortion-of-over-50-teens-charges-say.html?fbclid=IwAR2yPu-qE8aoYFafqrF31soO-phU5Q6U8Q74zbTTT5vDZWY0ejq3xWXtb6Q

 

so tell me, if "spiritual discernment" is a real thing, how do these people get sent on missions? get callings in the church?  aren't callings and missions supposed to be assignments from God?  so... is everyone going to admit nothing in the church comes from God? or... is everyone going to lay the blame on God's feet? ...  this seems to be the reason there are no background checks etc. - everything thinks everything is from God, so no need for any second-checking.

I asked one leader - are you familiar with everyone on the sex-offender list in this area? and they replied "I stopped looking at that list, because I don't want to know.  I don't want to judge or see anyone badly..."

My stake president disclosed to me that he was "prompted" to call someone to be bishop, only to find out this person was a porn addict (they turned down the callings, and told them this is why they turned it down) - the S.P. asked me "why do you think I was prompted to call him as a bishop?"  really??? I did not say it... I did not suggest that perhaps... just perhaps... what he thought was a "prompting" was not a prompting at all...

 

Edited July 3, 2019 by changed

[changed]

7 hours ago, webbles said:

This makes me wonder if you even read your own document.  Yes, the document doesn't include everything.  I don't doubt that abuse happens in the church.  Abuse happens all over the world and is in every aspect of our society, from schools, to government, to churches, to community, to jobs.  Abuse happens and it is absolutely horrible.

But as you yourself said: "actually having a track record of going after abusers, putting people in jail, taking care of victims - actions speak much louder than words".  Based off that document, the church does have an "actual track record of going after abusers, putting people in jail, taking care of victims".

Obviously, it didn't do that in your cases.  And that is a sad thing.  But that is years ago (unless I'm misjudging when it happened).  The church (and society) was a lot different.  The hotline was only added in the 90s.  The "believe women" happened just last year.  To say that the church is failing victims because of what it did or did not do in the past is ignoring all of what it is doing now.

arrested two years ago, sentenced a little less than one year ago - no help from the church. ...

and of course, a document produced from the church is going to be honest in it's dealings...   ... let's see, I guess we can also trust the pope to fully take care of the mess in their church as well, without any regard to outside accounts

Edited July 3, 2019 by changed

[The Nehor]

9 minutes ago, changed said:

The news stories just keep rolling in...
https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900077869/utahn-accused-in-sextortion-of-over-50-teens-charges-say.html?fbclid=IwAR2yPu-qE8aoYFafqrF31soO-phU5Q6U8Q74zbTTT5vDZWY0ejq3xWXtb6Q

 

so tell me, if "spiritual discernment" is a real thing, how do these people get sent on missions? get callings in the church?  aren't callings and missions supposed to be assignments from God?  so... is everyone going to admit nothing in the church comes from God? or... is everyone going to lay the blame on God's feet? ...  this seems to be the reason there are no background checks etc. - everything thinks everything is from God, so no need for any second-checking.

I asked one leader - are you familiar with everyone on the sex-offender list in this area? and they replied "I stopped looking at that list, because I don't want to know.  I don't want to judge or see anyone badly..."

My stake president disclosed to me that he was "prompted" to call someone to be bishop, only to find out this person was a porn addict (they turned down the callings, and told them this is why they turned it down) - the S.P. asked me "why do you think I was prompted to call him as a bishop?"  really??? I did not say it... I did not suggest that perhaps... just perhaps... what he thought was a "prompting" was not a prompting at all...

 

Wow, building a cornfield? In fact let us count the strawmen in your post:

1. The gift of discernment always catches sins before missions.

2. The gift of discernment always catches sins before callings.

3. All callings extended in the church are always inspired by God and are proof of the person's worthiness.

4. Everyone believes the previous three so we are left with the dichotomy of either believing God is at fault or there is not such thing as inspiration.

5. We oppose background checks because we believe spiritual gifts will sniff out predators despite no one giving that reason and Joseph Smith himself being deceived by one while the Prophet.

And since you are so free and liberal with making things up that we supposedly believe in I don't trust your anecdotes are truthful either.

[webbles]

14 minutes ago, changed said:

arrested two years ago, sentenced a little less than one year ago - no help from the church. ...

and of course, a document produced from the church is going to be honest in it's dealings...   ... let's see, I guess we can also trust the pope to fully take care of the mess in their church as well, without any regard to outside accounts

What document are you talking about?  I have been using the document you linked to.  That document is definitely not from the church.

[webbles]

22 minutes ago, changed said:

The news stories just keep rolling in...
https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900077869/utahn-accused-in-sextortion-of-over-50-teens-charges-say.html?fbclid=IwAR2yPu-qE8aoYFafqrF31soO-phU5Q6U8Q74zbTTT5vDZWY0ejq3xWXtb6Q

 

so tell me, if "spiritual discernment" is a real thing, how do these people get sent on missions? get callings in the church?  aren't callings and missions supposed to be assignments from God?  so... is everyone going to admit nothing in the church comes from God? or... is everyone going to lay the blame on God's feet? ...  this seems to be the reason there are no background checks etc. - everything thinks everything is from God, so no need for any second-checking.

I asked one leader - are you familiar with everyone on the sex-offender list in this area? and they replied "I stopped looking at that list, because I don't want to know.  I don't want to judge or see anyone badly..."

My stake president disclosed to me that he was "prompted" to call someone to be bishop, only to find out this person was a porn addict (they turned down the callings, and told them this is why they turned it down) - the S.P. asked me "why do you think I was prompted to call him as a bishop?"  really??? I did not say it... I did not suggest that perhaps... just perhaps... what he thought was a "prompting" was not a prompting at all...

 

Not sure how the linked story shows how the church failed.  It actually shows that once the church found out, they immediately sent him home.  That story is a success story for victims.

[The Nehor]

7 minutes ago, webbles said:

What document are you talking about?  I have been using the document you linked to.  That document is definitely not from the church.

Reality itself and Changed do not appear to be on speaking terms.

[changed]

10 hours ago, webbles said:

Not sure how the linked story shows how the church failed.  It actually shows that once the church found out, they immediately sent him home.  That story is a success story for victims.

 

The church failed in sending him on a mission in the first place.

[bluebell]

8 minutes ago, changed said:

 

The church failed in sending him on a mission in the first place.

Did the church know he had abused people before it sent him?

[alter idem]

9 hours ago, changed said:

The news stories just keep rolling in...
https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900077869/utahn-accused-in-sextortion-of-over-50-teens-charges-say.html?fbclid=IwAR2yPu-qE8aoYFafqrF31soO-phU5Q6U8Q74zbTTT5vDZWY0ejq3xWXtb6Q

 

so tell me, if "spiritual discernment" is a real thing, how do these people get sent on missions? get callings in the church?  aren't callings and missions supposed to be assignments from God?  so... is everyone going to admit nothing in the church comes from God? or... is everyone going to lay the blame on God's feet? ...  this seems to be the reason there are no background checks etc. - everything thinks everything is from God, so no need for any second-checking.

I asked one leader - are you familiar with everyone on the sex-offender list in this area? and they replied "I stopped looking at that list, because I don't want to know.  I don't want to judge or see anyone badly..."

My stake president disclosed to me that he was "prompted" to call someone to be bishop, only to find out this person was a porn addict (they turned down the callings, and told them this is why they turned it down) - the S.P. asked me "why do you think I was prompted to call him as a bishop?"  really??? I did not say it... I did not suggest that perhaps... just perhaps... what he thought was a "prompting" was not a prompting at all...

 

Don't you think that Stake President was prompted to call that man as Bishop?  Heavenly Father loved that man and wanted him to repent so that he might choose to change and not continue to limit his own potential and spiritual growth.  God knew what he was hiding and this experience would allow the spirit to prompt him to confess, which is often the first step in acknowledging and repenting sins.  Personally, I am impressed that it was, in this case, this Stake Pres. received  true prompting and guidance from the spirit.  I'd like to think that this man will overcome his pornography addiction and be able to serve as Bishop one day--it's likely his own experience would help him to better understand the struggles and trials of his ward members.

IMO, spiritual discernment is a real thing but there is always that pesky thing called agency which many do not understand is a vital part of everything we experience here.

[MustardSeed]

1 minute ago, alter idem said:

IMO, spiritual discernment is a real thing but there is always that pesky thing called agency which many do not understand is a vital part of everything we experience here.

Also if you believe that inspiration = magic then it’s easy to get disillusioned. 

It is my opinion* that many do think that inspiration = magic and so the illusion perpetuates itself. 

[The Nehor]

21 minutes ago, changed said:

 

The church failed in sending him on a mission in the first place.

Did it?

How many people did he abuse while he was out? My guess would be none. How many more would he have abused if his bishop or stake president or an apostle had rejected his application and in anger he sought relief through his desire for control and power to humiliate? Not saying that is the reason things happened the way they did but you jump to conclusions about everything.