Church discipline proceedings on a member who no longer lives in the stake boundaries?

[juliann]

10 minutes ago, bluebell said:

That does change the narrative a bit.

Not much when you include her behavior. If it was bad enough for her to blame it on being "Latina" to justify it, it must have been unacceptable. According to her, she was the one yelling she wouldn't be a part of anything. I have no doubt it was more than she admitted to. An acknowledgment of her refusal to particpate by giving her an option to leave still puts her in the position of it being the person that walked out and ended it.   

[jkwilliams]

I don’t know much about her. The church can discipline whomever it wants. I just don’t see the point.  

Edited April 19, 2021 by jkwilliams

[ttribe]

21 minutes ago, bluebell said:

That does change the narrative a bit.

Yeah.  I'm trying to have some compassion for how incredibly emotional this is, but at the same time doing a lot of her venting and processing in a public forum isn't helping her, IMO.

[helix]

53 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I pulled up the feed on the Mormon Stories Podcast, and at minute 1:46:30, she says that she was invited to leave after declining to email them her private notes to print.

I didn't pick up "email" in that.  Where is email mentioned?  I'll admit, it's hard to wade through that entire conversation.

(Dehlin's timestamps are about 5 minutes ahead of the Facebook timestamp feeds.)

44 minutes ago, juliann said:

What other common words does she consider to be vulgar? How would anyone know not to say them in front of her?

That's what was strange to me.  The word "lazy" is vulgar and requires a PG-13 rating?  So vulgar that children shouldn't hear it?  But calling someone a 'patriarchal prick' is "Too bad so sad"? 

And then she insists the word 'pornography' is unhealthy to even utter on a Sunday because it will literally cause her teenage son to picture lewd acts in his mind, leading him to seek out more pornography that same day?  And she's saying she is the one from a platform of healthy sexual science!? 

Edited April 19, 2021 by helix

[SeekingUnderstanding]

4 minutes ago, helix said:

I didn't pick up "email" in that.  Where is email mentioned?  I'll admit, it's hard to wade through that entire conversation.

1:45:10 on Facebook. And yes, it was clear that it was emotional stream of consciousness. And I will be the first to say I have no idea as to why she wants to be a member after listening to a couple minutes of it. 

[Stargazer]

On 4/16/2021 at 12:14 AM, smac97 said:

Patently untrue.  They are pictures of decorum and kindness.  Your characterization is absurd and patently inaccurate.

Maybe they do things differently in Oz.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

44 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I don’t know much about her. The church can discipline whomever it wants. I just don’t see the point.  

If the purpose is to protect the church I think there were a lot of unforced errors on the church’s part here. Doing something that can be spun as “forcing a single mom to cancel her work for an entire week (due to the extreme short notice), then pay her own way to fly to a place she hasn’t lived for 18 months, only to turn her away at the door because you hadn’t communicated that no phones were allowed” isn’t a great look. And I am sure there is another side to this narrative, but in every case the these errors serve no purpose. They could have given her more notice, held the council in Utah (or reimbursed reasonable expenses), and communicated more clearly. It’s not like this was their first rodeo. 

Edited April 19, 2021 by SeekingUnderstanding

[helix]

7 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

1:45:10 on Facebook. And yes, it was clear that it was emotional stream of consciousness. And

I'm not seeing it.  I'm referring to the one "Update to Natasha Helfer’s Membership Council.  Natasha Helfer shares her personal thoughts including a step-by-step retelling of the night’s events. "  The video is 2:47:41 long.  She doesn't talk about email at that timestamp.  I'm just wanting to quote her accurately, which is why I'm being persistent.  Plus, it adds more to the story.  

Quote

I will be the first to say I have no idea as to why she wants to be a member after listening to a couple minutes of it. 

Media attention and black eyes.  Her membership gives her that vector.  Just look at how some local and national outlets are portraying her as a brave white knight who is about to be excommunicated because she says she believes in science and the church wants to kick her out until she disavows science. 

She's been in the media before with Sam Young, John Dehlin, and writing an op-ed in the SLTribune.  She calls herself the "Mormon Therapist" and then uses her blog to rail on the church, calling them to repentance.  She is no stranger to craving media attention. 

[JustAnAustralian]

17 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

Maybe they do things differently in Oz

We have the same handbook you guys do. If people ignore it that's on them.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

22 minutes ago, helix said:

36 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

 

I'm not seeing it.  I'm referring to the one "Update to Natasha Helfer’s Membership Council.  Natasha Helfer shares her personal thoughts including a step-by-step retelling of the night’s events. "  The video is 2:47:41 long.  She doesn't talk about email at that timestamp.  I'm just wanting to quote her accurately, which is why I'm being persistent.  Plus, it adds more to the story.  

I’m on Facebook Mormon story podcast page. It’s not the exact same video since the length isn’t what you say, but since I recognize most of your quotes it’s of the same moment (her stream of consciousness post event).  I’ll dm you a link since I believe it’s against board rules to put it here. 

Edited April 19, 2021 by SeekingUnderstanding

[bluebell]

48 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Yeah.  I'm trying to have some compassion for how incredibly emotional this is, but at the same time doing a lot of her venting and processing in a public forum isn't helping her, IMO.

I would hope that a personal friend, like Dehlin or someone else she is including in this situation, would step in and try to talk her down some, because at this point she's not helping her case.  But maybe people have tried to intervene and she's not having it yet.

Anger is a strong emotion that usually makes us less rational.  It can be a hard emotion to fight against, especially if we feel attacked. 

I've said so many dumb, embarrassing, just plain wrong, things when I was angry.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

11 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I would hope that a personal friend, like Dehlin or someone else she is including in this situation, would step in and try to talk her down some, because at this point she's not helping her case.  But maybe people have tried to intervene and she's not having it yet.

Anger is a strong emotion that usually makes us less rational.  It can be a hard emotion to fight against, especially if we feel attacked. 

I've said so many dumb, embarrassing, just plain wrong, things when I was angry.

It felt like watching one party in a really bitter divorce. 

[juliann]

17 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

If the purpose is to protect the church I think there were a lot of unforced errors on the church’s part here. Doing something that can be spun as “forcing a single mom to cancel her work for an entire week (due to the extreme short notice), then pay her own way to fly to a place she hasn’t lived for 18 months, only to turn her away at the door because you hadn’t communicated that no phones were allowed” isn’t a great look. And I am sure there is another side to this narrative, but in every case the these errors serve no purpose. They could have given her more notice, held the council in Utah (or reimbursed reasonable expenses), and communicated more clearly. It’s not like this was their first rodeo. 

Although I think it would be naive to think the church wasn't involved at higher levels, we do have to remember that this is the first time for every SP who gets shoved into these circuses. Thus, we see the same why did they do that stuff every dang time. I wondered about the former SP doing this but then I remembered Covid. If she was going to church before she wouldn't have for the past year so it would also make no sense to hold it here, with strangers. That said, it does seem like they should pay airfare at least. 

And do you seriously believe, given past performances of recordings, that they wouldn't ban phones? I think it is absurd to think she wasn't told. I also think it is absurd to go into a procedure you compare to a court relying on a phone for "notes." There couldn't be a clunkier more inefficient way to have things at hand when you are in a stressful situation. So given her track record for believability so far, I suspect the notes thing was a ploy to hang onto the phone she knew she couldn't have. 

And again, the efficacy of church courts is a matter apart from all of the drum banging that is going on. 

[helix]

Thanks SeekingUnderstanding.  This is an important addition, I completely missed the word 'email'  The council did try to work out some kind of emailed/print off solution.  On the same timeframe I've been using:

1:40:01 - "So then their great idea to this recording problem that they did not put into any...in that document there was information that I did not want them to have so I said 'No, I'm not going to email you my notes or send them to you because then it would include information that is not meant for you.'"

Then soon after:

1:41:22 "The second time as he went in I did raise my voice because I wanted them to hear me. [Mimicking speaking to the entire group and not to the spokesman while using a mocking tone] 'Ya I'm not going to agree to anything I haven't been told about!' And my energy was very Latina in there by that point...  I was like 'Absolutely not!  I have let you do this to me my entire Mormon career.  I have let you decide what the rules are and how I need to show up and the questions you are going to ask me, most of them inappropriate, none of your business.  No!  This is my property.  These are my notes.  And you're giving me 20, 40 minutes at most to defend...the whole thing is so ridiculous that I was just like no.'  So then he said 'Well we're inviting you to leave then' I was like 'Peace out!  Peace out!"... [In a childish mocking tone] 'No really please...please let me come in...like...please take me even though I don't want to give you my phone.'  No.

 

 

[bluebell]

11 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

It felt like watching one party in a really bitter divorce. 

That's a good way to describe it.  

[bluebell]

6 minutes ago, helix said:

Thanks SeekingUnderstanding.  This is an important addition, I completely missed the word 'email'  The council did try to work out some kind of emailed/print off solution.  On the same timeframe I've been using:

1:40:01 - "So then their great idea to this recording problem that they did not put into any...in that document there was information that I did not want them to have so I said 'No, I'm not going to email you my notes or send them to you because then it would include information that is not meant for you.'"

Then soon after:

1:41:22 "The second time as he went in I did raise my voice because I wanted them to hear me. [Mimicking speaking to the entire group and not to the spokesman while using a mocking tone] 'Ya I'm not going to agree to anything I haven't been told about!' And my energy was very Latina in there by that point...  I was like 'Absolutely not!  I have let you do this to me my entire Mormon career.  I have let you decide what the rules are and how I need to show up and the questions you are going to ask me, most of them inappropriate, none of your business.  No!  This is my property.  These are my notes.  And you're giving me 20, 40 minutes at most to defend...the whole thing is so ridiculous that I was just like no.'  So then he said 'Well we're inviting you to leave then' I was like 'Peace out!  Peace out!"... [In a childish mocking tone] 'No really please...please let me come in...like...please take me even though I don't want to give you my phone.'  No.

 

 

It seems like she only has contempt for church leaders, including apostles and prophets, and does not believe they hold any authority.   She also seems to disagree with many church doctrines, from sexual stuff to lgtbq stuff, to the sealing of families stuff.

I really don't understand why she wants to stay.

[rongo]

1 hour ago, Bob Crockett said:

I feel sorry for her in above exchange. I've read her professional writings and thought she demanded lots of respect. Now she looks ridiculous. 

I feel sorry for her, too. 

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

She's imploding a bit on her professional page.  I do think the emotion is getting the better of her.  

These celebrity, candlelight vigil - style disciplinary councils all go the same trajectory. The people are given plenty of rope to hang themselves with, and they end up imploding gleefully. 

This really damages her "I represent science and progress, the Church represents knuckle-dragging, uni-browed Neanderthal thinking" stance. Who would want to go to her for sex therapy advice after her meltdown? And, if this is how the "masturbation and explicit pornography are healthy, and just good, clean fun" people are, well, maybe the conservative traditional religious people aren't so ridiculous after all. 

[rongo]

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I really don't understand why she wants to stay.

I don't think she does. This is exit blowup theater. We've seen it before. 

Had they let her bring her phone in (and certainly record it for distribution), she would have dramatically quit before they could fire her.  As so many have done before. One thing these people won't do is give the Church the satisfaction of excommunicating them --- they want to make big theater out of resigning in the dramatic moment before the council gets started. 

[ttribe]

3 minutes ago, rongo said:

I feel sorry for her, too. 

These celebrity, candlelight vigil - style disciplinary councils all go the same trajectory. The people are given plenty of rope to hang themselves with, and they end up imploding gleefully. 

This really damages her "I represent science and progress, the Church represents knuckle-dragging, uni-browed Neanderthal thinking" stance. Who would want to go to her for sex therapy advice after her meltdown? And, if this is how the "masturbation and explicit pornography are healthy, and just good, clean fun" people are, well, maybe the conservative traditional religious people aren't so ridiculous after all. 

That's a pretty bad generalization.  I would hope people wouldn't judge all accountants as bad based on my behavior on my worst day.

[bsjkki]

Why not show the entire document? White out names if necessary. Showing half a page makes me wonder what is on the rest.

 

Edited April 19, 2021 by bsjkki

[bluebell]

5 minutes ago, rongo said:

I feel sorry for her, too. 

These celebrity, candlelight vigil - style disciplinary councils all go the same trajectory. The people are given plenty of rope to hang themselves with, and they end up imploding gleefully. 

This really damages her "I represent science and progress, the Church represents knuckle-dragging, uni-browed Neanderthal thinking" stance. Who would want to go to her for sex therapy advice after her meltdown? And, if this is how the "masturbation and explicit pornography are healthy, and just good, clean fun" people are, well, maybe the conservative traditional religious people aren't so ridiculous after all. 

I admit, when she said about starting her period during all of this:

The FLOW is strong!
Both in blood and in force.
I feel it in my brain... my soul and my vaginal wall.
What a trinity that is!!!

She sounded more to me like Julie Rowe than a professional therapist.

[rongo]

5 minutes ago, ttribe said:

That's a pretty bad generalization.  I would hope people wouldn't judge all accountants as bad based on my behavior on my worst day.

That's a good rule for life in most things (don't judge people at their worst compared to you at your best), but I think psychologists and therapists have a higher bar to clear than most. People are going to go to them with emotional, awful problems. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

54 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

They could have ... reimbursed reasonable expenses ...

Apparently, she wants reimbursement not just for her expenses but for everyone else who merely watched this circus:

Quote

What did this experience cost you to witness?

What’s the financial representation of your pain and what you’ll need to heal...

they have a billions of dollars

They can afford to make this right.

 

[jkwilliams]

8 minutes ago, ttribe said:

That's a pretty bad generalization.  I would hope people wouldn't judge all accountants as bad based on my behavior on my worst day.

It's par for the course for the long knives to come out when something like this happens. 

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Apparently, she wants reimbursement not just for her expenses but for everyone else who merely watched this circus:

 

 

Quote

 

If you were at all involved in supporting me in a way where you now need financial reimbursement for the cost of physical travel.. or the cost of emotional distress as you either witnessed this violence in person or online (for example one of my line items will be a year of therapy costs.. which is generous given the life long trauma I have experienced at the hands of men that harmed me with their abuse of powers from the age of 15) or any other cost (even your donations to support our group)... I’d like to start gathering that data into another live document I’ll probably start today sometime. You can do so here publicly on the thread. Or private message me Your line itemed costs please. I want to be as transparent as possible in the financial invoice I will be delivering to the church if they are truly considering doing the Christlike thing of making things right.

What did this experience cost you to witness?

What’s the financial representation of your pain and what you’ll need to heal...

they have a billions of dollars

They can afford to make this right.

I need your calculations to be reasonable in the sense that they could be defended in a “court of law.”

Many of my private practice therapist friends had to cancel clients for example... they lost wages in this process.

Many people had last minute lodging or Uber expenses...

one young man drove 16 hours in his college level quality car.. cost of gas and wear and tear?

What else am I missing?