Wealthy Mormon Publicly Leaves the LDS Church

[why me]

49 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Two problems with your argument on this issue: 1) his company is publicly traded, is subject to audit and issues detailed financial statements and disclosures both quarterly and annually; and 2), there is no equivalence between the moral obligation on the transparency of finances of an individual and the finances of an ecclesiastical organization with millions of members.

I suppose that Trump would be excluded from this. Much pressure for him to disclose his tax forms and private finances. I am sure that the fellow who resigned notified the media of his heroic actions, thereby giving his company needed woke publicity. Fellow the money.

[why me]

1 minute ago, ttribe said:

 

How is it you manage to politicize, well, everything?

I didn't. A poster mentioned various religions but left one out. The personal is political. The LDS church is known to be a conservative church centered in Utah. I am sure that the media knew this, and used it accordingly.

[Daniel2]

55 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Two problems with your argument on this issue: 1) his company is publicly traded, is subject to audit and issues detailed financial statements and disclosures both quarterly and annually; and 2), there is no equivalence between the moral obligation on the transparency of finances of an individual and the finances of an ecclesiastical organization with millions of members.

Well said... I'd just been pondering how to make the same points, and you did it better and more succinctly than I would have.

[kimpearson]

47 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

Yes. I think it has probably occurred to several of us. Are you painting us all with the same broad stroke?

Nope just very little discussion that would indicate that.

[why me]

47 minutes ago, JustAnAustralian said:

He hasn't considered himself a member for over a decade (I.e before 2011). If he wanted to make a stand on  LGBT rights why didn't he officially leave the church in 2015? Would have been a great time.

Maybe. But would it have made the press? Maybe not. Now is a good time to take such an action and notify the press. The newspapers are full of this topic. It's trendy and profitable.

[ttribe]

5 minutes ago, why me said:

I suppose that Trump would be excluded from this. Much pressure for him to disclose his tax forms and private finances. I am sure that the fellow who resigned notified the media of his heroic actions, thereby giving his company needed woke publicity. Fellow the money.

More politicization, but an individual (any individual) who holds public office is in a different category.

[Daniel2]

38 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I wonder what it is exactly about the LDS church that makes this kind of thing newsworthy?????? I have never in my 71 years read a headline that this or that person left the Mennonite, Catholic, Pentecostal, Jewish, or Baha'i faith! People leave, switch, and join churches thousands of times every day! Leaving one group in a faith tradition for another in the same tradition is not converting. It is migrating. Birds, butterflies, and people migrate all the time. OK, so billionaires aren't on every corner, so maybe that makes it different. However, on this forum when someone posts about someone else leaving the LDS church, it is a big deal! Not sure I will ever understand that. My wife and I never decided to join. That doesn't seem to be a big deal to very many people, not even in our own ward. Fascinating stuff!

To be fair, its often newsworthy to LDS-affiliated news sources when people who are high profile join the LDS church or do something significantly newsworthy (such as taking this type of charitable action).  LDS Living, for example.  

I'd say it's often human nature to celebrate when someone "high profile" joins "your tribe," or likewise does something commendable and newsworthy, whatever type of tribe that is. 

Edited December 22, 2021 by Daniel2

[kimpearson]

33 minutes ago, BRMC said:

Ok, but what difference does that make?   Why would you subject yourself to the perceived Church issues if you didn't believe the Church's unique truths?   It seems the issue mostly lies with people who DON'T believe them yet want to force change for the people that for the most part don't want the change because they do believe those truths.
 

Not to sound crass, but "so what"?   There are many organizations that I don't agree with how they are managing their money.  I don't give money to those organizations.  

I am curious why you are on this board.  It feels like you have a mission to convert everyone to your way of thinking.  If they don't think like you, you dismiss them.  Why would you be on discussion board where we each present our thoughts with the expectation that they will be considered thoughtfully and with an open mind.  Your free to disagree but the way you do it shows a mind that is totally closed off to others.  This board is not a testimony meeting.  For us old timers, its high priest group discussion.

[Daniel2]

13 minutes ago, why me said:

I suppose that Trump would be excluded from this. Much pressure for him to disclose his tax forms and private finances. I am sure that the fellow who resigned notified the media of his heroic actions, thereby giving his company needed woke publicity. Fellow the money.

Please keep politics out of this thread. 

[BRMC]

1 minute ago, kimpearson said:

I am curious why you are on this board.  It feels like you have a mission to convert everyone to your way of thinking.  If they don't think like you, you dismiss them.  Why would you be on discussion board where we each present our thoughts with the expectation that they will be considered thoughtfully and with an open mind.  Your free to disagree but the way you do it shows a mind that is totally closed off to others.  This board is not a testimony meeting.  For us old timers, its high priest group discussion.

I mean, I could ask you the same question.   I write down information that I wasn't aware of and need to research further.  I agree when I agree.  I disagree when I disagree.   You seem to be doing the same thing, only don't like it when it's done by someone else?   

[Daniel2]

8 minutes ago, ttribe said:

More politicization, but an individual (any individual) who holds public office is in a different category.

Asked and now answered, so let's keep politics out of this thread, please. 

[kimpearson]

22 minutes ago, why me said:

You left out Islam. It would be interesting to have the news media ask Ihan Omar about Islam and gay rights and what exactly is her stance about her faith in regards to Lgbt rights. But only silence from the media and from her.

Wow someone is just a little racist but you will of course call me woke.  How does this comment add to or in any way help the conversation?  I am not trying to moderate you but rather hopefully lead you to share why you made this comment.

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, california boy said:

I am also not surprised it is now the 5th most popular story to be read.  The Church does not really have a very good reputation in California.

It probably matches California’s reputation with the rest of the states. 

[california boy]

Just now, bluebell said:

It probably matches California’s reputation with the rest of the states. 

Exactly.

[jkwilliams]

5 hours ago, bluebell said:

I agree, which is why I find it so odd that I'm seeing this story picked up and shared by multiple news sources across the country.  

I’m guessing that most journalists see the church as a fast-growing missionary church, so a high-profile exit seems counter to that narrative. 

I just find it interesting what people consider the final straw. Seems as good a reason as any to walk away. 

[california boy]

46 minutes ago, why me said:

I suppose that Trump would be excluded from this. Much pressure for him to disclose his tax forms and private finances. I am sure that the fellow who resigned notified the media of his heroic actions, thereby giving his company needed woke publicity. Fellow the money.

Wow you really know how to drive the point home that you politicize your posts in answer to Tribe's observation.  I now see what he is talking about.

[mfbukowski]

4 hours ago, california boy said:

I am also not surprised it is now the 5th most popular story to be read.  The Church does not really have a very good reputation in California.

Which is in itself a good reason to stay or join, and a reason to know we are on the right track.

 

[Hamba Tuhan]

6 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Which is in itself a good reason to stay or join, and a reason to know we are on the right track.

As Milton's Christ says in response to Satan's offer of the world's approval:

Quote

And what delight to be by such extolled,
To live upon their tongues, and be their talk?
Of whom to be dispraised were no small praise--

 

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, katherine the great said:

I cannot find any moral justification for a single individual to have a billion plus dollars. They should give most of it it away (and give and give and give and give). Have you noticed the pattern of these Uber wealthy men whose wives and mothers set up foundations to share the wealth? In my opinion that’s how it should be done. That is the only moral use of those types of funds. That’s my opinion. To be frank, I am no fan of the church’s hundred billion (give or take) dollar rainy day fund. Not a fan but at least the church does give away a considerable amount of wealth. 

I certainly admire Bill Gates and Warren Buffet for their commitment to put their wealth to work for others. And I agree that no single person should hoard billions.  So for Green, he says he plans to give it away. Maybe he will start a foundation or work with someone like Bill Gates.  Let's watch and see....

[pogi]

6 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

How else to bring public attention to the giant donation he just made?

Pathetic really.

A $600,000 donation from a multibillionaire and possibly “the wealthiest man in Utah” is equivalent to what we might spend on lunch, or less.

Why do most billionaires who donate their money wait until they die to donate the vast majority of their donations?  Wouldn’t it be more gratifying to see the good done with it?  

Edited December 23, 2021 by pogi

[Calm]

2 hours ago, kimpearson said:

 For us old timers, its high priest group discussion.

So I just checked your profile and you joined in 2013, but only 110 posts, though earlier posts might have gone missing when they did some deleting for updates, but that has been quite sometime since they did that and may have been prior to 2013…why the long gap in posting?  Were you reading the board?  I am somewhat confused because some of your posts show an expectation that posters are not aware of the nuances of the topic, but we have discussed these same topics many times. 

Edited December 23, 2021 by Calm

[Stormin' Mormon]

3 hours ago, Analytics said:

Green's plan is to give away 90% of his fortune by the time he dies. 

 

Not what he pledged at all. The pledge was to donate 90% of his fortune before or at the time of his death.

So, Mr. Green can still keep his pledge as he lives high on his $5 billion dollars, and only donates what's left through his will. He only needs to maintain this lifestyle for another 40 years or so, after which he'll no longer need his wealth and he can safely dispose of it with whatever charity he chooses. No risk at all to his personal comforts and desires.

Meanwhile, the Church has a mission with no known end date. It must keep operating for an indefinite period of time. There's no point a which the Church can say: we're done using this money and we won't ever need it again, so we're donating it all to charity now.

Edited December 23, 2021 by Stormin' Mormon

[Calm]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Wow you really know how to drive the point home that you politicize your posts in answer to Tribe's observation.  I now see what he is talking about.

 

2 hours ago, kimpearson said:

Wow someone is just a little racist but you will of course call me woke.  How does this comment add to or in any way help the conversation?  I am not trying to moderate you but rather hopefully lead you to share why you made this 

2 hours ago, Daniel2 said:

Asked and now answered, so let's keep politics out of this thread, please. 

Please, please. Take it private if you wish.  Too many threads have been derailed by why me’s apparently fixed interest.

Edited December 23, 2021 by Calm

[ttribe]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Wow you really know how to drive the point home that you politicize your posts in answer to Tribe's observation.  I now see what he is talking about.

Every. Single. One.

[Calm]

Just now, ttribe said:

Every. Single. One.

That is a bit overstated. My guess is 98% taking into account earlier posts of his as well.