Church Member in Rochester Going "Sam Young"

[Calm]

37 minutes ago, pondering said:

I'm sorry, it is triggering to be around those still caught in the lie.

It is your choice to be here and be triggered.  That responsibility and choice you can’t put on others.

[HappyJackWagon]

If he's "going Sam Young" to bring attention to the problem, then good for him.

[pondering]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

It is your choice to be here and be triggered.  That responsibility and choice you can’t put on others.

I'm gearing up for the holidays. Am using you to remind myself who I will be around, and build up my mental stamina for church mindset.  

A lot of good people in a lot of different cults out there.  LDS are not the only "group" in my family.  I guess seeing the same "spirit" in multiple groups is another thing that has given me a different perspective.  

Dark night of the soul, Fowler stages - perhaps that is the best approach to take this year... I will be forward about lgbtq, kids #1 priority in this, and I will be the one to stand against anyone bashing the lgbtq choice.

[pondering]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

If he's "going Sam Young" to bring attention to the problem, then good for him.

I was there at Sam's disciplinary hearing, waiting with the crowd outside in front of the church.  I've carried the flags.  

"NO!", Who remembers hearing it - broadcast that GC?  "NO!"

It makes you crazy.  ###'s 1st wife, people calked her the crazy one - not him - it was her... 

Not us..  Sam - Sam's the crazy one... that's how it seems, until you are on the other side, until you are called "crazy".  

So, how do you communicate?  With the correct sense of emergency- without looking crazy?  How do you maintain a calm rational appearance that will be listened to when your child, your little girl, was repeatedly raped?  and not just your little girl?  and it's still going on - institutionalized rape?  

You tell me.  How dies it stop?

[bluebell]

7 minutes ago, pondering said:

I'm gearing up for the holidays. Am using you to remind myself who I will be around, and build up my mental stamina for church mindset.  

A lot of good people in a lot of different cults out there.  LDS are not the only "group" in my family.  I guess seeing the same "spirit" in multiple groups is another thing that has given me a different perspective.  

Dark night of the soul, Fowler stages - perhaps that is the best approach to take this year... I will be forward about lgbtq, kids #1 priority in this, and I will be the one to stand against anyone bashing the lgbtq choice.

Calm is probably the most well-liked poster here--both with ex and non members as well as members--because she's seen as being very fair and open to all sides of the argument (whatever the argument is).  Saying that, she's not trying to be mean or dismissive of you or your experiences.  She's the last poster that would be likely to do so.

On this board, we discuss things.  We discuss everything. All sides of an issue.  It's not the place to come for healing or comfort (though most posters will try to be supportive) because rather than getting blanket acceptance of statements that are coming from a place of pain, you're going to get analysis.  Analysis both of the topic and your (or any other poster's) reactions to the topic.

It sounds like you are not in a place where that kind of thing is helpful or useful to you, so it probably is more healthy for you to not engage here.  But Calm is right in that the board has a policy not to remove accounts or block access for no reason other than the poster requests it.  You'll have to keep yourself from engaging (which I know can be difficult sometimes).

 

 

[Calm]

55 minutes ago, pondering said:

I'm gearing up for the holidays. Am using you to remind myself who I will be around, and build up my mental stamina for church mindset.  

A lot of good people in a lot of different cults out there.  LDS are not the only "group" in my family.  I guess seeing the same "spirit" in multiple groups is another thing that has given me a different perspective.  

Dark night of the soul, Fowler stages - perhaps that is the best approach to take this year... I will be forward about lgbtq, kids #1 priority in this, and I will be the one to stand against anyone bashing the lgbtq choice.

I have issues with certain traits that exist in my extended family and I can see the wisdom for reminding myself they are there and therefore I need to prepare myself, including what to say if something inappropriate is said. I and others have health issues that are trivialized by some family members and we are often pressured to do things that are not good for us and the reverse, we are left out and no accommodations are made because people see having to adapt as inconvenient…if it even occurs to them.
 

In another issue, my daughter is non-binary and politically liberal and she feels very awkward when conversations turn either way because she braces herself for the unkind or unthinking comment or a political comment that she wants to challenge, but does not because she sees it as not appropriate even if others are bringing politics into a family moment because others’ opinions are not thought of as important. She is also very socially sensitive and cannot speak for herself, so I try to keep aware and head off any conversations that look like they are turning into unsafe areas.  It is important that I remind myself that these happen because I miss stuff if I am not paying attention as I tend to focus on other aspects and she gets hurt unnecessarily. 

So I see nothing wrong with preparing yourself for family interactions to protect your children. I believe many people do the same for a variety of reasons. 

I do see an issue though if our expectations are so strong we see problems when they are not there.  If we are certain we will see something, human imagination is creative enough to create it on the flimsiest of pretexts. At that point we are contributing to conflict and not protecting our children, but more likely harming them.  We need to avoid making global judgments of groups’ members based on experiences with a limited number of individuals in these groups. That leads to bigotry, which is not a burden we should be passing on to our children if we can help it. 

Edited December 19, 2022 by Calm

[pondering]

On 12/19/2022 at 12:13 PM, Calm said:

 

I do see an issue though if our expectations are so strong we see problems when they are not there.  

 

The problems actually are there.

Ignoring, refusing to change policies...

In my industry, after a disaster, when someone loses a finger, or someone dies, recall, after the news articls, or even a "near miss", the incident is handled through changing proceedures, updating sds's, new regulations.  You cannot make up for a life lost, cannot help someone permanently damaged from the chemicals they were working with, but at least when the incident is acknowledged and new procedures are in place, new regulations,  there is some closure.

Imagine your company refused to acknowledge what happened, refused to apologize, refused to change proceedures, no new regulations  - while still working with the same dangerous chemicals, putting everyone there at risk.  Suppose you have family members at this company.

 

There is a problem.

Children in the lds church will continue to be abused.

It's not just a few bad apples, it is ingrained in the structure and pedophile foundation of the institution.

Kind words = avoiding, and grooming to me now, and are sickening.  

People like us, we will not be quiet until the needed changes are made.  No resolution, no closure, no rest, until the problem is corrected.  It would be evil of me to do anything else.

 

Anyone here familiar with risk matrix analysis?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_matrix

Probability along one side, and consequences on the other.  

The probability is high.  The consequences are high. 

The solution is admitting callings are not from God, church volunteers do not have the power of discernment, mandated reporting needs to happen, trained professionals need to be used.  

Edited December 21, 2022 by pondering

[2BizE]

It is a wonderful thing that we have some people who will stand up to policies that do not protect our children from predators and abusers.

Thank You Michael Benjamin for fighting to protect the children.

[bluebell]

9 minutes ago, pondering said:

 

The problems actually are there.

Ignoring, refusing to change policies...

In my industry, after a disaster, when someone loses a finger, or someone dies, recall, after the news articls, or even a "near miss", the incident is handled through changing proceedures, updating sds's, new regulations.  You cannot make up for a life lost, cannot help someone permanently damaged from the chemicals they were working with, but at least when the incident is acknowledged and new procedures are in place, new regulations,  there is some closure.

Imagine your company refused to acknowledge what happened, refused to apologize, refused to change proceedures, no new regulations  - while still working with the same dangerous chemicals, putting everyone there at risk.  Suppose you have family members at this company.

 

There is a problem.

Children in the lds church will continue to be abused.

It's not just a few bad apples, it is ingrained in the structure and pedophile foundation of the institution.

Kind words = avoiding, and grooming to me now, and are sickening.  

People like us, we will not be quiet until the needed changes are made.  No resolution, no closure, no rest, until the problem is corrected.  It would be evil of me to do anything else.

How do you change a “pedophile foundation”?

[pondering]

45 minutes ago, bluebell said:

How do you change a “pedophile foundation”?

The Catholics had a rough few years, a few other religious groups have changed.  We spent a Sunday in Salem, had services in a historic church where once witches had hung - completely different congregation now.  It takes leaving fundamentism and ... well... a few offshoot Mormon groups have done it though I haven't joined them either.

Spiritual, not religious,  non dogmatic movement is beautiful  - service-centered, living centered rather than dogma centered.  Getting away from authoritarian system, to personal light and personal responsibility,  critical thinking.

 

At the top of various stages of faith models/  religious progression studies is a universal faith.  Sooper fun to dive into the good of all the groups out there.

[Rain]

On 12/17/2022 at 10:36 PM, Kenngo1969 said:

For what little this may be worth coming from me (since, "Hallelujah and praise the Lord!" I will never be called to one of these positions [and probably wouldn't even if that whole "husband-of-one-wife" thingy weren't such a hang-up]), I think one of the reasons the Lord allows His fallible servants to extend certain callings to men who are not worthy is to give those men an opportunity to "come clean." 

When those men/people are abusive I think this can be a very hurtful idea for those abused. It is placing the guilty ahead of the innocent.

If God wants to give someone the opportunity to become clean it can be done in ways that don't give the opportunity to put the guilty in authority over the innocent. A temple reccomend interview. A visit to their home. Etc. 

I get that the person may not confess and the interviewer may not feel a prompting about the sin.  It's just the reasoning of the coming clean opportunity placed ahead of the victim that I'm not comfortable with. 

On 12/17/2022 at 10:36 PM, Kenngo1969 said:

If they don't take that opportunity, that failure cannot, I do not think, be laid at the feet of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or at the feet of the person who extended (or who approved) the call.  

That said, there have been times in my life when I have looked upon certain callings being extended to me as a sign of the Lord's favor.  I hope I haven't been wrong.    (Curiously, although this instance has not involved a calling being extended to me, the most recent instance I've had in which I've felt at least a faint ray of hope that the Lord sees me as something more than completely useless is a blessing I received recently under the hands of my Ministering Brother.)  Please believe me when I say, also, however, that I'm much, much more prone to wield the whip of self-flagellation with all the fervor of an ascetic and of a flagellant than I am to give myself the benefit of any deserved or needed doubt.

Crrrrrrrrrack!!!!!  Owwww!  Hurts so good!!!!!    

 

[Teancum]

On 12/13/2022 at 10:52 PM, carbon dioxide said:

Does he propose two on one interviews.  I think the more people involved might make it more difficult for youth.   Perhaps having the cone of silence in bishops office could be used where the bishop and person being interviews is in the cone of silence while another person is outside observing.  If the person being interviewed feels uncomfortable about the questioning, they can push a button and lift the cone of silence so it will not be a one on one interview.

Perhaps no intrusive interviews would be better.  I hated being grilled twice a year as a teenager by the bishop and his counselors.

[Eschaton]

21 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Perhaps no intrusive interviews would be better.  I hated being grilled twice a year as a teenager by the bishop and his counselors.

In my experience growing up, interviews were a chance for my bishops to ask very inappropriate questions. 

[bluebell]

9 hours ago, pondering said:

The Catholics had a rough few years, a few other religious groups have changed.  We spent a Sunday in Salem, had services in a historic church where once witches had hung - completely different congregation now.  It takes leaving fundamentism and ... well... a few offshoot Mormon groups have done it though I haven't joined them either.

Spiritual, not religious,  non dogmatic movement is beautiful  - service-centered, living centered rather than dogma centered.  Getting away from authoritarian system, to personal light and personal responsibility,  critical thinking.

 

At the top of various stages of faith models/  religious progression studies is a universal faith.  Sooper fun to dive into the good of all the groups out there.

But the Catholic Church doesn’t have a “pedophile foundation”, so they don’t work as an example.

How do we change a church that was founded on pedophilia (as you claim)?

[bluebell]

35 minutes ago, Eschaton said:

In my experience growing up, interviews were a chance for my bishops to ask very inappropriate questions. 

I’m very glad I never had any bishops do such a thing to me ever. That would have been extremely uncomfortable. 

[HappyJackWagon]

11 hours ago, pondering said:

 

The problems actually are there.

Ignoring, refusing to change policies...

In my industry, after a disaster, when someone loses a finger, or someone dies, recall, after the news articls, or even a "near miss", the incident is handled through changing proceedures, updating sds's, new regulations.  You cannot make up for a life lost, cannot help someone permanently damaged from the chemicals they were working with, but at least when the incident is acknowledged and new procedures are in place, new regulations,  there is some closure.

Imagine your company refused to acknowledge what happened, refused to apologize, refused to change proceedures, no new regulations  - while still working with the same dangerous chemicals, putting everyone there at risk.  Suppose you have family members at this company.

 

There is a problem.

Children in the lds church will continue to be abused.

It's not just a few bad apples, it is ingrained in the structure and pedophile foundation of the institution.

Kind words = avoiding, and grooming to me now, and are sickening.  

People like us, we will not be quiet until the needed changes are made.  No resolution, no closure, no rest, until the problem is corrected.  It would be evil of me to do anything else.

 

Anyone here familiar with risk matrix analysis?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_matrix

Probability along one side, and consequences on the other.  

The probability is high.  The consequences are high. 

The solution is admitting callings are not from God, church volunteers do not have the power of discernment, mandated reporting needs to happen, trained professionals need to be used.  

I agree with the bolded part.

Claiming a "pedophle foundation" is going too far.

But yes, changes could be made.

[pogi]

10 hours ago, pondering said:

The Catholics had a rough few years, a few other religious groups have changed.  We spent a Sunday in Salem, had services in a historic church where once witches had hung - completely different congregation now.  It takes leaving fundamentism and ... well... a few offshoot Mormon groups have done it though I haven't joined them either.

Spiritual, not religious,  non dogmatic movement is beautiful  - service-centered, living centered rather than dogma centered.  Getting away from authoritarian system, to personal light and personal responsibility,  critical thinking.

 

At the top of various stages of faith models/  religious progression studies is a universal faith.  Sooper fun to dive into the good of all the groups out there.

Can you show me that these other groups are free from abuse, or that there are statistically significant lower rates of abuse?

While I agree that more can be done, your proposed solutions of admitting that callings are not from God, etc. are not going to do anything.   Mandated reporting will take it further underground and hidden from people who may be able to intervene.  I agree with you on the use of trained professionals, but how do you envision their implementation?  I think more focus needs to be on prevention rather than treatment (without leaving the other undone), personally.

I serve in the nursery and there was zero required training or follow-up.  No one even mentioned 2-deep leadership let-alone any measures to require it.  No routine training/reminders.  No video cameras.  No sign in/sign out sheets to track who is there and when.  No background checks.  Nothing.  The safety of these children really boils down to the luck of calling someone who is not a perpetrator.  I was really underwhelmed and uncomfortable with the lack of  preparation and preventive measures to protect our little ones.  I agree that abuse will continue and that more could easily be done to protect them, but I think it is unrealistic to pretend that we can eliminate all abuse.

Edited December 21, 2022 by pogi

[pondering]

52 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I agree with the bolded part.

Claiming a "pedophle foundation" is going too far.

But yes, changes could be made.

 

Child brides happened in the early church.  The offshoots are following practices of the early church.  Many of those who have issues are mixed up because of teachings/practices of the early church.

[pondering]

20 minutes ago, pogi said:

Can you show me that these other groups are free from abuse, or that there are statistically significant lower rates of abuse?

While I agree that more can be done, your proposed solutions of admitting that callings are not from God, etc. are not going to do anything.   Mandated reporting will take it further underground and hidden from people who may be able to intervene.  I agree with you on the use of trained professionals, but how do you envision their implementation?  I think more focus needs to be on prevention rather than treatment (without leaving the other undone), personally.

I serve in the nursery and there was zero required training or follow-up.  No one even mentioned 2-deep leadership let-alone any measures to require it.  No routine training/reminders.  No video cameras.  No sign in/sign out sheets to track who is there and when.  Nothing.  The safety of these children really boils down to the luck of calling someone who is not a perpetrator.  I was really underwhelmed and uncomfortable with the lack of  preparation and preventive measures to protect our little ones.  I agree that abuse will continue and that more could easily be done to protect them, but I think it is unrealistic to pretend that we can eliminate all abuse.

I think the scouts have done a phenomenal job of addressing the problem.  I work with young adults, and my organization also does a phenomenal job.  

Switch the message up, word it however you want, "god helps those who help themselves" perhaps?  Consider the lesson of Judas - great example of NOT trusting church leadership, new verse in the song - " don't follow Jonah, don't follow Jonah, Don follow Jonah, he ran away".  The bottom line, prayers and temple and scriptures do NOT fix it.  A new message needs to be delivered,  a new mindset on what leaders really are - just people doing the best they can. 

Edited December 21, 2022 by pondering
Sp

[pogi]

2 minutes ago, pondering said:

Many of those who have issues are mixed up because of teachings/practices of the early church.

By "many of those who have issues", I assume you are talking about perpetrators who belong to the Church Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  

Can you support your claim with any evidence?  What teachings specifically are you referring to? 

[pondering]

10 hours ago, Rain said:

When those men/people are abusive I think this can be a very hurtful idea for those abused. It is placing the guilty ahead of the innocent.

If God wants to give someone the opportunity to become clean it can be done in ways that don't give the opportunity to put the guilty in authority over the innocent. A temple reccomend interview. A visit to their home. Etc. 

I get that the person may not confess and the interviewer may not feel a prompting about the sin.  It's just the reasoning of the coming clean opportunity placed ahead of the victim that I'm not comfortable with. 

 

I actually confronted - the bishop and interviewee- after the bishop was lied to in a temple interview.  They came out of office, I asked if he was given a recommendation  - yes, he was - and I essentially said "try again and they redid the interview.

Dissonance, dissociation are very real.  Often someone needs to be confronted, needs to be called on their lies  - some test the bishop, is he really able to discern?  When the answer is no - you can lie - its just further justification.  

Pedophiles are very good at dishonesty.

 

[pondering]

10 minutes ago, pogi said:

By "many of those who have issues", I assume you are talking about perpetrators who belong to the Church Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  

Can you support your claim with any evidence?  What teachings specifically are you referring to? 

132.

 

I was given a 13 page confession letter, written by pencil after he was convicted (not allowed to use computer).  In the letter, it was the church - purity culture - false claims of authority  - he was told he was worthy, he was told he was a leader, he was told he was in the right.

 

His mom was abused, same deal.

His 2nd wife was abused, same deal.

My sister-in law was abused by her brother, same deal.

No penalties, leadership positions, "you are special and chosen" message.  Women are "strong" if they forgive - more than 70x7 - not strong if they leave.  

 

Edited December 21, 2022 by pondering

[HappyJackWagon]

33 minutes ago, pondering said:

 

Child brides happened in the early church.  The offshoots are following practices of the early church.  Many of those who have issues are mixed up because of teachings/practices of the early church.

Obviously I knew where you were going with that. Were there very young brides? Yes. Was there coercion? Yes. Is that a shameful part of church history? yes. So my disagreement with the semantics isn't meant to diminish the problem.

But "pedophle" and "child bride" have specific meanings which don't fit this early practice.

I also disagree with the claim that it was part of the "foundation" of the church. Even though it happened as a practice doesn't necessarily mean it was a foundation, in teaching, doctrine, or practice. 

 

[Tacenda]

Maybe it became a thing later on because I don't remember sexual things brought up during youth interviews. But hear people say how they were asked things in a bishop's interview that even their doctors would never ask them. Or learn what it means to masturbate by a bishop explaining in detail what it is. Or so much more. I hope things are much better now and the church backs off. For a while it was full on all about porn etc. I thought to myself that many don't even think to look at porn, and now their church leaders are constantly bringing it up a long with ideas they'd never think of doing until it was asked them. 

[Rain]

58 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Maybe it became a thing later on because I don't remember sexual things brought up during youth interviews. But hear people say how they were asked things in a bishop's interview that even their doctors would never ask them. Or learn what it means to masturbate by a bishop explaining in detail what it is. Or so much more. I hope things are much better now and the church backs off. For a while it was full on all about porn etc. I thought to myself that many don't even think to look at porn, and now their church leaders are constantly bringing it up a long with ideas they'd never think of doing until it was asked them. 

It really depends on who you had as a bishop and probably location.  I was never asked those things either.  A few years ago a friend asked a group of us if we were asked about wearing a bra under or over garments in a temple reccomend.  This was something she had been asked regularly, but never happened to me. 

I expect that because people have been asked a lot of inappropriate things it is part of the reason why the church has said you don't add your own questions.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Rain