Page 2 of 3
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 10th, 2023, 12:48 pm
by Fred
SempiternalHarbinger wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 12:29 pm
I wonder what would happen if a ward financial clerk or an Ensign Peak employee was stealing money from the church a little at a time and it’s never discovered. He later privately confesses his crimes to his bishop. Is this information protected by the seal of the confessional or is he reported to the church and the police?
Don't ask a Q15 to compare the mere life of a child to something as important as money.
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 10th, 2023, 1:44 pm
by SempiternalHarbinger
Fred wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 12:48 pm
SempiternalHarbinger wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 12:29 pm
I wonder what would happen if a ward financial clerk or an Ensign Peak employee was stealing money from the church a little at a time and it’s never discovered. He later privately confesses his crimes to his bishop. Is this information protected by the seal of the confessional or is he reported to the church and the police?
Don't ask a Q15 to compare the mere life of a child to something as important as money.
Filthy Lucre > Protecting/Defending God's Children
“For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also” (Matthew 6:19–21).
No man, religion, organization, or corporation can serve two masters. . . . . Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
In my opinion, these bishops, Kirton McConkie, and the church are WAY worse than Penn State and Joe Paterno. It's unacceptable. Yet, so many in the church are celebrating today and defending these corrupt judges and the church. All is not well.
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 10th, 2023, 3:45 pm
by Ado
A church that professes to be followers of Jesus Christ should act like it and behave according to a standard that is higher than what the worst laws will allow them to get away with. This is just more evil slipping under the radar of the average Latter day "saint."
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 10th, 2023, 4:10 pm
by Rumpelstiltskin
Fred wrote: ↑November 8th, 2023, 6:58 pm
Mamabear wrote: ↑November 8th, 2023, 6:42 pm
https://apnews.com/article/mormon-sex-a ... f222c35e7e
“On Friday, Nov. 3, 2023, an Arizona Superior Court judge dismissed a high-profile child sexual abuse lawsuit against The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, ruling that church officials who knew that Paul Adams, a parishioner, was sexually abusing his daughter had no duty to report the abuse to police or social service agencies because the information was received during a spiritual confession.”
“In a prepared statement, the church said, “We are pleased with the Arizona Superior Court’s decision granting summary judgment for the Church and its clergy and dismissing the plaintiffs’ claims.”
Why is there no concern for the child?
Gotta protect those sacred tithing funds. (dripping with sarcasm)
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 10th, 2023, 5:15 pm
by Mamabear
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 10th, 2023, 6:57 pm
by fractal_light_harvest
SempiternalHarbinger wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 1:44 pm
Fred wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 12:48 pm
SempiternalHarbinger wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 12:29 pm
I wonder what would happen if a ward financial clerk or an Ensign Peak employee was stealing money from the church a little at a time and it’s never discovered. He later privately confesses his crimes to his bishop. Is this information protected by the seal of the confessional or is he reported to the church and the police?
Don't ask a Q15 to compare the mere life of a child to something as important as money.
Filthy Lucre > Protecting/Defending God's Children
“For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also” (Matthew 6:19–21).
No man, religion, organization, or corporation can serve two masters. . . . . Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
In my opinion, these bishops, Kirton McConkie, and the church are WAY worse than Penn State and Joe Paterno. It's unacceptable. Yet, so many in the church are celebrating today and defending these corrupt judges and the church. All is not well.
Yet, so many in the church are celebrating today and defending these corrupt judges and the church. All is not well.
Isaiah 5:20-23
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
21 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and shrewd in their own sight!
22 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.
Which justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him!
24 Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 10th, 2023, 11:17 pm
by Seed Starter
Where are members on this? Mormon HQ should have 100,000 letters and twice as many emails from members telling them to STOP this right now! WHERE...ARE...THEY... How dare the leaders of this church use their law firm to cover their financial @#$ and allow babies to be sexually abused for years? Then they say this:
"the court found that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its clergy handled this matter consistent with Arizona law.”
It is legal to abort a baby but it's not right. What about God's law and the Q15's urging for us to live the higher law of Christ?
Tithing dollars fund this satanic activity of keeping quiet. There is no explaining this away. The LDS church is PLEASED with the decision? Leadership needs to step down over this. Come on members, what will you do about this? Who do you serve? I've been white-knuckling it over here trying to find a way to stay in the church. How can men who allow abusers to keep abusing and who take pleasure in this decision be trusted with any sacred keys? The reality is the church told those bishops to do nothing and that allowed for children to get traumatized.
This may be it for me. At least with the SEC thing they said they regret mistakes made. With this one they are pleased with how it ended. How we act shouldn't come down to what can we legally get away with.
27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.
28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
From the church's handbook on repentance and church memberships councils.
Three Purposes of Church Membership Restrictions or Withdrawal
1. Help protect others
2. Help a person access the redeeming power of Jesus Christ through repentance
3. Protect the integrity of the Church
32.2.1
Help Protect Others
The first purpose is to help protect others. Sometimes a person poses a physical or spiritual threat. Predatory behaviors, physical harm, sexual abuse, substance abuse, fraud, and apostasy are some of the ways this can occur. With inspiration, a bishop or stake president acts to protect others when someone poses a threat in these and other serious ways (see Alma 5:59–60).
Alma 5:59–60
Book of Mormon
59 For what shepherd is there among you having many sheep doth not watch over them, that the wolves enter not and devour his flock? And behold, if a wolf enter his flock doth he not drive him out? Yea, and at the last, if he can, he will destroy him.
60 And now I say unto you that the good shepherd doth call after you; and if you will hearken unto his voice he will bring you into his fold, and ye are his sheep; and he commandeth you that ye suffer no ravenous wolf to enter among you, that ye may not be destroyed.
And
32.2.3
Protect the Integrity of the Church
The third purpose is to protect the integrity of the Church. Restricting or withdrawing a person’s Church membership may be necessary if his or her conduct significantly harms the Church (see Alma 39:11). The integrity of the Church is not protected by concealing or minimizing serious sins—but by addressing them.
32.4.5
Reporting to Government Authorities
Some people who are repenting have broken civil or criminal laws. In some cases, government authorities are not aware of this. Bishops and stake presidents encourage members to follow the law and report such matters when required. Leaders also counsel members to obtain competent legal advice when reporting. The Church’s policy is to obey the law.
In many places, priesthood leaders are required by law to report some illegal behaviors of which they become aware. For example, some states and countries require that child abuse be reported to law enforcement authorities.
In some countries, the Church has established a confidential abuse help line to assist bishops and stake presidents. These leaders should promptly call the help line about every situation in which a person may have been abused—or is at risk of being abused (see 38.6.2.1). It is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
In countries that do not have a help line, a bishop who learns of abuse should contact his stake president, who should seek guidance from the area legal counsel at the area office.
For more information about reporting abuse, see 38.6.2.1 and 38.6.2.7.
Every situation huh? Are they calling the legal hotline to see if a sexual predator abusing their child is against the law or to help the victim? Does helping the victim include telling bishops to keep quiet? It says above that, "The integrity of the Church is not protected by concealing or minimizing serious sins—but by addressing them." Most thinking humans would assume that getting the predator away from the victim is how sin is "addressed" in these cases. If they don't want to call police because it will cost the church money in a lawsuit they are complicit in the abuse. If the bishop called the cops there would be no lawsuit. The bishop didn't directly put hands on the girls, the father did. I'm tired of men at the top preach one thing and do the opposite. These things are not woopsies, they are anti- Christ behaviors.
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 11th, 2023, 12:55 am
by Ebenezer
Let's apply the Hamilton Doctrine (replace "church" with "Jesus") to the Church statement.
[Jesus] is pleased with the Arizona Superior Court’s decision granting summary judgment for [Jesus] and [his followers] and dismissing the plaintiffs’ claims. Contrary to some news reports and exaggerated allegations, the court found that [Jesus] and [his followers] handled this matter consistent with Arizona law.”
Math checks out.
Consider the matter closed.
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 11th, 2023, 1:56 am
by TwochurchesOnly
All while proclaiming they are "the church of Jesus Christ" !!! complete blasphemy - and conveniently leaving out LDS part...
and signaling to their true master their compliance
Nothing new
they have been killing for decades with vaccines
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 11th, 2023, 3:50 am
by TwochurchesOnly
KM/LdsCorp et al, certainly LOVE the Clergy-penitent exception/ privilege(evil loophole)for failure to report abuse
Just a few quotes from the azcentral.com/story:
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 11th, 2023, 4:02 am
by TwochurchesOnly
more from azcentral article:
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 11th, 2023, 4:17 am
by TwochurchesOnly
Sen.Farnsworth is part of the secret combinations keeping abuse a secret--The very religious institutions opposing laws to protect children
beyond sickening --, he wants to protect those churches, LDScorp, at any cost - Heaven forbid a law that would "disrupt centuries of church dogma"
(eubank might address him as "his holiness")
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 11th, 2023, 6:10 am
by Mamabear
Seed Starter wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 11:17 pm
Where are members on this? Mormon HQ should have 100,000 letters and twice as many emails from members telling them to STOP this right now! WHERE...ARE...THEY... How dare the leaders of this church use their law firm to cover their financial @#$ and allow babies to be sexually abused for years? Then they say this:
"the court found that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its clergy handled this matter consistent with Arizona law.”
It is legal to abort a baby but it's not right. What about God's law and the Q15's urging for us to live the higher law of Christ?
Tithing dollars fund this satanic activity of keeping quiet. There is no explaining this away. The LDS church is PLEASED with the decision? Leadership needs to step down over this. Come on members, what will you do about this? Who do you serve? I've been white-knuckling it over here trying to find a way to stay in the church. How can men who allow abusers to keep abusing and who take pleasure in this decision be trusted with any sacred keys? The reality is the church told those bishops to do nothing and that allowed for children to get traumatized.
This may be it for me. At least with the SEC thing they said they regret mistakes made. With this one they are pleased with how it ended. How we act shouldn't come down to what can we legally get away with.
27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.
28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
From the church's handbook on repentance and church memberships councils.
Three Purposes of Church Membership Restrictions or Withdrawal
1. Help protect others
2. Help a person access the redeeming power of Jesus Christ through repentance
3. Protect the integrity of the Church
32.2.1
Help Protect Others
The first purpose is to help protect others. Sometimes a person poses a physical or spiritual threat. Predatory behaviors, physical harm, sexual abuse, substance abuse, fraud, and apostasy are some of the ways this can occur. With inspiration, a
bishop or stake president acts to protect others w
hen someone poses a threat in these and other serious ways (see Alma 5:59–60).
Alma 5:59–60
Book of Mormon
59 For what shepherd is there among you having many sheep doth not watch over them, that the wolves enter not and devour his flock? And behold, if a wolf enter his flock doth he not drive him out? Yea, and at the last, if he can, he will destroy him.
60 And now I say unto you that the good shepherd doth call after you; and if you will hearken unto his voice he will bring you into his fold, and ye are his sheep; and he commandeth you that ye suffer no ravenous wolf to enter among you, that ye may not be destroyed.
And
32.2.3
Protect the Integrity of the Church
The third purpose is to protect the integrity of the Church. Restricting or withdrawing a person’s Church membership may be necessary if his or her conduct significantly harms the Church (see Alma 39:11).
The integrity of the Church is not protected by concealing or minimizing serious sins—but by addressing them.
32.4.5
Reporting to Government Authorities
Some people who are repenting have broken civil or criminal laws. In some cases, government authorities are not aware of this. Bishops and stake presidents encourage members to follow the law and report such matters when required. Leaders also counsel members to obtain competent legal advice when reporting. The Church’s policy is to obey the law.
In many places, priesthood leaders are required by law to report some illegal behaviors of which they become aware. For example, some states and countries require that child abuse be reported to law enforcement authorities.
In some countries, the Church has established a confidential abuse help line to assist bishops and stake presidents.
These leaders should promptly call the help line about every situation in which a person may have been abused—or is at risk of being abused (see 38.6.2.1). It is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
In countries that do not have a help line, a bishop who learns of abuse should contact his stake president, who
should seek guidance from the area legal counsel at the area office.
For more information about reporting abuse, see 38.6.2.1 and 38.6.2.7.
Every situation huh? Are they calling the legal hotline to see if a sexual predator abusing their child is against the law or to help the victim? Does helping the victim include telling bishops to keep quiet? It says above that, "The integrity of the Church is not protected by concealing or minimizing serious sins—but by addressing them." Most thinking humans would assume that getting the predator away from the victim is how sin is "addressed" in these cases. If they don't want to call police because it will cost the church money in a lawsuit they are complicit in the abuse. If the bishop called the cops there would be no lawsuit. The bishop didn't directly put hands on the girls, the father did. I'm tired of men at the top preach one thing and do the opposite. These things are not woopsies, they are anti- Christ behaviors.
A lot of people are upset…there’s talk about a mass resignation in response to the AZ story:
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comme ... n_related/
There’s also this in response to the “light the world posts:
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comme ... rld_posts/
- IMG_4873.jpeg (249.57 KiB) Viewed 237 times
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 11th, 2023, 11:33 am
by Fred
Not surprisingly, church owned KSL TV and radio, which are ordered to never reveal the truth, did not cover the story, at least truthfully.
One of your links had a photo of the SLC temple at night that looked like it was tipping over backwards. I tried to educate the KSL photographers how to take the photo correctly. There are two different ways. One is to edit the photo in Photoshop to adjust the perspective. Photographers in the old days of film always used what is called post processing. Today's photographers are not actually photographers, but snap shot takers. The second way is to use a lens that tilts to adjust the photograph perspective before it is recorded by the camera. I spent quite a bit of time attempting to teach KSL photographers how to take a picture. I commented on articles and showed examples. I thought it was working as I saw a few taken correctly shortly afterwards. But two things KSL "journalists" are not good at is taking pictures and telling a truthful story.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/384601315338
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 11th, 2023, 1:43 pm
by IcedKoffee
Mamabear wrote: ↑November 11th, 2023, 6:10 am
Seed Starter wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 11:17 pm
Where are members on this? Mormon HQ should have 100,000 letters and twice as many emails from members telling them to STOP this right now! WHERE...ARE...THEY... How dare the leaders of this church use their law firm to cover their financial @#$ and allow babies to be sexually abused for years? Then they say this:
"the court found that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its clergy handled this matter consistent with Arizona law.”
It is legal to abort a baby but it's not right. What about God's law and the Q15's urging for us to live the higher law of Christ?
Tithing dollars fund this satanic activity of keeping quiet. There is no explaining this away. The LDS church is PLEASED with the decision? Leadership needs to step down over this. Come on members, what will you do about this? Who do you serve? I've been white-knuckling it over here trying to find a way to stay in the church. How can men who allow abusers to keep abusing and who take pleasure in this decision be trusted with any sacred keys? The reality is the church told those bishops to do nothing and that allowed for children to get traumatized.
This may be it for me. At least with the SEC thing they said they regret mistakes made. With this one they are pleased with how it ended. How we act shouldn't come down to what can we legally get away with.
27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.
28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
From the church's handbook on repentance and church memberships councils.
Three Purposes of Church Membership Restrictions or Withdrawal
1. Help protect others
2. Help a person access the redeeming power of Jesus Christ through repentance
3. Protect the integrity of the Church
32.2.1
Help Protect Others
The first purpose is to help protect others. Sometimes a person poses a physical or spiritual threat. Predatory behaviors, physical harm, sexual abuse, substance abuse, fraud, and apostasy are some of the ways this can occur. With inspiration, a
bishop or stake president acts to protect others w
hen someone poses a threat in these and other serious ways (see Alma 5:59–60).
Alma 5:59–60
Book of Mormon
59 For what shepherd is there among you having many sheep doth not watch over them, that the wolves enter not and devour his flock? And behold, if a wolf enter his flock doth he not drive him out? Yea, and at the last, if he can, he will destroy him.
60 And now I say unto you that the good shepherd doth call after you; and if you will hearken unto his voice he will bring you into his fold, and ye are his sheep; and he commandeth you that ye suffer no ravenous wolf to enter among you, that ye may not be destroyed.
And
32.2.3
Protect the Integrity of the Church
The third purpose is to protect the integrity of the Church. Restricting or withdrawing a person’s Church membership may be necessary if his or her conduct significantly harms the Church (see Alma 39:11).
The integrity of the Church is not protected by concealing or minimizing serious sins—but by addressing them.
32.4.5
Reporting to Government Authorities
Some people who are repenting have broken civil or criminal laws. In some cases, government authorities are not aware of this. Bishops and stake presidents encourage members to follow the law and report such matters when required. Leaders also counsel members to obtain competent legal advice when reporting. The Church’s policy is to obey the law.
In many places, priesthood leaders are required by law to report some illegal behaviors of which they become aware. For example, some states and countries require that child abuse be reported to law enforcement authorities.
In some countries, the Church has established a confidential abuse help line to assist bishops and stake presidents.
These leaders should promptly call the help line about every situation in which a person may have been abused—or is at risk of being abused (see 38.6.2.1). It is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
In countries that do not have a help line, a bishop who learns of abuse should contact his stake president, who
should seek guidance from the area legal counsel at the area office.
For more information about reporting abuse, see 38.6.2.1 and 38.6.2.7.
Every situation huh? Are they calling the legal hotline to see if a sexual predator abusing their child is against the law or to help the victim? Does helping the victim include telling bishops to keep quiet? It says above that, "The integrity of the Church is not protected by concealing or minimizing serious sins—but by addressing them." Most thinking humans would assume that getting the predator away from the victim is how sin is "addressed" in these cases. If they don't want to call police because it will cost the church money in a lawsuit they are complicit in the abuse. If the bishop called the cops there would be no lawsuit. The bishop didn't directly put hands on the girls, the father did. I'm tired of men at the top preach one thing and do the opposite. These things are not woopsies, they are anti- Christ behaviors.
A lot of people are upset…there’s talk about a mass resignation in response to the AZ story:
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comme ... n_related/
There’s also this in response to the “light the world posts:
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comme ... rld_posts/
IMG_4873.jpeg
I hope someone starts a mass resignation here on the forum. I’d be all in if I hadn’t resigned already.
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 15th, 2023, 5:54 am
by Mamabear
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ ... 569441007/
“Rep. Stacey Travers, D-Phoenix, introduced a bill this year to require a member of the clergy to report abuse learned about during a confession or confidential communication if “there is a reasonable suspicion to believe that the abuse is ongoing, will continue or may be a threat to other minors.”
It didn’t even rate a hearing. Didn’t even get assigned to a committee.
And, apparently, it won’t go anywhere next year either, as Rep. Quang Nguyen, the Prescott Republican who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, says he won’t give the bill a hearing. (He did say he would at least speak to Travers, so I guess there's that.)
Nguyen, in his interview with Capitol Media Services, said he believes that the bill "is an attack on the church," and he questioned why members of the clergy would need to call the police or state Department of Child Safety.“
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 15th, 2023, 11:54 am
by The Red Pill
Not that I agree with or admire RFM on everything he says...but he lays out the facts of this disgusting case very well in this episode:
"
LDS Church Gets Away With Protecting Child Molester!"
https://youtu.be/WLP7ifEJFV0?si=6nc9Q3ypHkf0yZ96
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 15th, 2023, 12:04 pm
by Lizzy60
I can’t even begin to express my level of disgust for the two bishops who did not report the abuse to authorities, and for the church lawyers who told them that was the correct course of action. It was 100% legal, and not against any church policy or doctrine to report abuse, and the lawyers are just one step less culpable than the actual abuser.
I have done the quiet quitting of my membership to keep peace with my husband, but if I am challenged by my local leaders, they will get an earful. Sure, build your malls and rental cities, hide your investments from the members, coddle the gays and trans folk.......but applaud a court decision that abetted a 6-month old being sexually abused by an admitted and known child abuser, who photographed his deeds and posted them online.....that is so evil I can’t believe any moral person who hears about this would ever join the church. Their deeds are being shouted from the rooftops. Is anyone listening?
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 15th, 2023, 12:29 pm
by Mala_Suerte
SempiternalHarbinger wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 1:44 pm
Fred wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 12:48 pm
SempiternalHarbinger wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 12:29 pm
I wonder what would happen if a ward financial clerk or an Ensign Peak employee was stealing money from the church a little at a time and it’s never discovered. He later privately confesses his crimes to his bishop. Is this information protected by the seal of the confessional or is he reported to the church and the police?
Don't ask a Q15 to compare the mere life of a child to something as important as money.
Filthy Lucre > Protecting/Defending God's Children
“For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also” (Matthew 6:19–21).
No man, religion, organization, or corporation can serve two masters. . . . . Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
In my opinion, these bishops, Kirton McConkie, and the church are WAY worse than Penn State and Joe Paterno. It's unacceptable. Yet, so many in the church are celebrating today and defending these corrupt judges and the church. All is not well.
Are you saying the judges are corrupt b/c they followed the law as is their job? The law in AZ in this matter is pretty clear. That doesn't mean it's morally correct, just that it's the law.
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 15th, 2023, 12:58 pm
by Lizzy60
Mala_Suerte wrote: ↑November 15th, 2023, 12:29 pm
SempiternalHarbinger wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 1:44 pm
Fred wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 12:48 pm
Don't ask a Q15 to compare the mere life of a child to something as important as money.
Filthy Lucre > Protecting/Defending God's Children
“For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also” (Matthew 6:19–21).
No man, religion, organization, or corporation can serve two masters. . . . . Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
In my opinion, these bishops, Kirton McConkie, and the church are WAY worse than Penn State and Joe Paterno. It's unacceptable. Yet, so many in the church are celebrating today and defending these corrupt judges and the church. All is not well.
Are you saying the judges are corrupt b/c they followed the law as is their job? The law in AZ in this matter is pretty clear. That doesn't mean it's morally correct, just that it's the law.
Just to be clear, the law in Arizona allows churches to claim clergy-penitent privilege in order to give church leaders the option of NOT reporting an admission of abuse by a member. This does not mean that church leaders cannot report these abuse confessions. Any bishop or stake president in Arizona can legally call police the moment he is made aware of abuse. It is the LDS Church who tells them NOT to call. It is not the state laws of Arizona that tells them NOT to call. It is the state laws of Arizona that protect them if they choose NOT to call the police.
Texas does not recognize clergy-penitent privilege for the LDS Church. I had a Bishop tell me when I served as RS President that if he hears the word “abuse” he is obligated to report to the police. Just like teachers. Just like health care workers. Just like many other occupations.
WHY IN THE WORLD DOES THE CHURCH EVER STAND ON THE SIDE OF KEEPING CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE A SECRET, AND SENDING THE MAN BACK INTO THE HOME WITH THE CHILDREN BEING ABUSED?
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 15th, 2023, 1:43 pm
by Mala_Suerte
Lizzy60 wrote: ↑November 15th, 2023, 12:58 pm
Mala_Suerte wrote: ↑November 15th, 2023, 12:29 pm
SempiternalHarbinger wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 1:44 pm
Filthy Lucre > Protecting/Defending God's Children
“For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also” (Matthew 6:19–21).
No man, religion, organization, or corporation can serve two masters. . . . . Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
In my opinion, these bishops, Kirton McConkie, and the church are WAY worse than Penn State and Joe Paterno. It's unacceptable. Yet, so many in the church are celebrating today and defending these corrupt judges and the church. All is not well.
Are you saying the judges are corrupt b/c they followed the law as is their job? The law in AZ in this matter is pretty clear. That doesn't mean it's morally correct, just that it's the law.
Just to be clear, the law in Arizona allows churches to claim clergy-penitent privilege in order to give church leaders the option of NOT reporting an admission of abuse by a member. This does not mean that church leaders cannot report these abuse confessions. Any bishop or stake president in Arizona can legally call police the moment he is made aware of abuse. It is the LDS Church who tells them NOT to call. It is not the state laws of Arizona that tells them NOT to call. It is the state laws of Arizona that protect them if they choose NOT to call the police.
Texas does not recognize clergy-penitent privilege for the LDS Church. I had a Bishop tell me when I served as RS President that if he hears the word “abuse” he is obligated to report to the police. Just like teachers. Just like health care workers. Just like many other occupations.
WHY IN THE WORLD DOES THE CHURCH EVER STAND ON THE SIDE OF KEEPING CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE A SECRET, AND SENDING THE MAN BACK INTO THE HOME WITH THE CHILDREN BEING ABUSED?
Why are you quoting me?
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 15th, 2023, 2:12 pm
by Seed Starter
Mala_Suerte wrote: ↑November 15th, 2023, 12:29 pm
SempiternalHarbinger wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 1:44 pm
Fred wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 12:48 pm
Don't ask a Q15 to compare the mere life of a child to something as important as money.
Filthy Lucre > Protecting/Defending God's Children
“For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also” (Matthew 6:19–21).
No man, religion, organization, or corporation can serve two masters. . . . . Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
In my opinion, these bishops, Kirton McConkie, and the church are WAY worse than Penn State and Joe Paterno. It's unacceptable. Yet, so many in the church are celebrating today and defending these corrupt judges and the church. All is not well.
Are you saying the judges are corrupt b/c they followed the law as is their job? The law in AZ in this matter is pretty clear. That doesn't mean it's morally correct, just that it's the law.
I'm curious, why wouldn't the church just let the bishop report the abuse? The church wouldn't be held liable for a father abusing his children. Just reporting it right away would make the church look good but now they look bad. The con of not reporting is that kids keep being abused and the church has horrible PR but what is the pro for the church? Is reporting in a state that doesn't require reporting setting a precedent that may lead to required reporting? Then again, why is the church lobbying against mandatory reporting? Because then they have more legal liability if bishops screw up? I'm not sure what type of law you practice but I'd appreciate hearing your opinion on this.
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 15th, 2023, 2:15 pm
by Fred
Seed Starter wrote: ↑November 15th, 2023, 2:12 pm
Mala_Suerte wrote: ↑November 15th, 2023, 12:29 pm
SempiternalHarbinger wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 1:44 pm
Filthy Lucre > Protecting/Defending God's Children
“For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also” (Matthew 6:19–21).
No man, religion, organization, or corporation can serve two masters. . . . . Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
In my opinion, these bishops, Kirton McConkie, and the church are WAY worse than Penn State and Joe Paterno. It's unacceptable. Yet, so many in the church are celebrating today and defending these corrupt judges and the church. All is not well.
Are you saying the judges are corrupt b/c they followed the law as is their job? The law in AZ in this matter is pretty clear. That doesn't mean it's morally correct, just that it's the law.
I'm curious, why wouldn't the church just let the bishop report the abuse? The church wouldn't be held liable for a father abusing his children. Just reporting it right away would make the church look good but now they look bad. The con of not reporting is that kids keep being abused and the church has horrible PR but what is the pro for the church? Is reporting in a state that doesn't require reporting setting a precedent that may lead to required reporting? Then again, why is the church lobbying against mandatory reporting? Because then they have more legal liability if bishops screw up? I'm not sure what type of law you practice but I'd appreciate hearing your opinion on this.
If the father was also the Bishop, the church could be held liable.
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 15th, 2023, 2:58 pm
by Mala_Suerte
Seed Starter wrote: ↑November 15th, 2023, 2:12 pm
Mala_Suerte wrote: ↑November 15th, 2023, 12:29 pm
SempiternalHarbinger wrote: ↑November 10th, 2023, 1:44 pm
Filthy Lucre > Protecting/Defending God's Children
“For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also” (Matthew 6:19–21).
No man, religion, organization, or corporation can serve two masters. . . . . Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
In my opinion, these bishops, Kirton McConkie, and the church are WAY worse than Penn State and Joe Paterno. It's unacceptable. Yet, so many in the church are celebrating today and defending these corrupt judges and the church. All is not well.
Are you saying the judges are corrupt b/c they followed the law as is their job? The law in AZ in this matter is pretty clear. That doesn't mean it's morally correct, just that it's the law.
I'm curious, why wouldn't the church just let the bishop report the abuse? The church wouldn't be held liable for a father abusing his children. Just reporting it right away would make the church look good but now they look bad. The con of not reporting is that kids keep being abused and the church has horrible PR but what is the pro for the church? Is reporting in a state that doesn't require reporting setting a precedent that may lead to required reporting? Then again, why is the church lobbying against mandatory reporting? Because then they have more legal liability if bishops screw up? I'm not sure what type of law you practice but I'd appreciate hearing your opinion on this.
I honestly have no idea why the Church didn't let the bishop report the abuse. I would have advised him to report it and I would have reported it personally. Reporting it would've been the right thing to do for the reasons you point out.
If I had to venture a guess, I'd say the fault lies with the law firm who made the decision, and obviously by extension with the Church. I imagine the Church gave the law firm too much authority and the firm acted purely on legal grounds and not moral, which is why giving the firm the authority was a mistake. One of my biggest disappointments when I started practicing law was the realization that what is legal and what is moral are often not the same. I've practiced law on my own and in a law firm, I enjoyed both, but most law firms remind me of bloated governments that are slow to change and adjust, but are more than happy to take your money.
Re: Court cites clergy- penitent privilege in dismissing child sex abuse lawsuit against church
Posted: November 15th, 2023, 4:29 pm
by fractal_light_harvest
Mala_Suerte wrote: ↑November 15th, 2023, 2:58 pm
Seed Starter wrote: ↑November 15th, 2023, 2:12 pm
Mala_Suerte wrote: ↑November 15th, 2023, 12:29 pm
Are you saying the judges are corrupt b/c they followed the law as is their job? The law in AZ in this matter is pretty clear. That doesn't mean it's morally correct, just that it's the law.
I'm curious, why wouldn't the church just let the bishop report the abuse? The church wouldn't be held liable for a father abusing his children. Just reporting it right away would make the church look good but now they look bad. The con of not reporting is that kids keep being abused and the church has horrible PR but what is the pro for the church? Is reporting in a state that doesn't require reporting setting a precedent that may lead to required reporting? Then again, why is the church lobbying against mandatory reporting? Because then they have more legal liability if bishops screw up? I'm not sure what type of law you practice but I'd appreciate hearing your opinion on this.
I honestly have no idea why the Church didn't let the bishop report the abuse. I would have advised him to report it and I would have reported it personally. Reporting it would've been the right thing to do for the reasons you point out.
If I had to venture a guess, I'd say the fault lies with the law firm who made the decision, and obviously by extension with the Church. I imagine the Church gave the law firm too much authority and the firm acted purely on legal grounds and not moral, which is why giving the firm the authority was a mistake. One of my biggest disappointments when I started practicing law was the realization that what is legal and what is moral are often not the same. I've practiced law on my own and in a law firm, I enjoyed both, but most law firms remind me of bloated governments that are slow to change and adjust, but are more than happy to take your money.
So now that this happened and was clearly morally wrong, do you think the church will get a new law firm to handle the sexual abuse hotline or tell the current one to change their policies?