Sad story of abuse of LDS scout ....

[_Mister Scratch]

I think you missed the point of the article...

Which is?

That Scouts is official business of the LDS church. And if the Scoutmaster, called to the task by the church, is abusing boys while on LDS Scout activities and there were no safeguards in place to make sure these sorts of things don't happen, then the church has some culpability, and thus shares some of the blame.

I agree 100% with this. The whole scenario (and the Church's culpability) is further complicated by the fact that scouting activities are very, very strongly encouraged in the Church. So, to extend WK's metaphor, it would be like someone running a red light on Church business who had been very, very strongly encouraged to "step on it."

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

Actually, Robert was the son who was abused; Joe was the scout leader who abused Robert.

Oh man, now I feel like an idiot.

Well, don't we all sometimes? I still don't agree that Anne wasn't abused at all. It seems to me that Anne has suffered greatly, as the mother, and this is what the bishop is asking her to forgive. Is this a normal procedure when people are asking for rebaptism? If so, why? Does anybody know about this?

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

I just got done reading the whole thing. Wow, what a sad, sad story.

The clincher, in my opinion, came at the very end and sums up the LDS church's philosophy on child abuse (and every other form of abuse) in a tidy little package. Referring to the Joe, the child victim, his mother Anne reports:

Well, its Friday, and the creepy crawlies are out and about as usual. Slim Shady's guile plastered smear against the Church above leads the pack.

As I read this piece, two observations crossed my mind. The first is what does any of this have to do with the Church? The second is that the lawsuit lottery is as alive and well in the Pacific Northwest as it is in other parts of the country. How can the Church be held responsible for the individual actions of its members based on nothing more than the fact of their membership? The precedent this sets is intriguing. If a Mormon pedophile molests a child, you sue the Church of which he is a member. If this is the case, then what prevents the victims of a Mormon who runs a red light and causes a serious accident from suing the Church for damages and medical costs? After all, the person is a member of that Church, and the Church has deep pockets.

Its not enough that the pervert goes to jail; the church of which he is a member apparently somehow should have prevented his actions. Gee, where's the SCMC when you need them?

I don't think the church would ever be held responsible for a member's auto accident, even if he were on church business, unless he were driving a car owned or insured by the church.

Child abuse is a different matter. When they start announcing callings with a caveat, something like "Joe has been called of God to be scoutmaster, but God has been known to call pedophiles to positions of authority over children. We don't know if Joe is a pedophile or not, but it is the responsibility of the scouts and their families to be on the lookout for inappropriate behavior and be sure to report it immediately to local law enforcement if it occurs." Then maybe the church would have a defense.

[_The Nehor]

The policy now is to have two adults there at all times, was that not the case in the past?

[_Selah]

See link below for article.

http://www.seattleweekly.com/2007-05-30 ... church.php

I don't know what to say. I think I need a room to scream in for 15 minutes.

Ditto that. I couldn't believe this story. I just wanted to cry for all the victims they shared.

[_Gazelam]

I read a story like that and wonder why people get so upset about a doctrine like blood atonement.

That guy should have been put down like a dog, then thrown in a ditch somewhere.

[Guest]

I read a story like that and wonder why people get so upset about a doctrine like blood atonement.

That guy should have been put down like a dog, then thrown in a ditch somewhere.

Gaz? Gaz? is that you? Mormons don't believe or do that anymore. Didn't you get the memo?


So far as disembowelment atoning for the sin - I just don't understand faithbased murder. Besides, the ripple effect of the damage path from these monsters continues long after they are gone.

Capital punishment for pediphiles = The only proven permanent cure. This I understand.

(edited for a typo)

[_Gazelam]

I read a story like that and wonder why people get so upset about a doctrine like blood atonement.

That guy should have been put down like a dog, then thrown in a ditch somewhere.

Gaz? Gaz? is that you? Mormons don't believe or do that anymore. Didn't you get the memo?


So far as disembowelment atoning for the sin - I judge don't understand faithbased murder. Besides, the ripple effect of the damage path from these monsters continues long after they are gone.

Capital punishment for pediphiles = The only proven permanent cure. This I understand.

We do believe that, it just can't be practiced right now.

And yes, it is the right thing to do in those cases. If a person has slipped so far down that this activity is right to them, or they think it is what will make them happy, they are not going to be cured.

And I think perhaps the same rule here should apply to gang members. They should be hung in the closest local park to their house for everyone that is involved in the persons life to see justice done, and an example set for those who share the perverse views.

[_Inconceivable]

...The first is what does any of this have to do with the Church?

..How can the Church be held responsible for the individual actions of its members based on nothing more than the fact of their membership?
... If a Mormon pedophile molests a child, you sue the Church of which he is a member...

..Its not enough that the pervert goes to jail; the church of which he is a member apparently somehow should have prevented his actions...

Good and thoughtful questions Coggs.

Both the law and "the church" have determined that clergy have been unreliable at fostering cures for Pediphiles - forgiveness and a verbal commitment being their primary method.

There has been at least one case where a bishop, stake and mission president was aware of a sexual predator's history through his confession and testimony of the victims and the leaders unwittingly kept this information confidential. If the pediphile had been reported he could have been prosecuted and further acts of violence upon those unaware may not have been committed.

I believe for a clergy to keep such things confidential is now a criminal offence. It was not this way before the mid '90's.

The church has been sued for gross ignorance of the nature of such monsters. Though the pediphile is the ultimate dirtbag, the fact that a clergy was informed of such behavior and did nothing effective to prevent further molestations has brought the the church into justifiable liability.

This liability is one of the reasons for the church's revelation on the need for a damage control center to assist bishops that are informed of this incurable behavior.

To me, it was more of a knee/jerk born policy construed by blind men leaning way too much on old revelations of dubious men that are dead.

[_Inconceivable]

We do believe that, it just can't be practiced right now.

uncomfortably funny... until it occurred to me that you're serious about the blood atonement stuff.

No, you really did miss the memo. It's not doctrine anymore. You won't get a temple recommend if you preach or sympathise with those that advocate it. One of the many reasons why Brigham Young and Porter Rockwell wouldn't qualify for one now either.


Though the way we draw our conclusions don't run parallel, we can both agree they don't belong in mortality.