Death of Tom Kimball

[_Kishkumen]

Over at MD&D the predictable finger-pointing at Post-Mormons is unfolding. Some of it I think is justified. That is, because Tom was a Mormon Studies and Post-Mormon figure of some standing, many people started from a position of partial unbelief and shock and tried to square the good memories of the Tom they knew with the actual monster he was. That looked bad, and so the minor Mopologists are criticizing Post-Mormons for their way of reacting to the story. I would be more on board with the criticism if it weren't the case that many people within the Post-Mormon community are also being critical of these soft-pedaling reactions.

Also, like we saw on another apologetic blog earlier, there is concern that Post-Mormons are plain blaming the LDS Church for the fact that Tom was a pedophile. To them it seems obvious that there are pedophiles everywhere, in every community, in every walk of life, so it would be ludicrous to say the LDS Church uniquely breeds pedophiles. Of course, this is an oversimplification of the conversation. I have no doubt that some people would blame the LDS Church in a kind of sloppy way, but I think the more important question here is how a particular community and its culture protect their kids or inadvertently shield pedophiles from the consequences of their crimes.

More interesting yet to me is the way both sides identify each other as the Other. I get it. I see it all the time. It always puzzles me a bit because all of us are a community of sorts. Some of us may really not like others of us, and that is only to be expected, but we have all been shaped by very similar experiences. In this I am speaking mostly of those of us who are or were members of the LDS Church, since all of us went through the community experience that is pertinent to the discussion. That said, I see all of us who are Mormon, Post-Mormon, or Mormon-interested as a community.

So Mopologists see how the Post-Mormons are reacting to the news about Tom and speak of them as their own group, distinct from the insider Mormon experience. Post-Mormons look at the Church they have left and blame it for its alleged impact on Tom and his victims. What is missed in all of this is that we are all, when it gets down to it, the Mormon community. Post-Mormons don't suddenly cease to be Mormons in their culture and personality just because they quit going to Church and stop believing in the Mormon faith. They very much do respond to these situations as Mormons, both the good and the bad. It is sad, I think, to see this horrific tragedy become yet another opportunity for boundary construction and maintenance.

Furthermore, we all should be concerned about how the LDS Church succeeds or fails at protecting kids. We can put away the idea that the Church has a problem that is utterly unique because that is not helpful. It may make for an interesting research project, but what we really need is practical solutions for a real problem that should not be just an occasion for measuring the relative merits or demerits of Mormonism. If there is room for improvement, then that improvement should be sought by everyone. I decided that there was no way I would put my children in an organization that felt it was imperative that priesthood leaders interview kids in private and interrogate them about their intimate sexual experiences. I think that is a great place to start attacking the problem because the measures taken thus far in that regard are inadequate.

And let's also be realistic about Tom. Tom was a predator who deeply harmed many girls and women. He took the coward's way out, and that is consistent with him having always been a coward who preyed on the vulnerable. At the same time, he was the Mormon community's cowardly predator. Tom left the LDS Church 5 years ago. His first victim confronted him in 1991. You do the math. This means that long before 1991, in other words, when Tom was about 24 years old, he was already committing these crimes within the Mormon community. The fact that he perpetrated such acts for over 30 years within the Mormon community is naturally considered a failure of the community, including the LDS Church. If Tom left the LDS Church 5 years ago, there were many years in which he was perpetrating these crimes within the LDS Church proper, and I think it is completely fair to ask how the Church's problematic way of dealing with these problems may have shielded him from the consequences of his actions all those years.

[_Yahoo Bot]

The reason why pedophiles have freedom to operate in the LDS Church is the same reason pyramid schemes work in LDS communities. They are affinity crimes. The criminals are not concerned with church doctrine, but they capitalize upon friendships and relationships and the trust of persons in authority. That description applies to other churches, sports teams, youth organizations, schools and employers.

A pedophile who is a complete loaner without friends is not going to commit these kinds of crimes, but may try and kidnap kids as a driveby.

Don't let your kids do sleepovers. Accompany them to sports practices. Make sure when they engage in youth activities in church that there are two adults. Don't let them be interviewed by a bishop unless you are standing outside the door. I was a bishop for many years. No parent never did that and I personally questioned that. One thing I might recommend is to provide a switch to each bishop to turn off the white noise maker in the foyer next to almost all bishops' offices.

Talk to them about grooming practices. I have been a personal witness to how groomers work, usually unconsciously, in my extended family and in my practice.

However, a large number of molestation cases occur within families, where there is hardly anything that can be done. I both defend and pursue molestation cases. More than half involve fathers, step-fathers or brothers. Can't stop that.

[_Shulem]

Don't let them be interviewed by a bishop unless you are standing outside the door. I was a bishop for many years. No parent never did that and I personally questioned that.

Just to think about how many bishops questioned children about their personal masturbation habits and then shaming them for having touched their bodies makes me feel the Church has yet to be punished for their longstanding practice of abusing children behind bishop's doors.

You may have questioned the parents for not standing outside the door but you should have been questioning the ring leaders of the Child Molestation Program of the Church -- the General Authorities who sponsored it all along in order to control the crotches of the youth and shame them and make them feel guilty. Ultimately, Mormon Man-god is the real child abuser and may all the guilt and sins rest upon the head of Mormon Man-god. When I think of Mormon Man-god, I imagine him asking kids when was the last time they masturbated? I picture Mormon Man-god as the real abuser of both boys and girls.

[_Yahoo Bot]

There is no such thing as a Child Molestation Program in the Church.

Masturbation is a social taboo and considered wrong by many Christian and other faiths.

Confession is the part of many Christian religions.

[_Shulem]

There is no such thing as a Child Molestation Program in the Church.

The Church Cult interrogates and shames young men and women about their personal sexual habits and shames them regarding masturbation. The First Presidencies and Apostles of the past are all deserving of JAIL time for their crimes in abusing children. Same goes for the present leaders today. They are a child molesters, guilty of shaming boys and girls behind closed doors.

Masturbation is a social taboo and considered wrong by many Christian and other faiths

Churches and cults that abuse children by shaming them about their personal masturbation habits deserve to be wiped out. If I had my way I would have the First Presidency arrested and charged with crimes in running a child molesting cult. Lock them up for life. Disgusting Mormon leaders are child molesters, every one them!

Confession is the part of many Christian religions.

Get your filthy religious cult hands of the kids! Religious freaks do tend to be the worst perverts hiding behind pious doors that are sick and depraved. They use religion in order to abuse kids. So sick.

You belong to a CULT! Sick.

[_Yahoo Bot]

I don't think anybody takes you seriously.

[_Shulem]

Sure. If you say so. You should know.

[_Kishkumen]

The reason why pedophiles have freedom to operate in the LDS Church is the same reason pyramid schemes work in LDS communities. They are affinity crimes. The criminals are not concerned with church doctrine, but they capitalize upon friendships and relationships and the trust of persons in authority. That description applies to other churches, sports teams, youth organizations, schools and employers.

A pedophile who is a complete loaner without friends is not going to commit these kinds of crimes, but may try and kidnap kids as a driveby.

Don't let your kids do sleepovers. Accompany them to sports practices. Make sure when they engage in youth activities in church that there are two adults. Don't let them be interviewed by a bishop unless you are standing outside the door. I was a bishop for many years. No parent never did that and I personally questioned that. One thing I might recommend is to provide a switch to each bishop to turn off the white noise maker in the foyer next to almost all bishops' offices.

Talk to them about grooming practices. I have been a personal witness to how groomers work, usually unconsciously, in my extended family and in my practice.

However, a large number of molestation cases occur within families, where there is hardly anything that can be done. I both defend and pursue molestation cases. More than half involve fathers, step-fathers or brothers. Can't stop that.

Thank you, Yahoo Bot. I appreciate your knowledgable, measured, and practical perspective. Obviously I do not agree with you completely, but things would definitely be better in an attainable way if people would heed your advice. And I say kudos to you for posting in this way in what must seem to you to be a very unmeasured an unfair thread. I know it can't be easy.

Of course, I go much farther than you do. I do not see the overwhelming need for bishops to interview minors about their sex lives. My position is that this should stop. Period. I understand that this seems extreme from a real insider's perspective and that it is unlikely to happen, but I don't see any good reason for it not to happen. LDS parents should be responsible for the moral upbringing of their kids, including their worthiness to receive the ordinances of baptism, confirmation, and ordination to the Aaronic priesthood, and the Church should not substitute male leaders for the parents.

It is inappropriate for male leaders to communicate in private with children about their sex lives. Even the best of bishops lacks the proper training to know how to engage with kids on this sensitive topic in an appropriate and healthy way (unless that bishop has training in the psychology of adolescent sexuality). Not knowing how to do it properly, the door is wide open for these men to cause a lot of harm, which includes inuring young people to trusting male leaders with such intimacies too much. And I have not even gotten to the few men who are predators who deliberately use this situation to groom and abuse kids.

In other words, I agree with you that these are affinity crimes, and that one can encounter the same problems in other organizations. That said, the fixation the LDS Church has regarding holding onto one obvious source of trouble, the personal interview dealing with chastity, is somewhat particular. LDS belief and praxis do stand behind the choice not to remove this risk. At root, churches are very much social organizations whose doctrines and practices have everything to do with the social sphere. The reasons for preserving the right to interview kids about sexual purity are not neutral. The interviews are a problem. Until this is recognized and dealt with, I don't hold the LDS Church to be a safe environment for kids.

Safe is when we make our best effort to remove known risks. It is not when we excuse a situation by saying, essentially, "most kids are not abused by their priesthood leaders."

[_Dr Exiled]

I don't see bishop's interviews with kids going away any time soon regardless of what the bad apples do. The idea that one needs to include the church in periodic worthiness interviews is a source of the church's magic that members give it. So, the sooner kids get used to the idea the better. The members are supposedly broken and in constant need of having priesthood authority over them, guiding them through life. Supposedly change or repentance cannot happen unless a busy body neighbor gets involved under the cloak of the magical priesthood. And repentance is never really possible as the nebulous godly sorrow requirement and having to remain spotless for the rest of one's life guaranty failure. No, child interviews are there to stay.

[_Shulem]

Don't take me seriously. Whatever.

But, the world is evolving and changing and I think for the better. Governments are in place to protect the people and keep an orderly society running, that's the purpose of government. With that said, the time is coming when governments will step in and stop the Mormon Church from harassing kids about masturbation and their personal sexual habits. You can bet that change is coming and the Church will be forced to comply or be confronted with having their front doors padlocked and leaders charged with the appropriate crimes in which they have been alleged to have committed.

It has to stop. I'm serious about that and hope you take that seriously.

I hope that you, as a former bishop, didn't terrorize young boys and guilt them. If you did, you have some serious repenting to do. If you didn't, good for you.