Church postpones court for Flatlander ....

[_The Nehor]

I just hope that if the news covers it that they cover his letter writing campaign about bringing down the First Presidency.

[_SatanWasSetUp]

I'm mostly concerned why during this "politically chaged election season" more people aren't talking about the gay issue. The only people I hear talking about it are Mormon leaders. Once again they are at the forefront of morality. We have congress meeting to figure out the financial problems, and while our lawmakers spend their time talking about banks and bailouts and crap like that, somewhere two guys are humping. If we don't do something soon about the gay problem, the political discourse will be drown out by the sound of millions of ballsacks slapping together.

[_Roger Morrison]

I just hope that if the news covers it that they cover his letter writing campaign about bringing down the First Presidency.

I didn't read him being as vindictive, as you seem to have. He identified himself as a LDS member, a HP. That could cause confusion outside of the tribe. Not his fault;-) I don't recall him castigating the church, or its leaders in profane or vile terms.

He simply states his disagreement with them, as do I and, I hope many more. This guy was smart enough to be heard. I haven't been, except to those who frequent MDB. Which really doesn't help his/my/others cause a whole lot...

I think he, and anyonelse has the right to express diagreement civily without fear. It is also his right to petition (it is in Canada). Which, in a free & Democratic society should give him the right to present THE petition...

I wonder if Flatlander will bring a Lawyer to the "Court"? One can hardly be expected to attend "Court" without a Lawyer. Media notification would also be appropriate in these times of transparency. I doubt LDS Inc would want any proceedings not in full light so any malicious attacks by Flatlander on helpless old-men would be caught on tape!

Will be interesting to see how this plays out. Keep us boonie-dwellers posted, eh...

Roger

[_The Nehor]

I just hope that if the news covers it that they cover his letter writing campaign about bringing down the First Presidency.

I didn't read him being as vindictive, as you seem to have. He identified himself as a LDS member, a HP. That could cause confusion outside of the tribe. Not his fault;-) I don't recall him castigating the church, or its leaders in profane or vile terms.

He simply states his disagreement with them, as do I and, I hope many more. This guy was smart enough to be heard. I haven't been, except to those who frequent MDB. Which really doesn't help his/my/others cause a whole lot...

I think he, and anyonelse has the right to express diagreement civily without fear. It is also his right to petition (it is in Canada). Which, in a free & Democratic society should give him the right to present THE petition...

I wonder if Flatlander will bring a Lawyer to the "Court"? One can hardly be expected to attend "Court" without a Lawyer. Media notification would also be appropriate in these times of transparency. I doubt LDS Inc would want any proceedings not in full light so any malicious attacks by Flatlander on helpless old-men would be caught on tape!

Will be interesting to see how this plays out. Keep us boonie-dwellers posted, eh...

Roger

I'm not sure I see him as vindictive. I think he's being an attention whore. Sending false letters to get a response is silly and childish. I'm not sure how threatening the letters were. He got his response. If I tried to talk to the President of my nation I wouldn't get a response. If I sent threats to kill or depose him I think I would. This is hardly laudable activity though.

He can present the petition. He can mail it wherever he likes. He has no right to force any particular person to care about or read his petition.

As this court has no legal power over him he doesn't need a lawyer. As our own scripture attests we have power only to expel him from membership, nothing more. He has the right to represent himself if he wishes. Legally we don't have to do even that. If a private organization wishes they can kick someone out because they feel like it.

I don't doubt this loon will want media to show up so he can be interviewed afterwards. He might even succeed. Good for him.

[_Pokatator]

I don't doubt this loon will want media to show up so he can be interviewed afterwards. He might even succeed. Good for him.

I doubt that your really mean, "good for him", but I do. He did what he had to do to get their attention, to get some kind of correspondence going with them. He was and is creative, the average Joe going through normal methods will get nowhere. Maybe as far as their SP, no further, meaning nowhere. That is how these elitists in SLC operate, until correspondence, I mean real correspondence occurs we will only hear from those that seem radical but what other recourse do they really have?

[_The Nehor]

I don't doubt this loon will want media to show up so he can be interviewed afterwards. He might even succeed. Good for him.

I doubt that your really mean, "good for him", but I do. He did what he had to do to get their attention, to get some kind of correspondence going with them. He was and is creative, the average Joe going through normal methods will get nowhere. Maybe as far as their SP, no further, meaning nowhere. That is how these elitists in SLC operate, until correspondence, I mean real correspondence occurs we will only hear from those that seem radical but what other recourse do they really have?

No, I don't really mean 'good for him'. I really mean that I just don't care. I don't think he succeeded though. He didn't get 'some kind of correspondence going'. He threw out lying threats and portrayed himself as a psycho. Think Unabomber if he didn't actually use bombs but instead just threatened people.

What other recourse? If you really believe that they're an elitist out of touch group concerned solely with their own gain I recommend leaving the Church. Who would want to even associate with such people? What crackpot would accept that they hold the keys of God's Priesthood?

I don't this guy is some hero. He's a loon who forced some attention on himself, the attention one gets by being a loon.

[_Yoda]

OK, I admit to being lost. What was in the contents of the threatening letter he sent to the First Presidency? Is there a link?

[_The Nehor]

OK, I admit to being lost. What was in the contents of the threatening letter he sent to the First Presidency? Is there a link?

I just watched the videos on his site. He claims he sent letters to mid-level leaders (Area Seventy, Temple and Mission Presidents, etc.) with detailed codewords making it clear he wants to bring down the First Presidency. This is according to him. I've never seen the actual letter.

[_skippy the dead]

Flatlander is the owner of signingforsomething.com

He reports receiving this email from his SP about the upcoming court:

Dear [Flatlander],

We have decided to defer your disciplinary council to a later date given
this politically charged election season. We feel that a more measured and
considered discussion can be held at a date sometime in November.
Meanwhile, we invite you to meet with the stake presidency tomorrow night at
the same appointed time to discuss you situation.

It is almost a 200-mile trip for me to drive to the stake center so I would
appreciate a confirmation that you will attend the meeting.

Regards,
President [Bonehead]

Looks like the local leaders 'blinked.' I'm sure they'll still nail him after the election, when the risk of bad press is less.

So a sin isn't a sin if it occurs during a politically charged election season? Either he engaged in "conduct unbecoming" or he didn't. This backtracking shows the problem with trying to penalize members for disagreeing politically with the brethren.

[_harmony]

So a sin isn't a sin if it occurs during a politically charged election season? Either he engaged in "conduct unbecoming" or he didn't. This backtracking shows the problem with trying to penalize members for disagreeing politically with the brethren.

Well, it would likely cause a mild ripple in the California press and I doubt they want any ripples at all at this point.

What are the polls saying about the amendment?