mentalgymnast wrote:But again, my point is that Scratch was making a mountain out of a molehill. Would you agree?
Regarding the quote, "Mormons in law enforcement are keeping track of Internet chatter to find out where protests will be held. . . 'Our members in law enforcement know where to look for this kind of stuff,'" I'm afraid I disagree.
Why would it not be helpful to know where the protests are going to be held?
The point is that these law enforcement officers are apparently accessing privileged information that isn't available to the common citizen--thus abusing their position, all at the behest of a religious organization.
.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
Dr. Shades wrote:The point is that these law enforcement officers are apparently accessing privileged information that isn't available to the common citizen--thus abusing their position, all at the behest of a religious organization.
.
I suppose then you have to ask what is meant by "internet chatter" and whether or not it is privileged information, or if it's also available to anyone who knows how to locate/find it.
Dr. Shades wrote:The point is that these law enforcement officers are apparently accessing privileged information that isn't available to the common citizen--thus abusing their position, all at the behest of a religious organization.
.
I suppose then you have to ask what is meant by "internet chatter" and whether or not it is privileged information, or if it's also available to anyone who knows how to locate/find it.
Regards, MG
It raises the question: if it is "available to anyone who knows how to locate/find it," then why would Sis. West mention "our members in law enforcement"?
California cops are full-time law enforcement personnel, according to their sworn duties, whether they are being paid or not. Whether in Church or elsewhere.
They very often moonlight, and while moonlighting may wear their uniforms and guns. They moonlight as security guards often, most particularly in the motion picture industry where they control traffic. I see them all the time on the streets in my town working for the motion picture industry at various film locations. They can use their motorcycles and cop cars if their department lets them take them home. LAPD officers may use motorcycles and cop cars off-duty even though LAPD does not let them take them home.
They may also work for free if they choose. There is nothing prohibiting them from using department resources off-duty. And they do.
If is a little-known fact that the Church usually doesn't call California cops as bishops or stake presidents because their oath of office obligates them to report confessed criminal activity, even if they hear about it at church. Ordinary persons serving as bishops have no such obligation except in cases of child abuse.
Scratch's comment that the Church is likely creating dossiers on gays and lesbians is troubling and disturbing. Evidence?
Scratch: The point is that these law enforcement officers are apparently accessing privileged information that isn't available to the common citizen--thus abusing their position, all at the behest of a religious organization.
MG: I suppose then you have to ask what is meant by "internet chatter" and whether or not it is privileged information, or if it's also available to anyone who knows how to locate/find it.
Scratch: It raises the question: if it is "available to anyone who knows how to locate/find it," then why would Sis. West mention "our members in law enforcement"?
Ummm...because they know how to locate and find it...faster? Or they may know which sources are more reliable? You'd think anyway. They're experts. They've been down a lot of these rabbit trails before, wouldn't you assume?
Again, you've made a lot of to do about nothing as I originally said. Keep it up!
rcrocket wrote:If is a little-known fact that the Church usually doesn't call California cops as bishops or stake presidents because their oath of office obligates them to report confessed criminal activity, even if they hear about it at church. Ordinary persons serving as bishops have no such obligation except in cases of child abuse.
So.. bishops don't have to report fraud, theft, wife abuse, malicious mischief, or murder in CA? Whatever happened to AoF 12?
Scratch's comment that the Church is likely creating dossiers on gays and lesbians is troubling and disturbing. Evidence?
I agree. If Scratch is right, that is both troubling and disturbing. I'm just trying to figure out how that's any different from the church creating dossiers on the members. Shades of the Strenthening the Members Committee.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
There is no state, except one I think, that requires ordinary citizens to report crime. Including murder. Including bishops. Except in many states for child abuse.
And there are no dossiers on members. I challenge for proof.
rcrocket wrote:There is no state, except one I think, that requires ordinary citizens to report crime. Including murder. Including bishops. Except in many states for child abuse.
How odd.
And there are no dossiers on members. I challenge for proof.
Right. And it's all just a clipping service.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.