Fraud

[_ajax18]

I don't have that much faith in the actuality of objective legal analysis that is supposedly upheld by judges in the U.S. court system to say they commit fraud in the legal sense, certainly not to the point that I think they would ever be convicted. How much of that mumbo jumbo actually comes into play in real world legal practice Sock Puppet. It just brought back bad memories from law school to me. I never could get it because whole time I couldn't help but see it all from a legal realist perspective. We all know that judges already have the answer they want. The only thing they ask is a semi logical analysis to allow them to get to that predetermined answer.

But Gordon B. Hinckely did admit that either the Church was true or it is the biggest fraud known to man. I would concur.

[_sock puppet]

I don't have that much faith in the actuality of objective legal analysis that is supposedly upheld by judges in the U.S. court system to say they commit fraud in the legal sense, certainly not to the point that I think they would ever be convicted. How much of that mumbo jumbo actually comes into play in real world legal practice Sock Puppet. It just brought back bad memories from law school to me. I never could get it because whole time I couldn't help but see it all from a legal realist perspective. We all know that judges already have the answer they want. The only thing they ask is a semi logical analysis to allow them to get to that predetermined answer.

But Gordon B. Hinckely did admit that either the Church was true or it is the biggest fraud known to man. I would concur.

I think that the higher up the appellate court chain, the more true your assessment is. A court can stop going down the levels of exceptions to exceptions to exceptions...stopping at the level that gives the result that the judge's own sense of fairness or justice pre-determines. After all, law school is the study of appellate court decisions, and I know I had the same sense that you've expressed upon graduation and for the first few years of practice. It seemed a willy-nilly, mish-mash of results and decisions. Unpredictable.

However, when it comes to trial judges and the rubber hitting the road, it is quite a bit different. Somewhere between the 5th and 10th year of full-time practice most lawyers gain an understanding of the real traction at play in most trial judges' analyses and applications of the legal rules to factual situations. The legal terms and phrases take on a practical, real world effect meaning. The nexus takes place.

While appellate decisions coming down the pike yet smell of the stench of being outcome (politically palatable) driven, not process driven, at the trial court level I am rarely surprised at the outcomes rendered in any given case I am handling or am familiar with as an expert witness (I am in court as an expert witness almost as much as an advocate anymore). Looking at the fact of a case, studying the applicable legal precedents, it becomes pretty clear what the outcome will be. Rarely am I surprised anymore at the trial court level, either through resolution by a judge's ruling at the pre-trial stage (like summary judgment), evidentiary rulings the judge makes in advance or or at trial, or in crafting the jury instructions and special verdict forms. Jury verdicts are a bit more unpredictable, but I am surprised at how well juries on the whole follow the instructions, answer the questions on the verdict form in a way that makes sense given the evidence presented, and in deciding the amount of damages. Runaway juries/jury verdicts are rare, and are heralded from the rooftops by our media, such as the McDonald's hot coffee case--the real end result and background facts paint a compellingly different picture, for example.

I've tried cases involving civil fraud. I did not begin this OP with the hope of establishing a case that would prevail in a court of law. I began it to begin a discussion of what the Church is doing, vis-a-vis the legal standard for fraud.

[_Yoda]

I think that if you start to call fraud with the LDS Church, you have to take a look at ALL churches, and how they run in the US.

As Harmony pointed out, where are you seeing proof of injury. Are current members complaining of injury based on the translation of the Book of Mormon? Truth be told, most average members simply don't care! And I am not disparaging the average Church member's intelligence. It is just that most people compartmentalize logic and faith. I don't care what faith you practice...whether you or LDS, Catholic, Jewish, etc. Practicing your faith is more about family, traditions, and personal spirituality.

[_MCB]

All churches should be subjected to measures which reduce corruption. Public financial records, full infomation to potential converts, tax evasion through sale of privileges (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/simony), coverups of abuse, etc.

[_sock puppet]

I think that if you start to call fraud with the LDS Church, you have to take a look at ALL churches, and how they run in the US.

As Harmony pointed out, where are you seeing proof of injury. Are current members complaining of injury based on the translation of the Book of Mormon? Truth be told, most average members simply don't care! And I am not disparaging the average Church member's intelligence. It is just that most people compartmentalize logic and faith. I don't care what faith you practice...whether you or LDS, Catholic, Jewish, etc. Practicing your faith is more about family, traditions, and personal spirituality.

Ex-Mo's paid tithing too, and may not have the c'est la vie attitude about those funds pilfered from their pockets on false pretenses.

[_sock puppet]

It is just that most people compartmentalize logic and faith.

That's an intriguing comment.

These people each hold two opposing thoughts without their minds struggling to reconcile them?

Upon hearing such a comment, Socrates might have observed, 'An unexamined faith is not worth believing.'

[_Yoda]

I think that if you start to call fraud with the LDS Church, you have to take a look at ALL churches, and how they run in the US.

As Harmony pointed out, where are you seeing proof of injury. Are current members complaining of injury based on the translation of the Book of Mormon? Truth be told, most average members simply don't care! And I am not disparaging the average Church member's intelligence. It is just that most people compartmentalize logic and faith. I don't care what faith you practice...whether you or LDS, Catholic, Jewish, etc. Practicing your faith is more about family, traditions, and personal spirituality.

Ex-Mo's paid tithing too, and may not have the c'est la vie attitude about those funds pilfered from their pockets on false pretenses.

So are you saying that all of the other faiths where people have left and paid money to should get refunded as well? There is so much that is unproven about any organized religion that most of them could probably be proven as fraudulent. Do you really want to open that door?

[_sock puppet]

I think that if you start to call fraud with the LDS Church, you have to take a look at ALL churches, and how they run in the US.

As Harmony pointed out, where are you seeing proof of injury. Are current members complaining of injury based on the translation of the Book of Mormon? Truth be told, most average members simply don't care! And I am not disparaging the average Church member's intelligence. It is just that most people compartmentalize logic and faith. I don't care what faith you practice...whether you or LDS, Catholic, Jewish, etc. Practicing your faith is more about family, traditions, and personal spirituality.

Ex-Mo's paid tithing too, and may not have the c'est la vie attitude about those funds pilfered from their pockets on false pretenses.

So are you saying that all of the other faiths where people have left and paid money to should get refunded as well?

We're talking about the deception of Mormonism here. The LDS Church's stubborn insistence in perpetuating deceptions about how its canon came to be is not an indictment of any other religion.

There is so much that is unproven about any organized religion that most of them could probably be proven as fraudulent. Do you really want to open that door?

Perhaps you have examples in mind of how other, specific religions continue to perpetuate a false representation in the face of competent, historical evidence suggesting only one method by which its canon was derived. That will no doubt be interesting, particularly to that religion's ex-members who did pony up to the collection plate in part based on such representations.

But I thought Mormonism was unique. You know, the one true religion that is god's instrument on earth. How does it defend Mormonism by pointing out it is just like the other corrupt organized religions? Was all that JSJr doing was starting his own stripe of false religion because he didn't want to work his way up through the ranks of any of those already existing as of 1830?

Is this the true legacy of GBH on Mormonism? Its defenders just lump it in with all the other religions of the world? Is that what gaining mainstream acceptance means?

[_DarkHelmet]

But Gordon B. Hinckely did admit that either the Church was true or it is the biggest fraud known to man. I would concur.

He did set it up as either 100% true or 100% false, which creates problems for apologists who want to ignore the embarrassing stuff. I don't think it's the biggest fraud ever. That's delusions of grandeur. It's a religious fraud that is dwarfed by Islam, Catholicism and most other major religions.

[_sock puppet]

But Gordon B. Hinckely did admit that either the Church was true or it is the biggest fraud known to man. I would concur.

He did set it up as either 100% true or 100% false, which creates problems for apologists who want to ignore the embarrassing stuff. I don't think it's the biggest fraud ever. That's delusions of grandeur. It's a religious fraud that is dwarfed by Islam, Catholicism and most other major religions.

Good point, Dark Helmet. It also shines a light on how much hubris the Brethren have, how important that they think the Church is. I suppose having spent his life in SLC, GBH had difficulty imagining the world beyond the Mormon horizons. Even though he did travel extensively, such a comment suggests he did not really appreciate the size and grandeur of the world, its people, and its diversity. Maybe thinking the flip side of the coin is the 'biggest fraud known to man' makes the Brethren think their kingdom on the front side of the coin is a big domain.