Speaking of Paul H. Dunn...

[_Yoda]

It really looks like a major motivation for Elder Dunn was self-aggrandizement. I mean, come on.

And what do you think Packer's purpose in exposing him was?

[_Yoda]

And in another case of the church shooting the messenger and protecting the perp (this time the messenger was also a victim):

http://www.clobberblog.com/?p=3479

Let me get this straight
In the mid 1980s, a man named Kevin Garn got naked in a hot tub with a young woman by the name of Cheryl Maher.
Garn claims he was 28 30 at the time and acknowledges that Maher was only 15. Garn had formerly served as her Sunday School teacher when she was younger. (And just so we’re all clear, 28 30 is too old to blame something on youthful indiscretion.)
Garn becomes the [Republican] representative of the 16th District for the Utah House of Representatives in 1991.
In 2002, when Garn is running for re-election, Maher attempts to talk to the Church-owned Deseret News about what happened. DN verifies the story, yet decides to sit on it. Garn loses his bid for re-election in spite of the newspaper’s efforts to protect him.
Garn subsequently arranged a pay-off of $150,000 in hush money. The agreement was facilitated with the help of Maher’s LDS bishop.
Garn was re-elected to the House of Representatives in 2007 and became House Majority Leader in 2009.
If the Deseret News and the “helpful” bishop didn’t alert the Church to these happenings (which is extremely doubtful), Cheryl Maher did by writing a letter to the Church in 2008.
Maher was excommunicated at some point between 2002 and 2010, while Garn remains a member of the Church. She says she was excommunicated for an extra-marital affair. I’m dying to hear how Maher’s extra-marital affair (presumably with another consenting adult) warranted excommunication while Garn’s extra-marital affair with a 15 year-old didn’t.
Yet no one is blogging about this (outside of links to news stories in the sideblogs).

What am I missing here?

And just for the record, I don’t want any comments comparing this to 19th century polygamous practices.

I agree that the Church did not act properly in this case. I spoke out against it a few years ago when someone else wrote a thread about it.

But are you honestly comparing what Paul Dunn did to Garn? Come on.

[_jon]

Liz, is the point that Senior Church Leaders are clearly prepared to lie if they feel the end justifies the means?

[_Buffalo]

It really looks like a major motivation for Elder Dunn was self-aggrandizement. I mean, come on.

And what do you think Packer's purpose in exposing him was?

Well, he was a journalist, right? I suppose when you're a journalist it's called doing your job.

[_Buffalo]

I agree that the Church did not act properly in this case. I spoke out against it a few years ago when someone else wrote a thread about it.

But are you honestly comparing what Paul Dunn did to Garn? Come on.

I'm not comparing Dunn to Garn. I'm noting how the church reacts to embarrassment.

[_Tarski]

It really looks like a major motivation for Elder Dunn was self-aggrandizement. I mean, come on.

And what do you think Packer's purpose in exposing him was?

I know what mine would have been. What Dunn was doing wasn't OK. His lies created something false in me when I was a child. I would have wanted to know that when I felt the spirit listening to him, I was listening to lies.
My reason would simply be that people shouldn't assume they will get away with stuff like that. He needed to be held accountable no matter his age. Lying has consequences. Perhaps because of this, sebaceous church leaders will think twice about being phony for the lord. That alone would make it worth it.

In fact, without the phony faith promoting stories, all the way back to Joseph Smith himself, the church wouldn't even have survived. In other words, Mormonism couldn't have made it to this point while staying in the light.

[_Buffalo]

I agree that the Church did not act properly in this case. I spoke out against it a few years ago when someone else wrote a thread about it.

But are you honestly comparing what Paul Dunn did to Garn? Come on.

I'm not comparing Dunn to Garn. I'm noting how the church reacts to embarrassment.

Also, PS, how it protects wrongdoers when they have some status in the church, but will throw lay members under the bus faster than you can say Nancy Rigdon and Sarah Pratt.

[_Yoda]

Also, PS, how it protects wrongdoers when they have some status in the church, but will throw lay members under the bus faster than you can say Nancy Rigdon and Sarah Pratt.

I vehemently disagree with the Church's action in these cases as well, and have spoken out on it in previous threads here.

[_Some Schmo]

Heck, I think that local leaders should be paid, too...and Bishops should be at the top of the line. They clock in more hours than any CEO ever thought about.

I agree, liz. I think it's criminal that the church expects 10% of every member's cash supply while also expecting everyone to work their asses off to keep the church running for free. I can't think of a better business model (if, of course, all that matters is soulless capitalistic gains... money for nothing, baby!)

[_Darth J]

Other than murdering a couple of people, what harm did Mark Hoffman do?

Really, all he did was tell some false stories and made money from representing to people that his false stories were true.

What's so wrong about that? J.K. Rowling is a billionaire, and everyone knows that the Harry Potter stories are made-up. So why shouldn't Mark Hoffman have made some money from telling made-up stories, too?