Master of your Domain

[_Jason Bourne]

I'm sure the young man accused of rape or the young girl cutting her wrist and having sex with all the boys loved your typing skills too.

I guess you and the others on this board agree that it is OK for Jason, a former bishop, to blab about confessions he received on a public board? Amazing.

Bob you really are overstating this. I did not blab any confession. I was very vague. But due to any potential indiscretion I removed my comments. Please remove my comments that you copied into your post.

Thanks

[_Jason Bourne]

I see; you agree that it is OK for Jason to go around blabbing about what folks told him as a bishop. No?

Uh third false accusation. While my post was maybe a bit lacking in prudence it was not blabbing any confessions. This comment borders on false witness by you. Please stop it.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

At least Jason didn't squeal on them to their fathers, as others on this bb seem wont to do. Friggin' hypocrite.

IF you are talking about GoodK's humiliating post about his family, as you might recall, hundreds of people recognized that post about GoodK's father.

"hundreds of people"? CFR, bub.

I was rather shocked to see the son of a good friend making fun of my friend here in such a way calculated to bring attention to it in front of lots of people who would have obviously known about it.

Only you and DCP figured it out.

But, once I saw GoodK's post, and it was in the public realm, I had every interest in the world to tell his father about a public post made about him, made out to make him foolish.

What "interest" did you have in butting into another's family affair?

After all, I was his attorney.

Within the context of what was discussed in the email?

Turns out, my email never made it to the father and I did not follow up.

But you DID try. And you DID put DCP up to contacting the father.

Face it, Bishop, you have NO excuse whatsoever for what you did (or tried to do). You certainly are not one to lecture Jason or anyone else. Friggin' hypocrite.

I'm sorry that you object to it, but there just is no hypocrisy there.

Of course, I would never expect you to admit that your behavior was despicable, but a member of your ward would have to be a fool to ever admit anything to you in confidence after witnessing your behavior toward GoodK and his father.

[_dblagent007]

I have never, ever been asked about masturbation in an interview. Not growing up, not on my mission, and not in a temple recommend interview. It just never came up. So, I don't doubt that BC was never asked about it.

So you believe that it didn't happen?

I think a don't ask, don't tell policy would be best. In fact, as my kids get older I am contemplating telling my Bishop that it is NOT okay for him to specifically ask my kids about it or about anything more than the standard "are you living the law of chastity" question. I'm just a little nervous of the negative reprecussions of such a demand.

But now you believe it is happening? Bishops didn't do it in your day but.....bishops are now doing it in your kids day.

I related my experience. I didn't say that everyone else had the same experience or that all the Bishops in my day did exactly the same thing. I only said that based on my experience I didn't doubt BC's experience.

I think Bishops in the past asked about it more often (even though none of my leaders asked). I think they are asking less today. I have no hard evidence for this, it is just my impression based on what I have heard and read.

[_dblagent007]

Interesting. A clear breach of confidence here, even though you don't mention the names of the confessors. I wonder what they would have thought then had they known years later you'd be posting on a public bulletin board the most embarrassing possible things told to you.

They could be reading this board now and be affected by your indiscretion.

I did not mention specifics by any stretch. And I gave a big IF. But you are correct. Also I am anonymous. But you are correct. Anything that would be construed and breaking confidence should not be here so will go back and edit it out. Certainly it was not and is not my intent to breach any confidences given me.

Is spite of what you think of my Bob, I do cherish my time serving as a bishop and look at it as in many ways the best 6 years of my life. I know of nothing quite like it as far as being able to touch lives in a hopefully positive way.

I could be wrong, but I think Bob was being sarcastic.

[_Kishkumen]

Either I was asked in an interview about masturbation or I was not. I say that I was not. Do you think I am lying?

Don't be fatuous. There is a difference between assessing your possible motivations and the impact of a certain strategy and calling you a liar. Think it over.

Haha. I present a milquetoast view of the church.

You can go reread my post to see whether your characterization of it withstands scrutiny.

I just don't buy the Spawn of Satan image of the LDS Church that would result from believing all of your "rebuttals." I happen to think it is a good institution with some black marks in its past.

I'm sure it is a fine institution for some. That does not place it beyond the reach of criticism, as you freely admit.

[_Kishkumen]

Uh third false accusation. While my post was maybe a bit lacking in prudence it was not blabbing any confessions. This comment borders on false witness by you. Please stop it.

Ugh. Jason, there is nothing at all wrong with you describing in general terms your past practices in dealing with a certain transgression in the capacity of bishop. Bob is merely engaging in the lawyerly sophistry that we should expect of, well, a lawyer.

[_dblagent007]

Don't be fatuous. There is a difference between assessing your possible motivations and the impact of a certain strategy and calling you a liar. Think it over.

Okay, so you expressed your amazement at how "apologists" (I guess I am one, but it is news to me) convienently are exceptions to the rule. The implication was that I was lying (yeah, you didn't come out and say it, but it was clearly there). I didn't notice anything you wrote referring to my motivation, until later when you were backtracking.

By the way, I think I already explained my motivation and it wasn't to provide a milquetoast view of the church. The problem was that to some it seemed literally impossible for BC to have grown up without being asked about masturbation. I simply offered my perspective to back up BC's experience. To some it must seem unfathomable that such a thing could happen.

I'm sure it is a fine institution for some. That does not place it beyond the reach of criticism, as you freely admit.

Then we agree.

[_Kishkumen]

I think I already explained my motivation and it wasn't to provide a milquetoast view of the church.

And why you did is what I find puzzling. OK. So you didn't. So what? What I was pointing out was that the collection of rebuttals of this kind would tend to lead people to the impression that the Church was some kind of milquetoast operation. I said nothing of you intending to portray it as such.

The problem was that to some it seemed literally impossible for BC to have grown up without being asked about masturbation. I simply offered my perspective to back up BC's experience. To some it must seem unfathomable that such a thing could happen.

Probably because of the many, many, many stories they have heard and their own personal experiences that would lead them to conclude that such questions were standard procedure.

[_Jason Bourne]

Ugh. Jason, there is nothing at all wrong with you describing in general terms your past practices in dealing with a certain transgression in the capacity of bishop. Bob is merely engaging in the lawyerly sophistry that we should expect of, well, a lawyer.

Perhaps. But still I think prudence is best. I have always tried to practice that here and perhaps today I slipped a bit.