DiscussMormonism.com

When I worked in finance, our legal/compliance department would send out monthly "ethics scenarios" via email posing hypothetical situations dealing with kickbacks, conflicts of interest, etc.

Since I have a real life ethics scenario troubling me at the moment, I thought I would seek the advice of this distinguished group. Before reading, I want you to know I am being 100% sincere. Continue.

I have been made aware of a rather embarrassing bit of personal information about a Mormon Gulag executive. First, a little

Background:

This person is a very tenured and high ranking staff member, and is also involved in one of the gulag's other sister program.

This person appeared on my "The Bad Ones" list long before I found this out.

The Scenario:

Let's just call this Gulag executive "Roy." Roy, his wife, and his children lived in Utah County were he was a bishop in his ward.

One day a woman came to his office, seeking the advice of her bishop for her marital problems. An affair transpired, they were caught, and Roy was excommunicated. His wife divorced him, and Roy has since remarried to his mistress. I received information a month ago from my best informant, another staff member, about Roy's excommunication. I then received the same information from another independent source that currently works with Roy.

--

Considering that;
A. This is not a good person who has been abusive and cruel to children,
B. Apologists - like DCP and Bob Crockett, for example - take an active role in bringing to light the personal lives/skeletons of critics of the church (like Quinn),
C. This speaks to "Roy's" character and subsequently the leadership of the Mormon Gulag and its affiliates

Would you share this information publicly?




..

GoodK wrote:Apologists - like DCP and Bob Crockett, for example - take an active role in bringing to light the personal lives/skeletons of critics of the church (like Quinn),

Could you please supply an example of the personal information about Mike Quinn that I've supposedly made public?

Before you try, let me caution you that, so far as I'm aware, I don't know any personal information about Mike Quinn -- excepting what's publicly available -- and have never known any such information (beyond the very trivial). And you, I expect, know precisely the same personal information about him that I do.

Daniel Peterson wrote:

GoodK wrote:Apologists - like DCP and Bob Crockett, for example - take an active role in bringing to light the personal lives/skeletons of critics of the church (like Quinn),

Could you please supply an example of the personal information about Mike Quinn that I've supposedly made public?

Before you try, let me caution you that, so far as I'm aware, I don't know any personal information about Mike Quinn -- excepting what's publicly available. And you, I suspect, know precisely the same personal information about him that I do.

Not every thread that refers to DCP has to turn into a thread about him. So even if GoodK has a perfect answer to this, I urge him to stay schtum.

Anyone want to respond to GoodK's question? It is an interesting one ...

GoodK,

I had to read this twice to grasp where you were coming from.

You have no proof of this:

One day a woman came to his office, seeking the advice of her bishop for her marital problems. An affair transpired, they were caught, and Roy was excommunicated. His wife divorced him, and Roy has since remarried to his mistress. I received information a month ago from my best informant, another staff member, about Roy's excommunication. I then received the same information from another independent source that currently works with Roy.

And even if you did, I don't see how smearing the guy's character will help your cause. What you need to do is find irrefutable-concrete-fully documented proof of what goes on within the confines of the facility in question and appeal to social services.

Chap wrote:Not every thread that refers to DCP has to turn into a thread about him. So even if GoodK has a perfect answer to this, I urge him to stay schtum.

In other words, he's free to allege grossly unethical behavior on my part.

But if I deny it and ask him to justify his false allegation, that's an attempt to turn the thread into a discussion of me, and he should maintain lofty silence.

Wonderful.

Welcome to the Ex-Mormon Non-Discussions Libel of Mormons Board.

I think it depends, but before we can continue, it would help if we knew:

Church member or not, is he still an employee/director/whatever of the Mormon Gulag?

Daniel Peterson wrote:

Chap wrote:Not every thread that refers to DCP has to turn into a thread about him. So even if GoodK has a perfect answer to this, I urge him to stay schtum.

In other words, he's free to allege grossly unethical behavior on my part.

But if I deny it and ask him to justify his false allegation, that's an attempt to turn the thread into a discussion of me, and he should maintain lofty silence.

Wonderful.

Welcome to the Ex-Mormon Non-Discussions Libel of Mormons Board.

Whether or not GoodK chooses to respond is up to him. And participation in this board is a voluntary affair.

And to return to the topic: if an excommunicated adulterer is helping to run this apparently not very nice institution, then knowing that may make devout LDS parents less likely to send their sons there.

And that might be a good thing.

Chap wrote:Whether or not GoodK chooses to respond is up to him.

Of course it is.

Chap wrote:And participation in this board is a voluntary affair.

Of course it is.

So what?

I guess I've sat on what I know long enough: [Potentially slanderous/libelous material deleted]

Daniel Peterson wrote:

Chap wrote:Whether or not GoodK chooses to respond is up to him.

Of course it is.

Chap wrote:And participation in this board is a voluntary affair.

Of course it is.

So what?

I guess I've sat on what I know long enough: [Potentially slanderous/libelous material deleted]

Uh-huh. Great little religion you have there, bishop!