Why do so many people dislike John Dehlin?

[_Rollo Tomasi]

This is interesting because it is dated after SP King's June 7 letter to John Dehlin; however, King's letter references "recent statements and actions regarding the Church and your place in it." Anyone know what King is referring to here?

June 3rd
http://mormonstories.org/flawed-but-trying/

Thanks. Yep, that would probably do it.

[_Mayan Elephant]

SP King's June 7 letter to John Dehlin; however, King's letter references "recent statements and actions regarding the Church and your place in it." Anyone know what King is referring to here?

i am really having a hard time figuring your arguments out, in terms of where you are going. you seem to believe EVERY conclusion and assumption that mormonstories fed you. and when evidence is presented, you come back with the idea that these conclusions and assumptions made by mormonstories are actually factual and it is up to everyone to prove that your version of conclusions and assumptions that you swallowed when fed by mormonstories are not true. you seem to want to prove that people who like Mormon Stories are obliged to be mormonstories sycophants and practice the art of hack apologetics.

you had a completely different strategy when discussing kate kelly. it is very curious to me.

maybe the difference between the two (kelly and mormonstories), and how it is playing out still to this day is the bigger story, i think it is.

mormonstories launched a massive media campaign, perhaps unmatched, to inject misinformation and pity and sympathy and raw meat for sycophants. he launched it within a few hours of getting his letter. it worked, these things usually do. the uphill battle of disproving the misinformation is probably impossible, even though the facts are entirely on the church's side here with regard to protocol.

so, to answer your question you submitted to SML - a lot changed. a goddamn ton. it changed within the ward, and the leaders. it changed at the stake level. it changed at mormonstories and at Mormon Stories. for example, Mormon Stories published a 4 hour interview of Sandra Tanner. but, as soon as the campaign started, mormonstories moved that off his front page. it was a totally dickish move and one that got praise at his Facebook community.

[Guest]

It was from this foundation that MormonStories.org, StayLDS.com, MormonMatters.org, WhyMormonsQuestion.org, MormonMentalHealth.org, AThoughtfulFaith.org, ldshomosexuality.com, GayMormonStories.org, CirclingTheWagons.org, MormonsForMarriageEquality.org, NoMoreStrangers.org, and other such projects would grow. I saw many Mormons struggling….I was struggling myself….and wanted to provide help. In all of these efforts, I have been inspired (ironically) by what I learned at church.[/i].

hat tip to Racer and Rosebud.

yowza. too bad the bazooka didn't dig this up earlier in the conversation. no matter what you think of rosebud, here you have it, still taking credit for circling the wagons, and a whole ton of other half-baked premature marketing territory-grabs. nice work, bazooka. i doubt it is going to swing anyone on what they think of the rosebud conversation, but she sure as hell has at least that fact right.

and another hat tip to SML. i suppose this is an improvement over claiming to be "inspired" to his Mormon sycophants and doing it in the third person.

this all reminds me of another dude that was struggling with a question about religion, and along came inspiration, and all he wanted to do was help, so he published a thing or two, started a bank and a few other things and did it all out of inspiration to help. he too was really humble, and left it up to his sycophants to sing praises to him about his "calling." WTF was his name?

[_Bazooka]

SP King's June 7 letter to John Dehlin; however, King's letter references "recent statements and actions regarding the Church and your place in it." Anyone know what King is referring to here?

i am really having a hard time figuring your arguments out, in terms of where you are going. you seem to believe EVERY conclusion and assumption that mormonstories fed you. and when evidence is presented, you come back with the idea that these conclusions and assumptions made by mormonstories are actually factual and it is up to everyone to prove that your version of conclusions and assumptions that you swallowed when fed by mormonstories are not true. you seem to want to prove that people who like Mormon Stories are obliged to be mormonstories sycophants and practice the art of hack apologetics.

you had a completely different strategy when discussing kate kelly. it is very curious to me.

My impression of Rollo, and I'm not trying to put words in his mouth, is that he likes to distill the drama in an orderly set of facts that fit in and around a timeline.
I admire his ability and desire to do that, it appeals to my sense of logic and order and my penchant for finding patterns. The SP's letter makes for very clear reading. I understand Equality's desire to contextualise the letter and place into an order of things precipitated by mormonstories himself, I don't think Rollo is disagreeing with him. But doing so does not change the meaning of the SP's letter, it merely adds the backstory to where it came from.

maybe the difference between the two (kelly and mormonstories), and how it is playing out still to this day is the bigger story, i think it is.

mormonstories launched a massive media campaign, perhaps unmatched, to inject misinformation and pity and sympathy and raw meat for sycophants. he launched it within a few hours of getting his letter. it worked, these things usually do. the uphill battle of disproving the misinformation is probably impossible, even though the facts are entirely on the church's side here with regard to protocol.

so, to answer your question you submitted to SML - a lot changed. a goddamn ton. it changed within the ward, and the leaders. it changed at the stake level. it changed at mormonstories and at Mormon Stories. for example, Mormon Stories published a 4 hour interview of Sandra Tanner. but, as soon as the campaign started, mormonstories moved that off his front page. it was a totally dickish move and one that got praise at his Facebook community.

It would be my opinion that, in terms of the 'crime' of public apostasy, mormonstories is a bigger and longer term culprit than Ms Kelly.
That he has gotten away with it thus far, in light of Kelly's excommunication, really boggles my mind.

[_Mayan Elephant]

It would be my opinion that, in terms of the 'crime' of public apostasy, mormonstories is a bigger and longer term culprit than Ms Kelly.

That he has gotten away with it thus far, in light of Kelly's excommunication, really boggles my mind.

which brings me back to what rollo has done and is doing. a few things are clear to me with regards to these two situations.

1. Protocol. the North Logan Stake went by the book, the Virgina (sorry, can't remember the whole name here) Stake, went by a part of the book but really just botched the entire thing.

2. Charges of Apostasy. Kelly owned what she has done, owned her movement, owned her actions, met them directly, made no apologies, spoke unequivocally. she did interviews about who she was and what she wanted and who she represented as the leader of this specific movement. her rebuttal was about the process, without apologies for who she was and what she was asking.

mormonstories was like nailing jello to a wall. and Mormon Stories was just as impossible. mormonstories launched a media campaign saying this was tied to kelly, that wasn't sustainable. then said it was for having doubts. that didn't really add up either. then it was for defending gays, well, BS (see rosebud.) then it was him taking the high road and de-escalating. oh boy, and all this over a simple question.

3. Potential for Longevity and a Following - kate kelly spent a year or so making herself very clear and specific and she did it with honor and her head held high. she has a lot of potential. mormonstories is writing a prospectus for a business as he goes along and denying/claiming crap all willynilly. of course he is going to stick around if he can do that forever.

and then there is the other aspect - why in the world would otterson step in here if this guy is so willing to self-destruct publicly?

[_Molok]

“2/2/2014

Brian,

Margi and I decided today that we would like to ask the following of you as bishop forward: 1) We would like to ask you to please not request any more interviews with Margi or myself. Please do not contact us again as bishop. As a neighbor, no problem. But as a bishop, please don’t contact us or ask anyone to contact us again (other than to confirm receipt of this email). 2) We would like to ask you to please take our names off of any home or visiting teaching rolls/lists. Other than for community service opportunities, we do not want to be contacted by the Elder’s quorum or Relief Society in any way. 3) Please dispose of our fast offering envelope such that the fast offering boys no longer come to our house. 4) Finally, as a person who claims to believe in being honest and charitable, we would like to respectfully ask you to please keep the contents of this email between us. For the sake of our children, we would prefer not to be gossiped about in the ward. We are hopeful that you can arrange 1-3 above without needing to embarrass us or our children with other ward members. Our preference would be that you not speak about us in any way during your ward leadership meetings — and that if our family comes up in such a meeting, you respectfully let the ward members know that we would prefer to not be spoken about. We would just prefer to be left alone. Finally, please know that we sincerely have no hard feelings towards you or anyone else in the ward. We have not been offended. We are very happy in our lives and still feel much love for you, your family, and for the ward members. We know that you and others are just doing your jobs as you feel moved to do. This is just what would work for us right now. If things change, we will let you know. Also, please know that we will still be attending church on Sundays in support of our children (when they attend), but otherwise would like you to please no longer consider Margi and myself as members of the ward. Thanks for respecting this request. As a courtesy, please reply to let me know you have received this email.

Sincerely wishing you and your family all of the best. John and Margi”

Lol, this guy is ridiculous! If you're honest, you'll never tell anyone about this email. I, meanwhile, will put it up on the internet for everyone to see!

[_Sister Mary Lisa]

“2/2/2014

Brian,

Margi and I decided today that we would like to ask the following of you as bishop forward: 1) We would like to ask you to please not request any more interviews with Margi or myself. Please do not contact us again as bishop. As a neighbor, no problem. But as a bishop, please don’t contact us or ask anyone to contact us again (other than to confirm receipt of this email). 2) We would like to ask you to please take our names off of any home or visiting teaching rolls/lists. Other than for community service opportunities, we do not want to be contacted by the Elder’s quorum or Relief Society in any way. 3) Please dispose of our fast offering envelope such that the fast offering boys no longer come to our house. 4) Finally, as a person who claims to believe in being honest and charitable, we would like to respectfully ask you to please keep the contents of this email between us. For the sake of our children, we would prefer not to be gossiped about in the ward. We are hopeful that you can arrange 1-3 above without needing to embarrass us or our children with other ward members. Our preference would be that you not speak about us in any way during your ward leadership meetings — and that if our family comes up in such a meeting, you respectfully let the ward members know that we would prefer to not be spoken about. We would just prefer to be left alone. Finally, please know that we sincerely have no hard feelings towards you or anyone else in the ward. We have not been offended. We are very happy in our lives and still feel much love for you, your family, and for the ward members. We know that you and others are just doing your jobs as you feel moved to do. This is just what would work for us right now. If things change, we will let you know. Also, please know that we will still be attending church on Sundays in support of our children (when they attend), but otherwise would like you to please no longer consider Margi and myself as members of the ward. Thanks for respecting this request. As a courtesy, please reply to let me know you have received this email.

Sincerely wishing you and your family all of the best. John and Margi”

Lol, this guy is ridiculous! If you're honest, you'll never tell anyone about this email. I, meanwhile, will put it up on the internet for everyone to see!

Just to show my eminent fairness, John Dehlin did indicate that he was initially reluctant to release the email's contents publicly. It was only after pressure from the online community that he eventually posted it.

[_Tim the Enchanter]

try as you might to spin SP King's letter, any reasonable person would read it to say, 'if you don't signal your desire to resign within the next 11 days, I'm scheduling a church court for your apostasy.' There simply is no other reasonable interpretation of the SP's letter, one which, I dare say, you would have if it had been written to you instead of John Dehlin.

The letter sends mixed messages which I think lends itself to more than one reasonable interpretation.

This...

I have chosen to write this letter to you and inquire whether, by your earlier email to Bishop Hunt and your recent public statements, you desire to have your name removed from the records of the Church. As you know, if you make such a request I am bound to honor it.

...sounds like an inquiry, rather than an ultimatum. Whereas this...

If you choose not to have your name removed, then I think we are to the point where I should convene a formal disciplinary council on your behalf for apostasy.

...sounds more like an ultimatum. And this...

If you desire to have your name removed from Church records, please inform me in writing no later than June 18, 2014. If I do not hear from you by that time, I will assume that you do not desire to avail yourself of this option, and I will proceed to schedule a disciplinary council.

...sounds like part inquiry and part ultimatum.

Which interpretation (inquiry or ultimaturm) is more reasonable? It's hard to know, but I think there is more than one reasonable interpretation of this letter.

[_Bazooka]

Just to show my eminent fairness, John Dehlin did indicate that he was initially reluctant to release the email's contents publicly. It was only after pressure from the online community that he eventually posted it.

You're not that naïve, surely?

[_Sister Mary Lisa]

Take Tom Phillips and his court case as evidence that water moves quickly under the bridge of discussion. Is the price that a couple of people would pay for your disclosure worth the short term satisfaction you would feel?

The discussion may be short, but the impact is long-term.

TP has been essentially neutralized. Partly because folks here and elsewhere used sophistry to discredit Tom and his important work.

John Dehlin must be defended from similar attacks.

Ok, now this made me literally (not figuratively) LOL. Your leg-pulling has escalated, 6EQUJ5. Well done. Well done.