Jersey Girl wrote:I did read what you wrote. In both posts.
Well then (seriously no sarcasm on my part), I've done a poor job of outlining my position.
1) I think Rosebud had an interesting point when I was reflecting on her comments this morning. This caused me to
2) think about the LDS and ex-LDS activists I've know in real life and from afar through media. I find their drive and motivations to be interesting and was openly musing what they might be. Regardless, I think despite Mike Norton doing what he does regarding temple films and what Sam Young does regarding the November Policy and now the Protect the Children movement I view it as largely ineffective because
3) I was showing what your average TBM thinks and suggesting the Church is unmoved despite a few families leaving here and there.
All that said, I think if change is going to occur it has to happen through legal challenges which will affect the Church's bottom line. Until LDS families start suing and winning more cases, not just settlements, I don't see the Church changing this policy and I think Bishop Roulette will always apply, and we'll continue to have more victims. Once this kerfuffle blows over it'll be back to business as usual.
That said, I still admire their energy and any scrutiny that can be brought to the Church and how it handles its business, is still a positive.
- Doc