Feeding the Fortune 500

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Lemmie
_Emeritus
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 7:25 pm

Re: Feeding the Fortune 500

Post by _Lemmie »

Doc's latest is just silly.
who has objected for years to the “corporate” character of the Church.


DCP then goes on and on about how good "corporate culture" is.

Does he really not understand that the objection is to a CHURCH having the same character, motivations, and profit incentive as a CORPORATION? All while taking full advantage of tax breaks allowed only to churches and non-profits?
_Dr Moore
_Emeritus
Posts: 849
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:19 am

Re: Feeding the Fortune 500

Post by _Dr Moore »

“Snarling” indeed, professor. Critics might follow the leader here by asserting superiority because most Mormons have no credentials, but many biases. Is this, by Dr Midgley’s evident standard, not an ironclad proof that the church is false?

After all, arguments are invalid if they’re held by uneducated half wits. We should all be looking for an elite organization comprised only of credentialed PhD holders who publish.

Wait, does this mean BYU is the real true church? I have so many questions.
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Feeding the Fortune 500

Post by _Kishkumen »

Why thank you for bringing this to my attention, Doctor! It is always fun to watch DCP having a good time making whatever hay he can out of my posts, if I am not being vain in accepting the connection you are drawing.

I suppose it must have been my general prejudice against business people that has driven my admiration for my mother’s business which gave her the opportunity to help refurbish one of the Church’s temples. Or maybe that same hatred has motivated my high regard for my father-in-law, who has outfitted numerous LDS meetinghouses with much-needed technology.

And both of them have been known to dress like Galilean peasants and sport beards, oh, wait, scratch that—they dress like regular business people, as befits our times.

Of course, they ARE business people engaging in business for the purpose of turning profits in a healthy, capitalist way. In fact, they represent the very best of capitalism, if a person of my ilk can say so and be taken at all seriously, because, instead of inflating stock, selling mortgages to people who can’t afford them, privatizing public hospitals, or buying companies, loading them with debt, and selling them for spare parts while laying off all of their workers, my beloved family members do real work and honest business that makes the world a better place. In short, they provide real goods and services, turning an honest profit, paying their taxes, and paying their employees.

Another fellow I have a lot of respect for is Roger Hendrix. He is an LDS guy who has engaged in a lot of business. Indeed, he has done a lot to change my mind about some aspects of the Church’s business. One would think that would be impossible with all my irrational, politically-driven hatred.

Now, it just may be that my discomfort with the way the Church hides its finances from its members and engages in real estate schemes with the benefit of its tax exempt status is not at all a dig at capitalism, although putting capitalism and Christianity together in this way admittedly strikes an odd note. (By the way, both of my admired family members in business pay a full tithe and I do nothing to dissuade them from doing so.)

No, it is not a problem with capitalism that I have. It is a problem with rigged capitalism, where certain people tilt the system in such a way that fair competition becomes almost impossible. It is vulture capitalism that I have a problem with, in which viable companies are bled like the victims of so many vampires, and their employees are thrown out on the street after decades of faithful service.

And when it comes to the LDS Church, well, I have made my own decision not to give it my money. I hope that Dr. P. does not mind me deciding what is best for me according to my beliefs, while he can decide to believe that he is paying God his tithe when he hands his money to the LDS Church. Thankfully, we both get to do what we please in that regard.

We also both exercise our vote to support our individual views. I do not fight to curtail his individual rights in any way, and I hope he similarly refrains from trying to interfere with my freedoms.

Look, I can’t help it if I don’t find his church leaders particularly inspiring. Yes, they bore me. I don’t find their messages interesting, informative, or spiritual. It’s not a matter of dressing like businessmen but really the whole approach. The CEO comparison was probably off. CEOs are often much more interesting and visionary than LDS leaders. That said, I know LDS leaders are, by and large, decent men who are admirable in the way they seek to make the world a better place. They work hard in pursuit of their ideals and they succeed in doing much good.

The world, however, has room for many different kinds of people and many different kinds of Mormons. It has room for Mormons who no longer want to be called Mormons, who believe Satan rejoices when the word is heard or used, and people like me, who are proud to continue to bear the name, as being good enough for both my ancestors and me.

I understand, Daniel. It seems unfair and ignorant when people express criticism of the LDS Church, calling it “the corporation” and “LDS, Inc.” It does not fairly account for the goodness and good works of the people who serve therein. I can see that. At the same time, I think something has been lost along the way. I don’t blame particular individuals with being bad actors in this. Personally, I just don’t care for big, impersonal organizations with PR firms, troops of lawyers, a giant bureaucracy, cookie-cutter architecture and art. It’s just not me. It does make a fine target for my sense of humor.

Others, I agree, take things too far. I try to be fair, but there are things like the November Policy that get my dander up. If you think that is politics, I would respond that to me it is a matter of being humane. I do think the LDS Church tripped up on that one. I am guessing you disagree.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Feeding the Fortune 500

Post by _Kishkumen »

And, yes, fellow denizens of MDB, that is too much time to invest in responding to a deliberate distortion of my original post.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
_Lemmie
_Emeritus
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 7:25 pm

Re: Feeding the Fortune 500

Post by _Lemmie »

kishkumen wrote:Now, it just may be that my discomfort with the way the Church hides its finances from its members and engages in real estate schemes with the benefit of its tax exempt status is not at all a dig at capitalism....

No, it is not a problem with capitalism that I have. It is a problem with rigged capitalism...

Exactly.
_Dr Exiled
_Emeritus
Posts: 3616
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 3:48 am

Re: Feeding the Fortune 500

Post by _Dr Exiled »

Great comment Reverend. I wish if Dr. P's blog post were in fact about you (seems correct), he would say so directly or come over here and comment on it so you could respond. Instead he seems to be using your comments to create yet another imaginary, evil and misguided critic that he and Dr. Midgely can bash for the faithful audience he has at sic et non.

If there aren't any real devils, then by all means create one or create a dozen.
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen 
_Gadianton
_Emeritus
Posts: 9947
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:12 am

Re: Feeding the Fortune 500

Post by _Gadianton »

This is hilarious.

DCP "He's an academic, therefore, he can't be trusted!"

Midgley "He's not an academic, therefore, he can't be trusted!"

Where's good old Kiwi when you need him to cut through the chase that no matter what, the Reverend just plain can't be trusted?
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.

LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
_Mormonicious
_Emeritus
Posts: 1523
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 3:59 am

Re: Feeding the Fortune 500

Post by _Mormonicious »

Kishkumen wrote:
For all to understand and see, the Mormon Corporation has contracted Facility Management with EMCOR Facility Services http://www.emcorfacilities.com to reduce costs. This move will enable the Mormon Corporation to eliminate the costs of Salaries, Benefits and Retirement while providing employment to others. Isn't it wonderful, isn't it marvelous, isn't it about the money.


Thanks for the information, Mormonicious. Will EMCOR provide services for the temples?

I don't know at this time. I believe that the Contract has a "as Requested" additional services clause that allows the Mormon Corporation and EMCOR to add duties as negotiated.

I have also been told that "IF" the Mormon Corporation is pleased with the EMCOR Facilities Services feature of EMCOR, they will also contract Purchasing Services for all departments of the Mormon Corporation.

It ain't about the people it's all about the MONEY
Revelation 2:17 . . give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it. Thank Google GOD for her son eBay, you can now have life eternal with laser engraving. . oh, and a seer stone and save 10% of your life's earning as a bonus. See you in Mormon man god Heaven Bitches!!. Bring on the Virgins
_Doctor Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 8025
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:44 pm

Re: Feeding the Fortune 500

Post by _Doctor Scratch »

Kishkumen wrote:And, yes, fellow denizens of MDB, that is too much time to invest in responding to a deliberate distortion of my original post.


To the contrary, Reverend! I thought your post was a virtuoso response to Dr. Peterson's silly "series." He is distorting your points because he has no other options. He will not (I predict) respond meaningfully to your post. Nor will he provide a link to your thoughtful critique. The cowardice in this case is quite remarkable: Why not just engage the critic directly? Why not use verbatim quotes? The very simple point/criticism at the center of this whole discussion is the question of the extent that a Church should "operate" or "appear" to be a business. Peterson's point, which he's been hammering away at, is that, "Yes, it is okay for a Church to look like and behave like a typical American corporate entity." Does he give a theologically-driven reason why he believes this, though? A scripturally-justifiable reason? He doesn't. Nor does he try the aesthetic angle: i.e., why Jesus, Heavenly Father, and Joseph Smith want the modern Church of Jesus Christ to look this way.... Interesting to consider, though, isn't it?
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Feeding the Fortune 500

Post by _Kishkumen »

Doctor Scratch wrote:To the contrary, Reverend! I thought your post was a virtuoso response to Dr. Peterson's silly "series." He is distorting your points because he has no other options. He will not (I predict) respond meaningfully to your post. Nor will he provide a link to your thoughtful critique. The cowardice in this case is quite remarkable: Why not just engage the critic directly? Why not use verbatim quotes? The very simple point/criticism at the center of this whole discussion is the question of the extent that a Church should "operate" or "appear" to be a business. Peterson's point, which he's been hammering away at, is that, "Yes, it is okay for a Church to look like and behave like a typical American corporate entity." Does he give a theologically-driven reason why he believes this, though? A scripturally-justifiable reason? He doesn't. Nor does he try the aesthetic angle: i.e., why Jesus, Heavenly Father, and Joseph Smith want the modern Church of Jesus Christ to look this way.... Interesting to consider, though, isn't it?


Oh, I don’t mind, Doctor. After all, I post anonymously, so I do not expect any kind of straightforward engagement with each other. How could I? In any case, it comes down to what people are comfortable with. The LDS Church is neither a typical corporation, nor a typical church. It is an aspirational theocracy operating within the legal strictures of the places it exists and functions. What we can expect from DCP is that he will protect and promote the LDS Church as it is, not sympathize or agree with any criticisms. That is the game.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Post Reply