The LDS church wants journalism to reform

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
drumdude
God
Posts: 5219
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am

The LDS church wants journalism to reform

Post by drumdude »

https://publicsquaremag.org/sexuality-f ... -evidence/
So what’s your own conclusion about what took place in Arizona? It’s pretty clear from the report and its unusual editorial choices what these journalists want you to believe—but what do you believe?

It seems to me that one of the central storylines of this entire tragedy is something we see in so many other accounts: namely, how difficult it is to pick up on signs of sexual abuse happening behind close doors (yes, even when you’re aware it has happened before). However unexciting an “angle,” that is, it does seem to line up with the documented evidence.

For myself, I’m honestly surprised at how different a picture these court documents paint compared with the narrative in Rezendes’s “explosive” and “bombshell” article. I’ve struggled to understand how anyone could read these full transcripts and reach some of the conclusions these reporters did—not, at least, if you’re trying to be fair to all the evidence.

Calls to action:
We should still expect better from truth-seeking institutions. In my interview with Jon Haidt earlier this summer, he argued that the “spectacular failure of the late 2010s” was how leaders of what he called “our knowledge-centered institutions,” like newspapers and universities, have “failed to stand up for the mission of their institutions.”
Inherent tensions require a higher-quality public conversation. So much of this case is presented popularly as simple and obvious.
Understanding truth (should) come before taking action. I’ve seen and heard from many people who, as soon as the article came out, have been calling for crucial changes involving “brave conversations” and “overdue soul-searching.” Certainly, we should all be about finding ways to improve once it’s clear what actually happened.
That kind of public conversation seems simply beyond many people today. None of this nuance will matter to some people

I agree with the LDS church. The real issue here is how unfairly Mormon leaders have been treated by journalists. That is the real abuse story.
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: The LDS church wants journalism to reform

Post by Kishkumen »

Good grief. Disgusting.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 1812
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 2:16 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: The LDS church wants journalism to reform

Post by Dr Moore »

The “fake news” offense as defense. How original. They’re going to lose spectacularly in the court of public opinion.

I predict the cost in lost tithing dollars will eclipse inevitable class action payments.
Marcus
God
Posts: 5037
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: The LDS church wants journalism to reform

Post by Marcus »

wow. that article is really not going to help. the guy is trying to get nuanced, but here's number 1 from the list of 10:
Ten Misleading Assertions in the AP Report:

1. The Bishops were aware of current abuse in the Adams home. Multiple times, Rezendes and his colleagues collaborating on the article insinuate that bishops were aware of sexual abuse currently and actively happening in the home.
and the error? the phrase CURRENT abuse. this guy argues that the bishops only knew of PAST abuse. and that's different, i guess like "a few months shy of 15" is different from 14?

the article tries to argue the difference, but this is really going to backfire.
User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 1812
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 2:16 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: The LDS church wants journalism to reform

Post by Dr Moore »

Marcus wrote:
Thu Aug 25, 2022 5:39 pm
wow. that article is really not going to help. the guy is trying to get nuanced, but here's number 1 from the list of 10:
Ten Misleading Assertions in the AP Report:

1. The Bishops were aware of current abuse in the Adams home. Multiple times, Rezendes and his colleagues collaborating on the article insinuate that bishops were aware of sexual abuse currently and actively happening in the home.
and the error? the phrase CURRENT abuse. this guy argues that the bishops only knew of PAST abuse. and that's different, i guess like "a few months shy of 15" is different from 14?

the article tries to argue the difference, but this is really going to backfire.
Transcript evidence is unavoidably damning to any claim that somehow the abuse was believed to all be "in the past." Worse still, will be the hundreds/thousands of instances that trickle out in years to come, in which bishop(s), SP(s) and GA(s) knew about ongoing abuse and buried it through useless "repentance process and forgiveness" or "value trading and NDA" with hush money.
huckelberry
God
Posts: 2579
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:48 pm

Re: The LDS church wants journalism to reform

Post by huckelberry »

Anybody actually read the article? No comment seems to be aware of its contents. I do not know quite how to react to the complicated story. I am not in favor of the idea of confession as privileged information but the idea appears to have created a serious legal tangle.

The article claims church leaders were unaware of any ongoing abuse. If correct that is a serious adjustment to the story.

I am not sure how my views relate to this story. I cannot help but notice that the matter within the Catholic church is one were church authorities perpetrated the abuse and then were protected by the church authorities. This LDS story seems to be of lay leaders stumbling about unsure how to handle a problem they were unclear about and an perpetrator who occasionally attended church.
Marcus
God
Posts: 5037
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: The LDS church wants journalism to reform

Post by Marcus »

huckelberry wrote:
Thu Aug 25, 2022 6:15 pm
Anybody actually read the article? No comment seems to be aware of its contents. I do not know quite how to react to the complicated story. I am not in favor of the idea of confession as privileged information but the idea appears to have created a serious legal tangle.

The article claims church leaders were unaware of any ongoing abuse. If correct that is a serious adjustment to the story.

I am not sure how my views relate to this story. I cannot help but notice that the matter within the Catholic church is one were church authorities perpetrated the abuse and then were protected by the church authorities. This LDS story seems to be of lay leaders stumbling about unsure how to handle a problem they were unclear about and an perpetrator who occasionally attended church.
my comment from above, which i repeat here, quoted the article
Marcus wrote:
Thu Aug 25, 2022 5:39 pm
wow. that article is really not going to help. the guy is trying to get nuanced, but here's number 1 from the list of 10:
Ten Misleading Assertions in the AP Report:

1. The Bishops were aware of current abuse in the Adams home. Multiple times, Rezendes and his colleagues collaborating on the article insinuate that bishops were aware of sexual abuse currently and actively happening in the home.

https://publicsquaremag.org/sexuality-f ... -evidence/
and the error? the phrase CURRENT abuse. this guy argues that the bishops only knew of PAST abuse. and that's different, i guess like "a few months shy of 15" is different from 14?

the article tries to argue the difference, but this is really going to backfire.
it may not have been clear so i added the link. my quote was the sixth paragraph with a heading.
Marcus
God
Posts: 5037
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: The LDS church wants journalism to reform

Post by Marcus »

huckelberry's point about how complicated this is is correct, in my opinion. just to start, i picked out the first sentence only (the rest snipped) of the 10 errors the author asserts, just to get an overview of the direction he is taking in his defense of the lds church:
Ten Misleading Assertions in the AP Report:

1. The Bishops were aware of current abuse in the Adams home.

<snipped>

2. The Bishops were aware the abuse was continuing.

<snipped>

3. The bishops did little to ensure the children’s safety and prevent future abuse.

<snipped>

4. The Church and its helpline had a uniform policy of discouraging disclosure.

<snipped>

5. Clergy-congregant confidentiality in difficult cases is obviously only harmful secrecy.

<snipped>

6. The Church misinformed bishops about the law in Arizona.

<snipped>

7. The Church helpline aims to “divert” and “bury” abuse accusations.

<snipped>

8. Latter-day Saint leaders proactively “directed an effort to conceal” these many years of abuse.

<snipped>

9. The tragic abuse continued primarily due to the Church’s neglect.

<snipped>

10. Ergo, the Church ultimately prioritizes perpetrators over children.

<snipped>

https://publicsquaremag.org/sexuality-f ... -evidence/
i disagree with much of this article's position, and in particular, number 9 is misstated. in my opinion, the AP article asserted that the abuse was not stopped due to the lds church's neglect.
Last edited by Marcus on Thu Aug 25, 2022 6:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Dr Exiled
God
Posts: 1602
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:40 pm

Re: The LDS church wants journalism to reform

Post by Dr Exiled »

Here is what the Truth and Transparency Foundation discovered about this case from Leizza Adams' criminal case (she was the wife of the abuser and didn't come forward):

https://www.truthandtransparency.org/ne ... index.html

From the article:
CE Special Agent, Robert Edwards, who described this as one of the worst cases of abuse he has ever seen in his career, testified that he learned about the potential disclosure of the abuse to the bishop from Warr and went, unannounced, to speak with the bishop. John Herrod, a local doctor, was the bishop of the congregation the Adams’ attended from approximately 2004 to 2012 and agreed to talk to Agent Edwards when asked.

Herrod told Edwards that he believed the initial confession from Paul occurred in 2011. During this confession, it was disclosed to the bishop that the Adams daughter, who was six years old at the time, was being sexually abused and that the assaults were being video recorded. Herrod said that over the next 2 years, Paul continued to come and see him on a regular basis and often told him that the abuse was ongoing. Leizza was present during many of these confessions and, according to Herrod, would usually have no reaction to the disclosures. In 2012, a new bishop was installed and Herrod was no longer involved in the matter.When asked why he never called the police, Herrod explicitly stated that he had received instructions from the Mormon Church’s legal team in Salt Lake City not to report the abuse, but continue the one-on-one “counseling sessions” instead.
Herrod told the investigator of knowing of the sexual abuse being video recorded. Adams saw Bishop Herrod over two years (of course the Bishop would want to continually see the member to aid in repentance). During these interviews Adams said the abuse was ongoing! He spoke to Kirton McConckie and they didn't want the abuse story to get out, didn't want it reported to the police.
Last edited by Dr Exiled on Thu Aug 25, 2022 7:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
huckelberry
God
Posts: 2579
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:48 pm

Re: The LDS church wants journalism to reform

Post by huckelberry »

Marcus wrote:
Thu Aug 25, 2022 6:20 pm
huckelberry wrote:
Thu Aug 25, 2022 6:15 pm
Anybody actually read the article? No comment seems to be aware of its contents. I do not know quite how to react to the complicated story. I am not in favor of the idea of confession as privileged information but the idea appears to have created a serious legal tangle.

The article claims church leaders were unaware of any ongoing abuse. If correct that is a serious adjustment to the story.

I am not sure how my views relate to this story. I cannot help but notice that the matter within the Catholic church is one were church authorities perpetrated the abuse and then were protected by the church authorities. This LDS story seems to be of lay leaders stumbling about unsure how to handle a problem they were unclear about and an perpetrator who occasionally attended church.
my comment from above, which i repeat here, quoted the article
Marcus wrote:
Thu Aug 25, 2022 5:39 pm
wow. that article is really not going to help. the guy is trying to get nuanced, but here's number 1 from the list of 10:



and the error? the phrase CURRENT abuse. this guy argues that the bishops only knew of PAST abuse. and that's different, i guess like "a few months shy of 15" is different from 14?

the article tries to argue the difference, but this is really going to backfire.
it may not have been clear so i added the link. my quote was the sixth paragraph with a heading.
I am not claiming to know the full story but I was observing what this article proposed:

"Both bishops strongly deny awareness of any more than that single past incident, each stating under oath that they only learned the full extent of what was happening at the time of his arrest years later:

John Herrod: “I did not learn that Paul had abused his children after his confidential confession to me or about the extensiveness of the abuse and other illegal conduct until Paul was arrested in 2017 and news reports concerning the extent of the abuse were released.”
Kim Mauzy: “I did not know that Paul Adams was abusing his children while I was Bishop until he was arrested in 2017. The communications with me were about a past one-time incident (and other conduct by Paul Adams that gave rise to his excommunication). I did not know until Paul Adams was arrested in 2017 that he had abused Plaintiffs John Doe or Jane Doe II. I did not know until he was arrested that he had viewed or disseminated child pornography, including videos of his own children.”

In striking contrast with these statements, the report alleges that church leaders were not only aware of the abuse but somehow okay with it."
Post Reply