Study shows LDS Church participation increases risk to children from abusers

[MG 2.0]

I think that agency does need to be part of the conversation, yes. The some total of ALL the conversation? No.

Where do you think agency enters in on this conversation on this thread and others?

Regards,
MG

You're a crap grandparent and a soulless jerk if your response to a grandchild being molested by a Bishop is to remind everyone it’s simply a consequence of agency.

I didn't say "simply". And no, I'm not a crap grandparent. And no, I am not a soulless jerk.

And yes, you are a judgmental SOB.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

I'm not seeing the word "agency" anywhere here.

Ah, free agency! It's so nice that we all have the right to make choices. Just wondering, however: Are you talking about the right of the children to choose to be molested? Or the right of leaders to choose to molest the children?

You and I both know that there are many more moving parts than you are implying, Morley. I find it interesting that whenever 'agency' comes into the conversation critics and unbelievers seem to get quite uncomfortable in letting it come into the conversation in any serious way...rather they sidetrack, stonewall, set up a strawman, or go somewhere else.

"Right of the children to choose to be molested"? What on God's green earth are you even implying here? And gee whiz, leaders having the "right" to molest children? What the heck?

I'm questioning your ability to look at things without a jaundiced eye that results in lack of reasoning beyond a black and white view that you've just expressed.

C'mon Morley, you can do better than that.

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

You're a crap grandparent and a soulless jerk if your response to a grandchild being molested by a Bishop is to remind everyone it’s simply a consequence of agency.

I didn't say "simply". And no, I'm not a crap grandparent. And no, I am not a soulless jerk.

And yes, you are a judgmental SOB.

Regards,
MG

Thanks for confirming that I’m accurate in my assessment of how you would respond to a granddaughter being molested by a Bishop.

[Morley]

Ah, free agency! It's so nice that we all have the right to make choices. Just wondering, however: Are you talking about the right of the children to choose to be molested? Or the right of leaders to choose to molest the children?

You and I both know that there are many more moving parts than you are implying, Morley. I find it interesting that whenever 'agency' comes into the conversation critics and unbelievers seem to get quite uncomfortable in letting it come into the conversation in any serious way...rather they sidetrack, stonewall, set up a strawman, or go somewhere else.

"Right of the children to choose to be molested"? What on God's green earth are you even implying here? And gee whiz, leaders having the "right" to molest children? What the heck?

I'm questioning your ability to look at things without a jaundiced eye that results in lack of reasoning beyond a black and white view that you've just expressed.

C'mon Morley, you can do better than that.

Regards,
MG

I agree, gee whiz.

Help me out, then. Maybe you can elaborate on how your call for everyone to consider 'agency' is relevant, here. I'm not seeing that it is.

Where do you think agency enters in on this conversation on this thread and others?

I have no idea. If as you intimate, it has nothing to do with the right to be molested, nor with the right to molest, I really don't see how it enters the conversation.

[MG 2.0]

I didn't say "simply". And no, I'm not a crap grandparent. And no, I am not a soulless jerk.

And yes, you are a judgmental SOB.

Regards,
MG

Thanks for confirming that I’m accurate in my assessment of how you would respond to a granddaughter being molested by a Bishop.

You can be dead sure that I would do everything in my power to see that the Bishop was no longer a Bishop and was prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Apparently you are wrong in your assessment.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

You and I both know that there are many more moving parts than you are implying, Morley. I find it interesting that whenever 'agency' comes into the conversation critics and unbelievers seem to get quite uncomfortable in letting it come into the conversation in any serious way...rather they sidetrack, stonewall, set up a strawman, or go somewhere else.

"Right of the children to choose to be molested"? What on God's green earth are you even implying here? And gee whiz, leaders having the "right" to molest children? What the heck?

I'm questioning your ability to look at things without a jaundiced eye that results in lack of reasoning beyond a black and white view that you've just expressed.

C'mon Morley, you can do better than that.

Regards,
MG

Help me out, then. Maybe you can elaborate on how your call for everyone to consider 'agency' is relevant, here. I'm not seeing that it is.

Where do you think agency enters in on this conversation on this thread and others?

I have no idea. If as you intimate, it has nothing to do with the right to be molested. nor with the right to molest, I really don't see how it enters the conversation.

Humans do stupid things. We have to work ourselves around and through that and do what we can to inhibit stupid behavior/actions within the confines/parameters of that which is possible.

No sane person wants to see a child molested. But the fact of the matter is, it's going to happen. We don't live in a Pollyannish world. Agency of others is at the core. We make laws, we set expectations, but we will still have people doing stupid and even evil things.

It's really not rocket science. I hope this helps you better understand where I am coming from.

Non believers and come critics seemingly think that God could set up a world in which stupid behavior and actions would never occur. That is not the track record of humanity. That is not the track record of religions. And the LDS church struggles with intermittent/periodic trespasses of expectations of its leaders. Confidentiality and security/safety are sometimes at odds against each other. If I understand things correctly, within the LDS Church parents now have the opportunity to request that they sit in on youth interviews. If so, I think this is a good move.

The problem is, if the parent is the abuser...then what? You don't want the parent in the room.

Problems to the left, and problems to the right. No easy answers.

Regards,
MG

[Dr Exiled]

So if your granddaughter gets molested by a sex predator Bishop, because their parents (your kid) allowed them to be alone on a number of occasions where they were groomed, you’re going to pin that on “agency” and “all part of God’s plan”? When you’re all sat around the family dinner table lamenting the tragedy, are you going to say to all your family members “Hey, I’m not hearing the word ‘agency’ from any of you…”?

I think that agency does need to be part of the conversation, yes. The some total of ALL the conversation? No.

Where do you think agency enters in on this conversation on this thread and others?

Regards,
MG

I think it enters as a poor justification for the failings of churches around the globe.

[sock puppet]

You're a crap grandparent and a soulless jerk if your response to a grandchild being molested by a Bishop is to remind everyone it’s simply a consequence of agency.

I didn't say "simply". And no, I'm not a crap grandparent. And no, I am not a soulless jerk.

And yes, you are a judgmental SOB.

Regards,
MG

Where's that other cheek, MG 2.0?

[sock puppet]

Thanks for confirming that I’m accurate in my assessment of how you would respond to a granddaughter being molested by a Bishop.

You can be dead sure that I would do everything in my power to see that the Bishop was no longer a Bishop and was prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Apparently you are wrong in your assessment.

Regards,
MG

WHAT??? You would speak ill of the Mormon Lord's anointed bishop? For shame, MG 2.0, for shame.

[sock puppet]

Help me out, then. Maybe you can elaborate on how your call for everyone to consider 'agency' is relevant, here. I'm not seeing that it is.





I have no idea. If as you intimate, it has nothing to do with the right to be molested. nor with the right to molest, I really don't see how it enters the conversation.

Humans do stupid things. We have to work ourselves around and through that and do what we can to inhibit stupid behavior/actions within the confines/parameters of that which is possible.

No sane person wants to see a child molested. But the fact of the matter is, it's going to happen. We don't live in a Pollyannish world. Agency of others is at the core. We make laws, we set expectations, but we will still have people doing stupid and even evil things.

It's really not rocket science. I hope this helps you better understand where I am coming from.

Non believers and come critics seemingly think that God could set up a world in which stupid behavior and actions would never occur. That is not the track record of humanity. That is not the track record of religions. And the LDS church struggles with intermittent/periodic trespasses of expectations of its leaders. Confidentiality and security/safety are sometimes at odds against each other. If I understand things correctly, within the LDS Church parents now have the opportunity to request that they sit in on youth interviews. If so, I think this is a good move.

The problem is, if the parent is the abuser...then what? You don't want the parent in the room.

Problems to the left, and problems to the right. No easy answers.

Regards,
MG

Is Mormon God insane for letting children be molested by Mormon Bishops? Or is Mormon God too impotent to do anything about it?