Study shows LDS Church participation increases risk to children from abusers

[I Have Questions]

I’m interested in how MG explains “agency” in the case of a clinical psychopath or narcissist. These people have a compromised sense of right and wrong. They don’t understand “choice” and “consequences” in the way most people understand those things. If a sexual abuser was abused as a child, and so have a compromised sense of right and wrong and behavioural expectations, where is the agency capacity for that individual and their victims?

The Church has no capacity, no process, no safety nets, to prevent or manage the situation where someone with a personality disorder is appointed to a position where they are guaranteed unfettered access to potential victims - well, other than the Kirton McConkie Cover-up hotline. Which is why the study shows that children are more at risk if they are involved with Mormonism.

Again, it is cause and effect. Biology also 'rules the day'. Some folks are victim/subject to their biology in a way that results in bad actions/behavior. That in turn impacts negatively the behaviors/actions of that person. Another feature of living in a natural world in which genetics and evolution take their course.

If “Biology rules the day”, then where’s the agency? If “genetics and evolution take their course” where’s the agency?

[I Have Questions]

In ALL things. Including withing the system of religions we call the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It's a built in feature.

Regards,
MG

And there we have it. The abuse of children is a built in feature of Mormonism. Thanks MG, I could not have said it better myself.

Keeping your kids away from Mormonism decreases their risk of being abused. Fact.

[Marcus]

I’m interested in how MG explains “agency” in the case of a clinical psychopath or narcissist. These people have a compromised sense of right and wrong. They don’t understand “choice” and “consequences” in the way most people understand those things. If a sexual abuser was abused as a child, and so have a compromised sense of right and wrong and behavioural expectations, where is the agency capacity for that individual and their victims?

The Church has no capacity, no process, no safety nets, to prevent or manage the situation where someone with a personality disorder is appointed to a position where they are guaranteed unfettered access to potential victims - well, other than the Kirton McConkie Cover-up hotline. Which is why the study shows that children are more at risk if they are involved with Mormonism.

Mg's answers are nonsense, he is just attempting to sound lofty while saying absolutely nothing at all. We are talking about a specific issue here and what we've learned is that the LDS church has STILL not put even the most basic safeguards in place as standardized procedure across all of their congregations. It was with utter arrogance an LDS leader announced they were the gold standard of child safety when they were straggling decades behind common knowledge. Of course being as prepared as possible doesn't prevent everything, but it is our responsibility to do all within our power to minimize as much as humanly possible the risks. People have a responsibility to be as prepared and educated as possible, and not once has mentalgymnast talked about the practical efforts his religion is so woefully lax about. He can only wax on about 'agency,' but what he has not mentioned is the agency people have to walk away from a religion that is ill-prepared in and uneducated about how to care for children. Or in his case, he should be willing to use his agency to advocate for safer conditions, or at the very, very least, be willing to discuss them here and indicate he has some knowledge, at least, of how to humanly do his best.

Mormons who drone on and on about vague ideas without ever explaining them is why LDS children are at such risk. That's on his head, and on the heads of his leaders.

[I Have Questions]

It was with utter arrogance an LDS leader announced they were the gold standard of child safety when they were straggling decades behind common knowledge.

Astoundingly, at the point Church Leaders signed off on a statement congratulating themselves for a gold standard for child safety, they knew for a fact they were neck deep in an epidemic of cases of Church Leaders sexually abusing minors. At the point they declared their own gold standard, they were in fact covering up thousands of cases of instititional failure on child safety.

Church Leaders epitomise dishonesty.

[Dr Exiled]

Of course it's an answer...

But not a good one that covers the bases.

...I'm talking to a defend no matter what guy...

I call it like I see it.

...and someone that will do whatever gymnastics are necessary to justify his church.

If the justification is justified I call it like I see it.

So, God supposedly inspires the leaders to install molesters in positions where they can molest...

Yeah, right. That's so lame.

...and doesn't seem to realize that like wolves go to where the sheep are, molesters go where children are...

Whether by my own voice or the voice of my servants, it is the same. Agency of man is then operative and man/leaders chooses to receive the revelation or reject it. Sometimes the calling may be a result of desperation rather than inspiration. A person might be called with a higher calling and then fail to stay within bounds in regards to expected behavior.

...where the parents are overly trusting.

Parents should not be overly trusting. People are fallible.

God doesn't inspire the leaders to make changes that God should know, but instead seems to want to cover up the problem. Then supposedly inspires weak leaders to push the agency nonsense when the cover-up gets discovered.

The world is a world of nature. People take the course that their biology, their upbringing, and their own choices dictate. A person can break/fight against the 'natural man' and can succeed with the Lord's help. Unfortunately, there are too many people that don't fully trust God...that he can make them stronger against temptation. But as I said earlier, you then have situations where biology is stronger than spiritual will. The two come in conflict.

We live in a fallen world with people that are going to do stupid things. Now, how God's foreknowledge in regards to people doing stupid things works...that's above my pay grade. It seems as if God knows something is going to happen He would stop it happening, literally, in each and every case. But that's not the way God seems to work. He let's nature take its course with hopes that good will overcome evil. Again, that's where the Atonement of Christ comes in to make everything fit together, even when broken.

Yes, that takes a LOT of faith to believe. That God can make everything right as we move into the eternities even though people screw things up at time here. I think that the God of the lost keys is somewhat of a myth without any real evidence/substance. One could then extrapolate from that and say that God, in some respects, is the Deistic God that let's things...generally speaking...take their own course with the knowledge that a whole lot of people are going to screw up pretty often.

Unfortunately, I think critics and unbelievers have it wrong when they give/want God to solve every problem that comes along. It just doesn't work that way. Humans are here to learn. To overcome. To forgive. To forebear. To grow. Etc. These things don't happen unless there is REAL opposition.

In ALL things. Including withing the system of religions we call the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It's a built in feature.

Regards,
MG

It's the problem of evil and your response of God partially intervening in the world yet not intervening to stop evil makes him part of the problem, really makes your understanding of whatever God is, if there is a God, suspect or makes him into someone not worth of any worship. When God steps in, God takes ownership of his religion and should be blamed when his organization covers up molestation crimes or tax crimes, etc. I think the better answer is some sort of Deist thing where the God figure never intervenes or simply that there isn't a god like you envision or no god.

[Chap]

It's the problem of evil and your response of God partially intervening in the world yet not intervening to stop evil makes him part of the problem, really makes your understanding of whatever God is, if there is a God, suspect or makes him into someone not worth of any worship. When God steps in, God takes ownership of his religion and should be blamed when his organization covers up molestation crimes or tax crimes, etc. I think the better answer is some sort of Deist thing where the God figure never intervenes or simply that there isn't a god like you envision or no god.

Voltaire wrote his novel Candide as a satire on the theological position, advocated by some in his day (principally Leibniz), that "All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds that <deity name> could have made'. That is, our world, as it is, is the best that <deity name> could make. He did his best for us, so just be grateful for what he did do, and stop complaining.

Poor old misunderstood deity! I don't know whether you agree, but I think it makes a lot better sense just to say that no such entity exists, even assuming, which I tend to doubt, that a meaningful statement can ever be made of what such an entity might be.

[Dr Exiled]

It's the problem of evil and your response of God partially intervening in the world yet not intervening to stop evil makes him part of the problem, really makes your understanding of whatever God is, if there is a God, suspect or makes him into someone not worth of any worship. When God steps in, God takes ownership of his religion and should be blamed when his organization covers up molestation crimes or tax crimes, etc. I think the better answer is some sort of Deist thing where the God figure never intervenes or simply that there isn't a god like you envision or no god.

Voltaire wrote his novel Candide as a satire on the theological position, advocated by some in his day (principally Leibniz), that "All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds that <deity name> could have made'. That is, our world, as it is, is the best that <deity name> could make. He did his best for us, so just be grateful for what he did do, and stop complaining.

Poor old misunderstood deity! I don't know whether you agree, but I think it makes a lot better sense just to say that no such entity exists, even assuming, which I tend to doubt, that a meaningful statement can ever be made of what such an entity might be.

I want to believe there is something out there and that we continue after death. I don't think any human that I know personally or have any knowledge of has the answer and perhaps the null is the way to go until more is known. I don't know and remain agnostic. However, the Mormon god continues his suspect ways and continues to look like a cheap copy of the Christian god.

[MG 2.0]

Again, it is cause and effect. Biology also 'rules the day'. Some folks are victim/subject to their biology in a way that results in bad actions/behavior. That in turn impacts negatively the behaviors/actions of that person. Another feature of living in a natural world in which genetics and evolution take their course.

If “Biology rules the day”, then where’s the agency? If “genetics and evolution take their course” where’s the agency?

Agency works within the confines of the biology and genetics.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

In ALL things. Including withing the system of religions we call the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It's a built in feature.

Regards,
MG

And there we have it. The abuse of children is a built in feature of Mormonism. Thanks MG, I could not have said it better myself.

Keeping your kids away from Mormonism decreases their risk of being abused. Fact.

Out of context in regards to everything else I said. Sloppy.

Regards,
MG

[Chap]

If “Biology rules the day”, then where’s the agency? If “genetics and evolution take their course” where’s the agency?

Agency works within the confines of the biology and genetics.

Regards,
MG

Who created the biology and genetics? Did the Mormon deity create them? If so, they are his responsibility. If not, who or what did?