Study shows LDS Church participation increases risk to children from abusers

[MG 2.0]

By the way, there are some folks that have questioned whether or not I've been "turning the other cheek". Yes, I have. I number of examples could be given just within the last 24 hours where I have chosen to disregard and not respond to posts that were made in order to spread false accusations and false innuendo in regards to my character.

It's not that hard to do! The downside is I have to leave a bunch of crap sitting around without cleaning it up.

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

And back to the topic…

Bypassing the off-topic abstract rambling:
it makes you wonder what they really do care about. There are very practical measures the rest of the world puts in place, standardized, universal best-practices measures so that we, as those responsible for children, are being as efficient and as effective as possible. The LDS church doesn't have universal measures, and the few they have are in places where the law, the non-religious law, is forcing them into it. Weigh that against the incredible amounts of time, money, and effort they put into cover-ups and protecting abusive adults, and the only conclusion one can come to is that the LDS church fails in doing their human best to protect children. No amount of abstract 'above my pay grade,' 'just believe,' and 'you're damaged if you don't believe what I believe' hides that.

Well they very obviously care about money, and secrecy, and self aggrandisement. Child safety, not so much. The question that hangs in the air for me (given that it's not a lack of resources holding them back), is why they don't?

[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.

It's hard to argue with this except I might add that it's the Mormon leaders and some Mormon members who tell us when the Mormon god intervenes. in my opinion, they generally chase coincidences and ignore the hard misses. Maybe they don't realize how obvious that is, but no amount of 'trust me' or 'just believe' quiets the concern that there is really no consistency or legitimate intervention. I agree with your thought that the Deist thing might be a more humane definition of a godlike bring.

The more I get away from Mormonism, the more I see how obviously wrong it is. I had a Mormon girlfriend that swore up and down that her paying her last dollar for tithing brought a refund check from the IRS to her the next week. She's a medical professional, a manager over a bunch of people in a big hospital chain, a logical person in certain realms, but not others, I guess. I stumped her seemingly when I pointed out the obvious about how the IRS made the refund decision well in advance of her tithing dilemma and that she would have received the refund regardless. Perhaps the refund would have been "god" telling her that paying tithing to a delusional church group was the wrong decision and that the IRS refund should have been a reward for correct thinking. Anyway, coincidences are good for motivated reasoning and she held fast to it. Drilling down deeper, she was going to be obedient and it didn't matter what was shown her. She had a feeling and grabbed at whatever to justify it. I guess the story sounded good at the time and she had used it on her mission and in at least one church talk (I like to call it speeches now instead of talks).

Back to the story, I just don't see how a god choosing to intervene by supposedly inspiring a leader to install a pedo in a place of authority or a place where access to children is unsupervised, doesn't implicate that god in the crime. The god supposedly knows the people better than they do themselves. Why not inspire the leader to put the pedo on some benign duty or no duty at all? You don't put the alcoholic in charge of the liquor cabinet. Then the god supposedly inspires the higher ups to cover up the crime time and time again? Is god the devil? Is up down in Mormon world? Yes, but god allows free agency, blah, blah, blah, and I choose not to follow this defective entity, whatever it is ....

[Rivendale]

It's hard to argue with this except I might add that it's the Mormon leaders and some Mormon members who tell us when the Mormon god intervenes. in my opinion, they generally chase coincidences and ignore the hard misses. Maybe they don't realize how obvious that is, but no amount of 'trust me' or 'just believe' quiets the concern that there is really no consistency or legitimate intervention. I agree with your thought that the Deist thing might be a more humane definition of a godlike bring.

The more I get away from Mormonism, the more I see how obviously wrong it is. I had a Mormon girlfriend that swore up and down that her paying her last dollar for tithing brought a refund check from the IRS to her the next week. She's a medical professional, a manager over a bunch of people in a big hospital chain, a logical person in certain realms, but not others, I guess. I stumped her seemingly when I pointed out the obvious about how the IRS made the refund decision well in advance of her tithing dilemma and that she would have received the refund regardless. Perhaps the refund would have been "god" telling her that paying tithing to a delusional church group was the wrong decision and that the IRS refund should have been a reward for correct thinking. Anyway, coincidences are good for motivated reasoning and she held fast to it. Drilling down deeper, she was going to be obedient and it didn't matter what was shown her. She had a feeling and grabbed at whatever to justify it. I guess the story sounded good at the time and she had used it on her mission and in at least one church talk (I like to call it speeches now instead of talks).

Back to the story, I just don't see how a god choosing to intervene by supposedly inspiring a leader to install a pedo in a place of authority or a place where access to children is unsupervised, doesn't implicate that god in the crime. The god supposedly knows the people better than they do themselves. Why not inspire the leader to put the pedo on some benign duty or no duty at all? You don't put the alcoholic in charge of the liquor cabinet. Then the god supposedly inspires the higher ups to cover up the crime time and time again? Is god the devil? Is up down in Mormon world? Yes, but god allows free agency, blah, blah, blah, and I choose not to follow this defective entity, whatever it is ....

I have heard/read that apologist claim that an abusers free will is more important than the abused desire not to be abused. The later reward for the abused somehow gains more traction when it is eternal. Similar to a dentist visit where you allow suffering for your child for long term gains. Hitchen's elaborate.

What about Fraulein Fritzl in Austria? Whose father kept her in a dungeon where she didn’t see daylight for 24 years… and came down most nights to rape and sodomize her, often in front of the children who were the product of the previous attacks and offenses….

Plenty believers are happy to do this...

Now, you say it’s all right that she went through that, because she’ll get a better deal in another life? I have to ask you if you can be morally and ethically serious and postulate such a question!
That had to happen! And Heaven did watch it with indifference, because it knows that score will later on be settled, so it’s well worth her going through it, she’ll have a better time in the next life.
I don’t see how you can look anyone—ANYONE—in the face or live with yourself and say anything so hideously, wickedly immoral as that, or even imply it."