Headline;
Judge rules not enough evidence to convict Thomas Monson on charge of teaching Mormonism

Tom succeeded in shining more light on the history of mormonism and mormonism's bizarre beliefs.

The more TBM's learn about the mormon church history, the more mormons leave the mormon church. Most who sign up for the church have already left. Tom's superb effort just helps the cause more.

All my respect and admiration Tom. You've helped people you'll never know or meet by giving them information that will lead families out of the mormon church.

You rock, Tom!

Think of it this way, the church had to spend god knows how much money to send a team to court and argue the case, and then got more negative publicity. That's a pretty good deal. I hope Mr. Phillips and his people did not suffer too much financially.

Reminds me of the old saying:

"If you were accused of being a mormon, would there be enough evidence to convict you?"


Monson lets his minions do the talking so there's nothing to pin on the "prophet".

Surely the scope of fraudulent activity must be defined to include the actions of legal representatives (missionaries, church appointed leaders, and even apologists) for the corporate sole. I can't believe the merits of this case are so easily trivialized that a reasonable jury would never be allowed to even consider them. Come on, Judge Riddle!

"Monson lets his minions do the talking so there's nothing to pin on the "prophet"."

Reminds me of how Hitler and the other Nazi leaders never came out publicly and said "gas the Jews"

What about all the church publications that are published by "the corporation of the presidentt?" Surely those count as TSM's words.

As far as I'm aware the case was dismissed on legal grounds & not on lack of evidence. The Judge said that Tom had been wrongly advised but I believe the door was left open for a new amended summons to be issued. Feel free to correct me if I have it wrong.

Well, I read those 3 pages...I dont think so, sadly.

Cant go a religion for it's beliefs, it seems

http://www.scribd.com/doc/213378803/Correcting-FAIR-and-Looking-Empirically-at-Monson-s-Testimonies

One of the reasons givien for dismissal was that there was not evidence to tie Monson personally and directly to Church teachings which are factually untrue.

This, along with the recent insightful analysis by TruthIsReason, could have a greater impact than non dismissal of the case might have had.

A TBM testimony is immune to just about every conceivable assault. However, the fact that Monson HIMSELF does not appear to believe should be devastating! How can you not question the Church if the very man that God has called to lead it does not believe? "Follow the Prophet"?

The analysis by TruthIsReason should be tied to statements and articles about this case. Monson (appears) to have made his prosecution difficult by his lack of testimony bearing since 2005 on the unique claims of Mormonism. He used to testify strongly about Mormon claims. He continues to testify strongly of Christ and God, but since 2005 there has been an undeniable change pertaining to Mormon claims. This is actually good evidence that he either knows or strongly suspects that Mormonism is false. i.e. He has been perpetrating a fraud. There has to be a good reason for his lack of testifying. The only possibilities I can see that have not been ruled out are that; 1. He does not believe. 2. The corporation restricted his statements for liability purposes. (they know the truth) Either way, it is evidence of fraud. As sole head of the corporation, Monson is responsible. His slippery statements only help to prove the fraud.

Probably every Christian has heard; "If you were to be prosecuted for being a Christian, would there be enough evidence to convict you?" The world need to hear; "Judge rules there is not enough evidence to convict Thomas Monson of being a Mormon" If the analysis by TruthIsReason was not right on, FAIR would have been able to come up with something better than their pathetic and dishonest attempt.