Its so easy.

"Mr. Monson, President and what ever of the Corporation blah blah blah has been charged with a criminal crime of Fraud in England. The court date is March something. Mr. Monson plans on pleading no guilty and according to the law a person is innonce until proven guilty. We have no further details at this time."

End of debate.

All I want is the Church to practice what they preach. be honest in your dealings with your fellow persons.

This would be an honest approach rather than try and say "it's no true, it's a made up charge, there is nothing to it etc."

Simple, straight forward and honest.

So the way the Church is handling this makes me think there is something to the charge.

I am looking forward to how the Church handles the case. It will say a lot about how honest and dishonest they have been.

They could even be honest and say that its the Government of England bringing forth the charge and not a person.

Mormons love feeling like martyrs. You would think the Mormon pioneers were the first people to face hardships, and that they were the only ones crossing the Plains to have troubles.

because if something terminal happened to him before the Ides of March then the charge would at least have to be reworded causing further delay.

If the Morg acknowledges this then it will bring more unwanted attention to this case.

SEcular Priest Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
. . .

> They could even be honest and say that its the
> Government of England bringing forth the charge
> and not a person.

But it isn't the government of England bringing forth the criminal charge, it is a private prosecution by Tom Phillips which a magistrate has deemed plausible enough to bring to court.

True. Should have read the government issued a summons based on a private prosecution.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/21/2014 03:59PM by crom.

The church lies.

They lie about everything. Its a made up religion....

Why should they start telling the truth now? It's not

how they roll. They have too much at stake to all of

a sudden tell all or even bring attention to what is

going on.

If they were capable of "simple, straightforward, and honest", they'd refer to resignations of membership as resignations, not "requests for name removal". It is neither a request, nor is the name removed.

"Simple, straightforward, and honest" are not things they are good at.

Most of the places I've read about it haven't actually said the charges are "not true". Usually they say they're "bizarre" or something like that, but most people haven't denied that they're true.

It's a "
non denial denial"