There is no mention of the particular mormon offender who I mentioned in another post about a prominent Australian mormon and film maker who has been charged with 50 sexual assaults on boys.

However on the Australian newsroom website,they have posted statement on abuse issues and claim they have no tolerance for child abuse.

www.mormonnewsroom.org.au

They must be reeling that a respected and trusted member has been involved in such a scandal.

To how many 'authorities' did Holy McGhost withhold this tiny bit of information about the accused?

Does Holy McGhost ever apologize?

Holy McGhost never apologises because Holy McGhost always blames the victims, therefore no need for apologies. If anything, H.McG probably believes the victims should be the ones to apologise to TSCC.

elderolddog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To how many 'authorities' did Holy McGhost
> withhold this tiny bit of information about the
> accused?
>
> Does Holy McGhost ever apologize?

Convicted pedophiles should be exterminated swiftly and without remorse on the first offense. Anyone who would violate the innocence of a child deserves a bullet right between the eyes.

Not between the eyes my friend. That would be too kind.

Whoa. Keep your metaphorical gun in your holster for just one second. In adult cases, I agree that we need to act swiftly to keep offenders away from kids and to get from them the justice their victims deserve (which I think should be up to the victim to decide). But the sex offender conviction casts way too wide a net (in America -- I don't know about Australia) for me to agree with the idea of shooting (or rather, convicting with a life-long punishment) any and every person who is labeled a child molester. Sex offender laws in America actually catch innocent people, primarily teenagers who are dating with an age gap of 15 and 18 and having voluntary sex. They end up getting labeled as child molesters for life because under 16, any sex a teen has with someone older is considered statutory rape and can be prosecuted by their owners (er, I mean parents) even if it was consensual and the younger party was in no way harmed. Due to our statutory laws, gay kids have been convicted as sex offenders and have to wear the sex offender label for life because the parents of a younger girl or boy were homophobic and took the older teen to court mainly to punish them for "corrupting" their child.

There is also the issue of child offenders, who do something physically bad to another child that justifies arrest, but when they are put through the right re-education program, never do it again. There are some cases in childhood that are about poor or abusive parenting setting up a child so that they do not understand boundaries or the harm they are doing physically to another child, but once they get the proper treatment, the light bulb goes on and they don't do it again. I wouldn't put a bullet, literal or symbolic, through a child's eyes if that child could be saved from becoming a lifelong abuser.

But I understand the feeling. I have that feeling whenever I read about serial child molesters or serial rapists. If I ever stood next to one, I'm not sure I could resist the urge to pummel the crap out of them.

I agree.

Can you believe we, as TBM sheeple, Raised our hands to the square, and sang 'praise to the man', sustaining a PEDOPHILE
as our fearless leader of the church?

I wanna puke...

Sounds like you've been reading up on Brigham Young's Blood Atonement doctrine.

I second that!

Even Christ mentioned a strong punishment for anyone who would harm children, but in their twisted way TSCC has said that what Christ meant by 'offend' (must be their idiot King James version) was not teaching children the gospel, not fully indoctrinating them in your homes.. THAT's what the punishment is meant for, parents who 'fail' to teach their children properly.

I just read that in the book 'Recovering Agency' I forget which GA ass wrote it and preached it. But it's clear to me that TSCC does not actually care for children since every time (and it seems like it's a lot of times!) a Member is caught harming children they are either excused, harbored, forgiven, or sent on to another ward without any warning to that ward's members as to the dangers of this person.. and often are even recommended as baby-sitters!

The worst is when the GAs themselves are accused and of course deny it and protect themselves. The first thing on their minds is their own reputation and that of TSCC and the money that goes with that. The last thing on their minds is the children's welfare and protection. Just disgusting.

What you just stated reminded me of what the Catholic Church did with Priests that harmed children as well.

Namely forgave them, transferred them to another church, harbored them, etc.

UNTIL the civil authorities found out and the Catholic Church paid dearly for NOT reporting these priests to the police.\

Could this be de javu all over again?

If this happened to the Catholic Church then sooner or later, it WILL happened to the Mormon Church as well.

And just watched, when the civil authorities come down on the TSCC, they will yell religious prosecution over and over like they did in the past.

In case someone hasn't seen this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3721106/Mormon-film-director-facing-50-sex-assault-charges-allegedly-assaulting-young-boys.html

This is the fallout of the personality cult. When they are so quick to extol the virtues of famous people in their "I'm a Mormon" videos and parading around the "out of the box" artists, like somehow that is going to convert people, they must deal with the consequences. The "I'm a mormon" campaign only showed members who somehow had broken through the glass ceiling of conformity that the rank and file live by. Now they can deal with the publicity. The Daily Mail doesn't leave out in the headline that he was a "I'm a Mormon" it shouts it from the rooftop!!

Direct link to the article OP is talking about: http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/how-mormons-approach-abuse

Link to the other thread discussing the topic:

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1854827

The timing of the statement on how TSCC deals with child abuse is very interesting. It seems to have been published on the same day as the news broke about Darran Scott. They MUST have been working on the document beforehand. The question is, why were they working on it? Did they know about the story before it hit the news, or were they working on it in response to a different story, but decided to release it early?

As I pointed out on the other thread, a positive news story about Darren Scott has been taken down from the mormonnewsroom web site, which I don't think is justified given their new statement. I believe they took down the story to protect themselves, not the victim. I think they should add a paragraph to their BS story about how they deal with child abuse, stating that covering up child abuse and protecting the reputation of TSCC is by far their number one priority.

Producing a fluff piece about how they should (but don't) deal with child abuse is one thing, but trying change history crosses the line into a cover up. The fact is that Darren Scott produced movies that TSCC was proud of, and they gave him a calling as a stake high councillor, indicating that TSCC trusted him. TSCC should admit that they made a mistake instead of pretending it never happened.

I think that they have all sorts of these prepared in advance, generic to every situation.

Re: When the Challenger exploded, I was mildly comforted by the President's "personal" statement of condolences.

Years later, watching a documentary of the event, it was blatantly obvious that the statement had been recorded in advance - not one personal reference by name, no mention/description of the event or craft by name - scripted lines, just generic bs. The most descriptive thing he said was "these astronauts..."

Christa McCauliff (sp?) was the hottest news item since sliced bread - her students were watching live coverage. Not a peep to the kiddies, their school, nothing, from the pres?

I have since watched/read such statements with more informed eyes.

The church should not offer counseling to abused children because they apply their religious filter to it. They should be willing to cover the cost of an impartial, non-Mormon counselor, especially if any of the abuse happened on church property or the abuser was a member in a position of authority.

Not that they would be responsible enough to see how Mormonism might affect their ability to give psychiatric treatment impartially.

I've been to Mormon therapists and non-Mormon ones (for issues not related to child abuse, though). The former had blinders and I would never go to one again.

I have a question: If a male pedophile was to face disciplinary action in TSCC, wouldn't the case be heard at a stake level, with stake high councillors present? Doesn't that mean that if Darran Scott was to face disciplinary action, the matter would be heard by himself and his cronies? At the very least, the people on the council would be the people who trusted him and appointed him high councillor in the first place. It would not be a fair hearing.

Interestingly, if TSCC had heard allegations that Darran Scott was a pedophile, nothing in their latest statement would exclude him from serving as a high councillor, or from making films about youth outside church hours as part of a business deal. Even when TSCC writes fluff about "zero tolerance" of child abuse, they still don't go as far as stopping a suspected pedophile.

The Invisible Green Potato Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have a question: If a male pedophile was to face
> disciplinary action in TSCC, wouldn't the case be
> heard at a stake level, with stake high
> councillors present? Doesn't that mean that if
> Darran Scott was to face disciplinary action, the
> matter would be heard by himself and his cronies?
> At the very least, the people on the council would
> be the people who trusted him and appointed him
> high councillor in the first place. It would not
> be a fair hearing.
>
> Interestingly, if TSCC had heard allegations that
> Darran Scott was a pedophile, nothing in their
> latest statement would exclude him from serving as
> a high councillor, or from making films about
> youth outside church hours as part of a business
> deal. Even when TSCC writes fluff about "zero
> tolerance" of child abuse, they still don't go as
> far as stopping a suspected pedophile.

Is a church court ever a "fair hearing"?

More than likely he would have been released as a high councilman and either his replacement or the council without a replacement would hear the case. The case will not likely be heard until the criminal case is resolved, for several reasons; first, he is most likely denying the allegations and his leaders are buying his crap, if he is convicted they no longer can overlook it and second, the conviction simply makes it a very easy process.

The church will ex him though, he has embarrassed them so they will distance themselves from him as soon as practical.

Disgusting. I haven't heard about him until now. If I hear about this film from any TBM's I'll let them know about the director.

I got a letter recently, which informed me that a previously employed teacher had been charged with sexual abuse of a studentin ANOTHER state. They stated that there had been no charges of his having done so while at my alma mater, but they were notifying every alum and parent, just in case there were unreported events while he was there! Their intention was to err on the side of caution and cooperate with authorities in the other state.

They then reviewed reviewed their policies on the matter, and gave five persons to contact: two male, two female staff, all with certification, and an outside investigative contractor. Now that's erring on the side of caution!

Pedophiles tend to be drawn to professions and churches where they're encouraged to have contact with young children and minors.

Mormonism may provide a toxic shelter to these nutbags, until they smoke themselves out once they become identified. It does a grave injustice to the victims of pedophilia by turning a blind eye, or avoiding liability for its own sake, not admitting any culpability by not doing a better job screening teachers and youth leaders.

It says it promotes zero tolerance for pedophilia. It needs to do much more than it is in screening its teachers and youth leaders.

Then too, so does everywhere else.

My years in scouts is proof tscc does not give a rats ass about abuse of children. I did ok in life afterward, even though it haunted me for decades. There are at least 10 of the boys we grew up with in prison. Four of them murdered a girl. Mormons? Scouts? Child abusers. I know...

I appreciate that most other churches run a background check on the volunteers that work at the church regularly. Especially the ones that work with the young children while the adults watch the preacher ask for money.

Background checks at the Mormon church?? LOL!

Nope. The leadership are dumb enough to think the holy spirit will whisper child rapist into their ears. Of course it doesn't happen.

They might possibly run a check on a scout leader but I've been out for awhile.

Now that scouts is cancel for 14yr and up with no replacement program in sight who knows what they will do.

The duty to God program they had when I was youth... I honestly don't even remember what I had to do to earn that award. I had a few birthdays, was a deacon, teacher, priest, and then awarded the lame $2 pin/metal. I have no idea if I am even in possession of it anymore.

I thought all Bishops had the ability of Discernment. Where the Holy Ghost will tell them if a person is lying to them or is nothing but a SOB.

Blood atonement !!!

I believe anyone seen in public M'ing should be punished, but I'm not sure about sex offender status.
I also believe that females should be allowed to be top-free wherever males are (beaches, etc)