My brother in law is friends with Elder Hamula. They've been friends since high school. It came up this weekend at a bbq with a bunch of my TBM family.

This was a fascinating discussion as my TBM family defended Elder Hamula and what not since it wasn't apostasy or doctrinal disagreements or what have you.

My brother and law piped in and said "James was excommunicated due to his true nature and preference." He said that his friend always struggled and couldn't resist any longer."

gay????

If this is true, it could shake out any remaining LGBT members still on the fence.

Yup.

Hook, line and sinker.

I'm in with this. Why would anyone make this stuff up, right?



Pffft.



Nice try.

Wow. Excommunicating a gay 70 is playing with PR dynamite. Do they honestly hope this to be reasonably contained?

I'll need a Costco-sized case of microwave popcorn.

If the source is reliable?

Makes sense. I thought maybe adultery, embezzlement or "same sex" attraction.

"James was excommunicated due to his true nature and preference."

Maybe he switched from the "tastes great" camp and to the "less filling" camp.

Because once the prophet declares the truth about Miller Light, the thinking has been done.

"James was excommunicated due to his true nature and preference."

He's a... Democrat!?

After reading this, I contacted one his former mission companions and asked if he ever saw anything then or since that would indicate that Jim walks the other side of the road. This friend and former mission companion of Hamula is gay and has a very well tuned "gaydar". He stated that he NEVER saw anything then or since that would indicate Jim is gay. I call bull on this.

NY Times uses "reputable sources" all the time!

Something tells this is, and I can't believe I'm using this term, "FAKE NEWS".

He's a rich dude. No embezzlement. He's most likely in the closet or adulterer.

The term "un-named sources" (and the like) are just poor excuses for members of the media to make things up and call it news. Unless the church, or Hamula, or someone close to him is willing to go on the record with more information, we'll all never know why he was excommunicated.

azsteve Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The term "un-named sources" (and the like) are
> just poor excuses for members of the media to make
> things up and call it news.

I don't agree entirely. There are many reasons for sources to remain anonymous, but will agree that the device can be used by the unethical reporter to write complete bs.

Without delving into the fallout, one type of example is the leak-type site. People tend to take those documents as authentic, without knowing the source. Moving those types of leaks into reporting, aligning ideas and events - that's the nature of reporting. It does not necessarily invalidate the information for the source to remain anonymous.


Unless the church, or
> Hamula, or someone close to him is willing to go
> on the record with more information, we'll all
> never know why he was excommunicated.

I completely agree. There are no series of events or behaviors which point to facts, or from which one might form an opinion. Most of the country couldn't care less about who this person is, so there will be no "investigations."

Yeah, I take this story with a grain of salt, also, not to offend you, but just because I hate to see things like this circulate on hearsay.

That said, I have to admit he's pretty good looking for a G.A. (from a 60+ woman's standpoint), and most of the very best looking older guys I know are gay. So, may be true or may be a rumor that started for that reason.