Great line up tonight supporting Bill Reel, Skeptical Inquiry, Evidential Reasoning and Free Speech.


Your invited to come and support Bill as he faces Excommunication, shining light on the continued Mormon Church Inquisition. Tonight November 27th 8 PM.

Washington Utah Stake Center 446 E Mangum Road, Washington, Utah


The court starts at 8:30. There will be hot chocolate, donuts, cider, etc.

Just heard that New Name Noah is planning to attend, along with Sam Young, John Dehlin, and many others--some from hundreds of miles away. We look forward to joining you as we support one of our own.

The Reel Story has been lost. Kinda like the 116 Pages...

https://www.fairmormon.org/blog/2012/12/12/keeping-the-faith-7a-the-reel-story/

Interesting as I listened to Bill Reel talking with John Dehlin on Mormon Stories tell his story leading up to his receiving notice of his upcoming "love trial", I was struck by the new rules that keep cropping up concerning said trials as stated in a letter Bill received from his stake president.

One rule states that those who speak( Bill and his chosen) are required to sign a statement that what is said at the "sacred" trial will not be shared by recording or spoken about once they leave the trial.

The MormonCult grows more paranoid by the nana-second.

I acknowledge the fact that the mormoncult certainly is free to determine who it wants and doesn't want to be in its cult and are certainly free to sponsor excommunication trials, but how things are going, I wonder when the torture and beheadings will be begin. For an organization that proclaims LOVE is what they are all about, that Jesus must now be in their name, their actions are despicable and, of course, dishonest.

presleynfactsrock Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> One rule states that those who speak( Bill and his
> chosen) are required to sign a statement that what
> is said at the "sacred" trial will not be shared
> by recording or spoken about once they leave the
> trial.

So what happens if you refuse to sign such a thing...?

I mean, they're gonna ex you anyway. Seems an odd time to try and enforce absolute obedience, doesn't it?

They are desperately trying to keep their barbarism out of the public eye.

I, for one, would make the promise and then break it. The church has lied to us so many times, and made us accept covenants sight unseen, and retrospectively revised the standards for excommunication: these jokers have no moral standing.

To put the point in hyperbolic terms, murder is a sin and a crime but those who attempted to kill Hitler were acting morally. At a much lesser level, the LDS church is evil and dishonest and it was ethical of Tom Phillips and the Mattsons to break their temple covenants to discuss the second anointing.

The relevance in the present context is that it is morally right to expose the abuse of children, the official lies, and the corrupt practices of a corrupt church. Anyone who has gone through the trouble of attending a kangaroo court should, in my view, feel free to publicize the event.

They are effectively damning people. Why could the church think damnable people will respect its confidentiality?

Sure, I get that.

It's just that...for me, anyway, one reason I left was not being able to stand the dishonesty. And I wouldn't want to sink to their level.

Your mileage may vary, of course :)

I would care about the honesty issue if I did not think silence regarding the kangaroos contributes to abuse of other people, from young to old.

Conflicting imperatives: tell the truth or expose evil. In my case, I would opt for transparency in this case.

Curiously, do you talk about what happens in temples, Hie? I do.

I wonder how legally binding such an “agreement” even is?
What are you receiving in exchange?
Contracts cannot be so heavily one sided (as I understand it).

Are they going to sue you? Excommunicate you?
Seems like it’s all an intimidation tactic.
Asshats.

"I wonder how legally binding such an “agreement” even is?
What are you receiving in exchange?"

I was wondering the same thing. NDAs over sexual improprieties with public figures get paid a decent amount to keep silent. It seems that the church is trying to play in that sandbox but their cornbread ain't quite done in the middle.

I would doubt that it is enforceable since there is no consideration, nothing the member is given, in exchange for surrendering his rights. Even if it were, the church would be foolish if it tried to seek legal sanctions since that make Mormonism look even more controlling and vengeful.

There is another point here. When the church asks a member to respect the proceeding, they are collaterally getting the member to respect the the church. Agreeing that the trial is "sacred" or at least something respectable gives the church and the trial legitimacy.

So what do you do? Do you refuse to sign and let them excommunicate you in absentia or do you agree to the condition and then violate it? I'd do the latter since anyone who has been a Mormon deserves a fair trial, the D&C includes no confidentiality stipulation, and I would want to stare the men in the face and then to publicize what I experienced. The trial is not fair and open; it is a travesty.

It does not deserve respect, nor do the participants.

Exactly my thoughts...
I’d sign it and then publicize the crap out of it.
Let them THINK they have power where none exists.

Just get a copy of the NDA to make sure you can show that to the world as well. The media would love that.

What sort of church uses NDAs against its members?

I'm not in Washington, Utah, so I can't make it.

I'm ALWAYS for the "underdog", the person, the former saint.

Hope it goes real good Bill.

M@t

I'm going to add that I'll bet the disciplinary council has someone who takes notes. After all, the church thinks the "books" matter and likes to record everything.

So the notion that no one is allowed to record the court proceedings is nonsense. The church wants to have the only documentation. As in any legal proceeding, the defendant has a right to a full record both for purposes of appeal and because he has the same rights as the prosecutors and the court itself.

The NDA will only apply to Bill even though it says it applies to everyone. I applaud his decision to force the church to waste time and energy on this, also to compel the participants to bear moral and emotional responsibility for what the kangaroos dictate. I hope he additionally records the event in defiance of what is an immoral and legally uninforceable NDA.

In fact, Bill should have a countervailing right to demand NDAs from everyone on the prosecutorial team and the jury as well. In no court this side of St. Petersberg and Beijing is a defendant alone prevented from telling others about his trial.

I agree, it is nonsense that no one is allowed to record the proceedings. Bill's decision to participate in the church court is his. If I were put in that situation, I would refuse to play their game and hand them a letter of resignation. I liked the power I had over the church when I resigned. I wouldn't do what he did. I wouldn't give the church power over me that they don't have, but I'm not Bill.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/28/2018 05:34AM by mikemitchell.

My view, worth what you paid for it, is that while resignation may be great for ordinary members, excommunication is better in cases where people have some public prestige. For when a Dehlin or a Kelly or a Runnels or a Reel gets booted, the world pays attention.

It would be easier for the individuals to resign, and probably emotionally rewarding, but they can contribute a lot to the anti-Mormon cause by putting the church on the stand.

Quick report on the Support Bill Reel, an estimated 100+ supporters turned out for the event. This poster enjoyed reconnecting with RFM poster Cricket along with the pleasure of meeting for Bishop Sam Young found him to be a very nice caring fellow. We were prepared to do our support from the sidewalks not on Church property however Bill Reel was able to get permission from his stake president to use the church parking lot where we had a PA system, tables with donuts, cookies, hot chocolate and sider. Visiting with Church PR/Security said they were sympathetic had both gay family ExMormon family members, were provided hot chocolate to keep them warm. Sam Young and John Dehlin gave great rally talks to the crowd.
Couple of links for successful media coverage:
https://www.abc4.com/southern-utah/former-lds-bishop-facing-excommunication-over-podcast/1609252638

https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2018/11/20/jcw-southern-utah-man-who-served-as-mormon-bishop-faces-excommunication/

I wish I could have been there. It sounds like you guys did good work.

When I was summoned to a bishop's court... err... I mean when I was "invited" to a "council," I never had any intention of attending. I'd already given them my resignation letter so I didn't give a shit if they ex'd me, it would have just sped things up. But the bishop was convinced the only reason I was resigning was because of my supposed terrible guilt and if they could do something official to let me know I'm forgiven and can be a member in good standing again, I'd hug him in tears and be so grateful and be a good member of the church again (they didn't want to lose my teenaged son--there weren't a lot of youth).

I was going to tell him that I wouldn't be there when I got the invitation, but decided instead that I'd let them waste their Saturday afternoon and get all dressed up in their hot suits in the middle of the summer and spend their time at the church. So I typed up a letter and made 3 copies, stating that I'd already resigned from the church and was no longer a member, as far as I was concerned, so they could do whatever they wanted and I hoped they had a nice day. I lived a half a block from the church (Provo--our ward was all of 3 blocks by 4 blocks). So I waited to take it over until I saw the Bishop's car in the parking lot. I walked over in my shorts, handed him the letters and said "have a nice day." I passed two of the other jurors on my way home and just waved at them.

Funny thing, I still got a letter afterwards telling me they'd held the court and determined I was forgiven (not that I'd asked forgiveness for anything, but it was a small ward and obvious that the guy I was dating would sometimes have his truck parked outside my house all weekend), and that if I wanted to withdraw my resignation letter, my membership would be in good standing. I received that letter in certified mail, so I sent a certified mail back saying, "I expect my resignation to now be processed ASAP."

Anyway, yeah, I could have done it the easy way, but it was so much more fun to make the point that I was NOT intimidated by any of their self-proclaimed power or authority because they had absolutely none.

The mormon cockroches don't want the light shined on them.

Standing for truth! Another one get's excommunicated.