If my impression, based upon a quick reading, is incorrect, please let me know!
Here's what I am reacting to: "(The judge) rule(d) that no reasonable jury would believe Latter-day Saint leaders lied about how donations were spent."
A fine sentiment! Likewise, no reasonable jury would believe that a sitting U.S. President would get a blow-job from an intern... Or that the U.S. Attorney General would have a quickie with Marilyn Monroe... Or that a rich mormon doctor living in Utah would kill his wife... How long could I make this list of things that "...no reasonable jury would believe..." could possibly happen?
Also, if a trial judge knows what the findings of the jurors will be/should be, why not save time and money and just have the trial judge issue a verdict? Think of the time and money saved!
Will the 9th Circuit overturn this ruling? I hope so.
It's also mentioned in the article that Laura Gaddy's case survived a First Amendment freedom of religion challenge because Ms. Gaddy is not challenging church beliefs, but rather church financial activity. One supposes that the 9th and 10th courts of appeal will hear the respective rulings on appeal and then quite possibly SCOTUS may need to weigh in to establish a final consensus.
I think LSD INC. needs to hit SCOTUS some more. Again and again. Same with Scientology. Freedom in religious beliefs shouldn't imply freedom to create vast empires of wealth simply from people's donations of time and money. Seems to be counter the greater good.
Not gonna fly from the get-go for a few reasons, including:
> what were the promises he alleges were broken? Specific or vague/ambiguous?
> (if relevant) did they impair JHs decision(s) to donate (which is, after all, a free-will action-decision)?
> Other than his donations, did JH suffer any damages, tangible or intangible?
> is/was there any legal precedence for a favorable or unfavorable final decision? I'm betting none favorable. Lower court judges avoid setting new territory in the law 'like the plague.
Too bad it was tossed, but it sure brought of bad press for LDS Inc. My daughter in law even started questioning the church due to articles about the lawsuit in the news. YAY!!!
If members aren't being falsely led to believe how the tithing is being spent then they are willingly accepting the situation and going along with it. I'm trying to understand what the members are thinking...
Here is a recent link that I found that clearly explains what members are actually paying for. considering that there is about $7 billion annual tithing: 1% goes to humanitarian 2% goes to ward budget 6% to temples for dead people 19% goes to salaries/cars/tuition/insurance/pensions for the COB CES and GAs (19,000 bureaucrats, staff, and management)
That leaves 68% unaccounted for. The members should absolutely be demanding to know where that money is going... It's completely unacceptable to spend all this money on Stocks and Real Estate with no accountability to the purpose of mormonism or what it states as it's purpose to investigators or members. They are absolutely being dishonest.
macaRomney Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If members aren't being falsely led to believe how > the tithing is being spent then they are willingly > accepting the situation and going along with it. > I'm trying to understand what the members are > thinking... > > Here is a recent link that I found that clearly > explains what members are actually paying for. > considering that there is about $7 billion annual > tithing: > 1% goes to humanitarian > 2% goes to ward budget > 6% to temples for dead people > 19% goes to > salaries/cars/tuition/insurance/pensions for the > COB CES and GAs (19,000 bureaucrats, staff, and > management) > > That leaves 68% unaccounted for. The members > should absolutely be demanding to know where that > money is going... It's completely unacceptable to > spend all this money on Stocks and Real Estate > with no accountability to the purpose of mormonism > or what it states as it's purpose to investigators > or members. They are absolutely being dishonest.
'going along with it' is a long ways from being lied to (finances)
ChurchCo makes bold, sometimes clear & unambiguous claims about honesty, kindness, & respect;
they sometimes deny a tR to someone who drinks a beer or has sex with their bf/gf; Coffee? that gets some ppl denied too I'm sure, but it's done locally as if ChurchCo Central doesn't know about it (B.S.)
In my very own case, my DW did a deceitful, vicious, & greedy divorce bc I stopped going to church, no abuse, no adultery, ChurchCo knew it.
Guess who ChurchCo knowingly gave a TR to? Guess who they Ex'd for bringing the above to their attention.
ChurchCo doesn't seem to know or acknowledge that making claims but not following thru with them / choices contrary to your stated values/claims undermines or destroys credibility, but many or most other people DO;