I know a lot of people dislike Dehlin, but I am a qualified fan. He has created an immense record of the church's crimes and lies and of their effects on members. "Qualified" in the sense of permanently annoyed at his inability to say anything succinctly or to edit his videos, thereby driving at least a few aggravated viewers to throw their laptops at household pets.

Anyway, on rare occasion I watch one of Dehlin's productions, including most recently the interview with Lynn Packer about Paul Dunn. I have known for decades that Dunn lied about his wartime experiences and his sports career, things which left him in my estimation an overly enthusiastic buffoon.

It transpires, however, that Dunn was much worse than that. He lent his name to several financial endeavors--ponzi schemes of a sort that seem routine for today's observers of Mormondom--and when those went south, his highest priority was getting his money out and letting the little people incur the losses. Even worse, when the Affleck fraud became public he forged a document saying he had severed his connection to the business three years previously. At another juncture he manufactured a receipt stating that he had received payment from one of the Kansas City Royals's farm teams. The forgeries were often disguised by fuzzy photocopying, but there is a limit to what that can do to hide the differences between radically different signature styles.

As Packer remarked, Dunn was a sociopath. And the church tolerated, nay celebrated, his exploits until his military and athletic lies were uncovered. Yet in the final analysis what is more important: false claims about the size of the fish a man caught or the life-destroying effects of financial fraud?

This history leaves me with a rather ominous sense that there are probably a lot of sociopaths among the GAs, again tolerated and in some cases celebrated. How clear is the line between an amateur forger and thief like Dunn and an expert forger and thief like Hofmann? Sure, the latter finally killed some people and that distinguished him, but before then the two men were not dissimilar. The only obvious difference is that Dunn was already inside the tent and Hofmann was not.

How different is a man like Gordon Hinckley, with his Truth Restored propaganda, his decades-long campaign against gay people, and his lies about LDS doctrine?

I never liked him.

No matter how humbly he did it, he was tooting his own horn.

Lies are Always lies, I fail to distinguish any difference between them.

Snakes in Suits comes to mind.

Of course there are various degrees of lies.

If your neighbor asks "how are you?" and you say "fine, thanks" even though you have a terrible toothache, you are lying. But in moral terms that lie pales in comparison with a lie that actually hurts others.

I believe... that the way our brains work that accepting 'minor' or 'white lies' conditions our brain responses to accept other, more serious lies.

Why not tell neighbor U suffering a horrible toothache?

I think it's more brave, more responsible to tell the truth, regardless of the consequences, even if only to build a better habit, engage truthfully with everyone & yourself.

I'm certainly not claiming anything like perfection in this or anything for myself!!!

in b 4 ~


dehlin vids are longer than steve benson threds ~


an less interesting ~


srs ~

"there are probably a lot of sociopaths among the GAs"

Like Quentin Cook's shenanigans with Sutter Hospital in Marin County, making bank on others' pain and suffering. Cook is one of the most vile, venal toads ever appointed to the Q12.

https://www.exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1503537

http://www.albionmonitor.com/community/ch-marin.html

https://archives.sfweekly.com/sanfrancisco/sutters-empire-strikes-back/Content?oid=2134927

Paul Dunn never actually apologized for the lies. He never paid back anyone for the books he sold them - he kept every dime from the sales.

He was a slime and worse were his leaders who knew he was a liar and kept quiet.

Your point is a very good one, and I'll make it broader.

There is an inherent conflict between honesty and loyalty. For most of us most of the time, when that conflict rears its head, we choose loyalty--human beings are social animals after all. And, most of the time when that choice is made, the matters are small, mostly inconsequential, and affect very few. However, in some people (such as the late Paul Dunn and the most recent U.S. president), chronic lying to protect themselves or to make themselves look better than they really are makes them both untrustworthy and destructive people.

Untrustworthy but trusted. They have to believe their own lies, or how would they live with themselves? That's why they are called "pathological liars".

Not all GAs are sociopaths. I wouldn't put Uchtdorf in that category. It's interesting that the decidedly un-christlike are tolerated. It's as if the mission of the church is a sham. Jesus is for the little people, who are there to give a real estate holding company tax exempt status.

Q15 members might be aware of the problems. Apostles don't get voted out. It's kind of like tenure. As Nelson demonstrated, the new prophet can implement their pet ideas by fiat. The Q15 is the closest thing the US has to a constitutional monarchy. The church might have more money than the Royal Family.

I always thought that being a thief had a genetic component, and Uchtdorf isn’t one of the whole cross-pollinated bunch of em.

Narcissism/sociopathy is a spectrum, not a binary proposition. Sure, some of the GAs probably don't qualify as either.

But what exactly are our criteria? You mention pathological lying. Well, that is one of the defining characteristics of sociopaths.

What about knowingly protecting child molesters? I think that represents a degree of callousness, a degree of ruthlessness, that would probably also qualify a person for that enviable label.

Is Uchdorf a sociopath? Perhaps not. But he sustains lies even if he doesn't tell them--but I think he tells them, don't you?--and if he has ever participated in an abuse coverup, I think the odds are high that he is sociopathic.

Remember: if good suits and a nice smile preclude one from being a sociopath, Bernie Madoff and Jeffery Epstein were good people.

From what I’ve read, once a person becomes a GA, the church allegedly assumes the mortgage of the GA’s home. Supposedly, there’s a considerable NDA where if broken, the church can grab much of the GA’s assets along with demanding his million-dollar signing bonus and all church investment in the education of the GA’s children and grandchildren.

Has anyone else heard/read that? I wouldn’t doubt that it’s true, very explanatory if it is.

Yes, I believe that's the policy. The church assuming debts/mortgages and NDAs.

Overall, this (along with 2nd annointings) works very well retaining top leaders to stay "true" to the faith.

Obviously some leaders have deflected, but 97% or more stay loyal to the church to the end of their lives.

Have you ever wondered what the % of Primary teachers who stay loyal to the end? :D

Dunn probably had his calling and election made sure so it's all good.

Several of my church leaders at the stake level at the time were heavily involved in helping the church and Dunn cover up his crimes.

Real top-notch servants of the Lord.

Wasn't there also some sort of scandal with GAs and skimming money from Benificial Life Insurance company? I don't remember the details but I know a former girl friend's father was worried about going to jail because of his dealings with The Lords Anointed who were Board Members for several financial institutions.

if they (individually) were skimming Beneficial Life, I don't recall learning about it, but hasn't BL ceased writing new policies?

The GAs would probably slit their wrists rather than expose or allow a brother GA to be financially skimming ChurchCo... Think what a can of worms That would open...

You can add to your list Theodore M. Burton and Thomas Monson as liars. Both heard stories in my mission and inflated and contorted the facts to turn the stories into wonderful faith promoting pieces they used in their conference talks and books.

Monson’s widows, surely, but I suspect virtually all GA talks are embellished to one degree or another. They are trained entertainers, confidence men, predatory.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/15/2022 05:07AM by Lot's Wife.

You can say what you want about Dunn but when I heard him talk I was never bored. I

The corporation never apologized or asked for forgiveness due to Dunn. Many members lost 10s of thousand of dollars with his promotions of dubious ventures. Hell, Hinckley even spoke at Dunn's funeral. Dunn maintained emeritus status if I remember correctly. One of Dunn's books caused me great anguish. I don't remember the title. In the book he stated we should have a spiritual experience every day. For some reason, that seriously depressed me. Being busy raising a family, work, marriage, health, church activities etc. made such advice impossible to follow. It would of improved the corporation's image if Dunn had been ex'd for his activities. The other GAs though would of started sweating knowing they are just as culpable, so it would never happen.

>>...stated we should have a spiritual experience every day

They always managed to say something to let you know you are not good enough. They should have concentrated on themselves instead of trying to make everyone feel guilty.
Maybe bilking someone and selling a book was his idea of a "spiritual experience." ;-/

I attended a community event a couple of years after Dunn was publicly exposed and shamed. He was at the event and being fawned over by the local Mormons. He was even asked to give a prayer blessing the event (of course this was in Utah).
The Mormon need to GA worship apparently was more important than truth that day.

I worked with a few men who invested in Affleck. One ended up having to work 5 years longer than he planned because of his losses.

I was also friends with his sister years ago--LONG AGO--considering I was in my 20s then.