Excommunication Appeal

March sign keep me safe

Today, I appealed my excommunication from the Mormon Church. 

Dear President Nelson, President Oaks and President Eyring,

As you should know by now, the president of the Houston Texas South Stake recently called a disciplinary council to consider the status of my membership.  On September 12, the verdict of excommunication was delivered.

The purpose of this letter is to present my appeal.

First, my stake president.  He’s a good man, a friend.  An important reason for my appeal is in consideration of my stake president’s welfare.  If I don’t appeal, he will go down in history as the man who excommunicated the bishop who stood up to protect children.  The verdict was made by him and only by him.  Eventually, our interview policies will change.   In the interim, when cases come forward of abuse, suicide and other serious consequences resulting from our dangerous protocol, my sensitive stake president could very well take it hard.  He may hold himself accountable for abuse happening all around the world.  That’s not fair.  But the way it stands, he is all alone in responsibility for the excommunication.

With this appeal, you the First Presidency, will remove a huge burden from his shoulders.  Whatever your decision, ownership of the verdict will be transferred to you.  Whatever the consequences, they will be on your heads, not his.

Two charges were leveled against me.

  1. Encouraged others to vote opposed to Church leaders.

I have made a temple covenant to obey the law of God.  Part of that law is the law of common consent.  To me common consent is one of the most gorgeous principles of the latter-day restoration.  You should know it well.  Let me recap.

The Doctrine and Covenants contain the foundational revelations contingent with the restoration.  Common Consent is referenced several times in very plain language.  Here’s one.

D&C 28:13 states, “For all things must be done in order, and by common consent in the church.”

This law is also taught in the Bible and the Book of Mormon.

Common consent is further elucidated by this doctrinal statement found on lds.org:

“Not only are Church officers sustained by common consent, but this same principle operates for policies, major decisions, acceptance of new scripture, and other things that affect the lives of the Saints (see D&C 26:2).”

Under sworn oath to the United States Congress, President Joseph F. Smith explained how common consent is supposed to work in the church.  Following is an excerpt of President Smith’s testimony as he is questioned by members of the Committee on Privileges and Elections.  The Mr. Smith referenced below is President Joseph F. Smith, head of the Mormon Church at the time.

Mr TAYLER:  What is the method in which a revelation is received and becomes binding upon the people?

Mr SMITH:  I will say this, Mr. Chairman, that no revelation given through the head of the church ever becomes binding and authoritative upon the members of the church until it has been presented to the church and accepted by them. (Note: the interview policies of our youth have never been presented to the church nor accepted by them.)

Mr WORTHINGTON:  What do you mean by being presented to the church?

Mr SMITH:  Presented in conference.

Mr TAYLER:  Do you mean by that that the church in conference may say to you “We deny that God has told you to tell us this?”

Mr SMITH:  Yes, sir, they can.  And it is not binding upon them as members of the church until they accept it.

Senator OVERMAN:  Does it require a majority to accept or must it be the unanimous voice?

Mr SMITH:  A majority.

Mr TAYLER:  Then if you had a revelation and presented it to your people, all who did not accept it would thereby be unchurched?

Mr SMITH:  Not necessarily.  Our people are given the largest possible latitude for their convictions, and if a man rejects a message that I may give to him but is still moral and believes in the main principles of the gospel and desires to continue in his membership in the church, he is permitted to remain and he is not unchurched.  It is only those who on rejecting a revelation rebel against the church and withdraw from the church at their own volition. (Note:  I am still moral and believe in the main principles of the gospel.  I have not withdrawn from the church on my own volition.)

Mr SMITH:  I should like to say to the honorable gentlemen that the members of the Mormon Church are among the freest and most independent people of all the Christian denominations.  They are not all united on every principle.  Every man is entitled to his own opinion and his own views and his own conceptions of right and wrong so long as they do not come in conflict with the standard principles of the church.  (Note:  I love the statement that Mormons are among the freest of Christian denominations.  Excommunicating me sends a strong message that our Church is among the most repressive of Christian denominations.  I do not come in conflict with the standard principles of the church.  I stand as a witness in support of our core principles.  However, I do stand as a witness against a policy.  One that is damaging our children.  And a policy that has never been presented to the church in the approval process that President Smith is defending to the United States Congress)

If a man assumes to deny God and to become an infidel we withdraw fellowship from him.  If a man commits adultery we withdraw fellowship from him.  If men steal or lie or bear false witness against their neighbors or violate the cardinal principles of the Gospel, we withdraw our fellowship.  The church withdraws its fellowship from that man and he ceases to be a member of the church.  But so long as a man or a woman is honest and virtuous and believes in God and has a little faith in the church organization, we nurture and aid that person to continue faithfully as a member of the church, though he may not believe all that is revealed.  (Note: According to a prophet’s sworn testimony, I do not qualify for excommunication.)

This ends the quotes I’ll share from President Joseph F. Smith.

According to the law of common consent, members of the Church of Jesus Christ have the right and privilege to vote as their conscience dictates without punishment.  Nowhere are we constrained from free speech.  In order to exercise true consent, discussion should be encouraged and fostered.  Including, making suggestions and recommendations to other members.

The charge that I’ve encouraged others to vote opposed to Church leaders is nonsensical on its face.

  • In 1978 when the lifting of the racial ban was presented for a vote, what types of discussion were allowed? Was it ok for a member to encourage others to vote in approval?  If so, was it also ok for someone opposed to voice their opinion and encourage others to vote in disapproval?  Common consent is a farce if those who are voting can only discuss and make suggestions when they agree with what is being presented.  Otherwise it’s a dictatorial system that flies in the face of the beauty of Christ’s injunction that all things MUST be done by common consent.
  • Encouraged others to vote opposed to Church leaders? My encouragement has been for people to vote how they feel.  If they approve…vote to sustain.  If they disapprove…vote to oppose.  My recommendation for members is to embrace common consent.  I encourage all to live up to their temple covenant of obeying the law of God, which includes the law of common consent.
  1. Organized more than one public “action” that expressed opposition to the Church or its leaders.

This charge represents an uninformed interpretation.  I have never organized actions to express opposition to the Church or its leaders.  This is ridiculous.  Every event was organized to express opposition to a POLICY.  Not to a doctrine.  Not to core principles.  Not to our theology.  I am not opposed to the church.  Likewise I am not opposed to its leaders.  In fact, I’m the biggest supporter of my Church that I know.

If you care about something you fight for it.  If you love something you don’t tolerate what might destroy it.  You are passionate to nurture and make it better.  I don’t know of anyone who is fighting for our Church with more vigor than I am.

On the other hand, if I didn’t care, I’d ignore the Church’s deadly flaws.  I’d turn a blind eye to its faults.  Or I would simply desert it and walk away.  By my actions, it should be plainly evident that am speaking up FOR my church and not against it.

At the council, for 15 minutes the stake president presented his evidence against me.  Most of it was taken from my blog publications.  Much was taken out of context.  I believe that I’ve more than adequately addressed the evidence against me by addressing the two charges above.

However, there was one citation from the Deseret News that was presented as evidence.  Tad Walsh wrote that I was encouraging members to leave the church.  That’s a lie.  Tad either made-up the quote out of whole cloth or he misheard.  Nowhere have I told people that they should leave the church.  You won’t find it quoted by any other news outlets.  It’s not on my blog.  Nor can it be found in any of the multitude of videos that I’ve published.

Let’s work together to make our Church better, especially for our children.  I firmly believe that you have already received the revelation to eliminate one-on-one interviews and sexual questions to our children and youth.  Several factors point in that direction.

For example, on July 27th, I received a phone call from Gifford Nielson, a member of the 1st Quorum of the Seventy.  My 23 day fast had a planned start time of 7pm that evening.  He called me early in the afternoon.  Giff is a good friend and we had a great chat that lasted about 1 ½ hours.  The main thrust of his call was to find a way to avert the hunger strike.  We were not able to find an accommodation that was agreeable to both of us.  His final offer was this, “Sam, if the apostles provided you with a letter stating that they are working on making changes, would you call off your action?”

I can’t see Giff being dishonest or disingenuous.  He would have only offered a letter stating changes were being worked on if in fact they were really being worked on.  I listened to every talk during the 8 hours of last Sunday’s General Conference.  My hopes were high that the changes to which Elder Nielsen had alluded would be included in the major announcements all of us were anticipating.

My encouragement to you, dear First Presidency, is to release the changes now.  Don’t wait until April’s conference to offer our children the full protections that they deserve.

This conference was historic.  The change to a 2 hour schedule has been received with relish.  When you announce God’s new protections for children, it will be received with much more than relish.  You will go down in history as wise and beloved leaders.  Members, bishoprics and children will embrace the new policies without reservation.  They will rejoice.  Those outside the Church will be impressed.  They will witness the Church of Jesus Christ proactively putting on a strong protective mantle over our little ones.

Contrast this to what happens if you allow this excommunication to stand.  The Church and its leaders will be viewed with revulsion by many outside the church.   People will not respond well when they discover how we treat our children and what we do to members who speak up to protect them.

Do the right thing.  Be on the right side of history.  Reverse this excommunication.

Warm regards,

Sam Young

239 thoughts on “Excommunication Appeal

    1. I see I hit a nerve with you. Reliving the past are we? I see you can’t let it go which is indicative of a liar. My comment also, if you had a brain to infer anything at all, merely met your abrasive tone with equal force. Funny thing about you bully types…you can only dish it out.

      Like

    2. And if you read it, I didn’t acuse you, I simply said your opportunity to abuse is being taken away. At least with your comments people here will see your true colors. If I were Sam I would just block you. So much rage. I know a good anger management blog if you’re interested in self help.

      Like

    3. Ah. So in your mind, everyone has to post a “pic,” right? That’s very telling. You’re obsessed with “pics” of others. Is it sexual for you?

      I had no “abrasive tone” until you came forward with one. I’ve tried explaining this to you.

      There was no “opportunity,” because I have no opinion one way or the other about the whole kids thing, because KIDS HAVE NEVER BEEN ABUSED in the Church. By anyone. Ever. To say to the contrary is a lie. THAT’S why I hate Sam. He’s making all sorts of wacky claims, claims that I say are designed to ruin the good name of the Church.

      Also, I am not “enraged.” I just tell it like it is, and that enrages YOU. And that makes me laugh, given that you keep dragging this out –not letting it go– by replying to me over and over. You’re just making yourself look like a jerk.

      Like

    4. Nope, not a joke, troll or whatever else you pull out when confronted with opposing opinion. It is true: no child has been abused in the Church. Ever. In fact, I say that anyone, woman or child, who claims “rape,” abuse, etc. is LYING. And I said this to a lying woman’s face when she told me an employee of mine supposedly “molested” her. I told her, and quite honestly, that whatever did happen was her fault. Again, TRUTH.

      I know, I know….you can’t handle dissenting opinion, so you whine “joke.” Good luck with that.

      Like

      1. What evidence do you have to negate 50,000 victims? How about 100,000. How many people fail to report because of accusers like you? A lot! You nor your beliefs make anything true. Hot air pompous ass. Must be a hard pill to swallow knowing the church you defend is positioned as a pedophiles dream carnival. Are you a circus clown in your day job, or just at night in the ally’s of Albany?

        Liked by 1 person

    5. Bravo! Superb! You are incredible! Again, bravo! You are a wordsmith!! Standing ovation!! Nice work! God this guy is talented!!All with half his brain tied behind his back! Well played. Well played. In the shadows of greatness. Sam is a lucky man to have the wisdom of of this sage grace his page.

      Like

      1. Hi Jim. I have now deleted 3 of Michael’s comments. I won’t allow him to continue to insult the very people whom I am trying to help.

        Liked by 1 person

    6. I stand by what I’ve written. Since you clearly have unresolved anger issues, I will walk away from this conversation. You are clearly not rational, and given your hate speech towards the Church, which has done nothing to deserve this treatment, we’re done here, unless you can be rational.

      Like

    7. Sam, it’s your house, so it’s your rules, but I don’t feel that anything I’ve written is unwarranted or unreasonable. It seems that you only want material that supports your opinion that children are unsafe in the Church. That’s fine. It speaks volumes to your character, or lack thereof. Any decent person would have heeded his priesthood leaders’ counsel. But that’s not your end game, is it?

      Like

    8. Jim facts in this age do not matter. Most Mormons would rather be right about that which is wrong, than to busy themselves with facts. It about being right not about true happiness. All one has to give up In lieu of facts is ones aliveness. You will learn in the LDS/Mormon faith that you will never shake a believer for there is to much at stake! Being wrong kills out beliefs which seem more valuable than the truth. Once you realize that you have given up personal freedom both physically as well as mentally and spiritually , it Takes a type of courage and strength that Mormons do not have being committed to being right, they are willing to abandon substance for something as ephemeral as “good feelings. I for one am proud of Brother Young I can’t believe that he concerns jimself with those that cannot engage in meaningful dialogue, and those that resort to name calling.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I am super proud of him too. The comment section looks a little weird because I was attacked by a member and told multiple times to kill myself. Sam eventually deleted those comments, so it sort of looks like my comments are towards Sam. They are not. I fully support Sam and what he has done. Mine was one of the first letters sent in, but with my atheist blog and as an exmo, I don’t think he used it out of potential credibility issues. That was actually my suggestion to him at the time. I also gave him the option for me to offer proof. Thanks for checking in. From your writing I couldn’t tell if you were referring to me or Mr Cook

        Liked by 1 person

      1. I know how you must be feeling. I’m sorry Sam has single handedly restricted your right to abuse kids. Try maturbating and a cold shower—better yet, voluntarily castrate yourself.

        Liked by 2 people

      1. michaelcrook YOU are vile. In the words of one of Sam’s friends (and ours), “No amount of disrespect can fairly compensate Joseph and The Brethren for what they have done…and/or continue doing”… to our children..Jan’s and mine.

        Liked by 1 person

    1. Who are you to judge Sam’s intent? Judge his words, they are very good.

      Sam is not an enemy to the church, rather he is an enemy to sexual predators who use the church for cover.

      Thousands of others agree that it is time for this interview policy to change. Having an opinion about a church policy and sharing that opinion is within the right of every church member.

      Liked by 3 people

  1. Nice try, Jimbo. Just because you molest kids doesn’t mean everyone does. Kids never were in danger (I hate them, including my own), so all Sam did, I say, is wreck the good name of the Church. Bye, Jimmy. Stop touching those kiddies, k?

    Like

      1. Hi Jim,

        I’m so sorry for what happened to you. Long long ago, I started to notice your ‘likes’ appearing on my articles. Very often you were the only person liking the post. Thank you for your constant support. Now, I understand a little better. What happened to you was wrong. I hear you. I see you. I hope that this entire movement has provided validation, understanding and empathy.

        I love you my friend and brother,
        Sam

        Liked by 4 people

      2. Thank you Sam. All the best to you. I feel a lot better knowing things are changing. I still have kids and grandkids in the church and do worry about them and their health in this matter. My grandfather was the first photographer in the salt lake valley, so my roots were pretty deep. Not sure when these interviews turned for the worse, but mine were in the 70’s. I’ll be rooting for you.

        Liked by 3 people

  2. Mr. Young does not understand that you don’t counsel or attempt to school the Lord’s annointed, especially in public. He shows a lack of humility and sound judgment. It is hard, Mr. Young, to kick against the pricks, but kick you have, and my prediction is that the decision to excommunicate you will stand until you humble yourself and repent of your self-righteous arrogance.

    If children are committing suicide, it is not because their bishop asked them if they are involved in any of a myriad of sexual proclivities. Promiscuity, pornography, or any other habitual sexual pleasure outside of the marriage covenant warrants concern by parents as well as church leaders. These things damage the soul by stifling spiritual growth. Satan does not want youth interviews to function. To him, they are speed bumps in his effort to destroy the youth. Your efforts sound noble, but they are another deception, making good look like evil and evil look like good. There are those who say that outlawing abortion is taking a woman’s rights away and limiting her freedom to do with her body as she pleases. You are saying that the youth should have the private right to do with their bodies what they want and not have to answer to anyone but the Lord. Both arguments sound like noble arguments on the surface, but they are both flawed when you go in deeper. Mr. Young, you have unwittingly teamed up with the father of lies, and he has deceived you.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Hi Tom,

      “Mr. Young does not understand that you don’t counsel or attempt to school the Lord’s annointed, especially in public. He shows a lack of humility and sound judgment. It is hard, Mr. Young, to kick against the pricks, but kick you have.” Exactly what could be said of Christ as he openly spoke out against the church leaders of his time. Thank you my friend for reminding me that I’m in good company.

      Liked by 2 people

    2. “These things damage the soul by stifling spiritual growth” So does suicide and life long self deprecation from adult to child sexual communications that, outside of your own church, you would cry abuse! Replace every time Sam mentions bishop with catholic priest, and I’m pretty sure you’d see the ignorance of your statement.

      Liked by 4 people

    3. Hi, Tom,

      Thank you for expressing your thoughts about what Sam has accomplished and continues to accomplish, which happens to include saving lives of at-risk LDS youth (and probably some adults as well).

      I will interject some [[comments]] into what you wrote: (I hope you will forgive me, as I am about to forgive you.)

      “If children are committing suicide, it is not because their bishop asked them if they are involved in any of a myriad of sexual proclivities. [[ False statement, Tom, for two reasons. It’s not “if” children are committing suicide, it’s children ARE committing suicide. And credible investigations/surveys by professionals have linked some portion of Utah suicides to masturbation shame dispensed by Mormon bishops. Your denial of the root cause of a serious problem is … itself … a serious problem.]] Promiscuity, pornography, or any other habitual sexual pleasure outside of the marriage covenant warrants concern by parents as well as church leaders. [[ ANY form of sexual pleasure outside of marriage is SOUL DAMAGE? You are including masturbation, obviously. Your inclusion of masturbation in the same category as teenagers copulating is stunning, Tom. One is high risk behavior that can result in pregnancy, babies (who may not become tithe payers) or STDs. The other behavior does … does what? Causes a few moments of private pleasure? No babies. No STDs. Only one of the most intense rushes of euphoric sensations possible for a human body? Why is that a bad thing? You are about to tell me … ]] These things damage the soul by stifling spiritual growth. [[Feeling fleeting moments of private pleasure on occasion ‘stifles spiritual growth’? ]] Satan does not want youth interviews to function. To him, they are speed bumps in his effort to destroy the youth. [[ I do appreciate your metaphor, Tom. Good, creative writing. Also impressive is your ability to read the mind of a cartoon character who does not actually exist. He is affectionately known as ‘Stan’ to some of us former TBMs. Humans misbehave because we are all learning by our own experience to behave better. There is no boogeyman behind the curtain causing errant human behavior. It’s free will and choice that causes destructive behaviors, Tom. It is also free will and choice that causes positive behaviors. ]] Your efforts sound noble [[ Well, kudos to you, Tom for recognizing ‘noble’ when you see it.]], but [[why the but? Sam’s efforts sound noble. Because they protect children from being shamed for feeling private pleasure?]] they are another deception, making good look like evil and evil look like good. [[More good writing, Tom. You are a talented writer. The cross-transmogrification of good and evil does happen a lot, but not by Sam Young, imo.]] There are those who say that outlawing abortion [[Ooops! Sound the alarm. Strawman argument = logical fallacy. Downvote for a cheap shot, Tom. Sam is not discussing abortion. Shame on you for bringing that into the discussion with intent to discredit Sam. ]] is taking a woman’s rights away and limiting her freedom to do with her body as she pleases. You are saying that the youth should have the private right to do with their bodies what they want and not have to answer to anyone but the Lord. [[Tom, you are dancing with a mental illness diagnosis here. Do you realize what you just did? You compared aka equated masturbation with the termination of a pregnancy … or killing an unborn human being. You just agreed with The Brethren’s sex pamphlet that describes sexual sin (including masturbation) as a sin next to murder aka abortion. ]] Both arguments sound like noble arguments on the surface, but they are both flawed when you go in deeper. [[LOUD BUZZER SOUND … Tom, sorry, you lose this round for resorting to an intelligence-insulting strawman argument. Worse than that, if you actually BELIEVE YOUR OWN STRAWMAN ARGUMENT, you are seriously drain bamaged. It’s not your fault though, so don’t feel bad. If you are b.i.c. born in correlation, your brain was correlated (programmed) without your permission and without your knowledge. I forgive you. The people who do not merit forgiveness are The Brethren. They have many 55 gallon drums of innocent blood on their hands by now. Sam wants to make it stop. He is succeeding.]] Mr. Young, you have unwittingly teamed up with the father of lies, and he has deceived you.”

      In conclusion, Tom, you have unwittingly teamed up with (suffered brain correlation by) The Brethren of Lies, and they have deceived you. I do forgive you, but for the children’s sake (and for your own sake), I encourage you to pull your correlated head out of your programmed butt and get a clue. You’ll be glad you did.

      PS – Thank you for some good writing. If you can bring your attitudes and perspective on how to raise (and love) children on par with your creative writing skill, you will be awesome!

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Dear Sam,

    Masterfully written and well-communicated.

    Would you care to share the method of delivery to The Brethren you chose for your letter? One copy for all three … or a copy addressed to each one? Served by mail? Certified? Registered? Restricted Delivery? FedEx? UPS? Process Server?

    I am just curious … so ignore my question if you like.

    A core issue with your excommunication is that your excommunication letter DID NOT DISCLOSE the actual reason for The Brethren giving you the boot. In other words, the excommunication letter itself is a lie. (Big surprise, right?) If it had been delivered under oath in a court of law, it would be an act of PERJURY.

    You were excommunicated for committing an UNPARDONABLE SIN in today’s Church.

    What sin?

    DISOBEDIENCE aka INSUBORDINATION

    Your stake president commanded you to STOP? I don’t recall the exact language. Not back off. You can remind me.

    You REFUSED TO OBEY a direct order from your Priesthood Leader. If this were the military, you would have been Court Martialed. Instead, you were Court of Love Martialed, Sam.

    If it were me, I would have concluded the letter with this: (You can still deliver an ADDENDUM if you want to.)

    My Dear Brethren, when you render your decision in response to this, my DIRECT APPEAL to The First Presidency of my excommunication, I respectfully request and require that you authenticate your decision in writing, addressed to me personally, and subscribed with all three of YOUR ORIGINAL, WET INK SIGNATURES.

    You are hereby informed in advance that I WILL NOT ACCEPT AS AUTHENTIC any third party communication or any unverified, unsigned written or spoken notice of your “alleged” decision on appeal. I will consider any such unauthenticated communication as hearsay.

    This is not an unreasonable request. If a COURT ORDER in our legal system is not signed personally by the judge himself or herself, it carries no legal effect.

    Thank you in advance for giving me the courtesy of a duly authenticated judgment of my excommunication appeal.

    I HEREBY SERVE THE FOLLOWING NOTICE UPON THE FIRST PRESIDENCY:

    If you FAIL to deliver your judgment, authenticated by your signatures as I have requested and required, your failure to do so shall be interpreted as a REVERSAL OF MY EXCOMMUNICATION AND REINSTATEMENT OF SAM YOUNG TO FULL FELLOWSHIP AS A MEMBER IN GOOD STANDING OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS.

    Thank you. Have a nice day.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. “No one to blame but myself.” Exactly. But, I’d word it a little differently. I have no one to credit but myself for choosing to follow the teachings and example of Christ. I take full ownership of standing up to protect children and speaking up to give voice to the children who have been harmed.

      Liked by 5 people

      1. That’s not what you did at all. You held the Church up to ridicule. You should have done what any LDS would do: dummy up and deal.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Okay, Michael. I’m warming up to you. “ou should have done what any LDS would do: dummy up and deal.” I can respect that. But, I wasn’t capable of doing it.

        Liked by 2 people

  4. Hi Gary,

    Dang, I should have consulted you before I sent off my letter. How did I send it? The instructions were to submit it to the stake president, with I did by email. The stake presidents words of command your were looking for are “Walk away, Sam, walk away.”

    Like

    1. Sam, you are an ex-Mormon. You do not have to “follow instructions” for god’s sake! Snap out of that mindset!

      Here is what I think you want to avoid … in response to your excommunication appeal:

      Your SP and friend deliver a letter to you at home: You open it. It is a letter from your SP. The letter says:

      Dear Sam,

      This is to inform you that the First Presidency received your excommunication appeal letter and carefully considered everything you wrote.

      Your appeal is denied.

      We love you and invite you to repent and rejoin the Church a year from now.

      SIgned,

      /s/ Stake President

      I think you want an EXCOMMUNICATION APPEAL DENIAL hardcopy letter on Church stationery with three wet-ink signature on it. If so ….

      Please consider doing the following ASAP.

      Make sure your name and return address shows on your hardcopy letter, with this annotation:

      SEND REPLY CORRESPONDENCE TO:
      Mr. Sam Young
      <>

      Decide whether or not you want to require a signed response (per my previous post) with consequences for failure to perform. If you make an offer, and The Brethren do not respond, silence is consent. The Brethren DO NOT WANT to give you a signed excommunication appeal denial letter. You have the right to REQUIRE a signed letter. (I forgot to add a 30-day tolling of time default clause to my eariler post. “If you fail to postmark a signed response within 30-days of receipt of this appeal request, your default shall be considered to be TACIT APPROVAL OF MY APPEAL and reinstatement of full membership in good standing.

      That is all up to you, of course. The Brethren will take full advantage of whatever wiggle room you allow them to avoid signing their names to your excommunication.

      Make three hardcopies of your letter (one for each addressee).

      When I am sending the same letter to multiple addressees, to avoid making multiple versions of the same letter, I like this form: Just check the box on the three identical copies.

      [X] President Russell M. Nelson
      [ ] President Dallin H. Oaks
      [ ] President Henry B. Eyring
      <>

      Dear President Nelson, President Oaks and President Eyring,
      [your letter]

      Sign each letter separately (do not copy your signature). Insert each copy into a separate full-size envelope (available at Liberty Office Products). Look up the mailing address of the First Presidency offices. I will do that for you:

      President Russell M. Nelson
      The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
      Office of the First Presidency
      47 East South Temple Street,
      Salt Lake City, Utah
      84150

      President Dallin H. Oaks
      The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
      Office of the First Presidency
      47 East South Temple Street,
      Salt Lake City, Utah
      84150

      President Henry B. Eyring
      The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
      Office of the First Presidency
      47 East South Temple Street,
      Salt Lake City, Utah
      84150

      Put your return address on the envelope.

      Address the envelopes as shown above. I would write something on the envelope like:

      TIME SENSITIVE PRIORITY BUSINESS – PLEASE EXPEDITE

      Then MAIL via USPS using Certified Mail with Return Receipt. You can specify RESTRICTED DELIVERY where the Postal Carrier will require the addressee to sign for delivery. This can be a problem if the addressee is not available, so I do not recommend that. (I got burned recently doing Restricted Delivery … caused a long delay in delivery.) It will be OK for an admin to sign for regular Certified Mail delivery with Green Card receipt. You will have to fill out the Green Card with your return address on the front and then stick it to the front of the envelope. I’m sure you know the drill.

      ===================

      Be sure to keep a signed original as your copy of the letter.

      You might also want to contact the attorney at quitmormon.com for his advice on how to tighten up your appeal to ensure a SIGNED excommunication appeal verdict from The Brethren. I am sharing what makes sense to me if I were doing what you are doing. There are other ways to tighten this up even more, but keeping is relatively simple is best … seems to me. It is essential that you include terms and conditions and consequences if they do not give you the common decency respect of a signed letter denying your appeal. They could just ignore it if you let them. A 30 day time default is important, imo.

      You may want to just ignore all of this and see what happens. The Brethren could always surprise (me) and treat you with a minimum of respect, but I would not hold my breath … unless you like blue lips.

      Like

  5. Love the quote from Joseph F Smith, wish I had that for my Bishops are JUDGEs of Israel post. This is great appeal letter with quote and logic hard to argue with unless you are hard of heart and just don’t give a damn.

    Has not Sam testified of the wrongs of what have occurred from asking CHILDREN sexually explicate questions? Yea, he has boldly, and what was the LDS / Brighamite church done in response, they want to cast him out, and have said Sam Young is of the Devil and will not get back in his place where he belongs and we need to remove him from our ranks. All while at the same time protecting the one on the right of the picture. Who had his books sell in Deseret Book until recently as the LDS / Brighamite church trying to hide or be secret about what is going on. I have never read any of his books, but I can speculate it would of had things that mostly tickled peoples ears, especially considering he has not had the baptism of fire or if he once did he has lost it because of his sins and crimes against God and the people. A repentant man will confess of his sins, not hide behind the law or lawyers. Now also take a look at which man the LDS / Brighamite church is supporting and which one they are forsaking. To me this is a very dirty rotten fruit of theirs.
    https://seekingyhwh.com/2018/09/09/bishops-are-judges-of-israel/

    Liked by 2 people

  6. Hi Sam,
    I’m a Catholic who has seen similar suffering in my own church, and suffered helpless rage at the cover-ups which have since been revealed.

    Your letter is reasoned and sound. I hope that the reply you get does justice to it. Truly, although I am angry at the Catholic heirachy I cannot ask more of them. They have, and are, opening records to investigative bodies, they have made public apology, the Pope has met with victims in many countries, settlement figures are available and perpetrators have been, and are being, named.

    I feel for you. I am sorry your voice is not being heard by those who can change things. Praying for your peace always,

    Ceal

    Liked by 3 people

  7. What a tender mercy it would truely be to have a revelation like that handed down. Its such a faith promoting experience to see the Lord answer prayers and calm our troubled hearts. Thank you for being on the Lord’s side, Sam. So many of us are praying in behalf of the youth and in behalf of you for your membership reinstatement.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Hello Sam,

    As an active member of the church I’m so sad that they chose to excommunicate you. I support the changes you call for. We must all stand up to protect children to the utmost. I pray they reverse your excommmunication.

    Liked by 3 people

  9. A true disciple of Jesus Christ would humble themselves, repent, and seek quiet reinstatement into the church. Did Sam’s stake president make a mistake? No. This appeal is made to further solidify Sam’s annoyance with the upper eschulons of church leadership. Sam really has no desire to be accepted back into full fellowship with the church at this point. This policy issue is just one of many issues Sam has against the church.
    Sam is not a supporter of the church. You can’t support something you constantly accuse and question. There really is no positive faith promoting posts coming from Sam. In fact, everyone is of the same flavor. That flavor is that bitterness against church leadership. Sam has bashed and bashed church leadership roles, especially that of the bishop. He has continually stated that bishops act as sexual predators who groom children. That’s not support.
    Not just that, Sam has accused our bishops of being bad men who harm our children. That’s not support.
    Sam, It behooves you to change, start siding with the prophets and support them. Only then will we all know you want to be a true disciple.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I actively and vocally support the church leadership when they are in the right. For example, I praise the apostles for having condemned our past racist policies, practices and doctrines. I have stood at the pulpit during testimony meeting and offered that praise in public. Here is the testimony that I delivered in F&T meeting on June 3, 2018:

      Last month I shared my testimony of the teachings and example of Jesus Christ. I took some flak for not having mentioned the restoration or the prophets.

      Today, I’m going to correct that.

      I want to give our current crop of apostles and prophets a strong shout out of support. Last Friday, the church held an event to officially celebrate the 40 year anniversary of the reversal of our church doctrine that forbid black men from receiving the priesthood and prohibited both black men and black women from entering the temple.

      This ban on church privileges was lifted in 1978. I had the honor of sitting in a Houston chapel during general conference when Elder N. Eldon Tanner presented the lifting of the ban for a sustaining vote. My hand was proudly raised in support of changing our policy. This is a great example of the Law of Common Consent in action. All policies and major decisions are supposed to be presented to the membership for approval or disapproval. I love this empowering element of the restored gospel. So, there’s my full-throated endorsement of a glorious principle that came directly as a part of the restoration.

      Now, I want to express my appreciation and respect for our current apostles and prophets. 4 years ago, the apostles did something very gutsy that no top leadership has ever done before. They published an essay on LDS.org entitled Race and the Priesthood. It condemns our past racism. It disavows our past racist doctrine, teachings and practices. That’s a disavowal and condemnation of what all the past prophets and apostles from Brigham Young on have taught regarding black people being cursed with a dark skin. Halleluiah!!!

      Unfortunately, until 4 years ago when this essay was published, I completely believed our racist teachings that are now officially condemned. I’m glad that the church celebrated the lifting of the ban. However, I wish that there had also been an official full-throated apology for our past racism.

      Today, I offer my apology and the apology of many, many of my friends. We are sorry that we were gullible enough to believe that our white skin was a reflection of our righteousness in the pre-mortal life. And that a black skin was a reflection of the opposite.

      I’m sorry that these disavowed practices, which I fully supported, marginalized an entire race for 150 years within the church of Jesus Christ.

      I offer this apology in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Sam they just don’t apologise and if one does not apologise for anything, then one fails to acknowledge the atonement and the sacrifice of Jesus Christ (as taught by the lds church) becomes redundant.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. No need for an apology. These practices were once ordained of God and have since been repudiated. I am obligated to sustain that decision, personal feelings notwithstanding.

        Liked by 1 person

      1. A true disciple follows and uphelds the living holy prophets knowing they are the very mouthpiece of God. You certainly didn’t have any praise for elder Oaks from his talk this last conference.

        Like

    2. Robert,

      “A true disciple of Jesus Christ would humble themselves, repent…

      Church leaders are fallible and not exempt from this as well.

      “Did Sam’s stake president make a mistake?”

      Yes!!

      “This appeal is made to further solidify Sam’s annoyance with the upper echelons [sic] of church leadership”

      That is an assumption on your part. As Sam said in his appeal, the purpose of the appeal is to remove a huge burden from his stake president’s shoulders and transfer ownership of the verdict to the first presidency.

      “This policy issue is just one of many issues Sam has against the church.”

      This is another assumption on your part. Not “many.” Sam’s issues are against the way church policy directs bishops to interview children and the current practice of failing to practice common consent in the church as scriptures direct. That’s only two, not many.

      “Sam is not a supporter of the church. You can’t support something you constantly accuse and question.”

      Yes he is a supporter of the church and church leaders, and he elaborates on it in his appeal. You must have missed that.

      “There really is no positive faith promoting posts coming from Sam.”

      You must have missed that as well. Sam has said many times that he loves the church and his church leaders. One can call the brethren out on a bad policy while still being positive about the church and its leadership.

      “Sam has bashed and bashed church leadership roles, especially that of the bishop. He has continually stated that bishops act as sexual predators who groom children. That’s not support.”

      No, Sam has said how this bad policy can groom children so that if there is a predator present a groomed child might be in jeopardy. Predators are opportunists and they exist everywhere. Also, Sam said how this policy doesn’t protect well-meaning bishops from illegitimate allegations.

      “Sam has accused our bishops of being bad men who harm our children.”

      On the contrary, Sam has said that most bishops are good men. He accuses only predators who have had their way with children.

      “Sam, It behooves you to change”

      Nope, Sam doesn’t need to change, people like you do. True disciples don’t simply roll over and take it – it’s about standing up for doing the right things, even if that means calling out church leadership.

      The prophets are wrong about this policy, and Sam, et al, are right about not supporting it.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. You really should go and read all of Sam’s posts on this blog. He is anything but a true supporter. He truly dislikes the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

        Liked by 1 person

    3. Help me out Robert, How exactly would a “true disciple of Jesus Christ” respond to literally hundreds of first-hand accounts of abuse up to and including rape by LDS leaders?? Go ahead, read the stories with a prayer in your heart and the gift of discernment will bear witness to those that are true. It should break your heart, but you seem more intent on judging Sam and his actions than looking for a way to help the victims. Is that what Jesus Christ would do?? As Pres. Nelson pushes harder and harder for us to be referred to by the name of our Savior, shouldn’t our actions be a demonstration of that name as well?? I see none of that Christ-like love in your posts and that is truly sad……….. for you.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. The recent policy changes were indeed to correct a rare problem. No matter what policy the church puts in place there will always be those who take advantage of others. It happens in every institution, every organization.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Robert,

        The Brethren ENABLE putting LDS kids at risk.

        They GREASE THE SKIDS for child sexual predators to gain WAY EASIER ACCESS to vulnerable, pre-groomed, innocent children … operating under the birth-defect handicap of having been born Mormon.

        The policy change (allowing KIDS to bring protection if they take the initiative THEMSELVES) … does virtually NOTHING to protect kids.

        THEY ARE KIDS, ROBERT! THE BRETHREN ENTRUSTED THE JOB OF PROTECTING KIDS … TO KIDS!

        Robert, your perceptual BLINDNESS is stunning but understandable. You have clearly lost control of your own cognition long ago. You are obviously inebriated on an overdose of Kolob Kool-Aid. Your case appears to be so advanced … Stage 4 looks like … you may be terminal.

        Hope not, but it’s looking pretty grim for you.

        Liked by 2 people

  10. I find it astounding that members are willing to stand up and defend the church in the matter of worthiness interviews, sexual grooming, sexually explicit questioning, shaming and guilting of children. I find it equally astonishing that members care so little for their bishops and all LDS children that they are unwilling to protect either side from the inherent risks of sexual misconduct or even accusations of sexual misconduct.

    These worthiness interviews have lifelong damaging consequences. Anyone with the wit and fortitude to read the stories on “protectldschildren” can quickly see that for themselves.

    Sam, you have my admiration for standing up against people like Michael Crook for their attempts to shame you for your efforts to protect both the children and the church…although I personally no longer consider church leaders worthy of protection as they have made their stance clear in protecting sexual predators.

    The very idea that criticism is worthy of punishment is a very short-sighted view, in that without criticism organizations are unable to make important course corrections before they destroy themselves. They should be thanking you for pointing out that what they are doing is harming the reputation of the church on the world stage. You Sam, are not to blame. They are, for promoting and sustaining policies which harm children and put bishops at risk.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. Of course I defend the Church and I will lay down my very life to do so, if that’s what it takes. I do what the Church says for me to do and I believe that the Church says for me to believe.

      Liked by 1 person

  11. Great response Sam. Just this morning I was watching the news and a commercial from a law firm came on seeking responses from individuals who had been victims of sexual abuse by the Catholic church. Included was a statement to respond even if the abuse occurred 30 or 40 years in the past. The LDS church is setting itself up for this same recourse by not making a change and ignoring the facts brought to their attention by Sam and the countless claims posted on http://www.protectldschildren.org. Mormon Leaks has also posted material indicating payments to victims, including Non-disclosure agreements for victims of past abuse. The church needs to make a change to protect children and bishops. If I were a bishop today, I would not conduct any interviews without a parent or adult of the child’s choosing present. I find it hard to believe the leadership is so short sighted to not see this in their future.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Roy,

      Thanks for voicing the opinion of a sane, intelligent, observant, decent human being with core values that include authentic caring for the safety and well-being of others of your species, even those whom you do not know personally.

      With core values like that, you automatically disqualify yourself for any possibility of being promoted to high leadership callings in the Church formerly known as Mormon. The Brethren, quite obviously, do not share your core values.

      I will share one of my go-to maxims that resolves your puzzlement … “I find it hard to believe the leadership is so short sighted to not see this in their future.”

      The maxim is this: When your goal is to understand why anyone does what they do, step #1 is to turn the sound OFF. Human beings, particularly those of lesser spiritual maturation, will consistently TELL YOU what they want you to think of them. They will TELL YOU how righteous and wonderful they are. OK … fine. Turn the SOUND OFF.

      Step #2 is to simply use your EYES to watch their behaviors. Why? Simple. Liars lie. They lie to you. It’s what liars do. They lie. If their lips are moving, they are lying. Clever liars will mix some truth with their lies to fool you. It works on lots of people. That’s why you have to turn the sound off, to avoid being confused by clever liars. The Brethren SAY in news releases that they care about the children and have zero tolerance for child abuse. OK. Fine. The litmus test is … do The Brethren walk their talk? Sam has done a stunning job of OUTING The Brethren. Their true colors have been broadcast to Planet Earth for all to see and appreciate.

      The next question is a big fat WHY? The Brethren have established far beyond the shadow of a doubt that they have NO DESIRE OR INTENTION to cease and desist with the child-shaming (and adult-shaming) practice of sexual behavior interrogations … one-on-one (VERY important) … behind a closed door.

      Sidebar: Why is one-on-one so important? Why did The Brethren grudgingly say it was OK for the CHILD to request another person to be present? Dirt simple, Roy.

      THERE MUST BE NO WITNESSES TO WHAT GOES DOWN IN WORTHINESS INTERVIEWS

      Why is that important?

      Most Bishops would NEVER be so stupid as to verbally molest a child with a witness present. Unless the Bishop is an unrepentant, mentally disturbed SOCIOPATH, the Bishop has an innate sense of cultural decency that whispers how our civilized society thinks children should be treated. Asking a sequestered child pornographic questions about their sexual behavior is a CRIME in polite society.

      THERE MUST BE NO WITNESS.

      If there is a witness, most Bishops with any self-preservation instinct will NOT SEX-SHAME the child … or at least not to the degree that could/would happen WITHOUT A WITNESS present.

      Let’s drill down another layer and ask the NEXT question?

      Why?

      Why do The Brethren so clearly have ZERO INTEREST in ceasing the ubiquitous practice of sex-shaming LDS kids (and adults)?

      Again, dirt simple. Sex shaming cements the ControllerControlee relationship that is a core requirement for any successful Mind Control Cult to maintain control.

      How does that work? How does sex-shaming serve to control someone?

      Well, self-esteem is a fundamental, emotional, psychological need of all human beings. Most of us have an innate desire and need to think well of ourselves. We have a need to feel worthwhile and valuable and even desirable. We have a basic human need to be loved. We have a basic human need to FEEL WORTHY to be loved.

      It’s coming into sharp focus about now, Roy.

      They are called WORTHINESS interviews. The child (or adult) is going into the Bishops office to have their personal worthiness graded, judged, evaluated, measured, declared … by whom? Is the child or adult in the Bishop’s office to inform the Bishop how their self-esteem is feeling these days? How worthy THEY feel as a human being. How loveable THEY are feeling?

      No. Absolutely NOT!

      The child (or adult) is sitting in a chair in the Bishop’s office to FIND OUT if they are good enough. Good enough? Good enough for what?

      Good enough to be loved.

      God help the child (or adult) who goes into the Bishop’s office and emerges a few minutes later with the news that the nice man who speaks for God in their life has determined they are NOT WORTHY TO BE LOVED. Not good enough.

      When this happens, the guilt and shame overload is so oppressive that it’s very unlikely that the child (or adult) will ever be clear-headed enough to think through the following thoughts:

      “God, I am a piece of shit! Unworthy. Not good enough. I tried my very best to not masturbate, but the temptation became so powerful that I caved in. I traded my sexual purity and worthiness to be loved by God (or anyone else) for a few seconds of intense pleasure. It felt wonderful, but in the next moment, I felt horrible … just horrible.

      But wait a minute. Did I hurt anyone? Is someone suffering because I masturbated again?

      Who is suffering? It’s me. IT’S ME! Only me. I am the ONLY PERSON suffering because I masturbated.

      But it felt SO GOOD that I could not stop myself … despite my best efforts at will-powering myself to stay hands-off … to stay morally clean … not morally dirty … not a piece of unworthy shit … not even close to good enough to be loved.

      God, I feel terrible … horrible …. maybe I should just … I don’t even feel worthy to live.

      Why do I feel so bad? Why am I hating myself for succumbing to one more moment of intense pleasure? Why? Nobody else EVEN KNEW I had masturbated …. until … until what? Until I confessed to my Bishop.

      What did the Bishop do with this very personal information … that nobody on the planet would know … if I did not tell them what I did? What did the Bishop do with my most personal, sensitive, vulnerable disclosure of an intimately personal secret?

      My Bishop told me that I have violated the Law of Chastity and that … because I masturbated … I am NOT WORTHY. I am NOT WORTHY in the eyes of my Bishop, who is a good and righteous Priesthood leader in the only true Church … who speaks for God. It is the same as if I had confessed to God and God told me that I am not worthy … according to my Bishop …. yes, according to him.

      But hold on a minute. Did I hurt anyone else? Is someone suffering or feeling bad because I pleasured myself? Because I “made love” TO MYSELF? Whose life is worse? … who was harmed? … who is feeling bad? … who ELSE is feeling bad because I “loved” myself?

      Nobody. Nobody is suffering … except ME. I am the ONLY ONE suffering because I masturbated.

      Why am I suffering? Because my Bishop … because my Bishop … who speaks for God … because my Bishop told me I should feel bad … feel bad for giving myself a few moments of intense pleasure … that harmed nobody (except me). And it only harmed me because MY BISHOP … my Bishop … my Bishop … told me … I harmed myself … and disappointed him … and disappointed God.

      The only reason I feel horrible … unworthy … unloved … unloveable … is … is … is … it is MY BISHOP … he is the ONLY reason.

      My Bishop wants me to stop masturbating … never do it again … ever again …. if I want to be worthy again … to be loveable again … to be loved …. by my Bishop …. and by God.

      To be worthy again … to be loveable again … to be loved … again … I MUST STOP MASTURBATING. I must focus my will-power … tie my hands to the bedposts (my bed had no bedposts … what to do?) … grit my teeth … sing hymns … pray … distract myself … ignore that longing … that deep magnetic attraction … to feel that stunning pleasure … I must NOT … I cannot … do it again. I want to be worthy … to be loveable … to be loved. I cannot disappoint … my Bishop … disappoint … God ever again. I must do it. I have to do it. It’s the only way I cannot continue to be a living, walking piece of disgusting, unworthy, dirty, vile, almost-a-murder … piece of human excrement.

      ===========

      THIS is the mental and emotional state of the TBM child (or adult) that The Brethren do not want to give up. Look what just happened. The TBM child (or adult) has turned over … handed over … surrendered … given up ownership and control of … their core self-esteem and sense of being good enough to be loved and appreciated … to an external power … to the Bishop … and by extension … to The Brethren.

      When “you” have manipulated human beings from birth to never claim ownership of their own self-esteem, sense of being good enough … sense of being loveable … sense of being loved … to “YOU” (The Brethren) … you pretty much OWN THEIR HEARTS AND SOULS. As long as they remain convinced that “YOU” (The Brethren) are the owner,holder and literal DISPENSER of their self-esteem … sense of being worthy to be loved … they will continue to pretty much do WHATEVER YOU TELL THEM THEY MUST DO to get it back … to regain some self-esteem … some sense of being good enough to be loved.

      This is MIND CONTROL 101.

      Will the child (or adult) be willing to part with ten percent … if it’s a requirement to retain (or regain) some self-esteem … the ability to wake up in the morning and not feel disappointed that you are still the goddamned (damned by God via the Bishop) piece of shit who went to bed the night before?

      Without the sex-shaming … without the Bishop holding nothing less than your self-esteem … your sense of being good enough to be loved .. holding that fundamental human need HOSTAGE … like a guillotine above your neck … without any of that happy jazz going down … what … might … happen?

      God forbid!

      God forbid that you might regain enough presence of mind and reconnection with your own heart and soul to realize that you were CREATED BY GOD and BORN WORTHY and BORN GOOD ENOUGH TO BE LOVED. Not only that, but GOD created you with this amazing, built in, always available, extremely reliable, completely free, innate ability to FEEL AMAZING for a few moments.

      No matter what else is happening in your life. No matter what kinds of crap might be happening around you and to you. No matter all of that … regardless of everything … you can always take a brief time-out … to feel absolutely WONDERFUL … for a few moments.

      Is it possible that God made you this way on purpose? Sure, it’s necessary for reproduction to happen … for the human species to not go extinct for lack of babies … sure. But if that were the only thing that God cared about, then he would have made it ONLY possible to feel this good … during copulation ..aka baby making behavior.

      Masturbation never made a baby. So what if God created me with the ability to FEEL THIS GOOD all by myself .. what if God gave me this ability …. because God Loves Me? If so, why does God love me this much? …to give me “a piece of candy” whenever I feel like just feeling really good for a few moments … regardless of what other challenges and fears and overwhelm might be going on in my life … if I want to escape for a few fleeting moments of ecstasy. Or even if I am feeling good, happy, life-is-wonderful, everything is going great … and I just feel like celebrating my life … with a few moments of pure joy?

      What if my Bishop is full of shit? What if my Bishop is shaming me and guilting me because I enjoy touching myself … what if he is doing that to me … to PREVENT me from feeling free and independent and self-authenticating enough to decide for myself … if and when … I want to … or need to … tap into this amazing ability I was born with … gifted to me by God … to feel stunningly wonderful in my human body … for a few fleeting moments.

      And it’s OK to do that. It’s OK to make myself feel good … it’s OK to embrace and appreciate and fully accept this human body that God gave to me when I was born … and to feel good enough … good enough to be loveable … good enough to be loved … all by myself … when I hurt nobody … harm no one … and feel really good for a moment … and then get on with my life … trying to do my best … be a decent person … learn what I am learning … experiencing what I experience … making mistakes that don’t turn out very well … deciding to make a better decision next time …

      What if I can do ALL OF THAT … without my Bishop to rain on my parade and make me feel like shit … when God intended for me to feel really good … for a moment … instead of feeling like a goddamned piece of shit … ALL OF THE TIME?

      This is what The Brethren will never give up voluntarily. This is MIND CONTROL that keeps the tithing gravy train flowing. Billions and billions of dollars flowing into Salt Lake City continuously. The Brethren know full well that loosening the Mind Control grip on their FOOD SUPPLY will reduce the revenue flow and threaten the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed.

      Sam Young is messing with their FOOD SOURCE and they are not amused.

      Happy, contented, self-authenticating, self-directed human beings with an INTERNAL SENSE OF WORTHINESS and love-ability … ultimately will not give tithing checks to their Bishop … to be carefully guarded with two-deep money handling … on the way to Salt Lake City.

      … and The Brethren know this … It’s what they literally DO FOR A LIVING.

      PS – Where is the two-deep child handling? Turn the sound OFF. Just watch their behavior … to discover their core values.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Sam , Gary’s comments here are so profound, the ultimate in empathy…I am now able to feel my child’s pain and rejection. How ignorant and foolish are those who have the audacity to juge your motives, and set at naught what you are striving to accomplish. And as for the sitting Q15 and their predecessors…Shame on you ALL for what you have failed to accomplish…Satan will not win in the final round.

        Liked by 3 people

  12. Well, what is not up for debate is this: Sam here did not fulfill a good Saint’s obligation to keep one’s objections to oneself. If I were to disagree with a Church policy, I would tell no one. Not my wife, not my neighbor, not my cat. That’s what a good Saint would do.

    Sam went far beyond complaining to friends. He told the WORLD things that should not be revealed to the public. I don’t for one second believe that sexual abuse went on/goes on in the Church. That being written, if it were to happen, it should be resolved internally, not in a manner that ruins a man’s good name.

    I consider myself to be a good Saint. If I were to witness something like that, hear hearsay about it supposedly happening, etc., I would keep it under my hat. That’s the proper thing to do. I will not ruin a man’s good name over something like this and I will never go public/to the media like Sam here did, in what I can only assume is a campaign to destroy the Church.

    The interview questions are ordained of God and will not be mocked. Sam knows this, being a former bishop, right? He put on a good show crying and dramatically pointing to the COB, but in the end, he knew what he was doing. More to the point, he knew the price and pulled his little stunts anyway.

    Sam got what he deserved and I doubt that the FP will buy into his manipulative appeal. However, like anyone else, he can abandon the sin (his stunts), repent and one day enter the waters of baptism. There is hope, Sam. What is more important to you: your stunts or your eternal salvation?

    Liked by 1 person

      1. You mean government-sanctioned people who fly into tall buildings? Think whatever you like, I will rat on no one, and if forced to by a court order, I can use my bipolar, seizure disorder and schizophrenia to my advantage and get my testimony impeached, thereby rendering the victimized man free. So…you lose.

        Liked by 1 person

    1. michaelcrookalbany,

      “That’s what a good Saint would do.”
      “I consider myself to be a good Saint.”

      Definition: “good Saint”

      Mind-controlled, robotic, humanoid extension of the Supreme Will of The Brethren. Blindly executes correlated orders and understood expectations on command with zero internal processing, filtering or evaluation by any frame of reference whatsoever. Automatically rejects and opposes anything or anyone who does not idolize The Brethren as the equivalent of Gods Incarnate and never, ever questions or scrutinize anything they say or do.

      Others can add what I missed … in the definition of “good Saint”

      Liked by 3 people

    2. Oh my brother Michael. You are endearing yourself to my heart. You would tell no one, not even your cat. How can I not feel love for you when you say things like that. BTW, thank you for your concern for my eternal salvation. And I’m serious about that.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. Ah Ha, Michaelcrook so that explains your mindset. Your bipolar disorder indicates that you are intelligent; however your schizophrenia and seizure disorder render you lacking in confidence and the ability to think for yourself and so you are in the comfort zone of following the instructions of those “ordained of God.” The question here is which God? I put it to you that the god to whom you are referring, is the god of this world (as taught by the Mormon church in its temples) viz. ….SATAN himself.!! Sorry, you have already lost.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Well, as you would write, “Ah [sic] ha,” I never question the Church or its leaders. I sustain both, without question, without exception. That’s what a TRUE member of the Church does, you see. This stance has nothing to do with mental illness, but everything to do with the sacred promises I have made. Not up for debate.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Michael Crook a TRUE member of the church has a brain and doesn’t follow blindly in any scenario. “It is an unwise and slothful servant who must be commanded in all things” is what we are taught and to seek the confirmation of the spirit in ALL things. Your continued angry and judgemental comments are neither helpful, charitable or indicative of a TRUE follower of Christ.

        Liked by 2 people

  14. Michaelcrook YOU listed your mental illnesses. Further if as you keep repeating “not up for debate” why do you repeatedly state that you never question the Church or its leaders. What is the issue? I think that you are crying out for help and you feel as long as you obey implicitly, you will be okay (hence the repetition). You stated “I hate them (children) including my own.” What is the problem? Perhaps Protectlds Children can help you.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yes, **I** listed mental illnesses. So the hell what? It bears repeating: a good Latter-day Saint never questions. Since Sam questions, we can draw our inferences from there. Of COURSE I will be okay, because I will have sustained my leaders. I hate children and, as mentioned before, I will stand idle and silent if I have knowledge that one is being abused. That’s what a good priesthood holder does.

      Like

    2. Oh, and the reason **I** mentioned mental illness was to illustrate a point: I can use my conditions to either get out of testifying as a witness altogether, or out of having my testimony impeached if I get on the stand, because I don’t believe in ratting, whether the alleged “victim” is woman or child.

      Like

    1. Lesley,

      An interesting thing about life is there are thorns and weeds, so to speak, on our paths or trolls that come out to play on public forums – most of the time the audience discovers who the trolls are and has the common sense to know the trolls words are meaningless. I think you as well as many other readers have already discovered who one of the trolls is in this thread.

      I suggest you don’t waste your time responding to michaelcrookalbany. He/she seems to stir the pot to provoke a reaction and fails to add any meaningful insights to the discussion. Michaelcrookalbany disingenuously claims he/she will “defend the Church and I will lay down my very life to do so, if that’s what it takes. I do what the Church says for me to do and I believe that the Church says for me to believe,” yet also says that, “My policy is to refuse all callings,” yet “I never question the Church or its leaders. I sustain both, without question, without exception,” because it has “everything to do with the sacred promises I have made.”

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Yes, yes, here we go again. When confronted with opposing opinions, you cry “troll,” and run away. That’s fine, see, that’s okay…that’s your M.O., that’s how you operate.

        I have offered insight, but people with anger in their hearts have crapped all over that, like a baby having a blowout.

        I don’t know what point you’re trying to prove, but yes, I WILL defend the Church and its leaders, never questioning. That doesn’t mean I have to accept whatever meaningless calling comes along, now does it? No, it doesn’t.

        But if you’re whining about meaningful conversation, here we go: Sam Young knows his stuff, right? He was a bishop, yes? Yes. So, he knew the consequences of his little campaign and did it anyway.

        He’s akin to the driver who knows driving drunk is bad, but drinks the booze and drives anyway, killing people. Sam hasn’t killed anyone, that’s true, but he has potentially led some people down the path of apostasy. And that can’t stand.

        So, he was excommunicated, and e’en then he got off very light. And now he wants to go on TV, crying his crocodile tears and melodramatically pointing to COB, as if he’s the victim. And for what? No kids are in danger, and even if they are, it’s none of his business.

        How now, brown cow?

        Like

      2. Great observations, HTCat.

        Actually, mca is The Brethren’s dream-member-come-true … except for the refusal to accept callings. Does he also refuse to pay tithing? If he won’t clean chapel toilets or finance City Creek Malls … then he is totally useless. His thought that he keeps sacred promises is just as nonsensical as everything else he writes.

        Good advice to just ignore him going forward.

        Liked by 3 people

  15. Oh, Gary, how wrong you are. I understand that you seek to ignore opposing opinions. You’re a coward. Yes, I do pay a full tithe and I pull my weight, such as it is. I do my share of the meetinghouse cleanings. I do service projects. I help the Elders when they need a third male to teach a female. So the fact that I ignore callings is not relevant. Everyone is free to ignore a calling.

    You haven’t addressed the core issue, however, and that speaks volumes as to your cowardice.

    Like

    1. mca,

      I am relieved to hear that you pay a full tithing and clean chapel toilets. Phew! You had me worried for your Eternal Salvation there.

      But …BUT … sorry, Brother Dude, but if you IGNORE CALLINGS you are a super crappy member of the Church. Nine out of Ten TBMs would agree with me. Leaders are INSPIRED BY JESUS CHRIST when they extend a calling to you. If you REFUSE their callings, you are spitting on the Priesthood and telling Jesus to go **** himself.

      I am not ignoring opposing opinions, mca. I am calling you out on your self-contradictory BS that’s factually, internally inconsistent. To say it more succinctly, you are just plain full-a-shit.

      I hope you are a Troll … just messing with Sam’s bloggers. If you believe what you write, you should get help. When you get help, make damned sure you DO NOT consult a TBM mental healthcare professional.

      TBM and Mental Healthcare is an OyyMormon.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Nope, not a troll. Your vulgar language tells me you’re not worth my time, so I will only write to one of your asinine rantings: refusing a calling is NOT spitting on the priesthood, nor is it the foul thing you wrote about our Savior. I always have valid reasons for refusing a calling.

        Everything I wrote is correct. Since you use foul, vulgar language, we’re done here.

        Like

      2. Sorry, mca, there is NO SUCH THING as a “valid reason” for refusing a calling. If you refuse a calling, you are claiming that your Priesthood leader was NOT INSPIRED when he received guidance from the Holy Ghost to call you to a position.

        In actual reality, Priesthood leaders are NOT EVER INSPIRED when filling slots on their org chart, so from THAT perspective, you are correct that there is a “valid reason” for refusing a calling.

        Your TBM drain bamaged cognition thinks you can have your cake and eat it too. Your Dot-Connector is simply BROKEN, mca. You are unable to string two logical arguments together to result in a logical conclusion that’s not BS … if the conclusion suggests there is something amiss in the Church of Ziontology.

        It’s OK. It’s NOT your fault, especially if you were b.i.c. born in correlation. Your brain has been correlated, corrugated and copulated and simply cannot draw a line from DOT#1 to DOT#2 … if the logical conclusion is that the Only True Church is BS aka Joseph’s Myth aka Joseph Lied.

        I forgive you, mca. It’s truly not your fault. Eventually, you will figure it out like I did 38 years ago. I am b.i.c. myself and proud of my Mormon DNA. My great great uncle wrote the beloved hymn “O How Lovely Was the Morning” … you know the one … the cartoon song about one of the 9 versions of the First Vision. Not sure how Uncle George figured out which version to use for his beautiful hymn. I invite you to take a listen. It’s very beautiful … makes me wanna get baptized all over again.

        Liked by 2 people

    2. “I help the Elders when they need a third male to teach a female.”

      WTF???

      TWO elders cannot be alone with a female investigator?

      Is that true?

      When you accompany the Elders, do you testify that it’s OK to ignore callings?

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I purposefully ignored you, because of your foul language, and because I thought someone else, even Sam “I Spat Upon the Church” whatever his last name is, would jump in. YES, it is true. A companionship cannot teach an investigator without a “chaperone,” i.e. another member of the same gender as the companionship.

        So, I often go on what’s called “Lesson(s) With Member Present.” As the time implies, I am there to “chaperone,” for lack of a better term, and contribute when asked or when I feel it necessary. As I am male, I can only accompany the Elders.

        Of course, there are exceptions. No chaperone is needed if they do the lesson in a public place such as the library, or at a Church building, as long as people are there and as long as they’re in full view of other people.

        It’s all in the missionary “white book,” which is readily available on the Internet, on the Church’s own site, no less.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. …I hate how WP doesn’t let one edit. I should clarify, the companionship only needs a member present when the investigator is of the opposite gender. And, I can also add that they can teach the person of an opposite gender on the person’s front porch, in the park, whatever. Just not in their homes.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. mca,

        “I should clarify, the companionship only needs a member present when the investigator is of the opposite gender.”

        This is amusing because The Brethren are so oblivious regarding just how many thousands of their missionaries ARE NOT ATTRACTED to the opposite gender.

        The Brethren are likewise oblivious that thousands of their missionaries ARE SEXUALLY ATTRACTED TO THEIR COMPANIONS THEY LIVE WITH behind closed doors … sleeping in the same quarters ALL NIGHT EVERY NIGHT.

        The list of things about which The Brethren have no clue is WAY LONGER than the list of things they functionally understand in a meaningful way.

        Signing yourself up to have your Life Decisions made by a quorum of idiots* is a sad state of affairs. Fortunately, more and more members of the Church formerly known as Mormon are waking themselves up and not letting the chapel door hit ’em in the butt ON THEIR WAY OUT.

        *correction: They are not idiots. They know full well what they are doing, why they are doing it, and how they are spectacularly benefitting personally from what they are doing. The idiots are people like me … who took 30 years to figure it out and take my life back.

        Liked by 1 person

  16. Gary,
    What “kids” are we speaking of? I used to be a “kid” like we are discussing in the crosshairs. You make it sound like we are speaking of innocent 5 year olds. We are not. We are speaking of youth teenagers who are crafty, manipulative, often do immoral things, etc. I was there once. So we’re all of us. In my youth access to immoral material and activity was already an easy thing if one looked. Nowdays it’s rampant, it’s everywhere, you can’t escape it, you don’t have to go looking for it, it finds you. It’s a plague. As leaders of youth we are very aware of this problem. So, what do we do as leaders? We discuss this problem with them to help establish boundaries more easily recognized. We teach, warn, and exhort the correct principles of morality with them. How bad is it? Well, my wife is a bus driver for the local school district. One school she stops at is the middle school composed of 7-8 graders. Yep, 12-14 year olds. What’s some of the worst problems she sees with them? She says it’s becoming a problem of seeing many girls making out with other girls. She hears the constant barage of immoral language and stories. She sees youth not treating others of the opposite sex with respect, etc. Our youth who fall into these temptations often go down dark paths. They end up at wild sex parties with drugs and alcohol. The reality is that our “kids” are being introduced to immoral behavior and temptations at school and the internet long before a bishop has the opportunity to address the problems they fall into.
    Let me ask you this, where are these “kids” getting this information? Is it their bishops or church leaders? Absolutely not.
    You need to get off of the fantasy train and understand reality.

    Like

    1. Robert,

      Say what?

      “You need to get off of the fantasy train and understand reality.”

      No.

      YOU need to understand what a STRAWMAN ARGUMENT LOGICAL FALLACY is, Robert.

      EDUCATING youth about sex and the consequences of irresponsible sexual activity is certainly needed and not happening anywhere near enough.

      SHAMING teenagers in one-on-one confrontations for masturbating only MAKES EVERYTHING EVEN WORSE!

      If young (or old) Mormons felt OK about masturbating from time to time, they would avoid SEXUAL FRUSTRATION that can lead to irresponsible sexual behaviors fuelled by pent-up, unresolved sexual energy looking for some kind of outlet.

      The Mormon and Christian solution requiring TOTAL ABSTINENCE until marriage is a recipe for what?

      Precisely what you described in your post, Robert.

      Liked by 2 people

    2. Robert,
      It seems that you don’t get it, and like Gary said you’re using strawman arguments instead of focusing on the real issues.

      Are you okay with a predator in a room alone with a child/teen?

      If not, how do you tell who the predators are (wolfs in sheep’s clothing)?

      Under current church policy, how do you adequately protect children/teens from a bishop or other church leaders who are actually predators? Criminals are opportunists and they are everywhere, so how are you going to take their opportunity away?

      Are you okay with bishops protecting themselves against false allegations?

      Sam’s movement is about setting adequate policies in order to protect LDS children (including teenagers) from predators, and also protecting bishops.

      Like

    1. Sam’s beef is with those bishops and other church leaders who are predators. Ever hear of George P Lee? Also, his beef is with general authorities who aren’t doing enough to sufficiently protect LDS children and bishops.

      Like

      1. Robert just enjoys writing BS and falsely attributing it to people he wants to discredit.

        No workie here on Sam’s blog, Roberto.

        Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor?

        Say what?

        Sam is not your neighbor?

        Well, in that case, go right ahead, Robert.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. Sam’s beef is also with the POLICY that encourages Bishops to ask the gateway sex question, “Do you obey the Law of Chastity?” Most Bishops would never knowingly harm a child. Sam’s beef is that Bishops UNKNOWINGLY harm LDS kids by inducing deep and dangerous levels of sexual shame and self-loathing by teaching the kid that self-pleasure is vile wickedness and MUST STOP … if the kid wants to be acceptable and worthy to be loved. Then the normal kid cannot stop masturbating because the human sex drive can be simply overpowering … and getting relief from this natural, powerful urge is easy, satisfying and free …. with that little glitch that for an LDS kid, it is a sin next to murder.

        Liked by 1 person

    1. Robert, where did I write that the problem with youth and immorality is because of bishops?

      What I DID write about is … the problem with youth and SUICIDE is because of bishops.

      One of the Principles of the Gospel is that it is better to be DEAD than morally unclean.

      Masturbation = Morally Unclean.

      Therefore ….

      The Brethren are effectively teaching youth that it is better to KILL YOURSELF than to jerk yourself off.

      My money is on Robert AGREEING with that sentence. Am I right?

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Gary,
        That’s untrue. A bishop advising the youth on moral principle isn’t going to cause them to commit suicide. It’s such a weak claim, and rather pathetic, to blame bishops for why teens commit suicide. Besides, there are no statistics, no research by a legitimate source to back up this unwarranted claim. It’s like you guys just make this stuff up.
        If an LDS teen does commit suicide it’s because of a lot of factors, most of which are due to bad relations with close family members. Gary, you would be better off to actually blame parents for a teens suicide. At least then you would have some backing and support statistically. But you wouldn’t do that, that’s not pinning blame on bishops and the leadership.

        Like

  17. Harold, my encounter with that “notorious professional troll” ( Fox News 2007), unnerved me somewhat and now there is Robert, who seems determined to have his say and to undermine Sam’s efforts. I am amazed that he considers himself in the same league as Gary for example, who tells it as it is…the truth not his perception of the truth. Robert blames the schools for the behaviour of children. Protectlds Children, however, highlighted the fact that parents need to take responsibility for their children. Consequently many lds parents are now doing just that despite failure of the hierarchy to implement the necessary policies to assist them by not asking those sexually explicit questions, and blaming and shaming. In fact, Robert, this is why you are confused.The Church taught our children not to lie (refer Family Home Evening Lesson depicting a big black lie with a number of tentacles). Whenever Jacoba (autistic) was asked by one of her older brothers: “What happens to liars?”she would reply “Cast down into hell!”. As we have transitioned out of Mormonism during this year, I have concluded that all that we held dear for 55 years was nothing but a huge lie. Transitioning out has entailed peeling back those tentacles one by one. One should teach by example and just what example has the church been to our children? Boyd K Packer in his talk To The One, clearly stated “Bishop help me to help my son.” Our children were entrusted to us, not to the church , despite “the birth defect of having been born Mormon” (refer Gary). This is our biggest regret that joining this church was our choice. We should never have allowed our children to have been B.I.C., or to have been baptised by the age of 8. These matters should have been their choice. So Robert you can perhaps now begin to understand why you are confused.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. The reality is that almost entirely, LDS parents don’t talk to their children about morality. If it’s truly the parents job( and I actually fully agree) to teach their children then why isn’t Sam’s beef against LDS parents for their neglect and blindsightedness to properly teach their children? The church is in place to support the teachings of the parents in their homes. So, if we are teaching a lesson on morality to teenagers and it’s the first time they heard it, or contrary to what they learned at home, it’s not the churches fault but rather the parents. Thus, Sam’s beef really should be directed at lazy LDS parents who don’t teach their children about morality.

      Like

      1. Robert,

        A big reason many/most LDS parents do not properly educate their children regarding sex and morality is because they themselves were SEX SHAMED BY MORMON CULTURE and are too embarrassed to discuss it.

        “Sam’s beef really should be directed at lazy LDS parents who don’t teach their children about morality.”

        LDS parents are not lazy, Robert. They are PTSD Priesthood Transmitted Sexual Dysfunction.

        Please share your opinion on whether Masturbation is a sin … for which LDS youth (and adults) should confess to their Bishop and undertake whatever repentance consequences the Bishop requires.

        I would like to know if you consider self-pleasure a violation of the Law of Chastity, Robert.

        Like

  18. Here’s the reality-
    Hands down, children in LDS parents in homes are more likely, even of a great magnitude higher, to abuse or groom their children in an immoral fashion than a bishop. But that’s not just in LDS homes, it’s in all homes of every type, religion, etc. I have noticed that not one post written by Sam is directed at protecting children from predatory practices by parents. Not one post is directed at why parents allow their children to watch R rated movies or place internet filters blocking X-rated materials. If Sam really wants to protect the children shouldn’t he be directing his efforts towards the home and the lack of parental supervision? Shouldn’t he be directing his efforts towards stopping pedophile grooming by bad parents?
    Parents allow their children access to pornography in the home and no one says anything, including Sam, and yet a bishop mentions something along the lines of morality and he is the bad guy?
    You all need to wake up.

    Like

    1. Robert,
      Your strawman argument doesn’t negate Sam’s viewpoint.

      Since you are so concerned about wayward parents perhaps you should practice what you preach and start a movement to make wayward parents better. So how will you do it? Maybe parents should conduct their own child’s worthiness interviews by keeping the bishop out of it.

      Like

      1. Sam’s viewpoint is to protect LDS children. Lets just say for instance that for every 1 case of a bishop abusing his authority and harming a youth there are 100 cases of LDS parents abusing their children. Im probably not far off. If that is close to true, then, if Sam is really about protecting LDS children, how come he has chosen the path with the least effect? You see, I think that its not really about Sams desire to protect LDS children. Thats just his front for assaulting the church. If he was really sincere about protecting LDS children he would or should be addressing the problems in the home.
        BTW, I do practice what I preach. I am a youth leader who does frequently discuss with youth and parents the pitfalls of immorality.

        Like

      2. Robert,
        Since you are so wise, specifically how should Sam’s movement go about protecting LDS children from their own parents?

        Without breaking the constitutionally mandated rights of parents or their children, who should enforce your ideas? And how?

        Aren’t LDS church leaders already “addressing the problems in the home?” What changes should be made to ensure this is satisfactorily happening in the home?

        Part of Sam’s movement is in advising parents to not allow one-on-one leadership interviews with their children.

        **********

        Robert, you seem to have either ignored or evaded my other questions — I posted them again here. I suppose you don’t have a good answer.

        Are you okay with a predator in a room alone with a child/teen?

        If not, how do you tell who the predators are (wolfs in sheep’s clothing)?

        Under current church policy, how do you adequately protect children/teens from a bishop or other church leaders who are actually predators? Criminals are opportunists and they are everywhere, so how are you going to take their opportunity away?

        Are you okay with bishops protecting themselves against false allegations?

        Liked by 1 person

      3. HTC,

        Good call labeling Robert’s post a STRAWMAN ARGUMENT.

        Addressing child sex abuse by parents is certainly a major problem with no easy solution. Robert has chosen to BLIND HIMSELF to the reality that the cessation of Bishop worthiness interviews with sequestered children CAN BE STOPPED IMMEDIATELY if The Brethren would WRITE ONE LETTER and broadcast it to Priesthood Leaders worldwide.

        Sam has identified a serious problem that has a SIMPLE SOLUTION.

        Robert has yet to even grasp the fact that Bishop worthiness interviews are CHILD-GROOMING.

        That is understandable because Robert still thinks the Church is true.

        Robert, do you believe that President Nelson was inspired when he announced just recently that JESUS GETS OFFENDED whenever anyone refers to His Church using a nickname that does not include a shout-out to Jesus by name?

        OFFENDED? Really? JESUS GETS OFFENDED?

        Rusty apparently still believes in the Curmudgeon God of the Old Testament with a dangerously serious anger management problem. Apparently, Jesus has not made much progress … if he gets triggered by nicknames.

        Robert, was President Nelson inspired when he announced what offends Jesus … or was he just speaking as a loose cannon idiot at the time?

        Liked by 2 people

  19. I am an active, believing member and I applaud your movement. Because the Church doesn’t seek or give apologies, I doubt your appeal will be granted, which is regrettable because I believe you are right – eventually these interviews will be abolished. Carry on, brave brother.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. HTC,
    Sam’s cause is weak. It’s very rare that s bishop abuses his authority and oversteps his bounds and creates harm. Sam makes it sound as if it’s happening every Sunday in every church. It’s not. Sam doesn’t have any statistics, no hard evidence that the current policy is doing the massive damage he claims. The following for Sam’s cause is so small, so irrelevant, it’s just not a real issue at all.
    I personally would like to see Sam write a post that deals specifically with the problems of neglect, abuse, maltreatment and violence in homes. That’s where the problems really are. If he is so concerned about each and every child why does it appear his focus isn’t on the number one problem?
    You have no case in calling bishops predators. I’m not going to answer such a ridiculous question.
    The current church policy allows youth to be interviewed with another adult of their choosing. So, I’m not sure what your case is here. The youth themselves control the safety of their interviews. At anytime a youth can cease to have the interview or not go into it in the first place. Again, personal interviews in the church is not a problem as Sam makes it. It’s what a court calls heresay. If Sam actually had real numbers, real evidence of a widespread problems, maybe there would be merit to his cause. As it stands though his entire cause on this issue is based all on heresay.
    Bishops should protect themselves against false accusations. But, it’s not an issue to begin with. It’s very rare that a bishop is falsely accused. I have never personally witnessed a false accusation amongst any of my bishops I have ever had. I don’t even hear of them in neighboring wards and stakes either. It’s just not a problem. So, not really sure what your case is when there is no problem.

    Like

    1. It’s hard not to lose patience with you, Robert. Four of my daughters were asked questions such as Do you masturbate? Have you had anal sex? This is dangerous, immoral and offensive to me as a father. The church policy condones this practice for kids starting at least at 12 years old, all alone behind closed doors. Hearsay? I have 1,000s of first hand accounts, including 4 from my kids.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Robert,

      “Sam makes it sound as if it’s happening every Sunday in every church.”

      Wrong. Simply not true, Sam is clear that overt, touching, sex abuse by Bishops is rare, although it does indeed happen, as you indicated yourself.

      This is a good example, Robert, of your TBM brainwashday miracle cognition dysfunction immediately lapsing reflexively into BLACK AND WHITE FALLACIOUS LOGIC … the millisecond you hear something non-positive about the Church.

      Your bamaged drain cannot help itself, Robert. You are clueless regarding how glaringly obvious your argument fallacies insult the intelligence of recovered TBM brains now able to connect logical dots and NOT connect illogical, fallacious dots … as we were taught to do by … The Mind Control Brethren.

      It is NOT YOUR FAULT, Robert. My heart goes out to you. You have been sorely deceived and simply have not figured it out yet. You will eventually. Thousands are leaving the Church in droves because it is easier than ever now in 2018 to do very little research of history and facts and come to the inescable conclusion that Joseph Lied and the Former Utah Church Known as LDS is an outright fraud … a confidence game netting BILLIONS OF DOLLARS EVERY YEAR.

      Collateral Damage of lives ruined by crushing guilt and shame is not even seen as Damage from The Brethren’s perspective. It is POSITIVE FEEDBACK indicating that their Hook, Line and Sinker Control Grip on their marks is working quite well as designed.

      Liked by 2 people

  21. Gary,
    Reality check here- there is no “serious problem” with the claims you believe with interviews. Just because your moral standards aren’t in line with the church doesnt give you, or Sam, the authority to define or impose your version of morality on the church.

    Like

    1. [Note to Sam: Please delete my previous original post … typos corrected with more edits in this version. Thanks.]

      Robert,

      Your tone deafness persists … you wrote:

      “Just because your moral standards aren’t in line with the church doesn’t give you, or Sam, the authority to define or impose your version of morality on the church.”

      Let me borrow your words and reframe your thought:

      “Just because [The Brethren’s] moral standards [condemning masturbation as sexual perversion and debauchery] aren’t in line with [unbrainwashed people who understand that masturbation is normal human behavior harming nobody] doesn’t give [The Brethren] the [authority***] to define or impose [their] version of morality on the [members of the Former Utah Church Known as LDS].

      *** Laughing Out Loud here, Robert! There you go spouting off your brainwashday miracle belief that one must have “authority” to think for oneself, generate one’s own opinions and expressed core values, and encourage others to treat people as Jesus treated people.

      I want you to envision The Savior taking one of the little children at his knee … by the hand … and leading the child (now all alone) off away from the crowd, behind a bush for privacy.

      Then Jesus kneels down, looks the child in the eyes, and says, “Billy, do you obey the Law of Chastity?”

      Billy: Uh … I don’t know what that is, Jesus.

      Jesus: Well, do you touch yourself … down there?

      Billy: Down where, Jesus?

      Jesus: Between your legs, Billy. Do you touch yourself down there between your legs?

      Billy; Yes, Jesus. When I have to pee, I touch my wiener and point it in the right direction so I don’t pee all over everything. My Mom gets mad when I miss the toilet.

      Jesus: Now Billy, that is not what Jesus meant. I mean, do you touch yourself down there to make yourself feel really good?

      Billy: Well, if I have to pee really bad, Jesus, and then I hold my peepee so I can pee in the right place … then when I am done peeing, I feel better … when I don’t have to pee anymore. Is that what you mean by feeling good, Jesus?

      Jesus: No, Billy. That is NOT what Jesus meant. I mean, do you ever hold the end of your peepee and stroke it back and forth until it feels really good?

      Billy: What? Sorry, Jesus, but I’m afraid I don’t know what you are talking about. Why would I want to grab my peepee and stroke it back and forth? Wouldn’t that be … well … stupid?

      Jesus: Well, Billy, it is important for you to learn what would happen if you DID stroke your peepee so that if you ever felt like stroking your peepee so you can feel really good, that you would know that doing that is a violation of the Law of Chastity, and that if you stroke your peepee anyway and then it feels really good, that you would know that you just became morally unclean and a bad little boy, Billy.

      Billy: What are you talking about, Jesus?

      Jesus: Just don’t let me ever look down from heaven upon you and see you stroking your peepee. It’s OK to hold your peepee so you pee in the right place, but I NEVER want to see you stroking your peepee until you feel really good. Do I make myself clear, Billy?

      Billy: Yes. You want me to be very careful so I NEVER do anything with my peepee that makes me feel really good.

      Jesus: You are a good boy, Billy. As long as you behave yourself with your peepee, you will continue to be a good boy. If not, then you will have to repent. That means to never make your peepee feel really good ever again. You must use your peepee only for peeing … if you want God to like you and your Bishop to like you and call you a good boy.

      Billy: Thank you, Jesus!

      Jesus (sounding agitated): Billy! Please! NEVER say that to me … after you make your peepee feel really good. Please do not EVER do that! NEVER thank Jesus for making your peepee feel really good. And one more thing … two more things, actually. Please, Billy! NEVER refer to my Church as the MORMON CHURCH or as the LDS CHURCH. I get offended when I hear my Church members not honoring my name by always saying THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST. I know I should have outgrown feeling triggered by such inconsequential oversights, but I just can’t seem to help it. So I revealed to my servant, Russell M. Nelson, the President of my Church, to please admonish and exhort the members to STOP TRIGGERING AND OFFENDING JESUS THEIR LORD AND SAVIOR by continuing to say MORMON CHURCH or LDS CHURCH or to say they are MORMONS. Goddammit, anyway! Do I make myself clear, Billy.

      Billy: I’m sorry, Jesus. I did not mean to trigger you. I’m sorry. Will you forgive me?

      Jesus: Yes, of course I will forgive you, Billy. But only if you ask with more respect. Can you say, “My Saviour, wilst thou not forgive me?”

      Billy: Wilst thou not forgive me for being so disrespectful and offensive, Jesus?

      Jesus: Yes, I will forgive you, Billy. Just DO NOT LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN! EVER AGAIN!

      Billy: OK, Jesus. I covenant with thee to never do it again.

      Billy: One last question, Jesus. Does God the Father wash your mouth out with soap … when you curse?

      Like

      1. Deleted. I read this comment to Patty. We laughed and laughed and laughed. You could write comedy professionally my funny friend.

        Like

      2. Robert,

        blas·phe·mous
        /ˈblasfəməs/
        adjective
        sacrilegious against God or sacred things; profane.
        “blasphemous and heretical talk”
        synonyms: sacrilegious, profane, irreligious, irreverent, impious, ungodly, godless
        “a blasphemous mock communion”

        You are correct about your blasphemy diagnosis. And it seems to be true that Jesus Smith has no sense of humor.

        God will not be mocked?

        Not true. Got WILL BE mocked. God gets MOCKED regularly.

        My intent was not to MOCK Jesus … so much as to MOCK YOU, Robert.

        You took the bait and got triggered … just like we now know that Jesus gets triggered with He is not accorded His due respect from members of the Former Utah Church Known as LDS.

        Here are the DOTS your correlated TBM brain was unable (more accurately unwilling) to connect with my imaginary story “Jesus Administers Billy’s Worthiness Interview.”

        Dot#1: During a worthiness interview, the Bishop is the representative for Jesus Christ. He was called of God to be Bishop and was ordained and set apart with Priesthood keys and powers to perform and function as a Judge in Israel.

        Dot#2: Since the Bishop represents Jesus, if Jesus were to show up, then Jesus could do the worthiness interview Himself. (Give me ONE reason this sentence does not make perfect, logical sense.)

        Dot#3: If Jesus did the worthiness interview Himself instead of the Bishop, Jesus would have to find out if Billy masturbates before Jesus could determine Billy’s level of worthiness and sexual purity.

        Dot#4: When your brain was presented with a scenario where Jesus had sequestered Billy in private and then proceeded with the masturbation interrogation, you were triggered to call it Blasphemy.

        Dot#5: Why is it Blasphemy when Jesus finds out if Billy masturbates, but NOT Blasphemy when the Bishop DOES THE SAME THING, Robert?

        Five Dots: Count ’em one-by-one: One, Two, Three, Four, Five

        Then it will surprise you what The Lord Has Done … or what Jesus Smith would do in the Bishop’s office if he did Billy’s worthiness interview in place of his personal representative in Billy’s life … the Bishop.

        Robert, Robert, Robert … are you paying attention … Robert?

        If your reaction to Jesus leading Billy behind a bush and then administering a masturbation interrogation to him sounds blasphemous and ridiculous, but if your Bishop does the SAME THING in his office … it’s AOK?

        If that’s the case, Robert … seems like a preponderance of evidence strongly suggesting that your correlated brain IS NOT FUNCTIONING properly.

        ==============

        OK. I will acknowledge that there were some cheap shots in my Jesus & Billy story. The “Thank you, Jesus!” sidebar went off the rails. I admit it. It was also funny as hell, which was what inspired that addition to the story. I will plead guilty to First Degree Blasphemy for that little stunt. But I really enjoyed it.

        ( Sam was dumb enough to admit he thought it was funny as well. It’s OK if Sam thinks something blasphemous is funny, but NOT OK to say so in public. Did Sam just sabotage his excommunication appeal … by laughing at a Jesus Smith joke?)

        HOWEVER … the ditty about Jesus getting triggered by MORMON and LDS was not a cheap shot. It is CURRENT EVENTS in the only true Church, Robert.

        How are you personally processing President Nelson’s highly embarrassing “revelation” informing the world that Jesus is a Snowflake who is easily triggered … and we gotta stop OFFENDING Jesus?

        Robert … Robert … Robert … your House of Cards is tumbling down. You have entrusted a doddering, geriatric fool as the custodian of your Spiritual Well-Being.

        For your own sake, please WAKE YOURSELF UP, Robert. You are wasting valuable heartbeats believing a giant pile of steaming nonsense.

        Liked by 1 person

  22. Robert Osborn you are so typically Mormon…so judgemental (been there done that). Robert you have to STOP. Just who are you to discuss the pitfalls of immorality with …parents? And seriously you need to read most attentively EVERYTHING that Gary and Harold have written, and especially Sam . You missed HaroldTheCat’s remark about “Breaking the constitutionally mandated rights of parents or their children”. And I must hand it to you…you are THE MASTERMIND OF ASSUMPTIONS…your statistics ??? {database?}

    Liked by 1 person

    1. So you think discussing morality with youth and parents is being judgmental eh? Perhaps no one should ever speak up. That’s what you guys want. Good luck on fixing immorality then.
      Where are Sam’s statistics of abuse by bishops? Ifts as prevailent as he says there certainly must be some hard numbers? None exist, it’s all smoke and mirrors.

      Like

      1. Robert I did warn you to STOP; however you seem incapable of passing judgement without even thinking laterally; probably because you are incapable of doing so ( my judgement). Gary is way out of your league; you are going to come off badly each and every encounter. Find something else to do e.g. Google 1.Glenn Pace 2. McKenna Denson 3. McKenna’s lawyer, and then “report back” viz.on Priesthood Correlation (going through the line of authority in this god- forsaken organisation). Gary is spot on when he refers to your lack of ability to connect dots. When I asked you about Priesthood Correlation you ASSUMED I meant Priesthood Correlation Meetings.

        Like

  23. One can even see the smoke and mirrors by going to Sam’s protect LDS children site. The background picture shows very young children and the explaining paragraph makes it appear that this is a problem with very young children. Typical of Sam’s tactics to use smoke and mirrors.
    Just to set the record straight, bishops start interviews that deal with the law of chastity with youth at 12-13 years of age. Sam makes it appear as if it’s 5-8 year olds. That’s a lie, typical deceptive tact to get people on board with him.

    Like

  24. Gary,
    You just brush blasphemy aside as if it’s nothing. You either are atheist, or don’t want to get part of God’s kingdom. Whatever suits your fancy I guess. I take these matters serious though. You lose any and all credibility when you flame blasphemy from your lips. Sam has no credibility at all. He hides behind smoke and mirrors. It’s sad that he too chimes in thinking blasphemy is funny.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Robert,

      Echoing Sam … I thank you for continuing to display the archetypical TBM Correlated Brain in real-time living color here on Sam’s blog. This would be way more boring if everyone agreed with Sam or agreed with you.

      So … you believe that the God of Creation gets OFFENDED when doofuses like me make Jesus jokes?

      Really?

      Litmus test: I don’t know if you have kids, but presuming you do … would YOU get triggered and get offended if your toddler looked at you and said:

      “Daddy, too bad your parents didn’t have any kids.” (or fill in your own insulting joke)

      Robert, if you would not get offended by your toddler poking fun at you, then …. then what, Robert?

      Then … YOU are more emotionally mature and spiritually evolved than … than who, Robert?

      … than … even … Jesus Christ -and- his Sky Daddy!

      That means … means what, Robert?

      … that means that you worship some Sky People who are less spiritually mature than YOU!

      ========= change the subject, please ============

      Reminds me to observe the following (for some reason … this occurred to me the other day):

      Article of Faith #8: We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

      “as far as it is translated correctly”

      Joseph’s Myth has YOU believing that the Bible is correct except for translation errors. What about all of the editing that the Promulgators of the Great and Abominable Church wrought on the original texts … to delete and/or falsify the information they did not want the masses of Christians to ever know about?

      If you expanded your study literature repertoire beyond Brethren-Approved pablum, you might have discovered the following by now:

      > Mary was not a virgin when Jesus was conceived. She conceived Jesus the same way you and I were conceived … copulation with a male of her species. (I presume it was Joseph … very likely.)

      > Mary had other kids, including James and John … Jesus’ brothers.

      > Jesus got married at age 17 to Mary Magdalene. They had a traditional Jewish wedding ceremony lasting 3 days. They loved each other dearly and deeply.

      > Jesus and Mary had kids. Jesus was NOT celibate. Neither was Mary.

      > Jesus was born a VERY advanced and evolved HUMAN BEING … far beyond his peers and far beyond you and me. He was a spiritual genius in comparison to the rest of us … who are here learning and growing at our own pace … one lifetime after another … until we get it right … just like Jesus likewise paid his dues before us … until he got it right Himself.

      > Jesus incarnated to make an effort to TEACH HUMANITY a few important concepts that would reduce suffering and enable people to live happier and more fulfilling lives. Humanity fucked up anyway, but some of Jesus’ teaching took root. Some people pay attention to the simple truths Jesus taught … people like Sam Young, for example.

      > Human Beings have the innate capacity and potential to eventually develop the skillset to perform amazing manipulations of mind and heart over matter … aka … perform miracles.

      > A miracle is a physical phenomenon that looks like magic because you and I do not understand how it was done, nor do we have the skill and ability (yet) to do ourselves.

      > Jesus performed miracles … because He knew how.

      Robert, if what I just wrote is factually true (which it is), that means that you … pardon my French … don’t know shit about much of anything. Joseph Smith jumped on the Christianity weapon of mass deception and then troweled on a few more layers of imaginary BS … to Mind Control his clueless Mormon dupes even worse than regular Christianity controls its clueless dupes.

      I would say that you are hopelessly deceived, Robert, but that would be a lie … because THERE IS HOPE for you. Start by reading the CES Letter … after turning off your Truth Rejection Filter … that firewall in your correlated brain that prevents Truth from entering. Turn it OFF. Just turn it OFF, Robert. You can do it.

      And … please help yourself to a nice big piece of HUMBLE PIE, Robert.

      Mormons have no clue what HUMILITY is. Humility means you are TEACHABLE and that you do not believe that YOU ALREADY KNOW EVERYTHING WORTH KNOWING and that nothing you think is true …could actually be FALSE BS.

      Not to worry, Robert. You WILL figure it out eventually. If not in this lifetime, then maybe next time.

      What about me? Do I think I am HUMBLE? Writing like some goddamned know-it-all? Well, I do know more than I did as a correlated TBM, that’s for sure. I also leave room for the possibility that I am still duped and clueless. I tell people, “Somewhere between 80% and 95% of what I know for sure … is probably BS.”

      In the meantime, I don’t hand over TOTAL RESPONSIBILITY for my truth detection to Salt Lake Suits in exchange for 10% of my gross and most of my spare time.

      Like

      1. I didn’t even read your whole post. Sorry but it bores me to no end. You should really keep your posts shorter or serve it up with some caffeine to stay awake.

        Like

  25. This is about our children and grandchildren, and protecting them from harmful policies, giving support and showing compassion to those who have suffered in the past from control and abuse in the Lds/Mormon or Church of Christ. It is not about Robert Osborn and his shortcomings…his rudeness, his inability to speed read and moreover his impaired intellect as evident in his inability “to connect dots” and to think laterally, and particularly in his admission to being bored. We still have children who are TBMs; yet they would never admit to being bored. They would rather be silent than rude; they are engaged in raising and providing for their families. Indeed a sore trial has come upon them in that their mother particularly, obviously did “not have the amazing faith they believed she had” but they certainly would not be interfering with Sam’s Protectlds Children. Moreover, we have an amazing “add-on” son who, thank the Lord has never been tainted by Mormonism,and loves God and is a source of peace in our lives. Gary has done his utmost best to describe the problem related to the horrendous abuse in this organisation.; he has spelt it out most specifically….Robert you call that blasphemous. What was the most blasphemous action imaginable was the LDS Church’s facilitation of the several baptisms etc. of Jesus Christ in LDS Temples. How was that possible??? Where was the apology by the first presidency in 2010?? It was not forthcoming. The solution was to excommunicate the whistleblower. How could any organisation treat its God with so little respect?? Easy…eliminate Him in The Second Anointing.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Rude? Have you even read any of Gary’s posts? Gary is blasphemous by very nature. I choose not to read through all his dialogue because of his constant and prolonged blasphemous and sacrilegious nature.

      Like

      1. Robert,

        At least we can agree on a couple of observations:

        “…because of his constant and prolonged blasphemous and sacrilegious nature.”

        Yes, indeed … and proud of it!

        Earlier you wondered if I am an atheist. Not at all. I just don’t believe in anthropomorphic curmudgeony Snowflakes with anger management challenges.

        You have remained silent on President Nelson’s recent revelation informing the world that Jesus is a Snowflake who gets offended and triggered when he does not hear his name spoken often enough.

        What amount of disrespect does President Nelson deserve for spouting irrational nonsense … in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen?

        He happily harvests ten percent of YOUR INCOME, Robert. And what do you get in return?

        Jesus wants ME for a Snowflake?

        You wannabe like Jesus; you wannabe a Snowflake.

        Elder Holland is an excellent role model for Snowflaky Jesus. Jeffrey gets offended and triggered regularly. It’s become a trademark by now. He does have a good excuse, however. He has not read quite enough books or attended a good enough school … apparently.

        The F.ormer U.tah C.hurch K.nown as LDS cannot be disrespected enough.

        It is a colossal mega-fraud … and YOU have not figured it out yet, Robert.

        Liked by 1 person

    1. Robert,

      “Gary, Im not even going to respond to your drivel.”

      Sorry, Robert, but you DID respond. You evaluated what I wrote … assessed it as “drivel” … which IS a response … and then POSTED your response.

      driv·el
      /ˈdrivəl/
      noun
      1.
      silly nonsense.
      “don’t talk such drivel!”
      synonyms: nonsense, twaddle, claptrap, balderdash, gibberish, rubbish, mumbo jumbo, garbage; informalpoppycock, piffle, tripe, bull, hogwash, baloney, codswallop, flapdoodle, jive, guff, bushwa; informal,tommyrot, bunkum; vulgar slangcrapola, verbal diarrhea
      “he was talking complete drivel”

      I presume that a “respectful” conversation would be one where you and I exchange thoughts and ideas on the merits of those thoughts and ideas.

      When I do that, Robert … at least in some cases … THAT is when YOU do not respond.

      I will give you an example:

      Some posts ago, I requested in a respectful tone for you to share your perspective on whether or not you personally consider masturbation to be a moral sin.

      You did not respond.

      You ignored my question.

      THAT is how to ignore something, Robert.

      Radio silence.

      Nothing.

      Nada.

      By not responding AT ALL to my respectful inquiry, you left me to GUESS how you feel about masturbation as relates to whether or not the act of a human to pleasure himself or herself sexually … in private … constitutes a morality crime that serves to render that human as morally corrupt and unworthy to be considered a decent and upstanding person who is fully entitled to be loved and respected without reservation.

      I used different words when I asked you that question previously, but it was the same idea. I should boil it down more … fewer words.

      1. Robert, do you consider masturbation to be unacceptable behavior for human beings?

      A follow-on question, which I would STILL appreciate a response from you … is this?

      2. Is it desirable for LDS children (teenagers are children) to feel guilt and shame if they masturbate?

      Is there anything in either of those questions that is disrespectful or … drivel?

      I might add my observation … which you can label drivel if you like … that RADIO SILENCE is one of the most common forms of response employed by Mormons in Mormon Culture … to avoid virtually ALL communication on matters that are ostensibly not “faith promoting.”

      This pretend-it-does-not-exist is exemplified by The Brethren from the highest pulpit of the Church.

      This phenomenon of Mormonism is precisely the reason Sam Young resorted to his Talkerias … to provide a safe forum where REAL ISSUES that merit ACTUAL COMMUNICATION on the merits … can happen.

      So, once again, and in respectful tones … Robert, would you be so kind as to respond to my two questions? I will number them 1 and 2 to eliminate any ambiguity as to what those questions are.

      Thank you.

      And, by the way, I do not blame you for pushing back. I am pretty hard on you, Robert. Most would agree with you (imo) that I am not very respectful with you. I commend you for having the courage to even engage at all on Sam’s forum.

      There are at least a few dozen, if not a few hundred silent readers who are learning a lot from what they read here. Truth be told, THOSE are the people I am writing for, Robert. It is not my job to convince you of anything. But you are providing a valuable foil for discussion. That is a nontrivial contribution to Sam’s blog, which I truly, truly and sincerely appreciate.

      In other words, I truly appreciate YOU, Robert.

      And … as always … I plead guilty to the facts … to which I will not hesitate to … respond.

      As a human, I am by definition a work-in-progress. That means I just plain get-it-wrong some of the time … if not most of the time.

      ====== sidebar ======

      What does it mean to use someone as a foil?

      In addition to being the shiny silver stuff you use in cooking, or the verb meaning to thwart, there is a literary term called a foil. It refers to a secondary character that contrasts with one of the main characters in order to highlight certain qualities of that person.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. The problem with masturbation is that, like you even admit, it can be a problem. Masturbation and pornography often go hand in hand. And yes- that is a problem. Self pleasure is or can be addictive. And because it is associated with other deviant behavior such as pornography, pedophilia, rape and incest then it’s not hard to understand why it’s not a good thing.
        Should youth feel ashamed for their secret self pleasures, pornography viewing and immoral fantasies. Yes. Why? Because that behavior can and/or will lead to marital problems later, ED, rape, pedophilia, mental issues, suicide, etc.
        I have said this before, my best friend committed suicide because his self pleasures led from one fantasy to the next until he committed a gross crime on minors and decided to end his life versus going to prison. I have an uncle still incarcerated because his self pleasures led to committing rape and molestation of a minor. His son committed suicide because his upbringing around that groomed him into becoming the same monster.
        So don’t tell me it’s okay.

        Liked by 1 person

  26. Robert,

    I appreciate your thoughtful response to my two questions. My opinion is that you have connected several dots together with assumptions/presumptions, not sound logic. The logical fallacy involved is the causation/correlation mistake. Just because A seems to correlate with B, that does not mean that A caused B. This is a potentially HUGE mistake, especially if it leads you to false conclusions that hurt people.

    I will respectfully interject some [observations] into what you wrote … making a special effort to maintain respect and civility for differences of opinion:

    “The problem with masturbation is that, like you even admit, it can be a problem. [True. Eating can be a problem, too. Watching TV can be a problem. Playing video games can be a problem. Just because something CAN be a problem, does not, therefore, guarantee that is IS a problem or MUST be a problem.] Masturbation and pornography often go hand in hand. [True .. with keyword ‘often’ … So, then, is masturbation without pornography OK?] And yes- that is a problem. [You have linked masturbation to pornography, Robert. What about masturbation without pornography?] Self pleasure is or can be addictive. [Again, totally true … keyword ‘can be’. Running can be addictive (runner’s high). Collecting comic books can be addictive. What about masturbation in moderation … in ALL things, don’t we say?] And because it is associated with other deviant behavior such as pornography, pedophilia, rape and incest then it’s not hard to understand why it’s not a good thing. [Off the rails there, Robert. You just linked masturbation to an impressive list of criminal behaviors. I am exercising restraint to refrain from strong language right about now. Is it not possible for someone to ‘just masturbate’ and then continue their day of non-criminal behaviors?]
    Should youth feel ashamed for their secret self pleasures, pornography viewing and immoral fantasies. [Robert, is a sexual fantasy immoral? Is immoral for a boy to look at a cute girl and imagine what it might be like to kiss her … touch her … marry her?] Yes. Why? Because that behavior can and/or will lead to marital problems later, ED, rape, pedophilia, mental issues, suicide, etc. [Off the rails once again, Robert. Masturbation leads to marital problems and another long list? I think you just lost most of Sam’s readers with that causation/correlation list.]
    I have said this before, my best friend committed suicide because his self pleasures led from one fantasy to the next until he committed a gross crime on minors and decided to end his life versus going to prison. [I am sorry for your loss of your best friend. Robert. That had to be a major heartbreak for you. I must state, however, that the chain of events on one person’s life will not necessarily (or at all) play out similarly in another person’s life.] I have an uncle still incarcerated because his self pleasures led to committing rape and molestation of a minor. [How can you know that masturbation led to rape? What about the billions of humans who masturbate and never rape anybody, Robert? What about the billions of humans who masturbate and never molest anyone …ever?] His son committed suicide because his upbringing around that groomed him into becoming the same monster. [That is tragic, Robert. Broken lives. Very sad. Was the gateway behavior to that disastrous chain of events masturbation? If nobody had masturbated, would everything have turned out OK.]
    So don’t tell me it’s okay.”

    Robert, I think I have made my point. I do not think it’s a good idea to outlaw masturbation because the act can … in some cases … be followed by destructive behaviors.

    My opinion is that you have catastrophized masturbation beyond logic or reason.

    The downside of sex-shaming teenagers for masturbating makes as much sense to me as fat-shaming them for eating. Masturbation is NORMAL human behavior. Normal people eat, sleep, work, play and engage in some kind of sexual behavior on occasion. If they do not happen to be in a marriage (where the sex has not yet gone extinct) then a totally acceptable sexual outlet can be masturbation … in private … harming no one.) It’s even totally OK for people in a mutually sexually satisfying marriage to pleasure themselves on occasion.

    Robert, I respect your right to your opinion. I respectfully disagree. I think your chain of argument is seriously flawed. I believe that sex-shaming teenagers for masturbating does only harm … with zero upside whatsoever … unless bursting sexual frustration and preoccupation with NOT masturbating, guilt, shame, self-loathing, lying to the Bishop … can be considered a good thing.

    If President Nelson were to receive a revelation that masturbation in private and in moderation can be a healthy sexual outlet for ALL members of the Church … (dream on, Gary … NEVER gonna happen. I have already written about WHY that will never happen.)

    I invite other readers to weigh in … Everyone’s opinion is worth consideration.

    Liked by 3 people

  27. I can vouch for the fact that these questions on masturbation are so harmful that, without assuming, with firsthand knowledge on my part and the total ineptitude of a stake president, the consequences led directly to involvement with pornography. Morever, that SP knows what he did (or else he is so devoid of a conscience), and yet he accepted a position as a Seventy. I recall my mother years ago pointing out that positions in this “church” are actually voluntary. They are certainly not awarded as positions of merit. We always understood that one was called to a “high” position in order to go through the refiner’s fire. So why in goodness name have TBMs “so much to say about so much”? If they were clued up, if they had researched and had read the CES letter, or reflected on the ridiculous conclusion that Talmage reached in his comment about THE BEE after it had flown in through his window and he blamed the bee for dying when he Talmage had closed the window, then they would just “shut up”. Surely when one has failed to consider both sides of the story, it is best to say as little as possible? Incidently James Talmage also stated that those in the US government who had forced the “Church” to close down polygamy, would be punished. What absolute RUBBISH! TBMS would do well to realise that those that they are trolling were once TBMS themselves, many having also been forced into this organisation as BICs. That too is RUBBISH…what covenants? Made with whom? Looking at those comments on Protectlds Children such “As I know this church is true”, “I obey the prophets .. they communicate with the Lord”, and “Sam Young should go and confess to his bishop” reflects such ignorance. Gary and Sam your patience is admirable. The very worst aspect is the fact that these people are continuing to support abuse of LDS Children. No-one has the right to question one’s morality…that remains a matter between the Lord God and the child/ adult, him/herself. Adults approach their bishops only because they have been told that the bishop is the person to whom they need to confess because he has been “called of God”. They do not realise that they can go directly to the Lord God.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. It’s a weak excuse to say a church leaders interviews lead to a youths addiction to pornography. Youth are aware of pornography long before they start getting to have bishop interviews in their teen years. That part of the argument needs to die as it really has no merit.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Do you think that making broad sweeping statements will win you brownie ponts with the ” Lord’s Anointed” in the LDS Church? I am telling you as it is, in my experience..just who are you anyway, to refute that?

        Liked by 2 people

  28. Sam please look at Spencer Gardiner’s Facebook …you will be so gratified by what he has posted re Protectlds Children w.r.t. losing friends as he resigns. Robert I suggest you do the same so that you can broaden your outlook. Spencer talks about masturbation. Robert it would be to your advantage to read Spencer’s entire statement; not just the first paragraph.

    Like

    1. I read it. Wasn’t moved by it. I don’t mean to be rude or uncaring, I just honestly wasn’t moved at all by it. I don’t know if it’s because it wasn’t true, or if it was stretched out a bit but I just wasn’t moved. To call it “abuse” is a lie though. Abuse is properly defined as cruel and violent treatment. Asking a person a question isn’t cruel and violent treatment. The problem is folks like Spencer, Sam, etc, use the shock factor, use incorrect language, all for the purpose of creating a facade of hate. I’ve called it smoke and mirrors in previous posts. The reality is they won’t admit that the behaviors associated with youth immorality include things like viewing hardcore pornography. They don’t want to say that’s “natural” because then their facade is gone. The facade of youth being innocent, not knowing what immorality is until their bishop sparks their minds is ridiculous. Go hang out in any public school and listen to the chatter going on. Youth are not innocent or ignorant of what sex is and all that goes along with it. National statistics show that the average age of youth exposed or sexualized to hardcore pornography is between the years 8-11. Wake up to reality folks.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Pornography is a concern. I have already awoken to that. Members need to wake up to that reality that every person outside the church is already awake to. Taking children behind closed doors and talking about sex is dangerous. This practice can do and has done horrid damage. Pornography is a concern for all Christian religions. But they don’t resort to having an untrained part time congregational leader asking minors if they masturbate, under or over the panties and how many fingers. Robert, you are defending a practice that is indefensible.

        Liked by 1 person

  29. Sam, more shock factor eh? I’m sorry but bishops don’t go taking girls and ask them that question. Maybe it happened on some rare occasion, maybe it didn’t. Does it happen regularly? No. It’s very rare. Talking about proper sexual relations with youth is doing the right thing. It counters what the world tells them. If Sam had it his way no sexual practice by youth would be wrong.

    Like

    1. Robert,
      “I’m sorry but bishops don’t go taking girls and ask them that question.”

      Oh yes they do.

      “Does it happen regularly?”

      Yes, it’s commonplace.

      “Talking about proper sexual relations with youth is doing the right thing.”

      Not when it’s during one-on-one interviews with the bishop.

      “If Sam had it his way no sexual practice by youth would be wrong.”

      You’re misrepresenting Sam’s viewpoint, grasping at straws, and making assumptions.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Commonplace eh?
        It wasnt common for me in my experiences. And neither was it commonplace for even Sam. He even admitted such when he was a youth- he was never asked sexually invasive questions. Even as a Bishop he states he never was counseled to do such nor did he himself. Yet, he claims, as dou you, that its commonplace. I dont buy it. Were going off heresay and thats all. I find it interesting that Sam has no real direct experience, either as a youth or a Bishop that this claimed rampant problem exists, and yet he claims it nevertheless. He has built a case entirely off of heresay.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Nope.

        Most LDS people I know were asked as a youth, including myself, if they masturbated — we’ve talked about it. So it is commonplace in many areas. Also, one-on-one interviews are commonplace church wide.

        Liked by 2 people

      3. It is not hearsay, my friend. It is direct testimony of thousands of adults. Four of those adults are my own children.

        Like

      4. Robert,

        I echo Sam …

        https://protectldschildren.org/read-the-stories-2/

        Testimony of first-hand witnesses is NOT hearsay.

        Hearsay is what YOU say, Robert.

        Wake Yourself Up.

        If we wanna get technical … Sam reporting what his daughters told him is technically hearsay …. coming from Sam.

        His daughters reporting WHAT THEY PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED IN THE BISHOP’S OFFICE is not hearsay.

        Most of the 943+ stories on Sam’s website are first-hand accounts … portions of which could be considered as admissible evidence if the testimony were spoken under oath before a court reporter, etc.

        For you. Robert, to cavalierly dismiss the entirety of these heart-wrenching disclosures as meaningless “hearsay” wins you a Pharisee Merit Badge with gold trim.

        hear·say
        /ˈhirˌsā/
        noun
        information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor.
        “according to hearsay, Bob had managed to break his arm”
        synonyms: rumor, gossip, tittle-tattle, idle talk; stories, tales; informal the grapevine, scuttlebutt, loose lips
        “that’s all hearsay, and I don’t care to listen to such tripe”
        LAW
        the report of another person’s words by a witness, usually disallowed as evidence in a court of law.
        “everything they had told him would have been ruled out as hearsay”

        Phar·i·see
        /ˈferəˌsē/
        noun
        a member of an ancient Jewish sect, distinguished by strict observance of the traditional and written law, and commonly held to have pretensions to superior sanctity.
        a self-righteous person; a hypocrite.

        Liked by 1 person

      5. Robert,

        All of the youth in your ward go like this, “The Bishop asked me if I masturbate. The last time I told him the truth, he made me stop taking the sacrament for a month and texted me every week to ‘see how it’s going.’ I tried my best to stop, but I guess I’m just not righteous enough to stay morally clean. So .. I decided to lie last time and tell the Bishop I have stopped. Now I am not only a perverted masturbator, but a prevaricating liar as well. And I’ll bet that NONE of the other kids are as bad as me. I feel awful. …. Wait? I know what to do! I will tell Brother Osborn what is happening. He will be my friend and ally and give me support to figure out how to deal with the shame and guilt … and my inability to stop masturbating. He is a righteous, wise and caring Youth Leader for the last 20 years. Yes! Brother Osborn will help me! Plus, he knows if any other kids are masturbating as well. If I learn that I am not the only kid struggling, I won’t feel as bad. I thank my Heavenly Father for Brother Osborn. I don’t know what I would do without him as my Youth Leader with 20 years experience.”

        Liked by 1 person

      6. Robert,
        “So, because it happened to you its commonplace eh?”

        No, because its happened to so many children both in and out of Mormonism. Interesting you pose that question when you made a similar statement to the contrary (e.g., “I have been working with youth for almost twenty years in the church and I just flatly don’t see these claims he makes.”) So because it didn’t happen to you its not common place eh?

        Liked by 1 person

    2. Robert,

      Your personal, on-demand access to virtual omniscience is indeed impressive!

      It’s one summary declaration of facts-not-in-evidence after another! Too numerous to itemize.

      Why The Brethren do not contact you immediately and offer you Russell M. Nelson’s job … escapes me.

      I do acknowledge your right to form your own opinions. I also acknowledge your right to declare with a straight face that your opinions on A-to-Z are God’s truth of the matter … no further discussion needed (or wanted).

      Thank you for setting the record straight … time after time … for the benefit of those of us who lack your All-Seeing-Eyes and Knowledge-of-Everything that matters under the Sun.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. This is your cue Robert…Gary’s comment. Now PROVE that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is “true”, and that Sam Young and those that support him are barking up the wrong tree.

        Like

  30. If things are truly as Sam claims then why am I not seeing it? I was a youth once in this church and I don’t remember sexually invasive questioning as Sam claims. Neither do any of my peers. I’m thinking he is either making this stuff up or it’s a rare occurrence. I have been working with youth for almost twenty years in the church and I just flatly don’t see these claims he makes.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Hum…no.
      You guys fail to produce anything other than heresay. I mean really- do you guys actually have some hard numbers, some peer reviewed study, or something besides your own rogue opinions?

      Like

  31. Robert the fact that you have 20 years of conclusive experience with youth reminds me of that addage that states that first -year university students think they know everything about their subjects. In second year they realise they actually know very little and in the third year they finally conclude that they have so much still to learn. (Do refer to Gary’s Dunning-Kruger-effect). The problem with mentioning time as a factor in support of one’s expertise on a certain subject, is that often one has simply repeated the first year twenty times, and has failed to “gain further light and knowledge”. Finally perhaps in order to understand Sam’s Protectlds Children you need to pray for “softening of heart” as the Church’s policies have indeed hurt many people and continue to do so. It is very sad that you were not touched by any aspect of Spencer’s comment.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. How can I be touched by a person’s comment when I feel they aren’t being truthful? It’s kind of Like Sam’s post about the story of cannibalism and sex traficking ring by the stake president and bishop and him saying he is willing to turn over his membership to stop this in the church. I mean really? If people really think that our church leadership is made up of cannibals and sex ring traficking then WOW, they are idiots.

      I have been working with youth long enough to know that generally, by the time they turn 12, are already know a lot about sexuality. I overhear them talking about it from time to time when they don’t realize I’m in earshot. It comes as a shock to almost every parent I speak to and tell them their youth aren’t as sheltered as they think they are. Parents are in denial big-time over this issue. They have no idea, generally speaking, of what their kids are and have been exposed to at school, at home, etc. It’s completely naive to assume as does Sam that a bishops interview is where they are first exposed to terms like masturbation. My wife is a bus driver. One of her routes is a kindergarten route. She tells me all the time about kids at this age already discussing sexual themes. She says it blows her mind. Obviously, it’s not in the bishops office where they are getting these thoughts and ideas.

      Like

  32. Robert, it has been both interesting and frustrating engaging with you here. However your perceptions and statements seem to be based on assumptions, frequent (“all the time”) discussions with your wife and conclusions drawn from those discussions. What troubles me somewhat is that you both in essence are “stalking “youth and little kindergarten children. (Personally, I am really gratified that I was able to take our children to school myself…really creepy to imagine someone monitoring their behaviour and discussions unbeknown to them…). Robert unless you are prepared to do some research e.g. read and consider the CES letter, the stories that Sam presented to the Q15 etc., you are not in a position to bring anything meaningful to the table. Harold has asked you please to read and respond to his comments, Gary has resorted to shock tactics to spur you into some kind of mental action, I asked you to prove that the church is true. Your only response is accusation e.g. that Spencer and others are lying. Sam has sacrificed so much in order to respond to a personal revelation from God.You Robert represent the TBMs …who seem unable to think for themselves…obeying the prophet no matter what…Satan’s plan. What you need to do is simple…empty your mind of everything, no preconceived ideas. Then you need to INVESTIGATE the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, starting with the first vision of Joseph Smith, when Jesus Christ appeared to him (I think that is correct…there were several accounts) when he plagiarised Saul of Tarsus, who was an epileptic and suffered from hallucinations, and the naming of his church as The Church of Christ.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. That’s what this is really about isn’t it? It’s about you guys using any means to defame the church. This isn’t about protecting children, it’s about using any angle to discredit the prophet Joseph Smith. You guys all have the same boxes checked on the ballot.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Robert,

        Joseph Smith does not need anyone to discredit him.

        Historical fact gets it done quite effectively. The Essays on lds.org tell the story.

        TBM blinders are required to keep your Joseph Smith cartoon fantasy from being knocked off the pedestal.

        You are once again indulging in Logical Fallacy argument.

        Your claim paraphrased: Sam really does not care about protecting children. His real agenda is to defame the church.

        Gotta hand it to you, Robert. You certainly do have THICK SKIN. You keep coming back for more.

        Please do not blame Sam for anything I write on his blog. Sam has been quite respectful of the Church … all things considered. He has been focused on a POLICY and given The Tone Deaf Brethren the benefit of the doubt.

        I myself do not cut The Brethren any slack whatsoever. They are loathsome and disgusting predator parasites who have egregiously disrespected Jesus Christ by shamelessly perpetrating their manipulations and exploitation of innocent, defenseless mind control marks … all in the name of Jesus Christ.

        Joseph lied, Robert. The Church is a mega-colossal fraud. One day you will figure that out and then be faced with dealing with your own emotional reaction to discovering that the people you entrusted with your Life Energy … betrayed and violated you to a depth that’s difficult to comprehend.

        Liked by 2 people

  33. Gary,
    How many times have I said I was already over on the other side? At one time I hated the church. I chose to not follow the prophets. And where did it get me? Absolutely nowhere! No peace, no joy, no happiness. I look at you and see the same anger I once had. You aren’t happy, you have no peace nor joy. It’s manifest in your posts. You have no light within you, no guiding light. It’s darkness. And I’m not here to convince you but perhaps the anonymous viewers who are reading this and seeing the fruits of ones works. Perhaps it may help one soul to not fall into the same trap you yourself are in that destroys the soul.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Robert,

      Your continuing error is to presume you are omniscient.

      “How many times have I said I was already over on the other side?”

      You talk like there is only ONE “other side” … which is what you personally experienced. You presume that I am experiencing the same thing you experienced on the “other side”.

      We all have our own unique experience of Life. That includes our own unique experience of being Mormon. There is not just ONE Mormon Church. There are 15 million (pick a number) different Mormon Churches. We all experienced Mormon culture from a different and unique perspective. Sure … we have many experiences in common, but that does not mean we all have the SAME experience internally, emotionally, psychologically.

      “I look at you and see the same anger I once had. You aren’t happy, you have no peace nor joy. It’s manifest in your posts.”

      There’s that omniscience showing again. I usually use strong language when I refer to The Brethren, but that does not mean I am angry. Disgusted, yes. The Brethren disgust me. They are worse than vermin because vermin take good care of their babies and don’t exploit them for personal gain.

      The Brethren actually provide a valuable service to their members. They provide a spiritually toxic environment masquerading as The Best Thing Imaginable. The experience has gifted thousands of Mormons with the self-affirming exhilaration to awaken from their b.i.c. born-in-correlation or born-in-coma lifestyle … to take their life back from The Brethren who stole it from them.

      Robert, you see that I am not happy and have no peace or joy? Well, who am I to contradict your all-seeing omniscience. You apparently know more about me than I know about myself. Like I said earlier, when The Brethren discover your unique talents and abilities, they should appoint you the 13th Apostle immediately. (I did not say that … I suggested they give you President Nelson’s job … so it looks like I lied.)

      Anyway, Robert, I mouth off too much … I’m sure you won’t disagree. I do appreciate your opposing viewpoint … for the sake of discussion. The worst thing you could do would be to agree with me. That would make me angry. You wanna see angry? Then agree with me, Robert.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Gary,
        Why do I have so much peace then? You can’t feel what I myself feel but I can. It’s plainly obvious you don’t have peace or this subject wouldn’t get you so upset.
        I remember vividly the day when I was disaffected with the church. I too would swear at its people and leadership. So yeah, I know now, because I have seen both sides and that the side you are on brings no peace, only anger.
        By their fruits ye shall know them. You don’t have fruits meriting or eminating the Light of Christ. That speaks volumes to ones credibility. And again, this isn’t so much to change your mind at all but rather the viewer who stumbles upon this blog post, that they may be able to more easily discern the facade Sam has created and the false teachers who pervade his following.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Robert,

        “Why do I have so much peace then?”

        That is a fair question … deserving a thoughtful response.

        There are thousands, if not millions of TBMs who totally resonate with you, Robert.

        Why?

        If the Church is a colossal fraud founded by a congenital liar con-man sex addict, then WHY do so many people sincerely believe they are part of the most wonderful institution to ever grace Planet Earth?

        How is that remotely possible?

        Here is my ONE WORD explanation:

        Delusion

        Mormonism really does “work” for those with bad luck who happen to be a good fit for the CCC … Correlated Cookie Cutter.

        Here are the CCC requirements. If you have a critical mass of these attributes, skills and personal proclivitied, then you have a high likelihood of feeling peace and happiness as a TBM:

        0. You find comfort in being instructed by an external authority figure on what to think and believe.

        1. All you need to “know” the instructions are God’s Truth is to experience a warm and reassuring feeling about it … after being instructed that when you experience a warm and reassuring feeling … that the feeling is coming directly from God … who is manifesting the truth of it unto you.

        2. If you have questions, the authority figure has the answers.

        3. If you ask a question the authority figure cannot answer satisfactorily (not insulting your intelligence), you shrug it off and put the question on your shelf … to be dealt with later.

        4. You enjoy the concept of being a member of an exclusive Club with a monopoly lock on Truth. Not only does your Club have the Truth, it is the ONLY club in possession of the Truth. Other Clubs might have some truth, but not the whole truth. Other clubs believe some stuff that’s not true. The way to know if something is not true is to compare with what the OTC believes. Same = True ; Different = False.

        5. You enjoy feeling compassion for others not as fortunate as you are … to be in the Only True Club … but others can join OTC if they like … providing they are not homosexual or have any gender identity issues.

        6. You enjoy having your whole life and the lives of your children pre-mapped-out by the Club President. The only thing you need to know about a child is what kind of genitalia does it have. The child’s entire life is then Cast in Correlation. Grow up … no masturbation … go on a mission … marry a returned missionary … or … be a returned missionary …. get married in the temple …. finally have sex …. get pregant while still in school … have babies … pay tithing … do callings … go to church 3 hours every Sunday … feel ecstatic when the 3 hours is reduced to 2 hours …. hear the same Gospel Topics lessons over and over again … literally thousands of times … conceal your true feelings of being bored to tears ad nauseam over and over … forever and ever … pretend going to the temple is inspiring … pretend the wearing garments is a good thing … because you were told it is a good thing … and you got a warm feeling about it … and you were told that the warm feeling is a revelation from God that it is a good thing, and that the OTC really is the Only True Club.

        7. You are so invested in the benefits of the OTC that you regularly announce to other Club members that you don’t know what you would do without your Club membership, and that you know the Club is True because you got a warm and reassuring feeling … and knew that the warm and reassuring feeling was a revelation from God because the Club President told you that’s what warm feelings are … especially when the warm feelings are about the Club being the Only True Club.

        8. You have no curiosity about what the other 7 billion human on Planet Earth have been doing with their time and energy. Whatever they are doing, you know it is a waste of time because if they are not with you in the Only True Club, they are discovering bullshit not worth your time to even know about.

        My fingers are tired, Robert. I doubt you even read this far. Maybe if you see your name in a sentence you will read this sentence.

        So, yes, I totally understand why millions of TBMs feel peace and happiness in the Church. Handing over the controls of your life to an external authority can feel peaceful and comfortable. It is a state of childlike innocence … where you are not responsible for much of anything … not even responsible for figuring out what your life purpose is … or discovering your unique and valuable talents you were born with …. if they happen to point in any direction the Club President does not think are in the best interests of the Club.

        That is precisely where Sam Young went wrong. He discovered a life purpose and unique set of skills and talents that made the Club President very unhappy. As a result, the Club leadership revoked Sam’s membership card.

        The only problem, Robert, is that the peace and comfort you feel in the Club … is about the same as living in your Mom’s basement until you die. You might miss out on a thing or two when you never go out on your own and face the World and face Life … ON YOUR OWN.

        Liked by 2 people

      3. Robert,

        I should acknowledge that you DID go out and face Life on your own … and it was not a positive experience for you … so you retreated to the comfort and protection of a controlled environment.

        I might add that I assume and presume that being back in the Church is where you should be right now. This might sound harsh, but moving out of your Mom’s basement … before you are ready … may not be a good idea.

        Realizing that what I just wrote sounds insulting, I will respectfully posit that the metaphor contains more truth than many of us would like to take in.

        The Church prevents and discourages its members from growing up and going out on their own to face the Adventure of Life head on.

        When you compare the Adventure of Life with Pay, Pray, Obey … sorry, Robert. There is NO comparison.

        Liked by 2 people

  34. Gary,
    It’s obvious from your carrying on you have a lot of anger with the church. It hints you have a lot of anger with life. I’m sorry about that. I have peace. You can think whatever you want about how you think my life is in my religion. Doesn’t change anything though. Your voice, along with Sam’s will die out in the sands of time and in the end your following will amount to nothing. What people will remember though is that the church will roll on, it will keep rolling and gathering strength despite those who oppose the Lord’s will.
    My brother is my bishop. We discuss weekly the state of our youth and what we can do to help them. We spend time with them, we care for them, we want them to succeed. The problem with Sam’s cause is that he effectively is doing nothing to help youth individually, one by one. In fact, the effect is he is working on the same side of Satan to enable immorality more easily by youth. What are your fruits Gary?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Robert,

      I agree with Sam. Whatever positive effect you have on the kids in your ward, that is very commendable and should be encouraged.

      There is a difference of opinion on what kinds of interactions with youth have a positive vs negative effect. Maybe there is a scenario where policing the sexual behaviors of children in private interviews has a positive effect. If so, it escapes me.

      Sam can weigh in on how many of the 943 submitted stories on his website recount the positive effects of Bishop worthiness interviews. There must be at least one story. Sam?

      “My brother is my bishop.”

      Interesting. My late brother’s brother (my brother) was his Bishop many years ago. My late brother turned in his resignation request to … my other brother, the Bishop.

      My late brother is dead … heart valve failure four years ago. He was my best friend on Planet Earth. My other brother is no longer Bishop. He was a stake presidency counselor and is now stake patriarch.

      Robert, if your assessment of my life is accurate, can you offer some encouragement as to why I should not just end it all … what with me being so miserable and angry and hating life?

      “What are your fruits Gary?”

      Geeze? Maybe I don’t have any. Wait. There is one. Sam Young phoned me a few hours ago and we enjoyed exchanging sentiments of brotherly love, mutual support, admiration and encouragement of one another. I told Sam that I must have done something pretty good to have Sam Young as a close friend. He said something similar to me. He recalled his memory of when we first met in person in Houston. I told Sam it was magical. He agreed.

      Maybe Sam and I are just a couple of fruits.

      By their fruits ye shall know them.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. This is for Sam …

        Believe it or not, I have another very good friend named Sam … whom I have known for years … and whom … I have never actually met in person. He lives in Ashland, Oregon … about 5 hours drive south from here. We crossed paths years ago when I bought some educational materials from him. We resonated and began a phone relationship that has endured many years now. He is a very spiritually oriented dude who has visited India three times during his life. Very much into Eastern spirituality and consciousness, etc.

        Today I received an email from Sam in Ashland that his father had passed away, so I phoned him to strum heartstrings with him for a little while. It was a beautiful conversation. Sam’s dad had been wasting away for a couple years … down to 137 pounds.

        When he finally died … with Sam and Sam’s sister at his bedside, Dad’s pacemaker brought his body back to life … NINE TIMES before it was finally over. During those moments when Dad came back to life after his pacemaker defibrillated his heart yet again, Sam said the deep clarity and purity he beheld in his father’s eyes was like nothing he had ever seen before. It was like his Dad had been to the Spirit Realm and brought back the essence that wonderful place and radiated that peace and love and clarity to Sam and his sister.

        It was beautiful to hear Sam relate that amazing story to me.

        If you are curious, Sam of Ashland created some online imagery and writing about his Dad’s passing. The font is pretty small, so magnify it [ctrl (+)] and be sure to click on the four links at the bottom to see the other pages including a photo of Sam’s father and some other evocative images.

        The image represents Pure Eyes … that Sam’s father brought back from Our True Home.

        Like

      2. Gary,
        It’s not “policing”. It’s about communication. It’s about counseling. I can’t vouch for all those who wrote letters to Sam. I’m sure there is some truth in them. How much? Who really knows. I do know though that generally, youth have a positive experience with interviews. The amount of good it does far surpasseth the few rare cases where things go wrong. I’m not saying we should turn a blind eye, you just don’t stop a generally great thing in hopes to prevent the rare occurrence of the bad.
        The works of Sam go counter to what we are doing in the church. It hurts our cause. I have talked to hundreds of youth over the years about morality. My brother has also done so. Not once have we felt that we created an awkward situation or had a negative impact on youth. So, you guys are advocating that the hundreds we have counseled with is damaging, abusive, etc. It’s just not so. And from my interactions with other youth leaders in my area it’s the same sentiment. Now, that said, I can’t vouch for them either no more than I can vouch for Sam’s followers. But, I do know that in general, Bishops and youth leaders approach the topic of chastity with youth with prayerful hearts and sincerity, with the pure love of Christ. We are indeed, and absolutely, positively impacting the youth and their choices. This is our fruit. We see it manifest in their lives. We see a stronger conviction of morality with our youth in our congregations. This is not a false church, it’s fruits state otherwise.
        Sam’s fruits? They are leading nowhere real fast. His fruits destroy my fruits.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Robert,

        I do not doubt the good intentions of you and your brother to do your best to help your youth in a positive way.

        Here is where you go off the rails and harm kids instead of helping them:

        If you teach kids that self-pleasure is a moral sin that requires repentance and abstinence, you are harming the kids.

        Period.

        I realize you do not agree. Because you genuinely consider masturbation to be an evil act, you automatically shame any kid who masturbates … whether the topic is discussed explicitly with the kid or not.

        The very fact that YOU and YOUR BROTHER sincerely believe masturbation is evil … guarantees that you will be shaming kids. What? Evil is too strong a word? OK, Robert. Pick a different word. The result is the same: SHAME and GUILT for most kids … because most kids masturbate.

        There are some kids who do not masturbate. The joke is that 95% masturbate and the other 5% are liars.

        I think it is safe to say that the majority of kids masturbate. When you discover something that feels THAT wonderful and ostensibly harms nobody (because nobody else even knows you did it … except when you were told that your Bishop is “inspired” and therefore omniscient and therefore knows when you’ve been a bad boy or girl) … it is natural to respond to that powerful positive feedback where your biology WANTS you to masturbate. You want to eat. You want to breathe. You want sexual pleasure. It’s a fundamental component and attribute of The Human Condition, Robert.

        The Brethren are HOLDING HOSTAGE a fundamental human need.

        So … there is no way, Robert, you can claim to NOT BE SHAMING Mormon youth. No way. Spout off all you want. You are full of BS if you believe that you possess magical powers to be able to paint masturbation as the gateway to your long list of criminal behaviors … and somehow NOT be shaming your youth.

        So … admit it, Robert. I want you to admit that you believe that kids who masturbate SHOULD FEEL SHAME. What? Shame is too strong a word? OK. Pick a different word you like better, Robert. Let’s just go ahead and quibble over semantics.

        You are in good company. The Brethren have demonstrated repeatedly by their own public behavior that WE BELIEVE WE CAN SOLVE ANY PROBLEM WITH CLEVER WORDSMITHING.

        Go ahead, Robert. Wordsmith your way around the FACT that YOU are SHAMING Mormon kids who masturbate.

        The problem here is that KIDS ARE SUFFERING. You make that fact disappear (in your own mind) with wordsmithing and denial … instead of acknowledging a REAL PROBLEM and DOING SOMETHING to lessen the harm done to LDS kids.

        Go ahead, Robert. Keep harming kids. Keep doing it. Keep your head up your butt to keep yourself BLINDED by your own hubris.

        Hubris describes a personality quality of extreme or foolish pride or dangerous overconfidence, often in combination with (or synonymous with) arrogance.

        Liked by 3 people

      4. My fruits are leading nowhere real fast? Ok. You’ll have to convince the many victims of bishop interviews who have come forward to say that this movement has been the beginning of their healing process.

        My fruits are destroying your fruits? If so, I’d like to hear how. Perhaps you could put up a website and invite your fruits to submit stories of how they have been destroyed by my fruit.

        I don’t dispute that you have helped many children. Rather, I commend you for it. The vast majority of scout masters have helped thousands of children. Yet, the BSA implemented a policy that no child should ever be alone with a scoutmaster. The scoutmasters continue to bless the lives of many children even under the safety provisions they now operate under.

        When the church finally joins the rest of civilized society by baning one-on-one interviews and sexually probing questions bishops will continue to bless the lives of children. They’ll just do it in an safer environment.

        Liked by 2 people

      5. Robert,

        I should acknowledge that your position is well-founded in Mormon theology.

        THE BOOK OF MOSIAH
        CHAPTER 3:19
        For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father.

        The only problem is that Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon and made that natural man shit up. Granted, most of Christianity agrees with Joseph Smith about the general sex shaming of humanity.

        No! Being who God created you to be is BAAAAD! You gotta becometh a saint.

        Billy, thank you for confessing that you jerked off again. Your natural boy is getting the best of you, Billy. You must try harder to becometh a saint, Billy. You know what a saint is, Billy. A saint is a boy who NEVER makes himself feel good down there. NEVER, Billy. Do you wanna be an enemy of God, Billy. Is THAT what you wanna do with your life? Be an ENEMY OF GOD, Billy?

        Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s