cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board  

Go Back   cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board > non-Sports > Current Events

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-13-2007, 06:43 PM   #21
MikeWaters
Demiurge
 
MikeWaters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,363
MikeWaters is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex View Post

You're just, for lack of a better word, an assigned friend. If this were a Bishop, I could see more of a case, but home teachers carry almost no authority it all as an "agent" of the church.
My friendships aren't carefully tracked statistically, with meetings with my ecclesiastical authorities personally asking me how my friendships are going. Nor am I usually assigned topics to talk about with my friends.

And usually, I choose my own friends.
MikeWaters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 06:48 PM   #22
creekster
Senior Member
 
creekster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
creekster is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex View Post
I think the "agent of the church" claim is quite a stretch. From an ecclesiastical perspective, a home teacher carries no special assignment. You don't get set apart as a home teacher (it's considered part of the ordination to the priesthood) and you don't carry any special keys or responsibilities beyond any other priesthood holder (or member for that matter).

You're just, for lack of a better word, an assigned friend. If this were a Bishop, I could see more of a case, but home teachers carry almost no authority it all as an "agent" of the church.
So when they show up, who are they representing? Where does the assigned message come from? They are not set apart as home teachers, but it is a duty include din the ordination? You don't think that's a distincti9on without a difference (and try telling your bishop that you don't really care about home teaching becasue you weren't set apart)? There are some problems with this reault, IMO, but not based upon the assertion that a HT is not an agent.
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos.
creekster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 06:55 PM   #23
Archaea
Assistant to the Regional Manager
 
Archaea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
Archaea is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

I understand the agency issues, even though I suppose a lot of it is a reach.

The main issue that bothers me in the extreme is the issue of statute of limitations. A lawsuit filed in the 21st Century for something alleged to have occurred in the eighties.

That is bothersome to no end.

Not everything an agent does should or does establish liability. Some things are unforseeable.

The Church didn't send a person to act as a sexual predator. In many cases, the Church may be unaware. As shown in the previous fact scenario, he had been a friend for years, visiting more than twice a week.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα
Archaea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 07:01 PM   #24
creekster
Senior Member
 
creekster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
creekster is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post
I understand the agency issues, even though I suppose a lot of it is a reach.

The main issue that bothers me in the extreme is the issue of statute of limitations. A lawsuit filed in the 21st Century for something alleged to have occurred in the eighties.

That is bothersome to no end.

Not everything an agent does should or does establish liability. Some things are unforseeable.

The Church didn't send a person to act as a sexual predator. In many cases, the Church may be unaware. As shown in the previous fact scenario, he had been a friend for years, visiting more than twice a week.
Sure, scope of agency might be an issue, but to say a HT is not an agent when sent out to HT is a non-starter, IMO.
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos.
creekster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 07:04 PM   #25
Archaea
Assistant to the Regional Manager
 
Archaea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
Archaea is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by creekster View Post
Sure, scope of agency might be an issue, but to say a HT is not an agent when sent out to HT is a non-starter, IMO.
I wouldn't make the non-agent argument but would focus upon scope.


Oregon must have a screwy SoL law.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα
Archaea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 07:17 PM   #26
Tex
Senior Member
 
Tex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,596
Tex is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by creekster View Post
So when they show up, who are they representing? Where does the assigned message come from? They are not set apart as home teachers, but it is a duty include din the ordination? You don't think that's a distincti9on without a difference (and try telling your bishop that you don't really care about home teaching becasue you weren't set apart)? There are some problems with this reault, IMO, but not based upon the assertion that a HT is not an agent.
I'm no lawyer so this is all going to be in layman's understanding and terms, but I'm not sure that they legally represent anyone. Obviously they're coming from the ward, but are they really "agents" of the ward?

When I think of an agent, I think of someone with executive power, someone with the ability to make decisions and direct resources. A bishop, a stake president, maybe even an EQ or RS president, could be considered an agent. But a home teacher is just Joe Member coming over to say hi. If there's a problem or a need, the HTers are powerless to fix it on their own. They cannot leverage any church resources, but can only pass the message up the chain.

If we're going to call HTers agents, then we have to call VTers agents too. In that case, we have roughly a couple million "agents" running around the church, representing the church ... and to each other. What do we call it when HTers teach each other? A shareholder meeting?

I realize that it's not necessarily a legal distinction that will hold up in court, but then again, courts make a lot of really stupid decisions. I can't see how any clear thinking judge can really look at the home teaching program as a series of agents running around representing and acting on behalf of the church. It's just members making social calls.
Tex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 07:20 PM   #27
MikeWaters
Demiurge
 
MikeWaters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,363
MikeWaters is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Tex, the UPS guy just delilvers the packages. But surely he is an agent.

If you don't want millions of agents running around, then get rid of HT and VT (in our dreams, there are millions doing this).
MikeWaters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 07:31 PM   #28
Archaea
Assistant to the Regional Manager
 
Archaea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
Archaea is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex View Post
I'm no lawyer so this is all going to be in layman's understanding and terms, but I'm not sure that they legally represent anyone. Obviously they're coming from the ward, but are they really "agents" of the ward?

When I think of an agent, I think of someone with executive power, someone with the ability to make decisions and direct resources. A bishop, a stake president, maybe even an EQ or RS president, could be considered an agent. But a home teacher is just Joe Member coming over to say hi. If there's a problem or a need, the HTers are powerless to fix it on their own. They cannot leverage any church resources, but can only pass the message up the chain.

If we're going to call HTers agents, then we have to call VTers agents too. In that case, we have roughly a couple million "agents" running around the church, representing the church ... and to each other. What do we call it when HTers teach each other? A shareholder meeting?

I realize that it's not necessarily a legal distinction that will hold up in court, but then again, courts make a lot of really stupid decisions. I can't see how any clear thinking judge can really look at the home teaching program as a series of agents running around representing and acting on behalf of the church. It's just members making social calls.
HT's do represent the ward, a subset of the local state Church. Just because their authority is limited, doesn't change the legal status.

However, being a limited scope agent shouldn't hold the principle liable for every outrageous action of the agent.

The principle needs to have some reasonable knowledge of the agent's propensities, and thereafter fail to act.

What happened from time to time in the eighties and even early nineties, somebody would complain to a local bishop about somebody "molesting" another member. Bishops at that time were not trained in how to handle it; they are much better trained. Should they have been? I find it incredulous that they should have been, but the legal cases guess otherwise.

So in many cases in days gone by, the bishops failed to act and apparently the victim suffered horribly because the bishop thought the perp was either not guilty or capable of repenting of the action.

That's what's weird about these cases. And in Oregon, one can look back to a great time period in the past.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα
Archaea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 07:40 PM   #29
Tex
Senior Member
 
Tex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,596
Tex is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali Coug View Post
Corporations are dealing with the same problem. How many employees does UPS have? How many does Microsoft have? Enron? If any of them do something that hurts another person while acting in their capacity as an employee, they will incur liability for their company.
I think the corporation-church comparisons are poor analogies (the "shareholder" comment was a bit of sarcastic joking).

We're getting to a point in our society where no one can do anything nice for anyone for fear of a lawsuit. Everyone is carrying silly liabilities around with them such that if they breath wrong, they're gonna owe somebody millions. I remember someone commenting a while back about being unwilling to help lift a kid in a public restroom up to the sink (to wash his hands) for fear of some accusation of sexual harassment.

When I go visit someone in their home because the EQ president (or bishop) has asked me too, or because I feel a spiritual obligation as a MP holder, I am not acting in any official capacity for the church. I'm just being a nice guy. The law may not see it that way, but it ought to. There is no way, even if there weren't all the other extenuating factors (what we're calling "scope"), that the church should be held liable for this on the basis of "agency."
Tex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 07:45 PM   #30
ute4ever
I must not tell lies
 
ute4ever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,103
ute4ever is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeWaters View Post
as it was explained on CB, if a UPS driver runs a red light and hits you, you are not likely to only sue the driver. You will sue UPS as well, because the driver was an agent of UPS.

Thus it could be construed the home teacher was an agent of the church.

I don't know if this is sound legal thinking or not, however.
That is precisely legal thinking, to go after the deepest pockets you can find. The driver was probably judgment-proof (aka had no money) so they went after the corporate empire. Assume the driver was not in a UPS truck but was driving his own car; the lawyer would have gone after his auto insurance company for the maximum amount in his policy.
ute4ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.