Sex offenders in a ward - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

MikeWaters · 08-24-2005, 04:50 PM

So let's say one has gone through the ward roster and matched someone to the sex offender registry (which I haven't btw), what is one's moral obligation? To remain silent (under the theory that perhaps they have morally repented)? Tell the Bishop? I'll bet most would be esp. inclined to let Bishop (and others) know if the person had a calling amongst the youth. But let's say the person didn't have a calling?

SteelBlue · 08-24-2005, 04:57 PM

I would just want to make sure the person didn't ever have a calling that involved the youth.

MikeWaters · 08-24-2005, 05:01 PM

best option: wait til person called to youth, then raise hand in opposition. that would be awesome! never seen that done in my lifetime. except by 2 year olds.

fusnik11 · 08-24-2005, 05:07 PM

ive never seen someone hold their hand in opposition to a persons calling....

always wanted to be in a ward when that happened, see what the bishop, and the other members of the ward would do.

creekster · 08-24-2005, 05:17 PM

refused to sustain the bishop and raised his hand in opposition to the call. He was asked to wait in the foyer to discuss it after the meeting.

Eldreidge Cleaver was in attendance that day.

This is all true, btw. Berkely is an interesting place.

UtahDan · 08-24-2005, 05:26 PM

is not something one often sees exercised in that way, but I see nothing illegitimate about it.

I'm certain that my approach would be to talk to the Bishop and not raise my hand at all if that were the first time I was learning of it. If I had previously raised such a concern and was later asked to sustain that person I would have no trouble raising a hand to oppose. There is a reason these things are put to a vote.

My next step would be to talk to his priesthood authority (the Stake president), and on up the food chain. In general it is a bad idea to try to substitute your judgment for that of your leader. On the other hand, I have first hand knowledge of a situation where a general authority was asked to intercede directly in a situation where a Stake president and bishop were exercising such poor judgment with respect to a disciplinary matter with a member that the Bishop was released.

The bottom line is we should follow our leaders, but we are not expected to fall into line with things we know to be wrong, granted, that these sorts of situtations are usually once in a lifetime if ever. They do occur though.

il Padrino Ute · 08-24-2005, 06:45 PM

I believe it would be best to inform the Bishop only if the offender was in a calling working with the youth, though I tend to believe that the Lord wouldn't give any inspiration to the Bishop to call a person to that position in the ward.

I believe in giving someone a second chance, unless that person is a sexual predator of children. I've never heard what the rehabilitation of those offenders are, but I believe they should be under constant scrutiny when it involves interacting with kids.

SteelBlue · 08-24-2005, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

though I tend to believe that the Lord wouldn't give any inspiration to the Bishop to call a person to that position in the ward.

But it happens and it has happened to good bishops. I should rephrase that. It happens that good bishops call bad people to work with children.

SoCalCoug · 08-25-2005, 03:03 AM

Through my work (divorce attorney) I sometimes come across things about people in the ward or stake that can be quite shocking. Right now, we have a guy in the ward (married, five kids) who had an affair with a married woman and got her pregnant. He went through the church disciplinary system and was apparently excommunicated or disfellowshipped, but he has now been reinstated.

What I was consulted about was something that happened later on. In California, there is a presumption that a child born to a married couple living together, where the husband is not impotent, is conclusively presumed to be the child's father. You cannot get around this presumption by any means after the child turns 2.

The LDS guy had a paternity test administered through the church social services, which established him as the father. However, that test is not admissible in California courts to attack the conclusive presumption.

The woman wanted to get a divorce, and he had a friend represent her in the divorce. He agreed to pay child support - voluntarily, not through the court. The friend who represented the woman never informed her about the 2-year conclusive presumption of paternity.

Sure enough, within days of the child turning 2, our good LDS man told the woman, "I'm not paying any more support, and I don't ever want to see you again." According to California guidelines, based he (who is also an attorney making very good money) should have been paying the woman about $3,000 per month child support - he had been paying her about $500. The circumstances indicate that he set this up from the beginning.

It was a calculated, despicable act, to set her up like he did, and then get out of his responsibility. It is also one that I don't believe any of our church leadership knows about.

So, many times, I have wondered what am I going to do if he is given a calling? I was asked not to let the husband know that that I was consulted, or even that there might be the potential for something happening legally, so I don't think I can really even tell the Bishop about it.

I have decided that if he is ever given a calling where I have to work with him, I'm going to ask the Bishop to release me. I don't think I could stomach it.

The irony of this whole story is that after the woman had the baby, a bunch of "church people" started showing up at her house to help out and bring dinners and things. Yes, it was the relief society, and she ended up taking the discussions and joining the church.

realtall · 08-25-2005, 03:44 AM

This happened about 3 months ago.

There was a parent of a student at the Elementary School where my wife works who got out of jail after a 6-12 month stretch. According to the classroom teacher(my wife is the PE teacher), he was in for, among other things, sexual child abuse.

Anyhow, guess who shows up at church with the missionaries one Sunday? Yep, this guy. My wife was panicky.

I had her call the Bishop the same week. I figured that he needed to know(at least what we knew) in case it was true and in case that anything happened down the line. I didn't want to not tell anybody and then have something happen...

So he got baptised a few weeks later and comes every Sunday(as far as I can tell). Seems like a nice enough guy. I'm glad we told the Bishop, though.

08-24-2005, 04:50 PM	#1
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	Sex offenders in a ward So let's say one has gone through the ward roster and matched someone to the sex offender registry (which I haven't btw), what is one's moral obligation? To remain silent (under the theory that perhaps they have morally repented)? Tell the Bishop? I'll bet most would be esp. inclined to let Bishop (and others) know if the person had a calling amongst the youth. But let's say the person didn't have a calling?

08-24-2005, 05:07 PM	#4
fusnik11 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 2,506	youd think the bishop would know..... ive never seen someone hold their hand in opposition to a persons calling.... always wanted to be in a ward when that happened, see what the bishop, and the other members of the ward would do.

08-24-2005, 05:17 PM	#5
creekster Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: the far corner of my mind Posts: 8,711	Somoen in my Berkely Ca ward once refused to sustain the bishop and raised his hand in opposition to the call. He was asked to wait in the foyer to discuss it after the meeting. Eldreidge Cleaver was in attendance that day. This is all true, btw. Berkely is an interesting place.

08-24-2005, 05:26 PM	#6
UtahDan Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The Bluth Home Posts: 3,877	Church governance by common consent.. is not something one often sees exercised in that way, but I see nothing illegitimate about it. I'm certain that my approach would be to talk to the Bishop and not raise my hand at all if that were the first time I was learning of it. If I had previously raised such a concern and was later asked to sustain that person I would have no trouble raising a hand to oppose. There is a reason these things are put to a vote. My next step would be to talk to his priesthood authority (the Stake president), and on up the food chain. In general it is a bad idea to try to substitute your judgment for that of your leader. On the other hand, I have first hand knowledge of a situation where a general authority was asked to intercede directly in a situation where a Stake president and bishop were exercising such poor judgment with respect to a disciplinary matter with a member that the Bishop was released. The bottom line is we should follow our leaders, but we are not expected to fall into line with things we know to be wrong, granted, that these sorts of situtations are usually once in a lifetime if ever. They do occur though. __________________ The Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go. -Galileo

08-24-2005, 06:45 PM	#7
il Padrino Ute Board Pinhead Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the basement of my house, Murray, Utah. Posts: 15,941	That's a tough one... I believe it would be best to inform the Bishop only if the offender was in a calling working with the youth, though I tend to believe that the Lord wouldn't give any inspiration to the Bishop to call a person to that position in the ward. I believe in giving someone a second chance, unless that person is a sexual predator of children. I've never heard what the rehabilitation of those offenders are, but I believe they should be under constant scrutiny when it involves interacting with kids. __________________ "The beauty of baseball is not having to explain it." - Chuck Shriver "This is now the joke that stupid people laugh at." - Christopher Hitchens on IQ jokes about GWB.

08-24-2005, 04:57 PM	#2
SteelBlue Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Norcal Posts: 5,821	I would just want to make sure the person didn't ever have a calling that involved the youth.

08-24-2005, 05:01 PM	#3
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	best option: wait til person called to youth, then raise hand in opposition. that would be awesome! never seen that done in my lifetime. except by 2 year olds.

08-25-2005, 03:03 AM	#9
SoCalCoug Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Orange County, California Posts: 3,059	Through my work (divorce attorney) I sometimes come across things about people in the ward or stake that can be quite shocking. Right now, we have a guy in the ward (married, five kids) who had an affair with a married woman and got her pregnant. He went through the church disciplinary system and was apparently excommunicated or disfellowshipped, but he has now been reinstated. What I was consulted about was something that happened later on. In California, there is a presumption that a child born to a married couple living together, where the husband is not impotent, is conclusively presumed to be the child's father. You cannot get around this presumption by any means after the child turns 2. The LDS guy had a paternity test administered through the church social services, which established him as the father. However, that test is not admissible in California courts to attack the conclusive presumption. The woman wanted to get a divorce, and he had a friend represent her in the divorce. He agreed to pay child support - voluntarily, not through the court. The friend who represented the woman never informed her about the 2-year conclusive presumption of paternity. Sure enough, within days of the child turning 2, our good LDS man told the woman, "I'm not paying any more support, and I don't ever want to see you again." According to California guidelines, based he (who is also an attorney making very good money) should have been paying the woman about $3,000 per month child support - he had been paying her about $500. The circumstances indicate that he set this up from the beginning. It was a calculated, despicable act, to set her up like he did, and then get out of his responsibility. It is also one that I don't believe any of our church leadership knows about. So, many times, I have wondered what am I going to do if he is given a calling? I was asked not to let the husband know that that I was consulted, or even that there might be the potential for something happening legally, so I don't think I can really even tell the Bishop about it. I have decided that if he is ever given a calling where I have to work with him, I'm going to ask the Bishop to release me. I don't think I could stomach it. The irony of this whole story is that after the woman had the baby, a bunch of "church people" started showing up at her house to help out and bring dinners and things. Yes, it was the relief society, and she ended up taking the discussions and joining the church. __________________ Get your stinking paws off me, you damned, dirty Yewt! "Now perhaps as I spanked myself screaming out "Kozlowski, say it like you mean it bitch!" might have been out of line, but such was the mood." - Goatnapper "If you want to fatten a pig up to make the pig MORE delicious, you can feed it almost anything. Seriously. The pig is like the car on Back to the Future. You put in garbage, and out comes something magical!" - Cali Coug

08-25-2005, 03:44 AM	#10
realtall Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Krum, TX Posts: 891	This happened about 3 months ago. There was a parent of a student at the Elementary School where my wife works who got out of jail after a 6-12 month stretch. According to the classroom teacher(my wife is the PE teacher), he was in for, among other things, sexual child abuse. Anyhow, guess who shows up at church with the missionaries one Sunday? Yep, this guy. My wife was panicky. I had her call the Bishop the same week. I figured that he needed to know(at least what we knew) in case it was true and in case that anything happened down the line. I didn't want to not tell anybody and then have something happen... So he got baptised a few weeks later and comes every Sunday(as far as I can tell). Seems like a nice enough guy. I'm glad we told the Bishop, though.