NOM

Didn't happen on his watch? He's not fooling anybody. Everybody knows.

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2021/11 ... ays-shock/


Here's the full video of his Q&A:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5F92V-P9msQ

From the article:

"There are two ways to think about Oaks’ answer last week, said Chloe Fife, a third-year law student at Virginia who is from St. George and was present at the Q&A session.

“Either he didn’t know it was happening, which is disappointing,” Fife said Monday, “or what he said was untrue.”

She prefers to believe the former."


The "therapy" continued until 1976 and Oaks took over in 1971???

So for five years he was in the dark? Yeah that strains credulity just a little. He's either lying or he's a complete idiot. Take your pick.

Oaks most likely held the shock paddles himself!

Turn up the dial Brother Petersen! I can see his erection hasn’t gone down…

ZZZZAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!

Oaks: again……

ZZZZAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!

Oaks: turn it up to 10…..

ZZZZAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!

Oaks: again!! Again again!!!!!!!!

ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!

Oaks?: what do you mean you’re still attracted to the same sex???? Again!!!!

ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!
ZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP!

Oaks: I’m going to lunch. Have that machine calibrated. Double the flux gaycapacitor electrocution contacts, remove the breaker, and bring in a few buckets of water they can soak their feet in.

Oaks is the definition of pure evil.

Yeah, I was kinda across University Avenue from BYU at Provo High School in 69, and I knew it was happening, and even had a conversation about it with a friend who was probably more horrified than I was because I found out for sure he was gay after he disappeared to California upon graduation. So, if the dumb kids at the local high school were having conversations about it, how the hell did he not know? We covered electroshock therapy in my high school class my senior year, and the teacher said BYU was doing it. It was kinda common knowledge. Oaks is probably lying to himself, because looking back, he is sickened by what was going on on his watch, so now he is changing history in his own mind so he can feel righteous. My friend, by the way died of AIDS. He got it early on, when it was still unknown and a death sentence. So, yeah, I have strong feelings about the way gays have been treated. If it hadn’t been so shameful, maybe my friend would not have disappeared out of my life, because he moved away and cut off all contact with anyone from high school. I found out from my in laws, who found out from his parents, that they just happened to keep in contact with through several moves and had lived next door to when their kids were toddlers. So, maybe if he had not run away to the AIDS hot spot, because he was too shamed to come out in Utah, he wouldn’t have gotten AIDS.

So, I can’t accept that he didn’t know. And I don’t think the man is a purposeful liar. I can believe denial. Like I had clients as a social worker, who were being sexually abused by a father or older brother, and their mother walked in on them being abused. Saw the child naked on the bed, with naked father/brother on top of them in the act. And the mother walked right back out of the room and then when all hell broke lose because the girl went to the police, the mother swore that she had no idea it was going on. She just couldn’t not deal with reality, so she blinded herself to what she saw. That isn’t “not knowing” that is deep deep denial. So, Oaks blinded himself to what he had to see in reports, what he had to of heard. So, Oaks is in denial about what went on at BYU under his “not watching”. I am dying of not surprised.

Where's 60 Minutes when you need it?

He’s being as truthful as he knows how to be.

w2mz wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 17, 2021 6:07 pm

He’s being as truthful as he knows how to be.

Kapow!

Hi Zelph! We don't see you around here enough.

alas wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:05 pm

So, I can’t accept that he didn’t know. And I don’t think the man is a purposeful liar. I can believe denial. Like I had clients as a social worker, who were being sexually abused by a father or older brother, and their mother walked in on them being abused. Saw the child naked on the bed, with naked father/brother on top of them in the act. And the mother walked right back out of the room and then when all hell broke lose because the girl went to the police, the mother swore that she had no idea it was going on. She just couldn’t not deal with reality, so she blinded herself to what she saw. That isn’t “not knowing” that is deep deep denial. So, Oaks blinded himself to what he had to see in reports, what he had to of heard. So, Oaks is in denial about what went on at BYU under his “not watching”. I am dying of not surprised.

I discussed this with a friend today. I wonder if he convinced himself in the moment about what the truth is. It seems ridiculous to lie about something that is so well recorded. (I wonder what they say when material is not as well known, but that's a different discussion.) I could imagine that he had strong incentive to say something that would get him out of an awkward situation for the few minutes he needed to end his time. He can spend the rest of his life only talking to friendly audiences.

alas wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:05 pm

So, if the dumb kids at the local high school were having conversations about it, how the hell did he not know? We covered electroshock therapy in my high school class my senior year, and the teacher said BYU was doing it. It was kinda common knowledge.

Both Wilkinson and Oaks had to authorize it and read the reviews. Oaks was engaging in the time-honored church tradition of Lying for the Lord.

blazerb wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 17, 2021 8:56 pm

It seems ridiculous to lie about something that is so well recorded. (I wonder what they say when material is not as well known, but that's a different discussion.) I could imagine that he had strong incentive to say something that would get him out of an awkward situation for the few minutes he needed to end his time. He can spend the rest of his life only talking to friendly audiences.

As we learned from a recent ex-POTUS, if you say what you want your devotees to believe, that becomes the truth. Anyone who opposes them is, by default, lying. As we have learned from politicians in general, "I don't recall," and "I wasn't aware of that" are two of the most useful phrases in human language. And as we learn from church leaders, some truths aren't useful. Church leaders, while not seeing themselves as liars, also do not see themselves as bound by conventional truth. We have seen many examples of this.

Hagoth wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 18, 2021 6:59 am

As we learned from a recent ex-POTUS, if you say what you want your devotees to believe, that becomes the truth. Anyone who opposes them is, by default, lying. As we have learned from politicians in general, "I don't recall," and "I wasn't aware of that" are two of the most useful phrases in human language. And as we learn from church leaders, some truths aren't useful. Church leaders, while not seeing themselves as liars, also do not see themselves as bound by conventional truth. We have seen many examples of this.

What can get me worked up is that I totally bought the standard of honesty set out by the church. "Woe be unto the liar . . ." and all that. The Miracle of Forgiveness is very clear that anything less than complete honesty is a lie. I remember the Truman Madsen lecture reported that JS said something about no liar getting into heaven. If I remember correctly, he threw shade on all of us who answered the temple recommend question about honesty, "I try." After all that, DHO gets to hold onto his "alternate facts" as that ex-POTUS's people termed them. I guess the 2nd anointing allows lying.

So, to the SCMC folks that are hopefully reading this, please tell your superiors that lies are not acceptable.

Hagoth wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 18, 2021 6:59 am

As we learned from a recent ex-POTUS, if you say what you want your devotees to believe, that becomes the truth. Anyone who opposes them is, by default, lying.

Oh, absolutely.

"If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan."

But this is probably a discussion best kept for another place and time.

Getting back to the great obfuscators in church leadership, I've been kind of curious about Mr. Ballard lately. He seems like such a thoughtful, credible, straight shooter. How could such a person even THINK of misrepresenting the truth? These are great men of integrity. I have a TBM Dil that literally worships the ground they walk on.

So I just did a very little research on Ballard and was really surprised to find this interesting tidbit from Wiki:

"In 1961, Ballard was the president of Keystone Securities Corporation in Salt Lake City. The Securities and Exchange Commission opened an investigation into Keystone in 1962 after accusations that Ballard and Keystone had violated the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and the Securities Act of 1933. The investigation centered around "manipulation and fraud."[13] The SEC completed its investigation in 1963. Keystone, with Ballard as the primary cause, was found to have violated the Securities Act of 1933 in the following charges: providing false statements to the SEC, and aiding and abetting Shasta Mineral and Chemical Company in making false statements that included misrepresenting the relationships of the Shasta officers with both Ballard and Keystone. The SEC revoked the broker-dealer registration of Keystone as a result."


Am I reading this wrong? Why would the Corp call someone to be a GA who has the shadow of being a liar and manipulator hanging over them? I'm actually surprised that Ballard escaped jail time. Or maybe they don't send people to jail for this sort of thing?

Anyway, my bubble is burst....

When I was still a TBM I wanted to like and respect Ballard. He seemed so believable and confident.

Grandfatherly even.

Palerider wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 18, 2021 9:26 am

Am I reading this wrong? Why would the Corp call someone to be a GA who has the shadow of being a liar and manipulator hanging over them?

Maybe you should ask Quentin Cook for an explanation?

Palerider wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 18, 2021 9:26 am

Hagoth wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 18, 2021 6:59 am

As we learned from a recent ex-POTUS, if you say what you want your devotees to believe, that becomes the truth. Anyone who opposes them is, by default, lying.

Oh, absolutely.

"If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan."

But this is probably a discussion best kept for another place and time.

Getting back to the great obfuscators in church leadership, I've been kind of curious about Mr. Ballard lately. He seems like such a thoughtful, credible, straight shooter. How could such a person even THINK of misrepresenting the truth? These are great men of integrity. I have a TBM Dil that literally worships the ground they walk on.

So I just did a very little research on Ballard and was really surprised to find this interesting tidbit from Wiki:

"In 1961, Ballard was the president of Keystone Securities Corporation in Salt Lake City. The Securities and Exchange Commission opened an investigation into Keystone in 1962 after accusations that Ballard and Keystone had violated the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and the Securities Act of 1933. The investigation centered around "manipulation and fraud."[13] The SEC completed its investigation in 1963. Keystone, with Ballard as the primary cause, was found to have violated the Securities Act of 1933 in the following charges: providing false statements to the SEC, and aiding and abetting Shasta Mineral and Chemical Company in making false statements that included misrepresenting the relationships of the Shasta officers with both Ballard and Keystone. The SEC revoked the broker-dealer registration of Keystone as a result."


Am I reading this wrong? Why would the Corp call someone to be a GA who has the shadow of being a liar and manipulator hanging over them? I'm actually surprised that Ballard escaped jail time. Or maybe they don't send people to jail for this sort of thing?

Anyway, my bubble is burst....

When I was still a TBM I wanted to like and respect Ballard. He seemed so believable and confident.

Grandfatherly even.

I try to give these guys some benefit of the doubt because I don’t see how they can possibly be such blatant liars and then you hit me with stuff like this. My mind is still sputtering, but, but, but

Hagoth wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 18, 2021 11:53 am

Palerider wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 18, 2021 9:26 am

Am I reading this wrong? Why would the Corp call someone to be a GA who has the shadow of being a liar and manipulator hanging over them?

Maybe you should ask Quentin Cook for an explanation?

Right!

alas wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 18, 2021 2:01 pm

I try to give these guys some benefit of the doubt because I don’t see how they can possibly be such blatant liars....

I know.

And what's worse are the implications of encouraging others to lie as well, as described above. How many GA's, member/employees at the COB are spiritually coerced into shading the truth because leadership has them on the hook??? Their livelihoods and membership (standing in the community) all depend on getting and staying in line.

Lately I've been doing a fairly deep dive into Mountain Meadows Massacre and I'm amazed that John D. Lee was able to say (in His book written 18 years later) that he opposed the Massacre every step of the way until he was forced into it by the consensus of his Mormon associates, and THEN he participated in it. This is so typical of people. I'd give Lee the benefit of a doubt because he sounds so SINCERE , but:
1. All his Mormon associates said he was an instigator. Incidentally, there is is compelling evidence that his associates and Church leaders colluded in making him the single scape goat, but that's a whole other post.
2. He was involved every step of the way, including the deception that led the Fancher party out of their defenses.
3. His book was written 18 years later, and gives us a prime example of how a person's memory can evolve. (Interesting: 18 years is the same period between the "First Vision" and the P of GP account of the First Vision.

I think we could say John D. Lee is an example of the "Pious Fraud" mentality. It appears he actually believed he was forced to be involved in the MMM.
BTW, I'm not saying he didn't have peer pressure, but that is a whole other post, also.

My final point: I think it's likely that Pres. Oaks believes the Electroshock therapy terminated before his BYU presidency. I think it's also very likely he will never admit he is wrong.

Hagoth wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 17, 2021 2:35 pm

Where's 60 Minutes when you need it?

Tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick

Just so everyone is clear.. electro shock therapy is often what people say when they mean electro convulsive therapy, or electro convulsive shock therapy, which is still a viable treatment for severe depression.

The controversial therapy that was conducted at BYU in the 70's and maybe as late as the early 80s was aversion therapy for homosexuality, that often, but not always, included small electrical shocks paired with homoerotic images. The idea was that pairing the noxious stimulus with the homoerotic image would cause a person to become averse to such images and thus eventually go straight. It's a behavioral therapy, and it obviously didn't work even a little bit. BYU didn't come up with this idea, but they definitely tried it out.
Early on, I think from about 1952 to about 68 or early 70s, homosexuality was considered a psych disorder in the US.

Behaviorism was big in the 70s and it does help explain a lot of human behavior, but obviously falls short. Many behavioral therapies work great, but aversion therapy does not. Well, at least it doesn't work to help change sexual orientation. Aversion therapy is most commonly used as a drug or alcohol treatment, like alcoholics taking antabuse, which is a medication that causes stomach aches and nausea if combined with alcohol. It's still a bit controversial.

Cnsl1 wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 20, 2021 9:11 am

The controversial therapy that was conducted at BYU in the 70's and maybe as late as the early 80s was aversion therapy for homosexuality, that often, but not always, included small electrical shocks paired with homoerotic images.

The latest Mormon Stories episode is very enlightening about this topic. One of the panel members went looking for the dissertation of the person conducting the sessions and found that it had been removed from university libraries and even the Library of Congress. After threatening to start legal action for removal of BYUs accreditation (hiding dissertations is a serious offense) he was able to get a copy. It confirmed that:

-electric aversion therapy was going on during Oaks' tenure at BYU.
-it was an approved PhD project.
-the head of the psychology department knew about and supported it, and even wrote the disclaimer that participants had to sign.
-nude photographs were used.
-a bonerometer sensor (pretty sure that's the correct name) was self-attached to the participant's penis.
-electrical shock was applied to the bicep.
-the toleration limit of the subject was measured to ensure that the pain could be dished out to the limits of their endurance.

After the dissertation was magically erased from existence the former department director was interviewed by FAIR and had changed details. In the later retelling there were no nude images used.

Conclusion: Dallin Oaks lied. He did not claim he was unaware of such activities; he categorically denied that they happened while was there. Pants on fire.