NOM

James Huntsman, son of John Huntsman Sr. is suing LDSinc. for $5 million for miss-use of tithing. Says that he was told tithing was being used for charitable purposes, but instead was used for commercial ventures, and that info is coming from the Ensign Peak Investors scandal.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion ... story.html

At some point one of these suits will stick. If it was anything other than religion, the fraudulent company in question would be settling suits, going out of business or hopefully changing their ways. But for some reason in this country you can lie and steal in the name of freedom of religion.

Bear with me here - remember the ACA debate? Is it a tax, is it not a tax? In the end the SCOTUS upheld the law because congress has the power to tax. (I don't want to debate ACA) This isn't about speech, it's about fraud. The Mormon church makes testable claims (about history and/or charitable giving), requires its members to pay, but is dishonest about those claims. We don't need the courts to rule on the truthfulness of the religion, we need the courts to define what a charitable organization is. Or in other words, how much does an org need to give back to society to earn the tax breaks it already gets because it claims to give back to society. It's a tax law problem, not a speech problem.

I'm probably out of my depth, but it seems there is ground in between free speech and tax breaks that needs to be addressed.

Was it Huntsman's job to find out if the LDS Church was actually using his tithing for what they claimed? They claimed they were not using tithing funds for real estate ventures when they actually were. Even the Quorum of the Twelve had no knowledge of that huge investment fund. The mafia could take lessons from LDS secrecy.

I agree that sooner or later, one of these lawsuits will stick. This one, I believe has a small chance. 1) federal court case, 2) not in Utah, but California. 3) probably won’t have a BYU alum as the judge. At some point, the missing scale in the dragon’s armor will be discovered and then a blast of lawsuits will follow.

There's a sentence on the tithing slip that says the church can use donations however it wants. In that light, I'm not optimistic for the success of this lawsuit.

LSOF wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 25, 2021 12:25 pm

There's a sentence on the tithing slip that says the church can use donations however it wants. In that light, I'm not optimistic for the success of this lawsuit.

They were being as transparent as they know how to be. I think that's the slithery wording they like to use.

2bizE wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 25, 2021 11:50 am

I agree that sooner or later, one of these lawsuits will stick. This one, I believe has a small chance. 1) federal court case, 2) not in Utah, but California. 3) probably won’t have a BYU alum as the judge. At some point, the missing scale in the dragon’s armor will be discovered and then a blast of lawsuits will follow.

That statement was added fairly recently.

Hopefully that plays to Mr. Huntsman's favor.

I hope that one of these lawsuits will stick and that hundreds of them will follow. If the church is found to have engaged in fraudulent deception to collect tithing, then I hope that Huntsman's lawsuit to have his tithing returned will be followed up by hundreds of other lawsuits. This cannot happen fast enough.

Moshka wrote:Even the Quorum of the Twelve had no knowledge of that huge investment fund. The mafia could take lessons from LDS secrecy.

Apparently even the left hand knoweth not what the left hand doeth.

I've always been of the belief that the scientific method doesn't go far enough. More than just double blinding, we need to start triple blinding our research- no one should have any idea what's going on. Only that way can we truly eliminate bias.

moksha wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 24, 2021 6:58 pm

They claimed they were not using tithing funds for real estate ventures when they actually were. Even the Quorum of the Twelve had no knowledge of that huge investment fund. The mafia could take lessons from LDS secrecy.

I highly doubt the Q15 didn't know how big the fund is. The church, (that is leadership) watches their money like a hawk. Do they really expect us to believe they were asleep at the wheel?

Palerider wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 14, 2021 6:49 pm

I highly doubt the Q15 didn't know how big the fund is. The church, (that is leadership) watches their money like a hawk. Do they really expect us to believe they were asleep at the wheel?

That is what the Tribune reported. Only six people knew, the Church President (CEO), the Church Presiding Bishop (CFO), his assistant, and a couple of the Ensign Peak managers. The rest maintained their Mushroomhood by being kept in the dark. When you set about hiding vast sums of money, you want it to be as secret as possible.

moksha wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 14, 2021 10:37 pm

Palerider wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 14, 2021 6:49 pm

I highly doubt the Q15 didn't know how big the fund is. The church, (that is leadership) watches their money like a hawk. Do they really expect us to believe they were asleep at the wheel?

That is what the Tribune reported. Only six people knew, the Church President (CEO), the Church Presiding Bishop (CFO), his assistant, and a couple of the Ensign Peak managers. The rest maintained their Mushroomhood by being kept in the dark. When you set about hiding vast sums of money, you want it to be as secret as possible.

I thought they said the presiding first presidency and the presiding bishopric knew.

There was some issue with BKP not knowing about the funds and being pissed about it cuz the fund managers wouldn't tell him.

moksha wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 14, 2021 10:37 pm

Palerider wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 14, 2021 6:49 pm

I highly doubt the Q15 didn't know how big the fund is. The church, (that is leadership) watches their money like a hawk. Do they really expect us to believe they were asleep at the wheel?

That is what the Tribune reported. Only six people knew, the Church President (CEO), the Church Presiding Bishop (CFO), his assistant, and a couple of the Ensign Peak managers. The rest maintained their Mushroomhood by being kept in the dark. When you set about hiding vast sums of money, you want it to be as secret as possible.

I thought the First presidency and the presiding bishopric knew. I remember hearing a story about BKP being pissed that he couldn't know, he being the president of the 12 at the time he wanted to know about the funds.

moksha wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 14, 2021 10:37 pm

When you set about hiding vast sums of money, you want it to be as secret as possible.

Are they hiding Huge Tracts Of Land™ also?