NOM

I could be mistaken, but I think they announced a settlement in WV last week. They tried to outspend the victims and keep it running, but really wanted to avoid a guilty verdict. Especially since everybody started paying attention in light of the march.

IT_Veteran wrote: ↑Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:37 am I could be mistaken, but I think they announced a settlement in WV last week. They tried to outspend the victims and keep it running, but really wanted to avoid a guilty verdict. Especially since everybody started paying attention in light of the march.

They did. It broke very quietly in the middle of the March/GC news so it didn't make many waves.

Horrible.

I keep having mixed feelings about it though. For an organization to do what will reduce harm to it is totally rational. "Someone is going to sue us for enabling her rape, what can we do to minimize the damage?" Give her a settlement including a gag order and minimize the settlement by showing that she doesn't have a chance in a trial. Rational. And ruthless. And beyond ruthless. And completely unethical and immoral.

The church enabled her abuse, her rape, then added their own abuse by collecting information suggesting she was to blame. Trying to prove that she was to blame. When the KNEW that it happened. And they did it by using their free access to people she counseled with in good faith. Those people, her former bishops and leaders, would always put the church first; there's no chance she has one of them on her side when church leaders or lawyers come knocking.

I wish the church would decide if it is a corporation or a church and own it and be it, but there is too much benefit in playing both sides. They make a crappy church and crappy corporation, the magic sauce is being both at once. Good churches don't screw people like this. Good corporations have real products.

This whole thing makes me furious and sick.

Linked wrote: ↑Tue Apr 03, 2018 9:57 am I wish the church would decide if it is a corporation or a church and own it and be it, but there is too much benefit in playing both sides. They make a crappy church and crappy corporation, the magic sauce is being both at once. Good churches don't screw people like this. Good corporations have real products.

This whole thing makes me furious and sick.

Same here.

Sometimes organizations have to protect themselves against frivolous claims, or false claims made by enemies, I get that. Then you need the $600/hr attack dog attorneys. But in situations like these, where there is obviously a problem and somebody [usually a church member] damaged and hurt, why can't senior church leadership step in and ask questions like these:

• How did this happen?
  How can we keep this from happening again?
  Who has been damaged?
  What resources (and love, compassion) can we bring to bear to heal those who are injured?

Unfortunately I don't ever see it happening. The LDS church has institutionally objectified women for so long it will take decades to reverse the mind-set. After all, how can you abuse property, right?