posted
Dagonee, I just don't agree right now that they did what they are accused of at this point. Guess it goes back to my belief that trial by publicity comes close to going against the rights of the accused. I think the LDS Church is, without trying to cover up any complicity and acting within the strictures of modern media, doing some serious PR work. So, yes, I guess I do disagree with the assessment.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think trial by publicity is staggeringly unfair. I'm glad the names of the missionaries haven't been released.
I would like to know what actually happened. I don't think we do. What charges may be appropriate depends on what actually happened.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Dagonee, I just don't agree right now that they did what they are accused of at this point.
They certainly did some of it. The only real unknown is whether they broke the statue.
Regardless of whether they broke the statue, though, they were still staggeringly disrespectful. I'm sad that you don't see this, although not particularly surprised.
quote:Guess it goes back to my belief that trial by publicity comes close to going against the rights of the accused.
This isn't trial by publicity. This is publicity about bad actions that were posted on the world wide web for all to see, publicity about the apology of an organization taking responsibility for people it sends out into the field, and publicity about an investigation into possible criminal acts.
Note the last part again: this is an investigation. The parish council did not call for punishment, but for an investigation. The men have not been charged - rather, possible charges have been listed. All of this is appropriate for public reporting.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just want to say that I agree with what you said, Dagonee. We believe in being subject to the laws of the land. If those missionaries broke the law, then there's no reason why they shouldn't be charged and tried. Facing the consequences of your actions is part of the repentance process.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Regardless of whether they broke the statue, though, they were still staggeringly disrespectful. I'm sad that you don't see this, although not particularly surprised."
I have NOT once said they were innocent. The very opposite in fact. I am just questioning the legalities and force of conviction of their guilt.
"This isn't trial by publicity. This is publicity about bad actions . . ."
Is there a difference? Again, it comes down to what one thinks of the media I suppose. It would be nice if the media brought up a few questions themselves (that they often do) rather than how it has currently been reported.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: Dagonee, I just don't agree right now that they did what they are accused of at this point. Guess it goes back to my belief that trial by publicity comes close to going against the rights of the accused. I think the LDS Church is, without trying to cover up any complicity and acting within the strictures of modern media, doing some serious PR work. So, yes, I guess I do disagree with the assessment.
So you say that there are too many questions that haven't been answered, and then you say that you don't think they did it? I really don't get how your prejudgement is really that different from the prejudgements you are complaining about.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jon Boy, I guess I mean legalities rather than mere actions. In other words, I am not denying that they did some things that were disrespectful. I am just wondering if it is to a seriousness needing church action or especially legal action. It seems obvious to me that news reports and people's oppinions are in the affirmative.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Even if they did do the vandalism, I think what they are facing is going to make repentance (making them "better citizens") almost impossible.
What is the definition of repentance that you are using here? This sentence doesn't really make sense to me based on the definition I use.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I have NOT once said they were innocent. The very opposite in fact. I am just questioning the legalities and force of conviction of their guilt.
I didn't say you did. You said you disagreed with the LDS Church's assessment, which was that what was done was staggeringly disrespectful. If you meant some other assessment, I apologize for the confusion.
quote:Is there a difference? Again, it comes down to what one thinks of the media I suppose. It would be nice if the media brought up a few questions themselves (that they often do) rather than how it has currently been reported.
Can you point to a section of a news article on this topic that states things as fact that are still questionable? All of the ones I've read make it clear that the investigation continues and its not known if the missionaries harmed the statue.
quote:I just want to say that I agree with what you said, Dagonee. We believe in being subject to the laws of the land. If those missionaries broke the law, then there's no reason why they shouldn't be charged and tried. Facing the consequences of your actions is part of the repentance process.
Thanks. If I had to summarize, my Catholic self says that the Church should not seek criminal charges as a public expression of forgiveness. My would-be-prosecutor self says that an investigation is appropriate, as are charges if the actions of the missionaries amount to the elements of one or more crimes.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll add here that I'm in fully agreement with everything Dagonee has said on this issue.
As a Latter Day Saint, I'm particularly distressed by the behavior of these young men. Those who serve as missionaries need to fully understand that they are full time representatives of not only our Church but also our Lord and Savior. As such, when they do something stupid, disrespectful and criminal they bring shame not only on themselves but also on their church and their God. This is a very serious thing and all Missionaries need to understand that.
As I understand the principle of repentance, accepting the consequences of ones actions, even if those consequences mean jail time or loss of ones standing in the church, doesn't make repentance harder -- it is an absolutely essential part of repentance.
Forgiveness is a wonderful thing, but it is always the prerogative of those who were sinned against and not a right owed the transgressor. It is the duty of transgressors to seek restitution for crimes and to accept any associated punishments.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Does this quote from the apology strike a (minor) wrong note with anyone else?
quote:I should have known better because I have seen many of the same types of blasphemies made against my own church and I have been appalled
edit:
quote:As I understand the principle of repentance, accepting the consequences of ones actions, even if those consequences mean jail time or loss of ones standing in the church, doesn't make repentance harder -- it is an absolutely essential part of repentance.
Forgiveness is a wonderful thing, but it is always the prerogative of those who were sinned against and not a right owed the transgressor. It is the duty of transgressors to seek restitution for crimes and to accept any associated punishments.
That's pretty much how I see repentance too.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
Squick, it depends on how it's meant (or interpreted). It can be read as increasing the amount of culpability being assumed by the apologizer based on his direct knowledge of the effects of such acts, and in reading it that way, it seems appropriate.
What was the wrong note it struck with you?
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: I'm only worrying about the boys and their futures. That should matter more than anything to everyone. Human life is more important than ANY statue. Don't dare say otherwise! I worry for them. The town will eventually heal. These boys may pay for more than they took.
Why is human life on the line? I'm sure these people mean the waste of life that would occur with incarceration, but if they are so worried about that, they need to get out volunteering with some of the distressed minorities around them.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dag, I'm not completely sure. It just sounded wrong. The part about acts being taken against LDS doesn't feel like it belongs there at all.
I'm not sure if it's because it sounds like a ploy for sympathy/preliminaries to playing the victim or because the reason he should have known better has nothing to do with what has been done to his church, but rather a basic respect for other people or something else. The inclusion of that in that way just strikes me wrongly.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess I can see that, that one shouldn't need to have been a victim to know not to harm others.
P.S. I can't actually think of an instance of similar blasphemy except for that preacher from another church who gets some of the priesthood garments to do strange things to every conference. And while that doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy, I kind of take it in stride as part of our peculiarity.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"If I had to summarize, my Catholic self says that the Church should not seek criminal charges as a public expression of forgiveness."
My point is that I agree with this. However, the church did vote to pursue criminal charges. My sympathies were toward the church and far less on the missionaries until the vote. If the criminal charges were simply a matter of secular pursuit I would still have far more sympathies with the church than the missionaries. However, the vote and the LDS Church actions and the legal charges and finally the public scrutiny has tipped the scale for me toward the missionaries.
I know what I am about to say is going to boil some blood, but this has become a religious war by proxy. There is repentance by restitution that everyone here is lauding so strongly. For me at this point what is happening to the missionaries is feeling too close to retribution and vengance.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Did the perpetrators offer repentance and restitution? Or did it become necessary to press charges in order to get the situation investigated?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
No charges have been pressed - it's being investigated for possible criminal prosecution at the request of the Church.
It seems that once the incident became public, the LDS responded pretty darn quickly, and the news accounts don't seem to suggest that any legal maneuvering was made to spur that response.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thinking about it, I don't think I would have had any problem if he had talked about how reflecting on how it would (and does) feel when people attack his religion made he realize the extent of what he did.
I changed the context a little to get "I'm sorry that I beat up John. I should have know better because there was this kid who used to bully me in 3rd grade." sounds self-centered and deflective to me. It doesn't sound as if the person is really facing up to what they did and why it was wrong.
I think it is really the deflective aspect that feels wrong to me.
That's not to say that a more charitable interpretation isn't more correct, just how it struck me on first reading.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Did the perpetrators offer repentance and restitution?"
I don't think they did. That is why I was at first against the missionaries for what they did.
"Or did it become necessary to press charges in order to get the situation investigated?"
If this is the case then there are two problems. First, the incompetance and lack of respect for the church by law enforcement. Second, the church feeling they needed to take some actions by using the arm of the state.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I changed the context a little to get "I'm sorry that I beat up John. I should have know better because there was this kid who used to bully me in 3rd grade." sounds self-centered and deflective to me. It doesn't sound as if the person is really facing up to what they did and why it was wrong.
I think it is really the deflective aspect that feels wrong to me.
That's a plausible interpretation. I couldn't articulate it that well, but it matches what I alluded to in noting it depended on how that sentence was meant.
It's also why I likely wouldn't include such a sentence in an apology I wrote. However, I know there are lots of people who tend to communicate more metaphorically than I am generally comfortable doing. Alluding to a similar situation is seen as a way of demonstrating that one really understands.
There are enough people that do that and mean well in doing so that I'll adopt the charitable interpretation.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Go read the comments at the newspapers where this was reported. Self flagulation by the Mormons and accusitory finger pointing by the non-Mormons. I am not just talking about what has been said at the "Hatrack" bubble.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: There is repentance by restitution that everyone here is lauding so strongly. For me at this point what is happening to the missionaries is feeling too close to retribution and vengance.
Am I missing something? What exactly is going on here that goes beyond legal action?
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I must admit that once I got over the initial shock and outrage, I had more of a sanguine view of what happened and my belief was that they probably hadn't done any actual vandalism and was it really any worse than the missionaries in my mission who bought priests garb and wore it for Halloween (which I was appalled by but wouldn't have made a huge Internet incident out of).
But then I began to think about it more. And these troubling aspects remain:
They posted the photos.
And one of the photo captions suggests that they knocked the head (perhaps accidently, perhaps not) off the statue.
And then I got more information:
According to some of the comments in the Bloggernacle*, this is a poorer area of Colorado that is mainly white Mormon and Hispanic Catholic. The two sides have a history of tension.
This wasn't just a couple of missionaries serving in a big city who, for example, wander into a synagogue or cathedral while they're out tracting and take some stupid touristy pictures that could possibly offend but not to the level of desecration that this was.
The war was already going on. And so it becomes much more difficult to see this as lacking any sort of maliciousness or intent to offend. And that makes a huge difference, imo.
*The LDS sector of the blogosphere
Posts: 3423 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jon Boy, I thought I made a pretty good general list from the post you quoted.
Zalmoxis, if that is the case then that might tip my feelings away from the missionaries again, but I have my doubts. Are the missionaries from that place? Missionaries are often not part of the community they serve and I find it hard to believe they would have been part of the cultural war to that extent.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Second, the church feeling they needed to take some actions by using the arm of the state.
Why is this a problem? It's not like the we've never sought reparations through the law, and I'm pretty sure it was all for property since folks didn't really put a price on suffering and lost life back then.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Perhaps "press charges" is the wrong term. Did the Church have to bring the police into the situation in order to get the perpetrators to pay for whatever damage they had done? Have the missionaries made restitution? Did they admit to what was done? Do they repent? If so, I would hope the matter would be closed. If not, then involving the police seems reasonable.
If little Tommy breaks my window and comes to me to own up and offer to pay for it, I'm not going to sic the cops on him. If we have to track down an unrepentant Tommy and get a judge to make him pay for the window, that's another story.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I know what I am about to say is going to boil some blood, but this has become a religious war by proxy.
Get off yourself, dude.
Agreed.
The Boxer Rebellion? That's a religious war triggered by missionaries.
This? This is small potatoes. Property damage and vandalism mostly, the Catholic church's response (and those on Hatrack) seems to be perfectly reasonable so far, even if they do press charges.
Let's not exaggerate the smallest of incidents into a religious war, lest we forget exactly how gruesome that can really get.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Occassional, I think you're being a bit obtuse. As far as I can tell reading the article, no charges have been filed, and the vote hadn't even taken place yet.
Do you disagree that that is what has happened (so far)? Or do you have an update?
quote:Let's not exaggerate the smallest of incidents into a religious war, lest we forget exactly how gruesome that can really get.
Amen!
Occasional, You seem to be jumping to all kinds of conclusion about what actually happened and will happen. Wait for the facts to come forward in the investigation and to see what punishments are actually meted out by either the legal system or the LDS Church before you get yourself all worked up about it.
At this point, the actions taken both by the Catholic Church (seeking an investigation and possible criminal charges) and the LDS Church (public apology and promise to investigate and possibly punish) are reasonable and warranted.
While there is the potential for unfairness towards the missionaries, it just hasn't happened yet and it seems silly to get your undies in a bunch over something that may not ever happen.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: If this is the case then there are two problems. First, the incompetance and lack of respect for the church by law enforcement. Second, the church feeling they needed to take some actions by using the arm of the state.
How has law enforcement disrespected the church? Law enforcement has legitimate reasons for getting involved in this case. I'm not saying that I would advocate pressing charges against the offenders but I understand why the police may choose to do so. The offenders committed a crime and their actions cost police time and money. It's a similar situation with high school. School's are given discretion as to whether or not to report a fight to the police but have no such power when it comes to a kid pulling the fire alarm.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Squicky, that line in the apology struck me the same way. I thought it was a way of saying "Y'know, people do this stuff to Mormons all the time." I almost posted about it as well, but decided to give the guy the benefit of the doubt--especially because I am one of those people Dagonee mentioned who tends to allude to similar situations to indicate understanding.
Posts: 3149 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Threads, I am getting tired of people reading into things what I haven't said. My point was that if what I quoted was correct, then the police were not doing their job if it took pressure or request by the church to investigate vandalism. Then again, maybe Dagonee can enlighten me if the police had any choice in the matter and had to wait for consent by the church for such an investigation.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Occasional, I believe it is standard procedure for police to wait for a request from the injured party before investigating property crimes. At least in my experience, police don't investigate theft or vandalism unless the property owner reports the crime and requests and investigation or they happen to come across the crime while its in progress.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Then again, maybe Dagonee can enlighten me if the police had any choice in the matter and had to wait for consent by the church for such an investigation.
Well, they needed to be informed of it somehow before investigating. In practice, few investigations for minor crimes like this occur absent the consent of the victim. But it's not needed - both investigation and prosecution can proceed in the face of the victim not wanting them to. In the most extreme case, the victim can be subpoenaed and forced to testify.
I have prosecuted domestic violence in the face of an uncooperative victim. It's not easy, but I think it's necessary.
In this case, I can't think of a compelling reason to proceed without the Church's agreement.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rabbit, if what I predict (and assumed had already happened) does happen, can I get upset? I personally don't see any other direction this could go other than where it is already pointing. If it doesn't then I can feel relief and properly humbled.
"minor crimes like this"
That is kind of my point of contention. If it is a minor crime, why are so many treating the missionaries like major criminals? You know, lay down the law. Throw the book at them. That kind of attitude I am feeling has been expressed.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:That is kind of my point of contention. If it is a minor crime, why are so many treating the missionaries like major criminals? You know, lay down the law. Throw the book at them. That kind of attitude I am feeling has been expressed.
Major criminals - murderers, rapists, etc. - have a much heavier book thrown at them. That doesn't mean that the book associated with this crime shouldn't be thrown at them.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think a little of the "attitude" you sense is probably the contempt that people tend to feel for stupid criminals. Like the kind that post pictures of themselves committing a crime on the internet.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I have prosecuted domestic violence in the face of an uncooperative victim. It's not easy, but I think it's necessary.
Dag, Out of curiousity, I would consider violent crimes in a different category than property crimes but I'm not sure why? Is there any legal precedence for that? Can you think of any cases where you or other prosecutors would prosecute theft or vandalism of private property if the victim did not request it?
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: Rabbit, if what I predict (and assumed had already happened) does happen, can I get upset? I personally don't see any other direction this could go other than where it is already pointing. If it doesn't then I can feel relief and properly humbled.
As I understand it, you were thought criminal charges had already been brought against these young men. I still can't understand why you find that so outrageous. There is sufficient evidence to suspect that these young men are guilty of several crimes and I see no reason they should be considered above the law. So no, I don't think you would be justified in being upset solely because charges are brought against these young men.
If these young men go to court and receive a sentence that is disproportionate relative to their crime and exceeds sentence commonly given to people who vandalize holy sites -- then you'd be justified in your anger. But I see that as both highly unlikely and a long way off.
I'm curious -- what direction do you see this inevitably heading? I can see a large number of possibilities and really don't have a clue what you alluding to.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
The man quoted in the meeting as saying "turning the other cheek" means no revenge, but it's good to file charges for accountability, is missing something. The part of the Epistles that says believers shouldn't take each other to court, but resolve disputes among themselves instead. That's what I think should be done.
Posts: 544 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dkw: ... Like the kind that post pictures of themselves committing a crime on the internet.
Technically, Photobucket (from a cursory reading of the rules) does support private accounts protected by a password. On the other hand, they did go out of their way to caption the photos which seems to hint that they intended to distribute (or allow viewing) of the photos beyond their small group of three (why caption photos for yourself). That plus the fact that they got caught in the first place leaves open the possibility that they were public.
The optimist in me hopes that one of their friends or associates (that they mis-judged to be appreciative of this sort of thing) got an invitation to view the photos privately and then blew the whistle on them.
How long were the photos up? Did anyone come across details as to how they were discovered in the first place?
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
"'m curious -- what direction do you see this inevitably heading? I can see a large number of possibilities and really don't have a clue what you alluding to"
I think I have more than hinted at the direction this could go; religious war. Mormons trying to apologize for the stupidity of a few with many others using them as an example of how secretly evil Mormons are. The missionaries just become proxy for the larger battles.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Eh. Even a huge scandal with several Catholic priests abusing boys didn't manage to start anything approximating a religious war. A couple goofball Mormon missionaries isn't going to do much.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow, if that's your definition of war, what do you call conflicts where people actually die? What you describe is more on the level of snippy high school cliques. Not to mention the fact that Sangre de Christo really seems sadder than vindictive about all this.
Posts: 2849 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
