NOM

https://invisiblescubit.wordpress.com/2 ... -response/

The 4th clause is precious:

I acknowledge and agree that my participation in the disciplinary council is conditioned on this Agreement and that I will not be allowed to be present at the council if I do not sign this Acknowledgment and Agreement.

I wonder if Jesus had to sign a similar agreement before he was "allowed to be present" at his scourging.

I love this statement from his response:

I am not afraid of any of the contents of this court being revealed to the world. Are you afraid of how the church would look if the proceedings were shared to the world?

Bizarre is the first thing that comes to mind.

It is so interesting that the NDA has become the ensign to the nations regarding courts of love. They can't proceed without this important document to ensure the shaming (which surely will ensue) is not recorded to allow objective review. I trust there will be a stake secretary there taking careful notes so they can make accurate notations on Brother Sams membership record. I wonder if there is a possibility of a civil case where these notes could be subpoenaed and made public?

If my memory serves me correctly, there is the option to appeal any decision to higher authority, until eventually, the case will be seen by the first presidency. Correct me if Im mistaken here. This might serve Sam's purpose to eventually get a face to face with a GA.

I hope he doesn't suffer too much at the hands of those who profess to love him and his family.

Farce is the last thing that comes to mind.

Sam also needs to ask to see the Sacred Kangaroo Confidentiality Agreement™ that has been signed be every other person in the room.


Some of his replies seem to me that he has had it with the LDS/Mormon corporate clowns. I, for one, hope he signs their worthless agreement, records the idiocay, and publishes it for the world. His track record shows that he won't, so my hopes are likely in vain.

Honestly, the LDS/Mormon leadership is no better than the Catholic leadership, protecting and hiding predators for way too long.

No Tof wrote: ↑Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:14 am If my memory serves me correctly, there is the option to appeal any decision to higher authority, until eventually, the case will be seen by the first presidency. Correct me if Im mistaken here.

Correct - at least in theory. What is also bizarre to me is that they call such proceedings, 'sacred'.

NDA's.... Reason #7,247 why Mormons are weird.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Sat Sep 08, 2018 8:36 pm The 4th clause is precious:

I acknowledge and agree that my participation in the disciplinary council is conditioned on this Agreement and that I will not be allowed to be present at the council if I do not sign this Acknowledgment and Agreement.

I wonder if Jesus had to sign a similar agreement before he was "allowed to be present" at his scourging.

The Romans were brutal, but they were at least honest about the punishments. The Roman governor definitely wanted everyone to know what will routinely happen to political agitators. Romans were quite open about how they wanted conquered people to behave.

The LDS church, on the other hand, only has authority over you if you allow it. Sam is graciously granting them that authority and the church is embarrassed that anyone is paying attention to him.

In breaking news, the final result on Sam was announced and it's a big sad trombone of a result. No pronouncement will be handed down at this time leaving Sam's eternal covenants intact. It's not a huge surprise and does drag out the drama like too little butter spread across too much bread.

wtfluff wrote: ↑Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:47 amSome of his replies seem to me that he has had it with the LDS/Mormon corporate clowns. I, for one, hope he signs their worthless agreement, records the idiocay, and publishes it for the world. His track record shows that he won't, so my hopes are likely in vain.

He posted the statements he and his wife read. Didn't record anything, but someone calling himself "Alma" recorded some of what the sp said. I didn't listen to it, so don't know what it said, but New Name Noah posted it on YouTube.

Do you think someone in the room recorded it or was there some type of eavesdropping device used from outside the room.

From what I have heard, my guess is it was someone in the room, maybe a high council member. It sounded like the mic was very close to a person, considering a few places the talking get drowned out by noise close to the mic. I recording made a distance from the people would not have had that kind of interference.