Excommunication Appeal

March sign keep me safe

Today, I appealed my excommunication from the Mormon Church. 

Dear President Nelson, President Oaks and President Eyring,

As you should know by now, the president of the Houston Texas South Stake recently called a disciplinary council to consider the status of my membership.  On September 12, the verdict of excommunication was delivered.

The purpose of this letter is to present my appeal.

First, my stake president.  He’s a good man, a friend.  An important reason for my appeal is in consideration of my stake president’s welfare.  If I don’t appeal, he will go down in history as the man who excommunicated the bishop who stood up to protect children.  The verdict was made by him and only by him.  Eventually, our interview policies will change.   In the interim, when cases come forward of abuse, suicide and other serious consequences resulting from our dangerous protocol, my sensitive stake president could very well take it hard.  He may hold himself accountable for abuse happening all around the world.  That’s not fair.  But the way it stands, he is all alone in responsibility for the excommunication.

With this appeal, you the First Presidency, will remove a huge burden from his shoulders.  Whatever your decision, ownership of the verdict will be transferred to you.  Whatever the consequences, they will be on your heads, not his.

Two charges were leveled against me.

  1. Encouraged others to vote opposed to Church leaders.

I have made a temple covenant to obey the law of God.  Part of that law is the law of common consent.  To me common consent is one of the most gorgeous principles of the latter-day restoration.  You should know it well.  Let me recap.

The Doctrine and Covenants contain the foundational revelations contingent with the restoration.  Common Consent is referenced several times in very plain language.  Here’s one.

D&C 28:13 states, “For all things must be done in order, and by common consent in the church.”

This law is also taught in the Bible and the Book of Mormon.

Common consent is further elucidated by this doctrinal statement found on lds.org:

“Not only are Church officers sustained by common consent, but this same principle operates for policies, major decisions, acceptance of new scripture, and other things that affect the lives of the Saints (see D&C 26:2).”

Under sworn oath to the United States Congress, President Joseph F. Smith explained how common consent is supposed to work in the church.  Following is an excerpt of President Smith’s testimony as he is questioned by members of the Committee on Privileges and Elections.  The Mr. Smith referenced below is President Joseph F. Smith, head of the Mormon Church at the time.

Mr TAYLER:  What is the method in which a revelation is received and becomes binding upon the people?

Mr SMITH:  I will say this, Mr. Chairman, that no revelation given through the head of the church ever becomes binding and authoritative upon the members of the church until it has been presented to the church and accepted by them. (Note: the interview policies of our youth have never been presented to the church nor accepted by them.)

Mr WORTHINGTON:  What do you mean by being presented to the church?

Mr SMITH:  Presented in conference.

Mr TAYLER:  Do you mean by that that the church in conference may say to you “We deny that God has told you to tell us this?”

Mr SMITH:  Yes, sir, they can.  And it is not binding upon them as members of the church until they accept it.

Senator OVERMAN:  Does it require a majority to accept or must it be the unanimous voice?

Mr SMITH:  A majority.

Mr TAYLER:  Then if you had a revelation and presented it to your people, all who did not accept it would thereby be unchurched?

Mr SMITH:  Not necessarily.  Our people are given the largest possible latitude for their convictions, and if a man rejects a message that I may give to him but is still moral and believes in the main principles of the gospel and desires to continue in his membership in the church, he is permitted to remain and he is not unchurched.  It is only those who on rejecting a revelation rebel against the church and withdraw from the church at their own volition. (Note:  I am still moral and believe in the main principles of the gospel.  I have not withdrawn from the church on my own volition.)

Mr SMITH:  I should like to say to the honorable gentlemen that the members of the Mormon Church are among the freest and most independent people of all the Christian denominations.  They are not all united on every principle.  Every man is entitled to his own opinion and his own views and his own conceptions of right and wrong so long as they do not come in conflict with the standard principles of the church.  (Note:  I love the statement that Mormons are among the freest of Christian denominations.  Excommunicating me sends a strong message that our Church is among the most repressive of Christian denominations.  I do not come in conflict with the standard principles of the church.  I stand as a witness in support of our core principles.  However, I do stand as a witness against a policy.  One that is damaging our children.  And a policy that has never been presented to the church in the approval process that President Smith is defending to the United States Congress)

If a man assumes to deny God and to become an infidel we withdraw fellowship from him.  If a man commits adultery we withdraw fellowship from him.  If men steal or lie or bear false witness against their neighbors or violate the cardinal principles of the Gospel, we withdraw our fellowship.  The church withdraws its fellowship from that man and he ceases to be a member of the church.  But so long as a man or a woman is honest and virtuous and believes in God and has a little faith in the church organization, we nurture and aid that person to continue faithfully as a member of the church, though he may not believe all that is revealed.  (Note: According to a prophet’s sworn testimony, I do not qualify for excommunication.)

This ends the quotes I’ll share from President Joseph F. Smith.

According to the law of common consent, members of the Church of Jesus Christ have the right and privilege to vote as their conscience dictates without punishment.  Nowhere are we constrained from free speech.  In order to exercise true consent, discussion should be encouraged and fostered.  Including, making suggestions and recommendations to other members.

The charge that I’ve encouraged others to vote opposed to Church leaders is nonsensical on its face.

  • In 1978 when the lifting of the racial ban was presented for a vote, what types of discussion were allowed? Was it ok for a member to encourage others to vote in approval?  If so, was it also ok for someone opposed to voice their opinion and encourage others to vote in disapproval?  Common consent is a farce if those who are voting can only discuss and make suggestions when they agree with what is being presented.  Otherwise it’s a dictatorial system that flies in the face of the beauty of Christ’s injunction that all things MUST be done by common consent.
  • Encouraged others to vote opposed to Church leaders? My encouragement has been for people to vote how they feel.  If they approve…vote to sustain.  If they disapprove…vote to oppose.  My recommendation for members is to embrace common consent.  I encourage all to live up to their temple covenant of obeying the law of God, which includes the law of common consent.
  1. Organized more than one public “action” that expressed opposition to the Church or its leaders.

This charge represents an uninformed interpretation.  I have never organized actions to express opposition to the Church or its leaders.  This is ridiculous.  Every event was organized to express opposition to a POLICY.  Not to a doctrine.  Not to core principles.  Not to our theology.  I am not opposed to the church.  Likewise I am not opposed to its leaders.  In fact, I’m the biggest supporter of my Church that I know.

If you care about something you fight for it.  If you love something you don’t tolerate what might destroy it.  You are passionate to nurture and make it better.  I don’t know of anyone who is fighting for our Church with more vigor than I am.

On the other hand, if I didn’t care, I’d ignore the Church’s deadly flaws.  I’d turn a blind eye to its faults.  Or I would simply desert it and walk away.  By my actions, it should be plainly evident that am speaking up FOR my church and not against it.

At the council, for 15 minutes the stake president presented his evidence against me.  Most of it was taken from my blog publications.  Much was taken out of context.  I believe that I’ve more than adequately addressed the evidence against me by addressing the two charges above.

However, there was one citation from the Deseret News that was presented as evidence.  Tad Walsh wrote that I was encouraging members to leave the church.  That’s a lie.  Tad either made-up the quote out of whole cloth or he misheard.  Nowhere have I told people that they should leave the church.  You won’t find it quoted by any other news outlets.  It’s not on my blog.  Nor can it be found in any of the multitude of videos that I’ve published.

Let’s work together to make our Church better, especially for our children.  I firmly believe that you have already received the revelation to eliminate one-on-one interviews and sexual questions to our children and youth.  Several factors point in that direction.

For example, on July 27th, I received a phone call from Gifford Nielson, a member of the 1st Quorum of the Seventy.  My 23 day fast had a planned start time of 7pm that evening.  He called me early in the afternoon.  Giff is a good friend and we had a great chat that lasted about 1 ½ hours.  The main thrust of his call was to find a way to avert the hunger strike.  We were not able to find an accommodation that was agreeable to both of us.  His final offer was this, “Sam, if the apostles provided you with a letter stating that they are working on making changes, would you call off your action?”

I can’t see Giff being dishonest or disingenuous.  He would have only offered a letter stating changes were being worked on if in fact they were really being worked on.  I listened to every talk during the 8 hours of last Sunday’s General Conference.  My hopes were high that the changes to which Elder Nielsen had alluded would be included in the major announcements all of us were anticipating.

My encouragement to you, dear First Presidency, is to release the changes now.  Don’t wait until April’s conference to offer our children the full protections that they deserve.

This conference was historic.  The change to a 2 hour schedule has been received with relish.  When you announce God’s new protections for children, it will be received with much more than relish.  You will go down in history as wise and beloved leaders.  Members, bishoprics and children will embrace the new policies without reservation.  They will rejoice.  Those outside the Church will be impressed.  They will witness the Church of Jesus Christ proactively putting on a strong protective mantle over our little ones.

Contrast this to what happens if you allow this excommunication to stand.  The Church and its leaders will be viewed with revulsion by many outside the church.   People will not respond well when they discover how we treat our children and what we do to members who speak up to protect them.

Do the right thing.  Be on the right side of history.  Reverse this excommunication.

Warm regards,

Sam Young

109 thoughts on “Excommunication Appeal

    1. Ah. So in your mind, everyone has to post a “pic,” right? That’s very telling. You’re obsessed with “pics” of others. Is it sexual for you?

      I had no “abrasive tone” until you came forward with one. I’ve tried explaining this to you.

      There was no “opportunity,” because I have no opinion one way or the other about the whole kids thing, because KIDS HAVE NEVER BEEN ABUSED in the Church. By anyone. Ever. To say to the contrary is a lie. THAT’S why I hate Sam. He’s making all sorts of wacky claims, claims that I say are designed to ruin the good name of the Church.

      Also, I am not “enraged.” I just tell it like it is, and that enrages YOU. And that makes me laugh, given that you keep dragging this out –not letting it go– by replying to me over and over. You’re just making yourself look like a jerk.


    2. Nope, not a joke, troll or whatever else you pull out when confronted with opposing opinion. It is true: no child has been abused in the Church. Ever. In fact, I say that anyone, woman or child, who claims “rape,” abuse, etc. is LYING. And I said this to a lying woman’s face when she told me an employee of mine supposedly “molested” her. I told her, and quite honestly, that whatever did happen was her fault. Again, TRUTH.

      I know, I know….you can’t handle dissenting opinion, so you whine “joke.” Good luck with that.


      1. What evidence do you have to negate 50,000 victims? How about 100,000. How many people fail to report because of accusers like you? A lot! You nor your beliefs make anything true. Hot air pompous ass. Must be a hard pill to swallow knowing the church you defend is positioned as a pedophiles dream carnival. Are you a circus clown in your day job, or just at night in the ally’s of Albany?

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Okay buddy. This is enough. I have already deleted 2 of your comments. Anymore like this one and you will be banned from the site.


    3. I stand by what I’ve written. Since you clearly have unresolved anger issues, I will walk away from this conversation. You are clearly not rational, and given your hate speech towards the Church, which has done nothing to deserve this treatment, we’re done here, unless you can be rational.


    4. Sam, it’s your house, so it’s your rules, but I don’t feel that anything I’ve written is unwarranted or unreasonable. It seems that you only want material that supports your opinion that children are unsafe in the Church. That’s fine. It speaks volumes to your character, or lack thereof. Any decent person would have heeded his priesthood leaders’ counsel. But that’s not your end game, is it?


    5. Jim facts in this age do not matter. Most Mormons would rather be right about that which is wrong, than to busy themselves with facts. It about being right not about true happiness. All one has to give up In lieu of facts is ones aliveness. You will learn in the LDS/Mormon faith that you will never shake a believer for there is to much at stake! Being wrong kills out beliefs which seem more valuable than the truth. Once you realize that you have given up personal freedom both physically as well as mentally and spiritually , it Takes a type of courage and strength that Mormons do not have being committed to being right, they are willing to abandon substance for something as ephemeral as “good feelings. I for one am proud of Brother Young I can’t believe that he concerns jimself with those that cannot engage in meaningful dialogue, and those that resort to name calling.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I am super proud of him too. The comment section looks a little weird because I was attacked by a member and told multiple times to kill myself. Sam eventually deleted those comments, so it sort of looks like my comments are towards Sam. They are not. I fully support Sam and what he has done. Mine was one of the first letters sent in, but with my atheist blog and as an exmo, I don’t think he used it out of potential credibility issues. That was actually my suggestion to him at the time. I also gave him the option for me to offer proof. Thanks for checking in. From your writing I couldn’t tell if you were referring to me or Mr Cook

        Liked by 1 person

      1. I know how you must be feeling. I’m sorry Sam has single handedly restricted your right to abuse kids. Try maturbating and a cold shower—better yet, voluntarily castrate yourself.

        Liked by 2 people

      1. michaelcrook YOU are vile. In the words of one of Sam’s friends (and ours), “No amount of disrespect can fairly compensate Joseph and The Brethren for what they have done…and/or continue doing”… to our children..Jan’s and mine.

        Liked by 1 person

    1. Who are you to judge Sam’s intent? Judge his words, they are very good.

      Sam is not an enemy to the church, rather he is an enemy to sexual predators who use the church for cover.

      Thousands of others agree that it is time for this interview policy to change. Having an opinion about a church policy and sharing that opinion is within the right of every church member.

      Liked by 3 people

  1. Nice try, Jimbo. Just because you molest kids doesn’t mean everyone does. Kids never were in danger (I hate them, including my own), so all Sam did, I say, is wreck the good name of the Church. Bye, Jimmy. Stop touching those kiddies, k?


      1. Hi Jim,

        I’m so sorry for what happened to you. Long long ago, I started to notice your ‘likes’ appearing on my articles. Very often you were the only person liking the post. Thank you for your constant support. Now, I understand a little better. What happened to you was wrong. I hear you. I see you. I hope that this entire movement has provided validation, understanding and empathy.

        I love you my friend and brother,

        Liked by 4 people

      2. Thank you Sam. All the best to you. I feel a lot better knowing things are changing. I still have kids and grandkids in the church and do worry about them and their health in this matter. My grandfather was the first photographer in the salt lake valley, so my roots were pretty deep. Not sure when these interviews turned for the worse, but mine were in the 70’s. I’ll be rooting for you.

        Liked by 3 people

  2. Mr. Young does not understand that you don’t counsel or attempt to school the Lord’s annointed, especially in public. He shows a lack of humility and sound judgment. It is hard, Mr. Young, to kick against the pricks, but kick you have, and my prediction is that the decision to excommunicate you will stand until you humble yourself and repent of your self-righteous arrogance.

    If children are committing suicide, it is not because their bishop asked them if they are involved in any of a myriad of sexual proclivities. Promiscuity, pornography, or any other habitual sexual pleasure outside of the marriage covenant warrants concern by parents as well as church leaders. These things damage the soul by stifling spiritual growth. Satan does not want youth interviews to function. To him, they are speed bumps in his effort to destroy the youth. Your efforts sound noble, but they are another deception, making good look like evil and evil look like good. There are those who say that outlawing abortion is taking a woman’s rights away and limiting her freedom to do with her body as she pleases. You are saying that the youth should have the private right to do with their bodies what they want and not have to answer to anyone but the Lord. Both arguments sound like noble arguments on the surface, but they are both flawed when you go in deeper. Mr. Young, you have unwittingly teamed up with the father of lies, and he has deceived you.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Hi Tom,

      “Mr. Young does not understand that you don’t counsel or attempt to school the Lord’s annointed, especially in public. He shows a lack of humility and sound judgment. It is hard, Mr. Young, to kick against the pricks, but kick you have.” Exactly what could be said of Christ as he openly spoke out against the church leaders of his time. Thank you my friend for reminding me that I’m in good company.

      Liked by 2 people

    2. “These things damage the soul by stifling spiritual growth” So does suicide and life long self deprecation from adult to child sexual communications that, outside of your own church, you would cry abuse! Replace every time Sam mentions bishop with catholic priest, and I’m pretty sure you’d see the ignorance of your statement.

      Liked by 4 people

    3. Hi, Tom,

      Thank you for expressing your thoughts about what Sam has accomplished and continues to accomplish, which happens to include saving lives of at-risk LDS youth (and probably some adults as well).

      I will interject some [[comments]] into what you wrote: (I hope you will forgive me, as I am about to forgive you.)

      “If children are committing suicide, it is not because their bishop asked them if they are involved in any of a myriad of sexual proclivities. [[ False statement, Tom, for two reasons. It’s not “if” children are committing suicide, it’s children ARE committing suicide. And credible investigations/surveys by professionals have linked some portion of Utah suicides to masturbation shame dispensed by Mormon bishops. Your denial of the root cause of a serious problem is … itself … a serious problem.]] Promiscuity, pornography, or any other habitual sexual pleasure outside of the marriage covenant warrants concern by parents as well as church leaders. [[ ANY form of sexual pleasure outside of marriage is SOUL DAMAGE? You are including masturbation, obviously. Your inclusion of masturbation in the same category as teenagers copulating is stunning, Tom. One is high risk behavior that can result in pregnancy, babies (who may not become tithe payers) or STDs. The other behavior does … does what? Causes a few moments of private pleasure? No babies. No STDs. Only one of the most intense rushes of euphoric sensations possible for a human body? Why is that a bad thing? You are about to tell me … ]] These things damage the soul by stifling spiritual growth. [[Feeling fleeting moments of private pleasure on occasion ‘stifles spiritual growth’? ]] Satan does not want youth interviews to function. To him, they are speed bumps in his effort to destroy the youth. [[ I do appreciate your metaphor, Tom. Good, creative writing. Also impressive is your ability to read the mind of a cartoon character who does not actually exist. He is affectionately known as ‘Stan’ to some of us former TBMs. Humans misbehave because we are all learning by our own experience to behave better. There is no boogeyman behind the curtain causing errant human behavior. It’s free will and choice that causes destructive behaviors, Tom. It is also free will and choice that causes positive behaviors. ]] Your efforts sound noble [[ Well, kudos to you, Tom for recognizing ‘noble’ when you see it.]], but [[why the but? Sam’s efforts sound noble. Because they protect children from being shamed for feeling private pleasure?]] they are another deception, making good look like evil and evil look like good. [[More good writing, Tom. You are a talented writer. The cross-transmogrification of good and evil does happen a lot, but not by Sam Young, imo.]] There are those who say that outlawing abortion [[Ooops! Sound the alarm. Strawman argument = logical fallacy. Downvote for a cheap shot, Tom. Sam is not discussing abortion. Shame on you for bringing that into the discussion with intent to discredit Sam. ]] is taking a woman’s rights away and limiting her freedom to do with her body as she pleases. You are saying that the youth should have the private right to do with their bodies what they want and not have to answer to anyone but the Lord. [[Tom, you are dancing with a mental illness diagnosis here. Do you realize what you just did? You compared aka equated masturbation with the termination of a pregnancy … or killing an unborn human being. You just agreed with The Brethren’s sex pamphlet that describes sexual sin (including masturbation) as a sin next to murder aka abortion. ]] Both arguments sound like noble arguments on the surface, but they are both flawed when you go in deeper. [[LOUD BUZZER SOUND … Tom, sorry, you lose this round for resorting to an intelligence-insulting strawman argument. Worse than that, if you actually BELIEVE YOUR OWN STRAWMAN ARGUMENT, you are seriously drain bamaged. It’s not your fault though, so don’t feel bad. If you are b.i.c. born in correlation, your brain was correlated (programmed) without your permission and without your knowledge. I forgive you. The people who do not merit forgiveness are The Brethren. They have many 55 gallon drums of innocent blood on their hands by now. Sam wants to make it stop. He is succeeding.]] Mr. Young, you have unwittingly teamed up with the father of lies, and he has deceived you.”

      In conclusion, Tom, you have unwittingly teamed up with (suffered brain correlation by) The Brethren of Lies, and they have deceived you. I do forgive you, but for the children’s sake (and for your own sake), I encourage you to pull your correlated head out of your programmed butt and get a clue. You’ll be glad you did.

      PS – Thank you for some good writing. If you can bring your attitudes and perspective on how to raise (and love) children on par with your creative writing skill, you will be awesome!

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Dear Sam,

    Masterfully written and well-communicated.

    Would you care to share the method of delivery to The Brethren you chose for your letter? One copy for all three … or a copy addressed to each one? Served by mail? Certified? Registered? Restricted Delivery? FedEx? UPS? Process Server?

    I am just curious … so ignore my question if you like.

    A core issue with your excommunication is that your excommunication letter DID NOT DISCLOSE the actual reason for The Brethren giving you the boot. In other words, the excommunication letter itself is a lie. (Big surprise, right?) If it had been delivered under oath in a court of law, it would be an act of PERJURY.

    You were excommunicated for committing an UNPARDONABLE SIN in today’s Church.

    What sin?


    Your stake president commanded you to STOP? I don’t recall the exact language. Not back off. You can remind me.

    You REFUSED TO OBEY a direct order from your Priesthood Leader. If this were the military, you would have been Court Martialed. Instead, you were Court of Love Martialed, Sam.

    If it were me, I would have concluded the letter with this: (You can still deliver an ADDENDUM if you want to.)

    My Dear Brethren, when you render your decision in response to this, my DIRECT APPEAL to The First Presidency of my excommunication, I respectfully request and require that you authenticate your decision in writing, addressed to me personally, and subscribed with all three of YOUR ORIGINAL, WET INK SIGNATURES.

    You are hereby informed in advance that I WILL NOT ACCEPT AS AUTHENTIC any third party communication or any unverified, unsigned written or spoken notice of your “alleged” decision on appeal. I will consider any such unauthenticated communication as hearsay.

    This is not an unreasonable request. If a COURT ORDER in our legal system is not signed personally by the judge himself or herself, it carries no legal effect.

    Thank you in advance for giving me the courtesy of a duly authenticated judgment of my excommunication appeal.


    If you FAIL to deliver your judgment, authenticated by your signatures as I have requested and required, your failure to do so shall be interpreted as a REVERSAL OF MY EXCOMMUNICATION AND REINSTATEMENT OF SAM YOUNG TO FULL FELLOWSHIP AS A MEMBER IN GOOD STANDING OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS.

    Thank you. Have a nice day.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. “No one to blame but myself.” Exactly. But, I’d word it a little differently. I have no one to credit but myself for choosing to follow the teachings and example of Christ. I take full ownership of standing up to protect children and speaking up to give voice to the children who have been harmed.

      Liked by 5 people

      1. That’s not what you did at all. You held the Church up to ridicule. You should have done what any LDS would do: dummy up and deal.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Okay, Michael. I’m warming up to you. “ou should have done what any LDS would do: dummy up and deal.” I can respect that. But, I wasn’t capable of doing it.

        Liked by 2 people

  4. Hi Gary,

    Dang, I should have consulted you before I sent off my letter. How did I send it? The instructions were to submit it to the stake president, with I did by email. The stake presidents words of command your were looking for are “Walk away, Sam, walk away.”


    1. Sam, you are an ex-Mormon. You do not have to “follow instructions” for god’s sake! Snap out of that mindset!

      Here is what I think you want to avoid … in response to your excommunication appeal:

      Your SP and friend deliver a letter to you at home: You open it. It is a letter from your SP. The letter says:

      Dear Sam,

      This is to inform you that the First Presidency received your excommunication appeal letter and carefully considered everything you wrote.

      Your appeal is denied.

      We love you and invite you to repent and rejoin the Church a year from now.


      /s/ Stake President

      I think you want an EXCOMMUNICATION APPEAL DENIAL hardcopy letter on Church stationery with three wet-ink signature on it. If so ….

      Please consider doing the following ASAP.

      Make sure your name and return address shows on your hardcopy letter, with this annotation:

      Mr. Sam Young

      Decide whether or not you want to require a signed response (per my previous post) with consequences for failure to perform. If you make an offer, and The Brethren do not respond, silence is consent. The Brethren DO NOT WANT to give you a signed excommunication appeal denial letter. You have the right to REQUIRE a signed letter. (I forgot to add a 30-day tolling of time default clause to my eariler post. “If you fail to postmark a signed response within 30-days of receipt of this appeal request, your default shall be considered to be TACIT APPROVAL OF MY APPEAL and reinstatement of full membership in good standing.

      That is all up to you, of course. The Brethren will take full advantage of whatever wiggle room you allow them to avoid signing their names to your excommunication.

      Make three hardcopies of your letter (one for each addressee).

      When I am sending the same letter to multiple addressees, to avoid making multiple versions of the same letter, I like this form: Just check the box on the three identical copies.

      [X] President Russell M. Nelson
      [ ] President Dallin H. Oaks
      [ ] President Henry B. Eyring

      Dear President Nelson, President Oaks and President Eyring,
      [your letter]

      Sign each letter separately (do not copy your signature). Insert each copy into a separate full-size envelope (available at Liberty Office Products). Look up the mailing address of the First Presidency offices. I will do that for you:

      President Russell M. Nelson
      The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
      Office of the First Presidency
      47 East South Temple Street,
      Salt Lake City, Utah

      President Dallin H. Oaks
      The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
      Office of the First Presidency
      47 East South Temple Street,
      Salt Lake City, Utah

      President Henry B. Eyring
      The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
      Office of the First Presidency
      47 East South Temple Street,
      Salt Lake City, Utah

      Put your return address on the envelope.

      Address the envelopes as shown above. I would write something on the envelope like:


      Then MAIL via USPS using Certified Mail with Return Receipt. You can specify RESTRICTED DELIVERY where the Postal Carrier will require the addressee to sign for delivery. This can be a problem if the addressee is not available, so I do not recommend that. (I got burned recently doing Restricted Delivery … caused a long delay in delivery.) It will be OK for an admin to sign for regular Certified Mail delivery with Green Card receipt. You will have to fill out the Green Card with your return address on the front and then stick it to the front of the envelope. I’m sure you know the drill.


      Be sure to keep a signed original as your copy of the letter.

      You might also want to contact the attorney at quitmormon.com for his advice on how to tighten up your appeal to ensure a SIGNED excommunication appeal verdict from The Brethren. I am sharing what makes sense to me if I were doing what you are doing. There are other ways to tighten this up even more, but keeping is relatively simple is best … seems to me. It is essential that you include terms and conditions and consequences if they do not give you the common decency respect of a signed letter denying your appeal. They could just ignore it if you let them. A 30 day time default is important, imo.

      You may want to just ignore all of this and see what happens. The Brethren could always surprise (me) and treat you with a minimum of respect, but I would not hold my breath … unless you like blue lips.


  5. Love the quote from Joseph F Smith, wish I had that for my Bishops are JUDGEs of Israel post. This is great appeal letter with quote and logic hard to argue with unless you are hard of heart and just don’t give a damn.

    Has not Sam testified of the wrongs of what have occurred from asking CHILDREN sexually explicate questions? Yea, he has boldly, and what was the LDS / Brighamite church done in response, they want to cast him out, and have said Sam Young is of the Devil and will not get back in his place where he belongs and we need to remove him from our ranks. All while at the same time protecting the one on the right of the picture. Who had his books sell in Deseret Book until recently as the LDS / Brighamite church trying to hide or be secret about what is going on. I have never read any of his books, but I can speculate it would of had things that mostly tickled peoples ears, especially considering he has not had the baptism of fire or if he once did he has lost it because of his sins and crimes against God and the people. A repentant man will confess of his sins, not hide behind the law or lawyers. Now also take a look at which man the LDS / Brighamite church is supporting and which one they are forsaking. To me this is a very dirty rotten fruit of theirs.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. Hi Sam,
    I’m a Catholic who has seen similar suffering in my own church, and suffered helpless rage at the cover-ups which have since been revealed.

    Your letter is reasoned and sound. I hope that the reply you get does justice to it. Truly, although I am angry at the Catholic heirachy I cannot ask more of them. They have, and are, opening records to investigative bodies, they have made public apology, the Pope has met with victims in many countries, settlement figures are available and perpetrators have been, and are being, named.

    I feel for you. I am sorry your voice is not being heard by those who can change things. Praying for your peace always,


    Liked by 3 people

  7. What a tender mercy it would truely be to have a revelation like that handed down. Its such a faith promoting experience to see the Lord answer prayers and calm our troubled hearts. Thank you for being on the Lord’s side, Sam. So many of us are praying in behalf of the youth and in behalf of you for your membership reinstatement.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Hello Sam,

    As an active member of the church I’m so sad that they chose to excommunicate you. I support the changes you call for. We must all stand up to protect children to the utmost. I pray they reverse your excommmunication.

    Liked by 3 people

  9. A true disciple of Jesus Christ would humble themselves, repent, and seek quiet reinstatement into the church. Did Sam’s stake president make a mistake? No. This appeal is made to further solidify Sam’s annoyance with the upper eschulons of church leadership. Sam really has no desire to be accepted back into full fellowship with the church at this point. This policy issue is just one of many issues Sam has against the church.
    Sam is not a supporter of the church. You can’t support something you constantly accuse and question. There really is no positive faith promoting posts coming from Sam. In fact, everyone is of the same flavor. That flavor is that bitterness against church leadership. Sam has bashed and bashed church leadership roles, especially that of the bishop. He has continually stated that bishops act as sexual predators who groom children. That’s not support.
    Not just that, Sam has accused our bishops of being bad men who harm our children. That’s not support.
    Sam, It behooves you to change, start siding with the prophets and support them. Only then will we all know you want to be a true disciple.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I actively and vocally support the church leadership when they are in the right. For example, I praise the apostles for having condemned our past racist policies, practices and doctrines. I have stood at the pulpit during testimony meeting and offered that praise in public. Here is the testimony that I delivered in F&T meeting on June 3, 2018:

      Last month I shared my testimony of the teachings and example of Jesus Christ. I took some flak for not having mentioned the restoration or the prophets.

      Today, I’m going to correct that.

      I want to give our current crop of apostles and prophets a strong shout out of support. Last Friday, the church held an event to officially celebrate the 40 year anniversary of the reversal of our church doctrine that forbid black men from receiving the priesthood and prohibited both black men and black women from entering the temple.

      This ban on church privileges was lifted in 1978. I had the honor of sitting in a Houston chapel during general conference when Elder N. Eldon Tanner presented the lifting of the ban for a sustaining vote. My hand was proudly raised in support of changing our policy. This is a great example of the Law of Common Consent in action. All policies and major decisions are supposed to be presented to the membership for approval or disapproval. I love this empowering element of the restored gospel. So, there’s my full-throated endorsement of a glorious principle that came directly as a part of the restoration.

      Now, I want to express my appreciation and respect for our current apostles and prophets. 4 years ago, the apostles did something very gutsy that no top leadership has ever done before. They published an essay on LDS.org entitled Race and the Priesthood. It condemns our past racism. It disavows our past racist doctrine, teachings and practices. That’s a disavowal and condemnation of what all the past prophets and apostles from Brigham Young on have taught regarding black people being cursed with a dark skin. Halleluiah!!!

      Unfortunately, until 4 years ago when this essay was published, I completely believed our racist teachings that are now officially condemned. I’m glad that the church celebrated the lifting of the ban. However, I wish that there had also been an official full-throated apology for our past racism.

      Today, I offer my apology and the apology of many, many of my friends. We are sorry that we were gullible enough to believe that our white skin was a reflection of our righteousness in the pre-mortal life. And that a black skin was a reflection of the opposite.

      I’m sorry that these disavowed practices, which I fully supported, marginalized an entire race for 150 years within the church of Jesus Christ.

      I offer this apology in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Sam they just don’t apologise and if one does not apologise for anything, then one fails to acknowledge the atonement and the sacrifice of Jesus Christ (as taught by the lds church) becomes redundant.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. No need for an apology. These practices were once ordained of God and have since been repudiated. I am obligated to sustain that decision, personal feelings notwithstanding.

        Liked by 1 person

      1. A true disciple follows and uphelds the living holy prophets knowing they are the very mouthpiece of God. You certainly didn’t have any praise for elder Oaks from his talk this last conference.


    2. Robert,

      “A true disciple of Jesus Christ would humble themselves, repent…

      Church leaders are fallible and not exempt from this as well.

      “Did Sam’s stake president make a mistake?”


      “This appeal is made to further solidify Sam’s annoyance with the upper echelons [sic] of church leadership”

      That is an assumption on your part. As Sam said in his appeal, the purpose of the appeal is to remove a huge burden from his stake president’s shoulders and transfer ownership of the verdict to the first presidency.

      “This policy issue is just one of many issues Sam has against the church.”

      This is another assumption on your part. Not “many.” Sam’s issues are against the way church policy directs bishops to interview children and the current practice of failing to practice common consent in the church as scriptures direct. That’s only two, not many.

      “Sam is not a supporter of the church. You can’t support something you constantly accuse and question.”

      Yes he is a supporter of the church and church leaders, and he elaborates on it in his appeal. You must have missed that.

      “There really is no positive faith promoting posts coming from Sam.”

      You must have missed that as well. Sam has said many times that he loves the church and his church leaders. One can call the brethren out on a bad policy while still being positive about the church and its leadership.

      “Sam has bashed and bashed church leadership roles, especially that of the bishop. He has continually stated that bishops act as sexual predators who groom children. That’s not support.”

      No, Sam has said how this bad policy can groom children so that if there is a predator present a groomed child might be in jeopardy. Predators are opportunists and they exist everywhere. Also, Sam said how this policy doesn’t protect well-meaning bishops from illegitimate allegations.

      “Sam has accused our bishops of being bad men who harm our children.”

      On the contrary, Sam has said that most bishops are good men. He accuses only predators who have had their way with children.

      “Sam, It behooves you to change”

      Nope, Sam doesn’t need to change, people like you do. True disciples don’t simply roll over and take it – it’s about standing up for doing the right things, even if that means calling out church leadership.

      The prophets are wrong about this policy, and Sam, et al, are right about not supporting it.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. You really should go and read all of Sam’s posts on this blog. He is anything but a true supporter. He truly dislikes the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

        Liked by 1 person

    3. Help me out Robert, How exactly would a “true disciple of Jesus Christ” respond to literally hundreds of first-hand accounts of abuse up to and including rape by LDS leaders?? Go ahead, read the stories with a prayer in your heart and the gift of discernment will bear witness to those that are true. It should break your heart, but you seem more intent on judging Sam and his actions than looking for a way to help the victims. Is that what Jesus Christ would do?? As Pres. Nelson pushes harder and harder for us to be referred to by the name of our Savior, shouldn’t our actions be a demonstration of that name as well?? I see none of that Christ-like love in your posts and that is truly sad……….. for you.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. The recent policy changes were indeed to correct a rare problem. No matter what policy the church puts in place there will always be those who take advantage of others. It happens in every institution, every organization.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Robert,

        The Brethren ENABLE putting LDS kids at risk.

        They GREASE THE SKIDS for child sexual predators to gain WAY EASIER ACCESS to vulnerable, pre-groomed, innocent children … operating under the birth-defect handicap of having been born Mormon.

        The policy change (allowing KIDS to bring protection if they take the initiative THEMSELVES) … does virtually NOTHING to protect kids.


        Robert, your perceptual BLINDNESS is stunning but understandable. You have clearly lost control of your own cognition long ago. You are obviously inebriated on an overdose of Kolob Kool-Aid. Your case appears to be so advanced … Stage 4 looks like … you may be terminal.

        Hope not, but it’s looking pretty grim for you.

        Liked by 2 people

  10. I find it astounding that members are willing to stand up and defend the church in the matter of worthiness interviews, sexual grooming, sexually explicit questioning, shaming and guilting of children. I find it equally astonishing that members care so little for their bishops and all LDS children that they are unwilling to protect either side from the inherent risks of sexual misconduct or even accusations of sexual misconduct.

    These worthiness interviews have lifelong damaging consequences. Anyone with the wit and fortitude to read the stories on “protectldschildren” can quickly see that for themselves.

    Sam, you have my admiration for standing up against people like Michael Crook for their attempts to shame you for your efforts to protect both the children and the church…although I personally no longer consider church leaders worthy of protection as they have made their stance clear in protecting sexual predators.

    The very idea that criticism is worthy of punishment is a very short-sighted view, in that without criticism organizations are unable to make important course corrections before they destroy themselves. They should be thanking you for pointing out that what they are doing is harming the reputation of the church on the world stage. You Sam, are not to blame. They are, for promoting and sustaining policies which harm children and put bishops at risk.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. Of course I defend the Church and I will lay down my very life to do so, if that’s what it takes. I do what the Church says for me to do and I believe that the Church says for me to believe.

      Liked by 1 person

  11. Great response Sam. Just this morning I was watching the news and a commercial from a law firm came on seeking responses from individuals who had been victims of sexual abuse by the Catholic church. Included was a statement to respond even if the abuse occurred 30 or 40 years in the past. The LDS church is setting itself up for this same recourse by not making a change and ignoring the facts brought to their attention by Sam and the countless claims posted on http://www.protectldschildren.org. Mormon Leaks has also posted material indicating payments to victims, including Non-disclosure agreements for victims of past abuse. The church needs to make a change to protect children and bishops. If I were a bishop today, I would not conduct any interviews without a parent or adult of the child’s choosing present. I find it hard to believe the leadership is so short sighted to not see this in their future.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Roy,

      Thanks for voicing the opinion of a sane, intelligent, observant, decent human being with core values that include authentic caring for the safety and well-being of others of your species, even those whom you do not know personally.

      With core values like that, you automatically disqualify yourself for any possibility of being promoted to high leadership callings in the Church formerly known as Mormon. The Brethren, quite obviously, do not share your core values.

      I will share one of my go-to maxims that resolves your puzzlement … “I find it hard to believe the leadership is so short sighted to not see this in their future.”

      The maxim is this: When your goal is to understand why anyone does what they do, step #1 is to turn the sound OFF. Human beings, particularly those of lesser spiritual maturation, will consistently TELL YOU what they want you to think of them. They will TELL YOU how righteous and wonderful they are. OK … fine. Turn the SOUND OFF.

      Step #2 is to simply use your EYES to watch their behaviors. Why? Simple. Liars lie. They lie to you. It’s what liars do. They lie. If their lips are moving, they are lying. Clever liars will mix some truth with their lies to fool you. It works on lots of people. That’s why you have to turn the sound off, to avoid being confused by clever liars. The Brethren SAY in news releases that they care about the children and have zero tolerance for child abuse. OK. Fine. The litmus test is … do The Brethren walk their talk? Sam has done a stunning job of OUTING The Brethren. Their true colors have been broadcast to Planet Earth for all to see and appreciate.

      The next question is a big fat WHY? The Brethren have established far beyond the shadow of a doubt that they have NO DESIRE OR INTENTION to cease and desist with the child-shaming (and adult-shaming) practice of sexual behavior interrogations … one-on-one (VERY important) … behind a closed door.

      Sidebar: Why is one-on-one so important? Why did The Brethren grudgingly say it was OK for the CHILD to request another person to be present? Dirt simple, Roy.


      Why is that important?

      Most Bishops would NEVER be so stupid as to verbally molest a child with a witness present. Unless the Bishop is an unrepentant, mentally disturbed SOCIOPATH, the Bishop has an innate sense of cultural decency that whispers how our civilized society thinks children should be treated. Asking a sequestered child pornographic questions about their sexual behavior is a CRIME in polite society.


      If there is a witness, most Bishops with any self-preservation instinct will NOT SEX-SHAME the child … or at least not to the degree that could/would happen WITHOUT A WITNESS present.

      Let’s drill down another layer and ask the NEXT question?


      Why do The Brethren so clearly have ZERO INTEREST in ceasing the ubiquitous practice of sex-shaming LDS kids (and adults)?

      Again, dirt simple. Sex shaming cements the ControllerControlee relationship that is a core requirement for any successful Mind Control Cult to maintain control.

      How does that work? How does sex-shaming serve to control someone?

      Well, self-esteem is a fundamental, emotional, psychological need of all human beings. Most of us have an innate desire and need to think well of ourselves. We have a need to feel worthwhile and valuable and even desirable. We have a basic human need to be loved. We have a basic human need to FEEL WORTHY to be loved.

      It’s coming into sharp focus about now, Roy.

      They are called WORTHINESS interviews. The child (or adult) is going into the Bishops office to have their personal worthiness graded, judged, evaluated, measured, declared … by whom? Is the child or adult in the Bishop’s office to inform the Bishop how their self-esteem is feeling these days? How worthy THEY feel as a human being. How loveable THEY are feeling?

      No. Absolutely NOT!

      The child (or adult) is sitting in a chair in the Bishop’s office to FIND OUT if they are good enough. Good enough? Good enough for what?

      Good enough to be loved.

      God help the child (or adult) who goes into the Bishop’s office and emerges a few minutes later with the news that the nice man who speaks for God in their life has determined they are NOT WORTHY TO BE LOVED. Not good enough.

      When this happens, the guilt and shame overload is so oppressive that it’s very unlikely that the child (or adult) will ever be clear-headed enough to think through the following thoughts:

      “God, I am a piece of shit! Unworthy. Not good enough. I tried my very best to not masturbate, but the temptation became so powerful that I caved in. I traded my sexual purity and worthiness to be loved by God (or anyone else) for a few seconds of intense pleasure. It felt wonderful, but in the next moment, I felt horrible … just horrible.

      But wait a minute. Did I hurt anyone? Is someone suffering because I masturbated again?

      Who is suffering? It’s me. IT’S ME! Only me. I am the ONLY PERSON suffering because I masturbated.

      But it felt SO GOOD that I could not stop myself … despite my best efforts at will-powering myself to stay hands-off … to stay morally clean … not morally dirty … not a piece of unworthy shit … not even close to good enough to be loved.

      God, I feel terrible … horrible …. maybe I should just … I don’t even feel worthy to live.

      Why do I feel so bad? Why am I hating myself for succumbing to one more moment of intense pleasure? Why? Nobody else EVEN KNEW I had masturbated …. until … until what? Until I confessed to my Bishop.

      What did the Bishop do with this very personal information … that nobody on the planet would know … if I did not tell them what I did? What did the Bishop do with my most personal, sensitive, vulnerable disclosure of an intimately personal secret?

      My Bishop told me that I have violated the Law of Chastity and that … because I masturbated … I am NOT WORTHY. I am NOT WORTHY in the eyes of my Bishop, who is a good and righteous Priesthood leader in the only true Church … who speaks for God. It is the same as if I had confessed to God and God told me that I am not worthy … according to my Bishop …. yes, according to him.

      But hold on a minute. Did I hurt anyone else? Is someone suffering or feeling bad because I pleasured myself? Because I “made love” TO MYSELF? Whose life is worse? … who was harmed? … who is feeling bad? … who ELSE is feeling bad because I “loved” myself?

      Nobody. Nobody is suffering … except ME. I am the ONLY ONE suffering because I masturbated.

      Why am I suffering? Because my Bishop … because my Bishop … who speaks for God … because my Bishop told me I should feel bad … feel bad for giving myself a few moments of intense pleasure … that harmed nobody (except me). And it only harmed me because MY BISHOP … my Bishop … my Bishop … told me … I harmed myself … and disappointed him … and disappointed God.

      The only reason I feel horrible … unworthy … unloved … unloveable … is … is … is … it is MY BISHOP … he is the ONLY reason.

      My Bishop wants me to stop masturbating … never do it again … ever again …. if I want to be worthy again … to be loveable again … to be loved …. by my Bishop …. and by God.

      To be worthy again … to be loveable again … to be loved … again … I MUST STOP MASTURBATING. I must focus my will-power … tie my hands to the bedposts (my bed had no bedposts … what to do?) … grit my teeth … sing hymns … pray … distract myself … ignore that longing … that deep magnetic attraction … to feel that stunning pleasure … I must NOT … I cannot … do it again. I want to be worthy … to be loveable … to be loved. I cannot disappoint … my Bishop … disappoint … God ever again. I must do it. I have to do it. It’s the only way I cannot continue to be a living, walking piece of disgusting, unworthy, dirty, vile, almost-a-murder … piece of human excrement.


      THIS is the mental and emotional state of the TBM child (or adult) that The Brethren do not want to give up. Look what just happened. The TBM child (or adult) has turned over … handed over … surrendered … given up ownership and control of … their core self-esteem and sense of being good enough to be loved and appreciated … to an external power … to the Bishop … and by extension … to The Brethren.

      When “you” have manipulated human beings from birth to never claim ownership of their own self-esteem, sense of being good enough … sense of being loveable … sense of being loved … to “YOU” (The Brethren) … you pretty much OWN THEIR HEARTS AND SOULS. As long as they remain convinced that “YOU” (The Brethren) are the owner,holder and literal DISPENSER of their self-esteem … sense of being worthy to be loved … they will continue to pretty much do WHATEVER YOU TELL THEM THEY MUST DO to get it back … to regain some self-esteem … some sense of being good enough to be loved.

      This is MIND CONTROL 101.

      Will the child (or adult) be willing to part with ten percent … if it’s a requirement to retain (or regain) some self-esteem … the ability to wake up in the morning and not feel disappointed that you are still the goddamned (damned by God via the Bishop) piece of shit who went to bed the night before?

      Without the sex-shaming … without the Bishop holding nothing less than your self-esteem … your sense of being good enough to be loved .. holding that fundamental human need HOSTAGE … like a guillotine above your neck … without any of that happy jazz going down … what … might … happen?

      God forbid!

      God forbid that you might regain enough presence of mind and reconnection with your own heart and soul to realize that you were CREATED BY GOD and BORN WORTHY and BORN GOOD ENOUGH TO BE LOVED. Not only that, but GOD created you with this amazing, built in, always available, extremely reliable, completely free, innate ability to FEEL AMAZING for a few moments.

      No matter what else is happening in your life. No matter what kinds of crap might be happening around you and to you. No matter all of that … regardless of everything … you can always take a brief time-out … to feel absolutely WONDERFUL … for a few moments.

      Is it possible that God made you this way on purpose? Sure, it’s necessary for reproduction to happen … for the human species to not go extinct for lack of babies … sure. But if that were the only thing that God cared about, then he would have made it ONLY possible to feel this good … during copulation ..aka baby making behavior.

      Masturbation never made a baby. So what if God created me with the ability to FEEL THIS GOOD all by myself .. what if God gave me this ability …. because God Loves Me? If so, why does God love me this much? …to give me “a piece of candy” whenever I feel like just feeling really good for a few moments … regardless of what other challenges and fears and overwhelm might be going on in my life … if I want to escape for a few fleeting moments of ecstasy. Or even if I am feeling good, happy, life-is-wonderful, everything is going great … and I just feel like celebrating my life … with a few moments of pure joy?

      What if my Bishop is full of shit? What if my Bishop is shaming me and guilting me because I enjoy touching myself … what if he is doing that to me … to PREVENT me from feeling free and independent and self-authenticating enough to decide for myself … if and when … I want to … or need to … tap into this amazing ability I was born with … gifted to me by God … to feel stunningly wonderful in my human body … for a few fleeting moments.

      And it’s OK to do that. It’s OK to make myself feel good … it’s OK to embrace and appreciate and fully accept this human body that God gave to me when I was born … and to feel good enough … good enough to be loveable … good enough to be loved … all by myself … when I hurt nobody … harm no one … and feel really good for a moment … and then get on with my life … trying to do my best … be a decent person … learn what I am learning … experiencing what I experience … making mistakes that don’t turn out very well … deciding to make a better decision next time …

      What if I can do ALL OF THAT … without my Bishop to rain on my parade and make me feel like shit … when God intended for me to feel really good … for a moment … instead of feeling like a goddamned piece of shit … ALL OF THE TIME?

      This is what The Brethren will never give up voluntarily. This is MIND CONTROL that keeps the tithing gravy train flowing. Billions and billions of dollars flowing into Salt Lake City continuously. The Brethren know full well that loosening the Mind Control grip on their FOOD SUPPLY will reduce the revenue flow and threaten the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed.

      Sam Young is messing with their FOOD SOURCE and they are not amused.

      Happy, contented, self-authenticating, self-directed human beings with an INTERNAL SENSE OF WORTHINESS and love-ability … ultimately will not give tithing checks to their Bishop … to be carefully guarded with two-deep money handling … on the way to Salt Lake City.

      … and The Brethren know this … It’s what they literally DO FOR A LIVING.

      PS – Where is the two-deep child handling? Turn the sound OFF. Just watch their behavior … to discover their core values.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Sam , Gary’s comments here are so profound, the ultimate in empathy…I am now able to feel my child’s pain and rejection. How ignorant and foolish are those who have the audacity to juge your motives, and set at naught what you are striving to accomplish. And as for the sitting Q15 and their predecessors…Shame on you ALL for what you have failed to accomplish…Satan will not win in the final round.

        Liked by 3 people

  12. Well, what is not up for debate is this: Sam here did not fulfill a good Saint’s obligation to keep one’s objections to oneself. If I were to disagree with a Church policy, I would tell no one. Not my wife, not my neighbor, not my cat. That’s what a good Saint would do.

    Sam went far beyond complaining to friends. He told the WORLD things that should not be revealed to the public. I don’t for one second believe that sexual abuse went on/goes on in the Church. That being written, if it were to happen, it should be resolved internally, not in a manner that ruins a man’s good name.

    I consider myself to be a good Saint. If I were to witness something like that, hear hearsay about it supposedly happening, etc., I would keep it under my hat. That’s the proper thing to do. I will not ruin a man’s good name over something like this and I will never go public/to the media like Sam here did, in what I can only assume is a campaign to destroy the Church.

    The interview questions are ordained of God and will not be mocked. Sam knows this, being a former bishop, right? He put on a good show crying and dramatically pointing to the COB, but in the end, he knew what he was doing. More to the point, he knew the price and pulled his little stunts anyway.

    Sam got what he deserved and I doubt that the FP will buy into his manipulative appeal. However, like anyone else, he can abandon the sin (his stunts), repent and one day enter the waters of baptism. There is hope, Sam. What is more important to you: your stunts or your eternal salvation?

    Liked by 1 person

      1. You mean government-sanctioned people who fly into tall buildings? Think whatever you like, I will rat on no one, and if forced to by a court order, I can use my bipolar, seizure disorder and schizophrenia to my advantage and get my testimony impeached, thereby rendering the victimized man free. So…you lose.

        Liked by 1 person

    1. michaelcrookalbany,

      “That’s what a good Saint would do.”
      “I consider myself to be a good Saint.”

      Definition: “good Saint”

      Mind-controlled, robotic, humanoid extension of the Supreme Will of The Brethren. Blindly executes correlated orders and understood expectations on command with zero internal processing, filtering or evaluation by any frame of reference whatsoever. Automatically rejects and opposes anything or anyone who does not idolize The Brethren as the equivalent of Gods Incarnate and never, ever questions or scrutinize anything they say or do.

      Others can add what I missed … in the definition of “good Saint”

      Liked by 3 people

    2. Oh my brother Michael. You are endearing yourself to my heart. You would tell no one, not even your cat. How can I not feel love for you when you say things like that. BTW, thank you for your concern for my eternal salvation. And I’m serious about that.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. Ah Ha, Michaelcrook so that explains your mindset. Your bipolar disorder indicates that you are intelligent; however your schizophrenia and seizure disorder render you lacking in confidence and the ability to think for yourself and so you are in the comfort zone of following the instructions of those “ordained of God.” The question here is which God? I put it to you that the god to whom you are referring, is the god of this world (as taught by the Mormon church in its temples) viz. ….SATAN himself.!! Sorry, you have already lost.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Well, as you would write, “Ah [sic] ha,” I never question the Church or its leaders. I sustain both, without question, without exception. That’s what a TRUE member of the Church does, you see. This stance has nothing to do with mental illness, but everything to do with the sacred promises I have made. Not up for debate.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Michael Crook a TRUE member of the church has a brain and doesn’t follow blindly in any scenario. “It is an unwise and slothful servant who must be commanded in all things” is what we are taught and to seek the confirmation of the spirit in ALL things. Your continued angry and judgemental comments are neither helpful, charitable or indicative of a TRUE follower of Christ.

        Liked by 2 people

  14. Michaelcrook YOU listed your mental illnesses. Further if as you keep repeating “not up for debate” why do you repeatedly state that you never question the Church or its leaders. What is the issue? I think that you are crying out for help and you feel as long as you obey implicitly, you will be okay (hence the repetition). You stated “I hate them (children) including my own.” What is the problem? Perhaps Protectlds Children can help you.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yes, **I** listed mental illnesses. So the hell what? It bears repeating: a good Latter-day Saint never questions. Since Sam questions, we can draw our inferences from there. Of COURSE I will be okay, because I will have sustained my leaders. I hate children and, as mentioned before, I will stand idle and silent if I have knowledge that one is being abused. That’s what a good priesthood holder does.


    2. Oh, and the reason **I** mentioned mental illness was to illustrate a point: I can use my conditions to either get out of testifying as a witness altogether, or out of having my testimony impeached if I get on the stand, because I don’t believe in ratting, whether the alleged “victim” is woman or child.


    1. Lesley,

      An interesting thing about life is there are thorns and weeds, so to speak, on our paths or trolls that come out to play on public forums – most of the time the audience discovers who the trolls are and has the common sense to know the trolls words are meaningless. I think you as well as many other readers have already discovered who one of the trolls is in this thread.

      I suggest you don’t waste your time responding to michaelcrookalbany. He/she seems to stir the pot to provoke a reaction and fails to add any meaningful insights to the discussion. Michaelcrookalbany disingenuously claims he/she will “defend the Church and I will lay down my very life to do so, if that’s what it takes. I do what the Church says for me to do and I believe that the Church says for me to believe,” yet also says that, “My policy is to refuse all callings,” yet “I never question the Church or its leaders. I sustain both, without question, without exception,” because it has “everything to do with the sacred promises I have made.”

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Yes, yes, here we go again. When confronted with opposing opinions, you cry “troll,” and run away. That’s fine, see, that’s okay…that’s your M.O., that’s how you operate.

        I have offered insight, but people with anger in their hearts have crapped all over that, like a baby having a blowout.

        I don’t know what point you’re trying to prove, but yes, I WILL defend the Church and its leaders, never questioning. That doesn’t mean I have to accept whatever meaningless calling comes along, now does it? No, it doesn’t.

        But if you’re whining about meaningful conversation, here we go: Sam Young knows his stuff, right? He was a bishop, yes? Yes. So, he knew the consequences of his little campaign and did it anyway.

        He’s akin to the driver who knows driving drunk is bad, but drinks the booze and drives anyway, killing people. Sam hasn’t killed anyone, that’s true, but he has potentially led some people down the path of apostasy. And that can’t stand.

        So, he was excommunicated, and e’en then he got off very light. And now he wants to go on TV, crying his crocodile tears and melodramatically pointing to COB, as if he’s the victim. And for what? No kids are in danger, and even if they are, it’s none of his business.

        How now, brown cow?


      2. Great observations, HTCat.

        Actually, mca is The Brethren’s dream-member-come-true … except for the refusal to accept callings. Does he also refuse to pay tithing? If he won’t clean chapel toilets or finance City Creek Malls … then he is totally useless. His thought that he keeps sacred promises is just as nonsensical as everything else he writes.

        Good advice to just ignore him going forward.

        Liked by 3 people

  15. Oh, Gary, how wrong you are. I understand that you seek to ignore opposing opinions. You’re a coward. Yes, I do pay a full tithe and I pull my weight, such as it is. I do my share of the meetinghouse cleanings. I do service projects. I help the Elders when they need a third male to teach a female. So the fact that I ignore callings is not relevant. Everyone is free to ignore a calling.

    You haven’t addressed the core issue, however, and that speaks volumes as to your cowardice.


    1. mca,

      I am relieved to hear that you pay a full tithing and clean chapel toilets. Phew! You had me worried for your Eternal Salvation there.

      But …BUT … sorry, Brother Dude, but if you IGNORE CALLINGS you are a super crappy member of the Church. Nine out of Ten TBMs would agree with me. Leaders are INSPIRED BY JESUS CHRIST when they extend a calling to you. If you REFUSE their callings, you are spitting on the Priesthood and telling Jesus to go **** himself.

      I am not ignoring opposing opinions, mca. I am calling you out on your self-contradictory BS that’s factually, internally inconsistent. To say it more succinctly, you are just plain full-a-shit.

      I hope you are a Troll … just messing with Sam’s bloggers. If you believe what you write, you should get help. When you get help, make damned sure you DO NOT consult a TBM mental healthcare professional.

      TBM and Mental Healthcare is an OyyMormon.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Nope, not a troll. Your vulgar language tells me you’re not worth my time, so I will only write to one of your asinine rantings: refusing a calling is NOT spitting on the priesthood, nor is it the foul thing you wrote about our Savior. I always have valid reasons for refusing a calling.

        Everything I wrote is correct. Since you use foul, vulgar language, we’re done here.


      2. Sorry, mca, there is NO SUCH THING as a “valid reason” for refusing a calling. If you refuse a calling, you are claiming that your Priesthood leader was NOT INSPIRED when he received guidance from the Holy Ghost to call you to a position.

        In actual reality, Priesthood leaders are NOT EVER INSPIRED when filling slots on their org chart, so from THAT perspective, you are correct that there is a “valid reason” for refusing a calling.

        Your TBM drain bamaged cognition thinks you can have your cake and eat it too. Your Dot-Connector is simply BROKEN, mca. You are unable to string two logical arguments together to result in a logical conclusion that’s not BS … if the conclusion suggests there is something amiss in the Church of Ziontology.

        It’s OK. It’s NOT your fault, especially if you were b.i.c. born in correlation. Your brain has been correlated, corrugated and copulated and simply cannot draw a line from DOT#1 to DOT#2 … if the logical conclusion is that the Only True Church is BS aka Joseph’s Myth aka Joseph Lied.

        I forgive you, mca. It’s truly not your fault. Eventually, you will figure it out like I did 38 years ago. I am b.i.c. myself and proud of my Mormon DNA. My great great uncle wrote the beloved hymn “O How Lovely Was the Morning” … you know the one … the cartoon song about one of the 9 versions of the First Vision. Not sure how Uncle George figured out which version to use for his beautiful hymn. I invite you to take a listen. It’s very beautiful … makes me wanna get baptized all over again.

        Liked by 2 people

    2. “I help the Elders when they need a third male to teach a female.”


      TWO elders cannot be alone with a female investigator?

      Is that true?

      When you accompany the Elders, do you testify that it’s OK to ignore callings?

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I purposefully ignored you, because of your foul language, and because I thought someone else, even Sam “I Spat Upon the Church” whatever his last name is, would jump in. YES, it is true. A companionship cannot teach an investigator without a “chaperone,” i.e. another member of the same gender as the companionship.

        So, I often go on what’s called “Lesson(s) With Member Present.” As the time implies, I am there to “chaperone,” for lack of a better term, and contribute when asked or when I feel it necessary. As I am male, I can only accompany the Elders.

        Of course, there are exceptions. No chaperone is needed if they do the lesson in a public place such as the library, or at a Church building, as long as people are there and as long as they’re in full view of other people.

        It’s all in the missionary “white book,” which is readily available on the Internet, on the Church’s own site, no less.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. …I hate how WP doesn’t let one edit. I should clarify, the companionship only needs a member present when the investigator is of the opposite gender. And, I can also add that they can teach the person of an opposite gender on the person’s front porch, in the park, whatever. Just not in their homes.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. mca,

        “I should clarify, the companionship only needs a member present when the investigator is of the opposite gender.”

        This is amusing because The Brethren are so oblivious regarding just how many thousands of their missionaries ARE NOT ATTRACTED to the opposite gender.

        The Brethren are likewise oblivious that thousands of their missionaries ARE SEXUALLY ATTRACTED TO THEIR COMPANIONS THEY LIVE WITH behind closed doors … sleeping in the same quarters ALL NIGHT EVERY NIGHT.

        The list of things about which The Brethren have no clue is WAY LONGER than the list of things they functionally understand in a meaningful way.

        Signing yourself up to have your Life Decisions made by a quorum of idiots* is a sad state of affairs. Fortunately, more and more members of the Church formerly known as Mormon are waking themselves up and not letting the chapel door hit ’em in the butt ON THEIR WAY OUT.

        *correction: They are not idiots. They know full well what they are doing, why they are doing it, and how they are spectacularly benefitting personally from what they are doing. The idiots are people like me … who took 30 years to figure it out and take my life back.

        Liked by 1 person

  16. Gary,
    What “kids” are we speaking of? I used to be a “kid” like we are discussing in the crosshairs. You make it sound like we are speaking of innocent 5 year olds. We are not. We are speaking of youth teenagers who are crafty, manipulative, often do immoral things, etc. I was there once. So we’re all of us. In my youth access to immoral material and activity was already an easy thing if one looked. Nowdays it’s rampant, it’s everywhere, you can’t escape it, you don’t have to go looking for it, it finds you. It’s a plague. As leaders of youth we are very aware of this problem. So, what do we do as leaders? We discuss this problem with them to help establish boundaries more easily recognized. We teach, warn, and exhort the correct principles of morality with them. How bad is it? Well, my wife is a bus driver for the local school district. One school she stops at is the middle school composed of 7-8 graders. Yep, 12-14 year olds. What’s some of the worst problems she sees with them? She says it’s becoming a problem of seeing many girls making out with other girls. She hears the constant barage of immoral language and stories. She sees youth not treating others of the opposite sex with respect, etc. Our youth who fall into these temptations often go down dark paths. They end up at wild sex parties with drugs and alcohol. The reality is that our “kids” are being introduced to immoral behavior and temptations at school and the internet long before a bishop has the opportunity to address the problems they fall into.
    Let me ask you this, where are these “kids” getting this information? Is it their bishops or church leaders? Absolutely not.
    You need to get off of the fantasy train and understand reality.


    1. Robert,

      Say what?

      “You need to get off of the fantasy train and understand reality.”


      YOU need to understand what a STRAWMAN ARGUMENT LOGICAL FALLACY is, Robert.

      EDUCATING youth about sex and the consequences of irresponsible sexual activity is certainly needed and not happening anywhere near enough.

      SHAMING teenagers in one-on-one confrontations for masturbating only MAKES EVERYTHING EVEN WORSE!

      If young (or old) Mormons felt OK about masturbating from time to time, they would avoid SEXUAL FRUSTRATION that can lead to irresponsible sexual behaviors fuelled by pent-up, unresolved sexual energy looking for some kind of outlet.

      The Mormon and Christian solution requiring TOTAL ABSTINENCE until marriage is a recipe for what?

      Precisely what you described in your post, Robert.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s