clwnuke

June Hughes' (now McKenna Denson) character has been in question long before this incident and the start of this entire episode. IMHO everything has been orchestrated and planned well before she "decided" to reveal who she was. Some of you might remember that I posted that I thought I knew who it was immediately after the the news broke. If fact my entire Mission district knew who it was before she ever revealed her name. That's because there were huge issues at the MTC with this Sister, and a wake of disaster in the mission field afterwards. Many of us have been interviewed by defense lawyers in the case, but none of the information has made it into the news. I think all the media outlets are afraid. In almost every news story, the first thing reporters do is seek out people who were there and ask about the applicable person - in this case Sister June Hughes. But not one article that I have seen has does this. I personally confronted this Sister because of her behavior toward an Elder in my district, and I know that several others were affected as well. While I can't tell you whether what McKenna Denson says happened actually happened with President Bishop, I can tell you that there is so much more to the story that people don't know that any conclusions drawn from what the media has reported will be incomplete. I really think this latest incident should make her character in the MTC fair game and it's time for the press to seek out the many Elders and Sisters who experienced her behavior in the MTC and report the facts - even if they choose to keep the names anonymous (yes, it was that bad).

I can't tell you how unreal all of this is! Her picture brings it all back. If President Bishop did anything immoral with her then he should face justice. That I don't know for certain. All I can say is that I'm glad I confronted her and asked her to stop seeking out the Elder in my district, and even though he thought she was just being friendly at the time, he is also very glad now that he didn't accept her invitation to "take a walk". I've been told that other Elders were not so wise and consequently made early exits from their missions, but I can't independently confirm that, and I doubt it will be reported by the media even if it is true. Of course none of that makes the alleged assault OK, but it does make me wonder whether she was pursuing Mr. Bishop in the same manner she was pursuing the Elder in my district and the other Elders I saw her frequent. That's a very different story from the one being told by the lawsuit of an innocent and naive sister missionary being groomed by a predator. While she has acknowledged past criminal mistakes, she has not acknowledged that she was also preying on missionaries while at the MTC. In the end I pray that both parties can find peace, forgiveness, justice and mercy. I don't think lawsuits and money bring any of that.

Just so everyone knows I wasn't mistaken, now that the lawsuit is public knowledge and the woman's name is public please note that I knew her as Sister June Hughes at the MTC. She is now using the name McKenna Denson. You can search these names on the internet and find: June Denson is 55 years old and was born on 07/18/1962. Sometimes June goes by various nicknames including June M Hughes, Mckenna Denson, June Marie Denson, June M Hughes-denson, June M Denson,.

Here is an interesting article about this story - https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona-investigations/2018/03/24/amid-quiet-life-chandler-explosive-sexual-assault-allegations-hit-mormon-leader/449975002/ . I've also clipped out a portion but I suggest reading the entire article. This reporter is being far more fair than many. The sad thing is that this is exactly what I would have expected based on my interactions with Sister H****s. ________ "Greg Bishop said his father did not remember making that statement to police. He also said the accuser's background is relevant because it includes multiple rape claims, false police reports and other manipulations. As recently as February, the woman was arrested in New Mexico on suspicion of identity theft. According to a police report, she used an ex-boyfriend's name and Social Security number to obtain utility services and to lease an apartment. Detectives obtained a phone recording wherein the woman posed as the ex-boyfriend, using his name, according to the police report. That case is pending. Another police report, from South Carolina, describes a 1999 case in which the woman claimed she was pistol-whipped and locked in the trunk of a car by two men outside a restaurant where she had worked. Detectives learned she had been fired shortly before the incident and had made inquiries about the restaurant's security liability. They concluded she was dishonest and her report "unfounded." In separate interviews with The Republic, the woman's former husband and another family member also questioned her motives and credibility. On at least two additional occasions, they said, the woman reported being raped — once while on her Mormon mission in Washington, D.C. The ex-husband, who is not named in this report so as not to reveal the woman's identity, said, "This is an insult, especially, to women who have gone through something like that and really have been hurt." Greg Bishop said he supports the #MeToo movement but is trying to defend his father against a false charge. "I'm living a nightmare," he said. "This is the dark side of #MeToo, where somebody wants to manipulate the system, has a history of doing it, and has been successful."

I understand why you would want to be cautious, so to that end JAG you still need to edit one of the replies above quoting my post. We know who she is. I hope she's a different person now, but she left an impression so strong then that after 34 years we immediately presumed it was her.

Both Sister H****s and Mr. Bishop were adults at the time. I think it's a horrible moral tragedy but I also agree that it's probably not a crime unless assault/rape and coercion was actually involved. If that's the case then it all comes down to character. I sure wouldn't want to be in the courtroom when the dirt starts flying. [Mod edit: Let’s avoid putting specific names to the accuser until we have solid confirmation. Thanks—JAG]

I was in the MTC at the same time these events reportedly occured in 1984. I previously posted on this board that I thought I knew exactly who this sister was based on some very bad experiences that I and my mission district had with her. I have since spoken to some of my mission district members and we all agree that it is probably her. We believe the name of the sister was J*** H****s. If the woman who has made these allegations turns out to be the former "Hermana/Sister H****s" when she reveals herself, I would suggest that people be cautious about throwing your well meant support her way until all the evidence comes forward. Just be patient, the story is just beginning and there may be more unfortunate casualties. [Mod edit: While the supplemental info is appreciated, for the sake of avoiding libel in case we’re wrong let’s avoid putting specific names to the accuser until we have a more solid confirmation as to her identity. Thanks—JAG]

When we moved to New Jersey with our six kids people we didn't even know would sarcastically say "Don't you know what causes that?" Eventually we just started replying "Yes!! And we really like it! Do you like it too?" and then we'd both make googly eyes at each other and smile. Not sure if it was the best response but we had fun with it.

Relationship-to-relationship a spouse's reactions may be very different to the viewing of pornography. I've seen some spouses react with great hurt and alarm, and I've seen some wives and husbands basically say "whatever thrills ya". Neither reaction relieves the viewer of his or her responsibility to bring their habits and desires within the bounds the Lord has set, but an understanding reaction opens up communication channels and goes a long way in helping a person walk away from the temptations in a step-by-step manner.

As you see, there are different opinions on whether you should discuss this with your spouse. Some of it may depend on the kind of marriage you are seeking to build. There is nothing I can't discuss with my spouse - my weaknesses, my thoughts (good and bad), my joys, my frustrations, etc., We know everything about each other and complete transparency has been the bedrock of our relationship even before we were married. She helps me to be the best Priesthood holder I can be despite my errors, and I do my best to help her be the best daughter of God she can be despite her errors. If she were ever to commit a major sin, I would hope she knows that she can come right to me for help, support, and understanding through the entire repentance process. I'll be going to the Bishop with her in total love so that she knows I'm her advocate in every way for Celestial success. Sometimes that creates some difficulty - heck, I can't even buy a surprise birthday present for my wife because the first question will be "what did you buy at Nordstrom today?" when she sees the debit charge. But I would never trade the peace of mind that we share precisely because we know our pasts and have have a firm commitment to our futures.

Cotopaxi, here is a link I think would be of interest to many people in your situation. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12633158 There are many other cases and similar situations where people developed sexual desires outside of their norm due to medical conditions. Then upon surgery to remove the tumor the abnormal sexual desires disappear. It makes perfect sense that your medications could change your physical desires. Sexual drive is produced through psychoneuroendocrine mechanisms. The limbic system and the preoptic area of the anterior-medial hypothalamus are believed to play a role in sexual drive. Drive is also highly influenced by hormones and medications. There are even syndromes like Kluver-Bucy that can result in sexual behavior that would be well outside of the norm. People who struggle with these issues are not inherently immoral. It is my opinion that we are often far too judgmental about sexual issues. Human sexuality is much more complicated than simply saying people who control it are "good" and people who don't are "bad". I was able to see vastly different levels of sexual interest and curiosity in each of my six children. Some struggle more than others with those desires - but they are all precious and wonderful sons and daughters of God. You are as well. God built sexual desires into our bodies as part of a divine plan. You have struggled with that - welcome to mortality. What's important is where you are now. I say share it with your spouse, primarily so that she knows you will hold nothing back from her. Every couple should have enough emotional intimacy to be familiar with their past mistakes and weaknesses. As a father who's oldest son continues to struggle with depression (he is doing well) I applaud your efforts to follow the Savior. Now go forward and build your marriage stronger even if it means taking a little flak for a while if your sweet spouse reacts poorly. No matter how she reacts, you react with love, listening to her concerns, and understanding. Your firmness to be 100% honest with her in all things will bear more marital fruit than withholding any past indiscretions.

The demographics problem is very real issue for single women. But, outside of plural marriage I don't know how a society with more women than men can solve that problem? If plural marriage is re-instated (and I'm not hoping for that) perhaps a Relief Society committee or ward council could match up all the singles on a monthly basis to keep the problem in check ??? I once was campaigning in Washington State for the US Senate and a large group of conservative Republicans asked me if I had multiple wives because I was a Mormon. I replied that I only had one wife, but that I had calculated out how many I could afford. After a minute of silence one of them asked how many that was? I replied "slightly less than one." There was a good laugh and the rest of the night was very cordial. In all seriousness though, every time I see a single man or woman in the church who I know would love to be happily married my heart aches for them. Their struggle is difficult and I would wish it upon nobody. I pray God will bless them because there is little else I can do to help fill those empty chambers of the heart.

AMom31, You are not alone when it comes to those who didn't or don't feel that therapy and counseling was moving them forward. Elder Craig A. Cardon gave a talk recently where he outlined the difference between "programmatic" and "heart changing" approaches to problems. He mentioned that most of the time we (you, me, the church, etc.,) default to ineffective programmatic solutions because they are simple. We avoid the hard "heart changing" approaches to problems because they are less certain, much more difficult, and it takes far more time. For example, when we have problems keeping our God-given opposite-sex attractions within the bounds the Lord has set (that's my description of pornography) leaders and well-meaning friends will almost all suggest the programmatic approach - "Stop now, attend a twelve-step program and counseling, recognize how much your spouse and family feels betrayed, pray for strength, read your scriptures every day and then everything should work out." They do that because it's easy to measure if you've done those things. But as Elder Cardon pointed out, it rarely ever changes the heart and the person who is struggling doesn't overcome the problem internally despite doing all those things and ends up feeling even more "lost and abandoned by God and the Gospel." It sounds to me like the two of you have started the "heart" changing process by talking a lot and being 100% honest with each other. Add being non-judgmental, caring, and helpful to each other with a firm commitment to stand by each other in your trials and you have a firm foundation for developing a long-term plan to slowly walk away from Satan's lies that true happiness can be found in sexual imagery or extra-marital relations. We will never lose our natural desires to see the human body. But we can examine our impulses and separate truth from reality in a step-by-step fashion over time. Gradually we can bring more and more of our daily behaviors in line with the bounds the Lord has set and that will bring more joy into our life and marriage as our heart will have changed in the process. I sincerely hope you can find some wonderful people to help you both as you progress on that journey. People you can trust to love and help you both no matter how long it takes. People who see you as the sons and daughters of God that we are in a world full of challenges. The analogy that I like to use is that you can't bring a plane that's going the wrong way home by turning the engines off in flight. You have to work to turn it in the right direction and then gradually descend to the ground. Along the way there will be numerous course corrections, each one helping a little bit. Turbulence is a given, but don't let it stop your progress. Again, we are all praying for you!

Dear AMom31, Your post is so heart wrenching! But something you wrote is a very important concern to me - "I stopped [therapy] for financial reasons." It concerns me that so many people can't seem to get marriage counseling or advice they need because of the cost. I realize that speaking with Church leaders or clergy is free, but it is also true that very few church leaders have the expertise or understanding to provide much more than a listening ear and a caring heart. AMom31, let me ask this: If you and your husband had been able to discuss these matters with a private, caring, non-judgmental and non-professional couple for free, do you think that would that have been helpful?

Dear SDO1985, You and your spouse are working through something that is well known to researchers but mostly unknown to others. There is a distinct gender difference in how long attraction lasts between men and women. One experiment that easily illustrates this was done by researches using pictures of attractive men and women. The men were shown a series of pictures of attractive women and their physiological responses were measured. No matter how many times the same series of pictures was shown to the men, their positive physiological responses remained almost the same. In other words, men can be attracted to a woman almost forever. Similarly, the women were shown a series of pictures of attractive men and their physiological responses were measured. After being shown the same series of pictures a number of times, their positive physiological responses reduced to almost nothing. However, if a new picture of an attractive man was inserted into the series their physiological response jumped positively for that picture initially but reduced after being seen several times. The practical implication of this research is that going into marriage a man better be prepared for the women's attraction response to diminish as she becomes accustomed to you. If you had known this fact going into your marriage, the current situation would not be such a surprise. It also explains why changing up your routine and experiencing new things may revive your wife's attraction for short periods. Now I realize that it is difficult to experience your wife's loss of attraction no matter what the reason is for the loss. It was one of the most difficult periods of my own marriage. But once I learned that "bed death" was a normal part of a women's life, it helped me to understand that she still loved me very much despite her lack of being attracted to me. The research also shows that women become more emotionally attached to their husbands over time even though the hormonal attraction diminishes. I realized that my wife wasn't doing anything wrong, and that she couldn't change her physiological responses any more than I could change my eternal attraction to her. I don't know why God created men and women with these differences, but I can testify that armed with understanding - a husband can compassionately adjust to these changes in the relationship and still be happy. There is definitely more to marriage and your situation other than this small fact, but hopefully this helps in a small way. Good luck my Brother!

Dear Not Me, The reality is that most people can enjoy physical relations with just about every other person of the opposite sex (and from your comments both of you have - the degree is unimportant). For young people, the idea that someone has been sexually involved with another is a struggle, just like you are experiencing. But older couples don't seem to fester over this as much when they re-marry and the reason is that they see it as a natural part of any close relationship and jealousy doesn't enter into the equation. How would divorced or widowed people ever re-marry if sexual exclusivity was an absolute requirement for marriage? I remember when Elder Oaks visited Philadelphia after his wife died. He was single and lonely by his own admission. He has since re-married and is very much in love with his new wife - and none of that diminishes his love for his previous spouse. Notice that love trumps sex. Sexual relations will be different with different people, but love in the relationship makes all those differences meaningless. Let me be more frank if that does not help. Sex is a desire that is satisfied physically, but love is developed over time and experience and is satisfied by kindness and service. So you and the girl you love have satisfied your physical desires in the past - so what? She seems to love you now, and you seem to love her. The fact that another person has experienced sexual relations with another person in the past does not impair your ability to invest in loving her and to commit to her in an exclusive relationship. If all else in the relationship is good, I humbly suggest letting love bloom between you and her. Let go of the emptiness of your own doubts and investing in something spiritually wonderful. Good luck my friend!

I wholeheartedly agree on the nuanced and subtle in most instances. What makes me curious about this process in contrast to making other callings is that the submitted candidate for Bishop would most likely not be known to the people doing the evaluation. That would seem to make it more difficult to evaluate suitability as the nuances of their personality would not be apparent. Therefore, from a process evaluation standpoint I would be inclined to conclude that the First Presidency would need to rely heavily upon three things: the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the information submitted by the Stake President, and whatever records or background checks are available to them. It is the third item that I think would be most interesting to learn about. Background checks are routinely done by many organizations, and having been a membership clerk long ago I know the church has individual membership records and Patriarchal Blessings. I would be curious to see if there are any other types of notes, records, or information that is utilized in the process.

I think I'd ask him if he ever played Dungeons and Dragons. Boy that game had a lot of different dice!

I can see your point. But I think it's important to also include that people's understanding of "nothing" has changed drastically in the last couple of hundred years. Those who lived long ago thought that air was nothing. Even today physicists discuss the concept of "vacuum energy" roughly defined below: "Vacuum energy is an underlying background energy that exists in space throughout the entire Universe. One contribution to the vacuum energy may be from virtual particles which are thought to be particle pairs that blink into existence and then annihilate in a timespan too short to observe." Wikipedia So perhaps it's just semantics when we say God created the heavens out of nothing or fashioned it out of something. If nothing is really something then both interpretations may be correct. No matter what we think here on earth, I'm sure we will all be fascinated beyond measure to discover all the glory of God's creations and the processes He uses in the next life.

I would imagine it more like this, "Dear Brother Smith, your name was recently submitted as a candidate for Bishop in the Cookie Cutter Ward by President Grant. We congratulate you on your worthiness to be submitted for consideration for this Holy calling, however we feel inspired not to call you to this position at this time. We pray that you will support the new Bishop in your ward with full fellowship and continue faithful in your duties. Sincerely, The First Presidency." Your other question is a whole new topic.

When submitting the name (it may be electronically done now, I don't know) there is information about the candidate that is provided by the Stake President to the First Presidency.

Carborendum, Believing that members who ask questions may be on the edge of "counseling the Lord" seems to be a bit extreme. We have both probably been in meetings with Apostles and other church authorities where the formality was dismissed and the Apostle or visiting GA asked for questions - tough questions. I've always relished those opportunities because they are so rare, and very enlightening. I recall Elder Oaks coming to the Philadelphia area and having a very personal meeting with the region's Priesthood leadership where he specifically asked for tough questions on any church topic and then answered every question forthrightly and candidly. Unfortunately, this issue wasn't on my mind at the time, but I have no doubt that he would have answered this question in the same forthright and candid manner as he did all the others. In my experience we do not need to create a hedge around the law every time a member asks a question about how the church operates. Most of the time we can forthrightly and candidly discuss the matter without coming even close to telling the Lord how to run His Church. In answer to your questions: 1. No, I have not walked in their shoes. I enjoy coming home to my wife every night after work and would never wish the responsibilities and sacrifices of being a General Authority on any person (well, maybe once in a while I may wish it on somebody when I'm angry at them . But the work of deciding on the approval of a name for Bishop is already done by the time the admin writes the letter. Including the reason, if one exists, and informing the candidate would be a minimal burden at most for the admin. 2. I don't mind if the admin knows. Assistants and secretaries usually know what is going on. 3. I did not assume that it was "always" about being judged. I wouldn't know. I believe that if the First Presidency feels by inspiration that it's not the right decision then they could simply state such. However, if there is a specific reason, then they could simply state such as well. I am curious about your statement that "it is usually not" about being judged unrighteous or ineligible. Do you have insight into this matter that you can share? If you can I'd love to hear it. However if you are not at liberty to share I respect that as well. Please do not violate any confidences. 4, I'm curious and this is a forum to hear people's thoughts. But I've lived for 50 years not knowing the answer and I'll have no problem living another 50 if I never find out. 5. To my knowledge my name has never been submitted so I have nothing to complain about. I have moved often in my career and that likely limits my ability to serve. I help power companies analyze processes in my work, so I guess I'm pre-disposed to analyze church processes as well. As for David's brothers, just because the scriptures don't say they questioned the prophet, doesn't mean they didn't talk to him about it. Knowing the culture and traditions of David's day I would believe that they likely did broach the subject. 6. My church court analogy only applies if there is a specific reason. I do not assume it's the case. See (3). 7. How can I better word my thoughts to avoid your concern? I try to be open and fair but I may not be succeeding. I do appreciate your willingness to discuss the matter, and everyone's thoughts as well!

Carborendum, As I mentioned, all of the names submitted during my tenure were approved and those approvals came by letter. I would assume the non-approvals come by letter as well. With the letters already being written, I don't necessarily see an increased burden upon the Brethren to provide a minimal amount of information as to why a Priesthood holder in good standing was not approved. Again, if it simply didn't feel right at the time by divine inspiration, tell them. However, if the reason is more specific than that, then I see no great burden in telling the good brother by what standard they were judged. What if the information that the First Presidency relied on to make their judgement of non-approval is incorrect or biased in some way? There is never a chance to correct it. Even in church courts an individual is allowed to question the reports of their wrongdoings to ensure accuracy. Because the process is guarded so carefully, it is difficult to evaluate from a lay perspective but I see no harm is wondering why calling a Bishop requires so much more confidentiality than calling a Stake President. I believe that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints can fully support their leaders, while simultaneously being curious about how and why things work the way they do in His kingdom on earth.

Mathematicians and scientists need things to do. This might be one way to be entertained.

There are many who do not seek the calling, but do seek to be worthy of being called. If you are submitted and not approved, you never know if it was just not the right time, or if you were found inadequate or unworthy. Even Joseph Smith saw no guile in seeking after his status of worthiness with the Lord. I don't believe that any member should feel guilty about wanting to know their status with the Lord and His Church. Administratively, I would think the church would want to provide that status to the individual, but as of today there is clearly something in the process that the church desires to keep confidential. I trust my leaders, but I also know that processes and procedures change over time and equally trust that the process could change.