Prop 8 film out in June 2010

[Just_A_Guy]

The church employs lawyers. It believe was just a mixup with the paperwork (I don't think they deliberately deceived the agencies to which they report - I sure hope not).

Ayup. Methinks heads are rolling in the Church legal department right about now.

That said, I was under the impression that the church itself didn't donate to the Prop 8 cause but only encouraged its members to do so. Sure, the Church didn't donate cash, but it did pay its employees while they worked for the cause.

That was the Deseret News' position--that total Church contributions were less than $3,000--but the Church made some disclosures (in late January 2009, I think) showing a bit over $200,000 in in-kind donations. The fine was because about $36,000 of that should have been first disclosed in mid-to-late November, but the Church's accountants just waited and included it with the final disclosures in January.

Considering the Church's resources, the allegations that were made against the Church, and the demands that the CFPPC throw the book at the Church--the ultimate fine wasn't even a slap on the wrist.

It would be interesting to see where the Deseret News' figure came from, but I doubt we'll ever know.

This should only be volunteer though, not being paid by the Church. I originally thought that was what the church was doing.

I could be wrong, but I think the bulk of the Church's contributions involved using Church resources while coordinating with the ProtectMarriage.org staff (travel between Utah and California for a couple of 70s, paying their secretaries, etc); for the techies/equipment that made the Church's 2008 satellite broadcast on the issue possible; and for an abortive call center the Church set up in Idaho (and shut down after only a week or two in operation when someone figured out that it didn't look good for Idahoans to be cold-calling Californians on a California ballot issue).

Edited June 13, 2010 by Just_A_Guy

[Moksha]

The documentary talks about Bishops and Stake Presidents speaking with members and telling them how much they thought they should donate, based on their tithing records.

What is up with that?

[Just_A_Guy]

I'm told that was a pretty standard tactic back when individual wards had to raise their own building funds.

[Moksha]

But employing this method as a means of political fundraising takes things to a whole new level.

[Just_A_Guy]

But employing this method as a means of political fundraising takes things to a whole new level.

As opposed to assigning someone to a political party based on which side of the street they happen to live on?

[pam]

The documentary talks about Bishops and Stake Presidents speaking with members and telling them how much they thought they should donate, based on their tithing records.

What is up with that?

This was not uncommon back in the day when we had to raise money for buildings to be built. I remember having an interview with my Bishop and being assessed a certain amount to pay towards building fund. It was based on my tithing record and therefore based on my income.

This was also back in the day when chapels were built with a lot of sweat from the members. I've assisted with the building of 2 chapels.

[Voyager]

The documentary talks about Bishops and Stake Presidents speaking with members and telling them how much they thought they should donate, based on their tithing records.

What is up with that?

Is the documentary posted somewhere on the net yet?

[Moksha]

Is the documentary posted somewhere on the net yet?

Just the trailer as far as I know.

[Blackmarch]

I think the members should be encouraged to spend time on worthy political campaigns. This should only be volunteer though, not being paid by the Church. I originally thought that was what the church was doing.

well its not entirely clear cut-

Any time the church has let a political group use a building, it has donated money in the form of paying for electricity as well using its real estate, and likely someone in a leadership position would be there as well to watch over the building if nothing else during such an event.

The church also helps pay for trips and etc that higher ups have to make to visit stakes and wards and etc... and if they took any time during such to interact and/or support a political group, then it would be on church pay and time (or could at least be accredited as such in court- especially if the individual did not take any means to use money from a different source and took whatever measures at such a time to indicate that they were functioning seperate from the church.

a further complication is with the apostles- if I understand right, part of what apostles do is that they consecrate all their time and means to the building of God's kingdom, and so in that sense everything they have becomes part of the church both their time and their money- so if they want to hold that up in court then pretty much the apostles can also be considered on church time and pay all the time in court, and from that if any of them in any way support a political then it can be accounted to the church.

In light of this it would be hard to fight against the ruling, and probably more costly to do so.

I haven't yet seen good evidence that the church paid someone with the sole purpose to go support prop 8.