Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Utah politico arrested, suspected of DUI
UPI.com ^ | Jan. 15, 2010

Posted on 01/15/2010 10:46:09 PM PST by Colofornian

MILLCREEK, Utah, Jan. 15 (UPI) -- Utah Senate Majority Leader Sheldon Killpack was booked into a county jail Friday, suspected of drunken driving, police said.

The 41-year-old Republican was pulled over about 12:15 a.m. by a state highway patrol officer who allegedly noticed "a poor driving pattern," the Deseret News reported. Police said he failed a field sobriety test and then refused to breathe into a portable breath tester, the newspaper said.

"I could smell the odor of alcohol coming from the subject's breath," a trooper wrote in a probable cause statement.

Killpack issued a statement in which he said he is "deeply sorry for the impact this incident will have on those who support and trust me -- my colleagues in the Senate, my constituents and, most importantly, my family."

He added he is "prepared to accept all personal, legal and political consequences for my actions."

After Killpack was arrested, his car was impounded and he was booked into the Salt Lake County Jail on suspicion of DUI. Highway patrol officials obtained a warrant to allow them to take his blood. Results could take two to four weeks to obtain.

Senate President Michael Waddoups said Killpack's father was killed by a drunken driver when Killpack was a teenager. He also said he didn't know Killpack, who is a member of the Mormon Church, which frowns on drinking, was a drinker, the newspaper said.


TOPICS: Current Events
KEYWORDS: alcohol; antimormonthread; christian; drunkdriver; dui; lds; majorityleader; mormon; republican; utah
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last
From the article: Senate President Michael Waddoups said Killpack's father was killed by a drunken driver when Killpack was a teenager. He also said he didn't know Killpack, who is a member of the Mormon Church, which frowns on drinking, was a drinker, the newspaper said.
1 posted on 01/15/2010 10:46:11 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
He also said he didn't know Killpack, who is a member of the Mormon Church, which frowns on drinking, was a drinker, the newspaper said.

I suppose, too boot, that he wasn't wearing his special underwear.

2 posted on 01/15/2010 10:50:00 PM PST by Mr Ramsbotham (Obey the law, or you'll go to prison and be raped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Gotta get home somehow...j/k


3 posted on 01/15/2010 10:51:19 PM PST by world weary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
Killpack also takes money from Big Tobacco. From another article:

Senate Majority Leader Sheldon Killpack, who received $1,500 last year from Altria, said he has no problem taking the money and disclosing it, but it doesn't affect his votes.
"If you can't look at somebody straight in the face and take their money and vote according to your conscience, you probably shouldn't take the money," Killpack said.

Altia is the parent company of Phillip Morris, the maker of Marlboro and other cigarettes.

4 posted on 01/15/2010 11:20:08 PM PST by T Minus Four (Help Haiti and know your money is going to the right people - www.WorldVision.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Way to go Killpack, you jerk! If you want to make Mormons look like hypocritical jack@$$es I really don't care, but thanks a lot for making Utah and the Republican party look bad.

5 posted on 01/15/2010 11:25:44 PM PST by T Minus Four (Help Haiti and know your money is going to the right people - www.WorldVision.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

I rest my earlier case. So tell us, when and why did you become an obsessed Mormon-hater?


6 posted on 01/15/2010 11:25:46 PM PST by JustTheTruth (Say "NO!" to Socialism in America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

There’s no friggin’ excuse for this. May he lose his job and go to jail for a long time.


7 posted on 01/15/2010 11:38:10 PM PST by snuffy smiff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Talk about shattering allusions with one taboo - though a dangerous one at that when behind the wheel of a car.


8 posted on 01/16/2010 12:11:50 AM PST by Republic_of_Secession.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snuffy smiff

Well he will probably loose his job but whether he goes to prison is an open question.


9 posted on 01/16/2010 12:13:28 AM PST by Republic_of_Secession.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Republic_of_Secession.

He’ll lose his temple recommend, which is a big deal for an active Mormon — even one who’s not much of a believer, but just keeping up appearances for family and career reasons.


10 posted on 01/16/2010 12:57:40 AM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker; Colofornian

He’ll lose his temple recommend, which is a big deal for an active Mormon — even one who’s not much of a believer, but just keeping up appearances for family and career reasons.

- - - - -— -
If he is convicted of felony (DUI is a felony in many states), he will be excommunicated as well.


11 posted on 01/16/2010 1:23:12 AM PST by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JustTheTruth; Colofornian; Religion Moderator

Why do you assume Colofornaian hates Mormons? Several of his/her family and friends are LDS.

Just because someone posts news information of interest to people in Utah (both LDS and non) does not mean they hate Mormons.

I supposed it would be fair to say that if you posted news about an Arizona politician who was arrests, we could say you hate Arizonians? Or if you posted a thread about a politician who was arrested for DUI and a Catholic that you hate Catholics? Doubtful.

I am constantly amazed at how many people attack the “messenger”, the poster of a thread rather than the news organization that published it.


12 posted on 01/16/2010 1:31:23 AM PST by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JustTheTruth; Colofornian

‘Shooting the messenger’ eh?...tsk tsk tsk.


13 posted on 01/16/2010 1:58:06 AM PST by Tainan (Cogito, ergo conservatus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: T Minus Four
"...thanks a lot for making Utah and the Republican party look bad..."

How would a reader ever know he was a Republican?

no, wait...

14 posted on 01/16/2010 2:24:03 AM PST by Does so (ObamaCare...I pay for medical-marijuana claims by millions of Americans?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
He added he is "prepared to accept all personal, legal and political consequences for my actions."

As well he should. It is strange that the very weapon that took his father, he partook in.

15 posted on 01/16/2010 4:35:32 AM PST by svcw (The time is near at hand which must determine whether Americans are to be free men or slaves. GW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JustTheTruth

You assume to much.
It could be that the poster dislikes drunk drivers.


16 posted on 01/16/2010 4:37:30 AM PST by svcw (The time is near at hand which must determine whether Americans are to be free men or slaves. GW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: svcw; JustTheTruth; Colofornian

It is this type of self-righteous hypocrisy that makes the lawmaker an easy target.

1. He is in a position that requires, not only that he inact laws, but that he follow them.

2. He touts his religion and it is one that prohibits alcohol, yet he imbibes. He imbibes in such a way that it has become a social and legal problem.

3. With a man of this character, it makes one wonder just what else he is trying to get away with.

And so, his facade of Mormonism comes into play. If someone is acting with all these pretenses in life, it is human nature to wonder why, what the cause and effect are.

These hidden actions reveal the fruits of hypocrisy and deception - and YES we all are sinners. I would behoove us all to admit it, ask for forgiveness, let Christ wash us clean with his blood and become born anew in a life dedicated to our Savior.

The fruits of hypocrisy is seeing someone who must try, try, try to be a better person in his own strength yet always failing - and thus falling into the trap of living a lie. We see it in unregenerated people who call themselves “christian” too.


17 posted on 01/16/2010 4:56:11 AM PST by colorcountry (A faith without truth is not true faith.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: JustTheTruth
. So tell us, when and why did you become an obsessed Mormon-hater?

On thge American frontier, a long time ago.....

 

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1/17#17

  17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!
  18 My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.
  19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”
  20 He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time. When I came to myself again, I found myself lying on my back, looking up into heaven. When the light had departed, I had no strength; but soon recovering in some degree, I went home. And as I leaned up to the fireplace, mother inquired what the matter was. I replied, “Never mind, all is well—I am well enough off.” I then said to my mother,
“I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true.”
 

18 posted on 01/16/2010 5:28:55 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: T Minus Four
 

Way to go Killpack, you jerk!

If you want to make Mormons look like hypocritical jack@$$es I really don't care,

but thanks a lot for making Utah and the Republican party look bad.


 

 
But he DOES have a nice haircut!!


 
 
 
Professor Robert Millet        teaching at the Mission Prep Club in 2004  http://newsnet.byu.edu/video/18773/  <-- Complete and uneditted

 
 
Timeline...    Subject...
 
0:59            "Anti-Mormons..."
1:16            "ATTACK the faith you have..."
2:02           "We really aren't obligated to answer everyone's questions..."
3:57           "You already know MORE about God and Christ and the plan of salvation than any who would ATTACK you."

19 posted on 01/16/2010 5:31:23 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: colorcountry; svcw; JustTheTruth; Colofornian; Elsie
And so, his facade of Mormonism comes into play. If someone is acting with all these pretenses in life, it is human nature to wonder why, what the cause and effect are.

Wow! Been there, done that. As you know I take a drink or five on a regular basis. When asked by a local what I would be doing on New Years Eve, I responded that I would stay home and try not to compete with all the amateur Utah drinkers who would certainly be out there on the road.

I make an effort to not drive when I drink. Sometimes we make mistakes. This guy needs to honestly admit he doesn't believe in Mormonism. In a 12 step process that should be number 1. The drinking problem can be handled and managed as well.

As said, been there and done that.

20 posted on 01/16/2010 6:04:48 AM PST by Utah Binger (Southern Utah, where the World comes to see America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut; JustTheTruth; Colofornian

Some folks seem to choose the most ironic screen names.


21 posted on 01/16/2010 6:14:45 AM PST by ejonesie22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Utah Binger
been there, and done that

Me too.

22 posted on 01/16/2010 6:29:10 AM PST by colorcountry (A faith without truth is not true faith.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: colorcountry; GovernmentShrinker; reaganaut; JustTheTruth
He’ll lose his temple recommend, which is a big deal for an active Mormon [GovernmentShrinker]

If he is convicted of felony (DUI is a felony in many states), he will be excommunicated as well. [Reaganaut]

It is this type of self-righteous hypocrisy that makes the lawmaker an easy target. 1. He is in a position that requires, not only that he inact laws, but that he follow them. [colorcountry]

On top of all this, the SL Trib article this morning says he is the Utah Senate Chair for their Ethics Committee and the Utah Democratic Party Chairman has said: "We expect that there will be consequences for his leadership position and his position as chair of the Senate Ethics Committee".

So he's combined multiple losses with open hypocrisy and depicted the ironic tragedy that his own father was killed by a drunk driver!

23 posted on 01/16/2010 6:58:36 AM PST by Colofornian (If you're not going to drink the coffee, at least wake up and smell it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Mr. single issue poster strikes again.


24 posted on 01/16/2010 7:40:03 AM PST by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Invincibly Ignorant; Colofornian
I am really starting to think it’s some sort of crush...
25 posted on 01/16/2010 8:32:09 AM PST by ejonesie22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut
If he is convicted of felony (DUI is a felony in many states), he will be excommunicated as well.

I really doubt that. I'm not LDS, but am a long time observer of LDS culture and Church policy, and I've never heard of someone being excommunicated for a DUI. Now if he compounded this incident with further alcohol use, or with refusal to participate in something like an alcohol therapy group after being directed to do so by his bishop as part of the repentance process, or if he was already in some alcohol-related repentance process at the time of the DUI then he'd likely be facing excommunication, but more on the grounds of refusing to even make an effort to comply with Church teaching and directions from his priesthood leaders, than because the state classified his DUI as a felony and convicted him.

26 posted on 01/16/2010 9:18:13 AM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
the ironic tragedy that his own father was killed by a drunk driver!

This aspect of the situation makes it seem like he's really an out-of-control alcoholic. The combination of this family tragedy and strong Mormon teaching against alcohol use (and thus major consequences for a politician in a Mormon-heavy state), not being enough to dissuade him from driving while so impaired from alcohol that he obviously couldn't control the car, is pretty striking. Doesn't sound like a case of someone who just enjoys breaking the rules by sneaking out for a forbidden drink with friends now and then.

From today's Salt Lake Tribune article: "There will be those who may be upset enough they want to make a change [in the leadership post]. He may want to make a change," said Senate President Michael Waddoups, whose own wife was badly injured by a drunken driver. "I'll be supportive of whatever decision he comes to and he'll make a good one." I'd say the guy's political career is burnt toast.

He's said to have left the fundraiser event around 9PM, accompanied by an unnamed former lawmaker and lobbyist Mark Walker. When he was stopped, there was a male passenger in his car. Probably a couple of people are having serious chats with their bishops today, even though they avoided getting arrested themselves. It'll be interesting to see if the Utah media manages to pin down and publicize the identities of his drinking buddy or buddies. Walker will certainly be quizzed re his whereabouts between the time he left the fundraiser with Killpack and the time Killpack was stopped.

27 posted on 01/16/2010 9:43:02 AM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Rereading the article re who he left with, I realize now that it said he left with just one person, Mark Walker, who is both a former lawmaker and a current lobbist. Walker is definitely on the hot seat, especially if he’s member of the LDS Church.


28 posted on 01/16/2010 9:48:10 AM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

When my wife gets home for supper, we will toast this a$$ hat with a shot of good Alberta Premium rye whisky. I guess that his magical Masonic grips and passwords didn’t do it for him. Maybe the trooper wasn’t a Mason...


29 posted on 01/16/2010 1:10:28 PM PST by MarkBsnr ( I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
Killpack issued a statement in which he said he is "deeply sorry for the impact this incident will have on those who support and trust me -- my colleagues in the Senate, my constituents and, most importantly, my family."

Oh my...do all politicians have this boilerplate BS tattooed on the inside of their forearm so they can read it off when the time comes or do they just have it memorized by heart? Pathetic.

30 posted on 01/16/2010 3:00:14 PM PST by Moltke (DOPE will get you 4 to 8 in the Big House - HOPE will get you 4 to 8 in the White House.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

What has Orrin G. Hatch said? This will make it harder to keep UT Republican.


31 posted on 01/16/2010 3:05:19 PM PST by Theodore R. (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Another failure of UT primary voters, but how could they have known the truth about this gentleman? Or would it have mattered to them?


32 posted on 01/16/2010 3:08:01 PM PST by Theodore R. (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Invincibly Ignorant
Mr. single issue poster strikes again.Jog your record player.

It keeps skipping, and

skipping and,

skipping and,

skipping and,

skipping and,

skipping and,

skipping and,

skipping and,

skipping and,

skipping and,

skipping and,

skipping...

33 posted on 01/16/2010 7:08:29 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker

If he is convicted of felony (DUI is a felony in many states), he will be excommunicated as well. [me]

I really doubt that. [gs]

- - - - - - - - -
It is not that it is about alcohol. It is about if he is convicted of a FELONY (which DUI can be in many states).

The LDS “Church Handbook of Instructions”, which all preisthood leaders requires excommunication for those who have been convicted of a felony and they cannot be re-baptized (come back to the LDS church) UNTIL THEIR CIVIL RIGHTS HAVE BEEN RESTORED.

That is why he will probably be excommunicated.


34 posted on 01/16/2010 7:46:49 PM PST by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut

I’m quite sure it doesn’t require excommunication for any and all “felonies”. The Church is not going to defer to government on the question of who gets excommunicated. In some states, it’s a felony to possess a gun without a valid permit, even if one’s permit just recently expired and would have been renewed if the person had just gone to the right office and filled out the right form and paid a fee by a certain date. No way is the LDS Church going to excommnicate someone for that sort of felony. In the case of Killpack, the issue will almost certainly center on alcohol, and what (if any) prior history he had with alcohol-related Church discipline. If this is, as far as the Church knows, a first time lapse, and he agrees to pursue whatever repentance steps his priesthood leaders prescribe, then at most he’ll get disfellowshipped for a little while, even if he gets convicted of a felony.


35 posted on 01/17/2010 1:32:23 AM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker; colorcountry; Colofornian; Elsie; FastCoyote; svcw; Zakeet; SkyPilot; ...

Remember the LDS church does not work (on many levels) as Christian churches do. “Repentance” only starts AFTER your jail term is over and your rights have been restored.

Do you have a copy of the Handbook of Instructions? Many LDS do not even know what is in it since it is only available to those in leadership positions.

I have a copy, however I am on a business trip (and away from my library) for the next few months. I have asked a few other freepers if they have copies to provide a source for you.

That being said, it is not the LDS “deferring” to government, it is the idea that if you are convicted of a felony, you must have been involved in behavior against LDS standards and therefore need to be excommunicated.

I worked as a secretary for one of the psychologists in the prison system there. I also personally knew people who were excommunicated for so called “minor” felonies (like DUI).

I stand by my statement, however I will allow that since he is “high profile”, it is possible that the LDS First Presidency will allow only for dis-fellowshipment since they can override the local leadership.


36 posted on 01/17/2010 12:02:52 PM PST by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
It appears the CHURCH doesmn't want mere humans to know what they might face in the future:
 
Unauthorized distribution

Neither volume of the Church Handbook of Instructions is available for sale to the general public or the general church membership; however, an unauthorized copy is available on the internet. The church asserts copyright over the contents of the Church Handbook and prohibits its duplication.[8] The handbook emphasizes that "Book 1 has been prepared solely for use by general and local Church officers to administer the affairs of the Church."[4] The copyright to the Church Handbook is owned by Intellectual Reserve, Inc., a corporation owned by the LDS Church which owns the church's intellectual property rights.

After Book 1 was published in 1998, Jerald and Sandra Tanner's Utah Lighthouse Ministry published portions of it on the internet without permission from the church and without including the book's copyright notice. The text was also disseminated to other websites which the ULM's website linked to. In the 1999 lawsuit Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry, a United States district court issued an injunction prohibiting the further duplication of the contents of Book 1 and ordered ULM to remove the offending material from its website.[9]

In May 2008, the LDS Church notified the Wikimedia Foundation that it believed the copyright to the Handbook of Instructions had been violated by a link posted in Wikinews.[10] The link directed readers to the text of the handbook that was posted on the Wikileaks website, which is unaffiliated with the Wikimedia Foundation. Shortly after the complaint was made, Wikinews removed the link to the text from the article.

 

 

(From WIKI)

37 posted on 01/17/2010 12:56:57 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
The Church is not going to defer to government on the question of who gets excommunicated.

Oh?

Ever hear of the end of polygamy in 1890?

That was the GOVERNMENT telling the LDS bunch what to do!

38 posted on 01/17/2010 12:58:15 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Polygamous fundamentalists baptized by proxy into LDS Church, researcher says

Salt Lake Tribune
Kristen Moulton

June 3, 2009

Prominent fundamentalist Mormons, most of whom were excommunicated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for practicing polygamy while they were alive, have been posthumously re-baptized in LDS temples, a Salt Lake City researcher says.

Helen Radkey said in a new report that she obtained church records on 20 fundamentalists -- from murderer Ervil LeBaron to Joseph Musser to Rulon Jeffs --- showing that they've been baptized and have had their plural marriages "sealed" for time and eternity by proxy LDS members, one as recently as this year.

http://www.icsahome.com/logon/elibdocview.asp?Subject=Polygamous+fundamentalists+baptized+by+proxy+into+LDS+Church%2C+researcher+says

 




(Note that they were excommunicated for breaking WORLDLY law - NOT the law of GOD as described in D&C 132.)


39 posted on 01/17/2010 1:04:47 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker; colorcountry; Colofornian; Elsie; FastCoyote; svcw; Zakeet; SkyPilot; ...
In the case of Killpack, the issue will almost certainly center on alcohol, and what (if any) prior history he had with alcohol-related Church discipline. If this is, as far as the Church knows, a first time lapse, and he agrees to pursue whatever repentance steps his priesthood leaders prescribe, then at most he’ll get disfellowshipped for a little while, even if he gets convicted of a felony.

My source is the 2006 Church Handbook of Instruction. According to pg 119 of the hand book, in all conditions where a member has been disciplined by a Church Disciplinary council, if there is a crimial/civil sentence it states

If a person who has had Church Discipline has been convicted of a crime or found guilty in a civil action of fraud or other dishonest or immoral conduct, a disciplinary council should not be held to consider changing his Church status until he has fulfilled all terms and conditions of any sentence imposed by legal authorities. These conditions may include imprisonment, probation, parole, and fines or restitution. Exceptions require the approval of the First Presidency

Bottom line, how gravely did Killpack's DUI and his link to mormonism damage the image of the mormon church. Excom may be one of three means of punishment, however, he will lose his temple privilages for all until the full terms of the law are met - with the only exception being granted by the FP.

40 posted on 01/17/2010 4:19:43 PM PST by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker; colorcountry; Colofornian; Elsie; FastCoyote; svcw; Zakeet; SkyPilot; ...
In the case of Killpack, the issue will almost certainly center on alcohol, and what (if any) prior history he had with alcohol-related Church discipline. If this is, as far as the Church knows, a first time lapse, and he agrees to pursue whatever repentance steps his priesthood leaders prescribe, then at most he’ll get disfellowshipped for a little while, even if he gets convicted of a felony.

My source is the 2006 Church Handbook of Instruction. According to pg 119 of the hand book, in all conditions where a member has been disciplined by a Church Disciplinary council, if there is a crimial/civil sentence it states

If a person who has had Church Discipline has been convicted of a crime or found guilty in a civil action of fraud or other dishonest or immoral conduct, a disciplinary council should not be held to consider changing his Church status until he has fulfilled all terms and conditions of any sentence imposed by legal authorities. These conditions may include imprisonment, probation, parole, and fines or restitution. Exceptions require the approval of the First Presidency

Bottom line, how gravely did Killpack's DUI and his link to mormonism damage the image of the mormon church. Excom may be one of three means of punishment, however, he will lose his temple privilages for all until the full terms of the law are met - with the only exception being granted by the FP.

41 posted on 01/17/2010 4:19:43 PM PST by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker; reaganaut; Elsie; Godzilla
From "Church Handbook of Instructions. Book 1. Stake Presidencies and Bishoprics." Published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Salt Lake City, Utah, 1998.  (link, slow but works)

Persons Who Have Been Convicted of Crimes, p. 27

Persons who have been convicted of crimes and seek baptism for the first time or baptism for readmission into the Church are not baptized until they complete their terms of imprisonment, parole, or probation resulting from their convictions (unless the First Presidency has granted an exception). They are encouraged to work closely with local priesthood leaders and to do everything they can to become worthy of baptism.
 

A person who has been convicted of, or who has confessed to, murder (even in private confessions to a priesthood leader) may not be baptized unless the First Presidency gives permission. The request for permission to baptize must include all pertinent details as determined during a personal interview by the mission president (if the person is seeking baptism for the first time) or bishop (if a former member is seeking readmission).

Excommunication, p. 94

A person who is excommunicated is no longer a member of the Church. Excommunication is the most severe Church disciplinary action. As directed by the Spirit, it may be necessary for:

  1. 1. Members who have committed serious transgressions, especially violations of temple covenants (see "Considerations in Church Discipline").

  2. Members who have been disfellowshipped and have not repented and for whom excommunication seems to offer the best hope for reformation.

  3. Members whose conduct makes them a serious threat to others and whose Church membership facilitates their access to victims.

  4. Church leaders or prominent members whose transgressions significantly impair the good name or moral influence of the Church in the community that is aware of the transgression

Excommunication is mandatory for murder and almost always required for incest.

 

A person who is excommunicated does not enjoy any of Church membership. He may not wear temple garments or pay tithes and offerings. He may attend public Church meetings if his conduct is orderly, but his participation in such meetings is limited the same as for disfellowshipped members.

 Considerations in Church Discipline, pp. 102-103

The following paragraphs list some of the factors that leaders may need to consider in reaching decisions on formal and informal Church discipline. These factors are listed in order from those that suggest stem discipline to those that suggest more lenient discipline. None of these factors dictates any particular decision. They are only aids to a decision that must be pursued prayerfully and guided by the Spirit of the Lord.

Violation of Covenants

If a transgressor has been endowed, he has made covenants to live a higher standard of behavior than applies to those who have not been endowed. Violating these covenants magnifies the seriousness of the transgression. Therefore, endowed persons who commit adultery or fornication (including homosexual relations) are subject to stern Church discipline.
 

Adultery is a more serious sexual transgression than fornication because adultery involves a violation of marriage covenants.

Position of Trust or Authority

If a transgressor occupied a position of trust or authority (such as parent, bishop, or teacher) that was violated by the transgression, the seriousness of the transgression is magnified. For example, incest is a most serious form of sexual transgression for a parent because it violates the sacred trust of parental authority. Embezzlement is a most serious form of theft because the transgressor has been trusted with funds; it is a particularly serious offense when it involves Church funds. See also Serious Transgression While Holding a Prominent Church Position.

Repetition

If a transgression that was previously confessed and seemingly forsaken is repeated, the repetition may be viewed as part of a, pattern of conduct, even though the earlier transgression has been resolved with Church authorities. As the Lord warned those he had forgiven, "Go your ways and sin no more; but unto that soul who sinneth shall the former sins return" (D&C 82:7).

Magnitude

The seriousness of a transgression is measured in part by the number of sinful acts and the number of persons injured.  The number of persons who are aware of the transgression also affects its seriousness.

Age, Maturity, and Experience

Presiding officers should consider a transgressor's age, maturity, and experience when administering Church discipline.  The Lord revealed, "For of him unto whom much is given much is required; and he who sins against the greater light shall receive the greater condemnation" (D&C 82:3).
 

Leniency is often appropriate for those who are immature in the gospel. Leniency may also be appropriate for young members who are involved in a moral transgression if they forsake the sin and manifest sincere repentance. However, young members who persist in immoral conduct may require formal disciplinary action.

Interests of the Innocent

When administering and announcing discipline, presiding officers should consider the interests of innocent victims and the transgressor's innocent family members.

Time between Transgression and Confession

If a transgression occurred many years before it was confessed, the presiding officer carefully considers the intervening circumstances. If the sin was not repeated and the member has lived righteously in the interim, his conduct during the intervening time can show that he has forsaken the sin. In this instance, confession may complete rather than start the process of repentance.

Voluntary Confession

Voluntary and complete confession demonstrates a repentant attitude, which may favor leniency. An admission of guilt after a person has been accused of or interviewed about a transgression is less indicative of repentance. A person who admits guilt when interviewed by a bishop shows greater repentance than one who tries to deceive and admits guilt only when confronted with evidence.

Evidence of Repentance

Normally, evidence of repentance is the most important single factor in determining how to accomplish the first purpose of Church discipline: saving the soul of the transgressor. Genuine repentance is demonstrated more reliably by righteous actions over a period of time than by intense sorrow during a single interview. Judgments about the adequacy of repentance require spiritual discernment. Factors to consider include the nature of the confession, depth of sorrow for the sin, success in forsaking the sin, strength of faith in Jesus Christ, faithfulness in obeying other commandments, truthful communications to Church officers, restitution to injured persons' obedience to legal requirements, and willingness to follow the direction of Church authorities.

Serious Transgression While Holding a Prominent Church Position, p. 95

A disciplinary council must be held for a member who commits a serious transgression while holding a prominent Church position, such as Area Authority Seventy; temple, mission, or stake president; patriarch; or bishop. As used here, serious transgression is defined as a deliberate and major offense against morality. It includes (but is not limited to) attempted murder, rape, forcible sexual abuse, spouse abuse, intentional serious physical injury of others, adultery, fornication, homosexual relations, deliberate abandonment of family responsibilities, robbery, burglary, theft, embezzlement, sale of illegal drugs, fraud, perjury, and false swearing.

 

 

42 posted on 01/17/2010 5:31:23 PM PST by delacoert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: delacoert

Better copy than my scanned 2006 version. I see no real differences between the two in the extra areas you posted.


43 posted on 01/17/2010 5:38:20 PM PST by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla

Yes. From reading all the related sections of the handbook, it seems that way to me too.

It's interesting for me note just how much gravity is reserved for "violations of temple covenants."


44 posted on 01/17/2010 5:45:11 PM PST by delacoert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: delacoert

4. Church leaders or prominent members whose transgressions significantly impair the good name or moral influence of the Church in the community that is aware of the transgression.

I think this is probably most applicable, but it depends upon the political theocratic evaluation of the governing bishop and which is the most expedient way to handle the situation. As one reads, I noticed a significant emphasis on sexual immorality than DUIs


45 posted on 01/17/2010 6:04:06 PM PST by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: delacoert
Excommunication is mandatory for murder and almost always required for incest.

"How do I love thee"?

Let me count they ways."


And then point out the WRONG ones...

46 posted on 01/17/2010 6:48:28 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: delacoert
Excommunication is mandatory for murder and almost always required for incest.

"How do I love thee"?

Let me count the ways."


And then point out the WRONG ones...

47 posted on 01/17/2010 6:48:34 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut; delacoert; Godzilla
“Repentance” only starts AFTER your jail term is over and your rights have been restored.

Nope, not true. Repentance starts immediately. Except for murder, and usually incest as well, conviction of a serious crime is not automatic grounds for excommunication (see CHI excerpt posted by delacoert). If someone hasn't been excommunicated, then they're still a member, and certainly aren't expected to refrain from beginning a repentance process until some government agency says they're done with their sentence.

if you are convicted of a felony, you must have been involved in behavior against LDS standards and therefore need to be excommunicated.

Again, not true, which is why the CHI specifies only two crimes for which excommunication is mandatory (though, oddly, it specifies that the First Presidency may make an exception in the case of incest). The people you recall having been excommunicated for "minor" offenses were almost people who had repeated the offenses multiple times and/or lied to their priesthood leader about what they had done, etc.

The issue of initial baptism is completely different. For whatever reason, the Church policy is not to baptize new converts while they are still serving a prison term or parole, etc, though exceptions can be made and are probably made quite often in the case of lesser crimes and in cases where the court of jurisdiction is in a country with a sketchy judicial system. But it is definitely not Church policy to excommunicate anyone who wouldn't currently be eligible for first-time baptism, so lots of people retain Church membership even though their legal status is such that they would not be eligible for baptism if they were new converts.

Godzilla: You are misunderstanding the passage you quoted. It does not refer to excommunication, but to any status resulting from a Church Discipline proceeding -- such a status could be disfellowshipment or even some lesser impairment. And that's assuming a Church Discipline proceeding was held at all. In many cases, it wouldn't be, especially business/finance type cases, where failure to comply with certain arcane provisions of accounting rules, tax or securities regulations, etc., may constitute a crime, even though it may not be entirely clear whether the person realized they were committing a crime. While some convictions on such grounds result in a prison term, many more result in punishment such as being barred from the securities industry -- sometimes for life. No way is the Church is going excommunicate somebody and keep them excommunicated over a conviction for front-running or misclassification of a line item on audited financial statements. In fact it's very unlikely that a Church Discipline proceeding would held in most cases of this nature, in which case the convict wouldn't even be disfellowshipped.

48 posted on 01/18/2010 10:24:30 PM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker; Godzilla

The people you recall having been excommunicated for “minor” offenses were almost people who had repeated the offenses multiple times and/or lied to their priesthood leader about what they had done, etc.

- - - - - -
WRONG. I suppose it does depend upon your status in the ward and your Stake pres but you assume WAY too much about them.

BTW, you are NOT LDS are you? Much less a Stake Pres.

Don’t assume the LDS will tell you the truth. They will lie in order to make the “church” appear in the best light. I found that out the hard way.


49 posted on 01/18/2010 11:06:04 PM PST by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut

No, I’m not LDS. And I’m sure there are situations where the official policy is violated and someone who is unpopular with local church leaders is excommunicated for something that didn’t really warrant it per official policy. That sort of abuse of power is hardly peculiar to the LDS Church, though. But I have to wonder if the people you cited 1) were really as innocent of other offenses as they led you to believe, and 2) tried to appeal their excommunications to a higher authority.


50 posted on 01/19/2010 11:11:43 AM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson