12 year old gay Mormon at church
- Thread starter Miggs
- Start date
RandyForRubio
Well-Known Member
I think any church leader getting paid that much is out of line. Lot better things they could do with that money.
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
I find it hard to believe that everything that they do could not/would not be accomplished by volunteers. The leadership is by far the least impressive thing about the LDS church.
LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
I would be curious to know the exact benefit package. I am sure health insurance for their family is covered, we already know about travel, car allowances, often living arrangements, security details/driver services. I would be willing to bet on top of the 120k they are getting around another 50k in benefits, and that is probably low. It is really anything but a humble and meager lifestyle. I personally do not expect them to live a meager life. They are full time, meaning 24/7, responsible to the church and travel extensively away from their families in their duties, and I support them being, well supported. But again, the point of being out of touch. It is hard enough for many of the bishops I have been acquainted with over the years to relate to the single mother with 3 kids who needs bishop's storehouse yet again to relate, let alone someone like a GA that has probably never entered a BSH in any but an official capacity.
edit: Let me be clear, I have met plenty of these men, and find them most all to be for the most part humble and well-meaning and service-minded. Most of them would give you the shirt off their back if you needed it. I still think they are somewhat out of touch with the general population of the church, particularly the youth (read: 35 and under) in more affluent countries/areas. I think the church continues to grow in impoverished areas since it represents some level of hope, but in affluent areas where hope is not a commodity to trade on it is struggling.
Which is why I'd love to see some flavor among the leadership branches. Add more "youth", members that are not Caucasian, non Americans taking larger, more prominent roles.
I think that would go a long way towards battling the LDS church's image, youth and humbleness problems.
I think that would go a long way towards battling the LDS church's image, youth and humbleness problems.
What's your evidence that they are getting free $40/plate dinners?
I remember when Huntsman senior made a private plane available for Pres. Hinckley back in 1996. Here's a news article: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/496659/HUNTSMAN-OFFERS-USE-OF-JETS-TO-LDS-CHURCH-LEADERS.html. It wasn't even for exclusive use by LDS leaders, "The Huntsman family and business are happy to provide the aircraft for a multitude of humanitarian, charitable and business purposes...No single organization or group dominates usage." I haven't heard anything about one or more private planes since then. My brother-in-law's father was a GA (died maybe 10 years ago; to my knowledge he never flew in a private plane. The sister of one of my friends is a current general authorities (young women's presidency) and as far as I know she never flies in a private plane. I suspect the Huntsman plane or similar one is still available for Pres. Monson should he be in a condition to travel, but I think your claim that GAs routinely use private planes is hogwash. If you have evidence to the contrary I'm willing to listen.
Now this one wouldn't surprise me. I know lots of people who use company cars, that aren't even especially high up in their company.
Where's this coming from? The GAs almost certainly have the same health insurance that I do, namely DMBA. (As a BYU professor I'm technically employed by the church.) It's fine, but frankly not even as good as the health insurance I had at my last job, in Wisconsin.
Where's this coming from? I've never heard anything about free education for families of GAs, and doubt you have any evidence for this. At best perhaps they get 50% reduced tuition at church schools similar to university employees here at BYU.
They do likely get retirement benefits similar to what I get as a church employee, namely a retirement plan and access to a 401k plan.
As to whether the actual remuneration and things they ACTUALLY receive put them in the "lavish" category that's still open to interpretation. I still don't consider $120K/year to be "lavish". Consider that these are all mid-to-late career individuals who are nearly always top individuals in their field. Consider my field, namely physics. This government website says the mean annual wage is $122K. https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes192012.htm. So mid-to-late career individuals who are at or near the top of the physics field are probably more like $190K (the 90th percentile number). Or consider your field... you're a dentist, right? The same website, https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes291021.htm, says that the mean annual wage is $154K, and the 90th percentile number is "greater than $208K". And we know that many of the GAs come from law, medical, and business backgrounds, which undoubtedly have much higher numbers than those.
So let me ask you... if you think $120K is too large, what would be appropriate compensation in your mind for someone in physics, dentistry, law, medicine, business, etc.--probably among the top in their field, in his or her mid-to-late career--who then becomes a full-time GA?
This is a much more reasonable way of expressing a concern than what green wrote.
But I think you are vastly overestimating the benefit package. As I mentioned in my reply to green, it's very likely to be similar to mine as I am also a church employee. As with many employers, health insurance is partially paid for by the company but there's still a large individual contribution. Travel for church stuff is obviously paid for. There's very possibly a car allowance for some of the GAs, and maybe even a car service for those who are too old to drive. For those stationed away from home the living arrangements are very probably paid for (it's that way for mission presidents). Don't know about security details, but would expect the church president at the very least to have that. Possibly the first presidency and quorum of the 12 as well. Highly unlikely for any of the other GAs, in my opinion. But overall I strongly doubt the total benefits approach anywhere near $50K.
Is it "humble and meager"? Certainly not. Should it be? Maybe, maybe not. Is it lavish? Not in my opinion. But I think your point about potentially being out of touch is a good one.
Don't forget that reported income is a very subjective thing. I work for the government and my publicly available income number is way higher than anyone working in the private sector would use for their income. It includes all FICA and other taxes such as workman's comp, and benefits. This significantly inflates the number compared to what many others view their income as. My number is actually what honest economists use when discussing so claimed wage stagnation, but it is not what most consider as income.
So, my question is how was that $120,000 figure came about? Are we considering that elderly people might pay over $1000 each per month in health insurance costs? That's $24,000 per year alone in benefits for a GA and his spouse.
I don't know, just pulled it from the news story about the Mormon Leaks website. I assumed it was pay not including benefits.
Both my current job and my previous job had health insurance benefits for retirees. For that matter my job before that (U.S. Government), if I had been in a permanent position, would also have included that--see here: https://www.opm.gov/healthcare-insu...nefits-change-now-that-Im-retired/#url=Health. "As a Federal retiree you pay the same premiums and receive the same benefits as an active Federal employee." I think the DMBA retirement benefit is similar to that (couldn't find it in a quick search), although it wouldn't surprise me if there were some increase to the premiums.
addictionary
Well-Known Member
[MENTION=14]colton[/MENTION], if it's not too much trouble for you answering, what do you think of a homosexual LDS member? Do you philosophically accept or reject it as a possibility aside from politically respecting gender choices?
In regards to GA compensation packages:
I honestly don't know all the details, but Linda K. Burton was released in April after serving as General Relief Society President. She was in that position for a number of years. When she was called to serve, we were scheduled to do a remodel on her house (she lives across the street from one of my General Contractors). When she was called, that remodel went away. It didn't happen. They said it was going to be a money thing. Her husband was going to be missing significant amounts of work as he travelled with her on her assignments. His income suffered. As far as I know, she wasn't working at the time of her calling (could be wrong there). I don't know what she was compensated, if anything, as her husband continued to work, though not as much as he was before.
As a tithing paying member of the Church, I have no problems with how the GA's are handled.
I honestly don't know all the details, but Linda K. Burton was released in April after serving as General Relief Society President. She was in that position for a number of years. When she was called to serve, we were scheduled to do a remodel on her house (she lives across the street from one of my General Contractors). When she was called, that remodel went away. It didn't happen. They said it was going to be a money thing. Her husband was going to be missing significant amounts of work as he travelled with her on her assignments. His income suffered. As far as I know, she wasn't working at the time of her calling (could be wrong there). I don't know what she was compensated, if anything, as her husband continued to work, though not as much as he was before.
As a tithing paying member of the Church, I have no problems with how the GA's are handled.
Not that I'm cynical or anything, but there is no way the women's organizations are treated the same way as male GA's. Why would they need to pay the women when they have husbands to support them? They have been forced to use more inclusive language now in talking about the women's organizations, but I would be terribly surprised if that has changed anything about any stipends.
Are you talking about someone who just considers themselves gay (such as the child in the OP) or someone who is actually in an active homosexual relationship? I accept the LDS church's teaching that homosexual feelings are not inherently sinful, but homosexual behavior is. So I don't have a problem at all with the first.
If it's the second, are you then asking how would I react to someone who was active in a gay relationship but still wanted to be part of the LDS church? That is a more challenging situation. I'd like to think that in general I'd be supportive of the desire to attend and partcipate, but if I were their bishop I'd still follow church guidelines about practicing homosexuals not being able to receive temple recommends or hold callings. However, I also recognize those are policies rather than doctrines and would be open to the possibility of seeing them changed at some point in the future.
You probably also know this, but in case someone else reading this doesn't--the GAs are paid with income from church businesses and not from the tithing donations. From Pres. Hinckley, http://www.deseretnews.com/article/...umps-four-new-documents-about-LDS-Church.html, "I should like to add, parenthetically for your information that the living allowances given the General Authorities, which are very modest in comparison with executive compensation in industry and the professions, come from this business income and not from the tithing of the people."
I found this website which agrees with you, https://wheatandtares.org/2017/01/10/ever-wonder-how-much-president-monson-gets-paid-now-we-know/. "From what I can tell, members of the Third through Eighth Quorums of the Seventy (Area Seventies) and Auxiliary leaders do not receive salaries, presumably because those positions don’t require the same commitment. Notably, all female members of church leadership serve in Auxiliary organizations... Perhaps the determination of living allowance has more to do with life-time appointments as opposed to temporary service."
The author doesn't say where her info came from that she's basing the "From what I can tell" point on, so it may or may not be correct. If correct, it surprises me. The church has had a lot of improvement in that area in just the last 5-10 years, so I had assumed that in today's church the female full-time GAs were also given living allowances. Guess not. :-(
I would agree that a lot of that has to do with their being temporary positions, although I have heard that mission presidents (temporary positions) get some money, but I have no proof of that. I don't have a problem with their stipends at all, but I'm not happy that I mistakenly told people my whole life that we didn't have a paid ministry. No one ever said "except for the top guys."
green
Well-Known Member
Colton is very good at what he does:
Saying a lot of words to beat around the bush on topics.
It's very simple:
The FT GA's (first quorum of the seventy and higher) live very, very, very well. Better than most.
Just own it.
Most of these men have lived these lavish lifestyles for quite awhile now and the fact that a lot have spent most of their careers in church employment, living a very upper class lifestyle, could lead to them not having a clue when it comes to the millennial generation.
That disconnect is showing with their responses in the videos, the church's policies/doctrines, and the fact that the church is hemorrhaging members.
Now, the church will be fine. It has enough money to sustain itself forever. But, if they want to grow, they need to change.
Like they needed to change with polygamy. And their priesthood bans. And women taking/praying in church.
Unfortunately, when it comes to social issues, there is a large disconnect between what is right and what the prophet thinks is right and that continues today.
Saying a lot of words to beat around the bush on topics.
It's very simple:
The FT GA's (first quorum of the seventy and higher) live very, very, very well. Better than most.
Just own it.
Most of these men have lived these lavish lifestyles for quite awhile now and the fact that a lot have spent most of their careers in church employment, living a very upper class lifestyle, could lead to them not having a clue when it comes to the millennial generation.
That disconnect is showing with their responses in the videos, the church's policies/doctrines, and the fact that the church is hemorrhaging members.
Now, the church will be fine. It has enough money to sustain itself forever. But, if they want to grow, they need to change.
Like they needed to change with polygamy. And their priesthood bans. And women taking/praying in church.
Unfortunately, when it comes to social issues, there is a large disconnect between what is right and what the prophet thinks is right and that continues today.
green
Well-Known Member
What bothers me is when I'm in a nice restaurant that is very expensive and Holland walks in with a full entourage that stands around him while he eats creating a barrier between the people he is supposed to serve and himself.
Then he gets up in conference and talks about paying tithing first, before rent, before food, etc and guilts a single mom making $25,000 a year into paying $2,509 in tithing, which essentially boils down to almost 100% (if not higher) of their disposable income.
Or Elder Perry sits in a luxury suite at a Jazz game which runs close to if not more than $10,000 a game depending on the options and then gets up in conference and talks about sacrifice.
Explain that to me and how that is what Christ wants.
Then he gets up in conference and talks about paying tithing first, before rent, before food, etc and guilts a single mom making $25,000 a year into paying $2,509 in tithing, which essentially boils down to almost 100% (if not higher) of their disposable income.
Or Elder Perry sits in a luxury suite at a Jazz game which runs close to if not more than $10,000 a game depending on the options and then gets up in conference and talks about sacrifice.
Explain that to me and how that is what Christ wants.
MVP
Well-Known Member
That is sad part about basically all religions. You accept what church teaches you and not what you would think as individual. You are smart man colton, could certainly do better than "what church teaches".