B Glover🧤 🏳️‍🌈🎣🎢🐠🏈🚁📚🇵🇪🇵🇷🇺🇸

@neoavatara pt.icct.nl/sites/default/…

Trump does a lot of things I hate. But you know what he doesn't do? Promote political violence against his enemies. The same can't be said about the worst wackadoodles on the Far extremes right now.

@FaithCrisis24 I plan on reading the book, but what is an example of a cultural issue?

wild stats from Jeff Strongs new book "Torn". These stats are based on 20,000 respondents. 40% of once-active members have stepped away since 2000. Why? • 6% lifestyle • 42% church history • 33% social issues • 18% cultural issues Not the narrative we often hear.

@antiantimormon We sung this in sacrament meeting like 5 or 6 weeks ago.

I find it funny how many anti-Mormons bring up Kolob as if it is a core part of our doctrine. How do they even know the word? Seriously, when was the last time it was brought up in church? Maybe once every four years when studying the Book of Abraham IF you have Sunday School the week of Abraham 3 lesson. Maybe if you have an awesome music person who chooses “If You Could Hie to Kolob” as a Sacrament meeting hymn once every few years. The reality is that Kolob is an obscure, mostly irrelevant part of Latter-day Saint scripture that has nothing to do with salvation, core doctrine, or regular conversation in the Church.

@raulofmustachio @hemantmehta Good for you. I wish you well in your practice. If all lawyers were experts in their field of expertise there would be no reason for opposing counsel, judges or appeals. You don’t have to have a JD to have an opinion. I think the Church’s argument is weak.

@bradjglover79 @hemantmehta Mr. B Glover: Please tell us your background and experience evaluating the strength of trademark disputes? I litigate these issues regularly so I'm curious to here what experience you have that has led you to come to the opposite conclusions I have drawn.

John Dehlin built "Mormon Stories" into a podcasting empire helping those who harbor doubts about the LDS Church. The Church’s response? They're suing him for trademark and copyright infringement. This is bound to backfire. friendlyatheist.com/p/mormon-churc…

@stackerco Sometimes I feel like Cameron, I just need to sit down with Bishop/SP and have an honest conversation. I like to think it turned out well for him. But then again, his old man likely loved the car more than his son.

@stackerco I’ve typed up the answers to these questions myself probably 25 times over the past year. It’s on my Google Drive, so it changes each time I look at it. Mostly it has been an exercise to help me come to terms with what I really believe.

If I had a temple reccomend interview today, here are my honest answers. I'm curious how you bishops would deal with these raw responses. 1. Do you have faith in and a testimony of God, the Eternal Father; His Son, Jesus Christ; and the Holy Ghost? I don't really know what that is right now. I really love the Jesus of the Gospels and believe there's something out there. I hope God exists. 2. Do you have a testimony of the Atonement of Jesus Christ and of His role as your Savior and Redeemer? This is a loaded answer. But I don't believe Jesus taught he would be a sacrifice for sin. I think that was Paul and I don't really agree with Paul. Jesus taught mercy, compassion, repentance, serving and loving your neighbor. I connect with that more than Paul's doctrine of believing in the atonement. I'll stay with Jesus. 3. Do you have a testimony of the Restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ? I think the Restoration movement is a fascinating innovation of Protestantism. I like to include Swedenborg in this, he was a genius and seemed to inspire Joseph. Campbell and Joseph Smith brought a lot to the table. Joseph was inspired and even revelatory at times, while he was a scoundrel at other times. I don't think any LDS prophet since was equal to Joseph and I'm pretty sure none have been prophets since. So I'm mixed and don't know what I think about this anymore. I don't see any revelatory things with prophets since and they haven't added scripture, and they just seem like leaders and not prophets. Do you sustain the President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the prophet, seer, and revelator and as the only person on the earth authorized to exercise all priesthood keys? As far as I can support Oaks as the leader of the church, yes he's the leader of the church. And I think he's been OK so far, but the new young women's names are stupid and I'm not a fan of the lawsuits he's doing. But sure, he's the leader and I'll recognize that. Do you sustain the members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators? Sure. But I don't really think they see things, have prophecy or have new revelation. But I'll support them as leaders of the church. But if they say something stupid, I'll probably write about that on X. Do you sustain the other General Authorities and local leaders of the Church? This is a lot of loyalty questions about leaders, which seems weird. But sure. The Lord has said that all things are to be “done in cleanliness” before Him (Doctrine and Covenants 42:41). Do you strive for moral cleanliness in your thoughts and behavior? Absolutely. Do you obey the law of chastity? Outside of the occasional escorts, yes ... take a joke Bishop! Do you follow the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ in your private and public behavior with members of your family and others? I try to. Hard to do. But I try to be honest, good to my wife and kids, serve others. But I'm not to the level of selling everything I own to give to the poor. Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? I might, yeah. I take my kids to a Catholic service now and then. They like it. I listen to podcasts like Mormon Discussion and Mormon Stories. I get more from Zen and Buddhist ideas than from the modern prophets. I support John Dehlin over the church in the lawsuit because I think it's an abuse of power and attack on free speech. And I write a ton of critical stuff on the church on my X account. Do you strive to keep the Sabbath day holy, both at home and at church; attend your meetings; prepare for and worthily partake of the sacrament; and live your life in harmony with the laws and commandments of the gospel? This is a rough one, Bish. I haven't been going to church every week and I often leave Sunday school when the wrong teacher is in there. Church has become really painful for me. But I like to come and associate with the saints at times. I take the sacrament because I feel like I want to meditate on what to do better in my life. Do you strive to be honest in all that you do? Absolutely. I'm a big believer in honesty. Except when it comes to telling my 80 year old parents I don't really believe in the church anymore. Are you a full-tithe payer? This is a loaded answer too. I do not pay money to the church but I do give to charity. The early church used their tithing funds almost all exclusively to the poor. Our church doesn't do that. Excess goes into the massive investment fund. I don't think the way the church does tithing is the way God outlined it in the Bible and with Joseph Smith early on. So I won't pay tithing to the church right now. It's become a huge corporation that can sustain itself on interest alone and doesn't need tithing. Do you understand and obey the Word of Wisdom? Nobody understands the Word of Wisdom and nobody in the church follows it. Do you only eat meat in times of famine? I know you BBQ in the summer, Bish! The canonized scripture on it specifically says not by way of commandment, so it really shouldn't even be a temple question. It also says you can drink beer but not hard alcohol. Hot drinks should include hot chocolate and probably any hot broth. But Joseph and Brigham and all those guys drank coffee and beer, etc. And it's extremely hypocritical that you can drink 10 Red Bulls a day and still go to the temple. So no, I don't keep it. I eat a lot of meat, I don't eat a lot of grains, I don't drink beer, I do drink coffee and tea because they are much better sources of caffeine, I don't put tobacco on bruises, but I also don't do anything with tobacco. I don't eat things in the season they grow. But to the modern standards, only thing I do is drink coffee and tea. Nothing else. But I'll argue those things are keeping the spirit of the word of wisdom because they are a healthier choice. Do you have any financial or other obligations to a former spouse or to children? No. Do you keep the covenants that you made in the temple, including wearing the temple garment as instructed in the endowment? Ugh. No. I rarely wear the garment anymore. I speak ill of the leaders of the church. I don't sacrifice everything I have to building up the church because I see it as a big corporation that really isn't the kingdom of God. Although I still see it as a net good. Are there serious sins in your life that need to be resolved with priesthood authorities as part of your repentance? Nope. Do you consider yourself worthy to enter the Lord’s house and participate in temple ordinances? Yes. I'm searching for truth. I'm trying to be a good person and do what I feel is right and I'd like to go back to the temple and see how that feels for me again to see if I want to recommit to everything again.

I need to clarify something because people keep saying, “Why are you defending John Dehlin so much?” “Are you John Dehlin?” or “Why do you love Mormon Stories so much?” That’s not what this is about. John Dehlin and Mormon Stories is not the point. Whether John is perfect, annoying, flawed, useful, biased, helpful, or wrong or right sometimes is not the point. He’s all the above like we all are. This is about abuse of institutional power. The LDS Church is not some tiny local congregation trying to protect itself from confusion. It is a $300B dollar religious institution with lawyers, PR teams, global reach, and enormous cultural power in Mormon spaces. So when that institution goes after one of its most visible critics after 21 years, I do not buy that this is merely about sanserif fonts, sun rays, or brand confusion. Come on. Nobody with two functioning brain cells is accidentally listening to Mormon Stories thinking, “Wow, I love this official church podcast where ex members, historians, abuse survivors, LGBT members, and critics spend three hours discussing church problems.” This bothers me because it looks like a powerful institution using a legal argument to attack a dissenting voice. And the reflexive response from members might bother me more: The church acts and the critic becomes the villain. The faithful defend the institution over the individual. Every. Time. I don’t think John Dehlin is perfect at all and that Mormon Stories is above criticism. It isn’t. I think it’s an important voice right now but there are also things I don’t like about it too. And this to me isn’t because I believe the church can never protect its trademarks. It obviously can. What bothers me with this is it fits a pattern that drives me mad: when the institution is criticized, the critic becomes the problem. It happened with other excommunicated critics and whistleblowers and abuse victims and the SEC issue and anytime someone publicly challenges the image of the institution. Had the church ever been called to accountability by its members? If a member does, the person speaking out is always framed as bitter, deceptive, attention-seeking, anti-Mormon, or dangerous. That is what I am reacting to. This is not about defending John but about watching an institution use its power against a critic and then watching members pretend the real issue is font choice and light rays.

@UCStanford @hemantmehta Is Jasmine a lawyer? Are the people at scripture central lawyers? No; they all commented. Public Square. Even lawyers are not all experts in copyright/trademark litigation. I admitted I wasn’t an expert. I’m glad to know you are all-knowing. The world needs a few super geniuses

Why are you commenting on legal things if you're not a lawyer and clearly have no idea what makes a strong trademark or copyright case? I'll bet you do not even understand the difference between copyright and trademark, let alone what the elements of each cause of action are. Church lawyers do not bring lawsuits that are weak, that would be dumb.

@Consider_Truth @TeeplesCY Parody and satire are often exempt from intellectual property claims.

@TeeplesCY Why didn't they sue the Book of Mormon musical for the same reason?

The smartest guy in my group chat just explained the Mormon Stories lawsuit better than anything I've seen: Through Intellectual Reserve, Inc., the Church holds trademarks on specific names, logos, and branding elements associated with its official materials (including marks that incorporate terms like “Mormon” in defined contexts), which it is legally expected to police to prevent confusion about what is or isn’t an official Church source. If it consistently fails to enforce those rights in closer cases like Mormon Stories Podcast, courts could view the mark as weakened or inconsistently controlled, making it harder to stop future uses that more clearly mislead people or trade on the Church’s identity.

@TeeplesCY OK, but why now, and why not 20 years ago when Mormon Stories began? I think there is also something to the abandonment of a word. Intellectual property law is beyond confusing and I admit I’m not an attorney.

@plasmarob @AndersenNeilL It’s a start, but heavily controlled interviews are nothing more than propaganda. Interesting to listen to.

I am pretty sure this is subtly unprecedented. LDS apostle @AndersenNeilL is being interviewed longform off official church media. It's by his son so maximally softball but if they trial and expand from here this could change everything. Breaking free from church containment.

@jkdavis89 I just read every word of that. I disagree with it based on my experience listening to Mormon Stories, my reading of Turners biography of Joseph Smith and my 30 years of following church statistics, among other things.

When asked about the lies that John Dehlin tells about the church I decided to do a deep dive into some of his recent episodes. What I found will shock you! (If you're a PIMO)

@tvheidihatch A current BYU professor? Not that it matters. CSA is wrong no matter what. Even if it were an 18 year old student, it would still be ethically wrong because of the power dynamic. With a minor, it’s just criminal and disgusting

BREAKING: A 32-year-old Brigham Young University mathematics professor was arrested Saturday on felony charges after allegedly engaging in sexually explicit online conversations with someone he believed was a 17-year-old girl, authorities said. Stephen Henry McKean, of Springville, was taken into custody April 18 in Box Elder County on two counts of enticing a minor in the third degree and one count of distributing material harmful to a minor, according to an affidavit of probable cause filed by the Box Elder County Attorney’s Office. Photo: BYU

@hicksticks2001 @hemantmehta Not the logo. That’s weeks and weeks ago. Do I have records? No. We’ll see. It will all get laid out in court. I’m sure John has that all documented.

@bradjglover79 @hemantmehta Pretty sure they were added last weekend. They weren’t there Friday morning and they were there by Sunday.

@hicksticks2001 @hemantmehta Sure they were. Logo was changed many weeks ago around the time mediation started. Disclaimer added roughly the same time. Weeks and weeks passed then the lawsuit was announced by Jasmine R.

@bradjglover79 @hemantmehta Those were not resolved prior to the lawsuit being filed…

@LDS_Dems @RigdonNancy3 Maybe a middle ground? Acknowledge Church policy, agree to not “publicly” oppose “x” (I have questions about what public opposition means). But be allowed to state honest opinions beliefs to stake Pres or bishop without fear of being called into disciplinary proceedings

@RigdonNancy3 @bradjglover79 And so the only alternative is to air your grievances publicly?

I love this. If you defame the Church or infringe on our trademark, you should be sued. If you publicly speak ill of the Church and refuse to repent, you should be excommunicated. We bear Christ's name. We have a responsibility to defend it by every legal means possible.

@LDS_Dems Respectfully, it doesn’t help, but yes. that’s what I counsel elders in my quorum when they had questions. When I was their EQ Pres. Problem is those concerns don’t make it past SP or Bishop, or they do, no idea.

@bradjglover79 The Church is not a Democratic government. And you can oppose the Church all you want in the office of your Bishop or Stake President who can actually counsel with you on your concerns and even address some of them. But public activism against the Church never ends well

@LDS_Dems @RigdonNancy3 Fair question. I don’t know. A church leader just saying “have more faith” or “we will find out when we die” or “those questions are not acceptable” etc does not help. Constructive criticism exists in any healthy organization. CC not the same as complaining or “b” word

@RigdonNancy3 @LDS_Dems The Stand Forever talk by Corbridge or a different one?

@LDS_Dems @bradjglover79 Bishops and stake presidents don’t know things. I’ve talked to both, and they just send me Corbridge talk.

@DoBetter_ @stackerco What warrants a permanent ban? Excommunication for apostasy? Disrupting (in air quotes) a sacrament meeting? CSA? If membership withdrawal is to ultimately help someone return…?

I haven't shared this before here and am hesitant to share too many details, so I apologize in advance for not answering all questions, but I can confirm that Kirton McConkie does issue permanent bans on all church properties. It happened to me in Jan 2025.