Mormon Church IT ransacked, data stolen by 'state-sponsored' cyber-thieves Miscreants broke into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' computer systems and stole personal data belonging to "some" members, employees, contractors and friends, the church has confirmed. According to a church statement on the "data incident," posted on its website today, the security breach happened in late …
I have never in my life had any association with or interest in the Mornons. I've never contacted them, I've never even had some bright-eyed kids roll up here to talk to me about that Jewish carpenter dude. (they'd be eaten by dropbears before they made it 200 meters out of our nearest town).
Consider my surprise when this morning I wake up to an email from the LDS telling me about the break-in, that no of course nothing serious has been compromised, it's fine, all fine, etc etc etc.
Did some weirdo relative join them and try to save my soul be enrolling me ahead of my demise? With my email address which they assume would remain the same in the Great Winery in the sky (because that's where *I'm* goin' !)
Then it occurred to me: some years back I had done research into my family tree (getting as far back as late 1700s, I'm happy to say!). And yes, I ended up using ancestry.com, which still is the one that has the most data and search capabilities.
Guess who owns them? I knew they were LDS owned, but that would simply skim off my info into their great big post-mortem converts database was a bit of a shock.
A relative joined the mormons (he was actually non religious, but wife was a mormon), remember him telling me they "claim" all his ancestors as mormon by virtue of him having become one.
Hence their keen interest in genealogy.
Cannot ask him for info on this as he's long deceased, he died long before online genealogy web sites became a major thing.
Ordinances for the dead isn't well understood by outsiders.
Jesus taught that unless a man is born of water and the spirit, he will in no wise inherit the kingdom of heaven. Mormons believe that everyone who has ever lived on this earth will (eventually) be given the opportunity to accept to reject baptism and other ordinances. Peter wrote that Jesus spent the three days between his crucifixion and resurrection teaching the dead. Paul appealed to the acceptance of baptizing in behalf of the dead as proof of the belief in universal resurrection.
According to Mormonism, the righteous dead are engaged in teaching the gospel to people who did not have that opportunity during mortality. Worthy members of the Church are able to bring the names of kindred dead to the temple to receive ordinances by proxy. The Church teaches the deceased can accept or reject these ordinances. Members of the Church are only supposed to submit their own kindred unless a living relative of the deceased gives permission. There is also a waiting period between when someone dies and they can receive ordinances by proxy. The Church does not knowingly include dead people in Church member statistics it releases every year.
Well ownership by title is one thing.
Ownership by measure of influence is much more relevant.
If they're Mormon, they must do anything their local Bishop says to or they will not be able to go to their Temple.
The consequence for not doing Temple rights is God takes your genitals away in the afterlife.
By threat of holy castration.
If they are actually Mormon ,not just Mormon in name, everything they own essentially is in the control of the Mormon church.
Not very nice really. There's the tithing and the militant, polygamous ones for starters. Then there's the history - including the slaughtering of Native American and settler men, women and children on the orders of Mormon leader Brigham-Young.
The whole basis of the religion is hilarious - Joseph Smith is like that kid at school with totally ridiculous lies. Claiming he found a bunch of gold plates with a "missing" book of the bible enscribed on them. Except no one else gets to see the plates, and the book is written in contemporary US English and contains many anachronisms.
When it comes to pointing fingers at religions for who is a bigger murderous bastard, it's very much a case of stones being lobbed at greenhouses.
Loads of people hurt, discriminate, and even kill in the name of their magical mystical sky fairy, and when called on it, use their special book of inane witterings to justify continuing to do so.
even kill in the name of their magical mystical sky fairy
Or their belief in 'one man, one vote' or their belief in centralised collectivisation or their belief in racial supertypes..
In short - religion is just one of many things that humans use to dehumanise their opponents so that they become far game for killing.
Humans gonna human, please select your rationalisation.
The Mormons show how God has become an increasingly hands-off executive. He dealt with the Jews personally, let his son deal with the Christians, sent a messenger to the Muslims and for the Mormons he merely sent a memo.
[The icon is intended to be apotropaic, but no doubt there will be some who condemn me to Hell/downvoting.]
Mormon means different things in different contexts.
In 1830 Joseph Smith Jr founded The Church of Christ according to New York State law. He changed the name a few times before settling on The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Outsiders called believers "Mormons" because the Church accepts The Book of Mormon as Scripture. Outsiders mistakenly believe that Mormons don't accept the Bible as Scripture. Joseph claimed this was a Restoration of the original Church instead of branching off existing sects. All Mormon sects trace their roots to Joseph.
When Joseph Smith Jr died in 1844, several men stepped up and claimed to be Joseph's successor.The largest group chose to follow Brigham Young, since he was the Senior Apostle. Others founded their own sects, including the Strangles and the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (RLDS, now known as the Community of Christ). Brigham Young's group maintained the name The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and migrated to what is now Utah following The Extermination Order in Missouri (the Governor's executive order legalized the murder of Mormons). Brigham Young arrived in the Great Salt Lake Valley in 1847.
In 1890 the President and Prophet of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints issued a Manifesto (Official Declaration 1) ending new polygamous marriages within the sect. Anyone caught entering into a new polygamous relationship was to be excommunicated. However, men who already had multiple wives could maintain existing polygamous marriages, but could not take a new plural wife. Members who did not like this declaration broke off and formed their own groups which have zero affiliation with the LDS Church. The largest of these groups was the Fundamental Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (FLDS). Their most recent leader (Warren Jeffs) was on the FBI's Most Wanted List for kidnapping, forcing underage girls into marriage, and enabling statutory rape.
In 1978 when the President and Prophet of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints issued Official Declaration 2 (opens the Priesthood to all worthy males), some members broke away and started their own sects.
With that background in place, let's correct misinformation from your post.
The Bible was written by Prophets and historians in the Middle East. It is included in the canon of the LDS Church. The bulk of The Book of Mormon was written by Prophets belonging to a group which left Jerusalem about 600 years before Jesus was born. This group made its way to the American continent. Prophets of this people engraved revelations and teachings onto golden plates. The penultimate Prophet (Mormon) of this group abridged the records and gave the plates to his son (Moroni) who wrote a few words and his the plates. This Moroni gave the plates to Joseph Smith who translated them into English and published them as The Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon is part of the canon and seen as a companion (not replacement) of the Bible.
You alluded to the Mountain Meadows Massacre which is a complex topic. The LDS Church was chased from state to state. Outsiders disliked how big a group was gathering, and how they tended to vote together. Most members of the Church were against slavery. Outsiders burned barns and homes of Mormons, some of which retaliated. The hostilities hit the boiling point when Governor Boggs issued an Extermination Order legalizing the murder of Mormons within Missouri (this order wasn't rescinded until the 1970s). Joseph and Hyrum Smith were murdered in jail awaiting trial. This lead Brigham Young to lead the Mormons outside of the United States and into Mexico. They founded Utah, believing it to be so dry and desolate that no one would ever come to take it away from them. By 1850, the territory founded by the Mormons in the Great Basin was acquired by the United States through the Mexican-American War.
The Apostle Parley P. Pratt was called on a proselyting mission to Arkansas, when the jealous ex-husband of a convert from California caught up to him and shot him in the back (May 1857).
Later that year, President Buchanan sent the US Army to march against Utah Territory. Territorial Governor Brigham Young (also President of the Church) enacted martial law and forbade trading with outsiders. He believed that food, weapons, and ammunition would be needed for the upcoming conflict with the US Army. Many Mormons living in Utah Territory still had vivid memories of being chased across the continent trying to find a place to live in peace. The Mormons would not leave the Great Basin like they abandoned Missouri and so many other states.
In this climate, a caravan was making its way to California. Previous caravans successfully traded for food, ammunition, etc, in Utah, so this group was counting on getting supplies there.This caravan went city to city, but couldn't find anyone willing to trade. After a few cities, they started boasting and making threats. Some were part of the Missouri Wild Cats which burned houses and shot Joseph and Hyrum. Another in the caravan claimed he helped track down Parley P. Pratt. Some of the caravan vowed to return from California to kill every Mormon. A cow from the caravan died and poisoned a well with anthrax. Mormons believed this poisoning was on purpose (this misconception is still believed by the older generation today!). The parents in the caravan wanted food and supplies for their families, but the Mormons were under martial law to not trade with outsiders.
Cedar City is located in Southern Utah. The stake president and bishops in the area heard stories of this caravan and gathered to discuss their options. One bishop (John D Lee) convinced the stake president (Haight) to send a rider to Brigham Young to determine the right course of action. Three days later the stake president announced to the bishops that the Prophet ordered the death of every man, woman, and child. On 11 Sep 1857, 120 members of the caravan were killed. A few children under the age of 8 were spared and taken in by local families.
A few days later, a rider from Brigham Young arrives with a letter saying to let the caravan pass in peace. Despite riding hard, he arrived too late. John D Lee was the adopted son of Brigham Young. Brigham sent John into hiding. Eventually John was caught. After two mistrials, the US government threatened Brigham Young it would confiscate all Church property unless someone was found guilty. John was found guilty of 120 murders and was executed by firing squad on the same field those in the caravan died. No one else was ever charged, and John D Lee blamed the stake president until the day he died.
The massacre was perpetrated by members of the Church (and some natives) who believed they were answering the Prophet's command. In reality, the command did not come from the Prophet. The Church has long struggled trying to determine how to address this atrocity while not being implicated.
This post has been deleted by its author
Possibly caffeine - but that's probably in chocolate too. In the 1960s a teenage classmate gave a talk in RE class on being a Mormon. I think he said they had to buy the approved beverages via LDS. At a reunion in 2000 it was said he had left the LDS as soon as he reached adulthood.
"The Word of Wisdom" means different things in different contexts. In the 1830s, Joseph Smith Jr received a revelation now recorded in D&C 89. It was given as a word of wisdom, not commandment. It said to avoid alcohol, tobacco, and "hot drinks" (official interpretation has been tea and coffee). This revelation further encourages members to limit meat consumption, eat grains, and basically live healthy. This is sometimes called the Word of Wisdom.
Under Brigham Young, conforming to an interpretation of D&C 89 became mandatory to be baptized or obtain a temple recommend. This interpretation specifically forbids alcohol, coffee, tea, and tobacco. Later interpretations have added illicit drugs to the list of contraband. This is the most common meaning of the Word of Wisdom. Church leaders have explicitly stated that caffeine is not against the Word of Wisdom, but each member should use wisdom in what they consume.
Finally, some individual members go beyond the official interpretations. Some avoid white flour, refined sugar, or all caffeine. This is a personal choice.
The Heads of the Mormon Church, (church president and his 12 advisors known as the quorum of the twelve)..
Regularly identify and prohibit social behaviors that are successfully allowing church members to to relate and enjoy the company of non-members in a genuine manner.
The Mormon Church actively perpetuates a false ossification from the rest of society to maintain a false victim perspective.
There was a time when playing cards was banned because it was leading to cultural acceptance that threatened the power of their institution to override councious thought in the mindsets of their members.
As individuals in victim-state mentality are easily manipulated through emotional projection and collectivism, this manufactured gullibility is considered top priority to maintain.
They want their members feeling insecure and scared of the world rather than learning and discovering.
That way they always run back to the church and ask the church to tell them how to feel and think. The church and then happily exploits this for financial and social gain of its own gluttonous desire for power.
Most organizations of any kind have some very dirty laundry, LDS included - like many churches recently they're dealing with expositions of overlooking criminal sexual harassment. Any organization the size of LDS or larger is multifaceted. Mitt Romney voted to impeach and has a spine, and he hasn't been voted out because of it. Cult is a transitive label - I wouldn't use it for LDS, but I would for the "Charles Manson" family.
I escaped the Mormon cult.
They're about as culty as it gets.
Especially at higher levels.
It gets really weird, and yes it's all generally centered around money and positioning Mormons in key positions across industries and politics in order to subvert others over time until they can fully oppress everything else.
It's just another world domination club, with all the viciousness, misdirection, and campaigned psychological harm that all such clubs operate by.
The Church has always taught that abuse is wrong. Being guilty of abuse is grounds for having membership in the Church revoked. As a general rule, the Church does not make a public announcement regarding excommunication or other disciplinary actions.
The Associated Press has left out key elements regarding the case in Arizona.
1. The abuser was not active in the Church, meaning he rarely went to the weekly worship services.
2. The abuser confessed of a single act of abuse some time in the past. There was no indication the abuse was ongoing or that the abuser would go after more victims.
3. Arizona state law at the time forbade clergy from divulging confessions.
4. The bishop pleaded with the abuser and his wife to go to the authorities.
5. After that didn't happen, the abuser was excommunicated.
6. The Church only found out of the reoccurring nature of the abuse and additional victims years later when served with a lawsuit.
The Church is constantly trying to limit the opportunity for abuse. Policies are updated to match best practices of the day.
In practice the LDS church takes an active blind eye rather than being forced to follow through on its excommunication threat.
Unless of course, it has become a PR nightmare that projects to hurt their recruitment and retainment.
In that way they operate very much like the US government does concerning people trying to hold it accountable.
What they say doesn't match what they do, except for the occasional PR stunt to save face.
You are clearly a Mormon cultist.
To everyone else but a Mormon that it is "a religion"
Only current Mormons would artificially elevate the institution, religion and registered non-profit corporation known as "the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints"(Mormon Church" to the exclusionary status and title of "The Church"
I invite you to join the 10K club.
It's a club of technically on the books Mormons who are very happy to accept the lowest level of Kingdom where all that whoever born regardless of their their deeds in life enjoy an eternity that by Mormon doctrine is 10,000 times better than anything on Earth.
Remember only the greediest and power lusty aim for the Celestial Kingdom.
If you'd rather have a fantastic life of freedom and generously glorious afterlife for free, join the 10K Club. as a Mormon member you can do anything you want and still get sufficient glory for eternity. The mechanics described are all there firmly established and still current in core Mormon doctrine.
The official name (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) is rather long. Starting in the 1830s, outsiders started using the nickname "Mormon" because The Book of Mormon is part of our Scriptures. The Church did embrace it for a while (anyone remember the tv commercials "brought to you by your friends at The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints -- the Mormons?). Another common shortening was the LDS Church. This is not ideal as it places emphasis on "Latter-day Saints" instead of Jesus Christ. There is a recent campaign to get away from nicknames and re-emphasize our belief in Jesus. The website changed from lds.org to ChurchOfJesusChrist.org. I personally use "the Church" to refer to the organization if it's abundantly clear which one I am talking about. I could likewise use "The Church of Jesus Christ", but it's still long and can seem presumptuous. I use "church" to refer to a church building (chapel or stake center) or the block of weekly worship meetings.
They invented an entire data format for storing genealogical data. GED. You don't do that without some serious jobs in mind.
The Church's stated aim is, roughly stated, to "rescue" everyone alive or dead. Hence they acquire and store data on souls with a fetishism that FB and co can only dream of and they have been doing it a lot, lot longer.
I'm surprised our vultures haven't dug a little deeper because "a few" could mean the entirety of documented humanity from day one.
The file format suffers from the usual database problems. (Have a look at the file specs out there).
Their data is very questionable too. The LDS philosophy is that it doesn't matter if they get the wrong person's mother, father, etc., as they are all prime candidates to enrol. This is not good for more legal things such as tracking entitlement to inheritances, etc.
===
Throughout my life, my parents used to joke about their selling tactics. When they retired to the coast their neighbours were Mormons. It completely changed their perspective on them. They basically helped anyone in need in the community, without an obligation to "sign up", even if it meant taking a big chunk out of their own lives..
The file format is not conducive to the tenets of good researching principles, which IMO means that fresh information is additive to the record, rather than replacing what is already there. Replacement can well orphan data - breaking links and losing important information about previous researchers' conclusions.
Another important point is to record what is recorded, rather than interpreting what is recorded. An example of this from my own ancestry is someone named Morehouse should be recorded as such, because that is what the Primary Record says, rather than "correcting it" to Moorhouse.
There is a cut-off data for birth registrations after which parents could be fined for failing to record a birth. So frequently births are recorded as occurring some time after the actual birth, so as not to fall foul of this penalty. The church, on the other hand, was perceived to need the honest truth, so the true date of birth would be submitted, so baptismal records are considered to be a more reliable source of data. The genealogy program I wrote many years ago recorded both sets of information "as is", recording what is recorded. Individual researchers using this data as a basis for their own searches can make up their own minds, rather than putting up with the bias of someone who has "corrected" the official record.
A nice concrete example of the importance of handling of conflicting data is the coronation of KEVII. You will still find a lot of memorabilia with the date shown as 26 June 1902, rather than the correct date 9 August 1902. Users of GED will probably either gloss over the earlier date, or write a mini-essay in a text field explaining the discrepancy (he was rushed to hospital for an emergency op). Users of my program would "cut" a record for each of these two "events" which could be linked to. Anyone looking at his timeline would then see this in the chronology.
The ability to search and sort by date is not so easy with GED because it is a bit lax at enforcement during the data input process.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-RuZvtMxvc4c/UB844gVVsvI/AAAAAAAADkM/ze9KUJrQajk/s1600/HeddonBushSchool1902small.JPG
The Church stores different kinds of data for different reasons.
There is a membership database. This has a membership number, name, ordinance information (baptism, priesthood offices, temple ordinances), address, assigned congregation, etc. Donations are also recorded for auditing purposes (every year each member gets a summary report of the types and frequencies of donations which can be used for tax purposes). There are comment fields so bishops can share notes to future bishops, including any limitations for callings.
Then there's the genealogical database for FamilySearch. Names, dates, places for the deceased and who entered them.
The Church is digitalizing much of the handwritten manuscripts of the past. The largest project is the Joseph Smith Papers.
Amusing Post. I upvoted it.
But I'd note that many Amish and Mennonite sects allow some use of technology (including the internet) as long as the usage is deemed to be beneficial to the individual/family/community. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amish_way_of_life#Use_of_modern_technology
As I observe the use and abuse of technology in society, the more rational the Amish POV seems to me. I don't actually agree with them. ... Yet. ... But the way things are going what with the bizarre actions of big tech, the whackiness of (most of) the IoT, and the willingness of industry to foist seriously flawed technology (e.g. Tesla Autopilot) on the public, I may come around eventually.
"But I'd note that many Amish and Mennonite sects allow some use of technology (including the internet) as long as the usage is deemed to be beneficial to the individual/family/community"
Those communities seem to embrace the philosophy of "if it's works, why fix it". There is a sped up video of an Amish barn building and discounting the speeding up of the video, the barn was built in record time. They had somebody working a powered saw and a big group of guys that all knew exactly how to get a barn built put their heads up and got it cranked out. They women kept them fed and watered which might piss off some feminists, but if they'd rather climb up on the roof and pass boards along.......
So if carrier pigeons do the job, no point in changing. Too much of the time new things are brought out because they are new, not due their solving any sort of deficiency with the old thing or way. At the same time I'm very suspect of things being done a certain way because they've always been done that way. Without insight, jumping in either direction is wasted motion.
I'd often see Mennonites at the train station. I would also take notice that they might need to dilute the gene pool a bit.
In general, it's usually preferable that notice of a breach is given out as soon as it's detected so people that might be affected can take steps and be on the lookout for strange activity. Another example of something that would normally be frowned upon if a company held off saying anything while they do an internal investigation, but becomes perfectly fine when the Government does it, because they are the Government. Yet another truism brought to light by the prophet Douglas Adams in the scriptures of The Salmon of Doubt.
This is why US "data protection" laws will never be compatible with EU data protection laws, Privacy Shield 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 whatever point zero, without major changes in the US. How the fuck is a data breach of this magnitude and scope allowed to be kept from those affected for so long without some sort of legal punishment? It's entirely possible that data has been used maliciously in identity theft already with those affected completely in the dark as to how they lost their money.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
