#Legislative Transparency

[akeliciousmedia]

Voice Vote on Rivers State Emergency Violates Constitution, Senator Kingibe Warns

Senator Ireti Kingibe has voiced strong objections to the National Assembly’s decision to approve President Bola Tinubu’s state of emergency declaration in Rivers State through a voice vote, arguing that the procedure violates constitutional requirements. Kingibe, who represents the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), maintains that the method used does not align with the legal standard for…

[frank-olivier]

Clear Skies, Clear Answers: The Push for UAP Transparency in Congress

A recent U.S. Congressional hearing on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAPs) marked a significant turning point in the pursuit of transparency, acknowledging the reality of these enigmatic sightings and underscoring the need for comprehensive legislative actions. This hearing not only confirmed the existence of UAPs but also highlighted the imperative of balancing national security with public trust, setting the stage for a new era of inquiry.

The hearing was distinguished by a rare display of bipartisanship, with Chairwoman Mace and representatives from both sides of the aisle converging on the necessity of transparency. Criticisms of the Pentagon's historical secrecy were unanimous, emphasizing the detrimental effects on public trust and national security. This collective stance signifies a crucial shift towards openness, acknowledging that the era of unequivocal secrecy surrounding UAPs is no longer tenable.

Rear Admiral Timothy Gallaudet's firsthand account of a 2015 UAP encounter, coupled with Luis Elizondo's insights into advanced technologies, and Michael Shellenberger's revelations on the "Immaculate Constellation" program, collectively validate the existence of UAPs. These testimonies, rich in detail and credibility, dispel speculative skepticism, firmly establishing UAPs as a phenomenon worthy of serious, scientific investigation.

The need for legislative actions to enhance transparency and establish robust oversight was a recurring theme, with initiatives such as the "Safe Airspace for Americans Act" and the proposed "UAP Disclosure Act" being highlighted as crucial steps forward. Protecting whistleblowers and adopting a whole-of-government approach were also emphasized as essential for ensuring that UAP inquiries are conducted with the requisite openness and accountability.

The interplay between national security concerns and the erosion of public trust emerged as a pivotal aspect, with the frequent sightings of UAPs near sensitive installations posing a dual challenge. Addressing potential surveillance or technological advancements by adversarial entities must be balanced with restoring the faith of the American people, necessitating a nuanced approach that prioritizes transparency without compromising security.

The path forward is likely to involve selective declassification of UAP-related documents, which could provide invaluable insights, as well as leveraging NASA's scientific expertise to study UAPs, lending credibility and depth to the inquiry. International cooperation may also play a role, recognizing that UAPs are a global phenomenon requiring a unified, transparent, and scientifically driven response.

US Congress holds UFO Hearing (FOX 5 Washington DC, November 2024)

Wednesday, November 13, 2024

[ivygorgon]

An open letter to the U.S. Congress

Stop Elon Musk from stealing our personal information!

6,399 so far! Help us get to 10,000 signers!

I am writing to urge you to stop Elon Musk from stealing our personal information.

It appears Musk has hacked into millions of Americans’ personal information and now has access to their taxes, Social Security, student debt and financial aid filings. Musk's so-called Department of Government Efficiency was not created by Congress—it is operating with zero transparency and in clear violation of federal law.

This violation of our privacy is causing American families across the country to fear for our privacy, safety and dignity. If this goes unchecked, Musk could steal our private data to help in making cuts to vital government programs that our families depend on—and to make it easier to cut taxes for himself and other billionaires.

We must have guardrails to stop this unlawful invasion of privacy.

Congress and the Trump administration must stop Elon Musk from stealing Americans' tax and other private data.

▶ Created on February 10 by Jess Craven · 6,398 signers in the past 7 days

📱 Text SIGN PUTWGR to 50409

🤯 Text FOLLOW JESSCRAVEN101 to 50409

[silentauthor96]

Reminder from a politically obsessed Michigander: every progressive policy Michigan has passed in the last two years was made possible by citizen ballot initiatives that a) ended partisan gerrymandering and b) expanded voting rights and ballot access.

Recent legislation passed under Michigan's Democratic trifecta (both levels of legislature and the governor):

Red flag laws (gun control)

Free 2 years higher education (economy)

Free preschool (economy)

Free school lunch (economy)

Expanded child tax credit for working families (economy)

Expanded civil rights law to include LGBTQIA+ protections

Ended right to work (pro-union economy)

Codified abortion protections (these were also passed by citizen ballot initiative though)

Stopped local governments from blocking green energy projects like solar and wind (environmental)

Banned child marriage (marriage before 18. You'd be surprised how many Republicans went on the record against this)

Actually, don't take my word for it: here's a list

Edit: I feel I need to put a somewhat finer point on this because I worry some of y'all missed a critical point -

Voting AND organizing got us this progress!!!

Voting alone was not enough until we fixed the underlying system.

Fuck yeah!

[truckers-america-blog]

Drivers Here Is What to Send to your Congress Member

Subject: It’s Time to Address Unfair Driver Pay in the Trucking Industry Dear [Congressman/Congresswoman/Senator Name], As a CDL-A driver and recruiter Job Board Owner �� pay disparity and exploitation many drivers face nationwide. While I support the recent bipartisan “Strengthening Supply Chains Through Truck Driver Incentives Act”, tax credits alone won’t fix the real problems behind the driver…

[michigantopnews]

Michigan FOIA - Senate Just Voted for More Transparency—Will the House?

The Michigan Senate passed a landmark FOIA reform bill to expose government records from the governor’s office and legislature. The bill now moves to the House for a crucial vote.

A Bipartisan Senate pushes forward with Michigan FOIA reform, bringing the governor’s office and legislature under public records law for the first time in decades. Michigan Senate Approves FOIA Expansion, Pressuring House to Act Artist Rendition LANSING, Mich. — The Michigan Senate has overwhelmingly approved a bipartisan bill package that would significantly expand the state’s Freedom of…

[iakshaysrivastava]

Controversies Surrounding the Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2024

The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024, has emerged as one of the most hotly debated legislative proposals in India. The bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on August 8, 2024. It proposes significant changes to the Waqf Act of 1995. The goal is to enhance transparency, accountability, and efficiency in the management of Waqf properties. However, the bill has sparked controversy across various segments…

[michellesanches]

Latest AI Regulatory Developments:

As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to transform industries, governments worldwide are responding with evolving regulatory frameworks. These regulatory advancements are shaping how businesses integrate and leverage AI technologies. Understanding these changes and preparing for them is crucial to remain compliant and competitive. Recent Developments in AI Regulation: United Kingdom: The…

[akeliciousmedia]

Shehu Sani Reveals Escape from 6-Month Suspension for Exposing Senators' Salaries

Former Nigerian senator Shehu Sani has shed light on the risks of exposing legislative financial details, recalling how his past revelations on lawmakers’ earnings nearly led to severe consequences. In a statement posted on his official X (formerly Twitter) account, Sani recounted the backlash he faced after publicly disclosing the salaries and allowances of Nigerian senators. “When I publicly…

[kesarijournal]

A Modest Proposal for Strengthening Democracy, or How to Win Friends and Influence Elections

In an era where the mere mention of “free and fair elections” sends waves of laughter through the corridors of power, we find ourselves beholding the masterclass in governance offered by none other than the Supreme Leader Shri Sir Adarniya Modiji Maximum Authority, affectionately known as SLSSAMAM. The SLSSAMAM approach to democracy is not merely a strategy but an art form, a nuanced ballet…

[ivygorgon]

AN OPEN LETTER to THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Co-sponsor The Judicial Ethics Enforcement Act of 2024!

59 so far! Help us get to 100 signers!

A group of House Democrats, led by Reps. Melanie Stansbury, Ilhan Omar and Jamie Raskin, have introduced legislation that would strengthen oversight of the Supreme Court. I’m writing in support of it.

The Judicial Ethics Enforcement Act of 2024 would authorize the creation of an office of the inspector general to investigate allegations of misconduct in the judicial branch. The inspector general would also investigate alleged violations of the Supreme Court code of ethics, issued in November; conduct and supervise audits; and recommend changes in laws or regulations governing the judiciary. The inspector general would be required to inform the attorney general when they believe there has been a violation of federal criminal law.

Congress must pass this bill. Confidence in the Supreme Court is at an all-time low, and there’s good reason for that. Several of its justices are deeply compromised and everyone can see it.

Please co-sponsor The Judicial Ethics Enforcement Act of 2024 right away, so the provisions in it can begin to restore Americans’ faith in our highest court. Thanks.

▶ Created on April 19 by Jess Craven

📱 Text SIGN PWCSGV to 50409

🤯 Liked it? Text FOLLOW JESSCRAVEN101 to 50409

[reasonsforhope]

It’s an open secret in fashion. Unsold inventory goes to the incinerator; excess handbags are slashed so they can’t be resold; perfectly usable products are sent to the landfill to avoid discounts and flash sales. The European Union wants to put an end to these unsustainable practices. On Monday, [December 4, 2023], it banned the destruction of unsold textiles and footwear.

“It is time to end the model of ‘take, make, dispose’ that is so harmful to our planet, our health and our economy,” MEP Alessandra Moretti said in a statement. “Banning the destruction of unsold textiles and footwear will contribute to a shift in the way fast fashion manufacturers produce their goods.”

This comes as part of a broader push to tighten sustainable fashion legislation, with new policies around ecodesign, greenwashing and textile waste phasing in over the next few years. The ban on destroying unsold goods will be among the longer lead times: large businesses have two years to comply, and SMEs have been granted up to six years. It’s not yet clear on whether the ban applies to companies headquartered in the EU, or any that operate there, as well as how this ban might impact regions outside of Europe.

For many, this is a welcome decision that indirectly tackles the controversial topics of overproduction and degrowth. Policymakers may not be directly telling brands to produce less, or placing limits on how many units they can make each year, but they are penalising those overproducing, which is a step in the right direction, says Eco-Age sustainability consultant Philippa Grogan. “This has been a dirty secret of the fashion industry for so long. The ban won’t end overproduction on its own, but hopefully it will compel brands to be better organised, more responsible and less greedy.”

Clarifications to come

There are some kinks to iron out, says Scott Lipinski, CEO of Fashion Council Germany and the European Fashion Alliance (EFA). The EFA is calling on the EU to clarify what it means by both “unsold goods” and “destruction”. Unsold goods, to the EFA, mean they are fit for consumption or sale (excluding counterfeits, samples or prototypes)...

The question of what happens to these unsold goods if they are not destroyed is yet to be answered. “Will they be shipped around the world? Will they be reused as deadstock or shredded and downcycled? Will outlet stores have an abundance of stock to sell?” asks Grogan.

Large companies will also have to disclose how many unsold consumer products they discard each year and why, a rule the EU is hoping will curb overproduction and destruction...

Could this shift supply chains?

For Dio Kurazawa, founder of sustainable fashion consultancy The Bear Scouts, this is an opportunity for brands to increase supply chain agility and wean themselves off the wholesale model so many rely on. “This is the time to get behind innovations like pre-order and on-demand manufacturing,” he says. “It’s a chance for brands to play with AI to understand the future of forecasting. Technology can help brands be more intentional with what they make, so they have less unsold goods in the first place.”

Grogan is equally optimistic about what this could mean for sustainable fashion in general. “It’s great to see that this is more ambitious than the EU’s original proposal and that it specifically calls out textiles. It demonstrates a willingness from policymakers to create a more robust system,” she says. “Banning the destruction of unsold goods might make brands rethink their production models and possibly better forecast their collections.”

One of the outstanding questions is over enforcement. Time and again, brands have used the lack of supply chain transparency in fashion as an excuse for bad behaviour. Part of the challenge with the EU’s new ban will be proving that brands are destroying unsold goods, not to mention how they’re doing it and to what extent, says Kurazawa. “Someone obviously knows what is happening and where, but will the EU?”"

-via British Vogue, December 7, 2023

[thxnews]

New Zealand Unites Against Modern Slavery

  Legislation for Transparency and Accountability

In a significant move to combat modern slavery and promote ethical business practices, the New Zealand government has joined forces with businesses to introduce groundbreaking legislation. The proposed law mandates organizations and businesses with revenues exceeding $20 million to maintain transparency about their operations and supply chains through a new public register. This measure aims to tackle exploitation risks and ensure the safety and dignity of workers across various industries.  

Taking Action Against Modern Slavery

Carmel Sepuloni, a government representative, emphasized the urgency of addressing modern slavery practices head-on. She expressed concern about the alarming surge in global modern slavery cases since the onset of the pandemic. According to estimates from the International Labour Organization and Walk Free, approximately 50 million people find themselves trapped in modern slavery on any given day, a significant increase from the 40 million reported in 2016. The proposed legislation and public register are expected to establish one of the world's most robust reporting systems to combat this pervasive issue.  

Business Support and Consumer Impact

During consultations, the government received strong backing from businesses, who recognize the significance of this legislation in eliminating modern slavery from their supply chains. It is evident that some companies are already proactively ensuring that their operations are free from exploitation, and this new law will level the playing field, encouraging others to follow suit. Moreover, these changes will empower conscious Kiwi consumers with greater transparency regarding the products and services they choose. World Vision estimates that unwittingly, Kiwi households contribute an average of $34 each week to industries associated with modern slavery-linked products. The proposed legislation aims to raise awareness and empower consumers to make more informed choices that align with their ethical values.  

Safeguarding Trade Relations and Global Reputation

The importance of this legislation goes beyond domestic borders. New Zealand has committed to preventing modern slavery within its supply chains through Free Trade Agreements with the United Kingdom and the European Union. The failure to take decisive action could have detrimental effects on New Zealand's trading relationships. Upholding a transparent and ethical reputation in global export markets is crucial, and implementing measures to prevent modern slavery is more urgent than ever.  

Striking the Right Balance

Focusing on larger organizations for these reforms strikes a balance between encouraging those with more extensive supply chains to take responsibility and not burdening small businesses excessively. This approach aims to maximize the positive impact of eradicating modern slavery while ensuring fairness in compliance efforts across various business scales.  

Acknowledgments and Future Endeavors

The Modern Slavery Leadership Advisory Group, led by Rob Fyfe, played a pivotal role in shaping the proposed legislation. Their hard work and commitment to the cause have been instrumental in driving these changes forward. While the current legislation focuses on specific aspects related to modern slavery and supply chains, the government acknowledges that broader reforms are still in the pipeline. This includes addressing components such as 'due diligence' and 'take action' responsibilities, which remain a priority for the government's future decisions.    

The Road Ahead

The next step involves the drafting of the legislation, a process that is expected to take around six months. This period will be critical in finalizing the framework that will enable businesses to fulfill their obligations toward supply chain transparency and accountability effectively.   Rob Fyfe's Insight Rob Fyfe, Chair of the Modern Slavery Leadership Advisory Group, spoke about the value of understanding one's operations and supply chains. He praised businesses that have already taken the lead in addressing modern slavery without waiting for legislative changes. However, Fyfe highlighted the importance of creating a level playing field to ensure that cost competitiveness does not come at the expense of enabling modern slavery practices. He sees the proposed legislation as a positive step forward for Kiwi businesses and the country's international trading reputation. As consumers increasingly demand transparency in the products they buy, this reporting system is expected to shed light on supply chains, fostering ethical choices and greater accountability among businesses.  

In Conclusion

The collaboration between the New Zealand government and businesses represents a significant stride in the fight against modern slavery. By requiring transparency and accountability from organizations, the proposed legislation aims to create a safer and more ethical business environment. With a focus on larger businesses, the reforms aim to balance impact and responsibility while fostering a fair business landscape. As the drafting of the legislation commences, New Zealand is taking a crucial step towards securing a transparent and ethical reputation on the global stage, safeguarding trade relations, and contributing to the eradication of modern slavery practices worldwide.   Sources: THX News & New Zealand Government. Read the full article

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Oregon bans the corporate practice of medicine

I'm in the home stretch of my 20+ city book tour for my new novel PICKS AND SHOVELS. Catch me in PDX TODAY (June 20) at BARNES AND NOBLE with BUNNIE HUANG and at the TUALATIN public library on SUNDAY (June 22). After that, it's LONDON (July 1) with TRASHFUTURE'S RILEY QUINN and then a big finish in MANCHESTER on July 2.

Private equity firms are the demon princes of the hellspace that is the imploding, life-destroying, plutocrat-generating American economy. Their favorite scam, the "leveraged buyout" is a mafia bustout dressed up in respectable clothes, and if you mourn a beloved, failed business, chances are that an LBO was the murder weapon, and PE was the killer:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/05/23/spineless/#invertebrates

(Despite simplistic explanations and bad-faith apologestics, a leveraged buyout is nothing like a mortgage – it is a sinister, complex, destructive form of financial fraud:)

https://pluralistic.net/2024/08/05/rugged-individuals/#misleading-by-analogy

As bad as this is, it's ten quintillion times worse when applied to healthcare. When PE buys your hospital, people die. A lot of people:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/02/28/5000-bats/#charnel-house

PE doesn't even have to buy the whole hospital – for a long time, PE groups bought out anesthetist practices affilated with hospitals and pulled them out of the hospital's insurance affiliation. Unsuspecting patients who went in for routine surgical care at a hospital that was in-network for their insurer would get a rude awakening from their sedation: "surprise bills" running to tens or hundred of thousands of dollars. PE groups did the same thing with emergency rooms, so that people experiencing serious medical emergencies who had the presence of mind to insist upon being brought to an in-network ER nevertheless got hit with life-ruining surprise bills:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/03/14/unhealthy-finances/#steins-law

Donald Trump sometimes panders to anti-elitist elements in his base by threatening the private equity racket. For example, Trump has frequently railed against the "carried interest" tax loophole that allows PE bosses to pay half as much tax as you or I would on their vast takings. "Carried interest" is a tax law that gave 16th century sea-captains a break on their "interest" in the cargo they "carried." It is both weird and fantastically unjust that richest, worst financiers in America are able to take advantage of this Moby Dick-ass-law:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/04/29/writers-must-be-paid/#carried-interest

But while Trump sometimes talks a good line about fighting private equity looters, he does not, has not, and will not lift a finger to them. He dares not. The carried interest tax scam is preserved in the Big Beautiful Bill, joined with many other giveaways the least productive, most guillotineable looters America has produced:

https://www.pillsburylaw.com/en/news-and-insights/no-changes-carried-interest-big-beautiful-bill-so-far.html

Working people cannot rely on Trump's federal government and the Republican Congress to protect us from these vampires. But this is America: when the feds fail, that creates an opportunity for state legislators to step in and act. And that's just what's happened in Oregon, where the state legislature has passed sweeping, bipartisan legislation that bans corporations from owning or operating a medical practice in the state:

https://prospect.org/health/2025-06-13-united-health-care-oregon-corporate-medicine/

This is called the "corporate practice of medicine" (CPOM) and it's already banned. The American Medical Association has a longstanding, absolute prohibition on medical practices that are run by anyone except a doctor. Oregon has had a CPOM ban on the law-books since 1947. Private equity meets this prohibition with a very transparent ruse indeed: they get a "rent a doc," often out of state, to serve as the nominal owner of their practices, and the doctor takes orders from the PE firm, and hires the PE firm's outsource agencies to actually operate the clinic or hospital, absorbing the entirety of the practice's profits.

The Oregon bill closes this loophole, and not a minute too soon. Giant healthcare monopolists – most notably groups associated with Unitedhealth, the largest health corporation in America – have embarked on a statewide buying spree, buying and shutting down rural hospitals and clinics, and transforming the remaining facilities into understaffed charnel houses that hemorrhage doctors.

The bill took several tries to get through the legislature. As Oregon House Majority Leader Representative Ben Bowman told Matt Stoller and David Dayen on their Organized Money podcast, the statehouse was crawling with lobbyists hired by out of state private health-care firms who were worried about "contagion" if Oregon's bill passed and spread to other states:

https://www.organizedmoney.fm/p/how-oregon-is-ending-corporate-run

But the bill passed anyway, thanks to a combination of two factors. First, during the bill's legislative adventure, Unitedhealth's Optum bought out the Oregon Medical Group and made working conditions so terrible that dozens of doctors quit, leaving thousands of rural patients (from predominantly Republican districts) without medical care. Optum "fired" thousands of patients, including some who were undergoing cancer treatment, on the basis that they weren't profitable enough to care for:

https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/private-equity-unitedhealth-take

In the midst of all this, another Unitedhealth monopolist, Change Health, got hacked and virtually no one in America could get a prescription filled – worse, the hack exposed the health records of almost everyone in America, the largest health-related breach in US history:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/28/dealer-management-software/#antonin-scalia-stole-your-car

Then, as icing on the cake, Unitedhealth's Oregon operation screwed over multiple, cancer-fighting lawmakers who were serving in the state-house as the bill was under debate. Combine this with testimony from doctors who described how they were unable to practice medicine after leaving Unitedhealth's terrible facilities because they had been trapped with noncompete clauses in their contracts, nor could they warn other doctors away from falling prey to this trap because they were also bound by nondisparagement clauses.

The new bill, SB 951, passed out of the legislature and was signed by the governor earlier this month. It is now good law in Oregon, which means that corporations can't operate medical practices, and that medical personnel can't be subjected to noncompete clauses (fun fact: every noncompete clause is written by a lawyer, but the American Bar Association prohibits noncompetes for lawyers).

Now it's time for those out-of-state healthcare looters' worst fears to be realized. It's time for the contagion to spread to other states.

The US federal system is a big, gnarly mess, but by design, it leaves a lot of power in local hands. That's bad news when local power is being used to ban trans people from peeing, or to attack school librarians, or to ban masking. But it's good news when states and cities can use the American system to create sanctuary systems that welcome asylum seekers and treat them with dignity (which is why the American right, the standard bearer for "states' rights" when it came to school segregation and voter suppression, is now all-in on sending armed soldiers to terrorize their fellow Americans with assault rifles).

Another reason to like state and local politics: local Democrats often suck way less than the necrotic federal Dem establishment. Some of them are even good! In Philly, Mayor Cherelle Parker just signed the Protect Our Workers, Enforce Rights (POWER) Act, which protects 750,000 workers from wage theft:

https://prospect.org/labor/2025-06-18-how-philadelphia-secured-basic-rights-for-750-000-workers/

The POWER Act shifts the burden of proof for wage theft allegations from workers to their bosses and allows them to recover their stolen wages plus $2,000 in statutory damages per violation; it sets up a new fund (replenished with employer fines) that gives money to victims of retaliation, and it creates a public "bad boss" database of repeat offenders.

As Brock Hrehor writes for The American Prospect, the POWER Act was passed after Trump gutted the National Labor Relations Board and left it unable to protect American workers. The POWER Act tackles one of the most pernicious forms of crime in America: wage theft, which accounts for more losses than all property crime in America combined, with losses overwhelming borne by Black and brown workers, especially women. Wage theft is notoriously hard to police, thanks to fear of retaliation and the precarity of victims of this crime.

The POWER Act passed as a result of the combined efforts of unions (SEIU, AFL-CIO) and the Working Families Party. Along with the Oregon Corporate Practice of Medicine ban, it shows how local, grassroots activism can protect everyday, working people from even the worst corporate criminals, even in Donald Trump's America.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/06/20/the-doctor-will-gouge-you-now/#states-rights

[throwsahammer]

For what it's worth, I have yet to see any compelling data to support the claim that Mormons are disproportionately represented within federal agencies, and it seems to be a bit of folklore/propaganda that originated within mid-century Mormonism as part of its efforts to rebrand itself as more "American", combined with Utah having an NSA data center and lots of federal land & national parks combined with low population resulting in a higher than average percentage of federal employees per capita. The only places you ever really hear this claim made are within heavily mormon contexts where it's being presented as a positive thing (usually as a reason to serve a mission), but in recent years it's been increasingly prevalent within external contexts as well (likely due to the mass exodus from the church and increased visibility of exmormons in pop culture and counterculture spaces), where it's presented as a negative thing.

On the whole, Mormons as a population tend to be rather divided on the subject of federal agencies, as are most conservative American religious subcultures at present. Politically, most Mormons oppose the same federal agencies as mainstream conservatives (IRS, FBI, EPA, BLM, etc.), but tend to have more positive opinions about things like the secret service, national parks service, and pretty much any branch of the military. A minority of Mormons hold more liberal or even leftist political beliefs and tend to have more or less positive views of the aforementioned agencies as a result.

None of this is meant to be dismissive of your central point, (Mormonism teaches that rigid, unquestioning obedience to the "proper authorities" is a moral imperative in many ways and that inevitably results in a lot of abuse and harm) but I do think that criticism of Mormonism is most useful when it focuses more on the concrete harms it causes and perpetuates than on the more lurid and speculative aspects of the belief system. I agree that it's a cult, but that's simultaneously the least interesting and dangerous thing about it.

MORMON MISSILE TIME