The Mormon Church Is Suing a Mormon Stories to Silence Them

They Excommunicated Him. Now They're Suing Him.

Mormon Stories Interview Transcript:

Thomas Westbrook: A religious corporation sitting on roughly $300 billion with an army of more than 200 attorneys on retainer just filed a federal lawsuit against a podcaster. All in an attempt to silence one of their critics. And no, we're not talking about the Church of Scientology. The LDS church is suing a man who has been on their internal enemies list since 2013. All because he ran a podcast called Mormon Stories, giving a voice to members and ex-members, sharing their often negative experiences with the church. The legal fees alone could run into the millions. The case could take years, and the rationale behind the lawsuit is just wild. My guest today is Dr. John Dehlin, the host of Mormon Stories, and what's happening to him should concern every single person who cares about free inquiry, no matter what religion you grew up in. John Dehlin, welcome to the show.

John Dehlin: Thanks for having me on, Thomas. It's a real honor to be on your show. Thanks for helping bring a spotlight to what's going on.

Thomas Westbrook: So, John, who exactly are you and why is such a powerful religious organization suing you right now?

John Dehlin: I've been doing the podcast for 21 years. You probably won't meet many people that started their podcast in 2005. I'm a sixth-generation Mormon. My ancestors were pioneers that crossed the plains in the mid-1800s. I was born and raised in the church, married in the temple, all that stuff. In my early 30s, when I was working for Microsoft, I had a faith crisis and lost my orthodox faith in Mormonism, but still felt like maybe the church could expand to allow non-literal belief. In 2004, I left Microsoft, and in 2005, I started the podcast. I started it as someone who was still attending church and hoping to remain faithful my whole life.

The reason why I lost my faith to begin with was because I started learning things about the church's history that the church had never taught me. Things like Joseph Smith was a polygamist, that he had over 30 wives, that he married 14-year-olds, and that he married other men's wives. I learned that the church's founding scriptures had serious historical and credibility problems. I just felt really betrayed. When I started the podcast, it was with the idea that Mormons deserve to know the truth about their past and their history. Maybe through podcasting, the church could become comfortable with people talking openly about its history, doctrine, theology, and practices.

I did the podcast for about 10 years before the church excommunicated me in 2015. They wanted me to shut the podcast down at that time. They also were mad that I was supporting same-sex marriage and female ordination publicly. All of that got me excommunicated. I think they hoped that would silence me or shut me down, but we just continued growing. This culminated in November of last year, 2025. After using the name "Mormon Stories" for over 20 years without them ever contesting our trademark or copyright usage, they sent me an email saying, "We feel like you're violating our trademarks and copyright and we want you to make some changes."

I made all the changes that I felt were reasonable immediately. They didn't like that I was using blue in my logo, so I changed from blue to orange. They didn't like that I was using an image of Christ in my banner; I took that out. They didn't like that I was using rays in my branding, even though we've been using rays for over a decade.

Thomas Westbrook: Wait, so the Mormon church is saying that they have a trademark on crepuscular rays, on the color blue, and now on the word "Mormon" as well? I'm not an expert in Mormonism, but didn't the LDS church officially denounce the word "Mormon"? Their prophet came out and said it was like a slanderous slur. This is after they spent millions of dollars on ad campaigns with everyone saying, "I'm a Mormon."

John Dehlin: Yeah. Russell M. Nelson, the previous prophet, came out in the 2010s saying that to call the church the "Mormon Church" or for Latter-day Saints to identify as "Mormons" is a major victory for Satan. Those were his words. The church removed the word "Mormon" from the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, changed all their URLs and domain names, and purged "Mormon" from the whole church's SEO and identity. At that point, I had already been using the name for 10 or more years. I figured we were winning usage of the term anyway, so it was no big deal.

But I think at some point when Russell M. Nelson died and the new prophet, Dallin H. Oaks, took over, he might have regretted what his predecessor had done with the word "Mormon." I think that's part of what kicked them in to start becoming litigious over the term. That might be one of the reasons why they sent me that cease and desist.

Thomas Westbrook: So, just so I understand this, the Mormon church made a catastrophically stupid move from the standpoint of marketing. If you are trying to get people to come to your church, you identify as Mormons, you run ad campaigns saying you're Mormons, and you spend millions on SEO to be at the top of search results. Then all of a sudden you yank that, leaving ex-Mormons and critics to rise up the rankings in Google because the church's listings are no longer there. Now they're mad that all of this traffic is coming to you guys when people search for "what is Mormonism" because they no longer use that term.

John Dehlin: It's true. But there were reasons why they did it. Liberal Mormons, questioning Mormons, and ex-Mormons dominated blogging, podcasting, and social media before the church could catch up. The church is run by octogenarians and nonagenarians; the top 15 leaders average something like 85 to 90 years old. They were really slow to the internet. By the time they started their "I'm a Mormon" campaign, Mormon Stories and other critical podcasts were already dominating SEO.

Second, the LDS church has a famously bad reputation. By the time the Book of Mormon musical came out, customer research showed Mormons ranking at the bottom of all religious groups—around Scientology and atheists. Because they lost the SEO battle and had a terrible reputation, Russell M. Nelson thought they should do a rebrand. He wanted to jettison the term "Mormon" and focus on Jesus Christ so that evangelical Christians might start accepting them as mainstream Christians. It was an attempt to move away from their past as a "cult" or "polygamists." It was logical thinking, but it was a disaster for SEO and marketing.

Thomas Westbrook: So, what leg do they have to stand on coming after you for using the word "Mormon" if they have publicly abandoned the term? Walk me through the lawsuit and the demands. You guys went to mediation—what specifically were they asking?

John Dehlin: Prior to 2017, we used the color blue. We have logos using blue from long before the church did their rebrand. Around 2018, the church did a full rebrand that incorporated blue as their main color.

Thomas Westbrook: So your usage of the color predated them. It's not like you saw their blue and decided to copy it.

John Dehlin: Absolutely. You can go back to 2005 or 2010 and see we used blue. Around 2022, a graphic designer told me we needed a new YouTube banner and web redesign. He chose blue, partly because we had used it in the past. The church's strategy, in my opinion, was: "How do we defame, bankrupt, and silence Mormon Stories? Let's use our hundreds of billions of dollars to start a lawsuit claiming trademark and copyright infringement." Even if they lose, it doesn't matter because it will cost us two to three million dollars to defend.

In mediation, they told us to change our logo from blue to something else, so we changed it to orange. They said take the "Christus" statue out of your banner. That statue isn't even Mormon; it was created by a different denomination in Sweden hundreds of years ago. We took it out anyway. We took the rays out. They wanted a disclaimer on all our assets; I incorporated the disclaimer. They were concerned about copyrighted images in our thumbnails, like paintings of Joseph Smith. I had my designer go three years back and change every single thumbnail they might have an issue with, even though we felt it was fair use. We made all those changes and more, but they still wanted more.

Thomas Westbrook: What were some of the less reasonable requests that you weren't willing to accommodate?

John Dehlin: They wanted a legible disclaimer included directly in our YouTube banner. Imagine a banner that says "Mormon Stories" and then, in bold letters: "This YouTube channel is not produced by, sponsored by, or endorsed by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." They asked us to change the name of our podcast. They said we needed to change our logo to say "Ex-Mormon Stories with Dr. John Dehlin," and they specified that none of the text could have a smaller font than other words.

They didn't like that we used "Mormon" in our URL or social media handles. I feel like they wanted to destroy our SEO and branding so people couldn't find us, or if they did, it would look so unprofessional that people wouldn't watch. But the worst part was that they asked for an audible disclaimer at the beginning of every episode—and repeated every 15 to 20 minutes throughout every episode for the rest of our existence.

They asked us to renounce any trademark rights to the "Mormon Stories" name, promise never to file any trademarks for it, and never to challenge any of their trademarks. The most ridiculous thing was they asked me to sign an agreement that I would never create a project on the internet again that uses the word "Mormon." Then they told the public they weren't concerned about the term "Mormon," just trademark violations. I feel they were highly deceptive.

Thomas Westbrook: As a content creator, I know those requests would absolutely kill your channel. YouTube looks at audience retention. If you start with a long, unprofessional disclaimer, 20% of your audience bounces immediately. It seems extremely deliberate. And they can't seriously be concerned that people will mistake you for the official church, right?

John Dehlin: They publicly excommunicated me in 2015 and issued a press release calling me an apostate. Between that and the fact that we use "Mormon" while the prophet calls it a "victory for Satan," nobody is confusing us with an official church show. You just have to scroll through our episode titles: "Was Joseph Smith a pedophile?", "Is the Book of Mormon a fraud?" No one thinks this is sponsored by the LDS church.

In my opinion, they did mediation for two reasons. One was to see if they could scare us into giving them more than a judge would ever grant them at trial. We didn't cave. The second reason was so they could say they tried to mediate but we were unreasonable. That's why I refused to sign a confidentiality clause. In their press release, they said all they asked for was a disclaimer. That's a lie. Then they said I didn't incorporate a disclaimer. That is also a lie; the Wayback Machine shows we added it during mediation. They were publicly deceitful.

Thomas Westbrook: It's interesting because the word "Mormon" isn't really a trademarked word in general use. It's been used since the 1800s. You can't just trademark "Christian."

John Dehlin: The church has obtained a few trademarks, like "Book of Mormon Stories" for educational purposes. My understanding is that if those were challenged, they likely wouldn't hold up. But who wants to sue a church with endless pockets? If you have enough money, you can obtain trademarks unopposed even when you shouldn't. The term is ubiquitous—there's the Mormon History Association, Mormon studies at universities, and various offshoots. To enforce it now, after 21 years of allowing me to use it, is unreasonable. But again, it's not about the case; it's about the $3 million price tag of the fight. They are taking a page out of the Scientology playbook: use litigation to run the little guy out of business.

Thomas Westbrook: This is why I'm putting a link to your legal defense fund in the description. Even with lawyers helping, this could cost hundreds of thousands or millions.

John Dehlin: That's true. Our firm is being generous, but we are going to have to pay legal fees and expenses. The fund is dedicated to allowing us to survive legally against a multi-hundred-billion dollar organization. I would never use a lawsuit as a pretext to just fundraise generally. We were sustainable before this.

Thomas Westbrook: I've had similar issues. Kraft Foods sent me a cease and desist for using "Kool-Aid" in "Holy Koolaid." I explained it was a reference to the Jonestown slogan, not their drink. They asked me to change it to "Kool-Aid" with a "C." Even a "small" change is a logistical nightmare for SEO and branding. I told them I'd do it for a seven-figure compensation to cover the costs, and they stopped responding. But in your case, the church clearly sees you as a threat because you're simply giving people a microphone. Not everyone on your channel is an ex-Mormon, right? Would it even be accurate to call it "Ex-Mormon Stories"?

John Dehlin: It would be totally inaccurate. We interview believing Mormons and progressive Mormons every year. And the irony is, I had my faith crisis because the church has a two-century history of deceiving its members. I wasn't taught that Joseph Smith used a peep stone in a hat or that the Book of Abraham was a fraudulent translation. Even recently, the SEC fined the church for using shell companies to hide billions of dollars from its members. They have a history of fraud, and then they have the gall to accuse me of being "deceptive" for telling the truth.

Thomas Westbrook: One of my favorite episodes was your interview with Egyptologist Robert Ritner. He showed how the papyrus Joseph Smith claimed was about Abraham was actually just common Egyptian funerary texts. You weren't telling people they had to leave; you were just asking if the claims were true.

John Dehlin: Exactly. Members deserve informed consent. Nowadays, the church admits in obscure essays that the word "Abraham" doesn't appear in the papyri, but they hide that information. I'm not trying to get people to leave. If the church provides community or meaning for someone, that's their choice. I just want people to have the truth so they can make informed decisions.

Thomas Westbrook: When did you leave the faith? Did you consider yourself an ex-Mormon when you started the podcast?

John Dehlin: I still identify as a Mormon today, in the same way a secular atheist Jew identifies as Jewish. I'm a sixth-generation Mormon. When I lost my faith in 2001, I stayed active for 13 or 14 years. I didn't stop attending until I was excommunicated in 2015. So, calling it "Ex-Mormon Stories" wouldn't even be accurate for the host.

Thomas Westbrook: I've noticed a lot of Mormon social media influencers lately. How have they reacted to this?

John Dehlin: The "Secret Lives of Mormon Wives" cast is at a different level, so I haven't heard from them. Heather Gay from Real Housewives of Salt Lake City reached out; she had her own trademark battle with the church over her book Bad Mormon.

As for the pro-LDS influencers, on the Friday the church filed the lawsuit, they issued a press release but didn't even give my attorney a copy. An army of faithful Mormon influencers was already posting about it before I even knew it happened. It seemed like a coordinated smear campaign. I had to screen-grab a case number from a faithful apologist's video just to go to the federal registry and get a copy of the lawsuit. I wasn't even served yet.

Thomas Westbrook: This is going to be an uphill battle for years. But you have my support. This is the kind of action that earns an organization a reputation as a cult. If they want to be seen as a friendly, mainstream church, they shouldn't be suing critics into oblivion. To other content creators: the Mormon church buys a lot of YouTube ads at high rates. If you make content about this, you'll probably get some of that ad revenue while shining a light on the story.

John Dehlin: I hope there's a Streisand effect here. If we emerge victorious, we secure the right for everyone to use the term "Mormon." This is a First Amendment issue. Multi-billion dollar tax-free religions shouldn't be able to silence critics using money they accrued through religious protections.

Thomas Westbrook: You're standing in the gap. If you fall, they'll go after the next person. Is there anything else you want to say?

John Dehlin: If there are any legal experts in trademark, copyright, or First Amendment rights who want to help, please email me at mormonstories@gmail.com. Our legal team is willing to bring on more expertise.

Thomas Westbrook: John, thank you for coming on. Everyone, go support John and subscribe to his channel. And as always, dare to be curious, but don't drink the Kool-Aid.

Get Connected: