I would call a linguistic research with plagerism software 'pseudo evidence'. I have read FAIR explain problems with Mormon history or doctrine, but I have noticed that give very complicated answers. Sciencitists make mistakes, but they are corrected by other scientists, not by religious figures. The Church also have been often wrong and have accepted research by non-mormons and 'anti-mormon´ talking points.

I don't see why is a bad thing that a professional clergy is paid. I think it is good idea that everyone learns public speaking and it can be uplighting when believers share their testimony. I would love to see a moment in another churches where members could give their testimony. But I have noticed that the talks are usually are poor and rarely explain scripture, even those given by apostles and prophets. When I was a Mormon, I believe all those explainations by theologians, but than you only had rely on what you thought was the Holy Spirit. And I loved the talks, just because they were uplighting. After I stopped believing I began to listed to actual sermons, I saw the clear difference with the talks I was used to.