I think it is basically the society we live in today, they have to “show us” who they are by expressing their views in an open type forum.
People have to flaunt that they are not the social norm in our faces. whether it is being gay or not being LDS or how much money they make, etc… I think if you filtered out all the noise, and went down to the basic root event, most people like this (those that flaunts) is insecure and needs to be the center of attention.
I work with a gay guy, but you would never know it. He never discusses the issue with others, he lives his life in his own way with out causing much of a stir.
Expressing views is not always a bad thing, in the 50’s,60’s and 70’s people did not come forth with family abuse by their spouses. Children and wives suffered in silence, while their fathers/husbands were revered by neighbors and even church members. President Kimball and Hinckley started to focus on the issue explaining that men who miss treat their families are in fear of losing their salvation.
That’s all nonsense. People did too come forth about abuse. When there was evidence of it. I wasn’t a member until 1977 but I knew members and there were divorces over abuse and men going to jail for abuse of children.
And, if the guy you worked with never told anyone he was gay, how do you know?
Sometimes you are too argumentative and split hairs over things. I think what Floyd was saying is that in the 50s, 60s & 70s. it was common for children and spouses to suffer in silence. Nobody would suggest that would be the case 100% of the time.
Floyd never said the guy never told anybody he was gay. He said he doesn’t discuss it with others. I don’t think you can suggest that he has never told anybody based on Floyd’s comment.
Scott, I am not going to waste my time with you on this subject, because you are frankly a idiot when it comes to this stuff.
You spout “Nonsense” when you have no statistical data to back you up. There are many documented studies that showed what I said is true. I also know the stigma of being a divorced person has in the church during those times… It is one of the reasons a relative of mine is not active these days.
So Scott, for all that is holy… shut up, stop being offensive to those that suffered.
I said he never discusses the issues of being gay or gay rights. He doesn’t push an agenda like some of these people do. He simply lives his life the way he wants. That was my point.
But your too busy arguing to try to understand the point…
Wives and children still suffer in silence. Nothing has changed. I see it while I work in our ministerial association. As far as the Church handles it, we do when it comes to light, most of the time. Nothing different from the 70’s as I said before.
You say argumentative. I say challenging in a debate. You challenge me, right? Do I get all bothered by it? No. I challenge or debate back. I have no contempt for Floyd or anyone else. I get frustrated when people won’t engage without getting all flustered. Jim does a great job at it. I chuckle each time with his comments because he has a sense of humor.
Yes, people in abusive homes today still remain silent. I know in the mid eighties when I was EQ President, I spent time at homes calming down husbands who were angry and some drunk. Getting them to go with me to somewhere else. But, we could only do that if someone called. The wives called.
WOW! I feel sorry for you that you have trouble hearing truth from other persons. If you listen and pray about it, you might come to the realization other people actually can speak truth about the problems in the world. That little bubble of Utah you live in really has you fooled.
I might add he was approved by the BOT to speak with other general authorities present. Holier than though attitude.
It is not “Truth” Scott… it is OPINION… sorry you are so delusional you can not tell the difference.
Still does not make it “doctrine” or spoken by one having authority…
Bruce R. McConkie wrote Mormon Doctrine which ended up being edited by President David O McKay… Later President Hinckley band the use of it in Gospel doctrine classes.
Lastly, the scriptures teaches us in the last days, even the elect with be deceived. That is why I choose to follow the brethren and listen to what they have to say instead of some guest speaker at BYU.
Does not diminish his talk, I just don’t take as doctrine or official policy of the church.
I think there is a tendency for many Mormons to fall over each other in an effort to prove that they are tolerant and unbigoted. In modern parlance, that they are “woke.” My wife and I call this “Michael Jackson-izing.” People often say, “I don’t care for his music, but you have to admit, the man could dance.” Even though they really think he couldn’t. But there is the obligation (or felt obligation) to say this, because people feel they should say it.
I think people saying “I’ve never been so inspired!” like you overheard are the same way. There is a lot of social pressure (and now, increasingly, in the Church as well) to gush about gay members who are “inspiring,” like a valedictorian, etc. Guaranteed, if there is a (currently) active, believing gay member who is positive about the Church and impressive in some aspect of life or society, there is a mad scramble to spotlight them in an Ensign article or in Meridian or something.
The problem with this (and many other “back of the Ensign” stories) is that many, many of these people end up either leaving the Church, or becoming critical of it, etc. There are many of the inspiring, “back of the Ensign” stories that end up having a negative “rest of the story,” so our faith should never rely on things like this (and no one here is saying that it should).
I’ve know and worked with many gay members as a bishop (twice), and we’re all pulling for the ones who are trying to live the gospel and keep their covenants. What scares me with them is that the long-term track record and prognosis is not good. I sure hope it is with the ones I am close to and care about, but I can’t tell you how many times my heart has been broken by men (and women) declaring after decades of effort and struggle that they are going to be “true to themselves and what they are” and openly violate the commandments. We still love and care about them, but it’s sad.
Many of these people are the people people get so “inspired” about when they hear them at Time Out for Women, or commencement, or General Conference, etc.
Everything doesn’t have to be agreed on but I don’t see any reason to debate everything either. Saying that a lot of children and spouses suffered abuse in the 50s, 60s & 70s and suffered in silence is undoubtedly true. I think it is less likely today but undoubtedly still happens. What’s the purpose of arguing over it for the sake of arguing? The 2nd point you argued was about the gay man not making an issue of being gay. I got Floyd’s point immediately and never took it to mean the man had never told anybody he was gay. Your comment appeared to me to be a pointless challenge to provoke an argument. There are things to debate and there are ways to go about it. I don’t agree with everything Floyd, or anybody else, here says but I don’t challenge every remark to provoke a debate.
Sometimes a disagreement can be a friendly discussion rather than an argument.
So, you haven’t watched it yet. Even opinions can be truthful. All your comments are opinion but you expect me to bow down to you oh king of kings and believe you speak truth.
And, just to be clear, scripture is only correct as far as it is translated correctly. So, how do we know if something is true, Floyd? By the gift and power of the Holy Ghost. Then, it’s true, isn’t it!
All he was saying is that you don’t have to argue everything someone says. It makes you appear ignorant and unable to accept anyone else’s comments as being worthwhile. When Floyd made the comment he did, I happened to agree with what he said. Yes, there is also physical abuse today but it is much less tolerated than it was so many years ago. That is what he was saying.
Well said Reed. Now are you prepared to debate and argue with grasshopper when he disputes something you said by misinterpreting it for the sake of arguing about it? It seems as though that is his life’s calling as it gives him purpose and meaning…
So you are saying the Book of Mormon is not translated correctly? because that is the book I read the most.
Second, I am trying to do what Elder Oaks taught last conference:
“just because something is good is not a sufficient reason for doing it…Some things are better than good, and these are the things that should command priority attention in our lives. … We have to forego some good things in order to choose others that are better or best.”
I choose to follow the prophet’s voice (all the apostles are included in this) , not some guest speaker, for that I make no apology.
I try to do the things that the Lord would have me do:
I work at the Temple so that patrons can feel the spirit of the Temple and do ordinances for their ancestors.
I serve in a Spanish ward as an inner city missionary to help facilitate fellow members and non members to become more self sufficient and help them in their daily lives.
I serve my family to always be there when they need help or encouragement.
I am serve my neighbors, they know they can call on me any time day or night.
I try to live my life in way that my non LDS family and friends will feel the power of the spirit in the way I live and maybe some day want to know more about the Gospel of Christ.
I do not judge others life or lifestyles, it is not my job to do so, but it is my job to always be kind and loving toward them, even though I may disagree with their decisions.
I am not perfect, but I strive for perfection in the things I can control. You see Scott, my life service is based on the principle of “Love” not condemnation. I don’t always have to “defend” the church, I prefer to “live the gospel” so that others have a good impression of the church, that is the most effective way to influence people’s views.
You seemed to have forgotten that part, or maybe it is as Jim Hawks said, you like to be combative and argumentative to get your jollies some how.
I respect Jim and his opinions, I don’t always agree with them, but I know his heart is good. That is why I tried to answer his question as best I could to help maybe shed some light on the issue he presented.
Like I said, I don’t have the energy nor the time to “debate” with you on something so simple as following what the prophet says.
Some are sons of Helaman and some are those who covenant not to take up war. I have taken my covenant in the Temple to defend the kingdom of God on the Earth and do what I can that you do.
The Book of Mormon is the “most” correct book of scripture up to the point of when Joseph Smith said that. Then there was the Pearl of Great Price and Doctrine and Covenants. I’m sure there could be even more revealed to us through our Prophets. As for the correctness of the Book of Mormon, that depends on which language as only in our English was it translated just once. However, there have been some changes to it like punctuation and a couple other things.
As for those not of our faith and not prophets, I met the man who translated the Book of Mormon into Hebrew. He was an exchange professor from the University of Tel-Aviv and NOT a member of the Church. See, the spirit of prophecy comes through the Infuence of the Holy Ghost and not just by the Gift by the laying on of hands. If this were not so, there would be no real converts of baptism.
Do you not then think or feel that Dr. Brooks could not be influenced by the Holy Ghost to speak truth to the graduating students and the crowd in attendance? After listening to him, it’s puzzling why he’s not a member. And I still haven’t heard a word he said that isn’t truthful and good.
I’m glad you feel so great about yourself that you have to make a list. I find that puzzling. I think though Dr. Brooks words will have a much greater effect upon the world than your list. Not that what you do and are is bad. Just a bit holier than thou.
