Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7,524 Excellent


About rockpond

  • Rank
    Mormon Libertarian

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

3,193 profile views
  1. This made me laugh out loud. Thanks!
  2. I can understand that the reference comment likely felt like an attack in the church and its leaders. I happen to be someone who, like most here, is rather devoted to studying the scriptures and I spend a lot of time in the New Testament. My study of the Bible, coupled with pondering and prayer teaches me that God does not want marriage to be exclusively a man/woman arrangement. So, can you understand that when you make a conclusive statement, as if it is fact, that the Bible only supports God wanting man/woman marriage, that it likewise feels like an attack on my beliefs?
  3. Excellent question. That’s where it gets tough and I don’t have an answer. I have no interest in silencing beliefs. I also don’t want to hurt people.
  4. Okay. Makes sense. Does it bother you to have someone refer to a mixed orientation marriage (SSA man married to OSA woman, using your terms) as "pretend"? (This is what started this subthread in case you weren't following back then.) I'm guessing that bothers you. It certainly bothers me! I see all of this (what each of us find bothersome) as having to do with our personal belief systems. But then that makes me wonder, do we have a responsibility to temper our words when speaking in public since those words may hurt others even if they fit perfectly within our personal belief system? Was it wrong for @kllindley to speak up against @phaedrus ut for the hurtful "pretend" comment? Was it wrong for HRC to speak up against Elder Perry for the hurtful "counterfeit" comment? Just seeking to understand how this all works... or maybe how it should work.
  5. So do you support Elder Perry’s use of the word counterfeit in that context?
  6. Great points. And yes, when I have to click on “show this post” it’s like a reminder to me to think twice before I respond since past interaction with that individual has brought out a side of me that I don’t like.
  7. A few thoughts in response: 1) I don't want these boards to just be an echo chamber for any one point of view so I expect that there will be those who see things differently than I do. That's actually why I don't participate in discussions elsewhere -- I think this board tends to be more balanced than anywhere I've visited. 2) I think we should differentiate between when someone believes that the church should, for example, be doing more to help the poor or showing more love to those who sin vs. specifically saying that "the church is hypocrites". I think we see the entire spectrum here, certainly, but need to be careful not to paint with a broad brush and assume that anyone questioning the church's use of sacred funds is concluding that the church is guilty of hypocrisy. For example, I desperately wish that the church would return to its practice of disclosing its financial reports to members (and have argued for that here) but I don't believe the church is guilty of fraud or hypocrisy. 3) If you come across someone you find is consistently contentious, I'd encourage you do use the block function so that you won't even see their posts. I try to do this sparingly so that I don't create an echo chamber effect (by blocking everyone with differing viewpoints) while also avoiding people who I feel tend to lead me toward feelings of contention (possibly by no fault of their own but just because of where the two of us stand on things).
  8. Yes. 1) I think the word "counterfeit" was offensive regardless of one's position on marriage. I don't consider church members' and leaders' spiritual beliefs about marriage to be offensive and immoral. And yet, I still find describing other loving and committed relationships as "counterfeit" to be just as offensive as describing a mixed orientation marriage as "pretend". And it was painful for me to hear that from an apostle. 2) I think that there are board members who may feel that the church isn't showing love to LGBT individuals. But that isn't entirely what I quoted. Here is what I quoted from @Anonymous Mormon: While there may be a couple who have done this, I don't think it is productive or considerate to use blanket statements and state that "lots of people on this board" do it and that they are "yelling over and over". I certainly haven't seen it on this thread.
  9. I found the use of "pretend" in ostensibly describing a mixed orientation marriage to be offensive (the statement that I believe started this subthread). I also found Elder Perry's use of "counterfeit", to presumably refer to same gender marriage (but possibly not, it's unclear), to also be offensive. It does create unnecessary division and pain, it also diminishes many loving, committed relationships regardless of one's religious beliefs about marriage. I've read and re-read President Oaks' words from the 4-April-2019 press release many times as I take great comfort in this being a guiding principle for all of us, myself included, as we move forward: "We want to reduce the hate and contention so common today. We are optimistic that a majority of people — whatever their beliefs and orientations — long for better understanding and less contentious communications. That is surely our desire, and we seek the help of our members and others to attain it."
  10. @Anonymous Mormon indicated that he/she wanted to choose their words carefully so as to not accidentally cause offense. That is a great goal. I am trying to do the same. You'll note that I quoted two particular phrases. I think those are mis-characterizations of the individuals on this board who disagree with the Church's position/teachings on marriage. If we're seeking to not cause offense (and this is advice for myself as well), I think it is important to seek to understand the positions of those with whom we are talking and to not misrepresent their beliefs and statements. I don't come here thinking that I'm going to change opinions but I do hold to the hope that those who dialogue with me here will seek to understand me as I try to do the same.
  11. Then you might want to reconsider what you wrote above.
  12. That’s funny. I wasn’t baiting you. I responded to your derail. But I’m good with letting the thread get back on topic.
  13. I don't presume to answer for Daniel. He's free to respond. I find it odd because it seems clear that Daniel disagrees with Elder Perry's position so I am not sure why you'd ask him to rephrase it in a way that supports that position while not being offensive. My point in bringing up Elder Rector's quote was to illustrate that as a church, when we grow to a point where previous teachings are found to be wrong, we just delete them. So your request to rephrase Elder Perry's quote can be done in the same way we've done it in the past.
  14. It might help but I feel like it is impossible to control where a thread goes. Silver lining though is that as conversation continues on this thread (any conversation) at least the OP with that incredible video stays at the top and is likely to be seen by more people.
  15. Yep... I've started many threads that took turns that really bummed me out. The video is beautiful and touching. If you don't want the thread going off on other tangents, you could ask the moderators to lock it. I think they generally respect the wishes of the originator.
  • Create New...