Jump to content
flameburns623

GLBT+ Protest planned for Fast Sunday?

Recommended Posts

Question:  I was no longer a member in 2008.  Was there announcements in Sacrament Meeting or RS/Priesthood meetings for volunteers to help with Prop 8?  I was thinking if there was, members should also be able to participate in wearing rainbow pins/ribbons in support of gay members. 

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, rockpond said:

It wasn't selective quote mining... those quotes are the ones that explain the change they want:  charity, support, safe spaces, and love.  What change do you think they are trying to make?

I think that is probably a little naive, don't you? Or at least it is hiding the ball. You don't think they hope to change the Church so that SSM is accepted, tolerated and welcomed? You don't think they want to change the Church so that the policy is undone? 

So we should wait to be commanded in all things?  I also trust the Lord to oversee his Kingdom.  But that doesn't mean I don't need to do my part.

This is nothing to do with being commanded in all things. Your part is to lift where you stand, not to go lift where someone else stands, in fact you have been commanded to not overstep your own authority.

You seem to have seized upon the idea of "change" as if it is a bad thing.  When someone gives a talk in sacrament meeting, aren't they hoping to effectuate a change in the hearts of at least some of those who are listening?  When we teach a class at church, aren't we hoping to make a change in the lives of those who are there?  Or hoping that those who are listening might make a change in the lives of those around them?

Change is always a bad thing in the Kingdom of God if it is orchestrated by one(s) without the proper authority. The examples you listed are for people who have such authority. Trying to change the Church's doctrines and fundamental beliefs through manipulation, distortion, pressure, and calling upon allies in the Great and Spacious Building to increase the volume of their mocking and criticism, is not done with authority.

 

Edited by Mystery Meat

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

 

This last paragraph..change is always a bad thing in the Kingdom of God..?  And yet, a lot of the things that were deemed doctrinal changed when the essays came out.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Jeanne said:

This last paragraph..change is always a bad thing in the Kingdom of God..?  And yet, a lot of the things that were deemed doctrinal changed when the essays came out.

Thanks for leaving out the qualifier " if it is orchestrated by one(s) without the proper authority." Thanks for manipulating what I said.

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

Thanks for leaving out the qualifier " if it is orchestrated by one(s) without the proper authority." Thanks for manipulating what I said.

You're welcome..but I didn't mean to.  Wasn't there any priesthood authority in writing/contributing to the essays?  Sure there was.  If not, why do we have them?

Edited by Jeanne

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

You're welcome..but I didn't mean to.  Wasn't there any priesthood authority in writing/contributing to the essays?  Sure there was.  If not, why do we have them?

You still don't understand. The essays were written or approved of by those having authority. Any change, therefore, that comes as a result is good (assuming they acted in accordance with the will of the Lord, which I believe they do). If you or I were to take it upon ourselves to write the same essays, it would be done without authority and cannot be constituted as good.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Mystery Meat said:

You still don't understand. The essays were written or approved of by those having authority. Any change, therefore, that comes as a result is good (assuming they acted in accordance with the will of the Lord, which I believe they do). If you or I were to take it upon ourselves to write the same essays, it would be done without authority and cannot be constituted as good.

Thank you for explaining what YOU mean.  I understand where you are coming from here.  IMO, in actuality, as far as they essays are concerned, those changes came from and for responses to the internet.  I know that this has already been asked and answered, and I ask sincerely because I cant remember, who wrote those essays, were they signed and approved?  Sorry if this has been a repeated question.  After I wrote my last response, I went for a walk and bikeride and I got to thinking about this.  Thanks in advance.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah..thanks Tacenda..you just gave me my 1000 rep point.  Not a Scott Lloyd here..but hey..thanks!!

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎5‎/‎29‎/‎2016 at 8:57 PM, Pa Pa said:

A Ward house is no place for any protest, passive or otherwise. There are just lines that should not be crossed. I'll say no more either. 

I've had to endure a fair share of sacrament meeting talks and F&T meeting testimonies, as well as lessons and comments during lessons, that focusing on gay rights, gay marriage, and other LGBT issues, that to even many faithful members would be considered extremely offensive.  At a minimum, obsessive and tiresome.  So if a few members were to wear a ribbon . . . well, that would pale in comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎5‎/‎31‎/‎2016 at 5:34 AM, Storm Rider said:

I don't appreciate people who wear political pins in church that announce their chosen candidate.  I don't like it when they wear pins or any emblem in support of political parties.  I don't like it when they do the same thing for right to life or choice in church meetings.  

I have a Newcastle United tie that I sometimes wear.  I'd be more put off if someone were to wear a Sunderland pin or tie than a political pin.

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎6‎/‎1‎/‎2016 at 9:38 AM, Scott Lloyd said:

To this excellent post, I would add that it is the height of hubris to turn sacred Sabbath day worship services into a venue for protests. Latter-day Saints have the right to attend their Sabbath day services in peace and find there a refuge from the rancor of political and social debate among other things.

Unfortunately, it seems all too common that we have to deal with political and social debate from the pulpit in sacrament meeting.  Anytime there's a talk about being in the world but not of the world, how to resist worldly temptation, the last days, trying times, etc., it's almost guaranteed.  Back when Kaitlin Jenner was in the news last  year, I counted three Sundays straight where she was brought up, either over the pulpit or in a lesson, and every time in disparaging, rolling of the eyes, tones.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, toon said:

Unfortunately, it seems all too common that we have to deal with political and social debate from the pulpit in sacrament meeting.  Anytime there's a talk about being in the world but not of the world, how to resist worldly temptation, the last days, trying times, etc., it's almost guaranteed.  Back when Kaitlin Jenner was in the news last  year, I counted three Sundays straight where she was brought up, either over the pulpit or in a lesson, and every time in disparaging, rolling of the eyes, tones.

That it happens occasionally doesn't mean it should be tolerated.

Especially when it's a matter of expressing open oppositions to the teachings and policies of the Church.

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, toon said:

I have a Newcastle United tie that I sometimes wear.  I'd be more put off if someone were to wear a Sunderland pin or tie than a political pin.

I have a tie with the Deseret News logo in the design.

The ties were designed expressly and given out to us employees back in 2000 when our new building (which we moved out of in 2010) was dedicated by President Gordon B. Hinckley after its construction was completed.

If there are Trib readers who are put off by seeing me wear my Deseret News tie at church, they haven't said anything yet.

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, toon said:

I have a Newcastle United tie that I sometimes wear.  I'd be more put off if someone were to wear a Sunderland pin or tie than a political pin.

Alas you don't have to deal with US politics.  At least in Britain there seems to be relatively competent leaders at least when compared to the lot we have had the last twenty years.  I find the entire gamut of candidates to be an embarrassment not only to the USA, but to humanity.  We have one candidate that cannot tell the truth at any time or about any thing while the other is a foul creature of the most unpleasant character.  I think I am ready to do away with the republic and institute a benevolent dictator - though committed to care for the needs of the people, rules with an iron fist.  Give us a few generations of that and then lets see if society has advanced enough to begin to rule themselves through a democracy.  Those are my happy thoughts for the day.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, toon said:

I've had to endure a fair share of sacrament meeting talks and F&T meeting testimonies, as well as lessons and comments during lessons, that focusing on gay rights, gay marriage, and other LGBT issues, that to even many faithful members would be considered extremely offensive.  At a minimum, obsessive and tiresome.  So if a few members were to wear a ribbon . . . well, that would pale in comparison.

So, you want to get even? Let me expand on my original comment. A Ward is also no place for vengeance and getting even. But pointing out marriage between one man no one woman, and proper sexual relationships is scripture and doctrine. Why would this be insulting as comments in Church where doctrine is supposed to be and expected to be taught. Again, Sunday sacrament meetings are no place for any demonstrations, passive or otherwise. There is a scriptures that to paraphrase states, "have,I become thy enemy for telling you the truth". There are many public forums or private ones for such things, but not in Church and certainly no place for settling the score. It is a place to expound doctrine, speak the truth and feel the Holy Spirit. 

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I have a tie with the Deseret News logo in the design.

The ties were designed expressly and given out to us employees back in 2000 when our new building (which we moved out of in 2010) was dedicated by President Gordon B. Hinckley after its construction was completed.

If there are Trib readers who are put off by seeing me wear my Deseret News tie at church, they haven't said anything yet.

Well...you shouldn't be advertising your workplace!:P  Hopefully Kirby is wearing a Tribby tie to Sacrament Meeting.

Share this post


Link to post
48 minutes ago, toon said:

Unfortunately, it seems all too common that we have to deal with political and social debate from the pulpit in sacrament meeting.  Anytime there's a talk about being in the world but not of the world, how to resist worldly temptation, the last days, trying times, etc., it's almost guaranteed.  Back when Kaitlin Jenner was in the news last  year, I counted three Sundays straight where she was brought up, either over the pulpit or in a lesson, and every time in disparaging, rolling of the eyes, tones.

It seems your issue is more that members of the Church can say things like "marriage is between one man and one woman," and it is okay,  but advocating for SSM is frowned upon. Teaching the doctrines of the gospel and warning against sin and the confusion it causes (including transgenderism) is 100% appropriate at Church. That should be done with care, but it should be done.  

Share this post


Link to post
On June 1, 2016 at 9:50 AM, rockpond said:

 

They aren't protesting the policy. 

According to the article linked to, bringing attention to the policy and the harm it is doing is part of it, thus having it 7 months from the day of the policy. 

I don't see how that does not qualify as a protest statement. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Storm Rider said:

Alas you don't have to deal with US politics.  At least in Britain there seems to be relatively competent leaders at least when compared to the lot we have had the last twenty years.  I find the entire gamut of candidates to be an embarrassment not only to the USA, but to humanity.  We have one candidate that cannot tell the truth at any time or about any thing while the other is a foul creature of the most unpleasant character.  I think I am ready to do away with the republic and institute a benevolent dictator - though committed to care for the needs of the people, rules with an iron fist.  Give us a few generations of that and then lets see if society has advanced enough to begin to rule themselves through a democracy.  Those are my happy thoughts for the day.

To whom would you allow to be that dictator, or whom would you vote for the be this dictator? Other than God himself, no one on earth would remain would remain benevolent. As for Britian we don't see all their warts, because we don't know them well enough. As for our candidates...you are right, no matter who wins, America and the Consititution loses. 

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Mystery Meat said:
 

I think that is probably a little naive, don't you? Or at least it is hiding the ball. You don't think they hope to change the Church so that SSM is accepted, tolerated and welcomed? You don't think they want to change the Church so that the policy is undone? 

 

This is nothing to do with being commanded in all things. Your part is to lift where you stand, not to go lift where someone else stands, in fact you have been commanded to not overstep your own authority.

 

Change is always a bad thing in the Kingdom of God if it is orchestrated by one(s) without the proper authority. The examples you listed are for people who have such authority. Trying to change the Church's doctrines and fundamental beliefs through manipulation, distortion, pressure, and calling upon allies in the Great and Spacious Building to increase the volume of their mocking and criticism, is not done with authority.

1.  No, it's not naive or hiding the ball.  Perhaps some of them would like the policy changed.  I would. But the point of the initiative is to show love and support and create safe spaces. 

2.  They are lifting where they stand.  And they are encouraging others to lift where they stand.  That's the initiative!  Where a ribbon, show those who need it that you support and love them.  

3.  What authority is required to show love and support and encourage the change of increased love and support?

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Calm said:

According to the article linked to, bringing attention to the policy and the harm it is doing is part of it, thus having it 7 months from the day of the policy. 

I don't see how that does not qualify as a protest statement. 

 

Here is what the article says about the initiative and the policy.  No, I don't think it is a protest.  I think it is what they say it is.  

"The Rainbow Mormon Initiative is an attempt to gain visibility for LGBT+ Mormon issues within wards where discussions about the policy have yet to begin. It is an attempt to show love to the most neglected and mistreated members of our church, as Christ showed love to the most reviled of sinners, ate with publicans and prostitutes, because he knew that all of us are sinners and all of us need the Atonement. Rainbow Mormons are those who love LGBT+ people in our own lives and want to show that we are allies and can be called on for support by those who are afraid to come out within the Mormon church and to those who have been rejected by family, and have fled or been forced out of their homes as a result of their sexual orientation."

Note that it was also chosen because it is SLC's Pride (Parade) Day.

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Here is what the article says about the initiative and the policy.  No, I don't think it is a protest.  I think it is what they say it is.  

"The Rainbow Mormon Initiative is an attempt to gain visibility for LGBT+ Mormon issues within wards where discussions about the policy have yet to begin. It is an attempt to show love to the most neglected and mistreated members of our church, as Christ showed love to the most reviled of sinners, ate with publicans and prostitutes, because he knew that all of us are sinners and all of us need the Atonement. Rainbow Mormons are those who love LGBT+ people in our own lives and want to show that we are allies and can be called on for support by those who are afraid to come out within the Mormon church and to those who have been rejected by family, and have fled or been forced out of their homes as a result of their sexual orientation."

Note that it was also chosen because it is SLC's Pride (Parade) Day.

I notice you left out the part about endeavoring "to change the Church from within." There is more to this agenda than you would have us believe. 

Share this post


Link to post

The whole LGBT thing is not something I personally care about.  Now I would support an organization focuses on the prescription drug problem that exists in our society in and out of the Church.  I wish the Church would focus more on that.  It has said what it needs to say about the gay issue.  Time to move on.  As to ribbons I see no problem with it.  I think most members will not even notice the ribbon and half of those that do will not even now what its about.  Ribbons are so common place these days that they really don't mean that much.

Edited by carbon dioxide

Share this post


Link to post
48 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I notice you left out the part about endeavoring "to change the Church from within." There is more to this agenda than you would have us believe. 

I've commented multiple times about the change.  And I've quoted from the article regarding the change... Here it is again:

"The simple act of wearing a rainbow ribbon does make a change for the better. It signals to others that we are safe spaces for those who are in crisis."

Share this post


Link to post
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...