Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
cinepro

Gay Beehive Delivers Prepared Speech in F&T Meeting - Ends as Expected

Recommended Posts

nevermind. 

Edited by stemelbow

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, stemelbow said:

Juliann said, "What in the WORLD gives you the right to call a young teen, a complete stranger,  a sinner??????????   "

You responded, "Sin is identified in scripture and teachings of prophets.  Those who commit those sins are sinners.  It's not an insult to recognize reality. "

I'm like. confused...I guess.  You continue:

But...you just called her a sinner, above.

Actually, no, I didn't.
I merely pointed out to Juliann that we have every right to recognize a sin when we see one.  At no time was that young girl called a sinner.

2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Luckily that will change in the Church.  Hopefully sooner rather than later, of course.

I'm sure it will.  Then Christ will luckily change it and any other errors right back at his return.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, JLHPROF said:

Actually, no, I didn't.
I merely pointed out to Juliann that we have every right to recognize a sin when we see one.  At no time was that young girl called a sinner.

 

Alright so when Juliann asked "What in the WORLD gives you the right to call a young teen, a complete stranger,  a sinner??????????  "

You did not suggest there is a reason to call a young teen a complete stranger a sinner? 

Alright. 

Quote

I'm sure it will.  Then Christ will luckily change it and any other errors right back at his return.

Wow...you're sure?  Interesting.  I think it'll change too, but I think the change will be for the good. 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, cinepro said:

Another interesting chapter in Church history (or culture?) for the internet age:

hqdefault.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Alright so when Juliann asked "What in the WORLD gives you the right to call a young teen, a complete stranger,  a sinner??????????  "

You did not suggest there is a reason to call a young teen a complete stranger a sinner?

I did not.
I suggested that we have a responsibility and therefore a right to recognize sin wherever we encounter it, be they young or old, familiar or a stranger.
I made no statement about that girl's personal sins whatsoever.  I have no idea if she has committed any sin in her life.  I've never met her.
But I and every other person since Adam and Eve ate the fruit are capable of knowing good from evil and recognizing sin.  And we have the right to do so.

Edited by JLHPROF

Share this post


Link to post

I am perfect just the way I am. God made me this way and loves me.  Is that a doctrine preached regularly ? True?False? partly true?

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, cinepro said:

Another interesting chapter in Church history (or culture?) for the internet age:

......................................................  

I'm not sure that testimonies need to be written out beforehand.  We need to get up and bear our testimonies off the cuff.  My ward is very indulgent, even if someone has an opinion which is not generally shared.  We all need to listen carefully and make up our own minds.  I might hear some grousing afterward, but no one is told to sit down.  So, "ends as expected" is probably a bit much, cinepro.  I would have allowed her to finish her written comments, and counseled her later that it would be better to speak extemporaneously.  Otherwise, it tends to sound like a political statement.

I know of occasions in some other wards where political wars were fought during F&T, and church is just not the place for that.  In the ward in Tyler, Texas, for example, many years ago now, an off-duty law enforcement officer and a radical right-winger (both LDS) nearly came to blows during F&T meeting.  Church is just not the place for shouting and shoving matches.  Of course, Tyler is a volatile place.  However, that is no excuse.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

I am perfect just the way I am. God made me this way and loves me.  Is that a doctrine preached regularly ? True?False? partly true?

False except for the being loved part.

Edited by JLHPROF

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

I am perfect just the way I am. God made me this way and loves me.  Is that a doctrine preached regularly ? True?False? partly true?

"I am perfect just the way I am" -- False.  Christ is perfect.  With His power/guidance/grace we are working in that direction.  It is a work in progress for all of us.

"God made me this way" -- Partially true.  God did make you, we also start off as fallen natural men, and we make changes to ourselves, as do other people/things.

"God... loves me" -- 100% True.  Always.

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Actually, no, I didn't.
I merely pointed out to Juliann that we have every right to recognize a sin when we see one.  At no time was that young girl called a sinner.

I'm sure it will.  Then Christ will luckily change it and any other errors right back at his return.

I was responding to JaneDoe not you. And she did call her a sinner, although she has backed up a bit on that.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Jeanne said:

I realize that.  But conference is held to testify of Christ is it not? 

Yes, it is... and as I recall this past Gen Conf, that's exactly what it did... and it did not testify in any way that God created anyone to live outside his purposes... 

1st Cor 11:11 - 12... "Nevertheless, neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord."  

In all of nature... whether it be human, or animal, or even plant (based on my experience at the UCR Agricultural Experiment Station)... it takes male and female together to complete the whole (except for very few obscure species), and to create life for continuation of the species as we can see readily by our physiology.  IMO we don't understand what happens in the world of developing cells, chromosomes, etc that can obviously at some point impact that... I don't believe God has anything to do with it.   What I can do personally is to treat all persons in a Christlike manner, with respect and compassion, while maintaining my own testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.  And this is what I did at San Fran St Univ where I had many good friends in the LBGT community.  I'm still in touch with several friends after 27 years of retirement... they're still gay and we're still friends...

GG

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

"God... loves me" -- 100% True.  Always.

Are you sure...?

Quote

While divine love can be called perfect, infinite, enduring, and universal, it cannot correctly be characterized as unconditional. The word does not appear in the scriptures. On the other hand, many verses affirm that the higher levels of love the Father and the Son feel for each of us—and certain divine blessings stemming from that love—are conditional.

==================================================================================================

Understanding that divine love and blessings are not truly “unconditional” can defend us against common fallacies such as these: “Since God’s love is unconditional, He will love me regardless …”; or “Since ‘God is love,’35 He will love me unconditionally, regardless …”

These arguments are used by anti-Christs to woo people with deception. Nehor, for example, promoted himself by teaching falsehoods: He “testified unto the people that all mankind should be saved at the last day, … for the Lord had created all men, … and, in the end, all men should have eternal life.36 Sadly, some of the people believed Nehor’s fallacious and unconditional concepts.

In contrast to Nehor’s teachings, divine love warns us that “wickedness never was happiness.”37 Jesus explains, “Come unto me and be ye saved; … except ye shall keep my commandments, … ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.”38

 

Divine Love, Russell M. Nelson

 

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Are you sure...?

You're equivocating between two senses of love. One is that love entails giving blessings and the other is the feeling towards someone. I love my children absolutely and without qualification yet simultaneously I will not give them everything they want or expect. Some acts towards my children are conditional on their meeting certain requirements (like doing their chores).

Pres. Nelson is pretty clear about what type he is speaking of and the particular logic he is criticizing.

Edited by clarkgoble

Share this post


Link to post

Our Stake had a 17yr old excommunicated about 18 years ago now, he didn't have the MP or anything. He did far more though than give a testimony like this

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, stemelbow said:

Our individual sexual desire is a good part of us, not a bad part of us.

So, sexual attraction to children is a good part for those who are? Or a married person that is sexually attracted to others so strongly that he or she has extra-marital sexual flings on a regular basis?

For anyone who cares, just apply the logic that God made the pedophile a pedophile and God does not make mistakes to its logical conclusion. Or that God made the sex addict a sex addict to its logical conclusion. But what I expect to get is are emotional, indignant replies.

I have a lot of problems with the way this went down. The video recording of the affair is troubling. I imagine even those members posting here that had not heard of all of the details of Joseph Smith's polygamy and are having a faith crisis because of such have heard that taking pictures and videos in the church chapels is something that is not to be done. I do not know the details, but something is not right with this story.

Edited by Glenn101

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, clarkgoble said:

You're equivocating between two senses. One is that love entails giving blessings and the other is the feeling towards someone. I love my children absolutely and without qualification yet simultaneously I will not given them everything they want or expect.

are you talking about Cinepro or Pres Neslon? 

Share this post


Link to post

Well, it looks like we're getting to where most of these threads go and now we're discussing the rightness/wrongness of homosexuality.  I don't really need that in my life so I'll bow out now.  But I'll say this...

Savannah and her testimony are a symbol of several facts:

  1. There are LGBT youth in the church.
  2. LGBT youth in the church are unlikely to stay "in the closet" regarding their LGBT-ness.
  3. LGBT youth have testimonies of the gospel and the Savior that are just as strong/real as their non-LGBT counterparts.
  4. Today's youth will be the leaders of the church in the 2020's and 2030's.
  5. The first four facts above make current Church policy challenging to sustain.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Glenn101 said:

So, sexual attraction to children is a good part for those who are? Or a married person that is sexually attracted to others so strongly that he or she has extra-marital sexual flings on a regular basis?

Wait?
Are you saying some sexual attractions are good and some are bad?
If only we knew the purpose God had in mind for sexuality...

 /sarcasm

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, rockpond said:
  1. There are LGBT youth in the church.
  2. LGBT youth in the church are unlikely to stay "in the closet" regarding their LGBT-ness.
  3. LGBT youth have testimonies of the gospel and the Savior that are just as strong/real as their non-LGBT counterparts.
  4. Today's youth will be the leaders of the church in the 2020's and 2030's.
  5. The first four facts above make current Church policy challenging to sustain.

I agree with all this (except the bold part).  Clearly the testimonies are only of certain doctrines of the gospel while rejecting others.
But you are right on everything else.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, juliann said:

Well.....actuallly.....

"I'd like to bear my pheromony..."

fabio-1990s-inline.jpg

Edited by CV75

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Savannah and her testimony are a symbol of several facts:

  1. There are LGBT youth in the church.
  2. LGBT youth in the church are unlikely to stay "in the closet" regarding their LGBT-ness.
  3. LGBT youth have testimonies of the gospel and the Savior that are just as strong/real as their non-LGBT counterparts.
  4. Today's youth will be the leaders of the church in the 2020's and 2030's.
  5. The first four facts above make current Church policy challenging to sustain.

I think that's right although exactly what the solution is isn't terribly clear.

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, juliann said:

I was responding to JaneDoe not you. And she did call her a sinner, although she has backed up a bit on that.

No backing up: she is a sinner.  However, she is not a sinner especially because she's attracted to girls, as you misinterpreted my statement.  I'm also not denying that we are also all sinners.

Share this post


Link to post

Has everyone finished with their virtue signalling?

Here is what happened, apparently. A young woman made a statement in sacrament meeting. Her parents helped her write it. And then filmed it for all to see. That is significant, like it or not. I'm trying to imagine a situation in which I would film my child's alleged greatest humiliation and then put it out on the internet. I don't for a minute believe that these parents would, either. Which is why I'm pretty darn sure it wasn't. 

Now if this had been any other topic, say, she got up to advocate for nudist colonies since that is how God made us, there would be no sympathy. There would quite rightly be shock and disappointment with any parent that would set their child up to be shamed. No one would single out one church guy in one ward for a tongue lashing. But, since this really was a political statement disguised as a testimony about a hot button topic, there are other things at play. And other rewards for them and others. Like the opportunity to climb onto the stage and virtue signal.

So I'm not buying the look what they did to my child stuff. I'm not buying that she was harmed, quite the opposite.  I suspect she is quite proud of what she did and I'm not saying that is wrong, either. She and her parents are now on stage with a growing fan base. Those being scorned are the church people trying to control their own space. There just might be some gaslighting going on.

So let's not confuse the terrible conundrum that she represents with what this family did. Or that there is a very real and painful situation apart from what she did or didn't do.

Which leaves us at the real topic. What does a church do when the very basis and purpose of their church is the joining of a man and a woman. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I agree with all this (except the bold part).  Clearly the testimonies are only of certain doctrines of the gospel while rejecting others.
But you are right on everything else.

I don't think that's fair. Many LGBT youth wish they weren't that way. Indeed dealing with it is what makes it so hard for many. But I bet that if there were a pill that would change things for them many would take it. (Many wouldn't of course -- but since there's no pill coming the question is moot)

Again I think you have to keep in mind that attraction is not the same as sinful action. That's just as true for LGBT as it is for heterosexual youth. The reality is that youth shouldn't be sexually active. The big problem is that for heterosexuals there's a clear path to having a meaningful, spiritual sexual life in the future. There appears to be no such clear path for gay youth. So it's understandable that they ask what God's plan for them is and it's tragic that we have no answer. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, clarkgoble said:

You're equivocating between two senses. One is that love entails giving blessings and the other is the feeling towards someone. I love my children absolutely and without qualification yet simultaneously I will not given them everything they want or expect.

I think the sense she was using it in is pretty clear.  Love = acceptance:

Quote

- God loves me just this way, because I believe that he loves all his creations.

- I do believe he made me this way on purpose.

- I believe that if God is there, he knows I am perfect, just the way I am and would never ask me to live my life alone or with someone I am not attracted to.

As I mentioned before, this is just a clear example of the head-on collision course between the Church's policies, teachings and doctrines regarding "same-sex attraction" and the narrative presented by the world and gay people themselves.  Savannah said several things that are a total repudiation of current LDS teachings, policies and doctrines.

Also, you'll notice that President Nelson addresses both "love" and "blessings" separately.  The "love" itself is labeled as "conditional", not just the blessings that follow that love.

Heck, just look at the actual act of getting up in F&T meeting and saying those things.  Does the LDS conception of God present Him as the kind of being that would be looking down on that meeting (and Savannah's claims) from on high and being pleased?  Forget about the ward members who heard that speech.  Do you think Savannah's bold action was enough to change God's mind on the subject?

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...