Senator

I'm writing this post outside of the forum just in case the bot check wants to check me and blow my post away. This discussion has been extremely instructional to me. I thank the several articulate female voices here that have demonstrated to me what they are trying to say when such phrases as "all men are potential rapists" are used. You have flipped a switch, as it were, in my thinking. Like Smac, I too, retracted into a defensive position. “That's a provocative, unfair and prejudicial statement!” Yes, it is! That’s the point! I think it is meant, among other things, to get our attention. It got Smac’s attention. It got my attention. The thought came to my mind that a woman’s collective default mentality to exercise caution towards all men stems from the trauma of generations of abuse and harm suffered at the hands of men. It’s a function of an evolutional necessity for survival. It’s written into their DNA! And so, I feel absolutely no want nor justification to push back against it. In fact, it’s just the opposite. I have had an overwhelming sense of collective guilt, if you will, for the suffering that my gender has inflicted on women through out the ages. Scars that are so deep that only the actions of infinite loving God can heal and rectify.

Why did you inject their religious classification into the discussion. It is neither relevant nor appropriate. It is as if in order to discredit their argument, you needed to discredit them personally by showing their betrayal to the good name of "Latter-day Saint women in 2026"? Really?

!@#& I am so sick of this Bot crap. Just wrote a response only to be greeted with a picture quiz to find the motorcycles... and blew my post away. 😤 I'm done

I do not take offense. I am not a victim. But I could certainly understand how a victim could take offense at your generalized statement.

Are you also directing this at the women victimized?

It happens numerous times during the same visit, and always when I move from thread to thread. It's really frustrating

Is anyone else being driven bonkers with this Bot protection. I am constantly having to identify crosswalks, bikes, busses, bridges. I can't count how many time I have lost a response post due a bot check. Unless I just doing something wrong, this will likely drive me from this forum. (no clapping)🫵

And ultimately all of the LDS claims to truth and authority boil down to someone's personal spiritual experience. Namely, Joseph Smith. So, yes it is authoritative, to those who believe it.

You don't think Navidad's "non-covenant authority" spiritual experience is authentic? Yet, that's the way it is. What are you going to do about it? Tell them their spiritual experiences can't possibly be true because they don't all align and don't have the correct authority? Ok?! Meanwhile Navidad and scores of other go about their spiritually rich and abiding walk in Christ.

But not necessarily. And I think that is what Navidad is getting at.

If I had to choose between "experience[ing] real influence from the Holy Spirit" or a claim to priesthood authority, I would choose the former any day.

Then I'll file that away in the ol rumor bin

Can you provide any references for these claims?

I dunno. Jesus said that there would be few that find it. I would add that "there would be few that find it beautiful. Why? As you say, "humans"

For what its worth, I appreciate that you have taken the personal initiative to change the dynamic of the discussion. How refreshing it is to observe a discussion and come away actually informed and my understanding broadened. Kudos!

I agree, out of mere speaking convenience, groups do need names. And you will never please everyone. I do hope they get shortened, because those phrases are awkward.

Comes across a bit kitschy. But whatever

You mean kill.... Is that the lingo the kids are using these days? 😂

I believe it an oversimplification to say that doubt or belief are merely choices. Our mind's capacity to believe is a fascinating phenomena. I'm not a neurologist nor psychologist, but I suspect that there are multiple factors at play, even subconscious protocols that employ variables of upbringing, environment, experience, education, mental health, emotion, personality, and trauma to name just a few. All these quietly influence our state of perception, belief or disbelief, outside of our conscious and deliberate thought.

Yes, Elder Holland, I can be patient, kind and forgiving. At the same time I may chose to not doubt certain doubts if I feel they have merit, and "not hang on every word of the 12. I listen and consult with GOD and make my own path"

I think there is a growing number in the church that are adopting that approach.

If I must. You asked “what do you mean?”, in response to my statement that the proclamation is doctrine. I then responded by quoting church authorities giving evidence to statement. Some how you do not see that as responding to “anything” you asked?🤷‍♂️

“Clear and unambiguous” gets them in trouble. Generalities is the tactic of the day. Generalities leave wiggle room for exceptions.

"The proclamation on the family is, as President Hinckley stated, doctrine" Elder Rasband, Oct GC 2025 https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2025/10/21rasband?lang=eng&id=p_mmGnZ#p_mmGnZ

I'm not so sure about that. We have heard in the past two GCs a circling back to, and doubling down on the Proclamation on the Family, which has just a little to say about traditional gender roles. And make no mistake, the Proclamation is revealed doctrine. So, I am little surprised to see this message from a church site. Is it a mixed message?