Jump to content

california boy

Contributor
  • Content Count

    8,350
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5,987 Excellent

4 Followers

About california boy

  • Rank
    Looks for truth over dogma

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    I like to listen to others that share different beliefs than me. I try to respect those differences, but will also challenge those beliefs to sort out truth from dogma. I feel that people have often let religious dogma overshadow the basic message of Christ. I adhere to simple truths. Love God, love others, let God judge and worry about my own faults.

Recent Profile Visitors

4,416 profile views
  1. I really appreciate your candid remarks on this subject. I have taken mushrooms twice in my life. I count both of those nights as being one of the greatest experiences I have had in life. I didn't do it to become closer to God. I already felt close to Him. I did it because I wanted to experience something that can only be done with psychedelics. It was a life changing experience for me. These drugs touch on things that are within us that can not be reached any other way. I did do it both times under supervision of someone who was well acquainted with mushrooms and he was very careful t
  2. I would be glad to continue this discussion, but I need a little honesty here on what I actually have said. Are you not going to answer my CFR's? Until you address them, it is really pointless to continue this discussion. You know how this works Robert. Here they are again CFR Where did I say Barack Obama did not support gay marriage initially? CFR Where I said the Church's political activity was a Satanic plot CFR That I distain the political process CFR Where I said Church did not have a right to participate in the political process. CFR Where I said ANYTHI
  3. I tend to agree with you. Maybe in some way Prop 8 and the aftermath helped soften some hearts in the Church that were so hard against those of us that are gay. I have certainly seen a change of heart in the Church this past 10 years from what it was.
  4. There is more to winning ballot issues than the number of Mormons voting in California. That is why campaigns spend millions of dollars. That is why Church members spend millions of dollars. And why they got out there every week standing on the corners with their signs and chants. They were doing all of that to try and win the election. Why else would they be doing that? Please Robert, stop the personal attacks. You know darn good and well, I have never said there was any Satanic plots. Take a breath. Are you really being fair in your accusations against me? If you are, then po
  5. Robert, I can't believe you were in California during Prop 8 and don't believe the LDS church didn't play a LEAD in getting Prop 8 passed. You know darn good and well Church members gave 20 million dollars, over half of the total contributions to the campaign and 70% of the manpower. They were standing on the corners every single weekend and sometimes during the week. Didn't see the Catholics or Black churches standing on the corners with their posters or contributing any significant money to the campaign. Do you realize there is even a movie and play called Prop 8, the Mormon Proposition.
  6. We have talked back and forth long enough for me to at this point agree to disagree. I remember when the Church was leading the charge to take away the civil rights of gay couples to marry in California. If you had been here during this time, the common comment on the Mormon Church leading the charge on Prop 8 ran along the lines of "If any church was going to protest an alternative marriage to one man one woman, it shouldn't be the Mormon Church. So I am far from being alone in the belief that practicing polygamy in the United States was against how marriage was legally defined in this cou
  7. Maybe you could point to me where polygamy was ever an accepted definition of marriage in the United States. No one including me has never said that in other cultures, polygamy was and is currently practiced. What I stated is that Mormons redefined marriage IN THE UNITED STATES Sorry for the bold, but I have repeated that claim regularly in this thread. Maybe you and others will finally notice what I actually said. Other countries and other cultures also accepted gay marriage before it became legal in the United States. The Netherlands, for example redefined marriage long
  8. Virtually every single district court in this country and the Supreme Court would disagree with you. Did you miss that? Whether Mathew, Mark and James agree has yet to be revealed. Even if you believe the Church has a living prophet, none have yet to declare they have a revelation from God on gay marriage. In fact, the only claimed revelation on anything related to LGBT issues is the one President Nelson claimed concerning not baptizing underaged children of gay children and calling gay couples apostates. And that on has been rescinded.
  9. Not really saying that. What I am saying is that the Mormons changed the accepted definition of marriage in the United States by embracing polygamy as an institution. It is a redefinition the rest of the country rejected. Before their redefining polygamy for themselves, it was not really practiced in any significant way. The United States reaffirmed monogamy as being the only acceptable definition of marriage in the United States by passing the Edmunds Act and the Reynolds decision. By doing that, they affirmed that the new definition of marriage practiced by the Mormons was not all
  10. I think you missed the point I was trying to make. Scott was suggesting that Joseph Smith did not change the definition of marriage when he introduced polygamy. That occurred and was practiced by Mormons almost entirely in the United States. So yes, Joseph Smith did change the definition of marriage in the United States. I specifically stated the change in definition of marriage occurred in the United States in my comment to Scott. I might also point out that Obergefell only changed the definition of marriage in the United States as well. I hope that makes my post to Scott more clea
  11. Of course. No one is disputing that. But let's also not pretend that polygamy was not a redefinition of marriage in the United States. As a historian and anthropologist, I am sure you recognize that there are many definitions of rituals other countries and cultures have that Americans don't accept as being true here. I will give you an example. I once visited the island of Nias in Indonesia. They have their own definition of what a man is. They build small towers of stones that are, I would guess, about 6' tall. When a young person wants to become a man, they have to leap over the stone
  12. You do realize you are the one that brought drinking beer and comparing it to LGBT issues right? You do know that you don't have to read or comment on a single thing I write if you are not interested in my point of view. There is a lot of comments you make that I don't agree with. But I still like hearing your point of view. So I read your posts.
  13. Well the Church doesn't seem to have the same fascination with drinking beer as it does with what gay couples do. So you are probably going to be disappointed. I am sure there are a lot of people out there in the LGBT community who are just as tired of hearing from Mormons knocking on their door telling them what they should think about religion.
  14. We have heard this argument for years. If you were to take your argument out in the real world away from your Mormon bubble, how many people would agree that the definition of marriage in the United States includes polygamist marriages? Even if you are right and Americans in the 1830's accepted that the definition of marriage included as many wives as a man wanted. (Something that history just doesn't even come close to being able to support). So what. Definitions change all the time. Every year, a new dictionary is published with new definitions of words that have been in existence
  15. It is about time for Church leaders to figure out another way to throw the LGBT community under the bus. Past actions include: Tell gay men that if they just marry, they will no longer be gay Tells LGBT members in conference that being gay may "lead to despair, to disease, even to death" Tells church members in conference that gay physical attractions as "impure and unnatural" tendencies that can be "overcome" Church changes its position and maybe being gay can't be overcome. Tell gay men that marriage is not therapy Wage a political campaign to take away LGBT Am
×
×
  • Create New...