secondclasscitizen

On 10/30/2021 at 5:54 PM, Tacenda said:

Yeah, I meant more like exaltation. 

Too bad women aren't equal as far as being allowed to give blessings to their own children using oil to anoint them. Like they did in the early church.

Bless your children anyway. No oil needed. No church leader can tell you you cannot bless and pray for your child. It is just as effective as some dude down the street coming over with some other dude to do it for you. Probably more effective coming from the mother anyway. 

On 10/21/2021 at 8:08 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

I don’t recall it being much of an issue in the Church prior to President Hinckley giving that conference talk in which he also mentioned ear piercings. There was not much reason to talk about it before it became a pervasive fad in society particularly among younger people. Apparently, that caused the Brethren to see a need to call a halt to it, at least among our own people.  

Bednar still has a hang up about ear piercings. Enough to essentially trash talk a young lady in a byu devotional re the fake rule. 

On 10/21/2021 at 8:01 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

CB is right. Tattoos have been strongly discouraged since President Hinckley addressed the matter in general conference. I’d have to go back and look, but it has been longer ago than a decade. It was in the same general conference talk in which he said women/girls should not have any more  than one pair of ear piercings. 
 

It has been repeatedly emphasized by Church leaders since then. 

I have been taught tattoos were “against our religion” and a sign of a sinner long before Hinkley was the prophet. I doubt it is in print anywhere before that but in my mind as a youth a tattoo, cigarette, beer, Pepsi, long hair etc were all indicators of a bad person. Product of my environment. I got some tattoos in the military and my mother has never gotten over it. Given how it was reacted to I should have just got naked women tattoos on my forearms ad I wouldn’t have been treated any differently. All tattoos are evil lol. 

1 hour ago, JustAnAustralian said:

The word of wisdom wasn't initially a required living standard. Hence why it says "not by commandment" at the start.

It still isn’t a commandment now. Says exact same thing. I guess none of our past prophets felt it important enough to change d&c to reflect the alleged change. I’m thinking it was never intended to be any more than smith treated it. After all he is the one who received the revelation he ought to know. 

3 hours ago, webbles said:

He was accused in January 1841 shortly after he returned from his mission.  The likelihood that he knew about polygamy at that time would be extremely slim.  Joseph Smith didn't marry his first Nauvoo wife (and second polygamous marriage after Fanny Alger) until April 1841.  Even if Turley somehow knew about polygamy, he definitely would have been acting without permission from Joseph Smith.  The council also didn't disfellowship or excommunicate him.  They only requested that he confess both publicly and to the council.  So, it doesn't seem like Turley was able to keep it secret.

And it looks like that book that I linked to is wrong on his date of his first polygamous marriage.  It was most likely 1844.  It was to Mary Ann who actually had already had a child out of wedlock back in 1842.  She had been seduced by Gustavus Hills who was most likely a follower of John Bennet.

Turley joined the Council of Fifty after Joseph's death (1845) but did enter polygamy before his death (1844).  But I don't see that as corruption.  Joseph was a really forgiving person.  For example, W.W. Phelps testified against him in Missouri which led to Joseph's incarceration in Liberty jail.  Phelps was then excommunicated in 1839.  But by 1841 he was rebaptized, 1843 he was endowed, 1844 he received his second annointing in 1844, and also joined the Council of Fifty and the Nauvoo City Council.

I think Turley knew about it. He was one of smiths body guards and next door neighbor. Smith even let Turley open a brewery or some such thing… wow not withstanding lol. 

2 hours ago, JustAnAustralian said:

A break from what? Church discipline? Elder Hamula got excommunicated out of the blue only a few years ago so clearly being a GA isn't enough.

Dunn caught a free pass. Lied to the entire world under the color of the priesthood and walked with a pension and emeritus status. I have more respect to an adulterer. At least they generally only lie to one person instead of an entire church and prospective converts. Should have been exed. 

2 hours ago, JustAnAustralian said:

A break from what? Church discipline? Elder Hamula got excommunicated out of the blue only a few years ago so clearly being a GA isn't enough.

Apparently monson isn’t as forgiving as smith… like it is their job to forgive for anything. That’s what Jesus is for. 

7 hours ago, webbles said:

The first man other than Joseph who entered polygamy was Theodore Turley and that was in the beginning of 1842.  

Turley was first convicted by a church council of adultery/ fornication with two women. Then was brought into the council of fifty. Possibly the light sentence was because he knew of JS  polygamy.  Later Turley married three sisters one of who left her living husband in England and married Turley here in the us. (Speculating here but I wonder if he met her on his mission). 
 

imagine getting zinged in a church court these days as a married man for two counts of adultery and they promote you lol?! Talk about corruption. Just makes me glad we do not live in a theocracy esp a Mormon one. I’m sure the connected get a break theses days as well so long as the public doesn’t know about it. 

4 hours ago, katherine the great said:

How so? Is there a scripture that justifies this? Lev 20:14 

If a man marries a woman and her mother, it is wickedness. They shall be burned with fire, both he and they, that there may be no wickedness among you.

 

Joseph Smith married a mother and her daughter – Patty Bartlett Sessions and Sylvia Sessions Lyon

On 10/6/2021 at 1:42 PM, mfbukowski said:

Who says "Do you have a bathroom tissue?" instead of "Do you have a Kleenex"?

How about "Where's your Xerox?"

All the advertising in the world has not fully changed the usage of that terminology.

 

Amen…. “Welcome to Mel’s Diner. Would you like a coke? Yes I’d love one. Ok what flavor? I’ll have a root beer please.” 
 

4 hours ago, Maestrophil said:

Where was the choir from the second session from (I missed the first part of the session)? There was a remarkable amount of ethnic diversity 

I noticed that as well. The real choir is pretty much all white. I think black people make the singing waaaay too fun and entertaining and we can’t have that. Like cowbell, we need more Gladys knight.

51 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Did they tell us that everyone in attendance had been vaccinated?

Everyone but them are social distanced from what I can see. There is empirical evidence which supports the fact that masks, vaccines and natural immunity do not stop the spread of COVID. At best if one gets it who is vaccinated they generally don’t get as sick. Thus- one should always social distance with those you do not live with.  Last I heard that is the drill the medical community says is the best practice. 
 

myself? I don’t really care about it all. I am forced to wear a mask at work but I can’t social distance because of the nature of my work. It is a hand on job with people. I’ve had COVID twice so I’m over it.  Just surprised the entire conference center is social distance EXCEPT for the 12 and 1st pres. If they know better perhaps they should share the info. 

1 hour ago, katherine the great said:

My thought as well. 

Since none of us know maybe it’s time for some members to stop crying about people who don’t social distance, wear a mask or may or may not be vaccinated… since we are gonna just assume the best always. We can also assume the best among our neighbors whether they are apostles or not.
 

I agree they prob are vaccinated and tested reg. 

1 hour ago, Chum said:

Pres Eyring presiding. We're welcomed. He offers that only those who are fully vaccinated were permitted to attend.

Pres Nelson first up - to be followed by Jeffery Holland, Bonny H Cordon & Ulisses Soarez

And everyone but the fifteen are socially distanced. They are literally sitting shoulder to shoulder. Unless my eyes are lying.

25 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

You’ve had awful experiences. God will consider all. IMO

Yea but it is 100% all-in Mormonism so stepping outside that or “kicking against the pricks “ makes the non compliant one have an awful experience. Just this illustration alone the family / church attitude can be backed up by tons of material spoken by our prophets. One guy is mark e Peterson. Go look up racist quotes attributed to him. He was a total racist. I grew up with that dude visiting our home and eating dinner with us. The current 15 were raised like this so it isn’t hard to imagine what they believe. 
 

10 hours ago, rongo said:

Often, a lot of the judgment people feel coming from the Church/Church members is in their heads. That is, they feel judged, stared at, thought less of, etc., even when those they feel are doing it are not doing it. This happens a lot with people who are apprehensive about standing out in church meetings. Many of the young people leaving the Church have family who are doing everything they can to retain and maintain normal relations, not make it awkward or hostile, etc., but this is only perceived by them as being very different. I think a lot of this has to do with self-consciousness, dissonance, and sometimes even conscience. 

There is some merit to this. One also has to consider what the church teaches is bad/good, right/wrong etc about all kinds of things. When one is doing or believes something contrary to these teachings it is easy to assume the potential judgement being passed on them by faithful members. If the belief is that if someone does such and such they are bad… well I’m bad and that’s what they think about me. 
 

perfect example is this. Growing up I was taught to never date or marry outside your own race. It was against our religion, the prophet said so and it mixes the race of your descendants. You are white for a reason. That said, when I asked a girl out in high school who was not white I knew I could never take her to meet my parents if we became a thing. I was disobeying Spencer w kimball the prophet. 
 

we go out and lo and behold we become an item and my mother finds out. Dimed out by my sister of course and holy hell broke out at second class’ house. “ How dare you date a “bleep” behind our backs! You are forbidden to see her again! Of course we kept dating, went to prom etc. parents hated that. She wasn’t even Mormon but that just made it even worse since she was also a “bleep.” 
 

so when one of my kids is getting sealed in the temple twenty plus years later to someone who isn’t white…, yea it is not in my head what they are thinking. They taught me they hated that and no good Mormon does that. Def not just in my head. Never told my kids but my wife knows. My kids grew up military brat. They don’t have a problem with blacks and other races. 
 

Prob just in my head but I know what they believe and they believe this is a horrible thing. Good Mormons though… ask anyone around here lol

33 minutes ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

It wasn't until the early 20th century that the Supreme Court first interpreted the 14th amendment to incorporate the Bill of Rights against the states.  In other words, prior to that, the freedoms outlined in the Bill of Rights only applied to actions taken by the Federal Government.  It's why Joseph Smith was told, "Your cause is just, but I can do nothing for you."  It's why the Nauvoo City Council was able to legally vote on a measure that shut down a printing press that had been critical of the prophet. 

Too bad the guy lost his newspaper because the prophet lied about the truthfulness of the allegations made in the paper. 

36 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I have read about what he did in the military, but I do not own the books I read nor do I have them in my possession, so I suppose, as far as documentation goes, that you're out of luck, darn it!  Oh, well!  Life is like that, sometimes.

I believe you. 

36 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

The "what if?" isn't meant to illustrate what then-Doctor-Nelson did.  The "what if?" is meant to buttress the point that it is possible for what he did do to benefit even you, a point that, still, you have not granted even though I should think that it would be obvious.  But don't worry.  I'm not holding my breath.

So we don’t know what he did? I don’t really care because again the question was if any served in the military. For the record I’m not looking out for his action to have benefitted me in any way for them to be valid. I don’t know why you seem to believe I’m worried about how his work may or may not have benefitted me. Has not even crossed my mind. 

36 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

As regards specifics, that may be true.  But, in general, I'm sure President Nelson has great respect for those who have worn the uniform and who have served.

Okay.

I’m sure he does as well. That said you will never hear him at the pulpit telling the young men of the church there is any other honorable option to a mission. The church has said as much. He is excused. 

11 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Read my post again.  I alluded to or implied what he did in the question that I asked you at the end of my previous post ... which, of course, you have not answered.

You said “what if.” 
Are you guessing what he did or do you have done kind of documentation stating what the purpose was?

if you are so sure what he did why pose your response as a random “what if?” Analogy. Just spit it out. 
 

I care about what he did in the military about as much as he cares about what I did. Probably zero. The point is he served in the military and didn’t go on a mission. Someone else in the discussion brought up the fact the top three didn’t serve missions after I asked how many GAs didn’t serve missions.
 

7 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Right, because it's not like Dr. Nelson knew how to do anything that would be useful for doctors in M*A*S*H units over in Korea to learn, or anything.  He just went over there to visit them.  "Well, thanks for the hospitality, boys!  It's always interesting to visit someplace I've never been, but I've stayed long enough, and had best be on my way!" I realize the timeline is off so my analogy is imperfect, but what if someone such as a Dr. Nelson taught something to surgeons that, in turn, enabled those surgeons to save your life just after you had been brought in from being wounded on the battlefield, SCC?

I guess that’s what I get for sourcing his Wikipedia page. So what did he do touring Korea in the army? His page doesn’t say what he did. I’m not saying he didn’t do anything I’m just passing along what his page says.

Additionally you can add in your wierd looney toon third grade antics all you want but making up silly commentary to pass it off as my attitude towards his service when I never said those things is a dishonest representation of what I wrote. You go be you though. 
 

So what did he do while touring Korea? And no I don’t mean a vacation it is what he was described as doing. The military sends officers to war zones all the time to do tours  and come back and write manuals and such. Probably some heart stuff but again the page doesn’t say and the last thing I’m gonna do is buy a book.  I’m betting you have it and can share.
 

Thathathatsa …  that’s all folks!?

8 hours ago, Amulek said:

I'm on good terms with at least three real estate agents in my ward, so if you ever decide you want to move to the real Zion (i.e., Texas) just let me know.

 

Of course Texas.. merica ! Man it seemed like the army was packed with texans. Pretty patriotic state. You guys don’t have elk so I’ll pass. 

9 hours ago, Maestrophil said:

I didn't choose this quote as the only one I am addressing here, but rather to just single you out to ask some real sincere questions as a member and parent who wants to be better while still maintaining my faith and membership.

To respond to the OP question - yes I have seen this trend among the generation spoken of, and those a little older and younger as well.  It makes me sad and concerned at the same time.  Especially as a parent who has over half his children in full rejection mode of the church (4 of 6), and the remaining children in a very 'slightly' LDS mode (2).  None served missions (and I never condemned them for their decisions to not go).

So what do you recommend a person like me - a GenX dad who is active and believing - can do to improve the experience for my kids and to have them either return to faith, or feel less bitter towards the church?  It's an honest question.  I express continually that I love and accept them even if they live very different standards than I do, and I honestly think none of them doubt they are loved by my wife and I.  Still - the 4 who have left activity are very demeaning and dismissive when talking about the church and even its members.

So what more can be done? Especially given that:

 - I don't think the church will ever change chastity definitions to allow for any kind of sanctioned sexual relations between homosexual individuals.

 - I won't join in with any badmouthing or condemnation of the 1st Presidency or Q12.  I can have respectable dialog about feelings and reactions to their words and policies, but will always stop short of accusing them of being racist, homophobic, or liars.

What do you suggest from your perspective?  Is there truly anything a member/parent like myself can do, or is the gulf too wide and the hatred/resentment of the church too definite?  Could your family/ward/stake have done anything different to make it so you had a better outcome and disposition towards the church - or do you think the fact that the church has the truth claims it does simply force a gulf and you would have felt disillusioned regardless?

I have no idea why your kids have chosen to become in active or leave the church so I can’t have an opinion on that. I can say though that if you make their church activity a condition of your love for them or use it as a reason to miss treat or belittle them you will just push them away. I have no idea if this is how you roll I am just making a suggestion.

I can say in my personal circumstance that my church leaders at the time were probably some of the Most verbally abusive and dismissive people I’ve ever been around in my entire life. It was either you follow the prophet and all of the ChurchTeachings or you were just a flat out piece of crap. Let’s put it this way some of my family still call non-Mormons heathens because they’re not considered to be even decent people if you’re not a Mormon. To this day I still have no knowledge if my parents even have any nonmember friends. 

 That said me knowing how they feel about other people who were all in Mormons vs the not so good Mormons I knew how they felt about me. Despite my being married in the temple, kids on missions, kids in college kids married in the temple, I was still a failure because I didn’t go on a mission and I have been flat out told that to my face. They take the program way too seriously and my not going on a mission has been a permanent humiliation to them. Many of their friends and family are the same way. Not all- many. 

Well I’m probably not much help because I don’t know your personal situation all I can tell you is this. One day you’ll be of age and need to be taken care of.  Your treatment of your kids may ultimately determine how much help you get from them. Perhaps your good kids who are solid Mormons may decide to go on a senior mission for a year or two and leave you in the hands of your apostate children. You may be surprised who steps up to help in the end. Trust me. Be Christ like. Jesus doesn’t care if someone is Mormon if they are a self righteous prick as some here would describe them. 

38 minutes ago, SteveO said:

They need to kill something for legitimate military service, or…?

I must be missing something. Please explain why you ask that question.

14 hours ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

None of the current first presidency served missions.  They were not draftees; they served in the military or National Guard by choice. 

 

Yep. Pres Nelson was of age entire ww2 and somehow didn’t end up going until Korea when he was a DR. Even then his tour in Korea was to visit some mash units or something. 
 

oaks was natl  guard. Never went anywhere and married at 20. 
 

eyring went in Air Force I think after Korean War. 
 

monson served six months in training at end of ww2. 

3 hours ago, ttribe said:

You didn't...you seemed to be tangentially criticizing your local leadership for not celebrating those who served in the military in a similar fashion to missionaries.

Where did I state local leadership should celebrate military service?

My criticism is at leaders who exercise unrighteous dominion over congregation members and harass and berate them for not serving a mission… for any reason.