bluebell

Like I said 'barring serious sin'. Thanks for providing the reference for my statement.

Normally, when talking about two generations, you are talking about the difference between grandparents and grandchildren (one generation difference is parents and children). So it did confuse me, thinking of someone not attending as grandchildren or grandparents. So thanks for clarify that you meant someone not attending for 20 years or more. I agree, that's very possible. And yes, they will remain members even if they don't go. The church generally lets people decide that kind of stuff for themselves, baring serious sin.

The only people counted as members are those who were baptized when they were 8 (with parental permission). There's no way for people to be members 'for a generation or two' who have never attended. My grandparents were members since childhood but never attended regularly until they were in their 50s. My parents never attended regularly until they were in their early 30s. None of them wanted their names removed from the rolls and all had home and visiting teachers, etc. They considered themselves members even if they weren't actively attending. If people don't want to be members anymore, they can have their membership ended. I think the church does what it does because it's not that concerned about 'the look'. It's concerned with doing what they believe is right (though in an imperfect and flawed way sometimes). (Also, it sounds like Robinson was an ex-member? Or at least, hadn't attended in years? )

Sincere question, not a gotcha question. How do you feel about his words that promoted kindness and respectful dialogue regardless of what the other person believed? Or do you see all of his words as damaging?

Are you equating being disagreed with with being severely emotionally abused, or do you mean something different? I'm not sure I'm reading you right.

I think it has something to do with the natural man being an enemy to God and all that. Our biological natures trend toward selfishness, bigotry, greed, lasciviousness,....

“Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends”.

They say the same about you though, so it all cancels each other out. It increases the noise but there is no substance in any of it. We can each do a lot to change the world, if we can change ourselves first.

I've been listening to a talk a day from the last GC session (when I finish I just start over) and this morning Pres. Nelson's talk came on, and it was basically on the same topic. I just kept thinking, if we could only do what he's asking us to do, what a force we could be for good in the world! But if feels like we are becoming salt that has lost its savor. Good for nothing.

I don't think it's hurting anyone's feelings. It causes some eye rolling because it's so hyperbolical that it's easy for most to make fun of or brush off. When you get that far out there, the insults are easier and easier to ignore because they are so far out there. But at the same time, I think it's causing more harm to your cause than not though. Part of the reason that some people are clinging so desperately to their guns is specifically because of the rhetoric. The less they believe that the left will listen to them and try to understand their perspective, they more they double down. It's the same with issues on the right. Both sides are their own worst enemies because they refuse to believe that those who disagree with them are anything other than stupid or immoral.

I've been assuming that Seeking is an atheist, but I could easily be completely wrong on that assumption.

I spent the last two days trying to figure out a way to post this exact sentiment, and I could not think of a way to put it into words. So I just decided not to post at all. But yes! Thank you for saying it in a way that I could not.

I wanted to comment on this a while ago butt was traveling and lost track of the post. To be honest, my first reaction when I read the term 'gun worshippers' was anger because it immediate brought to mind the label 'baby killers' to describe someone who is pro-choice. It brought it to mind because--(both terms are crap and)--both terms are opposite sides of the same coin. The coin where we try to prove people are wrong and we are right by calling them the worst names we can think of. I'm really, incredibly, sick of that coin. Can we make some new money?

We are in a place in history where anyone can make a video that proves whatever they want to prove, or disproves whatever they want to disprove. Which from my perspective means two things. We have an unfettered ability to find evidence that supports our beliefs, and an unfettered ability to find evidence that proves everyone who disagrees with us is wrong. I don't say that to say that the links already posted are false. I say that to point out that people are less interested in looking at anything that challenges their perspectives while also being wary of unvetted websites and videos right now. It's a perfect storm. I think reason and the ability to discussion uncomfortable information will come back, but it's not coming back right now. We're too touchy and too willing to lash out at any perceived threat, even the perceived threat of being disagreed with. We all need to take some deep breaths and give it time. If we could all eventually come at the discussion with a willingness to engage with the side we disagree with until they feel understood before trying to argue our side, that would probably be the absolute best outcome from enacting real change. Right now everyone's too busy accusing and defending to do much more than make a lot of noise.

I think this 4 minute statement from Bernie Sanders (a liberal) perfectly explains why this murder has hit Americans so hard. It’s not the gun violence (which is horrible in and of itself). It’s the reason.

I think one of the reasons that people are reacting like they are to Kirk's killing is because of the reason that he was killed. If people are now getting killed because someone else doesn't like what they believe, then that means--in it's most basic iteration--that all of us are targets. Because we all believe something that someone else doens't agree with. The move away from "I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it" to "I hate what you are saying and I will kill you for it" has been a startling transition for many americans. It's the reason people are reacting the way that they are.

I’m reminded of someone who said that it is impossible to do good with hate in your heart. 💕

From the quotes by neighbors I’ve heard. His family hasn’t even at church for years. Not sure how vetted the quote is.

Im not sure what you mean? They have been the Choir at Temple Square since the change and it doesn’t seem to be causing them any problems.

Lots of strong emotions in this thread, with good reason. But I’m questioning the usefulness of leading with anger and polarization. It feels like that’s how we got here in the first place. We are in a unique situation on this board, in that many of us have “known” each other for years. I feel like if anyone has a chance to take the off ramp away from anger and accusations, it’s this group of people. Is there a way for us to discuss to understand rather to prove we are right? Is there usefulness in trying?

I’m so sorry.

I worry about this as well. This quote comes to mind. “Policemen and laws can never replace customs, traditions and moral values as a means for regulating human behavior. At best, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society. Our increased reliance on laws to regulate behavior is a measure of how uncivilized we’ve become.” Even laws have little power to save us now.

A day in, I feel like King Theodin had a point: “So much death, what can men do against such reckless hate?” It doesn’t matter what side of the isle the hate is coming from or who it’s directed at. It’s all destruction.

I’ve heard this argument made in regards to cars. That having cars is worth the unfortunate cost of some deaths caused by cars every year. I guess we all agree since we all still drive or ride in cars. But it’s not something any person with a heart would ever say to someone who has lost a loved one to a car accident. Nor would it be a great argument to make in a discussion about the need for car safety. Time, place, and tone make so much difference in how things come across.

This is what the church teaches about the difference between a chapel and a temple. Temples are different than the thousands of Church meetinghouses located around the world. Meetinghouses are where Sunday worship services, youth gatherings, service projects, and other community events take place. All are welcome to join in these activities. Temples have a more specific purpose. They are places specially set apart for sacred service and ceremonies. They are designated by the Lord and dedicated to His purposes. Temples are the only places where some priesthood ordinances are authorized to be performed. These sacred ceremonies lift and inspire participants as they make commitments to follow the teachings and example of Jesus Christ. The bolder is probably the crux of the issue. We believe it is the way it is because we believe the Lord set it up that way.