Steven Snow and LGTQ

[Tacenda]

On 7/8/2025 at 7:38 PM, bluebell said:

Maybe. I've never heard of anyone using that phrase who didn't know they could just walk away whenever they wanted. 

Personally, I think the phrase is used most often because.....it's used most often.  It's probably more a cultural habit than it is anything else.  A habit which came from a tradition of showing respect to the bishop, who is in charge of callings in a ward, and that now carries on because it's part of the lexicon of church membership (in some areas).

My husband is currently contemplating "asking to be released" from his calling because of his workload, and I've never met anyone less tolerant of being told what to do (and who cares less about what people think of him) than he is.   I guarantee he's not using the phrase because he accepts that it's not his call.   

I hope if your husband does "ask to be released", the bishop will allow it. My husband did that once and the bishop wouldn't let him be released.  It was in the High Priest presidency. 😄

[bluebell]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I hope if your husband does "ask to be released", the bishop will allow it. My husband did that once and the bishop wouldn't let him be released.  It was in the High Priest presidency. 😄

I’d like to see the bishop try to keep my husband in a calling.

Edit to add: I don’t think the bishop should have done that with your husband. It’s his decision 

Edited July 21, 2025 by bluebell

[Navidad]

I would like to make a comment of a kind that hasn't been addressed in this thread. I met Elder Snow on various occasions. At his request, when speaking at an event in SLC, I even once took him a gift from the village in which I live. On that occasion I almost got tackled by a committed security person in a beautiful suit and tie. Apparently in the post Hoffman world,  it was not ok to walk into the office building of a general authority with a package under your arm!

At any rate, I found Elder Snow to be one of the most godly men I ever met in all my LDS interactions. While historian of the Church, he evidenced God's grace and human kindness in every interaction with me and others, most of whom were not members of the Church. He helped me form my belief that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is truly a Christian church. I thank him for his strong witness to me in the same way that his top subordinate in that position did the same. That gentleman is now associate vice president of something or other at BYU. Godly men - the evidence of the spirit was strong with both of them. (that sounds like Star Wars, doesn't it?). 

Edited August 20, 2025 by Navidad
left out a point

[ZealouslyStriving]

3 hours ago, Navidad said:

I would like to make a comment of a kind that hasn't been addressed in this thread. I met Elder Snow on various occasions. At his request, when speaking at an event in SLC, I even once took him a gift from the village in which I live. On that occasion I almost got tackled by a committed security person in a beautiful suit and tie. Apparently in the post Hoffman world,  it was not ok to walk into the office building of a general authority with a package under your arm!

At any rate, I found Elder Snow to be one of the most godly men I ever met in all my LDS interactions. While historian of the Church, he evidenced God's grace and human kindness in every interaction with me and others, most of whom were not members of the Church. He helped me form my belief that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is truly a Christian church. I thank him for his strong witness to me in the same way that his top subordinate in that position did the same. That gentleman is now associate vice president of something or other at BYU. Godly men - the evidence of the spirit was strong with both of them. (that sounds like Star Wars, doesn't it?). 

I have no doubt that he is a humble, great man- but does that automatically indicate that he is correct in all his ideas? There are many humble, great men and women in all religions with whom I would fundamentally disagree theologically.

[Navidad]

1 hour ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

I have no doubt that he is a humble, great man- but does that automatically indicate that he is correct in all his ideas? There are many humble, great men and women in all religions with whom I would fundamentally disagree theologically.

You are correct. However, if forced to choose, I personally would prefer humble and great to people with whom I theologically agree.

[Rain]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

You are correct. However, if forced to choose, I personally would prefer humble and great to people with whom I theologically agree.

The thing about humble people is that they are humble with God as well, so they will listen if they end up with Him telling them they need to change their theology. 

Edited August 21, 2025 by Rain

[manol]

9 hours ago, Navidad said:

I would like to make a comment of a kind that hasn't been addressed in this thread. I met Elder Snow on various occasions. At his request, when speaking at an event in SLC, I even once took him a gift from the village in which I live. On that occasion I almost got tackled by a committed security person in a beautiful suit and tie. Apparently in the post Hoffman world,  it was not ok to walk into the office building of a general authority with a package under your arm!

At any rate, I found Elder Snow to be one of the most godly men I ever met in all my LDS interactions. While historian of the Church, he evidenced God's grace and human kindness in every interaction with me and others, most of whom were not members of the Church. He helped me form my belief that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is truly a Christian church. I thank him for his strong witness to me in the same way that his top subordinate in that position did the same. That gentleman is now associate vice president of something or other at BYU. Godly men - the evidence of the spirit was strong with both of them. (that sounds like Star Wars, doesn't it?). 

WONDERFUL to see you again!

[Teancum]

On 6/29/2025 at 9:56 AM, ZealouslyStriving said:

"Pearson also shared the story of a bishop in her area who ministers to a lesbian couple in his congregation. “The bishop has said, ‘If I am ever instructed by somebody in authority above me to do anything to discipline those women, I would before that resign my post as bishop.’”

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2025/06/28/retired-lds-general-authority/

** So let me see if I have this straight... That Bishop would refuse to take some type of disciplinary action against the Lesbian couple, and would resign if asked to- would he afford the same leeway to a heterosexual couple engaged in behavior contrary to the Law of Chastity?

This seems to trouble you quite a bit. Why is that?

[Teancum]

On 6/29/2025 at 10:35 AM, ZealouslyStriving said:

You didn't notice my extremely specific quote from the article?

There is a difference in helping people people feel as comfortable as possible and condoning/overlooking transgressions. If we are going to excuse it for a "marginalized" group, it should be excused for other consenting adult arrangements... Am I wrong?

Hey I am with ya. Let let consenting adults make their own choices and stay out of their bedrooms. All for it! See we do agree on something. 😛

[Teancum]

On 6/29/2025 at 11:21 AM, ZealouslyStriving said:

So we pretend like they are married because that can't get married.

Do I have that right?

You got it!  See you are making progress.🙃😁

[The Nehor]

10 hours ago, Teancum said:

This seems to trouble you quite a bit. Why is that?

They’re getting away with it! They shouldn’t be!

That is the impression I get when I look at laments about it. They hold up the heteronormative style of marriage as an ideal but also make it a duty and many marry out of that sense of duty or of it being an expected requirement. Then you have queer people marrying because they genuinely like each other without it being some sort of civic duty. The undercurrent of a lot of the complaints seem to be that queer people are cheating somehow and there is a strange envy mixed in when they complain about how they can’t have children (not always true) or that it somehow misses some perfect balance of gender roles or something. I have also discovered that straight people dating is weird. Seriously. A lot of crazy rules and expectations that don’t serve anyone involved and that just create discord. 

[california boy]

My partner and I have been together for 16 years.  I know I will be with him for the rest of my life.  But we have never married.  Partly it is because of the Church's strong stance AGAINST gay couples marrying.  The whole automatic apostasy thing.  I obviously don't really care about what the Church thinks about my relationship with my partner, but I thought it might just add additional problems for some of my children who are still active in the Church.  Coupled with our not really needing any of the financial and legal benefits that marriage brings.

But lately, my partner and I have started talking about maybe we should get married for those legal reasons.  It is not that I need his money or he needs my money if one of us die.  We both are pretty secure financially.  My estate will go to my children and his will go to his granddaughter which sadly is the only direct decendent he has.  But lately, he has decided that he might want to have his assets divided differently upon his death.  We both have living wills, but changing them as situations change in our lives is difficult to keep up.  If we marry, then I could divide up his estate any way he wanted me to even if he tells me what he wants in the last week of his life.  

Since marriage has become something that is not really important to either of us largely because of the Church, if we do get married, we don't really want even a small gathering of people.  It would be just for us.  I am not even sure I want to tell anyone.  Not even my children.  I don't want them to feel like it is something they need to attend or even acknowledge.  On the other hand, I don't want them to find out later after I am dead and feel like I hid it from them.  

The LAST thing any member of the Church should complain about is gay couples not marrying.  The Church is the one that set this up with their damn policies against gay couples and not just telling them to not marrying, but actually fighting their right to marry.  Could they be any more clear than that in encouraging gay couples to never marry?

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

My partner and I have been together for 16 years.  I know I will be with him for the rest of my life.  But we have never married.  Partly it is because of the Church's strong stance AGAINST gay couples marrying.  The whole automatic apostasy thing.  I obviously don't really care about what the Church thinks about my relationship with my partner, but I thought it might just add additional problems for some of my children who are still active in the Church.  Coupled with our not really needing any of the financial and legal benefits that marriage brings.

But lately, my partner and I have started talking about maybe we should get married for those legal reasons.  It is not that I need his money or he needs my money if one of us die.  We both are pretty secure financially.  My estate will go to my children and his will go to his granddaughter which sadly is the only direct decendent he has.  But lately, he has decided that he might want to have his assets divided differently upon his death.  We both have living wills, but changing them as situations change in our lives is difficult to keep up.  If we marry, then I could divide up his estate any way he wanted me to even if he tells me what he wants in the last week of his life.  

Since marriage has become something that is not really important to either of us largely because of the Church, if we do get married, we don't really want even a small gathering of people.  It would be just for us.  I am not even sure I want to tell anyone.  Not even my children.  I don't want them to feel like it is something they need to attend or even acknowledge.  On the other hand, I don't want them to find out later after I am dead and feel like I hid it from them.  

The LAST thing any member of the Church should complain about is gay couples not marrying.  The Church is the one that set this up with their damn policies against gay couples and not just telling them to not marrying, but actually fighting their right to marry.  Could they be any more clear than that in encouraging gay couples to never marry?

The critique of gay and lesbian couples for so long was that they are promiscuous and won’t form stable partnerships. Then when they try to form stable partnerships the same complainers try to stop them. It just shows that most of the excuses for the bigotry are rhetorical propaganda. They don’t want to “fix” the problem. They just want validation for pushing queer people back into the closet and/or into hiding.

This sums it up pretty well:

https://gethelphomework.laravel.cloud/question/tf-during-reconstruction-black-politicians-held-upwards-of-2000-office-of3rhdzs

And yeah, the URL is intentionally misleading.

 

[Calm]

6 hours ago, california boy said:

If we marry, then I could divide up his estate any way he wanted me to even if he tells me what he wants in the last week of his life.  

Isn’t it also relevant to medical decisions?  If there was disagreement between you and his granddaughter for whatever reason?  I don’t know how much a relative can veto a living will.

You also travel a lot iirc.  Seems like it might be worthwhile if you don’t have documents at hand to have a legal relationship.

”Not even my children.  I don't want them to feel like it is something they need to attend or even acknowledge.  On the other hand, I don't want them to find out later after I am dead and feel like I hid it from them. “

I do think it would be very important to tell them, but if you believe they will have strong negative emotional reactions at least at first, maybe presenting it as primarily pragmatic would help gently shift their atttitudes or at least open them up to thinking of it as something very different than apostasy…such as the travel issue, if something happens to you or him while away from home…

Edited August 22, 2025 by Calm

[california boy]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

Isn’t it also relevant to medical decisions?  If there was disagreement between you and his granddaughter for whatever reason?  I don’t know how much a relative can veto a living will.

You also travel a lot iirc.  Seems like it might be worthwhile if you don’t have documents at hand to have a legal relationship.

”Not even my children.  I don't want them to feel like it is something they need to attend or even acknowledge.  On the other hand, I don't want them to find out later after I am dead and feel like I hid it from them. “

I do think it would be very important to tell them, but if you believe they will have strong negative emotional reactions at least at first, maybe presenting it as primarily pragmatic would help gently shift their atttitudes or at least open them up to thinking of it as something very different than apostasy…such as the travel issue, if something happens to you or him while away from home…

Both good points.  I think that explaining to them why we are considering marriage is a significant part of why we need to tell them.  

[california boy]

9 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The critique of gay and lesbian couples for so long was that they are promiscuous and won’t form stable partnerships. Then when they try to form stable partnerships the same complainers try to stop them. It just shows that most of the excuses for the bigotry are rhetorical propaganda. They don’t want to “fix” the problem. They just want validation for pushing queer people back into the closet and/or into hiding.

This sums it up pretty well:

https://gethelphomework.laravel.cloud/question/tf-during-reconstruction-black-politicians-held-upwards-of-2000-office-of3rhdzs

And yeah, the URL is intentionally misleading.

 

This is so right on.  I honestly don't understand how people who have their own personal beliefs in their religion feel the need to prevent other people from having a different point of view and try to validate their beliefs by trying to control others.  

[The Nehor]

On 8/22/2025 at 10:40 PM, california boy said:

This is so right on.  I honestly don't understand how people who have their own personal beliefs in their religion feel the need to prevent other people from having a different point of view and try to validate their beliefs by trying to control others.  

Well, it is clearly God’s plan. I remember when that plan was presented.…..wait, what? Sorry, I have just been informed that plan got shot down at some point by some overzealous liberal weirdo talking about agency or some such nonsense.