Elder Gilbert, new Q12 member

[Peacefully]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

What about shared custody then?  Or adding a third adult to the household to provide the missing parent?

Or create households with one male couple and one female couple.

Our church is no stranger to alternative lifestyles. 

Edited February 21 by Peacefully

[Calm]

16 hours ago, Peacefully said:

Our church is no stranger to alternative lifestyles. 

The idea that it’s always been a husband and a wife both sharing responsibilities to raise the kids traditionally is not that accurate, especially for the more well to do.  Nannies, wet nurses, aunties, older kids, grandparents, etc that spend more time with the young ones than parents have been very common, as have been cultures where the women raise the children with little involvement of the men or fostering where the kids get exchanged or apprenticed before they hit puberty was also not unusual.  There are cultures where one daughter was not allowed to get married because she was expected to care for her parents and even run their household.

I do believe it’s ideal to have at least one adult man and one woman in the home, who can model (hopefully) healthy relationships between sexes, but to take the so-called nuclear family as proven to be the natural, meant to be pattern or God given pattern because it’s traditional is ignoring a great deal of human history and culture and actual tradition while focusing on a limited time and location.  It certainly wasn’t a nuclear family in ancient Israel when the Old Testament was written.  Not as familiar with New Testament times, but I suspect many homes were at least multigenerational, if not still including adult sons’ families including all their children as well as any unmarried adult siblings.  Jesus’ family likely operated that way given when he was 12 his parents didn’t bother looking for him before they left Jerusalem because they assumed he was elsewhere in the caravan….unlikely if just strangers traveling together or even neighbors imo, but extended family one was used to help raising the kids?  Easy to see that happening.  A similar caravan at the time of Jesus’ birth is likely, it would have been stupid to travel alone, easy prey to bandits, apparently common in that time period and location (Google).

Personally I don’t find the nuclear family to be that healthy, too much isolation and responsibility dumped on two people where family life was much more social in the past with a large extended family living together with shared responsibilities, though then you ran into the problem of favored kids—especially the ones getting the bulk of inheritance—these children getting the majority of attention/training/investment of resources including food with the idea that the family succeeds if this favored son succeeds and other children being neglected or even suppressed to avoid competition in the family.

Edited February 21 by Calm

[Tacenda]

I listened to the RadioWest podcast: https://radiowest.kuer.org/show/radiowest/2026-02-17/a-controversial-new-apostle-joins-latter-day-saint-leadership

Now I know what this thread is about, I hadn't delved into it yet, and I agree why it doesn't sit well with who Pres Oak's pick is.

[Tacenda]

5 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I listened to the RadioWest podcast: https://radiowest.kuer.org/show/radiowest/2026-02-17/a-controversial-new-apostle-joins-latter-day-saint-leadership

Now I know what this thread is about, I hadn't delved into it yet, and I agree why it doesn't sit well with who Pres Oak's pick is.

And has anyone seen Queer Eye on Netflix's last season? I'm so sad it's the last one, all the season's shows have been so amazing in how lives can change for the better. The five LGBTQ men, are such good people doing good. I'm sure in my former years I'd skip over watching this show. Thinking that probably is the case with some on this thread as well. The season 10 this year, is so good along with the rest, but the one I saw called, "Finding Father", is a must see too. But everybody likes different things, I don't care for a lot of Sci Fi stuff, so I get it if people wouldn't have a need to watch. 

Edited February 21 by Tacenda

[Peacefully]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

And has anyone seen Queer Eye on Netflix's last season? I'm so sad it's the last one, all the season's shows have been so amazing in how lives can change for the better. The five LGBTQ men, are such good people doing good. I'm sure in my former years I'd skip over watching this show. Thinking that probably is the case with some on this thread as well. The season 10 this year, is so good along with the rest, but the one I saw called, "Finding Father", is a must see too. But everybody likes different things, I don't care for a lot of Sci Fi stuff, so I get it if people wouldn't have a need to watch. 

I love that show, especially Jonathan:) 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I'm sure in my former years I'd skip over watching this show.  Thinking that probably is the case with some on this thread as well.

True, but that’s because I don’t watch reality shows unless it’s a craft…glassblowing, decorating, fashion…and then I skip the drama and just look at the results, lol.  I did try once or twice when it first came out.

Do they do follow up shows to see if the changes stick or how the person adapts them to their own lifestyle?  If I watched anything, it would be that. 

[Chum]

5 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I listened to the RadioWest podcast: https://radiowest.kuer.org/show/radiowest/2026-02-17/a-controversial-new-apostle-joins-latter-day-saint-leadership

I used web apps to turn this into a transcript; I posted it here: https://justpaste.it/gz7x3 

ftr: Raw MP3 file (gleaned from F12 Dev Tools), Podcast Transcription, Transcript Cleaner.

Edited February 21 by Chum

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Chum said:

I used web apps to turn this into a transcript; I posted it here: https://justpaste.it/gz7x3 

ftr: Raw MP3 file (gleaned from F12 Dev Tools), Podcast Transcription, Transcript Cleaner.

Cool

[Okrahomer]

5 hours ago, Chum said:

I used web apps to turn this into a transcript; I posted it here: https://justpaste.it/gz7x3 

ftr: Raw MP3 file (gleaned from F12 Dev Tools), Podcast Transcription, Transcript Cleaner.

 

Thanks for the transcript. I had to chuckle when it translated President Oaks’ name as “Dallin Chokes.” 😜

I’m admittedly a poor historian; nevertheless, If I am understanding Dr. Park, he seems to imply that “disruption theory” has already influenced Church governance in the form of correlation; but since correlation preceded publication of the theory by almost 3 decades, one would rather surmise that the reverse — that correlation influenced Christensen’s thinking — is more likely.

 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Okrahomer said:

he seems to imply that “disruption theory” has already influenced Church governance in the form of correlation; but since correlation preceded publication of the theory by almost 3 decades, one would rather surmise that the reverse — that correlation influenced Christensen’s thinking — is more likely.

Unless he means the changes that have been made in correlation.

“It's the idea of shaking up stagnant systems: you refocus the mission, you cut what doesn't serve the core.”

The simplification of the Church curriculum, focusing more on personal study, trimming down ministering, focusing on the relationship rather than the teaching…perhaps he is talking about these?

Edited February 22 by Calm

[Calm]

Would love to know what he means by this:

Quote

Mormon business professors and business scholars like Clayton Christensen and Kim Clark and Henry J. Eyring who really have reshaped the Church in the last few decades. 

Added:  he talks about this later.  See below

Edited February 22 by Calm

[Calm]

Couldn’t add to the above:

Quote

As far as my reading of work on disruption theories, it's a focus on how corporations fail. And that corporations fail when they become too stiff, when they become too rigid, when they don't listen to the public interests, and when they have so many obstacles within their way that it does not allow the ruthless and innovative approaches necessary to refine their institutional practices. And so disruptive innovation is meant to go out and overturn traditional assumptions, introduce a more streamlined message, emphasizing a strategic alignment, and differentiating our vision with competitors and things like that.

And so you see this play out when venture capitalists take over a corporation, they strip it down and they find what are our foundations, and we build from that foundation in a sustainable way for long-term gains in which we listen to our shareholders in order to build the bottom line. And this message, this disruption theory, has since been tried to be installed across different types of arenas and corporations and businesses, universities, churches, with mixed results we'll call them, because it often dehumanizes a project. It often emphasizes fidelity to the central mission rather than personal expression. It prioritizes correlation over individual diversity of expression. And so you see this play out as different corporations purchase public media companies like newspapers or radio companies, now with universities, and there's often a major conflict of disciplines as a result, where humanists will often denounce these types of approaches for turning us all into robots. And I think in return, of course, the disruption innovators will be like, well, you are misunderstanding how the world works. You are not being receptive enough to the type of change that the world needs. You need to be able to get with the program so that we can have sustainable long-term growth; otherwise, no one's going to have these types of expressions.

And so I find the roots of those types of ideas—of a correlated message, a streamlined mission, a nimble corporate strategy that allows a top-down intervention—as something that then plays a crucial role in what Clark Gilbert brings to his later jobs within the Church.

 

[Calm]

Quote

Does this member have a testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and of its doctrine, including its teachings on marriage, family, and gender?…But it never defines what those are. Clark Gilbert apparently is defining them in the most rigid way.

Where is the evidence for this?  Not seeing any, just his own conclusion about it being the “most rigid way”.

Edited February 22 by Calm

[Calm]

Quote

So the way hiring typically goes is that a candidate gets cleared by their local leaders, religious leaders. They wouldn't even apply if they didn't have that. Then they get interviewed by their department and then their names are put up the line. So then they go up to a department chair or dean or something, all cleared. Then they have to be interviewed by a general authority. And then, and I talked to so many candidates who were told by their general authority, "Oh yeah, you're a great candidate," essentially, quote, "clearing them." Now this is coming from the candidate, so the general authority could have said something else. But then at the final is Clark Gilbert's ecclesiastical clearance office. And all these candidates who believed they'd made it through didn't get hired—no reason given.

Why is the assumption they were rejected for religious reasons rather than another candidate was thought better academically and that candidate was hired?  Serious question.  Just because someone is told they are a great candidate doesn’t mean they are the best or the best fit for the job (which can include religious commitment, but might also be additional specialities, dynamics with the people, who they know if the job includes fundraising, etc).

This kind of stuff was going on before Gilbert was hired. Going off memory here, so details may be incorrect…My husband went through it a few times in the 90s (BYU business would not have been a good fit for him because Marketing was over Entrepreneurship and that was old school and he was more new, from a social psych background, he thought marketing professors generally clueless in the area).  He was told he was great, sometimes one of two final candidates. Once he was chosen, but they didn’t hire him anyway (gave the position to a marketing professor even though it was supposed to be entrepreneurship).  He did well at UVU and I was very happy he ended up there instead.

Edited February 22 by Calm

[Calm]

Quote

I talked to professors who said they were worried about attending someone's same-sex marriage and someone else posting their picture on social media and them being in trouble for attending someone's same-sex marriage. And that's not paranoia, because it has happened, but at a level that is definitely kind of a checklist

Meaning they lost their jobs because it was posted or only that it was posted?

[Calm]

Quote

I think with the bureaucratization of the Church in the last few decades, it's very hard for individual apostles to stand out. And when apostles do stand out, it's usually not the best thing. The fact that Dieter Uchtdorf has stood out in the 20-aughts and 20-teens—that led to one of the reasons why there might be some friction within church leadership. So I doubt we're going to see him standing out from the rest of the Twelve, because now the Twelve are understood to be trying to be seen as in lockstep, as a unanimous front.

Not the way I would describe the dynamics. 

[bluebell]

6 hours ago, Calm said:

Not the way I would describe the dynamics. 

It doesn't even make sense.  Elder Holland stood out for years as a 'fan favorite' but there didn't appear to be any friction over it.

[Okrahomer]

8 hours ago, Calm said:

Unless he means the changes that have been made in correlation.

“It's the idea of shaking up stagnant systems: you refocus the mission, you cut what doesn't serve the core.”

The simplification of the Church curriculum, focusing more on personal study, trimming down ministering, focusing on the relationship rather than the teaching…perhaps he is talking about these?

Ah! I hadn’t even thought of that. So he believes disruption theory manifests in a kind of Correlation 2.0. That seems a lot more plausible.

[The Nehor]

20 hours ago, Calm said:

Couldn’t add to the above:

 

That is way too optimistic. When the venture capitalists take over they don’t rebuild from the ground up. They typically burn everything down for short-term gains, cannibalize the acquisition for parts, and then move on to the next acquisition. “…sustainable way for long term gains….” Yeah, that is naive.

[Kenngo1969]

It's been my personal experience in a couple of organizations (though, admittedly, perhaps my perception is skewing the reality) that people who think they understand the concept of "disruptive innovation" have been long on disruption, and short on innovation.  Just one man's opinion ... your mileage may vary, not valid in all areas, void where prohibited, see retailer for details.  

[gopher]

On 2/20/2026 at 9:19 PM, The Nehor said:

If I leave it won’t be primarily for that. It is also not limited to the Old Testament. You can find some weird stuff God does in the New Testament, Book of Mormon, and the D&C.

Have you figured yet out what will be the reason you leave?  This isn't the first time you've floated that idea.  I can't be the only one who has noticed your posts have become much more cynical and critical of not only the church, its leaders and members, but also of God.  I figured it was mostly due to your disagreements over LGBT issues in the church, but maybe there's more.  I think even most believers will have lots of questions to ask on the other side about God's dealings with His children throughout history.  But when you have personal experiences of God's mercy and love for you, it's a lot easier to believe that when we get the full explanations of the "weird stuff" you mentioned, we'll learn that God was actually being merciful and just.  But that's just my opinion, of course.

[Tony uk]

As we grow from childhood to adulthood. Along the way, we may feel hard done by or confused by the attitude of parents to us. However, along the way as we become adults ourselves, and fortunate cases, parents ourselves. In many ways, we start to understand the attitude of our parents towards us. I feel this is how God is with his people. Sometimes we maybe confused by the things God does, or allows. But in time as we grow in knowledge, and allow ourselves to be open to his calling. We can understand that what is being done is for the best. Even at times if we are confused by the events God allows. We just need to trust in him as we would a parent who is there for us.

[The Nehor]

9 hours ago, gopher said:

Have you figured yet out what will be the reason you leave? 

Probably lots of carnal, sensual, and devilish sinning.

9 hours ago, gopher said:

This isn't the first time you've floated that idea.  I can't be the only one who has noticed your posts have become much more cynical and critical of not only the church, its leaders and members, but also of God.  I figured it was mostly due to your disagreements over LGBT issues in the church, but maybe there's more.  I think even most believers will have lots of questions to ask on the other side about God's dealings with His children throughout history.  But when you have personal experiences of God's mercy and love for you, it's a lot easier to believe that when we get the full explanations of the "weird stuff" you mentioned, we'll learn that God was actually being merciful and just.  But that's just my opinion, of course.

No, it is a systemic problem at this point. It didn’t start with LGBT issues. It started with a promise from God that failed. Then I realized that the same spirit of revelation that gave that promise is what convinced me the gospel was true. So all that is unreliable. So I started a deep dive into scripture without making excuses for God to see what was there. And realized how silly a lot of the justifications were that I used to say God was good when God wasn’t being good. I mean, you can do the whole God is working towards some unseen greater good rationale but the scriptures sometimes give reasons for why God acts and that isn’t the reason. So when God has his followers writing his supposedly inspired scriptures and can’t put His best foot forward even there it gets really silly.

So now I am waiting for something more from God. I’ve got a clock on this so will find out if God is gonna come up with a method to convince me.

[MustardSeed]

Just now, The Nehor said:

Probably lots of carnal, sensual, and devilish sinning.

No, it is a systemic problem at this point. It didn’t start with LGBT issues. It started with a promise from God that failed. Then I realized that the same spirit of revelation that gave that promise is what convinced me the gospel was true. So all that is unreliable. So I started a deep dive into scripture without making excuses for God to see what was there. And realized how silly a lot of the justifications were that I used to say God was good when God wasn’t being good. I mean, you can do the whole God is working towards some unseen greater good rationale but the scriptures sometimes give reasons for why God acts and that isn’t the reason. So when God has his followers writing his supposedly inspired scriptures and can’t put His best foot forward even there it gets really silly.

So now I am waiting for something more from God. I’ve got a clock on this so will find out if God is gonna come up with a method to convince me.

Hey.  God gave Abraham a son at 100.  So there’s that nugget to hold on to. 

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, MustardSeed said:

Hey.  God gave Abraham a son at 100.  So there’s that nugget to hold on to. 

I really don’t want to live to be 100 let alone try to raise a child at that point. At over 100 years old climbing to the top of the mountain to sacrifice that child was probably harder than actually sacrificing him.