CV75 Posted May 7, 2014 Posted May 7, 2014 It seems counterproductive to misrepresent the position of those who have differing views. I'm not aware of anyone who believes the Church should change its position so that it will match shifting societal trends. The reasons tend to run much deeper as many of us felt that way back when we were still a minority viewpoint. The way I see it, anyone whose attitude matches the middle of the bell curve of a societal trend (the number of people adopting the psyche over time) as it shifts to become more pervasive are still following the same trend, even when they are a minority that is ahead of or behind the times and may not recognize or acknowledge their part or place in the trend. So, it is reasonable to say that those who want the Church to change to match their deeper attitudes and reasons still want the Church to change to match the trend in which they may not recognize they are embedded in. 1
rockpond Posted May 7, 2014 Posted May 7, 2014 The way I see it, anyone whose attitude matches the middle of the bell curve of a societal trend (the number of people adopting the psyche over time) as it shifts to become more pervasive are still following the same trend, even when they are a minority that is ahead of or behind the times and may not recognize or acknowledge their part or place in the trend. So, it is reasonable to say that those who want the Church to change to match their deeper attitudes and reasons still want the Church to change to match the trend in which they may not recognize they are embedded in. It is my faith and testimony that compel me to desire legal and spiritual recognition of gay marriages. And I know that there are many who believe similarly. It has nothing to do with societal trends.
CV75 Posted May 7, 2014 Posted May 7, 2014 It is my faith and testimony that compel me to desire legal and spiritual recognition of gay marriages. And I know that there are many who believe similarly. It has nothing to do with societal trends.Inasmuch as spirituality is a component of society, individuals’ faith, testimony, beliefs and desires certainly impact the trends (and vice-versa). As much as I know that my testimony is strictly between me and God, I wouldn’t have gotten it if I wasn’t part of the particular society I was in at the time (which oddly enough wasn’t LDS).
rockpond Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 Inasmuch as spirituality is a component of society, individuals’ faith, testimony, beliefs and desires certainly impact the trends (and vice-versa). As much as I know that my testimony is strictly between me and God, I wouldn’t have gotten it if I wasn’t part of the particular society I was in at the time (which oddly enough wasn’t LDS).Be that as it may... It is a misrepresentation to suggest that we are just wanting the church to align with societal trends when, in fact, we hope for church acceptance of gay marriage due to deeply held religious beliefs and moral convictions about civil rights.We're all members of the church. Mischaracterizing or belittling each other's views do nothing to help us reach a better understanding of each other. 1
The Nehor Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 It is my faith and testimony that compel me to desire legal and spiritual recognition of gay marriages. And I know that there are many who believe similarly. It has nothing to do with societal trends. So if you were living in say, 1940, you are sure your faith and testimony would lead you down this same path?
Tacenda Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 You got a rep point on a blank post? How do I do that?He was making a point.
teddyaware Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 It is my faith and testimony that compel me to desire legal and spiritual recognition of gay marriages. And I know that there are many who believe similarly. It has nothing to do with societal trends.12 There is a away which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death. (Proverbs 14)
rockpond Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 12 There is a away which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death. (Proverbs 14)That's why I try to follow the Spirit and not man.
Mystery Meat Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 That's why I try to follow the Spirit and not man.I have had my own spiritual experiences with this topic that contradict yours. who wins?
Mystery Meat Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 (edited) Yes, this was a remarkable preface indeed.I found it meaningful in the context of what was soon to follow in his speech: a caution against the unwise use of technology; a denouncement of and warning against pornography; and a bold and explicit affirmation of the Church's doctrine relative to marriage.He seemed implicitly to be addressing those who, on the matter of the redefinition of marriage, for example, argue in essence that the Brethren hold to the positions that they do because they are old, out-of-touch ("living in a bubble") sticks-in-the-mud who can't muster the gumption to go to God and get Him to change His mind on the law of chastity so that the Church's position more closely matches shifting societal trends.On the contrary, Elder Ballard presents himself as a "watchman on the tower," an original signatory to the proclamation on the family, and one whose duty is to warn the people to keep the commandments of God.I note also the timeliness and relevance of his remarks on this occasion. He was addressing an audience who are part of the demographic of those who, if polls are any indication, are most apt to use social media and other new technological tools and to embrace shifts in attitudes about marriage.I am grateful for the clarity and candor with which he approached this assignment.I wonder if the day will ever come where members of the church accept that the proclamation to the family is doctrine? Edited May 8, 2014 by lvjd66
rockpond Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 (edited) So if you were living in say, 1940, you are sure your faith and testimony would lead you down this same path?I assume so. But I'm not saying that I have not been effected by my environment at all. I'm saying that I'm not hoping for the church to change to match societal trends. I'm hoping for the church to change because I think it's the right thing to do. Scott's original comment that sparked this sub-thread suggested that gay marriage proponents considered the apostles to be "stick in the mud" types that were incapable of seeing the light. But then he went on to do the same thing to the gay marriage proponents in suggesting that they are somehow slaves to societal trends.These types of portrayals of each other get us nowhere. Edited May 8, 2014 by rockpond 1
The Nehor Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 I assume so. But I'm not saying that I have not been effected by my environment at all. I'm saying that I'm not hoping for the church to change to match societal trends. I'm hoping for the church to change because I think it's the right thing to do.Scott's original comment that sparked this sub-thread suggested that gay marriage proponents considered the apostles to be "stick in the mud" types that were incapable of seeing the light. But then he went on to do the same thing to the gay marriage proponents in suggesting that they are somehow slaves to societal trends.These types of portrayals of each other get us nowhere. These portrayals may get us nowhere in discussion but that does not necessarily make them false. I have my doubts that discussion will avail us anything on this issue in any case.
rockpond Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 These portrayals may get us nowhere in discussion but that does not necessarily make them false. I have my doubts that discussion will avail us anything on this issue in any case. There's that positive attitude! For me, the portrayal is false. I also have not represented the other side in the way that Scott suggested is done by gay marriage proponents.
The Nehor Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 There's that positive attitude! I prefer a realistic attitude. The prophecies regarding the establishment of the Kingdom of God and the Return of the King suggest that right will not eventually win through sweet reason and rational discourse. For me, the portrayal is false. I also have not represented the other side in the way that Scott suggested is done by gay marriage proponents. I think it is a fair portrayal in general. I am even okay with calling them wicked. I know this might hurt their sensitive and delicate feelings and I'm okay with that too.
rockpond Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 I prefer a realistic attitude. The prophecies regarding the establishment of the Kingdom of God and the Return of the King suggest that right will not eventually win through sweet reason and rational discourse. I think it is a fair portrayal in general. I am even okay with calling them wicked. I know this might hurt their sensitive and delicate feelings and I'm okay with that too. Is it civil to call them "wicked"? Haven't we been asked to treat each other civilly with respect to this issue? 1
The Nehor Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 Is it civil to call them "wicked"? Haven't we been asked to treat each other civilly with respect to this issue? Yes and Yes.
CV75 Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 Be that as it may... It is a misrepresentation to suggest that we are just wanting the church to align with societal trends when, in fact, we hope for church acceptance of gay marriage due to deeply held religious beliefs and moral convictions about civil rights. We're all members of the church. Mischaracterizing or belittling each other's views do nothing to help us reach a better understanding of each other.The point of demonstrating that “wanting the church to align with societal trends” is the same as hoping “for church acceptance of gay marriage (which is a societal trend)" -- regardless of one’s “deeply held religious beliefs and moral convictions about civil rights” -- is not to belittle, but to clarify.
rockpond Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 The point of demonstrating that “wanting the church to align with societal trends” is the same as hoping “for church acceptance of gay marriage (which is a societal trend)" -- regardless of one’s “deeply held religious beliefs and moral convictions about civil rights” -- is not to belittle, but to clarify.I don't believe that the intent of Scott's comment was to clarify.
Gray Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 I think it's fair to say that the general authorities are just as influenced by the shifting trends of their own heyday as younger church members are by theirs.
CV75 Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 I don't believe that the intent of Scott's comment was to clarify.I was speaking only for myself of my own comments.
rockpond Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 I was speaking only for myself of my own comments.Then you would agree if I said that President Kimball removed the priesthood and temple ban in 1978 to bring the church up to the current societal trend?Just to clarify.
CV75 Posted May 8, 2014 Posted May 8, 2014 Then you would agree if I said that President Kimball removed the priesthood and temple ban in 1978 to bring the church up to the current societal trend?Just to clarify.No, I think it was the Lord's doing and I can see the divinity in what He did without attributing that divinity to any dependent association with any of the innumerable societal trends going on anywhere in the world at the time.
rockpond Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 No, I think it was the Lord's doing and I can see the divinity in what He did without attributing that divinity to any dependent association with any of the innumerable societal trends going on anywhere in the world at the time.I agree. Similarly, I hope for the day when the Lord will allow for recognition of gay marriage within the church because its His will, without attributing that divinity to any dependent association with societal trends. (Other than the fact that something usually needs to prompt the question, which was also the case for lifting the ban in 1978.)
Scott Lloyd Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 I don't believe that the intent of Scott's comment was to clarify.And you would be wrong -- about my intent, that is.
rockpond Posted May 9, 2014 Posted May 9, 2014 And you would be wrong -- about my intent, that is.So your intent was to "clarify"? Because it doesn't seem that you did. I, and many others who feel likewise, could care less about societal trends. We want recognition for gay marriage because we believe that it is the morally correct thing to do.
Recommended Posts