Dan Peterson on the family proclamation

[consiglieri]

13 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

As far as I can tell, the only one to have made a fuss over it was Sister Okazaki, and that was years after the fact, when she had long since been released and was well into her book-writing and speech-making career.  . . . I earnestly disapprove of her publicly second-guessing the Brethren about the manner in which the family proclamation was created and introduced, and I think it unseemly for one having held the position she did. 

I can't believe you actually wrote that, Scott!

First, you have just let everybody know why it is impossible to have an honest discussion with you about Mormonism--because you disapprove of anybody "publicly second-guessing the Brethren."

This means that no matter how you may actually feel, you are never going to spout anything other than the party line.  You have no intention of saying what you really think, but only what you think you ought to say.

How does this square with being a journalist, I wonder?

And nice job smearing Sister Okazaki with the implication the only reason she said this was for profit; i.e., she "was well into her book-writing and speech-making career."

Classy move, Scott.

[jkwilliams]

10 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

I can't believe you actually wrote that, Scott!

First, you have just let everybody know why it is impossible to have an honest discussion with you about Mormonism--because you disapprove of anybody "publicly second-guessing the Brethren."

This means that no matter how you may actually feel, you are never going to spout anything other than the party line.  You have no intention of saying what you really think, but only what you think you ought to say.

How does this square with being a journalist, I wonder?

And nice job smearing Sister Okazaki with the implication the only reason she said this was for profit; i.e., she "was well into her book-writing and speech-making career."

Classy move, Scott.

I have a hard time with the attitude that any expression of disagreement is a sign of bad faith, whether it's motivated by profit or anything else. People disagree with the brethren, and it's silly to ask them to shut up and face the right way. This is what I mean by a practical infallibility. We're not talking about direct opposition or attack, just Sister Okazaki expressing that she wished things had been handled differently, and yet that's somehow disloyal and unseemly. I guess I don't relate to that attitude at all. My father taught me to expect church leaders to sometimes make mistakes. Why pretend we think they're infallible?

Edited May 19, 2016 by jkwilliams

[stemelbow]

13 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

I can't believe you actually wrote that, Scott!

First, you have just let everybody know why it is impossible to have an honest discussion with you about Mormonism--because you disapprove of anybody "publicly second-guessing the Brethren."

This means that no matter how you may actually feel, you are never going to spout anything other than the party line.  You have no intention of saying what you really think, but only what you think you ought to say.

How does this square with being a journalist, I wonder?

And nice job smearing Sister Okazaki with the implication the only reason she said this was for profit; i.e., she "was well into her book-writing and speech-making career."

Classy move, Scott.

Years ago in college I gathered with a group of friends to socialize a bit.  The topic of the recent General Conference was there and I interjected the notion that the conference was boring, the same as previous ones and it seemed to lack much inspiration.  This was a mix of active--to not active--to not LDS at all.  One of my pretty good friends pretty much disowned me after that, or it felt like.  His face was drenched in terror when I said what I said, as if I had made a deal with the devil.  This was 97-98 time frame. 

Anywho, just wanted to point out, Scott's view isn't really surprising.  But I'm not sure I see a significant difference in disagree with Sister Okazaki (even if it was after she was released from her general leadership calling) and disagreeing with Thomas S Monson.  It's a mystifying control that clouds.  It's unseemly and concerning to me.  But it's not uncommon. 

[Gray]

15 hours ago, CV75 said:

Not in my book. 

 

You don't get to decide whether or not other people are happy. 

 

Edited May 19, 2016 by Gray

[SeekingUnderstanding]

 

9 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Sounds like speculative anti-Mormon hate propaganda to me.  Yes members donated lots of money, but they did not constitute anywhere near the high amounts you suggest.  California is a huge state with a significant population, less than 2% of which is Mormon.

I lived in a town in the bay area with two small wards. Looking over the donor list and adding it up (just the ones I know are LDS - so this is a low estimate as it's been  8 years) and over 80% of the money raised for Prop 8 from that city were members of the church. From talking to former ward members at the time, most of the volunteers going door to door were Mormon too. While obviously LDS only make up 2% of California, a huge amount of the lobbying and ground work was done by latter-day saints. 

Feel free to do your own research if you wish: http://projects.latimes.com/prop8/

[mtomm]

52 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

 I live in California, I was born in California so I have a lot of experience with Californians. No one I knew at the time was Mormon, I was in between wards and inactive and getting ready to sail to the Marquesas Islands. Everyone I knew  voted Yes on Prop 8. So your vivd imagination is telling you something that is not true and was never true. The Church had a minor affect on Prop 8. This is not the Wasatch Front the Church has about zero influence here.To tell yourself otherwise is pure vanity. 

So let's see, you weren't going to church, were between wards and busy getting ready to leave and yet you feel you can  say that the Church only had a minor influence. Okay.  Well, I live in Idaho and I'm currently active and was active in church at the time of Prop 8. Our bishop came into our Relief Society meeting to ask us to help man phone banks at a local university to call California voters.   So my vivid real life experience tells me that the Church tried very, very hard to to influence the vote on Prop 8.  To pretend otherwise is pure vanity.

 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

56 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

 I live in California, I was born in California so I have a lot of experience with Californians. No one I knew at the time was Mormon, I was in between wards and inactive and getting ready to sail to the Marquesas Islands. Everyone I knew  voted Yes on Prop 8. So your vivd imagination is telling you something that is not true and was never true. The Church had a minor affect on Prop 8. This is not the Wasatch Front the Church has about zero influence here.To tell yourself otherwise is pure vanity. 

Obviously most of the people that voted for Prop 8 were not Mormons. A substantial amount of the money and volunteer effort raised to pass Prop 8 was mormon. See the difference?

[jkwilliams]

7 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

 

I lived in a town in the bay area with two small wards. Looking over the donor list and adding it up (just the ones I know are LDS - so this is a low estimate as it's been  8 years) and over 80% of the money raised for Prop 8 from that city were members of the church. From talking to former ward members at the time, most of the volunteers going door to door were Mormon too. While obviously LDS only make up 2% of California, a huge amount of the lobbying and ground work was done by latter-day saints. 

Feel free to do your own research if you wish: http://projects.latimes.com/prop8/

To quote Chico Marx, Who you gonna believe, me or your own eyes?

[rockpond]

1 hour ago, rodheadlee said:

 I live in California, I was born in California so I have a lot of experience with Californians. No one I knew at the time was Mormon, I was in between wards and inactive and getting ready to sail to the Marquesas Islands. Everyone I knew  voted Yes on Prop 8. So your vivd imagination is telling you something that is not true and was never true. The Church had a minor affect on Prop 8. This is not the Wasatch Front the Church has about zero influence here.To tell yourself otherwise is pure vanity. 

I provided a number of concrete examples of how the church's efforts on Prop 8 were not minuscule.  Your response if that you knew non-Mormons who voted Yes on Prop 8.  Well, we already have a pretty good idea of the percentage of non-Mormon voters who voted Yes on Prop 8 (within +/- 2%).  So, your anecdotal evidence is not relevant and does nothing to counter my point:  Church members donated tens of millions of dollars, the Church published propaganda, the Church helped organize/fund/staff a political action committee, and the church had a very organized campaign effort both inside and outside the state of California.  That's not minuscule.

[USU78]

46 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I'm reminded of Pauline Kael's disbelief that Richard Nixon won: "I only know one person who voted for Nixon."

Although you're correct that the church has a relatively minuscule percentage of California's population (my home state, btw), it's pretty clear that the church was punching well above its weight in the Prop. 8 campaign. The church brought two major assets to the table: organization and money.

The church has long held up its organizational skills and ability to get things done as a positive thing. When there is a hurricane or tornado, this organization gets people to work quickly. Hurricane Katrina hit Louisiana on a Monday. By Friday evening there were thousands of us in many towns and cities helping with the clean-up. The church used the same skills to organize for the Prop 8 campaign. BYU students were asked to staff call centers, bishops brought in members to personally call them to donate time and/or money to the cause. And of course, the church was instrumental in setting up anti-gay-marriage organizations in several states.

The other thing the church brought was money, and much of this went hand in hand with its organizational success. Bishops were told to donate (one poster here, who opposed Prop. 8, donated $5,000 to the Yes on 8 campaign because he was a bishop and was told to set an example). Members were called in individually by their priesthood leaders and asked to give money. As someone else said, conservative estimates are that church members donated at least 40% of the money to the Yes on 8 campaign.

It was interesting to me that, in the run-up to the election, a lot of Mormons I know (including people here) were expressing pride in what church members had been able to accomplish, both in terms of organization and money. When the backlash came, suddenly it was the Catholics and the black churches, and the LDS church had a minuscule role.

A nice summary of the virulent, sometimes violent anti-religion, anti-Mormon, homophile cum trendy Lefty views on the infrequent entry of Mormons, individual and corporate, into the public square. Do you agree with the voices demanding the removal of Christian but especially Mormon participation in public debate on matters of interest to Mormons, individual and corporate? 

[rockpond]

10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Sounds like speculative anti-Mormon hate propaganda to me.  Yes members donated lots of money, but they did not constitute anywhere near the high amounts you suggest.  California is a huge state with a significant population, less than 2% of which is Mormon.

Local California LDS members and members of other churches manned the phone banks.  I saw them do it, the same way political phone banks are always manned at election time -- to get out the vote.  There was no secrecy.

Bishops and stake presidents were careful to conduct all such activities outside of LDS Church bldgs, and I did not see them pressuring anyone to donate.

So you are denying that the LDS Church has officially backed equal access to jobs, housing, public accommodations, etc., for homosexuals and other members of the LGBT community?

What you call speculative has been published in numerous places.  Yes, only about 2% of CA is LDS but over 40% of the funds for Yes on 8 were donated by Mormons... does that sound minuscule to you?

I didn't claim any secrecy in the phone banks.  And they were manned by church members outside of California as well... to make calls INTO California in support of Prop 8.  Again, not a minuscule part of the effort to pass Prop 8.

I liked in CA during Prop 22 and served in a bishopric at the time.  While leaders knew that they were supposed to keep all political activities outside of the church, it didn't happen that way.  And I know for a fact that pressure to donate happened both during Prop 22 and during Prop 8... from church leaders to members.  All over CA and other states.  Not a minuscule effort.

The LDS Church backed what they deemed a compromise, for the Church leaders it wasn't about protecting LGBT rights as much as it was about protecting the church's right to continue to discriminate which the bill assured them of their right to do (they made that clear when they responded to headlines after the bill passed).

I thought you believe that Prop 8 was the right thing to do?  If the Church and members worked hard to pass a good law, why do you want to minimize their efforts?

[jkwilliams]

Just now, USU78 said:

A nice summary of the virulent, sometimes violent anti-religion, anti-Mormon, homophile cum trendy Lefty views on the infrequent entry of Mormons, individual and corporate, into the public square. Do you agree with the voices demanding the removal of Christian but especially Mormon participation in public debate on matters of interest to Mormons, individual and corporate? 

Huh? I have no problem with the church being involved in public issues and debate. Where are you getting the idea that I feel otherwise? I'm just surprised that people are denying the church played a major role, almost as if they are embarrassed by the church's activities in the campaign.

And what is anti-Mormon about summarizing the church's involvement? Everything I said is true, and none of it was a criticism of the church.

Honestly, you must have read a lot into my post. 

[rockpond]

6 minutes ago, USU78 said:

A nice summary of the virulent, sometimes violent anti-religion, anti-Mormon, homophile cum trendy Lefty views on the infrequent entry of Mormons, individual and corporate, into the public square. Do you agree with the voices demanding the removal of Christian but especially Mormon participation in public debate on matters of interest to Mormons, individual and corporate? 

He didn't suggest that the Church or Christians shouldn't have been involved in the debate.

[USU78]

Just now, rockpond said:

He didn't suggest that the Church or Christians shouldn't have been involved in the debate.

But you do?

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, rockpond said:

He didn't suggest that the Church or Christians shouldn't have been involved in the debate.

No, I did not. Apparently, summarizing my understanding of the church's involvement in Prop. 8 is evidence of my virulent anti-Mormon and anti-religious hatred. 

I'm with you. I am mystified as to why people want to minimize something they worked hard to do. I've volunteered for political campaigns, both winning and losing, and I'm proud of the work I did, regardless of the outcome.

[rockpond]

6 minutes ago, USU78 said:

But you do?

No.  Why would you even think that?

[jkwilliams]

4 minutes ago, USU78 said:

But you do?

Did he say anything like that, either? Nope.

Why are you so insistent on assigning positions and motivations to us?

[SeekingUnderstanding]

42 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

 

I lived in a town in the bay area with two small wards. Looking over the donor list and adding it up (just the ones I know are LDS - so this is a low estimate as it's been  8 years) and over 80% of the money raised for Prop 8 from that city were members of the church. From talking to former ward members at the time, most of the volunteers going door to door were Mormon too. While obviously LDS only make up 2% of California, a huge amount of the lobbying and ground work was done by latter-day saints. 

Feel free to do your own research if you wish: http://projects.latimes.com/prop8/

Just looked at my inlaws much bigger zipcode in California. Once I got to 2/3 of the money for Prop 8 donated from Latter-day Saints, I stopped counting. I really don't get how this can be looked at as small.

Edited May 19, 2016 by SeekingUnderstanding

[jkwilliams]

7 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Just looked at my inlaws much bigger zipcode in California. Once I got to 2/3 of the money for Prop 8 donated from Latter-day Saints, I stopped counting. I really don't get how this can be looked at as small.

Thanks for the link. In my parents' zip code, I recognize about 40% of the "yes" donors as being members of my parents' ward. Interesting.

[CV75]

46 minutes ago, Gray said:

You don't get to decide whether or not other people are happy.

You obviously misunderstood my comment. In my book, the meaning of "lasting, real happiness" is found in at least two other books:

Abraham 1:2 speaks of the greater happiness found in the blessings of the fathers and the right to administer them. These entail priesthood, knowledge, righteousness, fatherhood, rightful inheritance, a spiritual child of peace (Christ), and desire to receive instructions and to keep the commandments of God. None of these abound in the corrupt ordinance and sacrament of gay marriage.

The Book of Mormon has a lot to say about this happiness and how it is obtained, and I refer you to do a word search of "happiness."

Of course people can find a brand of "happiness" in whatever it is they want to call it, but eternal happiness comes only on the Lord's terms, and that does not involve gay marriage.

[USU78]

14 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Did he say anything like that, either? Nope.

Why are you so insistent on assigning positions and motivations to us?

Just asking obvious questions. 

[USU78]

13 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Just looked at my inlaws much bigger zipcode in California. Once I got to 2/3 of the money for Prop 8 donated from Latter-day Saints, I stopped counting. I really don't get how this can be looked at as small.

If true, is that a bad thing? 

[jkwilliams]

Just now, USU78 said:

Just asking obvious questions. 

Obvious to whom? Neither of us said anything that suggested, even remotely, that we thought religious people and organizations should stay out of the public arena. That your mind went there says more about you than about us.

[USU78]

5 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Thanks for the link. In my parents' zip code, I recognize about 40% of the "yes" donors as being members of my parents' ward. Interesting.

And that was, if true, a bad thing? 

[USU78]

19 minutes ago, rockpond said:

No.  Why would you even think that?

Think what?