jkwilliams Posted July 20, 2016 Posted July 20, 2016 On July 19, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Jeanne said: I am not going to reply to you CountryBoy. I can write anything and you assume the very worst in me. I have asked you why before. So..what ever I write seems to rub you the wrong way. But sometimes I have no agenda..just asking a question or stating an opinion. An example of judgement..is what you do to me. That's what the Ignore feature is for. 1
UtahTexan Posted July 20, 2016 Posted July 20, 2016 5 hours ago, california boy said: I have never attributed satanic motives to the right of the church to speak out. I have only attributed satanic acts to forcing others to follow the church's beliefs. You can accuse me all you want of being animately against the church working to take away the civil rights of gay couples. What you can't do is accuse me of ever saying that the church did not have the right to speak out. I think you are smart enough to see the difference. I am not sure anyone is trying to force you to follow the Church's beliefs. I think you wither accept the beliefs, teachings and practices, or don't. Be Mormon, and all it entails, or don't be Mormon. 5 hours ago, california boy said: What is American is being allowed to speak in the public square. What is un-American is working to take away someone's civil rights. It is not un-American to ask you to follow the Church or not. Nor does it violate your Civil Rights.
Jeanne Posted July 20, 2016 Posted July 20, 2016 10 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: That's what the Ignore feature is for. Didn't even think of that. Sometimes I am so tired from work and just want to communicate..not fight a battle!
smac97 Posted July 20, 2016 Posted July 20, 2016 (edited) 14 minutes ago, california boy said: Let's make this simple. If you can give one reason why the Mormon church encouraged members to donated 20 million dollars and 70% of the manpower to take away the civil rights of gays to marry other than to force them to abide by the churches definition of marriage of only between one man and one woman then I will withdraw my accusation that the church was forcing gay couples to follow the churches beliefs on marriage. I could give a number number of reasons. A number of them are self-evident to anyone remotely familiar with the LDS Church and its beliefs about the Law of Chastity and marriage. And there are also many secular reasons as well. And many of these reasons are already available to you. And since they are already available to you, I don't believe your offer is in good faith. Any reason you don't like you'll reject as not a reason. Not unlike how you reject the possibility that people who view the world differently from you might have had principled, good faith reasons for supporting and voting for Prop 8. Nope. Reasonable minds cannot disagree about such things. Centuries of precedent don't matter to you. Baker v. Nelson doesn't matter to you. It's your way or the highway. That others voted in a way you don't like means they were motivated by Satan (I'm not sure if you are leveling such an outrageous slur against all seven million Californians who voted for Prop 8, or if you are reserving it just for the Mormon ones). That's your position. It's a sickening, vile, false, hateful accusation, and I think considerably less of you for it. Both for saying it in the first place and then doubling and tripling down when called on it. -Smac Edited July 20, 2016 by smac97 2
jkwilliams Posted July 20, 2016 Posted July 20, 2016 2 minutes ago, Jeanne said: Didn't even think of that. Sometimes I am so tired from work and just want to communicate..not fight a battle! It's impossible to have a reasonable discussion with some people, and the Ignore feature is great because you have to actively do something to read their posts. Just that little required extra step is usually enough to remind me not to bother.
Jeanne Posted July 20, 2016 Posted July 20, 2016 4 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: It's impossible to have a reasonable discussion with some people, and the Ignore feature is great because you have to actively do something to read their posts. Just that little required extra step is usually enough to remind me not to bother. Thanks!!
california boy Posted July 21, 2016 Author Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) 37 minutes ago, smac97 said: I could give a number number of reasons. A number of them are self-evident to anyone remotely familiar with the LDS Church and its beliefs about the Law of Chastity and marriage. And there are also many secular reasons as well. And many of these reasons are already available to you. And since they are already available to you, I don't believe your offer is in good faith. Any reason you don't like you'll reject as not a reason. Not unlike how you reject the possibility that people who view the world differently from you might have had principled, good faith reasons for supporting and voting for Prop 8. Nope. Reasonable minds cannot disagree about such things. Centuries of precedent don't matter to you. Baker v. Nelson doesn't matter to you. It's your way or the highway. That others voted in a way you don't like means they were motivated by Satan (I'm not sure if you are leveling such an outrageous slur against all seven million Californians who voted for Prop 8, or if you are reserving it just for the Mormon ones). That's your position. It's a sickening, vile, false, hateful accusation, and I think considerably less of you for it. Both for saying it in the first place and then doubling and tripling down when called on it. -Smac Yet the sole reason remains for the church involvement on prop 8. They wanted to force gay couples to conform to their beliefs on marriage. And they did it by taking their civil rights away from them guaranteed them by the constitution of the state of California. And that is the statement that I made that you don't like. So shoot the messenger Edited July 21, 2016 by california boy
carbon dioxide Posted July 21, 2016 Posted July 21, 2016 39 minutes ago, california boy said: Let's make this simple. If you can give one reason why the Mormon church encouraged members to donated 20 million dollars and 70% of the manpower to take away the civil rights of gays to marry other than to force them to abide by the churches definition of marriage of only between one man and one woman then I will withdraw my accusation that the church was forcing gay couples to follow the churches beliefs on marriage. I never was a big fan of it at the time since I believed Prop 8 would win regardless based on what currently was going on in the nation. However I did not see anything inconsistent with what the Church is supposed to do. The Church and the members are supposed to stand for Christ in all places and situations especially when it maybe not popular. It also encourages members to be politically and morally engaged in society. The Church did not demand members donate and those that did not were not punished. Nor were members who were against Prop 8. In my estimation, whether Prop 8 won or lost was secondary. The members got an opportunity to stand for Christ on an important issue. For me its never been about denying "civil" rights to another person. That has never been a motivation for me even if those actions might lead to that. It has always been for standing for correct principles and practices even if that means some people might not like it, disagrees, or is hurt in some way. Wickedness and righteousness will always offend each other. Unfortunately sometimes people might be hurt when one has to take a stand. 1
california boy Posted July 21, 2016 Author Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) 40 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said: I never was a big fan of it at the time since I believed Prop 8 would win regardless based on what currently was going on in the nation. However I did not see anything inconsistent with what the Church is supposed to do. The Church and the members are supposed to stand for Christ in all places and situations especially when it maybe not popular. It also encourages members to be politically and morally engaged in society. The Church did not demand members donate and those that did not were not punished. Nor were members who were against Prop 8. In my estimation, whether Prop 8 won or lost was secondary. The members got an opportunity to stand for Christ on an important issue. For me its never been about denying "civil" rights to another person. That has never been a motivation for me even if those actions might lead to that. It has always been for standing for correct principles and practices even if that means some people might not like it, disagrees, or is hurt in some way. Wickedness and righteousness will always offend each other. Unfortunately sometimes people might be hurt when one has to take a stand. The intention may not have been to deny anyone's civil rights, but that is what HAD TO HAPPED in order for the church to change the laws of California to conform to their beliefs. And they were willing to do just that to force gays from being able to marry If course the church is expected to stand up for its teachings. But it manages to do that with all its other teachings without passing laws that force others to follow those teachings. Gay marriage does not threaten how the church practices marriage. Edited July 21, 2016 by california boy
Guest Posted July 22, 2016 Posted July 22, 2016 On July 15, 2016 at 2:09 AM, california boy said: I feel like before I even ask or address any question, I need to be crystal clear about one thing. I understand the church's position is no sex ever if you are gay. The church believes this is immoral behavior. I completely respect that position and I have never and will never ask or demand that the church change it's position. Let's all this an immutable statement. It is against the doctrine of the church to have sex with the same gender under ANY situation. I promise not to ask or demand that the church change their position. And I ask that you not accuse me of asking or demanding that the church change it's position on this part of the Law of Chastity. Can we agree with that? Are we good so far? Of course there is a plan of happiness, and God has prepared many houses for his children...each according to his will for all except the "Son's of Perdition". What you have in bold print is not Church doctrine, it is Judeo-Christian doctrine, Biblical Doctrine. From the days of Adam until these Latter-days. This is not Mormon thing.
Robert F. Smith Posted July 24, 2016 Posted July 24, 2016 On 7/20/2016 at 6:42 PM, california boy said: .................................................... Here or on a new thread, could you review the following books by Carol Lynn Pearson: The Hero's Journey of the Gay and Lesbian Mormon. Walnut Creek: Pivot Point Books, 2012. Paperback. Reg. $14.99, SALE $4.99. No More Goodbyes: Circling the Wagons around Our Gay Loved Ones. Walnut Creek: Pivot Point Books, 2007. Paperback. $14.95.
california boy Posted July 25, 2016 Author Posted July 25, 2016 10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: Here or on a new thread, could you review the following books by Carol Lynn Pearson: The Hero's Journey of the Gay and Lesbian Mormon. Walnut Creek: Pivot Point Books, 2012. Paperback. Reg. $14.99, SALE $4.99. No More Goodbyes: Circling the Wagons around Our Gay Loved Ones. Walnut Creek: Pivot Point Books, 2007. Paperback. $14.95. I haven't read the first book you mentioned. But a friend did give me "circle the wagons". It has been s while since I read it. So I can't really give you a review on it. I just remember reading it on a plane and having a very hard time keeping the tears from.flowing. Sorry I can't give a better answer. I did pass it on to my father who was treating me pretty badly at the time
Recommended Posts