Gay Beehive Delivers Prepared Speech in F&T Meeting - Ends as Expected

[clarkgoble]

6 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

A local news channel was going to air the youtube but changed their minds, maybe it was because of the written rule on not videotaping in chapels.

I'll lay good odds the Tribune does a story on it. It sounds like it's right up their lane. (Not necessarily a complement)

Edited June 15, 2017 by clarkgoble

[cinepro]

Here's more "context" from Savannah's podcast interview:

- She wanted to bear her testimony for months, but parents wouldn't let her.

- Finally, they said "yes" and they wrote several drafts.

- They finally had the "perfect one" for the May F&T meeting.  

- She was happy because she could finally be "out" to everyone and show them "gays aren't weirdos."

- She had people come just to hear her bear her testimony.

- The Bishop is her best friend's father, and Savannah hopes he would have "stood up for her" had he been there (although he didn't know about her situation beforehand).

- She "figured out" she was gay in sixth grade.

- She feels like the Church leaders need to be "more supportive" of the LGBTQ community "instead of being really rude to them and accept them for who they are and let them do what they want to do."

- "I didn't say anything rude about the Church...I talked about Christ and God."

- "People are homophobic because they're afraid they'll become gay."

http://iliketolookforrainbows.com/2017/05/29/episode-2-savannahs-story/

 

 

Edited June 15, 2017 by cinepro

[bluebell]

6 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Those things aren't being stated as doctrine. She is expressing her hope for a happy life. That seems pretty reasonable for a testimony.

There is no doctrine stating that God erred in his creation of certain people.

The only possible area of disagreement is when she states that God wouldn't want her to live her life alone or with someone she's not attracted to. If one conflates the church with God, then it is definitely clear that the church wants people to remain alone or in a marriage to someone she is not attracted to. But that really seems like more of a policy than a doctrine.

 

I think the problem is probably when someone stands up and testifies that they hope that they can be happy in sin (from the church's perspective).  That doesn't seem very reasonable for a testimony at all.

[Jane_Doe]

3 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Here's more "context" from Savannah's podcast interview:

- She wanted to bear her testimony for months, but parents wouldn't let her.

- Finally, they said "yes" and they wrote several drafts.

- They finally had the "perfect one" for the May F&T meeting.  

- She was happy because she could finally be "out" to everyone and show them "gays aren't weirdos."

- She had people come just to hear her bear her testimony.

- The Bishop is her best friend's father, and Savannah hopes he would have "stood up for her" had he been there (although he didn't know about her situation beforehand).

- She "figured out" she was gay in sixth grade.

- She feels like the Church leaders need to be "more supportive" of the LGBTQ community "instead of being really rude to them and accept them for who they are and let them do what they want to do."

- "I didn't say anything rude about the Church...I talked about Christ and God."

- "People are homophobic because they're afraid they'll become gay."

http://iliketolookforrainbows.com/2017/05/29/episode-2-savannahs-story/

 

 

*sigh*

Yes, you can do whatever you want to do, but don't except to have people be ok with whatever you're doing.  In the Gospel we do believe that some things are sinful and are going to speak out against such things.  You still can sin (you have agency), but the Church is still going to speak out about it.  If you believe that certain behaviors are not sinful when the Church has made it quite clear that they are, then you do have a conflict there.  And no, people (for the most part) are not afraid that being gay in contagious. 

Honestly, if she had left out the part of which paraphrases to "and I hope one day to rejoice in sin", it would have been a great testimony.  But she included that in there, and that's a huge conflict.

[JLHPROF]

8 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Here's more "context" from Savannah's podcast interview:

- She wanted to bear her testimony for months, but parents wouldn't let her.

- Finally, they said "yes" and they wrote several drafts.

- They finally had the "perfect one" for the May F&T meeting.

- She was happy because she could finally be "out" to everyone and show them "gays aren't weirdos."

- She had people come just to hear her bear her testimony.

- The Bishop is her best friend's father, and Savannah hopes he would have "stood up for her" had he been there (although he didn't know about her situation beforehand).

- She "figured out" she was gay in sixth grade.

- She feels like the Church leaders need to be "more supportive" of the LGBTQ community "instead of being really rude to them and accept them for who they are and let them do what they want to do."

- "I didn't say anything rude about the Church...I talked about Christ and God."

- "People are homophobic because they're afraid they'll become gay."

http://iliketolookforrainbows.com/2017/05/29/episode-2-savannahs-story/

 

SMH.
How do so many people miss the point?
 

[Teancum]

5 hours ago, ksfisher said:

So the Holy Ghost has witnessed to her that God approves of her desire to live a lesbian lifestyle?

Maybe?  If that is what she claims who are you or I to question it. Or is it only the Holy Ghost speaking when it agrees with what WE think or what THE Church Thinks and says?

[clarkgoble]

16 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Here's more "context" from Savannah's podcast interview:

Did they explain why they were filming? That seems the oddity that makes many suspicious.

[clarkgoble]

7 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Maybe?  If that is what she claims who are you or I to question it. Or is it only the Holy Ghost speaking when it agrees with what WE think or what THE Church Thinks and says?

Of course people question what others claim the Holy Ghost tells them. Are you saying you don't question Warren Jeff's claims of revelation?

[Calm]

5 hours ago, rockpond said:

Seems like an accurate description of what this Beehive was doing.

Just starting the thread as just woke up and obviously the conversation has been going for awhile so ignore if already discussed...

Not really an "accurate description" given she started out with this:  "I don't know if they talk to us but I feel in my heart that they made me and that they love me."

Definitely heartfelt, but she herself makes it clear it is not a witness of the Spirit.

There are probably many other testimonies given that are at the same level, so I don't see the testimony as that unusual for that reason alone.

I haven't watched it and likely won't (I'm too off..but antibiotics are actually working---now I remember why I don't like them and avoid as much as possible---so may tomorrow), so not making judgment on it.

[Danzo]

35 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Here's more "context" from Savannah's podcast interview:

- She wanted to bear her testimony for months, but parents wouldn't let her.

- Finally, they said "yes" and they wrote several drafts.

- They finally had the "perfect one" for the May F&T meeting.  

- She was happy because she could finally be "out" to everyone and show them "gays aren't weirdos."

- She had people come just to hear her bear her testimony.

- The Bishop is her best friend's father, and Savannah hopes he would have "stood up for her" had he been there (although he didn't know about her situation beforehand).

- She "figured out" she was gay in sixth grade.

- She feels like the Church leaders need to be "more supportive" of the LGBTQ community "instead of being really rude to them and accept them for who they are and let them do what they want to do."

- "I didn't say anything rude about the Church...I talked about Christ and God."

- "People are homophobic because they're afraid they'll become gay."

http://iliketolookforrainbows.com/2017/05/29/episode-2-savannahs-story/

 

 

Sounds like quite a production.  Rehearsed. Special audience invited.  Video Recording provided.  

Hope everyone enjoyed the show. Did anyone bring popcorn?

 (next time they could sell tickets)

Edited June 16, 2017 by Danzo

[Duncan]

I wonder what would have happened if no one had turned her mic off? would it be an issue? or online? I gotta say I wish I had a recorder for some things i've heard over the pulpit. facebook has a "overheard over the pulpit" group even

Edited June 15, 2017 by Duncan

[Teancum]

11 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Of course people question what others claim the Holy Ghost tells them. Are you saying you don't question Warren Jeff's claims of revelation?

Active LSD here lean on the testimony of the Holy Ghost as being the ultimate way to know truth. But is only is ok was long as it agrees with their truth.  I am not allowed to question your testimony am I? 

Personally I find this a horrible and unreliable way to determine truth as all sorts of people claim some sort of spiritual witness to conflicting things.

I don't think Warren Jeffs has God telling him anything by the Holy Ghost,   Nor likely is he telling you or anyone else by the Holy Ghost.  The methodology has to be testable and consistent to be reliable.

So I question everyone's claims of revelation or a witness, testimony, spiritual experience, epiphany and so on since there are so many claims of such that conflict.

 

 

[Calm]

14 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

Honestly, if she had left out the part of which paraphrases to "and I hope one day to rejoice in sin", it would have been a great testimony.  But she included that in there, and that's a huge conflict.

What you posted is not a paraphrase, but a commentary.  She obviously does not believe it is sin.

If you had said 'if she left out the part which amounts to in church doctrine "I hope one day to rejoice in sin"'...you might be more accurate.  Having not seen it and too tired to refresh myself on the nuances of what the Church teaches these days about homosexual sexual/romantic behaviour (and I think it matters to pay attention to how things are currently taught because I do believe our leaders are prayerfully seeking the Lord's counsel as well as others more aware of experiences of LGB+ and those who identify as having same sex attractions...I am labeling two separate groups here by how they choose to identify), I am withholding my confidence that "rejoice" is fully accurate as I am not sure if one believes one is just doing what is normal and appropriately natural, that would be seen as "rejoicing in sin" though I believe in the past, this is how church doctrine probably portrayed it.

[Calm]

6 hours ago, rockpond said:

That's my impression.  She is certainly using the same kind of language that we (Mormons) traditionally use to convey such, so I have no reason to doubt her.

Except for the part she doesn't know if God talks to us.  Never heard that in a testimony before...

I wouldn't be surprised if those giving testimonies felt that way at times, but generally I would expect them to assume .God talks to us even if they haven't had that experience yet, but they hope to have that experience soon.  That God talks to us is rather foundational to .LDS doctrine and belief.

Edited June 15, 2017 by Calm

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

Who is emulating the woman in a gay marriage?  I certainly do not consider myself a woman in any sense at all.  And neither does my partner.

On the other hand, my friend David C. Martin, a gay LDS member, left his wife and children so that he could be a "wife" to another man -- so he stated to me.  He was living in St Louis at the time, and has since passed away (1939-1992).

[Robert F. Smith]

23 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Active LSD here lean on the testimony of the Holy Ghost as being the ultimate way to know truth. But is only is ok was long as it agrees with their truth.  I am not allowed to question your testimony am I? 

Personally I find this a horrible and unreliable way to determine truth as all sorts of people claim some sort of spiritual witness to conflicting things.

I don't think Warren Jeffs has God telling him anything by the Holy Ghost,   Nor likely is he telling you or anyone else by the Holy Ghost.  The methodology has to be testable and consistent to be reliable.

So I question everyone's claims of revelation or a witness, testimony, spiritual experience, epiphany and so on since there are so many claims of such that conflict.

Of course, Moses and Jesus faced the same quandary:  How can we know anything for certain?  The problem is epistemological.  Not sure that LSD is the answer, though.  

 

[Calm]

7 hours ago, Rain said:

No, what speaks out to YOU is that.  What speaks out to me is that the main purpose was USING a child and that makes me angry if it is an adult doing that. 

I think if my child were wanting to do this, I have no problem with writing it down and working on it ahead of time in order to get the best wording to express how and what she wants to say.  Once written, I would go in with her to discuss it with the Bishop and get his opinion on what was and was not acceptable to say across the pulpit during Testimony meeting.  Thus leaders would know what to expect and it wouldn't turn Testimony Meeting into a public forum.  I would also have her ask her friends if any were invited not to record it, not record it myself, but if she wanted a personal record of it, record her at home.  

If she still wanted to give the whole speech as presented (because if accurately portrayed here, I see it as a speech and not a testimony), I would have her do it at home to those she invited to hear it and then let her if wanted, post it online.

 I wouldn't have a problem with her sharing with a few close friends she was going to do this***** but if it was widely shared, it comes across as more of a public protest.

I don't think one can promote it as following the same standards as other testimonies when so many of those standards are ignored in the production of the video, especially knowing her future view was contrary to church teachings.

*****If the outline provided is correct, it comes across less of a testimony and more a public declaration of personal beliefs to me.  Having it recorded and shared online, it comes across now to me more of a manifesto...it is being used not to allow this young woman to share her beliefs with friends and family, but as a public statement, whose intent now appears to be to shame her leaders and the Church to sway public opinion.  I find this to be an inappropriate use of Testimony Meeting.

I may edit this later if I come across info that corrects my view that she knew what she was saying was contrary to Church doctrine, that there were more than just one or two friends invited for emotional support, that it was with her approval that it was recorded and it was with her approval that it was shared online.

Edited June 16, 2017 by Calm

[MormonVideoGame]

28 minutes ago, Calm said:

 That God talks to us is rather foundational to .LDS doctrine and belief.

True, but there are no unambiguous details in church publications on how to recognize or detect the Holy Ghost.

For Carolyn LeDuc holy ghost revelation is a "drastically better" life. 

https://www.lds.org/new-era/2010/02/waiting-for-my-testimony?lang=eng

48 minutes ago, Calm said:

Definitely heartfelt, but she herself makes it clear it is not a witness of the Spirit.

Or perhaps she didn't recognize it?  

34 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Personally I find this a horrible and unreliable way to determine truth as all sorts of people claim some sort of spiritual witness to conflicting things.

They tell me all religions are of God, the only difference is that the LDS church has priesthood ordinances.  

Edited June 16, 2017 by MormonVideoGame

[Rain]

3 hours ago, juliann said:

Explain the doctrine more thoroughly and convincingly without making it about gays. My concern is with anything that might remove woman from creation in any situation. It is a philosophical concern but one I don't see discussed. What is the natural consequence of eliminating the woman half of an eternal marriage? What does it say about women if men think another man can be substituted for a woman. Talking about eternity here.

I have that concern as well, but it goes both ways. I don't want to remove the man in creation either. I suspect you feel similar, but you are more concerned about women because of how women are missing from so many of our teachings.

[Rain]

Let me be clear on something. Had this only been a testimony that was written down it wouldn't have phased me. It was the controversial topic plus the ideas against our doctrine (I realize only some feel that way) plus the writing it down plus the videoing of it that bothered me. The combination of those things said something more to me than "testimony".

[Ouagadougou]

10 minutes ago, Rain said:

Let me be clear on something. Had this only been a testimony that was written down it wouldn't have phased me. It was the controversial topic plus the ideas against our doctrine (I realize only some feel that way) plus the writing it down plus the videoing of it that bothered me. The combination of those things said something more to me than "testimony".

But it would be ok with you if a parent stood behind a child as young as 5 and whispered every word into this child's ear to then repeat to the entire congregation as a  personal "testimony?"  

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 minute ago, Ouagadougou said:

But it would be ok with you if a parent stood behind a child as young as 5 and whispered every word into this child's ear to then repeat to the entire congregation as a  personal "testimony?"  

No.
 

[carbon dioxide]

8 hours ago, cinepro said:

1. I believe that if God is there, he knows I am perfect, just the way I am.

That alone is very wrong.  Nobody is perfect.  We are all sinners and called to repent.  We are commanded to overcome our faults and weaknesses.  Not celebrate them or magnify them.  Taking what she said, every person could justify themselves of whom they are and what they naturally temped to do.  An alcoholic could justify their drinking because they physiologically predisposed to alcoholism.  God made them that way so might as well down the whiskey.  A child abuser or a thief would justify their behavior because God made them that way.  Someone who does porn could justify their actions because God made them hypersexual.  There is nothing natural about monogamy.  Everyone could justify their unique natural tendencies because God made them that way.  But if one believes the natural man is an enemy to God, then the entire argument falls apart.  It does not matter whether one is born gay or not or an alcoholic or not.  What matters if one is willing to sacrifice their natural will and do God's will.  Those that do obtain Celestial glory.  Those that don't get something less.

[Gray]

1 hour ago, Danzo said:

Sounds like quite a production.  Rehearsed. Special audience invited.  Video Recording provided.  

Hope everyone enjoyed the show. Did anyone bring popcorn?

 (next time they could sell tickets)

Why so cynical? Do you take the same attitude when GAs bear testimony on camera, no doubt with rehearsal before hand?

[birdgirl]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Except for the part she doesn't know if God talks to us.  Never heard that in a testimony before...

I wouldn't be surprised if those giving testimonies felt that way at times, but generally I would expect them to assume .God talks to us even if they haven't had that experience yet, but they hope to have that experience soon.  That God talks to us is rather foundational to .LDS doctrine and belief.

I think if she was heterosexual (as far as anyone knew) and a 12 year old said she didn't know if God spoke to her but she felt loved and accepted by Him church leaders would tell her that was how her Heavenly Father communicated via the Holy Ghost.  

She failed to use the "I know" template but, either way, a testimony can be accepted or disqualified by what follows no matter how passionate the "knowledge."