Should Bishops turn the microphone off on "other" testimonies?

[Tacenda]

5 hours ago, rpn said:

I like to hope that if I'd been bishop, I would have stood after the child was done, at the end of the meeting and taught the correct principles, including that no one with same gender attraction should walk the walk in loneliness because everyone in that ward would be walking with them, helping them be strong in the challenges that face them, genuinely loving them, and even hugging them if that is what she wants or needs.  That it is possible to love and nurture and serve our brothers and sisters who think, act, believe, sin  differently than we do, and to make the ward a community of people who love Jesus Christ and seek always to do His will, and that the bishop expected this ward to rise to the challenge in doing so.

Bravo!

[Robert F. Smith]

22 minutes ago, longview said:

 

Quote

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, we need to be tolerant of diverse lifestyles.

................................................  

“Vice is a monster of so frightful mien
As to be hated needs but to be seen;
Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face,
We first endure, then pity, then embrace.”

― Alexander Pope

“Blessed is he who expects nothing, for he shall never be disappointed.” 
― Alexander Pope

 

“To err is human, to forgive, divine.” 
― Alexander Pope, An Essay on Criticism

 

“Charms strike the sight, but merit wins the soul.” 
― Alexander Pope, The Rape of the Lock

 

“Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.” 
― Alexander Pope, An Essay on Criticism

 Pope is brilliant, but your point?

Edited June 18, 2017 by Robert F. Smith

[california boy]

7 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

You did respond, but what would that thread be entitled, if you world rather respond in another thread? Tell me and I will do so...

How about "When are church leaders speaking for God and when are they just giving their own opinions"  Or "Should church leaders say they are speaking for God when they have not actually received a revelation"  Or how about "When church leaders have not received a revelation from God in an issue, should it be called doctrine or just church policy"

Edited June 18, 2017 by california boy

[california boy]

3 hours ago, Meerkat said:

Thanks for your response.  I agree with your statement " I am entirely ready to receive what ever God has in store for me.  I will let Him sort this out and trust him, rather than man."  That's how I feel about my own salvation.  Whatever I get is way beyond what I deserve no matter where I end up.  Also, many of the issues are so complicated, God will need to sort them out. We justify the choices we make as best we can.  I can't answer for what I would do in your circumstances.  The Scriptures are full of examples, people who have had harder trials than mine. That's where I go to try to support my choices. My sincere question is where in the scriptures, ancient or modern revelation, can I find God endorsing or approving a same sex relationship?  

 

I am so tempted to answer your question, but I think it is off track of this thread.  I do think it is a very important question.  Perhaps you can start a thread asking that question or pm me.  I would be glad to give you my opinion.  I think it is a very important question to answer.  Obviously this issue is an issue that many people are concerned about.

[MorningStar]

I don't think the microphone should be turned off.  I think there should be a gong.  Or a reminder every single time as to what a real testimony is, that children should testify without help, etc.  

[Meerkat]

14 minutes ago, california boy said:

I am so tempted to answer your question, but I think it is off track of this thread.  I do think it is a very important question.  Perhaps you can start a thread asking that question or pm me.  I would be glad to give you my opinion.  I think it is a very important question to answer.  Obviously this issue is an issue that many people are concerned about.

Okay.  I will start another thread with this question: "Where in the scriptures, ancient or modern, can I find a pattern of God endorsing or approving of a same sex sexual relationship?" I ask the question here first because it pertains to the subject of our young Beehive expressing a desire to marry a same gender spouse and raise a family with God's blessing.  Are you sure you don't want to answer it here?

[california boy]

1 hour ago, Meerkat said:

Okay.  I will start another thread with this question: "Where in the scriptures, ancient or modern, can I find a pattern of God endorsing or approving of a same sex sexual relationship?" I ask the question here first because it pertains to the subject of our young Beehive expressing a desire to marry a same gender spouse and raise a family with God's blessing.  Are you sure you don't want to answer it here?

Perhaps the other thread would be a better place to ask that question.  This thread is about the use of a microphone to control what members say in church.

[longview]

10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 Pope is brilliant, but your point?

First quote of Pope was to rebut your advocacy for being tolerant of diverse lifestyles.  Not all lifestyles are tolerable.  There are numerous examples but I will list a few:

The moslem practice of female genital mutilation (sometimes done on pre-teens).  This procedure removes the clitoris and labias.  There are reports of several moslem girls being subjected to FGM here in the USA (completely UNacceptable).  This is completely different from circumcision which is a sign of the Abrahamic Covenant and a helpful hygiene option for the male.  Whereas FGM enforces moslem subjugation of women and takes away their enjoyment of sex.  Islam teaches that women have only half the value of men.

The homosexual AIDS "holocaust" in 1980's was becoming epidemic and there were serious disagreements on public health oversights for controlling the spread of the disease.  Strangely some health officials bowed to PC pressure to allow unrestrained sexual contacts among homosexuals.  And strangely, many homosexuals welcomed becoming infected! See bathhouse closures.  And lookup  Savage, Michael A. (1986). Maximum Immunity. Houghton Mifflin. p. 207. ISBN 0-395-37910-5.

The other Pope quotations?  Just a public service to MDDB people to reacquaint us of the wonderful and familiar sayings.

Mod: This is off-topic and inflammatory and can result in post removal.

[bluebell]

13 hours ago, Rivers said:

Sounds a bit like Rameumptom testimonies.

Not at all!  They are some of the most humble and Christ like people in the ward.  I think it comes from bishops constantly repeating that a testimony is declarations of beliefs and nothing more.  These members are simply trying to bear their testimonies while being obedient.

[Robert F. Smith]

30 minutes ago, longview said:

First quote of Pope was to rebut your advocacy for being tolerant of diverse lifestyles.  Not all lifestyles are tolerable.  There are numerous examples but I will list a few:

...................................................

The other Pope quotations?  Just a public service to MDDB people to reacquaint us of the wonderful and familiar sayings.

I am a trained historian and anthropologist who is fully aware of the wide diversity of lifestyles worldwide both today and anciently.  I have no illusions about the utility and propriety of any and every lifestyle which one may encounter.  What puzzles me is why you think that Pope's first poem in any way rebutted my call for tolerance of diversity of lifestyles.  Do you really imagine that Pope was that shallow in his thinking?  Or do you just not understand the concept of a pluralistic society?

[longview]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I am a trained historian and anthropologist who is fully aware of the wide diversity of lifestyles worldwide both today and anciently.  I have no illusions about the utility and propriety of any and every lifestyle which one may encounter.  What puzzles me is why you think that Pope's first poem in any way rebutted my call for tolerance of diversity of lifestyles.  Do you really imagine that Pope was that shallow in his thinking?  Or do you just not understand the concept of a pluralistic society?

Pluralism is fine to a point.  But to take away American sovereignty by flooding the country with moslem invaders and allowing 3rd world opportunists to come in to burden the middle class with overflowing public schools, cadillac hospitals for sole use of immigrants, etc.  Making it a legal requirement for Spanish language in governmental functions and various public sector jobs.

Pope was not shallow but his poem is very applicable in many instances.  Is there a reason you have not responded to my two examples of lifestyles that cannot be tolerated in Western civilization?

poster removed

[USU78]

1 hour ago, longview said:

Pluralism is fine to a point.  But to take away American sovereignty by flooding the country with moslem invaders and allowing 3rd world opportunists to come in to burden the middle class with overflowing public schools, cadillac hospitals for sole use of immigrants, etc.  Making it a legal requirement for Spanish language in governmental functions and various public sector jobs.

Pope was not shallow but his poem is very applicable in many instances.  Is there a reason you have not responded to my two examples of lifestyles that cannot be tolerated in Western civilization?

poster removed

Why do we even bother?

[Guest]

13 hours ago, california boy said:

How about "When are church leaders speaking for God and when are they just giving their own opinions"  Or "Should church leaders say they are speaking for God when they have not actually received a revelation"  Or how about "When church leaders have not received a revelation from God in an issue, should it be called doctrine or just church policy"

So a series of loaded questions that are easy fodder to attack the very notion that anyone, or that no one speaks for God? Or most certainly if they (Church Leadership) or scripture ever speak out against a person's sin of choice, and someone takes offense, then they are all lies. This young woman was well prepared, well scripted and someone was there to record it, and to post it. In short, every part of it was an attempt to show how bigoted the Church and Mormons are. It was not about truth, but a hit piece, to entice all viewers to reject our Church, and reject any missionaries who knock on their doors, or for current members to leave and be outraged, for turning off the mic on a child. It would seem that in this digital age, no one can worship in peace, as every talk, lesson and even attending the Temple is sacred to those who wish only to harm, expose, deride and belittle. 

[california boy]

6 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

So a series of loaded questions that are easy fodder to attack the very notion that anyone, or that no one speaks for God? Or most certainly if they (Church Leadership) or scripture ever speak out against a person's sin of choice, and someone takes offense, then they are all lies. This young woman was well prepared, well scripted and someone was there to record it, and to post it. In short, every part of it was an attempt to show how bigoted the Church and Mormons are. It was not about truth, but a hit piece, to entice all viewers to reject our Church, and reject any missionaries who knock on their doors, or for current members to leave and be outraged, for turning off the mic on a child. It would seem that in this digital age, no one can worship in peace, as every talk, lesson and even attending the Temple is sacred to those who wish only to harm, expose, deride and belittle. 

So what do you think the video showed?  Do you think the video showed a church leader full of compassion and love for a 12 year old child struggling to figure out her relationship with the church and with God?  Tell me what truth did you see in the video.  Do you think it made people want to find out more about this church?  One thing is true.  The video captured events as they happened.  No one is denying that.  You just seem to be upset that the video shows how gay children are treated by the Church.  And I say the Church because it is the Church that has created this environment for gay members. 

While I don't fault the stake president for turning off the mike, what this video did recorded is reality for someone who is gay in the Mormon Church.  And 25 pages of criticism is just another example of what a gay Mormon should expect if they try and stay in the church and struggle to figure out how they fit into the plan of happiness.  

All of this makes me very sad.  Both for those that are gay in the Church and the Church itself for what it has done.

 

[mfbukowski]

On 6/17/2017 at 1:22 PM, california boy said:

At one time I would have answered that question without hesitating.  But quite honestly, the more I know about Joseph Smith, the less I trust his claims that everything he did was God's will,  I find some real problems with his multiple accounts of the first vision.  If I can not trust that modern church leaders speak for God, why would I be able to trust past church leaders speak for God.  What I do trust is the feeling I get from God that I am on the path He wants me to follow.  That is very clear for me.

You made me think of a scripture in D&C 46

Pe

I think I am more Verse 13 and less Verse 14.  Some people seem to need to believe on the words of others and have difficulty relying on their own testimony of Christ.  The church is perfect for such people.  Perhaps this is all part of God's plan.

I will say this.  I like a lot of the concepts that Joseph Smith taught.  I have retained a lot of those teachings and continue to practice and believe them in my life.  He is probably the greatest religious leader in recent history.  But do I have a testimony that everything he did came from God.  Not any more.  Too many problems with some of the things he did in the name of God.

Joseph Smith and his claims may very well be the path that God wants many to follow.  I do know that I am not one of those that should continue on that path.  The church is not where I find spirituality in my life.  

Thanks for asking.  That is my sincere answer.  I will try not to derail the thread any more than I have.  

And does that apply to future threads?  I mean why this one and not all the others?

Joseph never claimed that everything he did was God's will.  Perhaps that would be important for all of us to learn and that what we think is right might also not be God's will.

 

Edited June 18, 2017 by mfbukowski

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

While I don't fault the stake president for turning off the mike, what this video did recorded is reality for someone who is gay in the Mormon Church.  And 25 pages of criticism is just another example of what a gay Mormon should expect if they try and stay in the church and struggle to figure out how they fit into the plan of happiness.  

I think most people agreed the Stake President could have handled things better. Yet he was given an unexpected event with no warning in a meeting that the Bishop was missing at. Likewise the testimony doesn't appear to be someone trying to figure things out and get help from the ward but announcing a kind of exit statement. It's not looking for unity with the ward but judging the ward, as the comments in the podcast made clear.

Had the Stake President acted differently things certainly would have been better. But it seems inescapable to ignore the place of the mother in all this who had ample time about how to handle things and lead to this conflict. This simply can in no way shape or form be seen as someone merely trying to figure out how they fit into the plan of happiness.

I certainly wish there were better choices available for our brothers and sisters who are gay. Hopefully further light will come from the Apostles in the future to give God's will. But that seems a completely different question from the event in question. I'd add that I simply don't see people condemning the young woman in the least. Quite the contrary.

Edited June 18, 2017 by clarkgoble

[Robert F. Smith]

5 hours ago, longview said:

Pluralism is fine to a point.  But to take away American sovereignty by flooding the country with moslem invaders and allowing 3rd world opportunists to come in to burden the middle class with overflowing public schools, cadillac hospitals for sole use of immigrants, etc.  Making it a legal requirement for Spanish language in governmental functions and various public sector jobs.

Pope was not shallow but his poem is very applicable in many instances.  Is there a reason you have not responded to my two examples of lifestyles that cannot be tolerated in Western civilization?

poster removed

Anyone can posit strawman examples, as you have, while ignoring the rule of law -- which is primary in our U.S. Constitutional system.  Tolerance is absolutely essential to a pluralistic society.  Substituting hate for tolerance is the dilemma which you face in making a fair-minded analysis.

[carbon dioxide]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Do you think the video showed a church leader full of compassion and love for a 12 year old child struggling to figure out her relationship with the church and with God?  Tell me what truth did you see in the video.  Do you think it made people want to find out more about this church?  One thing is true.  The video captured events as they happened.  No one is denying that.  You just seem to be upset that the video shows how gay children are treated by the Church.  And I say the Church because it is the Church that has created this environment for gay members. 

While I don't fault the stake president for turning off the mike, what this video did recorded is reality for someone who is gay in the Mormon Church.  And 25 pages of criticism is just another example of what a gay Mormon should expect if they try and stay in the church and struggle to figure out how they fit into the plan of happiness.  

All of this makes me very sad.  Both for those that are gay in the Church and the Church itself for what it has done.

Apparently this girl is not struggling with anything.  When she said she was made perfect and that she is gay, she is saying that she is perfect being gay.  What is their struggle with.   There is a time and place for everything.  The Church should do a better job at teaching members what a testimony is.  Too often people go up and give thoughts on a wide range of issues but little of it has to do about the gospel or Christ.   Given the fact that the girl and the parents had to have known that this was going to be controversial, she should have informed the bishop ahead of time to make sure it was ok.  That would not have been hard to do and if the bishop was fine with it, there would not have been a problem.  If the bishop had a problem, it would save everyone from having to deal with it as it happened.  I am confident the parents and the girl did not want to do that.  They wanted the dramatic moment rather than asking themselves was the setting and situation was appropriate.  They set the table up and I guess perhaps want to be called the victim because things turned out as they should have expected.  Lets call it for what it is.  It was disrespect to the bishop for putting him in that position where he had to act.  It could have all been avoided if the parents and the girl showed some class and respect by getting approval ahead of time.

Edited June 18, 2017 by carbon dioxide

[MorningStar]

Remember this one?  Another prepared, non-testimony with a video camera.  The microphone was turned off in this case too.  Testimony meeting is for testimonies - not for stating the church is wrong or that you have the intent of leaving if things don't go your way. 

 

[california boy]

2 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

I think most people agreed the Stake President could have handled things better. Yet he was given an unexpected event with no warning in a meeting that the Bishop was missing at. Likewise the testimony doesn't appear to be someone trying to figure things out and get help from the ward but announcing a kind of exit statement. It's not looking for unity with the ward but judging the ward, as the comments in the podcast made clear.

Had the Stake President acted differently things certainly would have been better. But it seems inescapable to ignore the place of the mother in all this who had ample time about how to handle things and lead to this conflict. This simply can in no way shape or form be seen as someone merely trying to figure out how they fit into the plan of happiness.

I certainly wish there were better choices available for our brothers and sisters who are gay. Hopefully further light will come from the Apostles in the future to give God's will. But that seems a completely different question from the event in question. I'd add that I simply don't see people condemning the young woman in the least. Quite the contrary.

Well personally I don't think a 12 year old has her relationship with God and the church all figured out quite yet.  And I think this girl and her whole family could use all the help the ward is willing to give them.  That is all I am saying.  

[clarkgoble]

6 minutes ago, california boy said:

Well personally I don't think a 12 year old has her relationship with God and the church all figured out quite yet.  And I think this girl and her whole family could use all the help the ward is willing to give them.  That is all I am saying.  

I completely agree with that.

[california boy]

1 hour ago, carbon dioxide said:

Apparently this girl is not struggling with anything.  When she said she was made perfect and that she is gay, she is saying that she is perfect being gay.  What is their struggle with.   There is a time and place for everything.  The Church should do a better job at teaching members what a testimony is.  Too often people go up and give thoughts on a wide range of issues but little of it has to do about the gospel or Christ.   Given the fact that the girl and the parents had to have known that this was going to be controversial, she should have informed the bishop ahead of time to make sure it was ok.  That would not have been hard to do and if the bishop was fine with it, there would not have been a problem.  If the bishop had a problem, it would save everyone from having to deal with it as it happened.  I am confident the parents and the girl did not want to do that.  They wanted the dramatic moment rather than asking themselves was the setting and situation was appropriate.  They set the table up and I guess perhaps want to be called the victim because things turned out as they should have expected.  Lets call it for what it is.  It was disrespect to the bishop for putting him in that position where he had to act.  It could have all been avoided if the parents and the girl showed some class and respect by getting approval ahead of time.

Perhaps the girl and her mother are unaware that they need to pre-screen their testimony with the bishop (stake president) before going to the pulpit.  I personally was unaware of this practice as well and I have heard a lot of controversial doctrine presented in people's testimonies.

Personally I think the gay thing is so tramatic for church leaders they way over react to everything that has the slightest thing to do with a member that is gay.  This is just another example of the reality in the Mormon Church.  It just got recorded this time.  Look at every gay related thread that gets started.  People freak out for pages. There are few topics that don't get people circling the wagons more than someone suggesting that just because they are gay, they can still have a happy and fulfilling life just like everyone else.  

 

[Calm]

"Perhaps the girl and her mother are unaware that they need to pre-screen their testimony with the bishop (stake president) before going to the pulpit."

The parents were aware the speech would cause problems or they wouldn't have said no for months.  The girl had to be as well or she wouldn't have asked her parents' permission in the first place.

If the intent had been to avoid contention, it would have been wise to speak with a leader beforehand no matter what the usual process was.  All involved obviously knew this was not the "usual".

As far as overreaction, it isn't Church leadership who appear to think this is worthy of worldwide news attention.

Edited June 19, 2017 by Calm

[Rain]

3 hours ago, california boy said:

Perhaps the girl and her mother are unaware that they need to pre-screen their testimony with the bishop (stake president) before going to the pulpit.  I personally was unaware of this practice as well and I have heard a lot of controversial doctrine presented in people's testimonies.

Personally I think the gay thing is so tramatic for church leaders they way over react to everything that has the slightest thing to do with a member that is gay.  This is just another example of the reality in the Mormon Church.  It just got recorded this time.  Look at every gay related thread that gets started.  People freak out for pages. There are few topics that don't get people circling the wagons more than someone suggesting that just because they are gay, they can still have a happy and fulfilling life just like everyone else.  

 

You keep using words such as "outrage" and "freak out". I haven't seen that. If it has been happening then it has been happening on both sides. Words like this don't help conversation. The same goes for things like "way over react" when talking about things as simple as turning the mic off. 

[california boy]

6 hours ago, Calm said:

"Perhaps the girl and her mother are unaware that they need to pre-screen their testimony with the bishop (stake president) before going to the pulpit."

The parents were aware the speech would cause problems or they wouldn't have said no for months.  The girl had to be as well or she wouldn't have asked her parents' permission in the first place.

If the intent had been to avoid contention, it would have been wise to speak with a leader beforehand no matter what the usual process was.  All involved obviously knew this was not the "usual".

As far as overreaction, it isn't Church leadership who appear to think this is worthy of worldwide news attention.

I think you are only assuming that the parents thought the speech would cause problems in the way that it did.  I understand that assumption, because your point of view comes from being a member of the church.  It is just as likely that they were worried about their child coming out as gay to everyone all at once.  She had been out to a few family members and a few friends.  Coming out to everyone is a big deal.  Maybe her parents wanted to make absolutely sure she was really to make this next big step now and that she was prepared for it.  Maybe they wanted to make sure she said it exactly the way she felt about being gay.  You only get one chance at doing this.   Coming out is a really big issue for most gay people.  It changes everything.  It is a genie you can't put back in the bottle.  I knew that when I finally cam out, my whole life would change.  And it did.  Everything changed.  Especially with my family.  It took them 15 years to finally get over it.

I can understand why people don't like her statement about wanting to get married.  That goes against church doctrine and she is after all in church.  I have little doubt that she sincerely hopes that will happen.  But I have a different perspective on that as well.  Perhaps it is because I have found someone so special that I absolutely love and cherish in this life.  Nothing about our relationship feels wrong or against God's wishes for me.  In fact just the opposite.  I feel complete.  More complete than I ever did when I was married to a woman.  Being married to a woman is the one that felt wrong and against what I should have ever done.  Honestly, it was that relationship that felt immoral.  That feeling of being deceitful and untruthful to all those around me, especially ward members is ultimately what I could no longer live with.  Obviously the sex was not an important part of our relationship.  But when it did happen, I felt I was having sex with someone I really shouldn't be with.  It felt immoral as well.  When I came out, it was like a big burden that I had been carrying around with me for a very long time was lifted.  It ended up being a very spiritual experience for me.  I knew immediately that I had made the right decision.  When I hear other people's "coming out" stories, they often express similar feelings.

The thing that I am most surprised about and the thing that people seem to be way upset over is her statement about God made her perfect just the way she is.  Many are taking that to mean she thought she was perfect.  I find that a bit of a distortion of what she probably met.  I personally feel like I am gay for a reason.  Since I feel that way, I think that God did have a hand in making me gay.  I have learned so much from dealing with this issue.  And I think my family has learned so much about them dealing with this issue.  It was very difficult.  But all of us came out the other end being more Christ like in how we treat others.