In Latter Times Some Shall Forbid Marriage

[Scott Lloyd]

7 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I don't know. I hope not. He has no agenda. He is simply determined to serve others and share the gospel. 

Alas, that seems to mean nothing to some polemicists.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

10 hours ago, california boy said:

There are reasons why people don't like the term SSA.  This is not one of them.  I and others have explained the reasons to you.  You just prefer to disrespect their reasons and wishes to not use that term.  But that is hardly the most offensive thing you do to the gay community.  So do what you want.  The only people that care are those that wish to treat the gay community with respect and decency.

It is clear you don't think it's possible to do that short of total capitulation to the redefinition of marriage. And contrary to your hypersensitive political correctness, I have not done anything to the gay community -- unless it's to joke about a convoluted and unwieldy abbreviation.

By the way, that's not the most unwieldy I've encountered -- although it's beginning to rival it.

The most unwieldy is the abbreviation for the Society for the Preservation and Encouragement of Barbarshop Quartet Singing in America -- or SPEBQSA.

But you know what? I just looked them up on line, and even though they still use the long name for legal and corporate purposes, they have adopted a shortened name now: the Barbarshop Harmony Society. Makes a lot of sense.

 

Edited August 21, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[mfbukowski]

18 hours ago, Calm said:

n ever mind

sorry.  no mas

[california boy]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It is clear you don't think it's possible to do that short of total capitulation to the redefinition of marriage. And contrary to your hypersensitive political correctness, I have not done anything to the gay community -- unless it's to joke about a convoluted and unwieldy acronym.

By the way, that's not the most unwieldy I've encountered -- although it's beginning to rival it.

The most unwieldy is the abbreviation for the Society for the Preservation and Encouragement of Barbarshop Quartet Singing in America -- or SPEBQSA.

But you know what? I just looked them up on line, and even though they still use the long name for legal and corporate purposes, they have adopted a shortened name now: the Barbarshop Harmony Society. Makes a lot of sense.

 

I know you have a difficult time showing respect for the gay community.  I have come to expect it from you. It was just another one of your long list of jabs towards the gay community.   If someone else had joked about it, I probably wouldn't have been irritated by it.  But given your history, and relentless disrespect for the gay community, it came off more an offense than a joke.  

[Jeanne]

11 minutes ago, california boy said:

I know you have a difficult time showing respect for the gay community.  I have come to expect it from you. It was just another one of your long list of jabs towards the gay community.   If someone else had joked about it, I probably wouldn't have been irritated by it.  But given your history, and relentless disrespect for the gay community, it came off more an offense than a joke.  

I agree.  It is kind of sad that such disrespect is so allowed by certain members on the board.  I believe we have all tried hard on both sides to find a common ground in that respect.  I hope some day that Scott will join us in a tone of mutual understanding and empathy in how others feel.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

I know you have a difficult time showing respect for the gay community.  I have come to expect it from you. It was just another one of your long list of jabs towards the gay community.   If someone else had joked about it, I probably wouldn't have been irritated by it.  But given your history, and relentless disrespect for the gay community, it came off more an offense than a joke.  

So this <is> personal then. But not in the way some here have said. 

Edited August 21, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Bernard Gui]

5 hours ago, california boy said:

Well you obviously didn't read the OP.  I never claimed that Paul taught anything about gay marriage.  And actually I also stated that the statement forbidding of marriage was not the teachings of Paul, but rather a prophecy from God concerning the latter days.  Paul probably had no idea why he was given that prophecy.

Gay couples are forbidden to marry in the Mormon church.

So are polygamous couples. So are threesomes. So are minors. So are siblings. So are close relatives. Why the special pleading?

[california boy]

51 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

So this <is> personal then. But my in the way some here have said. 

NO.  It is annoying and disrespectful. 

[Jeanne]

32 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

So are polygamous couples. So are threesomes. So are minors. So are siblings. So are close relatives. Why the special pleading?

This sounds like something from Illinois in the early 1800"s..

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, Jeanne said:

I agree.  It is kind of sad that such disrespect is so allowed by certain members on the board.  I believe we have all tried hard on both sides to find a common ground in that respect.  I hope some day that Scott will join us in a tone of mutual understanding and empathy in how others feel.

 

Jeanne, having seen the way you treat me when you think I'm not looking, such as in MDB pile-ons, I am somewhat disinclined to put much stock in your sermonizing about respect. 

Edited August 21, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

28 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

This sounds like something from Illinois in the early 1800"s..

Non-sequitur. 

And anachronistic. Mormons did not enter Illinois until 1839, and mob violence didn't reach a head until 1844. In fact, the Church wasn't even organized until 1830. 

Edited August 21, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Jeanne]

1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Jeanne, having seen the way you treat me when you think I'm not looking, such as in MDB pile-instead, I am somewhat disinclined to put much stock in your sermonizing about respect. 

Scott, if you will look closely,..there are places where you have had my somewhat support because of who you are and the job that you have.  If I have ever been offensive it is because of the way you treat people here. 

[Bernard Gui]

7 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

This sounds like something from Illinois in the early 1800"s..

Not sure what you mean. 

[ALarson]

Just now, Bernard Gui said:

Not sure what you mean. 

Well, a threesome was hinted at by William Clayton and he was married to 2 sisters....so maybe that's what she was referring to?

[Jeanne]

2 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Not sure what you mean. 

Well...let's just say that it reminded me of polygamy and plural marriage at that time...Didn't two sisters get married to Joseph?  Was Helen Mar 14???  No worries..I am sad and angry on this thread right now...I am backing out. 

[USU78]

29 minutes ago, california boy said:

NO.  It is annoying and disrespectful. 

Glass houses.  As long as you continue to call Mormons liars and abusers, you are hardly in a position to complain about making fun of ridiculously long alphabet soup which must keep track of the ever-changing alliances in your kneck of the kwoods.

[USU78]

16 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Well, a threesome was hinted at by William Clayton and he was married to 2 sisters....so maybe that's what she was referring to?

Pottymouth in no position to judge class clown.

[ALarson]

1 minute ago, USU78 said:

Pottymouth in no position to judge class clown.

?

I have no idea what you're talking about.  Care to clarify?  

I was just answering a question that was posted with a factual answer.

[USU78]

8 minutes ago, ALarson said:

?  I have no idea what you're talking about.  Care to clarify?   I was just answering a question that was posted with a factual answer.

I don't care for your inferences of sexual adventurism in early Church leaders.  It's, moreover, one of the few rules that ought to be enforced hereabouts.

So let's not be coy.  You made the inference and it's pretty clear from context you intended it.

[ALarson]

12 minutes ago, USU78 said:

I don't care for your inferences of sexual adventurism in early Church leaders.  It's, moreover, one of the few rules that ought to be enforced hereabouts.

So let's not be coy.  You made the inference and it's pretty clear from context you intended it.

I'm not the one who introduced the word "threesome" to the discussion.  I actually did think it was possible that Jeanne was referring to what William Clayton wrote in his journal (regarding the two sisters he was married to and the invitation for them to all sleep together....).   Notice I used the word "hinted at" too.

There are plenty of sexual references in the records regarding polygamy.  And,  "pottymouth"???   Are you in 3rd grade?  That made me laugh 

Edited August 21, 2017 by ALarson

[Nemesis]

5 hours ago, Jeanne said:

I agree.  It is kind of sad that such disrespect is so allowed by certain members on the board.  I believe we have all tried hard on both sides to find a common ground in that respect.  I hope some day that Scott will join us in a tone of mutual understanding and empathy in how others feel.

 

Stop your board nannying.  This is the last warning on this issue,  it's time to pick a new hobby horse.  

Nemesis

[SamuelTheLamanite]

5 hours ago, california boy said:

I know you have a difficult time showing respect for the gay community.  I have come to expect it from you. It was just another one of your long list of jabs towards the gay community.   If someone else had joked about it, I probably wouldn't have been irritated by it.  But given your history, and relentless disrespect for the gay community, it came off more an offense than a joke.  

We disagree with the gay community, but we respect them. I am sure many here have gay friends, we don't see gays as inferior.  

[Bernard Gui]

13 hours ago, Jeanne said:

Well...let's just say that it reminded me of polygamy and plural marriage at that time...Didn't two sisters get married to Joseph?  Was Helen Mar 14???  No worries..I am sad and angry on this thread right now...I am backing out. 

What does this have to do with Paul's prophecy on forbidding marriage?

[Scott Lloyd]

4 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

What does this have to do with Paul's prophecy on forbidding marriage?

FYI. I don't think Jeanne will be responding, or even see this, right away. On another board, she reported that she has been banned here until until Aug. 31. 

[JulieM]

18 hours ago, ALarson said:

I'm not the one who introduced the word "threesome" to the discussion.  I actually did think it was possible that Jeanne was referring to what William Clayton wrote in his journal (regarding the two sisters he was married to and the invitation for them to all sleep together....).   Notice I used the word "hinted at" too.

What the heck?  Not that I don't believe you, but do you have a reference for that?