Tacenda Posted October 17, 2018 Posted October 17, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, flameburns623 said: Try this for size: https://rationalfaiths.com/the-ask-a-mormon-lesbian-podcast-oaks-personal-stories-from-lgbtq-mormons-303/ 11:05 on the video with Packer, is so sad. Those poor LGBTQ men who had to sit there and listen to this, and pretty sure was a reason for some of them taking their lives. The year was 1976, pretty sure this contributed to a friend's suicide that was gay and in the closet in high school. I'm sick. Edited October 17, 2018 by Tacenda
rockpond Posted October 17, 2018 Posted October 17, 2018 I listen to his message from this conference (and quite a few others with a similar them) and wonder what it is he is wanting members to do with it.
Tacenda Posted October 21, 2018 Posted October 21, 2018 In Oak's talk he mentions priestcraft of those articles we read that doesn't say where it came from or the author. Well, as Bill Reel mentions in his current podcast about conference. What about the Gospel Topics Essays that don't have the author listed???
Calm Posted October 21, 2018 Posted October 21, 2018 (edited) Quote We live in a time of greatly expanded and disseminated information. But not all of this information is true. We need to be cautious as we seek truth and choose sources for that search. We should not consider secular prominence or authority as qualified sources of truth. We should be cautious about relying on information or advice offered by entertainment stars, prominent athletes, or anonymous internet sources. Expertise in one field should not be taken as expertise on truth in other subjects. We should also be cautious about the motivation of the one who provides information. That is why the scriptures warn us against priestcraft (see 2 Nephi 26:29). If the source is anonymous or unknown, the information may also be suspect. The source is known in terms of motivation since it is on the Church's website. Add-on: It seems to me he is talking about one main concept---motivation/bias can affect material and therefore is important to be aware of---and two different corollaries of that concept, the first being beware of those whose motivation is for personal gain (priestcraft) and second, if a source is anonymous or unknown, it is harder to judge motivation. I do not believe he is equating priestcraft and anonymous writing. That doesn't really make sense because it is usually necessary to be known to benefit from priestcraft. https://www.lds.org/languages/eng/content/general-conference/2018/10/truth-and-the-plan Edited October 22, 2018 by Calm 1
Tacenda Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 1 minute ago, Calm said: The source is known in terms of motivation since it is on the Church's website. So who wrote the essay on polygamy? Or several others. Some don't believe these essays come from the presidency too. Maybe because they aren't providing who wrote them.
bluebell Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 12 minutes ago, Tacenda said: In Oak's talk he mentions priestcraft of those articles we read that doesn't say where it came from or the author. Well, as Bill Reel mentions in his current podcast about conference. What about the Gospel Topics Essays that don't have the author listed??? Like Calm already said so well, Pres. Oaks spoke of anonymous sources and their motivation when he spoke of priestcraft. In regards to the essays, we know the motivation and we know the source, even if we don't know the exact authors. The essays would not reasonably to described as anonymous because the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the source. 3
bluebell Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 3 minutes ago, Tacenda said: So who wrote the essay on polygamy? Or several others. Some don't believe these essays come from the presidency too. Maybe because they aren't providing who wrote them. The leadership of the church has endorsed the essays. They get the final say. It really doesn't matter who wrote them. 3
Calm Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 Added this also above as an alternative reading: Quote Add-on: It seems to me he is talking about one main concept---motivation/bias can affect material and therefore is important to be aware of---and two different corollaries of that concept, the first being beware of those whose motivation is for personal gain (priestcraft) and second, if a source is anonymous or unknown, it is harder to judge motivation. I do not believe he is equating priestcraft and anonymous writing. That doesn't really make sense because it is usually necessary to be known to benefit from priestcraft. 1
ALarson Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 (edited) 10 minutes ago, bluebell said: The leadership of the church has endorsed the essays. They get the final say. It really doesn't matter who wrote them. I have heard that Brian Hales is the author of the ones regarding polygamy (at least the one regarding Nauvoo polygamy). I don't know if that's true or if he maybe just heavily contributed (or just contributed). It would be nice to know who wrote them, but I don't see it as a huge deal. Edited October 22, 2018 by ALarson 2
rockpond Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 1 hour ago, Calm said: The source is known in terms of motivation since it is on the Church's website. Add-on: It seems to me he is talking about one main concept---motivation/bias can affect material and therefore is important to be aware of---and two different corollaries of that concept, the first being beware of those whose motivation is for personal gain (priestcraft) and second, if a source is anonymous or unknown, it is harder to judge motivation. I do not believe he is equating priestcraft and anonymous writing. That doesn't really make sense because it is usually necessary to be known to benefit from priestcraft. https://www.lds.org/languages/eng/content/general-conference/2018/10/truth-and-the-plan I am not disagreeing with your point here but if we say that we know the motivation of the gospel topics essays because they are on the Church website, than what are the anonymous sources of which President Oaks speaks? IOW, if an anonymously authored essay is okay as long as we can look to the entity that published it to understand motive/bias, are there essays/books we can read, programs we can listen to, or videos we can watch that are devoid of a publishing entity?
Calm Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 1 hour ago, rockpond said: I am not disagreeing with your point here but if we say that we know the motivation of the gospel topics essays because they are on the Church website, than what are the anonymous sources of which President Oaks speaks? IOW, if an anonymously authored essay is okay as long as we can look to the entity that published it to understand motive/bias, are there essays/books we can read, programs we can listen to, or videos we can watch that are devoid of a publishing entity? Anonymous comments anywhere online, anonymous websites that do not explain their purpose, all those cat videos.... 1
rockpond Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 52 minutes ago, Calm said: Anonymous comments anywhere online, anonymous websites that do not explain their purpose, all those cat videos.... Cat videos... lol. Anonymous comments - makes sense. And I guess the sites that provide forums for the anonymous comments Are we thinking Mormonleaks as an anonymous website? I guess I feel like most websites are pretty easy to figure out their motives and type of data they provide. But maybe that’s just me. My experience in the Church taught me to not trust even those I felt were most deserving of my trust. So I am fairly questioning now.
SeekingUnderstanding Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 2 hours ago, rockpond said: I am not disagreeing with your point here but if we say that we know the motivation of the gospel topics essays because they are on the Church website, than what are the anonymous sources of which President Oaks speaks? IOW, if an anonymously authored essay is okay as long as we can look to the entity that published it to understand motive/bias, are there essays/books we can read, programs we can listen to, or videos we can watch that are devoid of a publishing entity? I’d say a website like Mormon Think fits this definition well. All anonymously produced, claiming to be unbiased but written by people who do not believe the truth claims of the church. I don’t find too much objectionable about their site, except for the fact that they hide their motivation and hence their bias.
rockpond Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 15 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said: I’d say a website like Mormon Think fits this definition well. All anonymously produced, claiming to be unbiased but written by people who do not believe the truth claims of the church. I don’t find too much objectionable about their site, except for the fact that they hide their motivation and hence their bias. They are anonymous authors (like much of what appears on LDS.org) but they have a lengthy "Who Are We?" page and while I haven't read extensively on that site, they do appear to meet their objectives as outlined on their homepage.
Calm Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 (edited) MormonThink was originally less open about their purpose from what I remember. Iirc, the original owner or two claimed to be an active member. Been awhile so I could be wrong. My impression is they are much more open now, but it has been quite sometime since I looked at the site, so it is an impression that may be a result of knowing more about the people involved than the typical reader who might stumble on the site through google. I think Mormonleaks itself has been open up to an extent about their motivations from the beginning and at this point I think whether you believe there is more going on (is there any maliciousness or glee when they believe they are making life more difficult for Church leadership, etc) is probably pretty subjective, though certainly those who pass on info anonymously may be trying to benefit while avoiding costs. Edited October 22, 2018 by Calm
rockpond Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 7 minutes ago, Calm said: MormonThink was originally less open about their purpose from what I remember. Iirc, the original owner or two claimed to be an active member. Been awhile so I could be wrong. My impression is they are much more open now, but it has been quite sometime since I looked at the site, so it is an impression that may be a result of knowing more about the people involved than the typical reader who might stumble on the site through google. I think Mormonleaks itself has been open up to an extent about their motivations from the beginning and at this point I think whether you believe there is more going on (is there any maliciousness or glee when they believe they are making life more difficult for Church leadership, etc) is probably pretty subjective, though certainly those who pass on info anonymously may be trying to benefit while avoiding costs. I admit to not knowing a ton about MormonThink... I have not ever spent much time there. But they currently claim to have both active believers and former members on their staff. Mormonleaks ownership is certainly not anonymous and, as you note, they have been open about their motivations. But, obviously the sources of their content are often anonymous and therefore credibility is somewhat suspect.
Calm Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 Just now, rockpond said: I admit to not knowing a ton about MormonThink... I have not ever spent much time there. But they currently claim to have both active believers and former members on their staff. Unless content has changed, I find it unlikely they have active believers in the sense of believing we currently have leaders receiving true/actual revelation. They may be deceptive after all. Not the night to check up on my perception though.
USU78 Posted October 23, 2018 Posted October 23, 2018 On 10/17/2018 at 9:58 AM, Tacenda said: 11:05 on the video with Packer, is so sad. Those poor LGBTQ men who had to sit there and listen to this, and pretty sure was a reason for some of them taking their lives. The year was 1976, pretty sure this contributed to a friend's suicide that was gay and in the closet in high school. I'm sick. CFR on this despicable assertion, claiming that quoting or riffing on Bible themes in any meaningful way contributes to any sick person's suicide.
Ouagadougou Posted October 23, 2018 Posted October 23, 2018 On 10/6/2018 at 11:50 AM, provoman said: Gender is eternal. Male + female marriage. Male + females. I believe Elder Oaks and President Nelson are sealed to more than one woman, so they both practice spiritual polygamy.
Tacenda Posted October 23, 2018 Posted October 23, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, USU78 said: CFR on this despicable assertion, claiming that quoting or riffing on Bible themes in any meaningful way contributes to any sick person's suicide. Did I say quoting or riffing on Bible themes caused this? Nope, I said the LDS church's stance on homosexuality, has led to suicides, IMO. And Pres. Packer's talk to young men in the PH session in the late 70's and again in the General LDS conference in the 2000's, probably didn't help, and mostly likely contributed, this is my opinion. And when reading statistics, I feel very confident that it's true. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_Mormon_suicides Found this as well, interesting timeline on LDS homosexuals. http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Timeline_of_LGBT_Mormon_history Edited October 23, 2018 by Tacenda
smac97 Posted October 23, 2018 Posted October 23, 2018 1 hour ago, Ouagadougou said: Male + females. Actually, no, this is not correct. 1 hour ago, Ouagadougou said: I believe Elder Oaks and President Nelson are sealed to more than one woman, so they both practice spiritual polygamy. Only if you concede the truth claims of the Church.
clarkgoble Posted October 23, 2018 Posted October 23, 2018 (edited) On 10/21/2018 at 6:12 PM, ALarson said: I have heard that Brian Hales is the author of the ones regarding polygamy (at least the one regarding Nauvoo polygamy). I don't know if that's true or if he maybe just heavily contributed (or just contributed). It would be nice to know who wrote them, but I don't see it as a huge deal. I believe for all of them there are several authors and editors all contributing. I believe Hales was the primary figure but not the only one. He commented on the essay at FAIR when it came out. Gospel Tangents interviewed him about the essays and discussed authorship briefly. Edited October 23, 2018 by clarkgoble
Ouagadougou Posted October 23, 2018 Posted October 23, 2018 20 minutes ago, smac97 said: Actually, no, this is not correct. Only if you concede the truth claims of the Church. https://www.deseretnews.com/article/635197769/Elder-Nelson-marries-BYU-professor.html He married his second wife in the temple--and is sealed to two different women. How is that not spiritual polygamy? So yes...male + females is the eternal family unit they embrace.
rockpond Posted October 23, 2018 Posted October 23, 2018 9 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said: https://www.deseretnews.com/article/635197769/Elder-Nelson-marries-BYU-professor.html He married his second wife in the temple--and is sealed to two different women. How is that not spiritual polygamy? So yes...male + females is the eternal family unit they embrace. Well, we certainly can’t expect straight members to be celibate just because their spouse has passed away. 1
Calm Posted October 23, 2018 Posted October 23, 2018 49 minutes ago, Tacenda said: Did I say quoting or riffing on Bible themes caused this? Nope, I said the LDS church's stance on homosexuality, has led to suicides, IMO. And Pres. Packer's talk to young men in the PH session in the late 70's and again in the General LDS conference in the 2000's, probably didn't help, and mostly likely contributed, this is my opinion. And when reading statistics, I feel very confident that it's true. Quote DON’T attribute a suicide death to a single factor (such as bullying or discrimination) or say that a specific anti-LGBT law or policy will “cause” suicide. Suicide deaths are almost always the result of multiple overlapping causes, including mental health issues that might not have been recognized or treated. Linking suicide directly to external factors like bullying, discrimination or anti-LGBT laws can normalize suicide by suggesting that it is a natural reaction to such experiences or laws. It can also increase suicide risk by leading at-risk individuals to identify with the experiences of those who have died by suicide. http://www.lgbtmap.org/file/talking-about-suicide-and-lgbt-populations-2nd-edition.pdf
Recommended Posts