Kate Kelly in a Popular Magazine

[Robert F. Smith]

12 hours ago, teddyaware said:

For what it’s worth, the following is from her Wikipedia article:

By 1992, Johnson had stopped identifying as a lesbian.^[5] In January 2019, Johnson clarified that she was "disillusioned" about men, but "had never had sexual feelings for women." Nonetheless, she has made the choice to dedicate her attention to women because she finds men to be "boring" and "predictable" and "not as wonderful as women."^[1

Interesting.  I think that she first went into lesbianism as a socio-political  protest.  Her LDS husband had dumped her for a much younger woman.

[Nacho2dope]

15 hours ago, bluebell said:

I honestly didn't know that Kate Kelly was relevant anymore (not saying that in a snarky way) so was surprised to see that she made it into Glamour Magazine (similar to Cosmopolitan but slightly less raunchy).

Kate Kelly Wants to Recruit You

Some interesting points/beliefs about/of Kate Kelly covered in the article:  

• She's now a lesbian?  When did that happen?
• She leads spiritual gatherings with a female Imam, baptist preacher, and transgendered woman who is an orthodox Jew.
• Her excommunication has now become a 'gift' and the church is a cult.
• The fact that the church refused to ordain women means that we don't believe everyone is a child of God.

The article doesn't have much information, other than to catch us all up on what Kelly has been doing the last few years and provide a platform to say bad things about the church, but I thought some on here might be interested. 

Thanks for posting this, I saw this on social media and was surprised the magazine wrote the article. I have not read it and probably will not. The points you posted are pretty much what I expected from her, so I will not waste my time reading it. 

[smac97]

15 hours ago, bluebell said:

I honestly didn't know that Kate Kelly was relevant anymore (not saying that in a snarky way) so was surprised to see that she made it into Glamour Magazine (similar to Cosmopolitan but slightly less raunchy).

Kate Kelly Wants to Recruit You

Some interesting points/beliefs about/of Kate Kelly covered in the article:  

• She's now a lesbian?  When did that happen?
• She leads spiritual gatherings with a female Imam, baptist preacher, and transgendered woman who is an orthodox Jew.
• Her excommunication has now become a 'gift' and the church is a cult.
• The fact that the church refused to ordain women means that we don't believe everyone is a child of God.

The article doesn't have much information, other than to catch us all up on what Kelly has been doing the last few years and provide a platform to say bad things about the church, but I thought some on here might be interested. 

I found one comment by Kate Kelly in the article to be fairly interesting:

Quote

Ironically, the teachings of Mormonism—if you take them to their logical conclusion—actually are very socially progressive! There are a lot of communitarian ideas and radical politics if you go to the actual original founding of the group.

To an extent, she is correct.  The doctrines of the Church include some fairly radical ideas.  The scriptures define Zion as the "pure in heart" (D&C 97:21).  The "Zion" to which we aspire contemplates a "no poor among them" (Moses 7:18), "all things in common" (4 Nephi 1:3) sort of society.  See here:

Quote

Zion refers to the place or land appointed by the Lord for the gathering of those who accept his gospel (D&C 101:16-22; 3 Ne. 20-22). The purpose of this gathering is to raise up a committed society of "pure people" who will "serve [God] in righteousness" (D&C 100:13, 16). Hence, the lands of Zion are places where the pure in heart live together in righteousness. ... The Church and its stakes are called Zion because they are for gathering and purifying a people of God (D&C 43:8-11; Eph. 4:11-13). Scripture also refers to Zion as a "City of Holiness" (Moses 7:19), because the "sanctified" or "pure" live there (Moro. 10:31-33; Alma 13:11-12), and a "city of refuge" where the Lord protects them from the peril of the world (D&C 45:66-67).

"Pure in heart" may be explained in terms of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Jesus said that to be saved a person must believe in him, repent of sins, and be born of water and of the Spirit (John 3:5, 16; 3 Ne. 27:20). Scripture describes the rebirth to which Jesus refers as a "mighty change in your hearts" or being "born of God" (Alma 5:13, 14). It means that the person puts off the "natural man" and puts on a new nature that has "no more disposition to do evil, but to do good continually" (Mosiah 5:2;3:19). A person pure of heart is one who has died to evil and awakened to good. Thus "pure people," being alive to good, dwell together in righteousness and are called Zion (Moses 7:18). Zion, then, is the way of life of a people who live the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Since love comprehends all righteousness (Matt. 22:36-40), the people of Zion live together in love as equals (see Equality; D&C 38:24-27). They have "all things common" (4 Ne. 1:3). They labor together as equals, each contributing to the good of all and to the work of salvation according to their individual talents (D&C 82:3; Alma 1:26). As equals, all receive the things that are necessary for survival and well-being, according to their circumstances, wants, and needs (D&C 51:3, 9). Consequently, among a people of Zion there are no rich or poor (4 Ne. 1:3). It is written of the ancient people of Enoch that "the Lord called his people Zion, because they were of one heart and one mind, and dwelt in righteousness; and there was no poor among them" (Moses 7:18).

Unfortunately, Kate Kelly doesn't get it.  Zion can and only will be built when we are like the inhabitants of the first iteration who were "of one heart and one mind, and dwelt in righteousness" (Moses 7:18), and like the Nephites who, at their apex, had no "contentions and disputations among" them (4 Nephi 1:2), and "deal{t} justly one with another" (id.), and were "partakers of the heavenly gift" (id.).

Kate Kelly has done nothing to advance these ideals in our community.  She wants to use "radical politics" to foist her views on others.  Coercion.  Manipulation.  Misandry.  Usurpation.  Divisiveness.  That's her modus operandi.  Such things are antithetical to Zion.  "{T}he powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness."  (D&C 121:36)

Jesus Christ is at the center of Zion.  For Kate Kelly, political ideology is at the center.  For her, the Savior is tangential.  Her mission was not about proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and was instead her personal journey of political awakening and radicalizing (from the article):

Quote

On my Mormon mission I was meeting immigrants for the first time. I learned Spanish. I could talk to people I’d never talked to before. I could speak to undocumented immigrants. I was meeting all kinds of people who are marginalized in society, and my full-time job for two years was to reach out to them. Probably not a lot of people are radicalized politically by their Mormon mission, but there are some of us who think, Wait a minute—I don’t hate immigrants and women! I’m in my little modest missionary costume, walking around trying to talk to strangers about Jesus, learning about the world. By trying to convert people to my religion I was converted myself, to a bigger, wider worldview.

Oi.  Also, gotta love the implication she inserts here - that Latter-day Saints presumptively "hate immigrants and women," but that "some of us" come to a realization that we should not.  What a load of piffle.

God is not part of the equation for her.  Rather, the highest and best objective is the pursuit of imposing her political ideology on others, regardless of what they (and God) have to say about it.  "Nothing less will suffice."

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited May 7, 2020 by smac97

[teddyaware]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Interesting.  I think that she first went into lesbianism as a socio-political  protest.  Her LDS husband had dumped her for a much younger woman.

You know Robert, I’m very pleased with myself because I was going to say AH-HA (!!!) but resisted the temptation.

[bluebell]

12 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The song quoted in the article is one I’ve never heard of: “When I grow up, I want to be A mom and have a family.”  
 

From a Google search I learned it is from an album called “Songs For a Mormon Child”. I listened to a bit of it on YouTube. The recording seems to have been dubbed from a scratchy vinyl phonograph record, which tells me it must be pretty old. 
 

I suspect it is not nearly as “popular” or well known among “Mormons” as Kelly and the author of the article would have everyone believe. In fact, I’m thinking it is rather obscure. 
 

Did I miss something along the line? Is anyone else here familiar with that song?

I've never heard of it, but I wasn't baptized until I was 9 when my inactive parents decided to go back to church.  So I missed out on all of the stuff happening in the late 70s and early 80s with kids church music.

[bluebell]

I think one of the more interesting things about KK is her black and white thinking.  I don't want to put words into her mouth but it seems like she has a very black and white view of morality--mainly her beliefs are the standard for what is moral and therefore beliefs that don't agree with her's are automatically not moral.

What I find so interesting about that is that she admits that she changes her mind all the time on what she believes.  What she believes is always the morally superior position, but what she believes also changes frequently (because she's superior to most other people in that way).  

[bluebell]

11 hours ago, Thinking said:

Sometimes relevance is determined by whether something/somebody shows up on the news, and how often. Certainly we are all relevant in our own way. Kate seems to have been busy following her chosen path and somebody at Glamour thought it was relevant enough to publish an article that would help sell magazines.

Of course we are all relevant in our way and in our own lives.  I just didn't realize that KK was still relevant to the world at large.

If we take the mormon stuff out of the article, there isn't much left (and what is left would almost certainly not have led to an article in a national magazine on it's own merits, as she's championing good causes but not really doing anything more noteworthy than any other random political activist). So it seems like the her only real claim to fame is her past church membership, stuff she did as a member quite a few years ago, and her excommunication from that church. 

But she's not relevant to mormonism any longer, and hasn't been for a few years, so the fact that anyone found her relevant enough to write a whole article on was surprising to me.

[Kenngo1969]

3 hours ago, JamesBYoung said:

Tht [sic] merely demonstrates your unawareness but that's OK.

There are a lot of things of which I am unaware.  I never claimed otherwise, but thanks fer playin'!

 

[smac97]

3 hours ago, bluebell said:

Of course we are all relevant in our way and in our own lives.  I just didn't realize that KK was still relevant to the world at large.

I don't think she is.  This board's denizens have an over-developed willingness to pay attention to news items pertaining to the Church.  We are, much more than the average person, paying attention to not only people in the Church, but people critical of it, such as John Dehlin, Sam Young, Jeremy Runnells, and Kate Kelly.

Kate Kelly has no cachet relative to her perspective on the Church.  She's just another hard core advocate of her preferred political ideologies: abortion, identity politics, etc.

Quote

If we take the mormon stuff out of the article, there isn't much left (and what is left would almost certainly not have led to an article in a national magazine on it's own merits, as she's championing good causes but not really doing anything more noteworthy than any other random political activist). So it seems like the her only real claim to fame is her past church membership, stuff she did as a member quite a few years ago, and her excommunication from that church. 

Yep.  She had her 15 minutes.

Quote

But she's not relevant to mormonism any longer, and hasn't been for a few years, so the fact that anyone found her relevant enough to write a whole article on was surprising to me.

But it's not just any magazine.  It's Glamour!  The vanguard of political and social theory!

😃

-Spencer

Edited May 7, 2020 by smac97

[Islander]

13 hours ago, Thinking said:

Sometimes relevance is determined by whether something/somebody shows up on the news, and how often. Certainly we are all relevant in our own way. Kate seems to have been busy following her chosen path and somebody at Glamour thought it was relevant enough to publish an article that would help sell magazines.

People still buy magazines? Who would have thought. Oh, and I have no idea who she is or why anybody would be interested in what she is doing. Just my take.

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, teddyaware said:

You know Robert, I’m very pleased with myself because I was going to say AH-HA (!!!) but resisted the temptation.

Both technically and metaphorically you really didn't.

I am not saying I mind though.

[Scott Lloyd]

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

I've never heard of it, but I wasn't baptized until I was 9 when my inactive parents decided to go back to church.  So I missed out on all of the stuff happening in the late 70s and early 80s with kids church music.

I don’t think this was anything published or sanctioned by the Church. I think it was a private, profit-making enterprise — of which there has been a plentitude come and go over the years directed at Church members. 

[JamesBYoung]

Be fan girls of Kate if you want, but I believe she is old and long over news.

[Scott Lloyd]

9 minutes ago, JamesBYoung said:

Be fan girls of Kate if you want, but I believe she is old and long over news.

What became of the movement she founded (Ordain Women)? Does anyone know?

[teddyaware]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Both technically and metaphorically you really didn't.

I am not saying I mind though.

In this case, thought my use of tongue-in-cheek humor was too transparent not to be spotted immediately.

 

[Calm]

Scott, They don’t use their website to post news anymore (last item is 2016) and on the rare occasion I check, the blog is pretty much an occasional (as in every couple of months) thing.   New profiles are still being added on occasion according to FB. They have around 700. 
 

I believe it is more active on FB, but many posts there are for others’ events, articles, or blogs.  I am not seeing much original content.  They look like they had a theme last year of key to equality, but besides Sunstone doesn’t appear to be very visible. It was a quick skim though, so I may have missed something significant. 
 

Looks like posts were a couple a month at most in 2019 and often one, so frequency there has gone down since last I looked iirc. 

Edited May 7, 2020 by Calm

[smac97]

51 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

What became of the movement she founded (Ordain Women)? Does anyone know?

It looks like their blog is still vaguely active (some repetitive posts in April).  They also have a "12 Days of OW Christmas" that . . . well, I'll let it speak for itself (quoting just the last verse):

Quote

On the twelfth day of Christmas, the Prophet could decree…
Women’s ordination,
Female Stake Clerks,
Women Mission Leaders
More female speakers,
Lessons that quote women,
Gender inclusive language,
Wives, too, preside,
Women interview girls!
Female Ward Clerks,
Women on all councils,
Mothers in blessing circles,
and
Full gender parity!

No mention of "revelation."  

Thanks,

-Smac

[Scott Lloyd]

19 minutes ago, smac97 said:

It looks like their blog is still vaguely active (some repetitive posts in April).  They also have a "12 Days of OW Christmas" that . . . well, I'll let it speak for itself (quoting just the last verse):

No mention of "revelation."  

Thanks,

-Smac

I viewed that website just now. 
 

Instead of thoughtful discourse, I saw snarky memes. 

Edited May 7, 2020 by Scott Lloyd

[MorningStar]

Once in a while I see her post something (crazy) on Twitter. 

[mfbukowski]

23 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Oh.

I'm sorry.

Did Kate Kelly say something?

Who?

[bluebell]

32 minutes ago, MorningStar said:

Once in a while I see her post something (crazy) on Twitter. 

Interesting.  This is the first time I've come across her in years, but I don't really pay much attention to twitter.  What type of stuff does she usually post?  Religious, activist, political?

[JamesBYoung]

I have never missed being on or following others on Twitter.

[Rain]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I don’t think this was anything published or sanctioned by the Church. I think it was a private, profit-making enterprise — of which there has been a plentitude come and go over the years directed at Church members. 

Right.  It comes from "Songs for a Mormon Child" by Janeen Jacobs Brady. Others might be more familiar with I'm a Mormon.

[Kenngo1969]

4 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

What became of the movement she founded (Ordain Women)? Does anyone know?

Well, for what it's worth, the Web site's still up.

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, smac97 said:

It looks like their blog is still vaguely active (some repetitive posts in April).  They also have a "12 Days of OW Christmas" that . . . well, I'll let it speak for itself (quoting just the last verse):

No mention of "revelation."  

Thanks,

-Smac

That was awful. The lyrics did not match the music at all “mothers in blessing circles” is supposed to match “two turtle doves”? They tried to squeeze in seven syllables when there were originally four.