Should Elder Uchtdorf step down?

[mfbukowski]

40 minutes ago, Calm said:

Speaking of protecting your kids...just found out my dad may have done a disservice tax wise to one of my brothers trying to make the estate easier to deal with...though he may have had something in mind to do but it got screwed up with his very unexpected sudden death.

You got a decent size estate...talk to the tax man or estate planner or whatever to protect your kids with any inheritance. 

And in most cases you need a revocable trust to avoid probate

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, Theosis said:

I love the revelation that he supported Biden, not because I supported Biden ( I did not, nor Trump) but because this will help break the monolithic hold of appearances that the Republican party is the de facto party of the LDS Church. 

I'm actually pretty excited that this will be the impetus of the largest political demographic shift within the Church since ETB supported the KKK... I mean the Birch Society. 

Has it indeed been disclosed that he supported Biden?  Maybe he did, but I don’t see that as having been definitively established here, only that some member or members of his family did. 
 

If anything, this episode affirms that the Brethren, as a matter of policy, remain aloof from partisan politics — all to the good, say I. 
 

At the same time, rank-and-file Church members in the past have been encouraged to get involved in public affairs, including party politics, as it suits their own consciences. This is also a praiseworthy thing. 

Edited March 15, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[mfbukowski]

13 hours ago, teddyaware said:

in the last two General Conferences the Church leaders have warned us the that time is now fully come to put your financial house in order and gather a year’s supply of food storage and water.

And that means 365 gallons per person. 

That's a tough one

But I have noticed recently that most members think the food supply should be carried around their midsections.

 

 

Edited March 15, 2021 by mfbukowski

[Scott Lloyd]

12 hours ago, Calm said:

I thought it an inappropriate, but not creepy comment actually, but Mustard Seed is so rarely inappropriate and invariably kind, I gave her a pass.  
 

The creepiness generally comes in for me when there is a sense of ownership, someone who comes across as they have a right to tell others how to look, act, or feel.  Or a relationship that doesn’t exist is implied. 

Had it been the first time I had observed such a thing regarding this particular apostle, I might have let it pass without comment. But it’s not. I’ve seen it from others as well, and in each instance, yes, I have found it inappropriate. 
 

But my real point in raising it is, as I alluded, that had the genders been reversed, it would have been far less likely to be tolerated, an indication of a rather pervasive double standard. 

[california boy]

2 hours ago, ttribe said:

My observation, from a now outsider's perspective, is that there is a small, but vocal, segment of the membership of the Church who are behaving as if their "belief" in the Republican Party is most certainly placed above their belief in the Church and its leadership.  The very notion that any active member would call for the resignation of an APOSTLE over a donation to a Democratic candidate is strong (albeit, indirect) evidence that some members have completely lost their bearings.  I suspect, but cannot prove, that these same people would not be clamoring for Elder Uchtdorf to resign had the donation been made to the Trump campaign.  That being said, there would almost certainly be another segment of Church membership that would be, in that scenario.  There is a deep divide over politics in this country, and the U.S. membership of the Church is far from immune from it.

Where the country went in a bad direction is when religion started identifying with one particular party.  That party took up the branding to get the voting block.  Now it is almost impossible to separate the two.   It made it so politics was divided by religion.  It can all be traced back to Phyllis Schlafly when she made the ERA a religious crusade rather than a political cause and handed over mailing lists of religious organizations to the Republican Party to fund raise off of and get out the vote organizing.  Before that, Republicans and Democrats didn't see any connection between giving women equal rights and religion.  Even the Church took up the cause long after the amendment had been passed with wide, bipartisan support (including that of both major political parties, both houses of Congress, and presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter.  There was a really interesting in-depth series on the ERA on Netflicks a couple of months back.

[Tacenda]

49 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Broadly speaking, yes.  

Thanks Smac, for your honesty. I think the Dr. Seuss books that are racist are different than a statue for instance, because with a statue you can have a placard explaining the things the person did that were wrong and right. Children's books are different because the child is too young IMO, to understand a message slapped onto the books like maybe a sticker? Or something printed inside. And they may have conflicting feelings. I'm glad the company decided to take the children's books off the shelf for these reasons. 

I was about to comment and say should we leave up drinking fountains that say "whites only", and then thought hey, I wonder if we did we could show what monstrosity actually occurred but we hopefully have enough on the internet to keep that alive and well.  

[california boy]

51 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Broadly speaking, yes.  

So you don't believe a private institution should be able to control what they deem is appropriate content or not???

Given your stance on virtually every institution that YOU support, being allowed to determine what they feel is appropriate, can you please explain that? 

[katherine the great]

17 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

But I have noticed recently that most members think the food supply should be carried around their midsections.

A time-honored adaptation against starvation. 

[smac97]

2 minutes ago, california boy said:

Where the country went in a bad direction is when religion started identifying with one particular party.  

When did that happen?  And what "religion" are you referencing here?  From Pew Research in 2016:

It looks like there are healthy doses of political diversity in most religious groups.

In 2007 Sen. Harry Reid said: "My faith and political beliefs are deeply intertwined. I am a Democrat because I am a Mormon, not in spite of it."  We need to allow everyone room to say the same thing about their individual political views.  

My sense is that we started going in "a bad direction" after the 2000 election.  Pres. Bush was "selected," not "elected."  He was, in some quarters, never legitimately the POTUS.  Then the tables turned in 2008 when Pres. Obama took office, except that the pretext for refusing recognition/legitimacy was about his birth certificate and other absurdities.  Then we got 2016, and the tables turned again, and the pretext was, well, I'm not sure.  Sheer disbelief?  And then in 2020 we went back to the "stolen election" theory again.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Rivers]

On 3/14/2021 at 10:54 AM, ttribe said:

Why?

Doesn’t everyone have a favorite?

[mfbukowski]

7 hours ago, katherine the great said:

A time-honored adaptation against starvation. 

And ice cream sure beats ground wheat flour! 😉

Edited March 16, 2021 by mfbukowski
Betrayed by auto spell!

[The Nehor]

31 minutes ago, smac97 said:

When did that happen?  And what "religion" are you referencing here?  From Pew Research in 2016:

It looks like there are healthy doses of political diversity in most religious groups.

In 2007 Sen. Harry Reid said: "My faith and political beliefs are deeply intertwined. I am a Democrat because I am a Mormon, not in spite of it."  We need to allow everyone room to say the same thing about their individual political views.  

My sense is that we started going in "a bad direction" after the 2000 election.  Pres. Bush was "selected," not "elected."  He was, in some quarters, never legitimately the POTUS.  Then the tables turned in 2008 when Pres. Obama took office, except that the pretext for refusing recognition/legitimacy was about his birth certificate and other absurdities.  Then we got 2016, and the tables turned again, and the pretext was, well, I'm not sure.  Sheer disbelief?  And then in 2020 we went back to the "stolen election" theory again.

Thanks,

-Smac

I know this is a controversial take but I think it is time for us to move on over Governor Boggs and Governor Ford being Democrats. Our reactionary obsession with supporting the Whigs for almost two centuries now is starting to look silly.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

But my real point in raising it is, as I alluded, that had the genders been reversed, it would have been far less likely to be tolerated, an indication of a rather pervasive double standard. 

Given the history of unbalanced sexual harassment in the past (how many men have been subjected to catcalls when walking down a street? I have yet to meet a woman who hasn’t; how many men get groped...no doubt some, but percentage wise thinking likely women ‘win’ that contest based on reports...though men don’t tend to report harassment and assault out of embarrassment just like women, so actual numbers hard to guess), high sensitivity on the part of women is quite understandable, imo.  Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t work on removing any comments that suggest objectification no matter who is the target, but it makes sense that those who have been harassed in the past are more responsive and assertive about stopping similar comments.  
 

If I find out Mustard Seed has been wolf whistling men walking down the street or goosing them on the subway, my opinion will dramatically change about her...but I think it unlikely.  She hasn’t made a habit of such comments, I believe this is the only one in fact.  

Edited March 15, 2021 by Calm

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Had it been the first time I had observed such a thing regarding this particular apostle, I might have let it pass without comment. But it’s not. I’ve seen it from others as well, and in each instance, yes, I have found it inappropriate. 
 

But my real point in raising it is, as I alluded, that had the genders been reversed, it would have been far less likely to be tolerated, an indication of a rather pervasive double standard. 

You see it is men who are really oppressed by sexism.

[The Nehor]

16 hours ago, teddyaware said:

The people who are so unfairly branding conservative, traditional family values voters as dangerous extremists would also consider the Founding Fathers — men whom God himself has testified were in tune enough with his Spirit to produce the divinely inspired Constitution of the United States — as dangerous radicals. At the same time, these slanderers, who so unjustly paint with such a broad brush, are the same people who treat atheistic leftwing radicals like admirable heroes worthy of emulation.

I can absolutely guarantee you that this once free nation has reached the point of no return, and the days of the prophesied great tribulation will soon upon us. How do I know. In the last General Conference, President Nelson testified that we are the generation who will see with our own eyes the literal fulfillment of what the prophet Nephi saw only in vision. Referring to 1 Nephi 14 he said we are the people upon whom Nephi saw the Lord pouring out his Spirit in great power and glory unto eternal victory. But what President Nelson left out is in the in the previous verse Nephi witnessed that before that great outpouring of overcoming power and glory the entire world of the gentiles is going to unite in the common cause of the destruction of the restored Church of Jesus Christ. Through this means, and without having to be as blunt as a sledgehammer, the Prophet was letting those with eyes to see and ears to hear know that the day of the persecution of Christ the Church will soon be upon us. And I must say the idea that a true Apostle of Jesus Christ would support the very people who are going to instigate and perpetrate this worldwide assault on the Church of Christ is absurd.

Back in October of 1988, President Benson gave the momentous warning to the Church that the great worldwide secret combination that would seek to destroy freedom throughout the world in the last days, as prophesied by Moroni in Ether Chapter 8, was then (1988) in existence and already gaining unrighteous control over the United States and the entire world. To imagine that 32 years after President Benson’s dramatic announcement, that Moroni’s dark prophecy was then in the process of being fulfilled, that today’s First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve would be left in the dark on a matter of such paramount importance is ludicrous. And in case any of you have forgotten, in the last two General Conferences the Church leaders have warned us the that time is now fully come to put your financial house in order and gather a year’s supply of food storage and water.

What follows is the verse in 1 Nephi 14 that President Nelson said we are going to see literally fulfilled and the previous verse that testifies what’s going to happen before the Lord arms his Church with great delivering power and righteousness:

13 And it came to pass that I beheld that the great mother of abominations did gather together multitudes upon the face of all the earth, among all the nations of the Gentiles, to fight against the Lamb of God.
14 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, beheld the power of the Lamb of God, that it descended upon the saints of the church of the Lamb, and upon the covenant people of the Lord, who were scattered upon all the face of the earth; and they were armed with righteousness and with the power of God in great glory.

 

Okay, having slept on it now I can more clearly see why this whole thing is laughable. It is the idea that the tribulation will come from one side of the political aisle. It is kind of cute in its naive optimism. The death cult anti-maskers, the historically hostile evangelicals, and all the rest are on our side in the day Zion and Babylon clash. Adorable.

In my most condescending pitying southern grandmother voice: “Oh honey, they are all going to turn on you.”

Hope this helps.

Edited March 15, 2021 by The Nehor

[Amulek]

On 3/13/2021 at 2:03 PM, rongo said:

Should the Church have this 2011 policy, then? Should the Church get rid of it?

I tend to prefer my speech (political or otherwise) on the free side, so if I had my 'druthers I would probably ditch the policy.

I'm honestly not the least bit bothered by the fact that Church leaders invariably hold different political opinions than I do on any number of issues - that's just the nature of politics.

If Elder Uchtdorf wants to donate to the Biden campaign, I'm fine with that - policy or no policy. 

And I really don't care if - as appears to be the case here - someone other than Elder Uchtdorf (i.e., a family member) was the one who actually donated.

Now, if he were to have donated personally and then lied about it - then maybe we get to point where he should get a talking to, but I still wouldn't think he would need to be removed as an Apostle. Not just for that. YMMV. 

 

 

Edited March 15, 2021 by Amulek

[katherine the great]

55 minutes ago, Calm said:

If I find out Mustard Seed has been wolf whistling men walking down the street or goosing them on the subway, my opinion will dramatically change about her...but I think it unlikely.  She hasn’t made a habit of such comments, I believe this is the only one in fact.

I sense that some men are just jealous. Elder Uchtdorf’s wife is very attractive too. There. Equality. 

[katherine the great]

46 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

You see it is men who are really oppressed by sexism.

Apparently only handsome men. 

[The Nehor]

5 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

I sense that some men are just jealous. Elder Uchtdorf’s wife is very attractive too. There. Equality. 

How am I not supposed to be jealous that a guy twice my age looks better than I do? Answer me that.

To be clear in advance this is a joke and not a cry for pity. My withering self-loathing does not come from my physical appearance.

[The Nehor]

11 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

Apparently only handsome men. 

I bet they’re wealthy too. Poor oppressed saps.

[katherine the great]

4 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

How am I not supposed to be jealous that a guy twice my age looks better than I do? Answer me that.

Believe in yourself. 😊

[ksfisher]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

I know this is a controversial take but I think it is time for us to move on over Governor Boggs and Governor Ford being Democrats. Our reactionary obsession with supporting the Whigs for almost two centuries now is starting to look silly.

To this day I personally refuse to vote for Martin Van Buren.

[Meadowchik]

I personally think he should step down, for sure. Then up, to the right, to the left. The hokie pokie is good for everyone!

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

When did that happen?  And what "religion" are you referencing here?  From Pew Research in 2016:

It looks like there are healthy doses of political diversity in most religious groups.

In 2007 Sen. Harry Reid said: "My faith and political beliefs are deeply intertwined. I am a Democrat because I am a Mormon, not in spite of it."  We need to allow everyone room to say the same thing about their individual political views.  

My sense is that we started going in "a bad direction" after the 2000 election.  Pres. Bush was "selected," not "elected."  He was, in some quarters, never legitimately the POTUS.  Then the tables turned in 2008 when Pres. Obama took office, except that the pretext for refusing recognition/legitimacy was about his birth certificate and other absurdities.  Then we got 2016, and the tables turned again, and the pretext was, well, I'm not sure.  Sheer disbelief?  And then in 2020 we went back to the "stolen election" theory again.

Thanks,

-Smac

This is a bit outdated obviously but I found this interesting.  It's also based on official party affiliation, not voting habits.
I guess we know Uchtdorf is probably a Democrat.

 

[Amulek]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

If I find out Mustard Seed has been wolf whistling men walking down the street or goosing them on the subway, my opinion will dramatically change about her...

Mine too. And, on a completely unrelated note, I am now strongly considering getting a subway pass...