Federal lawsuit against religious schools, including byu

[smac97]

5 minutes ago, california boy said:

I gave you a rep point. I would be more enthusiastic about your post if I didn’t feel like these constant comparisons are a way Mormons use to demonize gay relationships.

I would also like to see fewer histrionics from you.  And more consistency.  My sense is that Latter-day Saints on this board disagree with homosexual behavior and same-sex marriage, but largely due so with tact and respect.  And yet you characterize such treatment as "demoniz{ing} gay relationships."  That's pretty risible.  And inaccurate.  

5 minutes ago, california boy said:

That seems to be a necessary part of dealing with this issue for some Mormons. (and yes I am using the term Mormon in this thread because there is nothing Christ-like in demonizing other peoples beliefs and relationships.)

Civility ought to be a two-way street.  You threatening to call heterosexuals "breeders" doesn't really help.

Thanks,

-Smac

[webbles]

42 minutes ago, california boy said:

Yet in these threads gay marriages become comparable to child rapists. Why is that?   The only reason I can see is to put them on the same level as child rapists.  

And adultery, fornication, etc are also comparable to child rapists.  Gay marriages is comparable to child rapists just as much as heterosexual adultery is comparable to child rapists.

44 minutes ago, california boy said:

Would you compare telling a lie to raping a child?  They are both sins.  Since we have all sinned should all of us be compared to child rapists?  If not, why not?

Yes, both are sins and so they are comparable.  Same as killing and any other sin.  If I tell someone to not sin, am I telling them to not rape children?  Absolutely.  I'm also telling them to not lie.  If I lie, I won't be able to return back to Heavenly Father.  If I rape a child, I won't be able to return back to Heavenly Father.  In both cases, I'd need to repent.  The sins have a difference in degree (raping a child is worse than lying) but they are both sins and so are comparable.

[jkwilliams]

2 minutes ago, webbles said:

And adultery, fornication, etc are also comparable to child rapists.  Gay marriages is comparable to child rapists just as much as heterosexual adultery is comparable to child rapists.

Yes, both are sins and so they are comparable.  Same as killing and any other sin.  If I tell someone to not sin, am I telling them to not rape children?  Absolutely.  I'm also telling them to not lie.  If I lie, I won't be able to return back to Heavenly Father.  If I rape a child, I won't be able to return back to Heavenly Father.  In both cases, I'd need to repent.  The sins have a difference in degree (raping a child is worse than lying) but they are both sins and so are comparable.

Put down the shovel. You've dug yourself deep enough. 

[Chum]

29 minutes ago, california boy said:

This is so hypocritical.

That is possible. I've learned that hypocrisy can be one natural outcome of expanding our understanding.

I suspect us freaking out over it isn't based on actual bad outcomes but from the power we get by using it to force others to make choices.

29 minutes ago, california boy said:

You act as if comparing gay marriage to a pedophile is not shocking harsh and disturbing language.

I said it shows a 'lack of concern' and equated it with your use.

You seem to be perceiving some technicality or right to bludgeon us this way. However, you can be right and toxic at the same time. It's an example of how honesty isn't at all a 'best policy'.

29 minutes ago, california boy said:

That is exactly why I am making it crystal clear what Mormons are actually comparing gay marriages to. 

Sure. Members who do this suck. Especially since we've (uniquely) been taught better.

But you don't need to suck too.

In case this makes you feel more included, I've done the exact same crap I'm hazing you for. I was being an inconsiderate jerk. I've made progress.

 

Edited June 2, 2021 by Chum

[ttribe]

12 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Put down the shovel. You've dug yourself deep enough. 

Yeah, that was bad...really, really bad.

[webbles]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

What?  Did my answer not fit your agenda?   I think I was pretty clear what the difference is.  

I don't have an agenda.  I was just trying to understand Meadowchick's thinking.  And your answer didn't really explain why heterosexual and homosexual couples are intrinsically better than the rest of the relationships.  You just listed some bad relationships but the number of possible relationships is much larger than that.  Basically, I'm asking for the Venn Diagram?  At what point does a relationship go from being "good" to being "bad"?  What makes heterosexual and homosexual couples "good" and all of the other possible relationships "bad"?

Is a married heterosexual couple better than an unmarried heterosexual couple?  Why or why not?  Is a poly relationship "good"?  What about an open marriage?  What about swingers?  What makes them as good as heterosexual/homosexual couples or what makes them worse?

[webbles]

15 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Put down the shovel. You've dug yourself deep enough. 

Can you explain why?

[rodheadlee]

2 hours ago, secondclasscitizen said:

Fact. There is a reason there are windows installed in all lds classroom doors. Cuz someone is touching the kids and it isn’t the relief society women.

The windows are there to prevent false accusations. I suggest you never be alone with a minor ever.

[jkwilliams]

10 minutes ago, webbles said:

Can you explain why?

Others have already done so, and yet you continue. So, no. I'll just say again, put down the shovel. Stop comparing same-sex relationships to child rape. It's not conducive to discussion because it is by default extremely offensive. 

Edited June 2, 2021 by jkwilliams

[california boy]

27 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I would also like to see fewer histrionics from you.  And more consistency.  My sense is that Latter-day Saints on this board disagree with homosexual behavior and same-sex marriage, but largely due so with tact and respect.  And yet you characterize such treatment as "demoniz{ing} gay relationships."  That's pretty risible.  And inaccurate.  

Civility ought to be a two-way street.  You threatening to call heterosexuals "breeders" doesn't really help.

Thanks,

-Smac

You are the one who introduced breeder relationships not me.  I said I would take your suggestion to start calling straight marriages as breeder marriages into consideration if gay marriages continue to be compared to pedophiles   Maybe Mormons have no idea what it is like to constantly have their relationship with their loved one and marriages debased regularly.  Maybe your  suggestion might help them think  before using such derogatory terms

 Have I yet used that term?  

[smac97]

4 minutes ago, california boy said:

You are the one who introduced breeder relationships not me.  

I noted that this epithet is used by some.  You then threatened to join in using it.

Res.  Ipsa.  Loquitur.

4 minutes ago, california boy said:

I said I would take your suggestion to start calling straight marriages as breeder marriages into consideration if gay marriages continue to be compared to pedophiles  

First, I made no suggestion.  At all.

Second, this is the second time I have denied making any such suggestion.

Third, that you are perpetuating this falsehood is not cool.

Fourth, that you are threatening to call heterosexuals "breeders" is also not cool.

4 minutes ago, california boy said:

Maybe Mormons have no idea what it is like to constantly have their relationship with their loved one and marriages debased regularly.  Maybe your  suggestion might help them think  before using such derogatory terms

 Have I yet used that term?  

Ah.  So if you only threaten to call heterosexuals breeders, that's okay?

I think we ought to be more civil with each other.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Daniel2]

On 5/30/2021 at 3:03 PM, kllindley said:

But, @smac97, we've been assured multiple times that this would never happen. Any fear we expressed about this possibility was unfounded and unhinged. 

While some may have suggested this wouldn’t happen, many of us who are pro-LGBT equality have been saying this is exactly what would happen, just as it happened with race.

It would be false to imply those that are pro-LGBT equality unanimously claimed this would never happen. 

[Chum]

6 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

The windows are there to prevent false accusations. I suggest you never be alone with a minor ever.

From a guy standpoint, I tend to lump minors and women together here.  Given this, I sometimes find it really complicated to respect these boundaries in a positive, helpful way.

One example: It's midnight in the Walmart parking lot. I'm walking by a closed entrance. A woman is loading her car 50 yards out and some guy is bicycling wide circles around her position. This isn't right. What to do? All my first choices aren't great - like walking toward her and giving her 2 strange guys to deal with.

I finally opted to yell from the sidewalk that the bike guy is making me uncomfortable and that I'd say where I was until she pulled away. It took me a while to put that together. It wasn't something I would have come up with a few years earlier. I had to learn a lot of stuff first.

[california boy]

10 minutes ago, webbles said:

I don't have an agenda.  I was just trying to understand Meadowchick's thinking.  And your answer didn't really explain why heterosexual and homosexual couples are intrinsically better than the rest of the relationships.  You just listed some bad relationships but the number of possible relationships is much larger than that.  Basically, I'm asking for the Venn Diagram?  At what point does a relationship go from being "good" to being "bad"?  What makes heterosexual and homosexual couples "good" and all of the other possible relationships "bad"?

Maybe you could be more specific on what kinds of relationships you want my response to. 

10 minutes ago, webbles said:

Is a married heterosexual couple better than an unmarried heterosexual couple?  Why or why not? 
 

I think committed relationships are more stable  Legal protection is given in marriages.  Children can feel more secure in married relationships.  

10 minutes ago, webbles said:

Is a poly relationship "good"?  What about an open marriage?  What about swingers?  What makes them as good as heterosexual/homosexual couples or what makes them 

I think multiple partner marriages probably are more challenging. But the church proved that multiple spouse marriages can work. I think if you go through the advantages and disadvantage of polygamist marriages you will have an answer to your question.  

I personally have little experience with multiple partner marriages. Most of my answers would be speculation 

10 minutes ago, webbles said:

[california boy]

51 minutes ago, webbles said:

And adultery, fornication, etc are also comparable to child rapists.  Gay marriages is comparable to child rapists just as much as heterosexual adultery is comparable to child rapists.

Yes, both are sins and so they are comparable.  Same as killing and any other sin.  If I tell someone to not sin, am I telling them to not rape children?  Absolutely.  I'm also telling them to not lie.  If I lie, I won't be able to return back to Heavenly Father.  If I rape a child, I won't be able to return back to Heavenly Father.  In both cases, I'd need to repent.  The sins have a difference in degree (raping a child is worse than lying) but they are both sins and so are comparable.

I strongly disagree with you

[AtlanticMike]

14 minutes ago, Chum said:

A woman is loading her car 50 yards out and some guy is bicycling wide circles around her position.

If he was going clockwise he might of been a predator, your correct, but if he was circling her car going counter clockwise, he might of been pretending to be Jeff Gordon. 

[california boy]

18 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I noted that this epithet is used by some.  You then threatened to join in using it.

Res.  Ipsa.  Loquitur.

First, I made no suggestion.  At all.

Second, this is the second time I have denied making any such suggestion.

Third, that you are perpetuating this falsehood is not cool.

Fourth, that you are threatening to call heterosexuals "breeders" is also not cool.

Ah.  So if you only threaten to call heterosexuals breeders, that's okay?

I think we ought to be more civil with each other.

Thanks,

-Smac

I took it as a suggestion. Do you think it would help?

If not just exactly what  would you suggest as an approach to persuade Mormons to quit comparing gay marriages to pedophiles and other derogatory comparisons.  This has been going on for years. I am all ears. 

[gopher]

Can we please stop using the highly offensive expression "gay marriage" on this LDS themed board?  It's offensive to all believing members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  Please stop comparing it to marriage which is between a man and woman.  Sometimes between a man and several woman.  But never between two dudes.

President Gordon B. Hinckley

“We want to help these people, to strengthen them, to assist them with their problems and to help them with their difficulties. But we cannot stand idle if they indulge in immoral activity, if they try to uphold and defend and live in a so-called same-sex marriage situation. To permit such would be to make light of the very serious and sacred foundation of God-sanctioned marriage and its very purpose, the rearing of families” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1998, 91; or Ensign, Nov. 1998, 71).

Thanks!

[jkwilliams]

19 minutes ago, california boy said:

I took it as a suggestion. Do you think it would help?

If not just exactly what  would you suggest as an approach to persuade Mormons to quit comparing gay marriages to pedophiles and other derogatory comparisons.  This has been going on for years. I am all ears. 

It's a conversation stopper in exactly the same was as saying the LDS church is a "cult." If you can get people to understand that, maybe they'll stop. 

[Jamie]

20 minutes ago, california boy said:

I took it as a suggestion. Do you think it would help?

If not just exactly what  would you suggest as an approach to persuade Mormons to quit comparing gay marriages to pedophiles and other derogatory comparisons.  This has been going on for years. I am all ears. 

I see the problem as a dilemma because we see the only "right" way for people to marry is for a male to marry a female.  Which means any other way than that way is some kind of "wrong" way to marry, even if some "wrong" way is legally authorized.

[OGHoosier]

7 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

Are you actually serious? I don't know about females, but most young Mormon males feel like the devil is on one shoulder and the holy ghost is on the other, and the holy ghost is trying his hardest to help you from doing the "evil act" of masturbation. So when you succumb to temptation and actually follow through with it, the amount of guilt is sometimes overwhelming. So it's not my problem sir, I'm not the one teaching masturbation is a sin. 

I am a young Mormon male. Unless you're an underclassman doing your undergrad right now, I've been in the shoes of a young man in this Church more recently than you, and the majority of my close associates are part of that group as well. I don't see what you're seeing, and I'm suggesting to you that your generalizations about "most young Mormon males" are not sufficiently accurate to declare that you are more enlightened in this regard than the rest of the Church and its leaders. 

7 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

What I'm asserting is, because of how we view sex inside the church, a large percentage of people/couples won't explore or use their imagination during sex, or even during the course of the day, trying to figure out a way to spice up their sex life. Personally, I see sex as a natural antidepressant, as long as  you're willing to open your mind. From listening to my wife talk about the sex lives of some of her friends, it seems like a lot of Mormon women have a hard time using their imagination when it comes to sex because they don't understand what is or isn't acceptable because for the first 18 years of their lives, sex was only taught as a "sacred act" and looking at it any other way is flirting with "sin". 

     I have a friend that went in and confessed to the bishop that he was masturbating, because his wife was so upset she started crying and wanted him to seek advice from the bishop. It was a major turning point in their marriage, she felt like he was cheating on her. Does that seem like a healthy way to view sex?

You see, I'm not sold on the "natural antidepressant" view. I think human history militates against the idea that sexuality is inherently therapeutic. Particularly when it is atomized and isolated from partnership like masturbation is. 

As for the case of your friend, the question of whether or not his or his wife's reaction were appropriate can only be judged based on your pre-existing conceptions of the validity or non-validity of masturbation itself. If you think masturbation is fine and they're making a fuss over nothing, then of course you will see this interaction as the paradigm example of unhealthiness. But I don't view the presence of uncomfortable situations or pain as a sign that standards necessarily must change; pain is not an inappropriate response to bad things. Therefore, your question (rhetorical or not) is not convincing since I don't share your starting premises. 

7 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

Last question, my wife and I teach our kids that masturbation is not a sin, it's actually a normal act that many people do. In your opinion, am I teaching my kids how to sin because we take a different view about masturbation compared to most parents in the church?

Frankly, yes. You may of course disregard my opinion at your leisure. 

Edit: For what it's worth, "a normal act that many people do" is not necessarily a positive recommendation in Christianity. "Normal" and "good" are not identical. 

Edited June 2, 2021 by OGHoosier

[smac97]

20 minutes ago, california boy said:

I took it as a suggestion.

You are once again falsely asserting that I "suggested" this.  I did not.  

This is the third time I have corrected your falsehood, yet you persist in it.

20 minutes ago, california boy said:

Do you think it would help?

I think civility would help. 

I also think not spreding falsehoods would help.

I also think your calls for civility start to ring a bit hollow when you do stuff like this.

20 minutes ago, california boy said:

If not just exactly what  would you suggest as an approach to persuade Mormons to quit comparing gay marriages to pedophiles and other derogatory comparisons.   This has been going on for years.

As I said previously:

Quote

Quote

Quit comparing gay marriages with pedophiles , beastiality, and other criminals sexual activities. I don’t care if members think someone in a gay marriage is committing fornication.  But they are not the same as a pedophiles.

In the main, I think this is a reasonable request.  I think such comparisons tend to inflame and offend more than they illustrate and clarify.  

Similarly, your continued spreading of falsehoods about me (repeatedly claiming that I "suggested" that you call heterosexuals "breeders," when I did nothing of the sort) also tends "to inflame and offend more than {} illustrate and clarify."  

Similarly, you repeatedly threatening to call heterosexuals "breeders" also tends "to inflame and offend more than {} illustrate and clarify."  

And yet you keep doing these things.

20 minutes ago, california boy said:

I am all ears. 

I would encourage civility.  I would encourage you to lead by example.  I would encourage you to not spread falsehoods about other people.

Thanks,

-Smac

[secondclasscitizen]

1 hour ago, rodheadlee said:

The windows are there to prevent false accusations. I suggest you never be alone with a minor ever.

Trust me I am not. I refuse callings in the church which have me work with kids. After scouts was shut down I was out.

The windows are also there to assist in preventing a safe place for a molester. The church has plenty of em they have had to deal with over the years. 

[california boy]

13 minutes ago, gopher said:

Can we please stop using the highly offensive expression "gay marriage" on this LDS themed board?  It's offensive to all believing members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  Please stop comparing it to marriage which is between a man and woman.  Sometimes between a man and several woman.  But never between two dudes.

President Gordon B. Hinckley

“We want to help these people, to strengthen them, to assist them with their problems and to help them with their difficulties. But we cannot stand idle if they indulge in immoral activity, if they try to uphold and defend and live in a so-called same-sex marriage situation. To permit such would be to make light of the very serious and sacred foundation of God-sanctioned marriage and its very purpose, the rearing of families” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1998, 91; or Ensign, Nov. 1998, 71).

Thanks!

Maybe you should make this a temple recommend holding exclusive site. That way you would be sure to never experience a different point of view.  

[california boy]

16 minutes ago, Jamie said:

I see the problem as a dilemma because we see the only "right" way for people to marry is for a male to marry a female.  Which means any other way than that way is some kind of "wrong" way to marry, even if some "wrong" way is legally authorized.

I am getting the idea that there is little tolerance or respect for a different point of view