Church chooses profits over principles

[Tacenda]

1 minute ago, pogi said:

Funny.  They likely wont invest more in alcohol because they have other interests and better investments, and because they are super conservative about alcohol - not prohibition conservative, but conservative none the less.  

Again, damned if we do, damned if we don't.  Whichever direction we choose to go, you will criticize us.  I don't see their position as duplicitous or hypocritical to be conservative with alcohol politically and with their investments.  The accusation seems absurd to me. 

 Once again, CFR that they have compromised their core values. 

Not to horn in on the conversation here, but I do like that there isn't alcohol in the grocery stores in Utah, I guess I have the church to thank for that! https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/alcohol-laws-utah

[pogi]

40 minutes ago, Teancum said:

You really don't think it hypocritical for the Church to own a business that sells booze?  This board is really an amazing place.  When mu bride and I got married we did not have alcohol served at the wedding reception which was attended by 95% non LDS. The reason?  We thought it would be hypocritical. 

My band Hoodooh played at several local bars including the Urban Lounge, we played at the old Zephyr Club, O'Shucks Bar and Grill, The Owl Bar at Sundance, we frequented Eddie McStiffs in Moab, and several others.  I didn't feel hypocritical one bit.  Should I have?

[Fair Dinkum]

3 minutes ago, pogi said:

 Once again, CFR that they have compromised their core values. 

Please correct me if I am mistaken, but is not the abstinence of alcohol not a core value of the church? Does not profiting from the consumption of alcohol not violate this core value?  You Pogi seem to want to church to be able to profit from any business venture even when it violates their core values.  I have no problem with the church profits either but please don't talk out of both sides of their mouths.  Pick a side and stick with their core values and principles. It's their duplicity I have an issue with not that they are profiting from the consumption of alcohol.

Again I am in utter shock that so many in this thread are in support of the church profiting from the sale of alcohol.  Why are so many not in support of holding the church accountable to keeping their core values, the same values they are so adamant about in condemning when others chose not to keep them?  This is truly bizarre to me. 

This "The church can do no wrong" mentality to truly amazing to me

[Bob Crockett]

I grew up in Texas.  There were "blue laws" prohibiting grocery stores from sellling non-perishable goods.  The grocery store I worked at would block off those aisles.

 

[mgy401]

38 minutes ago, Teancum said:

You really don't think it hypocritical for the Church to own a business that sells booze?  This board is really an amazing place.  When mu bride and I got married we did not have alcohol served at the wedding reception which was attended by 95% non LDS. The reason?  We thought it would be hypocritical. 

Huh.  I didn’t have alcohol at my wedding reception because alcohol is freakin’ expensive.  

All this sturm und drang about the Church selling alcohol while advising its own members to abstain, makes me wonder what would happen if the Church sold alcohol and advised its members to indulge.  Somehow, I don’t think the criticisms would be ameliorated.

[Maestrophil]

3 minutes ago, pogi said:

My band Hoodooh played at several local bars including the Urban Lounge, we played at the old Zephyr Club, O'Shucks Bar and Grill, The Owl Bar at Sundance, we frequented Eddie McStiffs in Moab, and several others.  I didn't feel hypocritical one bit.  Should I have?

My band played those same places - I actually had a bishop once tell me , "I wouldn't go anywhere the Savior wouldn't go" in response to me inviting him to one of my gigs.  And here I thought the Lord hung out with lepers, publicans, and sinners.  🙂  

 

Edited to add - having played the Zephyr really dates us though, doesn't it.  🙂

Edited July 13, 2021 by Maestrophil

[pogi]

34 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I never said that really. I just meant, and I am a poor communicator sometimes, that in Utah the church has a lot of sway over Utah liquor laws. 

I'm not saying it's bad, although for years people said it hurt our tourism, maybe the laws have been a little better as of late. All I really meant by asking you in the first place is to show that the church does care what non members do with alcohol, unlike what some posters say about the church and non members drinking alcohol. 

Yes they do care, that is why they are super conservative with alcohol in their investments and politically.  My point is that they don't have to be prohibitionist about in order to avoid violating their standards.  Conservative is fine. 

[HappyJackWagon]

34 minutes ago, pogi said:

It is clear that they are not advocating for prohibition.  They are also not advocating for zero restrictions (no state is).  They are definitely more conservative on the spectrum, but definitely not against members selling alcohol to non-members. 

I'm sure my Stake President and Bishop would approve of me opening a distillery or tap room, right? Perhaps a nice winery. Zero concerns...I'm sure.

 

[mgy401]

4 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I'm sure my Stake President and Bishop would approve of me opening a distillery or tap room, right? Perhaps a nice winery. Zero concerns...I'm sure.

 

I think you’re conflating the theological with the personal/political here.

The church as a matter of theological principle advises members to abstain from alcohol, and in a broader social context it expresses concern about drunkenness and access to alcohol by children.

Many church members (myself included) happen to see little social benefit to the consumption of benefit at all, and as a policy matter look somewhat askance on those who purvey the substance.  Your bishop/SP may well fall under this umbrella.

But the question isn’t whether my church leaders personally/politically/socially or even theologically approve of or have concerns about the things that I choose to do.  The question is whether they will deny me a temple recommend or otherwise take adverse action against my church membership; and AFAIK the answer to that is a near-universal “no”.

[pogi]

37 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I'm sure my Stake President and Bishop would approve of me opening a distillery or tap room, right? Perhaps a nice winery. Zero concerns...I'm sure.

They wont take your temple recommend away.  Who cares if they personally disapprove?  How many Saints own hotels with bars, or restaurants that serve alcohol, or coffee shops, or heaven forbid a steak house and still hold a temple recommend I wonder.    I am sure it is more than a few.   My sister was a waitress at Squatters at the airport many moons ago, no problem with worthiness interviews.  

Edited July 13, 2021 by pogi

[secondclasscitizen]

31 minutes ago, mgy401 said:

Huh.  I didn’t have alcohol at my wedding reception because alcohol is freakin’ expensive.  

All this sturm und drang about the Church selling alcohol while advising its own members to abstain, makes me wonder what would happen if the Church sold alcohol and advised its members to indulge.  Somehow, I don’t think the criticisms would be ameliorated.

I’d buy a round for sure. I drink beer anyway since the wow says it is acceptable so not much of a change here. 

[secondclasscitizen]

23 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I'm sure my Stake President and Bishop would approve of me opening a distillery or tap room, right? Perhaps a nice winery. Zero concerns...I'm sure.

 

Add a cigar lounge to it . Going to hell for sure lol. Joseph Smith  and Brigham Young would be all over that place. 

[Rain]

I actually am uncomfortable with the church selling alcohol. My brother was an alcoholic and it really messed up his life.  So alcohol really isn't a church thing for me.  It is a health thing and my feelings about alcohol are stronger because of him and not because of the rules of the church.

Oddly though I am ok with my neighbor who drank a glass of some kind of alcohol on new years.  And ok with my husband's coworkers in France who drank wine at dinner for company parties.  And ok with my husband's new boss being excited about happy hour next week when they all fly from out of town here to meet each other - though we hope he won't be too disappointed when he finds out how many don't drink (only one member, but several muslims etc).

So I have this weird back and forth going on inside of my head. - uncomfortable with the church renting to another company who will sell alcohol and thinking "that might be ok.  We don't know the whole story.  We don't know what they will do with the profit.  So I can hold judgment."

[mgy401]

8 minutes ago, secondclasscitizen said:

I’d buy a round for sure. I drink beer anyway since the wow says it is acceptable so not much of a change here. 

You’d serve beer at a wedding reception?  I’d think champagne or wine would be more appropriate, and I imagine that would get pricey really fast.  I still remember a work dinner hosted at a local restaurant by my boss a few years ago—fewer than 25 attendees, several of us non-drinkers, and the alcohol tab alone still blew past $1500.  

Edited July 13, 2021 by mgy401

[Tacenda]

16 minutes ago, Rain said:

I actually am uncomfortable with the church selling alcohol. My brother was an alcoholic and it really messed up his life.  So alcohol really isn't a church thing for me.  It is a health thing and my feelings about alcohol are stronger because of him and not because of the rules of the church.

Oddly though I am ok with my neighbor who drank a glass of some kind of alcohol on new years.  And ok with my husband's coworkers in France who drank wine at dinner for company parties.  And ok with my husband's new boss being excited about happy hour next week when they all fly from out of town here to meet each other - though we hope he won't be too disappointed when he finds out how many don't drink (only one member, but several muslims etc).

So I have this weird back and forth going on inside of my head. - uncomfortable with the church renting to another company who will sell alcohol and thinking "that might be ok.  We don't know the whole story.  We don't know what they will do with the profit.  So I can hold judgment."

I relate, both my brothers are alcoholics. I helped pay for my oldest's rehab with my inheritance when my dad died. And the other I helped pay for rehab and took him in and helped him with the withdrawal period. So I get it! 

I'm so glad I don't like how I feel drinking alcohol. With my faith crisis, I tried some, and hate how I felt, but I'm not everyone, I know people can social drink and be fine. 

Edited July 13, 2021 by Tacenda

[pogi]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

I actually am uncomfortable with the church selling alcohol. My brother was an alcoholic and it really messed up his life.  So alcohol really isn't a church thing for me.  It is a health thing and my feelings about alcohol are stronger because of him and not because of the rules of the church.

Oddly though I am ok with my neighbor who drank a glass of some kind of alcohol on new years.  And ok with my husband's coworkers in France who drank wine at dinner for company parties.  And ok with my husband's new boss being excited about happy hour next week when they all fly from out of town here to meet each other - though we hope he won't be too disappointed when he finds out how many don't drink (only one member, but several muslims etc).

So I have this weird back and forth going on inside of my head. - uncomfortable with the church renting to another company who will sell alcohol and thinking "that might be ok.  We don't know the whole story.  We don't know what they will do with the profit.  So I can hold judgment."

I am sorry to hear about your brother and I can see why it would be of concern to you given your personal experience.  Alcohol can be dangerous for some for sure.  This is the perspective that I have of alcohol in terms of physical well-being - I am confident that the American high sugar, low fiber, high meat, highly processed foods diet (which is against the word of wisdom) kills far more people and is responsible for far more debilitant disease like diabetes and heart disease than alcohol ever will.  I won't judge others for eating at McDonalds however, or for eating a donut.  Heck, I will indulge myself in moderation.  The fact that these things can lead to serious life threatening problems and addictions, doesn't mean that we should be spiritually/morally opposed to opening a McDonalds as a business venture.  I feel it is the same with alcohol.  We focus so much on alcohol and coffee, when avoidance of the rest of the word of wisdom is responsible for so much more disease, in my opinion.  It can all be dangerous, but we need to allow for liberty and to give others the option of moderation. 

Remember that Jesus' first miracle was to turn water into alcohol for a party. 

Edited July 13, 2021 by pogi

[CV75]

15 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

So you agree that when they speak, offer advice and issue pronouncements they are speaking to the entire world and not just to church members? Right?

It depends on the venue and the particular message. Just as not everyone in the entire world enters the temple, not all the Prophet's keys are exercised whenever he is in public.

[secondclasscitizen]

22 minutes ago, mgy401 said:

You’d serve beer at a wedding reception?  I’d think champagne or wine would be more appropriate, and I imagine that would get pricey really fast.  I still remember a work dinner hosted at a local restaurant by my boss a few years ago—fewer than 25 attendees, several of us non-drinkers, and the alcohol tab alone still blew past $1500.  

Well I’m retired military. My friends drink beer and whiskey preferably from the skulls of our enemies but a can is ok too. Champaign?? I think the girls do so yea a couple bottles here and there for good measure.

[CV75]

@Fair DinkumIt is not duplicitous to decry the evils of alcohol while accommodating the comforts of friends, guests and visitors who, within the scope of the host-paying guest relationship and according to the light the guests are operating under, are not using these things for evil purposes (as far as anyone wants to speculatively cogitate over). The guests may well be aware of the Word of Wisdom, but it doesn’t mean anything to the unconverted. To be recompensed for this accommodation is reasonable.

[HappyJackWagon]

37 minutes ago, CV75 said:

@Fair DinkumIt is not duplicitous to decry the evils of alcohol while accommodating the comforts of friends, guests and visitors who, within the scope of the host-paying guest relationship and according to the light the guests are operating under, are not using these things for evil purposes (as far as anyone wants to speculatively cogitate over). The guests may well be aware of the Word of Wisdom, but it doesn’t mean anything to the unconverted. To be recompensed for this accommodation is reasonable.

I recall Elder Oaks saying something regarding SS couples that they should be shown love but don't expect him to introduce them to friends, or something like that. I've heard people talk about how they won't let a SS couple or even an unmarried adult family member spend the night with their significant other. It doesn't seem like he would agree with the idea that hosting others who "sin" is no biggie.

[HappyJackWagon]

1 hour ago, mgy401 said:

I think you’re conflating the theological with the personal/political here.

The church as a matter of theological principle advises members to abstain from alcohol, and in a broader social context it expresses concern about drunkenness and access to alcohol by children.

Many church members (myself included) happen to see little social benefit to the consumption of benefit at all, and as a policy matter look somewhat askance on those who purvey the substance.  Your bishop/SP may well fall under this umbrella.

But the question isn’t whether my church leaders personally/politically/socially or even theologically approve of or have concerns about the things that I choose to do.  The question is whether they will deny me a temple recommend or otherwise take adverse action against my church membership; and AFAIK the answer to that is a near-universal “no”.

You really think that would be a "near-universal no". I'm not as confident.

And keep in mind there are things they could do that could impact a member beyond taking a temple recommend.

[mgy401]

1 minute ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I recall Elder Oaks saying something regarding SS couples that they should be shown love but don't expect him to introduce them to friends, or something like that. I've heard people talk about how they won't let a SS couple or even an unmarried adult family member spend the night with their significant other. It doesn't seem like he would agree with the idea that hosting others who "sin" is no biggie.

FWIW, the Elder Oaks interview you’re thinking of is at https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/interview-oaks-wickman-same-gender-attraction.

And I think the point that keeps coming back is:  the proscription against alcohol use is of limited applicability in terms of time, space, and place; whereas the Church holds that the proscription against fornication (including gay sex) is eternal in nature and universal in application.

[pogi]

15 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I recall Elder Oaks saying something regarding SS couples that they should be shown love but don't expect him to introduce them to friends, or something like that. I've heard people talk about how they won't let a SS couple or even an unmarried adult family member spend the night with their significant other. It doesn't seem like he would agree with the idea that hosting others who "sin" is no biggie.

Except drinking alcohol isn't a "sin" for non-members.

[mgy401]

6 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

[1]You really think that would be a "near-universal no". I'm not as confident.

[2]And keep in mind there are things they could do that could impact a member beyond taking a temple recommend.

1.  Perhaps.  If a plethora of folks start saying they were denied temple recommends for producing/serving alcohol and that the area authorities ratified these denials, I’ll naturally have to re-evaluate my position.

2.  Like . . . release me?  Refuse to call me to teach primary/nursery?  I mean, yeah, I suppose a bishop’s position in the hierarchy gives him a stronger platform from which to stir up “ward drama” against me if he’s particularly sadistic; but ultimately—not a lot of sadists get called as bishops; and fundamentally either you care about ward drama, or you don’t (and I don’t).  

Edited July 13, 2021 by mgy401

[pogi]

16 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

You really think that would be a "near-universal no". I'm not as confident.

Once you educate the bishop/stake president that the church itself currently owns a bar, I am sure that you would have no problem getting a temple recommend.