Clean up your act online, church tells Latter-day Saints

[Teancum]

14 hours ago, Stargazer said:

Why not? Are you opposed to this policy? Or just the loss of membership?

 

Loss of membership. The policy is reasonable guidance.  Though I wonder why the leadership needs to be the parent that codifies something that ought to be common sense behavior for someone who claims to be a disciple of Christ.  But given what I have seen the past couple of years from so called Christians as well as LDS people on social media I see why they are doing this.

[Stargazer]

1 minute ago, Teancum said:

Loss of membership. The policy is reasonable guidance.  Though I wonder why the leadership needs to be the parent that codifies something that ought to be common sense behavior for someone who claims to be a disciple of Christ.  But given what I have seen the past couple of years from so called Christians as well as LDS people on social media I see why they are doing this.

It's not just Christians or even the behavior of other religious people. Plenty of people, regardless of belief, need to clean up their acts.

You may have read what Morningstar wrote in this thread about a church member she knows who has openly written things on social media that are utterly despicable and should be subject to not only legal sanction but church discipline as well. 

On another thought, not to bring punching Nazis back into this again, but should an LDS member who is a member of and open avows, say, Nazi party membership, with all the trimmings thereof, NOT be subject to church discipline as a direct result? I feel there is some justification for it. 

[Teancum]

18 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

It's not just Christians or even the behavior of other religious people. Plenty of people, regardless of belief, need to clean up their acts.

No argument from me on that.  

18 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

You may have read what Morningstar wrote in this thread about a church member she knows who has openly written things on social media that are utterly despicable and should be subject to not only legal sanction but church discipline as well. 

YEs I read that afterwards.  I guess things can cross the line and require some sort of council.  

18 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

On another thought, not to bring punching Nazis back into this again, but should an LDS member who is a member of and open avows, say, Nazi party membership, with all the trimmings thereof, NOT be subject to church discipline as a direct result? I feel there is some justification for it. 

I don't know. Maybe.  I am not a fan of church discipline generally.  Loving council and guidance is great.  Threat of membership, not so much.  But I guess in extreme cases I can understand it.

[JLHPROF]

6 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

So you’re saying that “not even … Christ” is Christlike? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a more self-contradictory assertion. 
 

Or are you saying the Church leaders (the issuers of the handbook) lack a true concept of what it means to be Christlike and thus are using the term inauthentically? 

I'm saying not even all the words of God would be considered uplifting.  Sometimes they were derogatory and include condoning of violence.

[Nofear]

5 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I'm saying not even all the words of God would be considered uplifting.  Sometimes they were derogatory and include condoning of violence.

An example of some provocative language:

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household." Matthew 10:34-36

The only personal epithet that I think the Savior used was to describe Herod as 'that old fox'.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Nofear said:

An example of some provocative language:

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household." Matthew 10:34-36

The only personal epithet that I think the Savior used was to describe Herod as 'that old fox'.

He also commanded us to love our enemies.  To me that means that when there is enmity between a follower of Christ and someone else, it's not the follower of Christ that should be causing it.  It might be the consequence of choosing to be His disciple but not because the disciple sees people as his foes. 

It's because other people see him as theirs.

[bluebell]

7 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Can you cite maybe two or things that are wrong with it? Because I just read it, and I’m not seeing anything glaringly wrong. 

Read ttribe's reply to Whyme on the 3rd page for a solid but short answer to some of what was wrong with his understanding of nazism.

[BRMC]

2 hours ago, Stargazer said:

 

You may have read what Morningstar wrote in this thread about a church member she knows who has openly written things on social media that are utterly despicable and should be subject to not only legal sanction but church discipline as well. 

Did she post what those things were?   I've seen a lot of claims of horrendous things that weren't horrendous at all.  

[CV75]

According to the Handbook 32.2. a council may be necessary if a person threatens physical violence, whether in person or online (see 32.6.2.5).

This has to do with one of the purposes of Church membership restrictions or withdrawal, to help protect others: “The first purpose is to help protect others. Sometimes a person poses a physical or spiritual threat. Predatory behaviors, physical harm, sexual abuse, substance abuse, fraud, and apostasy are some of the ways this can occur. With inspiration, a bishop or stake president acts to protect others when someone poses a threat in these and other serious ways (see Alma 5:59–60).”

Alma 5:59–60: “For what shepherd is there among you having many sheep doth not watch over them, that the wolves enter not and devour his flock? And behold, if a wolf enter his flock doth he not drive him out? Yea, and at the last, if he can, he will destroy him. And now I say unto you that the good shepherd doth call after you; and if you will hearken unto his voice he will bring you into his fold, and ye are his sheep; and he commandeth you that ye suffer no ravenous wolf to enter among you, that ye may not be destroyed.”

A personal belief or general ideology alone does not constitute a threat, only its expression and the extent of expression. This has a lot to do with the "free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the protection of life." (D&C 134: 2).

[ttribe]

31 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Read ttribe's reply to Whyme on the 3rd page for a solid but short answer to some of what was wrong with his understanding of nazism.

He won't; he has me on ignore.

[ttribe]

27 minutes ago, BRMC said:

Did she post what those things were?   I've seen a lot of claims of horrendous things that weren't horrendous at all.  

Or maybe you might need to recalibrate what you think is 'horrendous?'

[bluebell]

3 minutes ago, ttribe said:

He won't; he has me on ignore.

Well, you can opt to look at replies from people that you have on ignore if you want to on a post-by-post basis so hopefully he'll do that. 

[ttribe]

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Well, you can opt to look at replies from people that you have on ignore if you want to on a post-by-post basis so hopefully he'll do that. 

Ooooooo, this seems like a good opportunity for a wager!

[Scott Lloyd]

39 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Read ttribe's reply to Whyme on the 3rd page for a solid but short answer to some of what was wrong with his understanding of nazism.

ttribe and I don’t get along. I’ve had him on “ignore” for quite a while now and thus won’t be reading his post. I’m interested in your thoughts. 

[ttribe]

3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

ttribe and I don’t get along. I’ve had him on “ignore” for quite a while now and thus won’t be reading his post. I’m interested in your thoughts. 

@bluebell  I win!  I win!

[MorningStar]

38 minutes ago, BRMC said:

Did she post what those things were?   I've seen a lot of claims of horrendous things that weren't horrendous at all.  

Horrendous enough for the FBI and Secret Service to pay him a visit. On top of saying Obama’s family and his family should be executed, he talked in detail about how it should be done slowly and painfully and that it should be televised every hour for a week. Ranted about how he worked harder than his Muslim co-workers and that they should all be “exterminated.”

He thought he was saying these things in a private group of likeminded people, but they were public groups and everyone could see. 
 

He then posts about how righteous he is and doesn’t realize people see his unhinged rants combining profanity and names of deity. 

One of our elders asked me out of the blue if I knew him and then laughed, “THE LOOK ON YOUR FACE!” They absolutely hate how this man forces selfies on them, hugs them, and puts his head on their shoulders. Yes, I’ve witnessed plenty of that. 

My old stake was combined with his stake. Thank goodness we moved! He also joins FB groups of wards he doesn’t belong to and posts derogatory articles. A friend freaked because she thought he moved into her ward. 😂 

 

 

 

[bluebell]

59 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Ooooooo, this seems like a good opportunity for a wager!

I read people's posts that I have on ignore all the time.  But I have them on ignore because I can never stop myself from responding and the discussion between us never goes anywhere productive. It's not because I don't value their thoughts or like them.  

 

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

ttribe and I don’t get along. I’ve had him on “ignore” for quite a while now and thus won’t be reading his post. I’m interested in your thoughts. 

I'm not going to take the time to re-say what he said so well.  

"I suggest reading Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.  It should take you no time, whatsoever, to understand that 'Socialism' is primarily an economic system that was never actually used by Hitler.  He was perfectly happy to exploit an existing capitalist system for his own benefit.  The 'Socialist' in the party name was always a red herring designed to get certain parts of the population on his side in his effort to seize power.  Once he got that power, he dropped the veil in short order and any pretense of 'socialism' was swept away, as were the brown shirts who were murdered. 

Fascism is, and always has been - "a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition."  (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism).

Nazism was, and is, an exploitation of extreme patriotism for whatever country it is being organized in, coupled with the creation of enmity to 'foreigners' and 'lesser' races.  It places loyalty to the state (i.e. the country) above all other things.  Period, end of story.  It has nothing to do with socialism or communism."

@MiserereNobis also had a good reply, comparing the actual name of North Korea to the actual name of the Nazi party, and reminding us that dictators like to use words to make their product sound more palatable, even though the labels are lies.  

[Scott Lloyd]

7 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I'm not going to take the time to re-say what he said so well

As you wish. 
 

I won’t engage with ttribe, not even by proxy. 

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, Nofear said:

The only personal epithet that I think the Savior used was to describe Herod as 'that old fox'.

Not so sure about that.
Speaking of the people and groups of people he encountered Christ always had some choice words for next time you're feeling extra Christlike online.

Matthew 7 - 5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.
Matthew 7 - 6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
Matthew 12 - 39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:
Matthew 23 - Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
Matthew 23 - Ye fools and blind:
Matthew 23:33 - 33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

And as for violence - 

Alma 43 - 47 And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed.
John 2 - 15 And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables;

Or we like to tell the story of Peter and the Centurion's ear to prove Christ's forgiving nature.
But we forget why Peter had a sword to begin with at Gethsemane.
Luke 22 - 35 And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing.
36 Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
37 For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end.
38 And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.

Anyway, being Christlike doesn't always mean only being uplifting to those we encounter.  Sometimes it means being brutally honest or fighting evil.
 

[Scott Lloyd]

14 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

The official name for North Korea is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

Since you are using the official name of the Nazi party to claim that Nazis are socialists, would you then also argue that North Korea is a democratic republic, based on its official name?

(or maybe... dictators like to misuse words for their own purposes? just a thought)

That’s true. Similarly the name of the old Soviet Union was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Yet I wouldn’t regard the Soviet regime (or any of its satellite governments) as a true republic. 
 

So what’s the underlying message here? We have to look beneath names and take note of actual practice. I think it can be reasonably argued that both Hitler’s and Stalin’s dictatorships had substantial elements of socialism. 
 

I offer the following link for consideration:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/hitler-and-the-socialist-dream-1186455.html%3famp

Edited December 16, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

I'm saying not even all the words of God would be considered uplifting.  Sometimes they were derogatory and include condoning of violence.

OK. But surely you understand how blatantly self-contradictory it is to say that Christ was not Christlike. 

[Scott Lloyd]

41 minutes ago, bluebell said:

MiserereNobis also had a good reply, comparing the actual name of North Korea to the actual name of the Nazi party, and reminding us that dictators like to use words to make their product sound more palatable, even though the labels are lies. 

I’ve now addressed that directly with him. 

[BRMC]

1 hour ago, ttribe said:

Or maybe you might need to recalibrate what you think is 'horrendous?'

That's not a fair question without examples.   

Edited December 16, 2021 by BRMC

[BRMC]

1 hour ago, MorningStar said:

Horrendous enough for the FBI and Secret Service to pay him a visit. On top of saying Obama’s family and his family should be executed, he talked in detail about how it should be done slowly and painfully and that it should be televised every hour for a week. Ranted about how he worked harder than his Muslim co-workers and that they should all be “exterminated.”

He thought he was saying these things in a private group of likeminded people, but they were public groups and everyone could see. 
 

He then posts about how righteous he is and doesn’t realize people see his unhinged rants combining profanity and names of deity. 

One of our elders asked me out of the blue if I knew him and then laughed, “THE LOOK ON YOUR FACE!” They absolutely hate how this man forces selfies on them, hugs them, and puts his head on their shoulders. Yes, I’ve witnessed plenty of that. 

My old stake was combined with his stake. Thank goodness we moved! He also joins FB groups of wards he doesn’t belong to and posts derogatory articles. A friend freaked because she thought he moved into her ward. 😂 

 

 

 

Yep.  That's pretty horrendous, in my opinion.   Doesn't matter if it's a legitimate threat or not.