Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Another Instance of Compelled Speech (Targeting Religious People) (Sorta)


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Last month we had a discussion about members of the Tampa Bay Rays baseball team who had declined to wear "gay pride" regalia: Tampa Bay Rays players opt to not wear the "Pride Night " logo on shirts

We also discussed how they were criticized on social media, but that the team management - to their credit - nevertheless did not compel these team members to submit to compelled speech.

It looks like we are looking at another iteration of this issue, this time involving Austrialian rugby players (one of whom is a Latter-day Saint) : Inside the VERY religious world of the Manly players who are refusing to wear the pride 'inclusive' jumper

Quote

Four of the seven Manly Sea Eagles' players who are refusing to wear a rainbow-striped gay pride jersey hold staunch religious beliefs - one is Mormon, one studied chaplaincy, one grew up in a 'megachurch', and another has homophobic slurs on his social media accounts.

Josh Aloiai, Jason Saab, Christian Tuipulotu, Josh Schuster, Haumole Olakau'atu, Tolutau Koula and Toafofoa Sipley decided on Monday to boycott Thursday's must-win match against the Sydney Roosters because they don't want to play in the 'inclusive' jersey.

More players, who have not been named, have since joined the jersey protest on unspecified cultural or religious grounds. 
...
Sydney-born Olakau'atu, 23, is a missionary at the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints - otherwise known as Mormon Church.
...

Olakau'atu is upfront about his status as a missionary at the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS), otherwise known as the Mormon Church.

According to the church website: 'The experience of same-sex attraction is a complex reality for many people.'

'The attraction itself is not a sin, but acting on it is.'

Missionaries believe people who experience same-sex attraction should be loved and supported by their families and communities, and encouraged not to act on their feelings.
...
Members who do engage in acts of homosexuality can be punished if they confess and promise never to do it again, or excommunicated if they refuse to repent and change their ways.

The LDS used to believe same-sex attraction was a curable condition, but they now say 'individuals do not choose to have such attractions' and acknowledge conversion therapy as 'unethical'.

Mormons are strongly discouraged from drinking coffee, tea or any soft drinks containing caffeine, taking drugs other than ones prescribed by a doctor, consuming alcohol, or gambling.

Contrary to popular belief, most Mormons stopped practicing polygamy in 1809 - very few groups outside the main church continued marrying multiple women.

"Mormons stopped practicing polygamy in 1809."  That is, 21 years before the Church was organized, and when Joseph Smith was four years old.

Quote

So severe has been the fallout that Manly coach Des Hasler fronted the cameras on Tuesday afternoon to apologise to his own players, the LGBTQI community and all 15 other NRL clubs. 
...

During a rambling speech on Tuesday, Sea Eagles boss Des Hasler refused to comment on who made the call to launch the rainbow strip without consulting any of the players.

He called the fiasco 'a significant mistake' and admitted the club was guilty of 'poor management' that caused 'confusion, discomfort and pain'.

...

Monday night's 90-minute meeting ended with coach Des Hasler telling the players he understood they were put in a difficult position and that he supported their decision not to play.

...

It was understood Monday night's meeting floated the idea of the players who objected to the new design be allowed to wear the standard jersey instead, but NRL regulations stipulate all players must be wearing the same playing strip. 

A decent amount of news coverage on this:

Yahoo: NRL world divided over 'disgraceful' Manly pride jersey furore

Quote

The drama has caused an enormous stir throughout the footy world, but NRL 360 co-host Paul Kent said it was the Manly club's fault for not consulting players first, before making the decision to wear the pride jerseys.

“The Manly club did this without any consultation of the players, they did it without board approval. It’s basically a marketing decision and they’ve just assumed everything was ok," Kent said on Monday night.

“The club has imposed its own politics on these players and these players have inadvertently been embroiled in this scandal and they will be, hopefully, protected. But they will be under pressure now through no fault of their own.

“It’s an embarrassing look for the club and it’s a difficult one. This talk about inclusion, wearing the Manly jersey for me is inclusion.

“To inflict their own political views on the players who may not share that and are now being forced to deal with the consequences of that is a real oversight by the club and it’s something they should be embarrassed about.”

The issue has also left the NRL community fiercely divided, with some calling Manly's move "woke" and insisting social politics should play no part in sport.

While some fans have praised the players for standing up for their beliefs, others have brandished them "disgraceful" and hypocritical.

Crikey.com: ‘Wearing prejudice with pride’: seven Manly players put principle over playing

Quote

The refuseniks’ objection is reportedly on cultural or religious grounds. The issue is, of course, that their personal religious beliefs don’t include acceptance of homosexuality, and presumably they don’t feel they can comfortably wear a jumper that communicates such acceptance as a social norm.

Some would call that conviction, others pride. What one wears is an expression of identity, of course, and pride includes both what one is and what one is not. The seven players are, I imagine, proud of their principled stance.

That just takes us back into the morass of religious freedom v sexual/gender identity equality, the pointless argument that gave us the marriage equality plebiscite and Katherine Deves. The players are absolutely right if you share their beliefs, or absolutely wrong if you don’t.
...
The media are busily blowing up the Manly story because who doesn’t love a culture war, but we’d be wiser to take a long view on this. We know where the arc of progress goes. Let the players sit the game out; they can wear their prejudice with pride. Ultimately, what no doubt feels to them to be a stand, will prove to have been merely a footnote.

Daily Mail: Kyle Sandilands and Jackie O blast NRL stars for objecting to Manly's LGBT pride jersey but not gambling and alcohol sponsors - as three players 'backflip' on religious boycott of crucial game

Quote

Kyle Sandilands and Jackie 0 have lashed out at the group of Manly NRL players refusing to wear a rainbow striped jersey on the field for 'religious' reasons, accusing them of hypocrisy.

Seven Manly Sea Eagles stars vowed to step down from Thursday's must-win match against the Sydney Roosters because of the new gay pride jersey.
...
Their decision has sparked an outpouring of public outrage, including from their own fans and club legends, while others have supported their freedom of religious beliefs.

It has since emerged three players have changed their mind and will play this week following an emergency meeting.

'Of the seven players who are refusing to wear the jersey, at least three now have had a bit of a change of heart and are considering wearing the pride jersey for this upcoming round,' reporter Michelle Bishop told Channel 7's Sunrise on Tuesday morning.
...
The radio stars said they were at a loss trying to understand why some players refused to support the LGBT+ community when gambling company Pointsbet is the main club sponsor and their Brookvale Oval home ground is currently called 4 Pines Park after a beer company.

'The whole excuse of religion doesn't make sense. If they're all playing in a stadium sponsored by alcohol and all the jerseys are sponsored by a gambling company, it makes no sense,' Sandilands said.

'But they're okay to talk about gambling and encourage that,' Jackie O added.

Sandilands said everyone should 'take a moment to think about [the seven players' feelings]', suggesting people that furiously oppose homosexuality are often insecure about their sexuality themselves. 

Jackie O said the players boycotting the jerseys were 'mean'. 
...
Kyle and Jackie O's newsreader Brooklyn Ross, who is gay, described the decision as crazy.

He called for boycotting players to be booted out of the NRL but understood concerns about the gay marriage.
...
Sea Eagles boss Scott Penn said the club would remain firm on plans to wear the jersey.

'We're not going to force them to play, but we're committed to the jersey and we're committed to inclusion. We're not walking away from our position. And we respect their beliefs,' he told the Sydney Morning Herald.

Wide World of Sports: Gay Manly player devastated by players' boycott of pride jersey

Quote

A young gay Manly player has been devastated by the stance taken by seven of his club-mates to stand down this weekend rather than wear the club's pride jersey.
...

But their stance has left a promising young homosexual Sea Eagle, who has not yet come out publicly, devastated.

"He is a good young player coming through the grades and just wanted to play first grade for Manly," a close friend of the player told Wide World of Sports.

"But this move by the players has shocked him. He thought they would accept him for who he is if he ever decided to make his sexual preferences public - clearly that is not the case.

"He has been devastated by this turn of events - the pride jumper is supposed to be a sign of hope and inclusion.

"The fact that half the team would boycott it rather than play has deeply saddened him.

"They have no problem supporting gambling on their jumpers, which is a sin according to the Bible. But when it comes to homosexuality, they have a problem."

Courier Mail: NRL world divided by Manly Sea Eagles pride jersey player revolt

Quote

A former Manly Sea Eagles club great has detailed his heartbreak over the player revolt surrounding a pride jersey.

Seven Manly stars are boycotting Thursday night’s contest against the Sydney Roosters after the club’s decision to wear a one-off pride jersey.

...

Former Sea Eagles great Ian Roberts, the first rugby league player to come out as openly gay, was left broken hearted by the player revolt.

“I try to see it from all perspectives but this breaks my heart,” Roberts said to The Daily Telegraph.

“It’s sad and uncomfortable. As an older gay man, this isn’t unfamiliar. I did wonder whether there would be any religious pushback. That’s why I think the NRL have never had a Pride round.”

“I can promise you every young kid on the northern beaches who is dealing with their sexuality would have heard about this.”
...

Social media users, however, weren’t backing down from condemning the players for revolting against wearing the pride jersey.

Wide World of Sports’ Matt Bungard wrote: “I don’t want to hear one single thing about ‘respecting other people’s opinions’ or using religion as a crutch to hide behind while being homophobic. No issues playing at a stadium covered in alcohol and gambling sponsors, which is also a sin. What a joke.”

Spalk Talk’s Tom Read wrote: “As a manly fan, I’d be more than ok for those players to not play in this game, or ever again for the club.”

Courier Mail (again) : ‘Will not play’: Des Hasler confirms seven players out over jersey boycott

Quote

Manly coach Des Hasler has confirmed all seven players will miss this week’s NRL match against the Sydney Roosters over the club’s pride jersey furore.
...

Despite reports three players were wavering on their stance, Hasler confirmed in a press conference today the seven players would miss this week’s match.

“None of the coaching staff or the players had prior knowledge to the jersey,” Hasler said.

“They are not wearing the jersey as it conflicts with their cultural and religious beliefs. And I am concerned with their welfare.

“Their spirituality is a central part of their wellbeing. The club has made an error from which it and we will learn. The players will not play on Thursday and we accept their decision.

“These young men are strong in their beliefs and convictions and we will give then the space and the support they require.

“The playing group are solid and understanding of each other’s views. As a club, we will wear the jersey on Thursday night.”
...
Sea Eagles coach Des Hasler reportedly told his players he would support their decision to stand down from the Round 20 contest over the pride jersey, while ARLC chairman Peter V’landys argued the footballers were completely within their rights not to play.

“Rugby league is the greatest game for all,” he told 2GB.

“It’s inclusive. But at the same time you have to respect people’s religious beliefs and cultural beliefs.

“Those players are taking a stand and they’ve got every right to — they’ve got freedoms to do so.”
...
On Tuesday morning, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was asked whether he had a message for the country’s religious communities in the aftermath of the Manly saga.

“That I respect people of faith,” he said.

“That all people, regardless of their faith, should be respected. That‘s something I have always done. And something that my Government will do as well.

“We will address the issues of religious discrimination and the need to legislate there. We’ll do that during the term of Parliament. We’ll do it in a way which is much more consultative and brings people together in a way that I hope characterises the way my Government functions.”

Daily Mail (again) : Gay TikTok icon is praised for his 'brilliant' scathing response to the Manly players who refused to wear the rainbow pride jersey

Quote

A gay TikTok star has been praised for his 'brilliant' response to the Manly Sea Eagles players who have refused to wear a new pride jersey, describing them as 'homophobes' and the situation as 'ugly and tiring'.  

Scott O'Halloran from Melbourne has been branded 'incredibly well articulated' for his composure in the now-viral video where he questioned the players place to 'define the validity of that jersey'.
...

Scott has now asked Manly to make the players step down for their 'outdated, backwards and homophobic views'.

The clip begins with Scott's brother Luke explaining that he's just sent him a news article.    

'I'm pretty sure you're about to blow up,' he says, before asking 'what are your thoughts?'.

Scott then says he's 'not surprised' before launching a vicious tirade against the players.

'Listen up you fellas. When you put on your jersey you represent the sport and your team not your religion, he said.

'There are fans at home that are black, white, brown, Christian, Muslim, trans, gay, bi,  straight.

'Who the f*** are you to define the validity of that jersey?

'Because last time I looked, it's the members that pay really big bucks, and the sponsors that pay even bigger bucks to keep your a***es employed.

'Now you either go and chuck that jersey on and you do your job or I'm asking your club to stand you down permanently for your outdated, your backwards and your homophobic views because let's be really f***ing clear here it's got nothing to do with religion.

'I have a lot of religious friends that do not have a problem with my sexuality at all.'

He then goes on to ask AFL players,  people of faith and NRL fans and players to share the message to 'stand with the LGBTQI+ community'.

'Let us know that we are included in Australian sports. Be an ally and not a homophobe it's really f***** ugly and tiring'.

The video quickly racked up thousands of comments - with many praising the comedy star for his take.

A few thoughts:

1. I am continually surprised at the intolerance exhibited by supposed champions of "tolerance," "diversity," "inclusion," etc.  Nothing demonstrates a commitment to these things better than . . . publicly calling for people to be severely punished for resisting compelled speech that contravenes their religious (and/or cultural) beliefs.

2. Several of the critics of these players lambasted the players as hypocrites for declining to wear "pride" regalia while at the same time willingly wear advertisements for gambling and alcohol companies.  This is a pretty good, though ultimately unavailing, critique.  Virtually everyone has to make principled distinctions regarding accommodating things they may personally find problematic.  I pay my taxes even though I disapprove of some of the projects that are funded by taxes.  I shop on Amazon even though it "sells and streams more than 30 Nazi propaganda films" and sells any number of things I find offensive or problematic.  I obey the law of the land, even though I disagree with laws which legalize elective abortion, re-define marriage, and so on.  

3. I was pleased to see the owner of the team acknowledge the rights and sensibilities of the players.

4. The corporatized/commoditized "pride" stuff is fast becoming farcical.  Pride Month (a whole month!) has become an extended exercise in commoditized, corporatized virtue signaling. And yet there is also an increasing feeling that all this regalia is, as this fellow put it, "sinister":

"Sinister" seems unfortunately apt.  There are real threats to Free Speech, and threats for failing to submit to compelled speech.  

Thoughts?

-Smac

 

Edited by smac97
Posted
2 hours ago, smac97 said:

Last month we had a discussion about members of the Tampa Bay Rays baseball team who had declined to wear "gay pride" regalia: Tampa Bay Rays players opt to not wear the "Pride Night " logo on shirts

We also discussed how they were criticized on social media, but that the team management - to their credit - nevertheless did not compel these team members to submit to compelled speech.

It looks like we are looking at another iteration of this issue, this time involving Austrialian rugby players (one of whom is a Latter-day Saint) : Inside the VERY religious world of the Manly players who are refusing to wear the pride 'inclusive' jumper

"Mormons stopped practicing polygamy in 1809."  That is, 21 years before the Church was organized, and when Joseph Smith was four years old.

A decent amount of news coverage on this:

Yahoo: NRL world divided over 'disgraceful' Manly pride jersey furore

Crikey.com: ‘Wearing prejudice with pride’: seven Manly players put principle over playing

Daily Mail: Kyle Sandilands and Jackie O blast NRL stars for objecting to Manly's LGBT pride jersey but not gambling and alcohol sponsors - as three players 'backflip' on religious boycott of crucial game

Wide World of Sports: Gay Manly player devastated by players' boycott of pride jersey

Courier Mail: NRL world divided by Manly Sea Eagles pride jersey player revolt

Courier Mail (again) : ‘Will not play’: Des Hasler confirms seven players out over jersey boycott

Daily Mail (again) : Gay TikTok icon is praised for his 'brilliant' scathing response to the Manly players who refused to wear the rainbow pride jersey

A few thoughts:

1. I am continually surprised at the intolerance exhibited by supposed champions of "tolerance," "diversity," "inclusion," etc.  Nothing demonstrates a commitment to these things better than . . . publicly calling for people to be severely punished for resisting compelled speech that contravenes their religious (and/or cultural) beliefs.

2. Several of the critics of these players lambasted the players as hypocrites for declining to wear "pride" regalia while at the same time willingly wear advertisements for gambling and alcohol companies.  This is a pretty good, though ultimately unavailing, critique.  Virtually everyone has to make principled distinctions regarding accommodating things they may personally find problematic.  I pay my taxes even though I disapprove of some of the projects that are funded by taxes.  I shop on Amazon even though it "sells and streams more than 30 Nazi propaganda films" and sells any number of things I find offensive or problematic.  I obey the law of the land, even though I disagree with laws which legalize elective abortion, re-define marriage, and so on.  

3. I was pleased to see the owner of the team acknowledge the rights and sensibilities of the players.

4. The corporatized/commoditized "pride" stuff is fast becoming farcical.  Pride Month (a whole month!) has become an extended exercise in commoditized, corporatized virtue signaling. And yet there is also an increasing feeling that all this regalia is, as this fellow put it, "sinister":

"Sinister" seems unfortunately apt.  There are real threats to Free Speech, and threats for failing to submit to compelled speech.  

Thoughts?

-Smac

 

It's because the LGBTQ were for so long treated inhumanely, as did the black community. The blacks only make up for 13.6 % of the United States, according to my google search. So he's saying only 2 % are gay and why are we worrying so much over them? It may be overkill with Gay Pride parades etc., but the motives come from love. Maybe it backfires too, but I think it's all from hoping to stop the prejudice against them. Just as there was for Black Lives Matter campaigns and parades. It's to counteract the racists and the bigots out there. White straights rule as far as being the most percentages, so maybe it's just speaking up for the marginalized out there, or the people that suffer either by inequality or even death.

https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/lgbtq-people-are-more-likely-be-victims-hate-crime-any-other-group

Posted

The concept of “free speech” was never about preventing social consequences for what you say or don’t say.

3 hours ago, smac97 said:

1. I am continually surprised at the intolerance exhibited by supposed champions of "tolerance," "diversity," "inclusion," etc.  Nothing demonstrates a commitment to these things better than . . . publicly calling for people to be severely punished for resisting compelled speech that contravenes their religious (and/or cultural) beliefs.

The so-called "tolerant left" lured me into catacombs with the promise of a rare vintage of amontillado, then proceeded to bury me alive.

Posted
7 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

The concept of “free speech” was never about preventing social consequences for what you say or don’t say.

The so-called "tolerant left" lured me into catacombs with the promise of a rare vintage of amontillado, then proceeded to bury me alive.

I guess we can call you Fortunato from now on.

Posted
2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The concept of “free speech” was never about preventing social consequences for what you say or don’t say.

You know, it kind of was.  And is.

When the government is compelling speech as a "social consequence," that's a problem.  

When the government is punishing speech as a "social consequence," that's a problem.

Thanks,

-Smac

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, smac97 said:

A decent amount of news coverage on this:

It's even worse actually being over here. Anytime someone "famous" makes any comment on it, it's front page news with the storyline repeated each time. 

The comments on social media relating to it also show how little religious knowledge people have about Christianity*. People are calling them hypocrites because they are wearing alcohol and gambling related branding, and say things like "The Bible says that gambling is a serious sin" (it doesn't), and "The Bible says that drinking is a sin" (it doesn't). Then call them hypocrites for having tattoos (they aren't Jewish). A few have made the legitimate point about working on the Sabbath, but those comments are far fewer.

The really interesting thing will be the near future. A large proportion of NRL players are Polynesian, and Polynesians in Australia seem to be quite religious. So this could have happened to any team that tried something like this (bringing in a pride stripe** without telling the players or coaching staff, but also organising celebrities to promote it before the players knew about it). 

There are talks of bringing in a pride round, which other sports have had for years without issue. That will be the real test.

 

Acceptance of everyone in sport is an important discussion and thing to promote, but it should have been done better.

 

*To be fair, I have very little knowledge about Hinduism etc.

** Although officially they are calling it "everyone in league" (league being a reference to rugby league), all the news reports were using the term pride, as did the apology.

Edited by JustAnAustralian
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, smac97 said:

You know, it kind of was.  And is.

When the government is compelling speech as a "social consequence," that's a problem.  

When the government is punishing speech as a "social consequence," that's a problem.

Thanks,

-Smac

Do you have any evidence this is happening?

I didn’t read anything about government compelling speech or engaging in or condoning social media attacks.

I don’t see your frequent social media condemnation and attacks of their use of free speech as as anything different.  If social a media attack is equivalent to compelled speech - how are you not guilty yourself?

Edited by pogi
Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, pogi said:
Quote

When the government is compelling speech as a "social consequence," that's a problem.  

When the government is punishing speech as a "social consequence," that's a problem.

Do you have any evidence this is happening?

Yes.  See here, here,  herehere, here, herehere, herehere

38 minutes ago, pogi said:

I didn’t read anything about government compelling speech or engaging in or condoning social media attacks.

I don’t see your frequent social media condemnation and attacks of their use of free speech as as anything different.  If social a media attack is equivalent to compelled speech - how are you not guilty yourself?

I am not speaking of "social media" commentary.  Private parties generally cannot "compel" speech.  

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited by smac97
Posted
24 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Yes.  See here, here,  herehere, here, herehere, herehere

I am asking for evidence of government compelled speech in the Australia incident.  Things relevant to this specific incident.  All I see is complaining about social backlash/free speech being called “compelled speech”. 

Posted
1 hour ago, JustAnAustralian said:

There are talks of bringing in a pride round, which other sports have had for years without issue.

What is a “round”?  I saw in the article reference to an indigenous/multicultural round,  but can’t pin it down and too much clutter in google.

Posted
1 hour ago, Calm said:

What is a “round”?  I saw in the article reference to an indigenous/multicultural round,  but can’t pin it down and too much clutter in google.

A season is split into rounds (generally one per week), with each round consisting of several teams paired up for a single game. Round 1 might be AvB CvD EvF, Round 2 might then be AvC BvF DvE etc. Each team only plays once per round, and there are occasionally "bye" rounds, in which a certain number of teams sit out to balance numbers of games etc. You can see this years NRL season split into rounds at https://www.nrl.com/globalassets/2022_nrl_draw_10_11_final.pdf . In that PDF "network" is who has TV broadcasting right for that game.

Some rounds will be themed. You've mentioned the indigenous/multicultural round. There are also ANZAC related rounds (war remembrance), Women themed rounds (which this week's is meant to be), etc.

So in an indigenous round, the outfits might be altered to have designs relating the local traditional aboriginal groups. Pride themed rounds will have rainbow alterations etc.

 

 

 

Posted (edited)

So basically play is dedicated to a particular cause for that round.  Does part of the income from tickets and advertising go to a cause or is it to just bring attention to a cause or to have a memorial/celebration of something?

Edited by Calm
Posted
44 minutes ago, Calm said:

Does part of the income from tickets and advertising go to a cause or is it to just bring attention to a cause or to have a memorial/celebration of something?

I'll occasionally see it mentioned that a percentage of sales related income will go to for instance, an Aboriginal health charity or LGBT support charity, but I wouldn't put a percentage on how often it happens or how much goes to charity. I would expect that raising awareness is a bigger part of it.

Posted
5 hours ago, pogi said:

I am asking for evidence of government compelled speech in the Australia incident.  Things relevant to this specific incident.  

I don't see it, either.

"Compelled speech" typically applies to government actors.  However, it is possible (though not legally actionable) for a private actor - such as the owner of a rugby team - to "compel" his employees to "speak" in a particular way, such as by wearing a jersey with "Pride" regalia.  Here, that fortunately did not happen.  I am glad of that.

The title of the thread was bad.  My apologies.

Thanks,

-Smac

Posted
1 hour ago, smac97 said:

I don't see it, either.

"Compelled speech" typically applies to government actors.  However, it is possible (though not legally actionable) for a private actor - such as the owner of a rugby team - to "compel" his employees to "speak" in a particular way, such as by wearing a jersey with "Pride" regalia.  Here, that fortunately did not happen.  I am glad of that.

The title of the thread was bad.  My apologies.

Thanks,

-Smac

Well you got what you wanted out of the headlines.  Yet another anti LGBT thread by SMAC.  In the end, that is what is relevant to you.

Posted
8 minutes ago, california boy said:

Well you got what you wanted out of the headlines.  Yet another anti LGBT thread by SMAC.  In the end, that is what is relevant to you.

Personal taunt.  No substance.  No reasoning.  

Posted
6 hours ago, smac97 said:

Personal taunt.  No substance.  No reasoning.  

Really? No substance?  No reasoning?  How many of these anti LGBT threads have you started?  How many times have you smeared the LGBT community by your diatribes about how horrible the gay community is?  Did you read your post about how horrific gay people are because, well let me scour the internet and find the most inflammatory quotes I can find about gay pride events as a reason to not support the gay community.

 

Let's just try this on for size and see how it fits.  Here is my thread title

Why a rugby player should never play on a team with a Mormon on it.

It has been brought to my attention by a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is playing on an Australian rugby team.  Team players have been asked to play right beside this player from the Mormon Church.  This is the same Church that has members that kill children.  See here and here and here and here

From the last article

 

Quote

 

"After midnight on a bitterly cold 4th of February, not far from our home, a young Mormon mother named Christine Jonson bundled up her two children, loaded them in the car and drove to the middle of the cable bridge between Pasco and Kennewick Washington. She kissed her children goodbye, lifted them one by one over the bridge railing, and dropped them into the Columbia River. Christine later recollected hearing faint splashes in the icy water 40 feet below. She did not hear crying and so felt that her children had not suffered too much before they died.

Why? Christine believed that she was a fallen woman, and that with her as a mother, her two boys had little chance of growing up otherwise. In accordance with the teachings of her Mormon faith, she believed that if her two children died before the age of accountability, they would automatically go to heaven. In fact, they would go to the Celestial Kingdom. Christine believed that she would be cast into outer darkness for their murder, but since she was going to hell anyway, she decided to at least try to save her children. Needless to say, this event was of real concern to the local Mormon community. I was greatly saddened by this tragedy."

 

Bishops of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints groom children.  See here and here and here

Quote

 

(KUTV) — A Utah man, who once was a bishop in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is in jail on a two-year sentence after he pleaded guilty to two counts of sexual abuse of a child. 

Francis Heber Fuller, 78, was originally charged with 11 counts of aggravated sexual abuse of a child, one count of first-degree sexual abuse of a child and lewdness involving a child. Fuller was to face a jury trial this year but instead pleaded guilty to two of the charges that were reduced to second-degree felonies while the rest of the charges were dismissed with prejudice; they cannot be brought against Fuller in the future.

 

Quote

 

On Feb. 17, 2019, a Dodge County Sheriff’s deputy pulled Davis over because he saw a child moving around the front seat while not wearing a seat belt.

The deputy ran Davis drivers’ license and discovered he was a lifetime registered sex offender in Utah.  

According to court documents, the boy "knew Davis from church," "considered him family."  Davis would give him expensive gifts and "guy" hugs.

The boy would later admit Davis repeatedly sexually assaulted him and tried to rape him.

 

 

Mormon bishops protect and hide child abusers.  See here

Quote

 

When a Bisbee man told his Mormon bishop he was sexually abusing his own 5-year-old daughter, the bishop provided counseling. He involved the man’s wife in the sessions, apparently hoping that knowledge of her husband’s activities would prompt her to keep their children safe.

What the bishop didn’t do was report the abuse to police

 

Quote

The bishop’s counseling sessions apparently had little effect. The man continued to molest his daughter, and later, after her birth in 2015, his infant daughter. He made videos of the encounters and posted them on pornographic websites, which were eventually discovered by Interpol, reported to his employer, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and led to criminal charges.

You consistently find some little article, blow it up, throw in all kinds of anti gay quotes by scouring the internet to put the worst possible spin on any dirt you can find and then try to paint the entire LGBT community with this broad brush.  Frankly, I am getting sick of it.  So I think what I will do every time you start one of these posts, I am going to start scouring the internet as well and finding the worst possible stories I can find about your precious Church.  You know, the one that teaches that we should show love and compassion for our LGBT brothers and sisters while at the same time smearing them with internet dirt.  No mention of all the amazing LGBT people who do wonderful amazing charity work in their communities.  No mention of all the wonderful LGBT parents raising children who have taken in older children that are not often adopted and given them loving and caring homes.  We are your doctors, your care givers, your teachers, your firemen, your policemen and even lawyers.  Supporting those that are LGBT does not mean supporting every single person that is in a pride parade.  It is about supporting a community that gets marginalized (see above post) by many.

Do you really think your diatribe about gay pride parades is an accurate portrayal of a gay pride parade?   Or perhaps you might have just Googled outraged comments to show a picture you want to paint of what gay pride parades are about. Well I have attended a very few.  They aren't really my thing.  But I can tell you that the San Francisco gay pride parade goes on for hours and over a million people attend it prior to Covid.  It is an endless line of different religious groups, real estate agents, politicians, police, fire, parents of gay children, corporations,busienesses, and on and on.  Quite frankly I get bored and never actually have seen the entire parade.  And guess how many participants are running around in scanty clothes?  It is a very small minority of what that parade is about.   It is quite obvious that you have never actually attended a gay pride parade.  If you have, then tell us about the most outrageous thing you saw there.  And then tell us about the endless other people who participated in the parade.  But like all the great bishops in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, those aren't the ones that make it into the right wing news  propaganda.  Just like they are the ones that never make it into your tirades against the LGBT community.

Every time I read one of your anti LGBT threads, I take a further step away from the Church.  Every time a gay member of the Church comes to me (and there have been quite a few) for advice and guidance as to what they should do,  I tell them they should carefully decide if they want to spend their lives surrounded by people that are toxic and will try to paint the LGBT community in thee worse possible way. The Church is not a healthy and safe place if you are LGBT because of members like you.  Yeah this is a personal attack on your behavior because I am sick of these endless threads you start.   Can you imagine how this board would react if I started a thread about every single bit of dirt I could find about members of your Church?  Yet you got your cheerleaders cheering you on for exposing the gay community. Personally I am sick and tired of these drive by threads where, like this one, you find some news article, but the next post you write is a How badly can I paint the LGBT community even if it has nothing to do with the original article.  If you are trying your hardest to build the biggest wedge between The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the LGBT community, you are doing a hell of a job. Congrats.

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints acknowledges that same-sex attraction is a sensitive issue that requires kindness, compassion and understanding."  Not feeling it SMAC.

Posted (edited)

@smac97 Would you please delete the pictures from your post?  While I can eaily skip past words it is harder to not see the pictures and then they stick in my mind.

Edited by Rain
Posted
23 hours ago, smac97 said:

Mormons stopped practicing polygamy in 1809."  That is, 21 years before the Church was organized, and when Joseph Smith was four years old

Likely a typo for 1890.  Did you really not realize that?

Posted
18 hours ago, smac97 said:

You know, it kind of was.  And is.

When the government is compelling speech as a "social consequence," that's a problem.  

When the government is punishing speech as a "social consequence," that's a problem.

Thanks,

-Smac

The government owns this team?

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, california boy said:

Really? No substance?  No reasoning?  How many of these anti LGBT threads have you started?  How many times have you smeared the LGBT community by your diatribes about how horrible the gay community is?  Did you read your post about how horrific gay people are because, well let me scour the internet and find the most inflammatory quotes I can find about gay pride events as a reason to not support the gay community.

 

Let's just try this on for size and see how it fits.  Here is my thread title

Why a rugby player should never play on a team with a Mormon on it.

It has been brought to my attention by a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is playing on an Australian rugby team.  Team players have been asked to play right beside this player from the Mormon Church.  This is the same Church that has members that kill children.  See here and here and here and here

From the last article

 

Bishops of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints groom children.  See here and here and here

 

Mormon bishops protect and hide child abusers.  See here

You consistently find some little article, blow it up, throw in all kinds of anti gay quotes by scouring the internet to put the worst possible spin on any dirt you can find and then try to paint the entire LGBT community with this broad brush.  Frankly, I am getting sick of it.  So I think what I will do every time you start one of these posts, I am going to start scouring the internet as well and finding the worst possible stories I can find about your precious Church.  You know, the one that teaches that we should show love and compassion for our LGBT brothers and sisters while at the same time smearing them with internet dirt.  No mention of all the amazing LGBT people who do wonderful amazing charity work in their communities.  No mention of all the wonderful LGBT parents raising children who have taken in older children that are not often adopted and given them loving and caring homes.  We are your doctors, your care givers, your teachers, your firemen, your policemen and even lawyers.  Supporting those that are LGBT does not mean supporting every single person that is in a pride parade.  It is about supporting a community that gets marginalized (see above post) by many.

Do you really think your diatribe about gay pride parades is an accurate portrayal of a gay pride parade?   Or perhaps you might have just Googled outraged comments to show a picture you want to paint of what gay pride parades are about. Well I have attended a very few.  They aren't really my thing.  But I can tell you that the San Francisco gay pride parade goes on for hours and over a million people attend it prior to Covid.  It is an endless line of different religious groups, real estate agents, politicians, police, fire, parents of gay children, corporations,busienesses, and on and on.  Quite frankly I get bored and never actually have seen the entire parade.  And guess how many participants are running around in scanty clothes?  It is a very small minority of what that parade is about.   It is quite obvious that you have never actually attended a gay pride parade.  If you have, then tell us about the most outrageous thing you saw there.  And then tell us about the endless other people who participated in the parade.  But like all the great bishops in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, those aren't the ones that make it into the right wing news  propaganda.  Just like they are the ones that never make it into your tirades against the LGBT community.

Every time I read one of your anti LGBT threads, I take a further step away from the Church.  Every time a gay member of the Church comes to me (and there have been quite a few) for advice and guidance as to what they should do,  I tell them they should carefully decide if they want to spend their lives surrounded by people that are toxic and will try to paint the LGBT community in thee worse possible way. The Church is not a healthy and safe place if you are LGBT because of members like you.  Yeah this is a personal attack on your behavior because I am sick of these endless threads you start.   Can you imagine how this board would react if I started a thread about every single bit of dirt I could find about members of your Church?  Yet you got your cheerleaders cheering you on for exposing the gay community. Personally I am sick and tired of these drive by threads where, like this one, you find some news article, but the next post you write is a How badly can I paint the LGBT community even if it has nothing to do with the original article.  If you are trying your hardest to build the biggest wedge between The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the LGBT community, you are doing a hell of a job. Congrats.

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints acknowledges that same-sex attraction is a sensitive issue that requires kindness, compassion and understanding."  Not feeling it SMAC.

Yep. 

Here's a recent post from Carol Lynn Pearson on the Facebook group, Mormons Building Bridges. I hope Smac takes the time to read it. 

Carol Lynn Pearson:

THE TIME I RECEIVED A LETTER OF APOLOGY FROM THE PRESIDENT/PROPHET OF MY CHURCH. A letter in my personal archives came to mind when I read of the current visit of the excellent Pope Francis to Canada on what he calls a “penitential pilgrimage” to atone for the historic role of Catholic missionaries in the forced assimilation and “cultural genocide” of generations of Indigenous children, hundreds of whom—perhaps thousands—lie in unmarked graves near residential schools.

My story is not nearly so brutal, but still it serves as a good example in a community that continues to discuss the appropriateness of institutional apology for harm done.

On August 17, 1983 I wrote a three page letter to President Gordon B. Hinckley, with whom I had had several positive communications. I told him of my attending a talk given by a popular speaker in the First Quorum of the Seventy. I wrote, “I have never heard a talk in which the voice of the Lord as I know it was so conspicuously absent.” This talk was given in an outdoor setting on a lovely summer evening at the Aspen Grove Family Camp, where I had been invited to be a participant. My four children were with me.

“The voice that I heard was a voice of bigotry, of self-righteousness, of condescension and patronization . . . . The general thrust of the talk was how special we Mormons really are . . . . An unkind humor permeated the talk from beginning to end.” [He joked about Catholics whom the Lord obviously loves because we converted 50,000 of them last year, and about people in India who worship their cows.] “And now let’s talk about San Francisco and the homosexuals . . . . Brothers and sisters, I want you to know that homosexuality is nothing more than an addiction, like an addiction to drugs or to cigarettes, and you simply get over it . . . . But it’s tougher. And do you to know why it’s tougher? Because Satan himself is one of them, and he wants these men!’ ”

At this I heard someone clomping down the steps from the benches above. Yes, my fifteen year-old daughter who had been sitting toward the top with other young people. She was sobbing, tears running down her cheeks. Her fists were clenched and she was shaking with anger as she sat down beside me. “Let’s leave,” I said to her. “No,” she said as she glared at the speaker. “I’m going to sit right here.” I kept my arms around my daughter—whose gay father would pass away the following year. More laughter, more jokes. The speaker smiled. My daughter cried. During the closing prayer she got up and ran and I followed her.

We talked long into the night. I held her close and told her that this man was not representative of the general authorities that I know and love. My letter to President Hinckley concluded:

“There is false economy in worrying about the billions of waiting spirits and forgetting about [the young people of the church who are] anxious to hear a voice that is consistent with the voice of the Lord. And when the voices in the Church are not—they do not hesitate to go elsewhere.

“Thank you for listening. Thank you for your enormous efforts in dealing with difficult things. I send my best wishes and appreciation.”

A couple of weeks later there was a letter in my mailbox from church headquarters.

“Dear Sister Pearson:

I read your letter of August 17th with dismay. I very much regret the experience which you and your daughter had . . . . I hope that you and your daughter will accept my apology in behalf of the Church and the speaker for any injuries done. Please be assured of my earnest desire for your happiness and that of your daughter within the framework of the Church and the gospel.

Sincerely,

Gordon B. Hinckley

P.S. Thank you for the book which you sent me. Its contents are beautiful.”

Apologies are powerful things that assist with healing—as we hope will happen for the Indigenous people of Canada through the public presence and words of Pope Francis—and as lifted my own heart through the personal communication to me from the good man who was the president of my church.

Edited to add, from personal experience: I remember attending one of the first times that Mormons Building Bridges walked in the gay pride parade and took a photo and put it on my FB profile. And my aunt posted a reply and asked why I would do such a thing, and then a conversation ensued to the point that I finally had to take it down because it got so bad. 

 

Edited by Tacenda
Posted (edited)

Couple of quick thoughts:

  1. I didn't know professional rugby was really a thing. So I suppose congratulations are in order for being one of the few sports I apparently care about even less than soccer.
  2. From a purely aesthetic perspective, I have got to say that those rainbow stripes do not look good on those maroon jerseys. They should have color-swapped the jerseys with the shorts (which are white) for this round to at least make them look halfway decent. Apparently they sold out of the ugly versions though, so maybe I don't know what I'm talking about.
  3. Why does the Daily Mail article keep calling the LDS guy a "missionary?" Do missionaries in Australia get to play professional sports on P-Day or something?
  4. And finally (perhaps related to number 1 above), if these guys really are professionals then why on earth is this even a story - shouldn't this sort of thing be handled in their player's contracts?

 

Edited by Amulek
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, california boy said:

Really? No substance?  No reasoning?  

Nope.  Not a whit.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

How many of these anti LGBT threads have you started?  

I start threads about all sorts of things.  Here are the last 75 topics I have started (I have asterisked the ones where the topic is, broadly, "LGBT"):

  1. Another Instance of Compelled Speech (Targeting Religious People) (Sorta)
  2. Discovery of Photograph of Joseph Smith?
  3. "Suspicious" Fire at Orem Temple Site
  4. Update on Investigation of BYU's Speech and Language Clinic
  5. Pres. Oaks: "Religious Rights Cannot Be Absolute"
  6. It's Official: SCOTUS Overturns Roe v. Wade 
  7. Update on the "Glass of Wine is Good for You" Thing...
  8. Update on Massacre of Polygamists in Mexico
  9. Another SCOTUS decision on religious liberty.
  10. Des News Article Re: "Under the Banner of Heaven" Mini Series
  11. White Nationalists (Some from Utah) Planned to Attack LGBTQ Rally in Idaho
  12. Dallas Jenkins Walking a Tightrope
  13. Update on Story Re: Missing Kids (Daybell)
  14. ***BYU Student Flashes Rainbow Flag at Graduation
  15. The 2021 Annual Report: How the Church of Jesus Christ Cared for God’s Children
  16. "Patriarchy" - On its definition, meaning, on its "smashing," etc. 
  17. On Elder Renlund's "Arrogant and Unproductive" Comment ("Demanding revelation from God is both...")
  18. (2nd) Update on Arizona Abuse Case
  19. Church Faces Possible Tax Issue in Australia (Simon Southerton is involved...)
  20. Two Trib Articles Re: John Dehlin
  21. Latter-day Saints call first Black woman to serve in a general presidency
  22. The Trailer for "Banner of Heaven" has dropped
  23. Trib Article re: Heavenly Mother 
  24. Is the "Mormon" label fading?
  25. Story Re: Assignment from BYU Professor
  26. Dehlin v. Kwaku - An Update
  27. Article Re: SCOTUS Review of Gay Rights Case (Wedding Websites)
  28. Thoughts on the Church's Response to Ukraine Conflict
  29. QAnon Continues to Disturb (Trib Article)
  30. Saints Unscripted - Series of Vids Re: Blacks and the Priesthood
  31. Federal lawsuit against religious schools, including byu - Update
  32. Two Announcements Re: April 2022 General Conference
  33. Article: "What happens when Mormon women are called to ordained ministry?"
  34. The Church's Marketing Strategy - Reverting from the Shift?
  35. Controversy Over Utah Pastor's Tweet Re: Woman Posting Pics of Themselves in Revealing Clothing
  36. ***BYU Bans Protests on Y Mountain
  37. New Church Pamphlet on Islam
  38. RICO Act, Proposed Class Action against the Church - it is filed (Part 2) - Gaddy Lawsuit
  39. "Conversion Therapy" in Canada: Apparently a One Way Street
  40. Graphic Novel re: Joseph Smith
  41. Information About Ken Bowers
  42. Interesting article re: polygamists' approach to COVID, medical issues
  43. "Government Dole" v. Church's Welfare System
  44. Feet of Clay
  45. NASA Asking Religious Leaders About Aliens - What Would Latter-day Saint Leaders Say?
  46. Idaho County Sheriff Pulls Gun on Church Youth Group
  47. Former Doctor in Las Vegas Arrested for Terroristic Threats against Church
  48. Is the Provo Temple . . . Ugly?
  49. Police Chief for USU Police Warns Football Team re: Sex w "Mormon Women"
  50. Clean up your act online, church tells Latter-day Saints
  51. Saints Unscripted - Bible Genres and Historicity
  52. SCOTUS - Oral Argument on Abortion Rights Case
  53. DezNat in the News Again
  54. Federal lawsuit against religious schools, including byu
  55. Christian Pastor on Trial in Finland
  56. Input on Eating Meat "Sparingly"
  57. ***Two Articles re Improvements in Utah re: LGBT Issues
  58. Church Members in California Seeking "Religious Exemption" Forms for Vaccine, Church Saying "Nope."
  59. New Schisms: Denver Snuffer and Phil Davis
  60. Great Article Re: "Reconversion" Narratives
  61. ***Article re "Mixed Orientation Marriage"
  62. ***Opinion Piece by Ty Mansfield: Managing "Tension" between Doctrines and Impact
  63. Sexism in Utah: How Latter-day Saints Fare
  64. Jewish Leaders in AZ Tour Mesa Temple During Open House
  65. Minerva Teichert's Grandson's Lawsuit Against the Church
  66. Fire in Joseph Smith Memorial Building (Not Arson)
  67. Catholic "Ordinariates" - Any corollary in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?
  68. ***Opinion Article Re: Religious Activity and Suicidal Ideation (LGBT)
  69. 1st Edition Book of Mormon Sold - Record-setting Amount
  70. Boy Scouts, Church Pay into Settlement Fund for Abuse Victims
  71. Church completes digitization for billions of family history records
  72. Will the Church Purchase the Kirtland Temple?
  73. James huntsman (jon's brother) sues church for 'fraud'
  74. Idaho Bishop Released, Charged with Abuse
  75. Denver Snuffer - Canonizing "QAnon" Conspiracy Theories?

I count 6 out of 75.  Or about 8%.

Most of my threads are about legal topics pertaining to the Church (civil liberties, lawsuits against or other legal issues affecting the Church, etc.), current events and news items involving the church, doctrinal issues, media (news and social) treatment of the Church, critics and criticism of the Church, issues pertaining to Christianity generally.

Meanwhile, let's take a looksee at your threads (gay-themed, including topics where you and your status as a gay man, are asterisked) :

  1. ***We Can Find Common Ground on Gay Rights and Religious Liberty
  2. ***A Prophet of God
  3. ***In Latter Times Some Shall Forbid Marriage
  4. You Guys Need a Hug
  5. ***Is there a place in the Plan of Happiness for gays?
  6. Do you think there has  been a revelation from God since Joseph Smith's time?
  7. Is the Bible the Words of God?
  8. ***Why would any straight person want to be a member of the COJCOLDS?
  9. ***Main resons for faith crisis
  10. So What Is The Real Plan Of God. Or Is The Plan Of Salvation A Complete Disaster.
  11. ***The Last Ever Ssm Thread. Who's In?
  12. Why Is Organized Religion Failing
  13. ***Eternal Increase And Eternal Progression
  14. Use Of The Urim And Thummim In Translating The Book Of Mormon
  15. ***Plantiff Files Prop 8 Brief For Supreme Court 
  16. ***The Church Has Done More For Gay Marriage Than Any Other Organization
  17. ***Marriott Pushes For Doma Repeal
  18. Does God Cause Natural Disasters?
  19. ***Has Anyone On This Board Softened Their Views Of Gay Marriage?
  20. ***Catholics Backing Away From Politically Fighting Gay Marriage.
  21. ***Prop 8 The Play To Broadcast On Youtube
  22. David Archuleta Announces He Is Serving A Mission
  23. ***George Cloney To Star In Dustin Lance Black'S Prop 8 Play
  24. Morality And The Presidency
  25. ***Prop 8, The Play

I count 16 out of 25, or 64%.

You have started eight times as many "LGBT" threads as I have.

Personally, I would be fine if there were less "LGBT" topics pertaining to the Church (and even in general).  I recently posted a link to this video of a British guy commenting on the oversaturation of "gay" stuff.  A transcription:

Quote

Gay people make up maybe 2-3% of the population.  They've acquired almost all of the rights in a country like Australia or Britain that you could wish to acquire.  At some point, you've just got to get on with being like everybody else.  But this sort of endless insistence that everybody else has to put up with a sort of weird overreach by a very distinct minority of the population, I think heralds, at some point, a backlash of its own. 

A lot of gay people don't feel at all represented by "Pride."  They don't have anything to do with it.  They just want to get on with their lives.  And I think a lot of straight people look at this and think 'Just, you know, just tone it down a bit.  We're very happy for you, but you don't have to go on about it, you don't have to have months of special flag-flying.  Let's just get on with being equal.'  I think a lot of gay and straight people agree with that, but weird figures, like the Mayor of London, want to push the LGBTQIA+ {messaging} until they really stretch everyone's tolerance.

"A lot of gay people don't feel at all represented by "Pride."  They don't have anything to do with it.  They just want to get on with their lives."

"{A} lot of straight people look at this and think 'Just, you know, just tone it down a bit.  We're very happy for you, but you don't have to go on about it, you don't have to have months of special flag-flying.  Let's just get on with being equal.'"

Alas, I don't expect any such respite, either in general or from you.

My interest in the Church is eclectic.  I am interested in discussing and learning about and debating its origins, history, doctrines, practices, governance, societal influence and impact, and so on.  I think that is amply attested in my posting history.  If anything, my particular emphasis tends toward legal issues affecting the Church.  Developments in civil liberties.  Legislation.  Lawsuits.  Members of the Church who break the law.  That sort of thing. 

Meanwhile, you are far more of a one-trick-pony than I am when it comes to "LGBT" issues.  The difference is that I don't really hector you about your preferred choice of discussion topics. 

Meanwhile, your prior response to me was devoid of substance or reasoning.  A driveby potshot, that's all.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

How many times have you smeared the LGBT community by your diatribes about how horrible the gay community is?  

Never.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Did you read your post about how horrific gay people are because,

I never posted any such thing.

And you continue to personalize the thread.  No substance.  No reasoning.  Just personal attacks.

Must be a day ending in "y."

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Let's just try this on for size and see how it fits.  Here is my thread title

Why a rugby player should never play on a team with a Mormon on it.

It has been brought to my attention by a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is playing on an Australian rugby team.  Team players have been asked to play right beside this player from the Mormon Church.  This is the same Church that has members that kill children.  See here and here and here and here

From the last article

 

Bishops of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints groom children.  See here and here and here

 

Mormon bishops protect and hide child abusers.  See here

Yawn.  

I didn't do anything comparable to this.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

You consistently find some little article, blow it up, throw in all kinds of anti gay quotes by scouring the internet to put the worst possible spin on any dirt you can find and then try to paint the entire LGBT community with this broad brush.  

I do nothing of the sort.  To the contrary, I often differentiate between the broader gay community and those subparts of it that are prone to excesses, unseemly behaviors, etc.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Frankly, I am getting sick of it.  

Then feel free to disregard my posts.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

So I think what I will do every time you start one of these posts, I am going to start scouring the internet as well and finding the worst possible stories I can find about your precious Church.  You know, the one that teaches that we should show love and compassion for our LGBT brothers and sisters while at the same time smearing them with internet dirt.  No mention of all the amazing LGBT people who do wonderful amazing charity work in their communities.  No mention of all the wonderful LGBT parents raising children who have taken in older children that are not often adopted and given them loving and caring homes.  We are your doctors, your care givers, your teachers, your firemen, your policemen and even lawyers.  Supporting those that are LGBT does not mean supporting every single person that is in a pride parade.  It is about supporting a community that gets marginalized (see above post) by many.

Meh.

Again, there is no reasoning here.  No substance.  No evidence.  No reasoned analysis or argument.  Just emotional vitriol and threats.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Do you really think your diatribe about gay pride parades is an accurate portrayal of a gay pride parade?  

I was not describing all pride parades.  I was instead commenting on the ones that include depraved, licentious behaviors, that are grooming children, etc.

I have likewise not spoken against all drag shows.  I have instead commented on the ones that involve inappropriate sexualization of children.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Or perhaps you might have just Googled outraged comments to show a picture you want to paint of what gay pride parades are about. Well I have attended a very few.  They aren't really my thing.  But I can tell you that the San Francisco gay pride parade goes on for hours and over a million people attend it prior to Covid.  It is an endless line of different religious groups, real estate agents, politicians, police, fire, parents of gay children, corporations,busienesses, and on and on.  Quite frankly I get bored and never actually have seen the entire parade.  And guess how many participants are running around in scanty clothes?  It is a very small minority of what that parade is about.   

And it is those portions of pride parades that I find problematic, and which I am criticizing.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

It is quite obvious that you have never actually attended a gay pride parade.  If you have, then tell us about the most outrageous thing you saw there.  

I have not.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

And then tell us about the endless other people who participated in the parade.  But like all the great bishops in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, those aren't the ones that make it into the right wing news  propaganda.  Just like they are the ones that never make it into your tirades against the LGBT community.

Again, no reasoning.  No analysis.  No evidence.  Just vituperation.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Every time I read one of your anti LGBT threads, I take a further step away from the Church.  

Emotional blackmail tends to work better when you have a personal relationship with the other guy.  And threatened emotional blackmail as a distraction from the topic at hand is ineffective.

I don't post "anti LGBT threads."  That is a caricture of your own divising.  

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Every time a gay member of the Church comes to me (and there have been quite a few) for advice and guidance as to what they should do,  I tell them they should carefully decide if they want to spend their lives surrounded by people that are toxic and will try to paint the LGBT community in thee worse possible way.

Oh, the irony.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

The Church is not a healthy and safe place if you are LGBT because of members like you.  

Again, the irony.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Yeah this is a personal attack on your behavior because I am sick of these endless threads you start.   

Then ignore them.  We'll both be better off.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Can you imagine how this board would react if I started a thread about every single bit of dirt I could find about members of your Church?  

No need to imagine.  Much (most?) of your participation on this board consists of disparagements, insults, taunts, accusations, etc.  Against the Church, its leaders, doctrines, members, etc.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Yet you got your cheerleaders cheering you on for exposing the gay community.

Get a grip, dude.  I regularly post news items where Latter-day Saints have been arrested, convicted, etc.  Daybell/Vallow.  The guy in Arizona who horrifically abused his children.  The guy from Utah (on his stake's high council) who was caught taking upskirt photos in a mall in Tennessee (?).  Swindlers who have conned fellow Latter-day Saints out of millions of dollars.  DezNat.  The USU coach who was caught disparaging women.

Here a few I found offhand:

All of these involve Latter-day Saints misbehaving, usually in some pretty serious ways.  And yet nobody has ever accused me of using such topics to "expose" or disparage the entirety of the Latter-day Saint community.

I have likewise said nothing to disparage the entirety of the "gay community."  I have instead critiqued those parts and members of it which are doing things I find problematic. 

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Personally I am sick and tired of these drive by threads where, like this one, you find some news article, but the next post you write is a How badly can I paint the LGBT community even if it has nothing to do with the original article.  

Then feel free to not read them.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints acknowledges that same-sex attraction is a sensitive issue that requires kindness, compassion and understanding."  Not feeling it SMAC.

Not really buying into your attempt at guilt-tripping, CB.  It's based on a caricature.  

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited by smac97
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...