Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

More Cultural and Moral Decay


Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

For example, you wouldn't think there's something wrong with disapproving of people yelling "don't protect the homos," but apparently some people here think there is. 

You are seriously going there with Incognitus?

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Calm said:

You are seriously going there with Incognitus?

What do you mean? I posted my disapproval of BYU students who yelled “don’t protect the homos” and got downvoted. InCognitus didn’t have anything to do with that, and I’m sorry if I didn’t make that clear. I gave it as an example of the bigotry I stand up against. 

Edited by jkwilliams
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, Duncan said:

where did you get this ability to mind read that these folks "rejected that Jesus"? Do you know any of them?

When this is a person’s chosen form of entertainment and they share it with their children, it’s a pretty good guess.  Be sure to read the full conversation in the link below (language warning):

 

Edited by Durangout
Posted
8 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

What do you mean? I posted my disapproval of BYU students who yelled “don’t protect the homos” and got downvoted. InCognitus didn’t have anything to do with that, and I’m sorry if I didn’t make that clear l. I gave it as an example of the bigotry I stand up against. 

The BYU students who yelled "don't protect the homos" are far afield from what the Church teaches (see this month's Liahona): https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2022/09/digital-only/love-unity-respect-and-friendship-recent-messages-from-prophets-and-apostles?lang=eng So maybe you are going along with the Church on this point concerning removing contention from expressing differences, and even disapproval.

Posted
10 hours ago, Calm said:

I do not read him that way at all. 

I don’t agree with how he phrases his criticisms at times, but I don’t read disdain for those identifying as LGBTQ+ individuals  in them. 

As long as they play nice and fit within the confines of the church. But otherwise? They are useful idiots to him. He said so himself. 

Posted
13 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Pure deflection. What is being condemned is Trojan-horse attempts at normalising unmistakably sexualised behaviour in front of minors. (Why people might be determined to do this is a completely separate topic!) That is not celebrated by BYU in any way, and you and your fellows know it.

Your own issues are showing. You have no context for that still grab from a video and so supplied your own. It’s disgusting to watch actually. 

Posted
12 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I graduated summa cum laude with a BA in literary studies. I'm thoroughly steeped in critical theory, especially Derrida, Foucault, and Lyotard. Your word games don't work on me.

You started the word games here. 

Posted
Just now, CV75 said:

The BYU students who yelled "don't protect the homos" are far afield from what the Church teaches (see this month's Liahona): https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2022/09/digital-only/love-unity-respect-and-friendship-recent-messages-from-prophets-and-apostles?lang=eng So maybe you are going along with the Church on this point concerning removing contention from expressing differences, and even disapproval.

I know they are. But they are the ones who went out of their way to protest and insult gays and lesbians. I was just surprised that I got downvoted for daring to suggest that yelling "don't protect the homos" is unacceptable behavior. 

Posted
10 hours ago, Calm said:

But I think it is a modern construct as well and yet I know I see there is massive pain at times because there is a lack of acceptance or even aggression targeting them

And that comes across from you and not him. 
 

The idea that homosexuality is a modern construct is utterly banal. Blue is a modern construct. But it’s a better and more accurate way to see the world. Once a culture invents blue, it doesn’t go back. The modern germ theory of disease is a modern construct, but also one that is much better than the religious explanations preceded it. Saying something is a modern construct doesn’t tell us anything about how useful or true something is. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

That’s the issue no? But what do I know. I’m just a useful idiot. 

I didn't see the drag show, either, but it seems telling that this was the worst thing they could find to post. As I mentioned, the couple I know, both active LDS, didn't see anything objectionable at the event. I trust their judgment.

Posted
35 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I know they are. But they are the ones who went out of their way to protest and insult gays and lesbians. I was just surprised that I got downvoted for daring to suggest that yelling "don't protect the homos" is unacceptable behavior. 

They are far afield but...??? No "buts" about it.

Considering the exchanges and personalities we see on this board, no reaction to my posts surprises me. 

If important to you, it would be interesting for you to engage your down-voters in explaining why they downvoted you.

Posted
Just now, CV75 said:

They are far afield but...??? No "buts" about it.

Considering the exchanges and personalities we see on this board, no reaction to my posts surprises me. 

If important to you, it would be interesting for you to engage your down-voters in explaining why they downvoted you.

My point was that my issue is with those who side with the shouters, outliers as they may be. I absolutely agree with you (and the church) about lowering the level of contention and treating each other with respect. 

Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I didn't see the drag show, either, but it seems telling that this was the worst thing they could find to post. As I mentioned, the couple I know, both active LDS, didn't see anything objectionable at the event. I trust their judgment.

There are true horrors in the world. Poverty, plagues, racism, violence and more. There is also an infinite amount of outrage porn out there. You can tell a lot about a persons priorities by where they direct their attention. Are they more upset that “Black Lives Matter” or about the systemic racism that is still pervasive in society. Same applies here I think. Are there drag shows that are inappropriate for children. Undoubtably yes. Was this one of them. Probably not. Are children at drag shows more of an issue that the mistreatment of LGBTQ youth? Not by a long shot. 

Edited by SeekingUnderstanding
Posted
9 hours ago, InCognitus said:

Not appropriate.  Not because of the images themselves or because of why you are asking the questions, but because of the inappropriate escalation of trying to find images that push the limits, on either side.

The first post of the drag show was inappropriate since it gave no context but was used to deride and vilify the event.

 

The Cougar shots show the hypocrisy of that derision and vilification.  Neither shots are appropriate, yet the Cougar shots show the necessity of pointing out the hypocrisy that is expressed regularly and inappropriately on this forum and elsewhere in the Church.

Why did InCognitus , Scott Lloyd and Hamba  give a downvote for the Cougar shots but not the drag show shot.  It seems totally hypocritical yet also typical.

Posted
3 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

I would like my son and my friends to live in a world where they are not marginalized and bullied because of their sexual orientation. Ideally, this would involve not being compared to grooming pedophiles. One way I support them is to stand up against bigotry. For example, you wouldn't think there's something wrong with disapproving of people yelling "don't protect the homos," but apparently some people here think there is. 

Sadly not a single TBM upvoted this idea.  That says a LOT.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, CV75 said:

The BYU students who yelled "don't protect the homos" are far afield from what the Church teaches (see this month's Liahona): https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2022/09/digital-only/love-unity-respect-and-friendship-recent-messages-from-prophets-and-apostles?lang=eng So maybe you are going along with the Church on this point concerning removing contention from expressing differences, and even disapproval.

Some yell "don't protect the homos". Some whisper their distain.  Some start threads on this sit that regularly demean and marginalize the LGBT community.  And some stand quietly by and never confront those that constantly attack the LGBT community.  

We have all seen the statement by Church leaders. Great guidance.  Does anyone here really believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints really treats the LGBT community the way Church leaders have asked?  Does BYU treat the LGBT community the way the Church leaders have asked?  I have seen this referenced at least twice in this thread that was designed to spur outrage against the LGBT community. My takeaway is the more TBM you are, the less one is likely to follow that counsel.

I know this is a bit harsh, but sometimes the weight of the constant demonizing and degrading the LGBT community gets pretty heavy to bear.  I also know this post will probably do very little to change those entrenched attitudes.

Edited by california boy
Posted
5 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I would describe peacefully as true believing

Thank you for pointing out the exception.  There are probably a few others.  But the point is pretty clear.

Posted
1 hour ago, Durangout said:

When this is a person’s chosen form of entertainment and they share it with their children, it’s a pretty good guess.  Be sure to read the full conversation in the link below (language warning):

 

Makes me wonder if the Dez guy, is a Des Nat.

But no biggy, I get why some may be concerned if they are throwing this at children. But where is the evidence? Or I'm late to the party.

Posted
5 minutes ago, california boy said:

Some yell "don't protect the homos". Some whisper their distain.  Some start threads on this sit that regularly demean and marginalize the LGBT community.  And some stand quietly by and never confront those that constantly attack the LGBT community.  

We have all seen the statement by Church leaders. Great guidance.  Does anyone here really believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints really treats the LGBT community the way Church leaders have asked?  Does BYU treat the LGBT community the way the Church leaders have asked?  I have seen this referenced at least twice in this thread that was designed to spur outrage against the LGBT community. My takeaway is the more TBM you are, the less one is likely to follow that counsel.

I know this is a bit harsh, but sometimes the weight of the constant demonizing and degrading the LGBT community gets pretty heavy to bear.  I also know this post will probably do very little to change those entrenched attitudes.

It's funny how we're supposed to be the "useful idiots" anxiously engaged in sexualizing small children (but we're not supposed to take any of that as disdain), but "our team" never starts these threads. We aren't going out of our way to point out any possible mistreatment of our LGBTQ+ friends by the LDS church. No, we just refuse to sit by and watch our loved ones described as morally and culturally decadent, predatory, and evil in thread after thread of outrage porn. 

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

What do you mean? I posted my disapproval of BYU students who yelled “don’t protect the homos” and got downvoted. InCognitus didn’t have anything to do with that, and I’m sorry if I didn’t make that clear. I gave it as an example of the bigotry I stand up against. 

My apologies at least in part. Somehow I misread that as “you….approving…” rather than disapproving even after reading it twice, meaning you were claiming Incognitus would approve of it.  I need to sleep before I think about it more as it still reads as inappropriate in general to me, but I don’t trust myself to figure out why till more awake.  I need to make sure I am not inserting what isn’t there. Hopefully won’t see me until after 6 or later (day and night is currently reversed for me)

Edited by Calm
Posted
Just now, Calm said:

My apologies at least in part. Somehow I misread that as “you….approving…” rather than disapproving even after reading it twice, meaning you were claiming Incognitus would approve of it.  I need to sleep before I think about it more as it still reads as inappropriate in general to me, but I don’t trust myself to figure out why till more awake.  Hopefully won’t see me until after 6 or later (day and night is currently reversed for me)

Get some rest, and again, I'm sorry I wasn't clearer. I'm just really tired of these threads that attack our families. 

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

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