JK Rowling steps in it (re: The Book of Mormon)

[SteveO]

21 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

That was what we call a “joke”.

It’s hard to tell sometimes when you have the clown nose on or off.

[webbles]

57 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Watched "Shark Tank" last night and saw a wonderful human that was trans man. I hope you could watch and see that not all trans people are like the guy in the video. But I'm sure you know that, but wanted to share. But shoot, can't figure out how to show it but maybe on your end hopefully you can find it. It's September 30th episode.

It doesn't really matter if all of the transwomen are saints.  Allowing transwomen in the bathroom means that cis male offenders will take advantage of it.  The US has 480,000 transwomen (https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/trans-adults-united-states/).  It is kind of impossible to calculate the number of cismen that would take advantage of the situation, but considering that the number of registered sex offenders is 767,000 (https://www.safehome.org/data/registered-sex-offender-stats/) and that number is mostly men and it doesn't encompass all sexual offenders, I'd say that half the time you see a man in a female bathroom, he will be a cisman offender.

With the number of men in the US, there are probably more bad cismen than all the transwomen.  So, why make it easier for these bad cismen to get into the female bathrooms?

Edited October 1, 2022 by webbles

[The Nehor]

1 minute ago, webbles said:

It doesn't really matter if all of the transmen are saints.  Allowing transmen in the bathroom means that cis male offenders will take advantage of it.  The US has 480,000 transmen (https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/trans-adults-united-states/).  It is kind of impossible to calculate the number of cismen that would take advantage of the situation, but considering that the number of registered sex offenders is 767,000 (https://www.safehome.org/data/registered-sex-offender-stats/) and that number is mostly men and it doesn't encompass all sexual offenders, I'd say that half the time you see a man in a female bathroom, he will be a cisman offender.

With the number of men in the US, there are probably more bad cismen than all the transmen.  So, why make it easier for these bad cismen to get into the female bathrooms?

I think you mean transgendered women here.

Also your sex offender stat is just made up. How did you reach that conclusion? Many places have implemented these changes. We should be deluged by all these sex offenders.

[webbles]

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I think you mean transgendered women here.

Also your sex offender stat is just made up. How did you reach that conclusion? Many places have implemented these changes. We should be deluged by all these sex offenders.

I linked to the source of the sex offender stat.  They say for the source:

Quote

We searched each state’s online sex offender registry to calculate the number of people listed as of April 2022. In some cases, the information was not available from the state registry websites, and in those cases, we contacted law enforcement public information officers and other state officials who provided us with the most updated numbers in their states.

Also, 767,000 offenders is actually pretty small.  It is only like 0.5% of all men in the US.

And yes, you are right, I meant transwomen.

[Teancum]

4 hours ago, InCognitus said:

The irony here is that J.K. Rowling's ignorant comment and the correction to what she said is getting the attention of the "wide wild world" through the internet.  Now more and more people will know that "The Book of Mormon" musical got it wrong, and that there were really several witnesses to seeing the golden plates.

I doubt many are paying much attention and it will all be forgotten in a few days.

[Ragerunner]

She is a hot mess. 

[Ragerunner]

Reading this thread was kinda like watching mental gymnastics. 
‘I really don’t like that she is lying about the prophet Joseph Smith but, see really hates transgenders and my politics tell me that a good thing.’ 
What to do, what to do.

Edited October 2, 2022 by Ragerunner

[PeaceKeeper]

The Church is a soft target on all social media platforms. Want to be "brave"? Bash the Church. So strong, so brave, so common.

[InCognitus]

1 hour ago, Ragerunner said:

Reading this thread was kinda like watching mental gymnastics. 
‘I really don’t like that she is lying about the prophet Joseph Smith but, see really hates transgenders and my politics tell me that a good thing.’ 
What to do, what to do.

You're reading it wrong.  She wasn't "lying" about the prophet Joseph Smith, she was misinformed or mistaken and was corrected by others, and she corrected herself.

Now, whether you join in on the whole transgender thing (pro or con) is up to you.

[bsjkki]

1 hour ago, Ragerunner said:

Reading this thread was kinda like watching mental gymnastics. 
‘I really don’t like that she is lying about the prophet Joseph Smith but, see really hates transgenders and my politics tell me that a good thing.’ 
What to do, what to do.

Why do you believe she hates transgenders? She admitted she was misinformed in her statement about Joseph Smith and researched further. 
 

 

 

[MorningStar]

12 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Watched "Shark Tank" last night and saw a wonderful human that was trans man. I hope you could watch and see that not all trans people are like the guy in the video. But I'm sure you know that, but wanted to share. But shoot, can't figure out how to show it but maybe on your end hopefully you can find it. It's September 30th episode.

Yeah, I know. My cousin is trans. My issue is that anyone can claim to be trans when they’re not. They don’t have to make the least amount of effort. Dude with a burley beard complaining that he doesn’t pass as a woman - pure insanity. “I want to be a woman, but I want to keep my penis, my man voice, my beard, my receding hairline, and my crappy attitude towards women who don’t feel safe with men in the bathroom.” 

[provoman]

On 9/30/2022 at 12:38 PM, smac97 said:

 

I still love JK Rowling, but she really goofed on this.

Thanks,

-Smac

She could have used JFK assassination, NASA soundstage moon landing, Camelot.

 

[Ragerunner]

13 hours ago, InCognitus said:

You're reading it wrong.  She wasn't "lying" about the prophet Joseph Smith, she was misinformed or mistaken and was corrected by others, and she corrected herself.

Now, whether you join in on the whole transgender thing (pro or con) is up to you.

Glad she tried to correct. The real questions is, why did she feel a need to go after Joseph Smith and the church. It wasn’t just a random moment. She could have pick from millions of post options. She chose the church.

[smac97]

4 minutes ago, Ragerunner said:

Glad she tried to correct. The real questions is, why did she feel a need to go after Joseph Smith and the church. It wasn’t just a random moment. She could have pick from millions of post options. She chose the church.

I suspect a measure of mere happenstance, alongside the prejudice.  I think she had recently seen "The Book of Mormon" musical, which includes the claim that nobody but Joseph saw the Plates.  The comparison came more freshly to mind.

[smac97]

On 10/1/2022 at 7:01 AM, Teancum said:

This just shows that most of the world does not know much about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and most do not care. 

I tend to take a long view of these things.  See, e.g., here:

Quote

c.4 BC	Birth of Jesus Christ, in Bethlehem.
c.30 AD	Death of Jesus Christ.
c.33	Pentecost and the coming of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2). Sometimes known as the Birthday of the Church.
c.33	Stephen - First Christian martyr (Acts 7).
c.48	Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15). Gentile Christians accepted alongside those in the Jewish tradition.
c.60	First Gospel published (often thought to be that written by Mark).
62	Martyrdom of James, "The Lord's Brother".
c.67-68	Apostles Peter and Paul* martyred in the reign of the Roman emperor Nero.
70	Jewish rebellion against the Roman empire ends. Destruction of the temple in Jerusalem.
From 70	Centre of Christianity moves to Antioch, Alexandria and Rome.
c.90	Book of Revelation and Gospel of Saint John written.
161-80	Widespread persecution of Christians under Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius. (Severe persecutions also occurred under the emperors Decius (249-251) and Diocletian (284-305)).
301	Armenia becomes the world's first country to officially adopt Christianity as the state religion.
312	Roman emperor Constantine receives a vision of a flaming cross with the words 'In hoc signo vinces' : 'By this sign conquer'. Defeats rival Maxentius at the Battle of Milvian Bridge.
313	Edict of Milan issued by Constantine - Christianity becomes a legal religion within the Roman empire.

Christianity, without prophets and apostles and priesthood authority to guide it, was fairly "slow to launch."  I expect a faster developmental curve for the Restored Church, but I still think it's a long process.

Also, I'm not sure what metric we use to ascertain the influence of the Church.  

Also, I'm not sure how this is a knock against the Church (I am assuming you intended it as such).  The scriptures don't seem to indicate that the function of the Church is to grow to such a point that it gains particularized social/political/cultural notoriety and/or power.  

• "And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were few ... I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon all the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small..." (1 Nephi 14:12.)
• “Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” (Matt. 7:13–14.)
• “For strait is the gate, and narrow the way that leadeth unto the exaltation and continuation of the lives, and few there be that find it.” (D&C 132:22.)
• "The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened." (Matthew 13:33.)
• "And again he said, Whereunto shall I liken the kingdom of God?  It is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened."  (Luke 13:20-21.)
• "Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men."  (Matthew 5:13.)

In my lifetime the Church has seen substantial both numerical growth and financial prosperity.  It will not always be so.  We make mistakes.  Some, even many, lose faith and fall away.  I question just how "big" the Church is supposed to be in terms of numbers or overt sociopolitical power/influence.

Still, I am happy to carry on.  Things will work out in the end.

On 10/1/2022 at 7:01 AM, Teancum said:

The only True and Living Church really has little impact on the wide wild world. 😏

I commented on this same theme last year:

Quote

I've always been comfortable with distinguishing the overall growth of the Church from the truthfulness of its message.  The Church is as true today with its many millions of members as it was in 1830 with six.  We of course should continue the pursue the mandates given to us, including the Great Commission.  But I don't think the Church was ever intended to be the Holy Roman Empire, or the Catholic Church, or some other worldwide "religious" superpower.
...

To the extent the institutional Church is to have an influence, I don't think that influence is supposed to be political, or military, or financial, or medical, or technological, or in music/entertainment, or in news/media, and so on.  Rather, its mandates are to perfect the Saints, proclaim the Gospel, redeem the dead, and care for poor and needy.  The Church has many thousands of buildings, hundreds of temples, tens of thousands of missionaries, and extensive humanitarian and educational endeavors.

If there were a facet of society where the Church has an obvious and substantial and overside "sphere of influence" (aside from the quality of its members and their cumulative "leavening" influence on their communities/societies), I would point to . . . family history work.  I think the Church is a recognized leader in that field, which is notable given Malachi's prophecy about Elijah:

Quote

5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord:
6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

There are still more things that will happen in the future, I believe.  

• “Before the great day of the Lord shall come, … the Lamanites shall blossom as the rose” (D&C 49:24).  I think this is starting to happen.  
• Also: "Near the time of the coming of Jesus Christ, the faithful Saints will build a righteous city, a city of God, called the New Jerusalem. Jesus Christ Himself will rule there. (See 3 Nephi 21:23–25; Moses 7:62–64; Articles of Faith 1:10.)"
• The literal gathering of the Ten Tribes.  
• A temple in Jerusalem, and one in New Jerusalem.
• The gathering at Adam-ondi-Ahman.
• Two witnesses in Jerusalem.  

I think the institutional Church will be involved in most or all of these.  

I'm not really that concerned about how much "the World" takes notice of these things.  That's not the predominating metric by which I gauge the role of the Church.
...

Per this website, there were an estimated 218,000 Christians worldwide in 200 A.D., out of an estimated population of 190-256 million.  If we assume a global population of 216 million (the average of the estimated population in 200 AD), Christians constituted a percentage of about .1% of the global population.  If Jesus Christ was the Son of God, then that truth is not negated by his followers only constituting .10% of the world 200 years after His birth.

The Church was founded in 1830.  A bit less than 200 years later, in 2016, there were 15,882,417 members of the Church, out of an estimated worldwide population of 7,464,022,049.  The Church, then, constitutes about .21% of the global population.  If the Church is what it claims to be, then that truth is not negated by its membership only constituting .21% of the world 200 years after its founding.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Meadowchik]

On 10/2/2022 at 6:25 PM, Ragerunner said:

Glad she tried to correct. The real questions is, why did she feel a need to go after Joseph Smith and the church. It wasn’t just a random moment. She could have pick from millions of post options. She chose the church.

The BOM musical is playing in Edinburgh right now.  If you live there or spend time there you will see the ads everywhere and many people see the show.

[smac97]

5 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

The BOM musical is playing in Edinburgh right now.  If you live there or spend time there you will see the ads everywhere and many people see the show.

Yep. Not too hard to connect the dots:

• JK Rowling lives near Edinburgh. 
• The BOM musical started playing in Edinburgh on 13 September 2022.
• In the musical's song “All-American Prophet,” the angel Moroni sings, “But don’t let anybody see these plates except for you.” Later in the musical, the dying Smith says, “Oh God, why are you letting me die without having me show people the plates? They’ll have no proof I was telling the truth or not.”
• Rowling published her tweet on 29 September at 9:46 a.m.

I suspect Rowling attended the musical between 13 September and 28 September, that she noticed the above plot elements (explicitly stated in the lyrics of two separate songs), that she then saw the other tweet ("It's baffling that people still hide behind 'can you name one thing she said that was transphobic' like sorry I don't keep a tally, I don't keep notes, I just saw them, knew they were transphobic and acted accordingly.  Why is it so hard to just believe us?"), and that she analogized that reasoning (which she clearly believes to be specious) with the plot element from the musical she had just seen.

As one guy tweeted in response:

Quote

When you're a Latter-Day Saint and a Potterhead, and J.K. Rowling tweets a little dig at The Book of Mormon

I don't think it's all that bad. She was critical of unsubstantiated claims (fair), not saying people should hate a religion. But where accusations should have evidence behind them, ALL religions require more faith than proof. Rowling's tweet didn't observe that key difference.

Rowling and others have been unfairly accused of bigotry and hatred toward LGBTQ people, accusations not backed by evidence. That was her point, and she is absolutely correct, though she could and should have drawn a much more relevant parallel.

(Emphasis added.)

Rowling also published two mildly mea culpa follow-up tweets:

Quote

I'm now being told that lots of people saw the golden plates. I'm genuinely fascinated: how many people?

---

I've just gone to look it up. Eleven people claimed to have seen the plates, some of them related to Smith, but there's debate as to whether this was a metaphysical experience or they genuinely saw them. And one man was allowed to hold the box but not look inside it.

And another responder (possibly BOMC?) :

Quote

ScripturePlus @ScripturePlus Sep 29

 

Replying to @jk_rowling

Great question. Here's a brief overview of who saw the gold plates, intentionally and accidentally.

 

Thanks,

-Smac

[Emily]

35 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I've just gone to look it up. Eleven people claimed to have seen the plates, some of them related to Smith, but there's debate as to whether this was a metaphysical experience or they genuinely saw them.

It would have been nice if she'd referenced where she "looked it up" because it obviously wasn't on the Church website. I'm also surprised more people didn't tweak her about accepting a staged musical as the authoritative source of information for all things "Mormon." But I think visitors to her page respect her talent so they don't want to actively harangue her. 

[Emily]

On 9/30/2022 at 8:09 PM, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I’ve heard the story of Joseph running through the woods with would be thieves giving chase. How many other documented theft attempts are there? I honestly don’t know. No need to do work if you don’t either, I’m just curious. 

I've heard various stories about people trying to steal the plates from a number of sources over the years, but in this age of information, I suspected that someone, somewhere has done a decent job of compiling most, and possibly all, of the stories in one place.

And I was correct. Here you go: 

“Take Heed Continually”: Protecting the Gold Plates 

Https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2001/01/take-heed-continually-protecting-the-gold-plates

[smac97]

33 minutes ago, Emily said:

It would have been nice if she'd referenced where she "looked it up" because it obviously wasn't on the Church website. I'm also surprised more people didn't tweak her about accepting a staged musical as the authoritative source of information for all things "Mormon." But I think visitors to her page respect her talent so they don't want to actively harangue her. 

A number of responders noted that she has a huge fanbase of Church members who love Harry Potter.  Some chastised her for her (admittedly ignorant) disparagement of their faith, but I would hope that most would take this as an opportunity to clarify and inform.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Meadowchik]

For a long time former member such as myself, the mischaracterisation isn't terribly far off the mark: the plates vanished indefinitely, the supposed witnesses were limited, and when it existed the access to them was private. 

Sometimes exaggeration and hyperbole do make a valid point.

Why would God allow witnesses to establish veracity, but then take away the concrete evidence? Why not let access expand indefinitely and open those doors to more people?

[Ragerunner]

18 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

The BOM musical is playing in Edinburgh right now.  If you live there or spend time there you will see the ads everywhere and many people see the show.

So basically she did the following?

I just saw a play last night about a religion, I think I will go home and post a nasty gram about that church now!?

I stand by my original comment. She is a hot mess.

[InCognitus]

3 hours ago, Ragerunner said:

So basically she did the following?

I just saw a play last night about a religion, I think I will go home and post a nasty gram about that church now!?

I stand by my original comment. She is a hot mess.

So basically you did the following....   "I just saw a comment from J.K. Rowling that says something false about my church, I think I will go make a nasty gram post about that person now?" 

The way you portrayed the events isn't what happened.  I'll attempt to summarize:  

She saw the play (maybe - this is a theory she has not personally confirmed that I'm aware of).  Then later, in Twitter, she was being accused of making "transphobic" remarks.  The comment she responded to said the following (emphasis added):  "It's baffling that people still hide behind 'can you name one thing she said that was transphobic'  like sorry I don't keep a tally, I don't keep notes, I just saw them, knew they were transphobic and acted accordingly.  Why is it so hard to just believe us?"

Her response was:  "It's like when Joseph Smith found the golden plates and nobody else was allowed to look at them".   Her comment had context, and it wasn't done maliciously, it was an analogy that came to her mind.  She had one person claiming they saw something but refused to provide evidence, and she thought (probably based on false information she got from the play) that Joseph Smith also made claims and refused to produce evidence.  Yes, it was a false comparison, but she didn't know that at the time.

She was corrected on her comment later and admitted her ignorance of the matter.  She said, "I'm now being told that lots of people saw the golden plates.  I'm genuinely fascinated:  how many people?"   She's still skeptical, but she admitted she was misinformed about Joseph Smith never showing the plates to anyone.   In short, she was just looking for a metaphor and picked a bad one.

Edited October 4, 2022 by InCognitus

[bluebell]

20 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

So basically you did the following....   "I just saw a comment from J.K. Rowling that says something false about my church, I think I will go make a nasty gram post about that person now?" 

The way you portrayed the events isn't what happened.  I'll attempt to summarize:  

She saw the play (maybe - this is a theory she has not personally confirmed that I'm aware of).  Then later, in Twitter, she was being accused of making "transphobic" remarks.  The comment she responded to said the following (emphasis added):  "It's baffling that people still hide behind 'can you name one thing she said that was transphobic'  like sorry I don't keep a tally, I don't keep notes, I just saw them, knew they were transphobic and acted accordingly.  Why is it so hard to just believe us?"

Her response was:  "It's like when Joseph Smith found the golden plates and nobody else was allowed to look at them".   Her comment had context, and it wasn't done maliciously, it was an analogy that came to her mind.  She had one person claiming they saw something but refused to provide evidence, and she thought (probably based on false information she got from the play) that Joseph Smith also made claims and refused to produce evidence.  Yes, it was a false comparison, but she didn't know that at the time.

She was corrected on her comment later and admitted her ignorance of the matter.  She said, "I'm now being told that lots of people saw the golden plates.  I'm genuinely fascinated:  how many people?"   She's still skeptical, but she admitted she was misinformed about Joseph Smith never showing the plates to anyone.   In short, she was just looking for a metaphor and picked a bad one.

It’s a great lesson in not using something you know practically nothing about to try to make a point.