Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

David Archuleta's new single about he and (some in?) his family leaving the Faith


Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Post of the year, decade or however long this topic has been in threads...

Thanks, but that highly-coveted "post of the year" status may be very short-lived:  @smac97 is far more intelligent than me, and it's his turn at bat!

33 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

 Manol, I could gush about you, [blah blah blah...]

Don't tell anyone, but I'm actually a sociopath.  My parole officer says that I'm a very convincing one...

Seriously, thank you. 

Edited by manol
Link to comment

I don't see why  a person needs to leave the church based on sexual orientation. I have found the LDS community rather understanding of people's sexual preferences. I have never heard of anyone being excommunicated for being gay. What I have found interesting is that since the proclamation of the family just how things have changed in Western society. It seems now it is an anything goes civilisation. The LDS church is in a pickle jar when it comes to all this. I don't think that the temple will be having same sex dealings anytime soon. Nor ward marriages of same sex couples. Its entire family philosophy depends on women and men marrying. 

Link to comment
22 minutes ago, why me said:

I don't see why  a person needs to leave the church based on sexual orientation. I have found the LDS community rather understanding of people's sexual preferences. I have never heard of anyone being excommunicated for being gay. What I have found interesting is that since the proclamation of the family just how things have changed in Western society. It seems now it is an anything goes civilisation. The LDS church is in a pickle jar when it comes to all this. I don't think that the temple will be having same sex dealings anytime soon. Nor ward marriages of same sex couples. Its entire family philosophy depends on women and men marrying. 

Many people think they are being “accepting” when they are not.

Link to comment
46 minutes ago, Peacefully said:

They are being accepting but with major caveats. 

Yeah, it is more that they are deliberately trying to be nice. Then they hold meetings discussing the person’s status and potential threat level. They treat them as if they need special handling and that you have to protect yourself from them. If they are youth it is even worse. Suddenly they are a problem that has to be dealt with.

Meanwhile some of the ward just wishes these people would go away.

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Yeah, it is more that they are deliberately trying to be nice. Then they hold meetings discussing the person’s status and potential threat level. They treat them as if they need special handling and that you have to protect yourself from them. If they are youth it is even worse. Suddenly they are a problem that has to be dealt with.

Meanwhile some of the ward just wishes these people would go away.

I have heard of some very accepting wards in places like California. But even sincere acceptance by members doesn’t change the rules that make them “other.”

Link to comment
10 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Many people think they are being “accepting” when they are not.

Maybe so. But I think that most members are rather tolerant these days. It is interesting that the mom also left the LDS church to show solidarity with David. Does she believe in the LDS faith still? And did David have bad experiences with the members? I think that in the west there is much confusion over identities. I don't see this outside the West. And I think that many people are rather confused about it all. I just can't see most lds members being harsh to the LGBT community.

 

Edited by why me
Link to comment
8 hours ago, Peacefully said:

I have heard of some very accepting wards in places like California. But even sincere acceptance by members doesn’t change the rules that make them “other.”

The lds church is a world wide church with members outside the Western paradigm. I think that in many parts of the world there is much more intolerance toward 'others' whoever ehy may be or whatever they may be. But I think that inside the lds church there is a great deal of tolerance, regardless of geographical location. If a gay lds couple marries in a civil marriage outside the lds church and are members of the lds church, I don't see an excommunication forthcoming if they are having sexual relations. I just see acceptance of their 'difference'.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

This is interesting. How does one go from faith to non faith? I have this feeling that many members who knew David knew that he was gay. But interestingly David received an answer from God. He knelt down and prayed a prayer and received an answer. He was not told to leave the lds faith but rather God gave him an interesting answer to his prayer. I will post it in my next post.

 

 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, why me said:

This is interesting. How does one go from faith to non faith? I have this feeling that many members who knew David knew that he was gay. But interestingly David received an answer from God. He knelt down and prayed a prayer and received an answer. He was not told to leave the lds faith but rather God gave him an interesting answer to his prayer. I will post it in my next post.

 

 

David prays for guidance and receives an interesting answer from God. It can be found at around 13.40 onwards.

Edited by why me
Link to comment
10 hours ago, why me said:

The lds church is a world wide church with members outside the Western paradigm. I think that in many parts of the world there is much more intolerance toward 'others' whoever ehy may be or whatever they may be. But I think that inside the lds church there is a great deal of tolerance, regardless of geographical location. If a gay lds couple marries in a civil marriage outside the lds church and are members of the lds church, I don't see an excommunication forthcoming if they are having sexual relations. I just see acceptance of their 'difference'.

That would be a baby step in the right direction, I suppose. But I defer to others who are living it to say whether this would be enough for now. 

Link to comment
10 hours ago, why me said:

The lds church is a world wide church with members outside the Western paradigm. I think that in many parts of the world there is much more intolerance toward 'others' whoever ehy may be or whatever they may be. But I think that inside the lds church there is a great deal of tolerance, regardless of geographical location. If a gay lds couple marries in a civil marriage outside the lds church and are members of the lds church, I don't see an excommunication forthcoming if they are having sexual relations. I just see acceptance of their 'difference'.

You see this actually happening or you imagine/like to think it is happening?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

You see this actually happening or you imagine/like to think it is happening?

It is actually happening. When we look at Africa, there can be a intolerance of difference. If we look at the middle east, there is great intolerance toward difference. And if we look at certain countries in Asia, it is no different. But I think that church members are rather tolerant of difference and much more non-judgemental. I don't see the lds church excommunicating LBTG members. And I am sure that if a gay or lesbian couple would join the church, they would be welcomed. I have never heard of any discrimination

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Peacefully said:

That would be a baby step in the right direction, I suppose. But I defer to others who are living it to say whether this would bI e enough for now. 

Of course there are rules. But then again,  I am not temple worthy and I am still welcomed in the lds church. I know the rules and I choose to follow what I want to follow. No problem. Why would it be any different with a same sex attraction couple? Or anyone else? David was still welcomed in the lds church as far I have read. He chose to leave as did his mother. I did not see any pressure. And I posted the video, David prayed and received his answer which shows God answers prayers. But God did not tell him to leave the lds church. Just to be true to himself. Not a bad answer.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, why me said:

It is actually happening. When we look at Africa, there can be a intolerance of difference. If we look at the middle east, there is great intolerance toward difference. And if we look at certain countries in Asia, it is no different. But I think that church members are rather tolerant of difference and much more non-judgemental. I don't see the lds church excommunicating LBTG members. And I am sure that if a gay or lesbian couple would join the church, they would be welcomed. I have never heard of any discrimination

Africa’s intolerance of LGBT people is to a large extent imported from British colonialism. American religious leaders have encouraged harsher anti-gay laws in various African nations. It was actually a nice reminder for those here not to trust these people. They would do the same in the US and elsewhere if they could. Some members of the Church are involved with these efforts.

And no, the experience of LGBT LDS in South America and Africa is not generally one of acceptance and love. In Africa it is often ‘hide it completely’ or risk imprisonment or death.  When you are in a homophobic culture the local church leaders generally do little to nothing to blunt that stigma.

If you have never heard of any discrimination then yeah….you are just guessing. And you are guessing wrong. Read stories.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, why me said:

I have never heard of any discrimination

Ever or just recently? As in the last few years?

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
9 minutes ago, Calm said:

Ever or just recently? As in the last few years?

In general. Usually people attracted to the same sex have just left and at times their relatives too can leave. But no one to my knowledge discriminated against them in church. I don't see it as a big concern for the members that have been involved with at churches.

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, why me said:

In general. Usually people attracted to the same sex have just left and at times their relatives too can leave. But no one to my knowledge discriminated against them in church. I don't see it as a big concern for the members that have been involved with at churches.

Are you not aware of the excommunication policy for apostasy for participating in a gay marriage that was in force back in 2015 for a few years before it was rescinded? Do you not see that as discrimination (whether or not it was appropriate discrimination, I don’t see how you could say it wasn’t discrimination)?

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
On 4/4/2024 at 9:15 PM, The Nehor said:

*looks at the length of the post I am responding to*

This is silence?

No.  This is me not assenting to your censorious proclivities.

On 4/4/2024 at 9:15 PM, The Nehor said:

Surgical procedures sometimes have complications! The secret reality the medical world doesn’t WANT YOU TO KNOW!

"Surgical procedures."  The form of eugenics that dares not speak its name.

Eugenics and the practice of transgendering children

Quote

The practice of eugenics is returning to contemporary Australia in the treatment of transgendered children.

With the cooperation of the Family Court, children as young as ten are being put on puberty delaying drugs after being diagnosed with “gender identity disorder” or “gender dysphoria”.

There is the expectation that they will be moved onto cross-sex hormones at 16 and receive surgery to amputate their genitals at 18.

Taking from the past

There are similarities between the eugenic sexual surgeries and drug treatments of the past and the transgendering of children now.

The ideas for both treatments come from scientists of sex such as biologists, endocrinologists and psychiatrists. Both practices are based on the idea that certain problematic behaviours have a biological basis and can be “cured” by treatments which alter sexual characteristics.

Historically, eugenics practice was directed at the control or elimination of the economic underclass, “morons”, prostituted women, criminals, gypsies, those deemed morally deficient and lesbians and gays.

The eugenic treatment of lesbians and gays in the past included surgeries such as castration, hysterectomy, vasectomy and lobotomy.

Though males seeking to be transgendered today may be attracted to women or other men, it is recognised that the women are generally lesbians before they are diagnosed as “transgender”. Professionals involved in treating gender identity disorder in childhood are aware that three quarters of the boys referred for diagnosis by their parents will be homosexual or bisexual when they reach adulthood.

A regime of transgendering children, as well as adults, shores up up a correctly gendered and heterosexual state and citizenry.

If an adult wants to sterilize himself or herself, and if he is mentally competent to consent to the medical procedure, we are still left with the ethical question here.  I think this deserves some discussion.

On 4/4/2024 at 9:15 PM, The Nehor said:

I’m done. If you aren’t going to try to understand the studies and will instead just do mass copy and pastes why should I look at it?

I don't expect you to.  I was, however, hoping that other readers might review some of the links and come to their own conclusions.

On 4/4/2024 at 9:15 PM, The Nehor said:

On the off chance you are interested in mental and physical health outcomes I would recommend looking at the meta-analyses of the data of multiple studies instead of cherry-picking and saying the data is “mixed”.

Actual debate requires facts and people who understand them. You aren’t debating. You are copy/pasting.

I pretty much never "debate" you in any meaningful sense.  You essentially never have anything substantive to say.  Just potshots, insults, and provocations.

Other readers, however, might be more open to the materials I provided.

On 4/4/2024 at 9:15 PM, The Nehor said:

So now you are just posting random articles whether they agree with you or not? Bold strategy.

As I noted previously: "We are getting lots and lots of mixed messaging about the long-term effects and efficacy of 'gender affirming care.'"

On 4/4/2024 at 9:15 PM, The Nehor said:

While you propagandize against the treatment that is helping him.

If medical treatment is ethical and worthwhile, I will either support it or be indifferent to it.

As it is, however, people like you don't want to have discussions about this topic.  You just want to shout down any viewpoint you dislike, using emotionalisms, insults and taunts.

On 4/4/2024 at 9:15 PM, The Nehor said:

Do you know what I call people who claim to sympathize with those who struggle with ADHD and wish them the best while trying to cut off or limit access to medication that improves our quality of life?

Enemies.

See?

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment
5 hours ago, smac97 said:

No.  This is me not assenting to your censorious proclivities.

I don’t think the word “censorius” means what you think it means.

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

"Surgical procedures."  The form of eugenics that dares not speak its name.

Eugenics and the practice of transgendering children

Well, that is an article. Who wrote this weird thing? Ah, that name sounds familiar. Should look that up and……

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!

Sheila Jeffreys?

LOL

Welcome to the alt-Left Smac! Well, I can’t actually welcome you since I think they are all crazy and won’t pretend I am one of them.

Sheila Jeffreys is a political lesbian. In other words she thinks women should abstain from all sexual contact with men. All of it.

She thinks transgender people are just replicating heterosexual norms and she does not see that as a good thing. She also doesn’t like regular heterosexuality. She sees transgender surgery as the equivalent of painful beauty practices women practice like leg waxing. She claims gay male culture has poisoned lesbian culture.

She has also called marriage a form of prostitution.

You know how I and some others have criticized you for only seeing things from a masculine point of view, making women’s issues about you, and passing judgment on women for holding views you think are unfair without understanding why? This woman would have done that except on steroids. She dehumanizes men and mind-reads ALL their motivations. She does the same thing to all transgender people. One of her critics described her movement as full of: "anti-intellectualism, emphasis on innate knowledge, fetishisation of tiny ideological differences, heresy hunting, conspiracy theories, rhetorical use of images of disgust, talk of stabs in the back and romantic apocalypticism.”

Here is what she thinks of gender:

“Radical feminist theorists do not seek to make gender a bit more flexible, but to eliminate it. They are gender abolitionists, and understand gender to provide the framework and rationale for male dominance. In the radical feminist approach, masculinity is the behaviour of the male ruling class and femininity is the behaviour of the subordinate class of women. Thus gender can have no place in the egalitarian future that feminism aims to create.”

She wants to abolish it. Mandatory non-binary status for all!

“The opposite of heterosexual desire is the eroticising of sameness, a sameness of power, equality and mutuality. It is homosexual desire.”

Homosexual Superiority!

“The bonding of women that is woman-loving, or Gyn/affection, is very different from male bonding. Male bonding has been the glue of male dominance. It has been based upon recognition of the difference men see between themselves and women, and is a form of the behaviour, masculinity, that creates and maintains male power… Male comradeship/bonding depends upon energy drained from women.”

Male bonding is vampiric and sucks energy from women.

“Male supremacy is centered on the act of sexual intercourse, justified by heterosexual practice.”

Heterosexual sex itself destroys any hope of men and women being equal.

She is nuts!!!! Oh wow, you sure can pick them smac.

Now on to the article:

“There is the expectation that they will be moved onto cross-sex hormones at 16 and receive surgery to amputate their genitals at 18.”

That is not anything like a universal transgender journey or even desire. Then again she thinks transgender men are lesbians who want a male body so they can get women. She is not playing with a full deck.

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

If an adult wants to sterilize himself or herself, and if he is mentally competent to consent to the medical procedure, we are still left with the ethical question here.  I think this deserves some discussion.

It does but you aren’t discussing it. You are posting article dumps.

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

I don't expect you to.  I was, however, hoping that other readers might review some of the links and come to their own conclusions.

They probably know how to use Google.

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

I pretty much never "debate" you in any meaningful sense.  You essentially never have anything substantive to say.  Just potshots, insults, and provocations.

Untrue, you rarely respond to my rebuttals of your article dumps. You just dump more articles. You aren’t discussing. I end up rebutting other people. I am the one actually engaging.

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

Other readers, however, might be more open to the materials I provided.

Hopefully I pointed out the folly of that.

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

As I noted previously: "We are getting lots and lots of mixed messaging about the long-term effects and efficacy of 'gender affirming care.'"

On the one hand we have the majority of the developed world’s medical and psychiatric establishment and on the other hand we have insecure men who are weirdly afraid of drag shows and anything that blurs masculinity and femininity joining hands with alt-left loonies who consider heterosexual sex an oppressive evil and want to abolish gender completely. So who can know who we should trust? A lot of mixed messaging if you trust all messages equally. /s

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

If medical treatment is ethical and worthwhile, I will either support it or be indifferent to it.

I don’t think you will. I think that even if the entire medical establishment unanimously agreed that gender-affirming medicine was ethical and worthwhile you would still reject it on religious grounds. Don’t pretend you are weighing the evidence on this. You’re not. You are looking for supporters for a viewpoint you already hold.

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

As it is, however, people like you don't want to have discussions about this topic.  You just want to shout down any viewpoint you dislike, using emotionalisms, insults and taunts

As I said you don’t actually discuss these issues. I don’t shout you down. I shoot down your message. You don’t defend it. You just go back to repeating your position without addressing anything others say and go on posting articles about things you don’t understand.

I love discussing these issues. I don’t need to shout you down. I actually understand (to an extent) the topic we are discussing.

Quote

See?

Yeah, no. You don’t get to propagandize against medical care that helps people and whine that people who desperately want or need said care and the loved ones of those who want or need said care and then get weird over how those people don’t think you are their friend or ally or that they aren’t ‘respecting your position’ or something. Grow up.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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