The Church on the Wrong Side of History Again

[Gidget]

I'm late on this one (as usual, my day job as a mother must be very busy or something) but I read the article and felt myself feeling "yeah stick it to 'em Joe" but then logic (submissive blind lamb) took over and I was left with guilt. Which makes me realize that I am SO on the fence on this issue, and doesn't the Bible say that is the worst place to be? I feel positively green and two years old when I think of Prop 8. I consider myself an intelligent person with strong opinions and I can't tell if I am just shaken that this one isn't so strong or if I am experiencing that LDS leadership guilt mongering thing. Probably both. I am sad and confused at the church's obnoxious outpouring of support for Prop 8 combined with their lack of even a small mention to many other national/international political atrocities. And as lame as this sounds, I don't know what that means for my testimony. I still feel like the Church is true. Have no plans to leave ever - is anyone else experiencing this awkward volley?

[Gidget]

Please someone respond to me I am going insane!!!

[Jim Swarthout]

Originally Posted by Gidget

Please someone respond to me I am going insane!!!

It's called cognitive dissonance and it can be a real mofo.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Originally Posted by Gidget

Please someone respond to me I am going insane!!!

As has been lamentably well-documented, my BIL, Morris Thurston, has taken a lot of flak because of an article he published critiquing a Pro-8 memorandum from a legal perspective. He did so because, as an active Church member, he was concerned by what he perceives as a lot of inaccuracies in the arguments advanced by certain proponents. He hasn't criticized anything coming directly from the Church. Some, including a small mob on CB, have urged that a disciplinary council be convened against him. But he has been told by Church officials there's no problem with what he's done. This is consistent with a statement reported in Sunday's Salt Lake Tribune, that "Latter-day Saints are free to disagree with their church on the issue without facing any sanction, said L. Whitney Clayton of the LDS Quorum of the Seventy. 'We love them and bear them no ill will.'"

That same issue included a column by Robert Kirby, an active LDS member, that's pretty funny. Quoth Kirby:

The only serious concern I have about gays getting married is that they'll register someplace pricey. The church is serious about the sanctity of marriage. I get that. But aren't more potentially "dangerous" marriages already being performed out there? For example, I hear in church all the time about marriage being ordained of God. But I also hear about how the glory of God is intelligence.
Shouldn't it be against the law for stupid people to get married? What's more harmful to society - two well-dressed men getting married and settling down, or two idiots tying the knot and cranking out any number of additional idiots? You should have to pass a harder test to get married than the one we currently have. Essentially, there are but two questions: "How old are you?" and "Is that your sister?" Hell, you could pass this test just by guessing.

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_10798657

[SoCalCoug]

Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar

That same issue included a column by Robert Kirby, an active LDS member, that's pretty funny. Quoth Kirby:

The only serious concern I have about gays getting married is that they'll register someplace pricey. The church is serious about the sanctity of marriage. I get that. But aren't more potentially "dangerous" marriages already being performed out there? For example, I hear in church all the time about marriage being ordained of God. But I also hear about how the glory of God is intelligence.
Shouldn't it be against the law for stupid people to get married? What's more harmful to society - two well-dressed men getting married and settling down, or two idiots tying the knot and cranking out any number of additional idiots? You should have to pass a harder test to get married than the one we currently have. Essentially, there are but two questions: "How old are you?" and "Is that your sister?" Hell, you could pass this test just by guessing.

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_10798657

Man, Kirby's gained some weight in the last 10 years.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by SoCalCoug

Man, Kirby's gained some weight in the last 10 years.

So if we eliminate morally defunct people for matching, fat people from matching, and allowed only perfect people to match, we could emulate Ricardo Monteban?

[CardiacCoug]

Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar

Shouldn't it be against the law for stupid people to get married? What's more harmful to society - two well-dressed men getting married and settling down, or two idiots tying the knot and cranking out any number of additional idiots? You should have to pass a harder test to get married than the one we currently have. Essentially, there are but two questions: "How old are you?" and "Is that your sister?" Hell, you could pass this test just by guessing.

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_10798657

Kirby is pretty funny. I talked to him a few times growing up -- he lived a few blocks away and he wasn't very funny in real life. I never would have guessed that he was such a funny writer by talking to him.

I heard today that our Stake Pres is calling some individual members of our Stake and asking for donations to support Prop. 8. Since when do Texans care what happens in such a comparably insignificant state like California?

Funny how some members have such a difficult time taking the Church leaders at their word when they express tolerance for mild and respectful dissent within the ranks. Most of said members are current or future Bishops and Stake Presidents.

[Solon]

Originally Posted by CardiacCoug

Kirby is pretty funny. I talked to him a few times growing up -- he lived a few blocks away and he wasn't very funny in real life. I never would have guessed that he was such a funny writer by talking to him.

I think we're from the same neighborhood. Kirby was in my ward, although he's older than I am. His parents were still living there when I was a teenager.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by CardiacCoug

Funny how some members have such a difficult time taking the Church leaders at their word when they express tolerance for mild and respectful dissent within the ranks. Most of said members are current or future Bishops and Stake Presidents.

I suspect that, for the most part, General Authorities aren't nearly as judgmental as are some of the people on CB. GA's don't want to cultivate disagreement, but I don't hear any GA demanding that members "agree with everything I say or get out!" or "If you don't agree with everything I say or don't do what I tell you, you aren't sustaining me!"

There are some real jackals on CB. Maybe, over time, life will knock some of that self-righteous indignation off of them.

[hyrum]

Originally Posted by Gidget

Please someone respond to me I am going insane!!!

Well, if hindsight is 20-20, where would you have been on the civil rights movement in the 1960s? What would you have been thinking while the leadership blantantly discriminated against people of color for 14 years after the civil rights act of 1964 was passed? Spencer Kimball was quoted as saying the leadership prayed about it every night -- assuming this started around the time of the passage of the civil rights act, it means you believe the LDS prophets and GAs prayed for 5000 nights before they got the right answer from God? So why sweat any disagreement with LDS leaders on social issues.