cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board  

Go Back   cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board > non-Sports > Politics
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-07-2008, 12:43 AM   #11
Jeff Lebowski
Charon
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the heart of darkness (Provo)
Posts: 9,564
Jeff Lebowski is on a distinguished road
Default

Interesting events, DDD. Thanks for posting that.

I wonder how I would react if I were a church leader in California right now? There is no way I could support that movement. I am sure there are leaders there that feel the same way.
__________________
"... the arc of the universe is long but it bends toward justice." Martin Luther King, Jr.
Jeff Lebowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 12:51 AM   #12
All-American
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,420
All-American is an unknown quantity at this point
Send a message via MSN to All-American
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post
odd that this is the battle cry for Monson's era. I wonder if this is Monson or Eyring.

What chances are it that the Proposition will be adopted?
You want my little theory? This isn't Monson at all. Probably not Eyring or Uctdorf, either.

My guess is that somebody in the twelve with sufficient muscle and momentum is encouraging the First Presidency to sign the letters and pass out the memorandums that would have been quashed under President Hinckley's direction while the new guy is still cutting his teeth on the mantle.
__________________
εν αρχη ην ο λογος
All-American is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 12:57 AM   #13
MikeWaters
Demiurge
 
MikeWaters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,365
MikeWaters is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by All-American View Post
You want my little theory? This isn't Monson at all. Probably not Eyring or Uctdorf, either.

My guess is that somebody in the twelve with sufficient muscle and momentum is encouraging the First Presidency to sign the letters and pass out the memorandums that would have been quashed under President Hinckley's direction while the new guy is still cutting his teeth on the mantle.
As if Monson is a greenhorn and still finding his sea-legs?

This is a continuation of 2000. Hinckley signed off on that, didn't he?
MikeWaters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 01:15 AM   #14
danimal
Senior Member
 
danimal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Your mom's house
Posts: 588
danimal is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

My father-in-law lived in California during the last time around, and was asked by the Stake President to donate money to the cause. He's a pretty conservative guy, but was against the proposition. He said he would think about it, but did not end up donating. The SP never followed up and nothing more was done.

There must be church leaders in CA who are against this. I'd be interested to see how they're handling this.
__________________
Tobias: You know, Lindsay, as a therapist, I have advised a number of couples to explore an open relationship where the couple remains emotionally committed, but free to explore extra-marital encounters.

Lindsay: Well, did it work for those people?

Tobias: No, it never does. I mean, these people somehow delude themselves into thinking it might, but...but it might work for us.
danimal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 01:55 AM   #15
YOhio
AKA SeattleNewt
 
YOhio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,055
YOhio is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Why is everybody discounting the possibility that Jesus Christ himself inspired his prophet, seer and revelator, Thomas S. Monson, to take this course of action?
YOhio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 02:04 AM   #16
All-American
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,420
All-American is an unknown quantity at this point
Send a message via MSN to All-American
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YOhio View Post
Why is everybody discounting the possibility that Jesus Christ himself inspired his prophet, seer and revelator, Thomas S. Monson, to take this course of action?
Because that possibility's a given.
__________________
εν αρχη ην ο λογος
All-American is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 12:19 PM   #17
Indy Coug
Senior Member
 
Indy Coug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between Iraq and a hard place
Posts: 7,569
Indy Coug is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by All-American View Post
You want my little theory? This isn't Monson at all. Probably not Eyring or Uctdorf, either.

My guess is that somebody in the twelve with sufficient muscle and momentum is encouraging the First Presidency to sign the letters and pass out the memorandums that would have been quashed under President Hinckley's direction while the new guy is still cutting his teeth on the mantle.
I don't buy that for a second. President Monson isn't holed up in a downtown apartment being nursed through his Benson-esque senile dementia. He's aware of and behind this action.
Indy Coug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 12:20 PM   #18
Indy Coug
Senior Member
 
Indy Coug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between Iraq and a hard place
Posts: 7,569
Indy Coug is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YOhio View Post
Why is everybody discounting the possibility that Jesus Christ himself inspired his prophet, seer and revelator, Thomas S. Monson, to take this course of action?
I think that allows them to feel more comfortable about criticizing this.
Indy Coug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 02:31 PM   #19
T Blue
Junior Member
 
T Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Down by the River in a Van
Posts: 216
T Blue is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YOhio View Post
Why is everybody discounting the possibility that Jesus Christ himself inspired his prophet, seer and revelator, Thomas S. Monson, to take this course of action?
How could Christ be behind this, didn't he teach us to love one another?

This is being dreamed up by those old men in downtown SLC just because they hate gay people.

Wouldn't it just be so much easier for the LDS church to open their arms and embrace homosexuality, look at all of the people the church would have instantly join the ranks because they love homosexuals.

After that they could petition to reinstate polygamy because how could two men plugging each other be worse than a man and 27 women? Than we could move onto the men and women who want to marry children and have sex with them, what could possibly be wrong with that, after all what happens behind closed doors is nobody elses business, right? And the argument that it is bad for society, well...... Throw that one out because how could two homosexuals possibly benefit society if they can't reproduce?

Next we move onto brothers and sisters marrying each other, or mothers marrying sons and Fathers marrying daughters, after all they could possibly love each other, now what is wrong with that?

This is just getting started, but tell me where any of this is any worse than two homosexuals marrying each other? You can't because it is all morally wrong, but hey who is the LDS church to teach and preach morality?
T Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 02:37 PM   #20
MikeWaters
Demiurge
 
MikeWaters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,365
MikeWaters is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by T Blue View Post
How could Christ be behind this, didn't he teach us to love one another?

This is being dreamed up by those old men in downtown SLC just because they hate gay people.

Wouldn't it just be so much easier for the LDS church to open their arms and embrace homosexuality, look at all of the people the church would have instantly join the ranks because they love homosexuals.

After that they could petition to reinstate polygamy because how could two men plugging each other be worse than a man and 27 women? Than we could move onto the men and women who want to marry children and have sex with them, what could possibly be wrong with that, after all what happens behind closed doors is nobody elses business, right? And the argument that it is bad for society, well...... Throw that one out because how could two homosexuals possibly benefit society if they can't reproduce?

Next we move onto brothers and sisters marrying each other, or mothers marrying sons and Fathers marrying daughters, after all they could possibly love each other, now what is wrong with that?

This is just getting started, but tell me where any of this is any worse than two homosexuals marrying each other? You can't because it is all morally wrong, but hey who is the LDS church to teach and preach morality?
Next thing you know we will have one guy marrying 25 women!
MikeWaters is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.