Elder Oaks promoting political left

[ebenezerarise]

Once again Elder Oaks continues to move more and more to the political left, especially on the issues of gay "rights"
http://www.ksl.com/?sid=37033080&nid=12 ... d=queue-16" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As someone who has lived as a Mormon my entire life in Utah I am shocked how far to the left politically that my "leaders" have moved. Not only does this new position toward the "center" goes against everything I have been taught in the church, it goes against the teachings of the scriptures and common sense.

Oaks=Disgrace

Once again we see an apostle criticized against a personal filter. Oaks is a disgrace? Who do you think YOU are? Just because he stakes a position different than your own doesn't necessarily make him wrong and it most certainly doesn't warrant this kind of un-Christlike condemnation.

I find it continually disappointing that there are those out there like you who hold apostles and prophets up like television shows to be reviewed.

So apostles can state their personal opinions about political subjects without anyone questioning them?

I guess Abinadi was the bad guy then and King Noah good.

Elder Oaks wasn't giving his personal opinion. He was in a public forum representing the Church and speaking of religious freedom.

[ebenezerarise]

I find it continually disappointing that there are those out there like you who hold apostles and prophets up like television shows to be reviewed.

We are expected to review everything they say and compare it to what written scripture teaches.

No you're not. You're expected to listen to the Spirit and compare them to nothing. That's a fool's errand right there.

[Serragon]

Once again Elder Oaks continues to move more and more to the political left, especially on the issues of gay "rights"
http://www.ksl.com/?sid=37033080&nid=12 ... d=queue-16" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As someone who has lived as a Mormon my entire life in Utah I am shocked how far to the left politically that my "leaders" have moved. Not only does this new position toward the "center" goes against everything I have been taught in the church, it goes against the teachings of the scriptures and common sense.

Oaks=Disgrace

Once again we see an apostle criticized against a personal filter. Oaks is a disgrace? Who do you think YOU are? Just because he stakes a position different than your own doesn't necessarily make him wrong and it most certainly doesn't warrant this kind of un-Christlike condemnation.

I find it continually disappointing that there are those out there like you who hold apostles and prophets up like television shows to be reviewed.

So apostles can state their personal opinions about political subjects without anyone questioning them?

I guess Abinadi was the bad guy then and King Noah good.

Elder Oaks wasn't giving his personal opinion. He was in a public forum representing the Church and speaking of religious freedom.

then whose opinion was he giving? That of God? If so, don't you think he should have mentioned that?

[shadow]

Kim Davis is an employee of the state. The state accepts gay marriage thus as an employee she needs to allow gay marriage. It isn't her choice to deny what the state allows. Oaks basically said she has no authority to decide the law. If she worked for a ministry she would be exempt from performing or recognizing gay marriages but as a state employee she can't discriminate. If she worked for a restaurant and had a religious belief against pop would she have the freedom to deny patrons a root beer? Sure, but the owner would have every right to reassign her or fire her.

[Zathura]

I find it continually disappointing that there are those out there like you who hold apostles and prophets up like television shows to be reviewed.

We are expected to review everything they say and compare it to what written scripture teaches.

No you're not. You're expected to listen to the Spirit and compare them to nothing. That's a fool's errand right there.

“It makes no difference what is written or what anyone has said, if what has been said is in conflict with what the Lord has revealed, we can set it aside. My words, and the teaching of any other member of the Church, high or low, if they do not square with the revelations, we need not accept them. Let us have this matter clear. We have accepted the four standard works as the measuring yardsticks, or balances, by which we measure every man’s doctrine.
.”
(Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 3 vols., edited by Bruce R. McConkie [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1954-1956], 3: 203.)

"If any man preaches to you, doctrines contrary to the Bible, the Book of Mormon, or the Book of Doctrine & Covenants, set him down as an imposter... Try them by the principles contained in the acknowledged word of God; if they preach, or teach, or practice contrary to that, disfellowship them; cut them off from among you as useless and dangerous branches."
Joseph Smith, Times & Seasons, 5:490-491, April, 1, 1844.

"It is not to be thought that every word spoken by the General Authorities is inspired, or that they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost in everything they read & write."
Elder Harold B. Lee, To Seminary & Institute of Religion Faculty, July 1964. DCSM :144

Clearly we are supposed to compare their words to the scriptures. Why wouldn't you compare their words to the scriptures? If Thomas Monson tells you to kill anyone who isn't Mormon, would you do it? Of course not, because that contradicts the scriptures.
What a horrifying belief that is, to assume that we shouldn't even question and compare the words of those 15 men to the words of the scripture. This belief will NOT help you progress one bit.

[Zathura]

No you're not. You're expected to listen to the Spirit and compare them to nothing. That's a fool's errand right there.

We have accepted the four standard works as the measuring yardsticks, or balances, by which we measure every man’s doctrine. -Joseph Fielding Smith.

THE SCRIPTURES ARE THE YARDSTICK BY WHICH WE MEASURE EVERY MAN'S DOCTRINE, INCLUDING THE GENERAL AUTHORITIES.

I pray that your heart isn't too hardened and set upon these 15 men that you cannot understand this.

[Serragon]

Kim Davis is an employee of the state. The state accepts gay marriage thus as an employee she needs to allow gay marriage. It isn't her choice to deny what the state allows. Oaks basically said she has no authority to decide the law. If she worked for a ministry she would be exempt from performing or recognizing gay marriages but as a state employee she can't discriminate. If she worked for a restaurant and had a religious belief against pop would she have the freedom to deny patrons a root beer? Sure, but the owner would have every right to reassign her or fire her.

I have a different view of the situation (it could be based on incorrect assumptions or information):

She works for the State of Kentucky, where I believe that the law actually states that same sex marriage is illegal.

The Supreme Court (Whom she does not work for) have stated that the laws are not constitutional. I do not believe the state of Kentucky has yet amended their laws. The courts do not write law.

So, according to the law of her employer, it is illegal for same sex couples to be married. If her employer is unhappy, then her employer is free to remove her. In this case, that would be the people who elected her. This has not yet happened. Instead, a judge with absolutely no authority has taken upon themselves the executive authority and has begun changing Kentucky law to suit their purposes. This judge is authorizing others to issue licenses and is punishing Davis when no crime has actually been committed. This is well outside the scope of this judges authority.

I commend Kim Davis for her stance. I wish more would do the same. I wish our leadership would declare loudly and boldly the evil that is same sex marriage and abortion. They used to do this. Instead it appears we are being told to meet the devil halfway.

[iWriteStuff]

Instead it appears we are being told to meet the devil halfway.

How do you figure? Seems to me, what's being said is:

"We recognize your legal right to sin as long as you recognize our right to call it sin."

[Robin Hood]

Serragon,
I agree with you absolutely.
I also feel that any change in the law needs to make provision for those who feel unable to do the states bidding, especially those who were already employed in that capacity prior to the change in the law.
There needs to be some recognition that it is the state that has changed and not the employee.

I wonder what would have happened if the employee in question was a Muslim.

[EmmaLee]

She works for the State of Kentucky, where I believe that the law actually states that same sex marriage is illegal.

That is correct.

http://marriage.laws.com/gay/state-laws/kentucky" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[gkearney]

“One generation of homosexual “marriage” would depopulate a nation, and, if sufficiently widespread, would extinguish its people. Our marriage laws should not abet national suicide.” –Dallin H. Oaks Principles to Govern. P. 19. 1984

Well this would only be true if everyone in the nation were to engage in homosexual marriage, something which is not going to happen. Even if every single homosexual were to marry another homosexual they would still make up only a tiny faction of the population, well under 2%.

[Stacy Oliver]

“One generation of homosexual “marriage” would depopulate a nation, and, if sufficiently widespread, would extinguish its people. Our marriage laws should not abet national suicide.” –Dallin H. Oaks Principles to Govern. P. 19. 1984


Elder Oaks I'm a little confused here. You said pro gay marriage laws would be "national suicide" but now your hitting Kim Davis for standing up for her religious beliefs?

This is conflicting, but the views and policies of the church have evolved in step (albeit a little behind) with the cultural climate of the day -- polygamy, interracial marriage, blacks and the priesthood/temple blessings, and now homosexuals.

We as members, who sustain the prophet, believe those changes were divinely inspired/revealed -- not done because of social pressure.

Perhaps Elder Oaks is also inspired? I believe so.

Where's the conflict? He opposed gay marriage and likely still does. Now, its the law of the land and he says that people should follow the law. Why is that in conflict?

I oppose abortion. But, it's the law of the land. If i were a cop, and someone had an abortion, should I arrest them because I think it should be against the law? Or, should I vote for the law to be changed, while enforcing the laws as they are?

Kim Davis should have stood up for her religious beliefs and resigned. A judge ordered her to issue gay marriage licenses; it was immoral for her to refuse. No one says that she HAD to issue the license. She could have just resigned. Then she wouldn't have to issue any licenses.

[ebenezerarise]

I pray that your heart isn't too hardened and set upon these 15 men that you cannot understand this.

You're condescension is almost too much to stomach. You remind of those spoken of that "draw near to me with their lips but their hearts are far from me".

[ebenezerarise]

No thinking for yourself allowed. The thinking has been done already. You are not here to test your own sense o right and wrong. You are here to prove if you can be a mindless slave that will obey, even if the orders you receive are wrong and immoral.

God will bless you for being a mindless slave.

Your thinking has been done when you make a choice. And clearly you choose to go against the spoken word of one of the Lord's annointed. That's your choice -- and you can have the consequence too.

[Col. Flagg]

The church is intentionally going out of its way to appease the government in order to preserve its tax-exempt status - it's almost as if they are willing to do and/or say anything, no matter how questionable it is to members or contrary to Christ's teachings and will of the Lord in order to keep the church tax-exempt while existing as a corporation sole under the chains of the IRS. Sad... very sad. So not only do we not challenge evil or speak out against anything wrong that might be considered 'political' over the pulpit, we now suck up to Uncle Sam. I'm sure ancient Prophets like Noah, Abinidi and Samuel the Lamanite 'understand'. Do we need to honor, uphold and sustain the law? Yes. But that does not mean we have to take it one step further by essentially abandoning our morals just to stay on the good side of government.

[Stacy Oliver]

The church is intentionally going out of its way to appease the government in order to preserve its tax-exempt status - it's almost as if they are willing to do and/or say anything, no matter how questionable it is to members or contrary to Christ's teachings and will of the Lord in order to keep the church tax-exempt while existing as a corporation sole under the chains of the IRS. Sad... very sad. So not only do we not challenge evil or speak out against anything wrong that might be considered 'political' over the pulpit, we now suck up to Uncle Sam. I'm sure ancient Prophets like Noah, Abinidi and Samuel the Lamanite 'understand'.

Who says our tax exempt status is in jeopardy? Have they taken away the tax exempt status from any church? Even the Westboro Baptist?

[ebenezerarise]

Clearly we are supposed to compare their words to the scriptures. Why wouldn't you compare their words to the scriptures? If Thomas Monson tells you to kill anyone who isn't Mormon, would you do it? Of course not, because that contradicts the scriptures.
What a horrifying belief that is, to assume that we shouldn't even question and compare the words of those 15 men to the words of the scripture. This belief will NOT help you progress one bit.

From President Wilford Woodruff --

“I will refer to a certain meeting I attended in the town of Kirtland in my early days. At that meeting some remarks were made that have been made here today, with regard to the living prophets and with regard to the written word of God. The same principle was presented, although not as extensively as it has been here, when a leading man in the Church got up and talked upon the subject, and said: ‘You have got the word of God before you here in the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants; you have the written word of God, and you who give revelations should give revelations according to those books, as what is written in those books is the word of God. We should confine ourselves to them.’

“When he concluded, Brother Joseph turned to Brother Brigham Young and said, ‘Brother Brigham I want you to go to the podium and tell us your views with regard to the living oracles and the written word of God.’ Brother Brigham took the stand, and he took the Bible, and laid it down; he took the Book of Mormon, and laid it down; and he took the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and laid it down before him, and he said: ‘There is the written word of God to us, concerning the work of God from the beginning of the world, almost, to our day. And now,’ said he, ‘when compared with the living oracles those books are nothing to me; those books do not convey the word of God direct to us now, as do the words of a Prophet or a man bearing the Holy Priesthood in our day and generation. I would rather have the living oracles than all the writing in the books.’ That was the course he pursued. When he was through, Brother Joseph said to the congregation; ‘Brother Brigham has told you the word of the Lord, and he has told you the truth.’” (Conference Report, October 1897, pp. 18–19.)

[ebenezerarise]

The church is intentionally going out of its way to appease the government in order to preserve its tax-exempt status - it's almost as if they are willing to do and/or say anything, no matter how questionable it is to members or contrary to Christ's teachings and will of the Lord (

Oh? What would YOU know about what the will of the Lord is to the Church?

[Col. Flagg]

The church is intentionally going out of its way to appease the government in order to preserve its tax-exempt status - it's almost as if they are willing to do and/or say anything, no matter how questionable it is to members or contrary to Christ's teachings and will of the Lord in order to keep the church tax-exempt while existing as a corporation sole under the chains of the IRS. Sad... very sad. So not only do we not challenge evil or speak out against anything wrong that might be considered 'political' over the pulpit, we now suck up to Uncle Sam. I'm sure ancient Prophets like Noah, Abinidi and Samuel the Lamanite 'understand'.

Who says our tax exempt status is in jeopardy? Have they taken away the tax exempt status from any church? Even the Westboro Baptist?

Who says it's not? There are a lot of organized groups trying to get the church's 501c3 status revoked right now, mostly stemming from Prop 8 years ago.

[Col. Flagg]

The church is intentionally going out of its way to appease the government in order to preserve its tax-exempt status - it's almost as if they are willing to do and/or say anything, no matter how questionable it is to members or contrary to Christ's teachings and will of the Lord (

Oh? What would YOU know about what the will of the Lord is to the Church?

Wow. =;

[Stacy Oliver]

The church is intentionally going out of its way to appease the government in order to preserve its tax-exempt status - it's almost as if they are willing to do and/or say anything, no matter how questionable it is to members or contrary to Christ's teachings and will of the Lord in order to keep the church tax-exempt while existing as a corporation sole under the chains of the IRS. Sad... very sad. So not only do we not challenge evil or speak out against anything wrong that might be considered 'political' over the pulpit, we now suck up to Uncle Sam. I'm sure ancient Prophets like Noah, Abinidi and Samuel the Lamanite 'understand'.

Who says our tax exempt status is in jeopardy? Have they taken away the tax exempt status from any church? Even the Westboro Baptist?

Who says it's not? There are a lot of organized groups trying to get the church's 501c3 status revoked right now, mostly stemming from Prop 8 years ago.

OK.... But they've, without exception, gone nowhere. You're accusing the Brethren of acting out of fear of something that has never happened. I think that they are more sensible than that.

[ebenezerarise]

The church is intentionally going out of its way to appease the government in order to preserve its tax-exempt status - it's almost as if they are willing to do and/or say anything, no matter how questionable it is to members or contrary to Christ's teachings and will of the Lord (

Oh? What would YOU know about what the will of the Lord is to the Church?

Wow. =;

I'm serious, Col. Who are you to receive this for the Church? The Prophet of the Lord, who I heard you sustain once upon a time, got up in Conference and not once but twice said no tithing funds were used on City Creek. Yet here you remain YEARS later complaining about the same things, spreading the same disinformation, and dissing the Church as if you alone have knowledge nobody else has.

So I'm calling you on it. Who do you think you are to speak for the Lord or to know his will for HIS Church???

[OhioState001]

“One generation of homosexual “marriage” would depopulate a nation, and, if sufficiently widespread, would extinguish its people. Our marriage laws should not abet national suicide.” –Dallin H. Oaks Principles to Govern. P. 19. 1984


Elder Oaks I'm a little confused here. You said pro gay marriage laws would be "national suicide" but now your hitting Kim Davis for standing up for her religious beliefs?

This is conflicting, but the views and policies of the church have evolved in step (albeit a little behind) with the cultural climate of the day -- polygamy, interracial marriage, blacks and the priesthood/temple blessings, and now homosexuals.

We as members, who sustain the prophet, believe those changes were divinely inspired/revealed -- not done because of social pressure.

Perhaps Elder Oaks is also inspired? I believe so.

Where's the conflict? He opposed gay marriage and likely still does. Now, its the law of the land and he says that people should follow the law. Why is that in conflict?

I oppose abortion. But, it's the law of the land. If i were a cop, and someone had an abortion, should I arrest them because I think it should be against the law? Or, should I vote for the law to be changed, while enforcing the laws as they are?

Kim Davis should have stood up for her religious beliefs and resigned. A judge ordered her to issue gay marriage licenses; it was immoral for her to refuse. No one says that she HAD to issue the license. She could have just resigned. Then she wouldn't have to issue any licenses.

Not a good comparison at all with the cop. So no Christian can hold the office of clerk without having to violate their religious beliefs? That's how you want to operate the country?

[ebenezerarise]

Not a good comparison at all with the cop. So no Christian can hold the office of clerk without having to violate their religious beliefs? That's how you want to operate the country?

This country has operated that way from the very beginning.

[OhioState001]

Not a good comparison at all with the cop. So no Christian can hold the office of clerk without having to violate their religious beliefs? That's how you want to operate the country?

This country has operated that way from the very beginning.

Absolutely not