Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

[EmmaLee]

If the SP is in on it though, there isn't much that can be done immediately.

How come?

[righteousrepublic]

It all depends the context. The Bishop might be trying to do what he thinks is expected of him by the Church, but if they are doing wrong then yeah they should go to the next PH authority.

Read through Bishop Augenstein's Facebook page - all the context anyone needs, loud and clear. There is no doubt higher church authorities are aware of this - how could they not be?!

So the lack of response from higher priesthood authority thus far must likely be one of the following, correct?

1) Church leadership is okay with what the Augensteins are doing
2) Church leadership is not entirely okay with what the Augensteins are doing, but see calling in some form of discipline or putting a stop to it as likely to cause more of a problem than allowing them to continue
3) Church leadership is not okay at all with what the Augensteins are doing, and are allowing them to do this thing for now, so that the judgements they exercise upon them will be just.

If so, which of those three do you presume is most likely the case?

Lol. I have no idea. I would say the last one is not likely at all. Why invite judgment on a PH holder that could instead be corrected? I don't know the individuals involved and do not know exactly what they are doing. I do think that some people affiliate with anti-church groups and that LGBTQ groups could possibly be in that category and introducing those ideas to the lessons at Church would be at odds with the handbook.
I also would be aware that some people could have civil rights goals more in mind rather than conforming to the standards of the Church.
There are people who would like to receive a gay marriage in the temple, which is a no-no.

Standards of the church? Who do these people think they are? They seem to think that earthly men run the church; they forget, or don't care, that God, Jehovah, runs the church. It is his church and his rules apply. Can people just arbitrarily demand that sinful activities be condoned and become church policy? Do gay people have the right, or a foot to stand on, in demanding gay marriage in the temples? Do they have a right requesting a Bishop to marry them at any location or setting?
Can civil rights eradicate laws of God without consequence? Aren't these people messing with God, even if they, in any way, declare they do not believe in God or his laws, or are not willing to conduct their lives according to his commands? Should God soften and allow sin to now become acceptable?
Aren't people who are bent on bringing sin to the table and wanting it condoned, allowed and performed, bringing Satan before the Lord?
Aren't we told that the church would be under increased persecution? So if the church relents and allows all this evil to be allowed, would there be any need for persecution? Would then the LDS church just be another lawless church?

[Lizzy60]

Dan Reynolds (Imagine Dragons) was on Ellen today, talking about how he's trying to change the LDS doctrine on homosexuality. I pasted a quote where he calls homosexuality "beautiful and perfect and normal." He was the main attraction at the LoveLoud concert in Orem last year, the one the church "applauded".


https://www.billboard.com/articles/news ... -interview


“Feeling a little bit of shame in my life over something I shouldn’t have been shamed about helped me to kind of identify to some degree with what our LGBTQ youth face all the time in orthodox religion,” the Utah native told host Ellen DeGeneres. “Which is feeling guilt and shame over something that is beautiful and perfect and normal.”

[abijah]

The tares are revealing themselves.






And the wheat?

[Thinker]

Dan Reynolds (Imagine Dragons) was on Ellen today, talking about how he's trying to change the LDS doctrine on homosexuality. I pasted a quote where he calls homosexuality "beautiful and perfect and normal." He was the main attraction at the LoveLoud concert in Orem last year, the one the church "applauded".

https://www.billboard.com/articles/news ... -interview

“Feeling a little bit of shame in my life over something I shouldn’t have been shamed about helped me to kind of identify to some degree with what our LGBTQ youth face all the time in orthodox religion,” the Utah native told host Ellen DeGeneres. “Which is feeling guilt and shame over something that is beautiful and perfect and normal.”

So sad that he’s using his fame for bad. So unnerving when adults fall for peer pressure, going along with harmful lies, like they are still teenagers.

Those who wrote books like “The Overhauling of Straight America” had strategic plans of how to get people from hating sexual perversion to loving it - much of it manipulating people based on the common desire to be liked. They set it up so that not only were you labeled “homophobic bigoted hater” if you voiced belief in man/woman marriage, but they created fear so people felt the need to “come out” and let everyone know they support homosexual perversion, proactively before the mob comes after them and so they are not seen negatively as a “homophobic bigoted hater.” Those books & mental manipulations knew about 70% of people go along with herd mentalities and have little if any, backbone.

[mmm..cheese]

Read through Bishop Augenstein's Facebook page - all the context anyone needs, loud and clear. There is no doubt higher church authorities are aware of this - how could they not be?!

So the lack of response from higher priesthood authority thus far must likely be one of the following, correct?

1) Church leadership is okay with what the Augensteins are doing
2) Church leadership is not entirely okay with what the Augensteins are doing, but see calling in some form of discipline or putting a stop to it as likely to cause more of a problem than allowing them to continue
3) Church leadership is not okay at all with what the Augensteins are doing, and are allowing them to do this thing for now, so that the judgements they exercise upon them will be just.

If so, which of those three do you presume is most likely the case?

Lol. I have no idea. I would say the last one is not likely at all. Why invite judgment on a PH holder that could instead be corrected? I don't know the individuals involved and do not know exactly what they are doing. I do think that some people affiliate with anti-church groups and that LGBTQ groups could possibly be in that category and introducing those ideas to the lessons at Church would be at odds with the handbook.
I also would be aware that some people could have civil rights goals more in mind rather than conforming to the standards of the Church.
There are people who would like to receive a gay marriage in the temple, which is a no-no.

Standards of the church? Who do these people think they are? They seem to think that earthly men run the church; they forget, or don't care, that God, Jehovah, runs the church. It is his church and his rules apply. Can people just arbitrarily demand that sinful activities be condoned and become church policy? Do gay people have the right, or a foot to stand on, in demanding gay marriage in the temples? Do they have a right requesting a Bishop to marry them at any location or setting?
Can civil rights eradicate laws of God without consequence? Aren't these people messing with God, even if they, in any way, declare they do not believe in God or his laws, or are not willing to conduct their lives according to his commands? Should God soften and allow sin to now become acceptable?
Aren't people who are bent on bringing sin to the table and wanting it condoned, allowed and performed, bringing Satan before the Lord?
Aren't we told that the church would be under increased persecution? So if the church relents and allows all this evil to be allowed, would there be any need for persecution? Would then the LDS church just be another lawless church?

I do not know what is happening in the riverton ward. I saw a post on reddit about it as well and it seemed like something strange. I would not worry about the Church allowing gay marriage in the temples, or bishops being forced to marry. I mean, I would not turn a blind eye to it, but I think we have leaders who are aware of this possibility. I am sure there is a gay activist somewhere with their gay activist girlfriend/boyfriend who are hellbent on persuading the Church to have doctrine that gay people can be eternally married as well. I just do not want to jump to any conclusions about the way a Bishop is presiding over his ward since it would put me in an awkward position if he is doing nothing wrong to begin with, yet I am accusing a judge in Israel. I have to look out for myself first.

[mmm..cheese]

Imagine dragons... a band with 2 good songs and the rest are basically some of the worst noises I have ever heard called music.

[abijah]

Imagine dragons... a band with 2 good songs and the rest are basically some of the worst noises I have ever heard called music.

perhaps political relevance & religious progressivism compensate for talent, skill & artistic depth?

[Robin Hood]

If the SP is in on it though, there isn't much that can be done immediately.

How come?

In terms of disciplinary action all the 15 can do is bring concerns to the attention of the stake president. What he does with it is up to him.
General authorities have no jurisdiction in these matters.
The 15 could reprimand the bishop, or insist on his release, but they cannot instigate or insist he is disciplined for his standing in the church.

[mmm..cheese]

It all depends the context. The Bishop might be trying to do what he thinks is expected of him by the Church, but if they are doing wrong then yeah they should go to the next PH authority.

Read through Bishop Augenstein's Facebook page - all the context anyone needs, loud and clear. There is no doubt higher church authorities are aware of this - how could they not be?!

I still have 4 days of the social media fast
If he is actively doing anti-mormon stuff then there will be something done about it.

[captainfearnot]

So the lack of response from higher priesthood authority thus far must likely be one of the following, correct?

1) Church leadership is okay with what the Augensteins are doing
2) Church leadership is not entirely okay with what the Augensteins are doing, but see calling in some form of discipline or putting a stop to it as likely to cause more of a problem than allowing them to continue
3) Church leadership is not okay at all with what the Augensteins are doing, and are allowing them to do this thing for now, so that the judgements they exercise upon them will be just.

If so, which of those three do you presume is most likely the case?

I don't think church leadership is unified on this issue at all.

The Augensteins are like the Soggy Bottom Boys. For every Homer Stokes in church leadership that wants to condemn them, there is a Pappy O'Daniel willing to get on board.

[EmmaLee]

If the SP is in on it though, there isn't much that can be done immediately.

How come?

In terms of disciplinary action all the 15 can do is bring concerns to the attention of the stake president. What he does with it is up to him.
General authorities have no jurisdiction in these matters.
The 15 could reprimand the bishop, or insist on his release, but they cannot instigate or insist he is disciplined for his standing in the church.

Okay, thanks, I understand all that. After reading your post again, I was misunderstanding the bit I quoted above. I thought you meant there's nothing that can be done to the stake president immediately, if he was in on it - and I was thinking 'why can't something be done immediately to the stake president' (as in, remove the SP from his calling) - but you were referring to the bishop. Got it.

[mgridle1]

Hmm the latest in this war.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/stephaniemlee/ ... .qed1m7deB

When will people realize that that there is a severe war on Christian religious beliefs. I can not see how in the world as to why Berger could not fill a discrimination case based on religion. An employee can't fire someone if they come at as homosexual, but if they come out and say homosexuality is sin they can fire them . . .how is that not religious discrimination?

[EmmaLee]

I just heard about this on the news this morning. ^^ Truly sickening. Hopefully, naive people who think there is no 'gay agenda', or that gay people just want everyone to be "tolerant" toward them (but it's always one-way tolerance, as evidenced by the article linked to above) will WAKE UP to what is really happening in the U.S. and world. What they are demanding (and getting) is for people to genuflect to all things homosexual - and if you don't, you will be fired, you will be black-balled, you will receive extreme intolerance, you will go bankrupt (bakers, et al), etc. Rights come from God, full stop. They are not granted by government, they cannot be taken away by government. This was never about "rights". It was and is about destroying traditional man/woman marriage and the family as God ordained it - and with that everything else will fall - and as we can see, they are having great success, largely due to blind, ignorant people who refuse to see that this is an organized, deliberate plan. But too many will continue to keep their fingers in their ears and their head in the sand, 'cause LOVE!!!

[EmmaLee]

Here's another choice tidbit - https://canadafreepress.com/article/the ... roadcastin

Watch the video in the link, and if that doesn't infuriate you and make you want to literally throw up, there is seriously something wrong with you. The Lord is going to need a LOT of millstones.

Matthew 18:6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

Part of the article at the link - "The Wholesale Indoctrination of School Children by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC)

When little school kids talk about what they are learning in class, it’s no longer about anything to do concerning the ‘Three Rs’, it’s about the Politics of Inclusion, which they learn through indoctrination.

Self-acclaimed Patron Saint of Tolerance and Diversity Jessi Cruickshank leads children in this CBC video in a “rah!” “rah!” for Happy Pride Month, which according to Cruickshank, viewers “loved”.

“I believe in education and tolerance and celebration of diversity.”

It’s easy to see that the children in the video have been indoctrinated, rather than educated and that they can spout gay talking points as well, or better than, any adult gay activist.

Do school kids of the current day really sit around talking about gay marriage being normal? Do they really aspire to “grow up and be gay icons”?

Whatever happened to wanting to grow up to be astronauts, scientists, or even Dads or Moms?

Cruickshank, who touted Jodi Foster as her growing up role model told the kids, “She made me question my sexuality as a child because I liked her so much.”

“She was nude in the film, ‘Nell’, not that I remember watching several times.”

‘Nell’ was released in 1994, Cruickshank born in 1982.

While Foster was Cruickshank’s growing up model, she told the children in the CBC Gay Pride video “everybody should aspire to grow up and be a gay icon”.

Because CBC is a state-owned television network, taxpayer-subsidized to the tune of $1 billion a year, parents paid for the Cruickshank video."

[mgridle1]

It was and is about destroying traditional man/woman marriage and the family as God ordained it

Yes it is specifically designed to ensure that NO ONE believes, thinks or says that homosexuality is wrong, sin and against God's laws. Never mind that the vast majority of people who believe in homosexuality don't believe in God. It's not just about destroying traditional marriage-it is about destroying God himself.

And the data bears this out. A Pew study poll showed those who believe in homosexuality believe overwhelmingly that right and wrong depends on the situation and in a disbelief in God. Just wait until this war becomes a real war and the bodies start pilling up. Funny thing, they always go back to Germany, except that ALL the mass murderers of the 20th century were atheists-not religious.

[Sirius]

Like the violence coming out of the race war, how long before the violence comes to those that believe homosexuality is a sin, from the lgbt community and those that support them? This definitely has nothing to do with "tolerance" for them or their community, as is shown by the intolerance towards anyone that doesn't share their same views or accept their lifestyle. As things get worse, do you foresee the lives of the brethren being threatened over this issue? I was just thinking of a few things Durzan mentioned from sitting in a stake conference where Elder Holland presided, and talked about..

Said that the changes we saw announced last conference session was just the beginning and that we ain't seen nothing yet. Mentioned that 13 Temples would be dedicated next year (or something like that).

Talked a bit about how we need to be fully committed to the Gospel and quoted the first Great Commandment. Asked us to ask ourselves what our motivations are and to work towards keeping the First Great Commandment.

Mentioned how he and the other members of the Twelve discuss how they could be killed in the future, but how all of them couldn't be gotten. The keys will not be taken from the Earth; thus he was boldly reaffirming that the Rough Stone Rolling is the Church. viewtopic.php?f=1&t=48286

Just looking at how people are attacked right now for having a different view or belief, I can see this really escalating into much worse things very quickly.

[BackBlast]

Like the violence coming out of the race war, how long before the violence comes to those that believe homosexuality is a sin, from the lgbt community and those that support them? This definitely has nothing to do with "tolerance" for them or their community, as is shown by the intolerance towards anyone that doesn't share their same views or accept their lifestyle.

Has already happened during the prop-8 effort in California. I found cases of demonstrators turning violent and statements about others not wanting to remain peaceful as the organizers desired. There was vandalism to temple grounds and a meeting house and an anthrax type scare targeting the church. It wouldn't take much for this to heat up again, just needs a point of contention really.

I remember documenting all of this at the time in a vain attempt to show which side of the issue was the violent side, or at least more prone to turn to violence. I was met with a hand wave of "the oppressed have reason" justifying the behavior.

Just looking at how people are attacked right now for having a different view or belief, I can see this really escalating into much worse things very quickly.

It could indeed happen quickly, but I think the build up to the next event will be slow and steady. I'm anticipating such a build up after the 'Be One' event along with the current rate of change within the Church. Certain parties are going to expect their desired changes to come forth, and will grow increasingly restless when it doesn't. I think we'll see some increasing division and contention inside of the church within a year. Could also be that some future announcements or changes ratchet up the tension as well.

Just a guess

[Lizzy60]

Like the violence coming out of the race war, how long before the violence comes to those that believe homosexuality is a sin, from the lgbt community and those that support them? This definitely has nothing to do with "tolerance" for them or their community, as is shown by the intolerance towards anyone that doesn't share their same views or accept their lifestyle.

Has already happened during the prop-8 effort in California. I found cases of demonstrators turning violent and statements about others not wanting to remain peaceful as the organizers desired. There was vandalism to temple grounds and a meeting house and an anthrax type scare targeting the church. It wouldn't take much for this to heat up again, just needs a point of contention really.

I remember documenting all of this at the time in a vain attempt to show which side of the issue was the violent side, or at least more prone to turn to violence. I was met with a hand wave of "the oppressed have reason" justifying the behavior.

Just looking at how people are attacked right now for having a different view or belief, I can see this really escalating into much worse things very quickly.

It could indeed happen quickly, but I think the build up to the next event will be slow and steady. I'm anticipating such a build up after the 'Be One' event along with the current rate of change within the Church. Certain parties are going to expect their desired changes to come forth, and will grow increasingly restless when it doesn't. I think we'll see some increasing division and contention inside of the church within a year. Could also be that some future announcements or changes ratchet up the tension as well.

Just a guess

Members who want more equality for LDS women regarding PH and leadership positions, as well as the pro-gay-marriage LDS members, are already using the "Be One" theme, and quotes from some of the talks, to bolster their position on the necessity of members employing "bottom-up revelation" to achieve their goals. I'm watching one such posting over at Wheat and Tares.

https://wheatandtares.org/2018/06/07/pr ... at-be-one/

[EmmaLee]

From the link Lizzy shared above -

"I think this is a pretty good model to show why some LDS could disagree with a policy or doctrine, how to study it out and come to an opinion, and what to do about it. He gives license for members to disagree, implying it is the right thing to disagree in certain cases. The key for doing this as a member in good standing is to pray and hope for change, but do so while staying loyal to the Church. I analyzed what this means in a prior post, looking at many statements made by the brethren, including Pres. Oaks, and determined this general guideline.

OK:

have doubts, questions, disagree
constructive criticism
voice opposing viewpoints on social media
expressing disagreement while maintaining spirit of brotherly love and cooperation

Not OK:

betrayal
passing severe judgement
attacking the reputation of a Church leader
organized effort to attack the Church
attempting to manipulate or humiliate the Church into change
protesting
attempting to remove Church leader from office

I read in a recent post that Pres. Kimball consulted with Pres. Oaks in the years prior to the 1978 revelation. I think it can be assumed that Pres. Oaks rightly modeled the “OK” side of how to disagree and express disagreement on the issue. And maybe he was part of the reason for why Pres. Kimball became more active in seeking the revelation and eventually received it.

I think this illustration gives us great hope that the church can and does change on important issues. I can think of a couple areas, female equality and LGBT+ issues, where many people have some disagreement and are following this pattern modeled by Pres. Oaks to be involved in change."

Locally, I have heard similar sentiments regarding the bold, and especially the underlined, part above. Members have been so indoctrinated by popular culture, the media (especially social media), etc. that most do not view same-sex sex as sinful anymore, especially if the man/man or woman/woman are "married" - which of course, they are not "married", as only men and women can be married to each other according to that one guy.... oh yeah, GOD. Also, there is no circumstance or situation or arrangement where same-sex sex is not a sin - according to the same GOD - similarly to unmarried opposite-sex, and extra-marital sex. It's all forbidden, and with good reason. It's almost like humanity has lost its ability to reason though, and to think straight (no pun intended).

[EmmaLee]

Like the violence coming out of the race war, how long before the violence comes to those that believe homosexuality is a sin, from the lgbt community and those that support them? This definitely has nothing to do with "tolerance" for them or their community, as is shown by the intolerance towards anyone that doesn't share their same views or accept their lifestyle. As things get worse, do you foresee the lives of the brethren being threatened over this issue? I was just thinking of a few things Durzan mentioned from sitting in a stake conference where Elder Holland presided, and talked about..

Said that the changes we saw announced last conference session was just the beginning and that we ain't seen nothing yet. Mentioned that 13 Temples would be dedicated next year (or something like that).

Talked a bit about how we need to be fully committed to the Gospel and quoted the first Great Commandment. Asked us to ask ourselves what our motivations are and to work towards keeping the First Great Commandment.

Mentioned how he and the other members of the Twelve discuss how they could be killed in the future, but how all of them couldn't be gotten. The keys will not be taken from the Earth; thus he was boldly reaffirming that the Rough Stone Rolling is the Church. viewtopic.php?f=1&t=48286

Just looking at how people are attacked right now for having a different view or belief, I can see this really escalating into much worse things very quickly.

I just read this article and thought of your post above. It is coming.

Thursday, 07 June 2018
New California Law May Punish Pastors for Helping Others Leave Homosexuality

Could California pastors be charged with a crime for using Christian doctrine to help someone leave homosexuality? This could be the case if a new Golden State bill, AB 2943, becomes law. Making matters worse, some critics claim it could even be used to impede sales of the Bible.

California, 11 other states, and D.C. already ban “reparative therapy” — which seeks to eliminate unwanted same-sex attraction or feelings of “gender” identity — for minors. The new bill, however, applies to adults as well and would prohibit not just therapists but anyone from offering such aid. It’s gold-plated hypocrisy: The same people who allow a physician to help a person “change his sex” (not actually possible), a quality certainly inborn, want to make it a crime to help someone change his sexual feelings — in the thinking that they’re inborn.

Yet AB 2943 goes further still and prohibits efforts to change even behavior. As National Review’s David French explains, if, for example, “a sexually active gay man or woman sought counseling not to change their orientation but rather to become celibate, then the services and goods provided in that effort would violate this statute.”

Full article here - https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/i ... osexuality

[Lizzy60]

Last night John B Wells interviewed a man who had been a gay transvestite. This man was healed by Christ, and talks about how that happened, and the reality that attractions and vices can be changed and overcome, through Christ, repentence, and the Atonement.

Ha also said that he can't get a single church in the US to allow him to come and tell about his experience.

[captainfearnot]

I read in a recent post that Pres. Kimball consulted with Pres. Oaks in the years prior to the 1978 revelation. I think it can be assumed that Pres. Oaks rightly modeled the “OK” side of how to disagree and express disagreement on the issue. And maybe he was part of the reason for why Pres. Kimball became more active in seeking the revelation and eventually received it.

Maybe. But I suspect Harold B. Lee's death had more to do with it than anything else.

It wouldn't surprise me if the church does not recognize same-sex marriage as long as David A. Bednar is alive.

[Sirius]

Like the violence coming out of the race war, how long before the violence comes to those that believe homosexuality is a sin, from the lgbt community and those that support them? This definitely has nothing to do with "tolerance" for them or their community, as is shown by the intolerance towards anyone that doesn't share their same views or accept their lifestyle. As things get worse, do you foresee the lives of the brethren being threatened over this issue? I was just thinking of a few things Durzan mentioned from sitting in a stake conference where Elder Holland presided, and talked about..

Said that the changes we saw announced last conference session was just the beginning and that we ain't seen nothing yet. Mentioned that 13 Temples would be dedicated next year (or something like that).

Talked a bit about how we need to be fully committed to the Gospel and quoted the first Great Commandment. Asked us to ask ourselves what our motivations are and to work towards keeping the First Great Commandment.

Mentioned how he and the other members of the Twelve discuss how they could be killed in the future, but how all of them couldn't be gotten. The keys will not be taken from the Earth; thus he was boldly reaffirming that the Rough Stone Rolling is the Church. viewtopic.php?f=1&t=48286

Just looking at how people are attacked right now for having a different view or belief, I can see this really escalating into much worse things very quickly.

I just read this article and thought of your post above. It is coming.

Thursday, 07 June 2018
New California Law May Punish Pastors for Helping Others Leave Homosexuality

Could California pastors be charged with a crime for using Christian doctrine to help someone leave homosexuality? This could be the case if a new Golden State bill, AB 2943, becomes law. Making matters worse, some critics claim it could even be used to impede sales of the Bible.

California, 11 other states, and D.C. already ban “reparative therapy” — which seeks to eliminate unwanted same-sex attraction or feelings of “gender” identity — for minors. The new bill, however, applies to adults as well and would prohibit not just therapists but anyone from offering such aid. It’s gold-plated hypocrisy: The same people who allow a physician to help a person “change his sex” (not actually possible), a quality certainly inborn, want to make it a crime to help someone change his sexual feelings — in the thinking that they’re inborn.

Yet AB 2943 goes further still and prohibits efforts to change even behavior. As National Review’s David French explains, if, for example, “a sexually active gay man or woman sought counseling not to change their orientation but rather to become celibate, then the services and goods provided in that effort would violate this statute.”

Full article here - https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/i ... osexuality

wow

[mgridle1]

Like the violence coming out of the race war, how long before the violence comes to those that believe homosexuality is a sin, from the lgbt community and those that support them? This definitely has nothing to do with "tolerance" for them or their community, as is shown by the intolerance towards anyone that doesn't share their same views or accept their lifestyle. As things get worse, do you foresee the lives of the brethren being threatened over this issue? I was just thinking of a few things Durzan mentioned from sitting in a stake conference where Elder Holland presided, and talked about..

Said that the changes we saw announced last conference session was just the beginning and that we ain't seen nothing yet. Mentioned that 13 Temples would be dedicated next year (or something like that).

Talked a bit about how we need to be fully committed to the Gospel and quoted the first Great Commandment. Asked us to ask ourselves what our motivations are and to work towards keeping the First Great Commandment.

Mentioned how he and the other members of the Twelve discuss how they could be killed in the future, but how all of them couldn't be gotten. The keys will not be taken from the Earth; thus he was boldly reaffirming that the Rough Stone Rolling is the Church. viewtopic.php?f=1&t=48286

Just looking at how people are attacked right now for having a different view or belief, I can see this really escalating into much worse things very quickly.

I just read this article and thought of your post above. It is coming.

Thursday, 07 June 2018
New California Law May Punish Pastors for Helping Others Leave Homosexuality

Could California pastors be charged with a crime for using Christian doctrine to help someone leave homosexuality? This could be the case if a new Golden State bill, AB 2943, becomes law. Making matters worse, some critics claim it could even be used to impede sales of the Bible.

California, 11 other states, and D.C. already ban “reparative therapy” — which seeks to eliminate unwanted same-sex attraction or feelings of “gender” identity — for minors. The new bill, however, applies to adults as well and would prohibit not just therapists but anyone from offering such aid. It’s gold-plated hypocrisy: The same people who allow a physician to help a person “change his sex” (not actually possible), a quality certainly inborn, want to make it a crime to help someone change his sexual feelings — in the thinking that they’re inborn.

Yet AB 2943 goes further still and prohibits efforts to change even behavior. As National Review’s David French explains, if, for example, “a sexually active gay man or woman sought counseling not to change their orientation but rather to become celibate, then the services and goods provided in that effort would violate this statute.”

Full article here - https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/i ... osexuality

wow

Doesn't surprise me in the least bit. 10 years ago had you asked if about it, I would have said homosexual "marriage" should be dealt by the states and the best solution is to get government out of it and that if it were legalized it wouldn't be that big of a deal. I bought hook, line and sinker the idea that well it's a sin but it doesn't affect me so whatever.

That is such a big lie, b/c it was never about homosexual marriage-it was about convincing the public that homosexuality isn't wrong and even worse that homosexuality is GOOD and anyone that thinks homosexuality is wrong is an evil person. It has never been about "equal" rights, it's always been about completely switching the cultural mores so that what was once universally thought of as wrong is now almost universally thought of as good.