LDS Freedom Forum

Satire? Maybe at the time it was said to be satire, to obscure its real intent. But no matter whether the author intended satire or not, almost every single point made and every goal sought in this article has been achieved.

A very depraved agenda is now being celebrated as awesome and cool, and wonderful. Just look at what's happening with Mayor Pete on the campaign trail. "Good people" love him and his husband and totally embrace their marriage, and only haters and homophobes criticize him, or call his marriage sinful.

Evil called good, and good called evil, not just by "others" but by someone sitting in your chapel, or at your Easter dinner table.

Also, people write "satire" in order to say what can't be said seriously.

Anybody read Spencer W Kimball's talk on Morality. He is not politically correct, He speaks revelation from Jesus Christ and quotes past history from scriptures.
Our Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ will never change their laws on the ACT of homosexuality.

ori wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 3:42 pm

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 10:16 am However, Tom is saying that we completely accept their depraved lifestyle choice, and if two gay men in your ward adopt a baby, THROW THEM A PARTY!!!

I'm not going to lie, I am repulsed by the idea of attending a baby shower for gay parents. I would prefer not to attend. Reason is, a baby shower can be seen as a party that is celebrating the new parenthood of the baby. If it was only celebrating the emergence of a new child into the world, then I would be much more comfortable with attending. I believe many people will see it that way: that is, they will see it as a party celebrating the emergence of a new child coming into the world, and nothing more. However, I don't see it that way. I see it as a celebration of the new child coming into that family. I cannot celebrate a new child coming into a family headed by a gay couple.

The sad fact is we have to deal with splitting hairs like this, and it makes me very sad, and makes me feel very disgusted. I abhor homosexual sin like no other. It truly is an abomination. In a better day in the future we won't have to split hairs on what the meaning of a baby shower is (whether it means we are celebrating the "family" gaining a new member, or just the newness of the child).

All that said, if the bishop or stake president asked me to attend a baby shower thrown for gay parents, I would attend. This is ground I wouldn't be comfortable on, but would do it (and I'd feel disgusted doing it), but I'd do it due to acknowledgment that I am not to judge where the line is, and deference to the leaders.

Attending a gay pride parade or a gay "marriage", however, would be taking it up a notch for me, from "highly questionable/be careful" territory to crossing the line into "outright support of homosexuality".

Not all Bishops or Stake Presidents are called of God, some are called by men and if either one of them asked me to attend a baby shower for gay parents I would tell them a flat out NO.

ori wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 5:05 pm

setyourselffree wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 4:27 pm
Neither will laziness, idleness, lying, inappropriate speaking, looking at your cell phone to much, getting angry often, gossiping, evil speaking of the lords anointed, backbiting, not following directions well, the kind of stuff we are doing right now, and every other sin you can think of.

LOL! "looking at your cell phone too much" just made me smile because it seems out of place in this list of obvious sins. I would say "looking at your cell phone too much" isn't obviously a sin like the others are. But it is a sin inasmuch as it is idleness....

On a more serious note, what do you mean by "not following directions well"? I mean, aside from all the other commandments you mentioned. Did you have anything specific in mind?

When your boss or significant other has asked you to do something and you do it half assd. When in Zion instructions will need to be carried out with exactness. If you dont know how to follow simple instructions you are not ready for Zion. If your leader asks you to do something and you can't do it without saying I can do it better or even talking behind that leaders back, your probably are not ready for Zion.

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 5:17 pm Satire? Maybe at the time it was said to be satire, to obscure its real intent. But no matter whether the author intended satire or not, almost every single point made and every goal sought in this article has been achieved.

A very depraved agenda is now being celebrated as awesome and cool, and wonderful. Just look at what's happening with Mayor Pete on the campaign trail. "Good people" love him and his husband and totally embrace their marriage, and only haters and homophobes criticize him, or call his marriage sinful.

Evil called good, and good called evil, not just by "others" but by someone sitting in your chapel, or at your Easter dinner table.

Also, people write "satire" in order to say what can't be said seriously.

None of that makes it any less dishonest to represent a satirical piece as anything but satire.

If everything you're saying is true then none of the impact will be lost by properly crediting the source.

captainfearnot wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 8:13 pm

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 5:17 pm Satire? Maybe at the time it was said to be satire, to obscure its real intent. But no matter whether the author intended satire or not, almost every single point made and every goal sought in this article has been achieved.

A very depraved agenda is now being celebrated as awesome and cool, and wonderful. Just look at what's happening with Mayor Pete on the campaign trail. "Good people" love him and his husband and totally embrace their marriage, and only haters and homophobes criticize him, or call his marriage sinful.

Evil called good, and good called evil, not just by "others" but by someone sitting in your chapel, or at your Easter dinner table.

Also, people write "satire" in order to say what can't be said seriously.

None of that makes it any less dishonest to represent a satirical piece as anything but satire.

If everything you're saying is true then none of the impact will be lost by properly crediting the source.

It's been over 30 years since the piece was written. I think it's probably going to be very difficult to prove if it's satire or not. What is obvious is that the Gay Agenda has come very, very far in meeting their goals.

Thinker does give the source. The debate is whether or not the writer used satire. At this point, what does it matter?!?!

jimmyk3512 wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 5:42 pm

ori wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 3:42 pm

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 10:16 am However, Tom is saying that we completely accept their depraved lifestyle choice, and if two gay men in your ward adopt a baby, THROW THEM A PARTY!!!

I'm not going to lie, I am repulsed by the idea of attending a baby shower for gay parents. I would prefer not to attend. Reason is, a baby shower can be seen as a party that is celebrating the new parenthood of the baby. If it was only celebrating the emergence of a new child into the world, then I would be much more comfortable with attending. I believe many people will see it that way: that is, they will see it as a party celebrating the emergence of a new child coming into the world, and nothing more. However, I don't see it that way. I see it as a celebration of the new child coming into that family. I cannot celebrate a new child coming into a family headed by a gay couple.

The sad fact is we have to deal with splitting hairs like this, and it makes me very sad, and makes me feel very disgusted. I abhor homosexual sin like no other. It truly is an abomination. In a better day in the future we won't have to split hairs on what the meaning of a baby shower is (whether it means we are celebrating the "family" gaining a new member, or just the newness of the child).

All that said, if the bishop or stake president asked me to attend a baby shower thrown for gay parents, I would attend. This is ground I wouldn't be comfortable on, but would do it (and I'd feel disgusted doing it), but I'd do it due to acknowledgment that I am not to judge where the line is, and deference to the leaders.

Attending a gay pride parade or a gay "marriage", however, would be taking it up a notch for me, from "highly questionable/be careful" territory to crossing the line into "outright support of homosexuality".

Not all Bishops or Stake Presidents are called of God, some are called by men and if either one of them asked me to attend a baby shower for gay parents I would tell them a flat out NO.

I agree to a point. I understand and empathize with your sentiment. In fact I’m going to qualify my previous statement. I was thinking of my leaders, who are good people. If my current bishop asked me to attend a baby shower with gay parents then I would assume it was for a good reason, like positive fellowshipping inspired by the spirit , so I’d trust the bishop. But yes if i felt the Bishop was trying to promote homosexuality then I would be inclined to act otherwise.

Like I said , this baby shower thing is a grey area for me so I’m flexible. Under normal circumstances I would NOT attend.

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 8:18 pm At this point, what does it matter?!?!

Okay that made me laugh.

setyourselffree wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 7:44 pm When your boss or significant other has asked you to do something and you do it half assd. When in Zion instructions will need to be carried out with exactness. If you dont know how to follow simple instructions you are not ready for Zion. If your leader asks you to do something and you can't do it without saying I can do it better or even talking behind that leaders back, your probably are not ready for Zion.

Hmmm. Where do you get the idea that one needs to obey one’s significant other? I’m not sure I’m familiar with that teaching. Seems a bit off to me. If you first agree to do something that your significant other asked, then don’t do it (or do it half-baked), I’d say that’s not keeping your word, which is not honest. Is this what you meant? Were you making a point about honesty, or about obedience?

captainfearnot wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 8:30 pm

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 8:18 pm At this point, what does it matter?!?!

Okay that made me laugh.

My impersonation must have been amazing because I got the quote wrong.

What difference, at this point, does it make?!?!

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 6:22 am

The Airbender wrote: ↑April 16th, 2019, 11:14 pm Hmm... you'd think a revelation could sort this all out once and for all?

Well, in his article, Tom says the leaders are "wrestling" over unanswered questions, and gaining new light and knowledge.

So far, they've had a revelation about the Nov 2015 policy, and now they've had a revelation about the rescinding of the Nov 2015 policy. Some people won't be happy until they get the revelation their group wants, and others, like the poster above, will believe anything that's claimed to be revelation. Notice, she said she agreed with the Nov 15 POX, and now she agrees with the rescinding of the POX (policy of exclusion). She also loves and accepts her gay friends and family, but doesn't condone their sin. That ain't gonna fly for long. They don't want anyone to label them as sinners, no matter how much you say you love them.

I'm assuming Lizzy60 when you're referring to "she" you mean me "Staplean". One thing you need to know about me is I sustain our Prophet and all general authorities. I do believe they receive revelation for the church and if they want to "rescind" or "add" to I will sustain that. Another thing you need to know about me is I know God is in charge and HE will not allow the Prophet or His Apostles to lead us astray. That is absolutely something we can all count on. Yes they are mortal men and not perfect but they are the best God has and I trust Him and them.

This was my first post but I am not new to forums such as this. Please feel free to ask me questions if you don't fully understand what I post..don't just assume what I think. I will be happy to share further such as some of the journey of having a gay brother and the pain and sadness of two granddaughters being raised in an anti-traditional marriage, man hating, anti-christian etc. etc environment. It has been extremely heart breaking. Do I love my ex-daughter-in-law? Ummm I'm working on it!! But I will do what is best for my sweet granddaughters to keep them close and have an influence on them. And if loving the sinner is what I have to do I will do it. And yes Lizzy60 you are right most but not all will not be happy unless that can be totally accepted "as they are" and have the church look the other way. I am not naive to this. They will push for more.

Now this is my personal opinion about the change in the policy made before conference. The church will do all that it can to love and help the membership struggling with gay issues. They have come a long way to do their best to assist them but they will stop short of changing the doctrine. This won't happen. The brethren are staving off as long as possible the persecution that is about to be heaped upon us but when pushed up against the wall on this issue to "change or else" our prophet will not change, or better put God won't change. He is the same today, as yesterday as He will be tomorrow. Isn't that great that we can count on that??? I get it, I shake my head some days hoping for a more firm approach to the world but it would "twix the tail of the beast" and as I said they are keeping the wolves at bay. Elder Anderson was right on in his talk. Usually President Oaks tackles this subject and my prayers are with these men as they do hard things. This last conference felt sober to me. I felt our leaders pleading with us to get our lives in order. Time is short. It will be the former "apostate" members of the church that will lead the charge against the believers and it will be harsh. And as the government and outsiders join in it will be tough to endure. President Nelson is preparing us. Let's all resolve to be obedient and learn to hear the voice of revelation and stay in the boat.

Lastly read Tom's book. He has had a long weary road back to the church. His parents were amazing. I don't think I would handle the situation as they did. You can judge it for what it's worth as it certainly gives a different perspective. Can't say I agreed with everything in it but it opened by eyes to the struggle.

Not all Bishops or Stake Presidents are called of God, some are called by men and if either one of them asked me to attend a baby shower for gay parents I would tell them a flat out NO.
[/quote]


All Bishops and Stake Presidents are called by men.

ori wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 3:42 pm
All that said, if the bishop or stake president asked me to attend a baby shower thrown for gay parents, I would attend. This is ground I wouldn't be comfortable on, but would do it (and I'd feel disgusted doing it), but I'd do it due to acknowledgment that I am not to judge where the line is, and deference to the leaders.

I've really enjoyed your posts, but I am just curious why you would feel the need to put yourself in an extremely uncomfortable situation and open yourself to anxiety just because a Bishop asks you to do it?

I have gotten very comfortable saying no to things over the last 18 months or so. I still accept all callings I am extended and do my best in them, but some things I have respectfully let known that I wont assist with, such as cleaning the church buildings. If a leader asked me to attend a shower for a gay couple and I didnt want to, I'd say "I'm not interested in attending but thanks for asking" and that would be it.....

^Disregard previous post....I saw you answered my question in a following post.

Staplean wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 10:17 pm
The brethren are staving off as long as possible the persecution that is about to be heaped upon us but when pushed up against the wall on this issue to "change or else" our prophet will not change, or better put God won't change.

Agreed. There is no need to attract the full attention of the homo-mafia until it is absolutely necessary. They are the biggest political bullies around and could make things unnecessarily difficult for the church in all sorts of areas they don't need difficulties in at this time.

Staplean wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 10:17 pm This last conference felt sober to me. I felt our leaders pleading with us to get our lives in order. Time is short.

Agreed. I believe they are trying to gather in some fence sitters before the fence is turned into a no mans land.

thestock wrote: ↑April 18th, 2019, 8:10 am
I wont assist with, such as cleaning the church buildings

I'm curious why that is?

Too old? Too disabled? Single parent of young children?

Karakorum wrote: ↑April 18th, 2019, 9:23 am

thestock wrote: ↑April 18th, 2019, 8:10 am
I wont assist with, such as cleaning the church buildings

I'm curious why that is?

Too old? Too disabled? Single parent of young children?

I made a thread about it a few weeks back:

viewtopic.php?t=50458

ori wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 8:26 pm

jimmyk3512 wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 5:42 pm

ori wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 3:42 pm

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 10:16 am However, Tom is saying that we completely accept their depraved lifestyle choice, and if two gay men in your ward adopt a baby, THROW THEM A PARTY!!!

I'm not going to lie, I am repulsed by the idea of attending a baby shower for gay parents. I would prefer not to attend. Reason is, a baby shower can be seen as a party that is celebrating the new parenthood of the baby. If it was only celebrating the emergence of a new child into the world, then I would be much more comfortable with attending. I believe many people will see it that way: that is, they will see it as a party celebrating the emergence of a new child coming into the world, and nothing more. However, I don't see it that way. I see it as a celebration of the new child coming into that family. I cannot celebrate a new child coming into a family headed by a gay couple.

The sad fact is we have to deal with splitting hairs like this, and it makes me very sad, and makes me feel very disgusted. I abhor homosexual sin like no other. It truly is an abomination. In a better day in the future we won't have to split hairs on what the meaning of a baby shower is (whether it means we are celebrating the "family" gaining a new member, or just the newness of the child).

All that said, if the bishop or stake president asked me to attend a baby shower thrown for gay parents, I would attend. This is ground I wouldn't be comfortable on, but would do it (and I'd feel disgusted doing it), but I'd do it due to acknowledgment that I am not to judge where the line is, and deference to the leaders.

Attending a gay pride parade or a gay "marriage", however, would be taking it up a notch for me, from "highly questionable/be careful" territory to crossing the line into "outright support of homosexuality".

Not all Bishops or Stake Presidents are called of God, some are called by men and if either one of them asked me to attend a baby shower for gay parents I would tell them a flat out NO.

I agree to a point. I understand and empathize with your sentiment. In fact I’m going to qualify my previous statement. I was thinking of my leaders, who are good people. If my current bishop asked me to attend a baby shower with gay parents then I would assume it was for a good reason, like positive fellowshipping inspired by the spirit , so I’d trust the bishop. But yes if i felt the Bishop was trying to promote homosexuality then I would be inclined to act otherwise.

Like I said , this baby shower thing is a grey area for me so I’m flexible. Under normal circumstances I would NOT attend.

No way, no how! I would rebuke the Leader in public and make my stand for the Lord!
A baby shower for two gay men or women in the church would be in direct contradiction to the Lords plan!

What kind of leadership is in your area, if your leaders are concerning themselves with baby shower attendance?

I think it is safe to say this has never happened. How can we have a serious discussion when it gets this silly?

PressingForward wrote: ↑April 18th, 2019, 11:46 am

ori wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 8:26 pm

jimmyk3512 wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 5:42 pm

ori wrote: ↑April 17th, 2019, 3:42 pm

I'm not going to lie, I am repulsed by the idea of attending a baby shower for gay parents. I would prefer not to attend. Reason is, a baby shower can be seen as a party that is celebrating the new parenthood of the baby. If it was only celebrating the emergence of a new child into the world, then I would be much more comfortable with attending. I believe many people will see it that way: that is, they will see it as a party celebrating the emergence of a new child coming into the world, and nothing more. However, I don't see it that way. I see it as a celebration of the new child coming into that family. I cannot celebrate a new child coming into a family headed by a gay couple.

The sad fact is we have to deal with splitting hairs like this, and it makes me very sad, and makes me feel very disgusted. I abhor homosexual sin like no other. It truly is an abomination. In a better day in the future we won't have to split hairs on what the meaning of a baby shower is (whether it means we are celebrating the "family" gaining a new member, or just the newness of the child).

All that said, if the bishop or stake president asked me to attend a baby shower thrown for gay parents, I would attend. This is ground I wouldn't be comfortable on, but would do it (and I'd feel disgusted doing it), but I'd do it due to acknowledgment that I am not to judge where the line is, and deference to the leaders.

Attending a gay pride parade or a gay "marriage", however, would be taking it up a notch for me, from "highly questionable/be careful" territory to crossing the line into "outright support of homosexuality".

Not all Bishops or Stake Presidents are called of God, some are called by men and if either one of them asked me to attend a baby shower for gay parents I would tell them a flat out NO.

I agree to a point. I understand and empathize with your sentiment. In fact I’m going to qualify my previous statement. I was thinking of my leaders, who are good people. If my current bishop asked me to attend a baby shower with gay parents then I would assume it was for a good reason, like positive fellowshipping inspired by the spirit , so I’d trust the bishop. But yes if i felt the Bishop was trying to promote homosexuality then I would be inclined to act otherwise.

Like I said , this baby shower thing is a grey area for me so I’m flexible. Under normal circumstances I would NOT attend.

No way, no how! I would rebuke the Leader in public and make my stand for the Lord!
A baby shower for two gay men or women in the church would be in direct contradiction to the Lords plan!

I do not condone homosexuality at all and believe that the COJCOLDS is led by Prophets, Seers and Revelators. I have no doubt the Church will never change doctrine related to marriage. But I don't see the big deal about being kind to those who have made the (tragic) choice to live a gay lifestyle. As far as the baby shower that's been discussed here...if it did in fact happen...I don't see the problem. It is a celebration of a birth/adoption. Just remember, in his time, Jesus Christ was condemned for sharing meals and sitting and spending time with sinners.

I would follow the example of the Savior and attend the shower. I don't see how being kind in such a situation means acceptance of gay relationships/ marriage.

Jesus spent time with sinners so he could plead with them to repent. Go, and sin no more. Preach nothing but repentance, etc. Or at least that's what God, in the scriptures he has given us, has commanded us to do - but that's so last millennium...

EmmaLee wrote: ↑April 18th, 2019, 4:35 pm Jesus spent time with sinners so he could plead with them to repent. Go, and sin no more. Preach nothing but repentance, etc. Or at least that's what God, in the scriptures he has given us, has commanded us to do - but that's so last millennium...

His concern was for their soul, and He very well understood that each person is at a different stage in their journey. He modified His message based on their ability to understand principles. Could it be that that Stake President and Bishop were inspired to support that baby shower? Perhaps showing them that kindness and loving them as fellow travelers will teach them a sermon in the only way they may be able to hear.

But I guarantee one thing...rejecting them...ignoring them...treating them as lepers...harping on them to repent...will almost assuredly accomplish nothing. They know the Church's position on homosexuality...I doubt that harping on them to repent will accomplish anything.

Again....we can show love and acceptance of the person without condoning the sin. I have a gay son, and I have made it clear to him that while I love and accept him as a person and that will never change, I will never compromise my beliefs. And so long as he can accept my beliefs as I accept his right to live his life in his own way even though I don't agree with it, then our relationship need not change. He agrees, and as long as that's the case, then I can live with his choice. Not like it...not agree with it...but accept it. And as long as we have a loving relationship, I have hope that I may be able to influence him for good.

jsk wrote: ↑April 18th, 2019, 4:53 pm

EmmaLee wrote: ↑April 18th, 2019, 4:35 pm Jesus spent time with sinners so he could plead with them to repent. Go, and sin no more. Preach nothing but repentance, etc. Or at least that's what God, in the scriptures he has given us, has commanded us to do - but that's so last millennium...

His concern was for their soul, and He very well understood that each person is at a different stage in their journey. He modified His message based on their ability to understand principles. Could it be that that Stake President and Bishop were inspired to support that baby shower? Perhaps showing them that kindness and loving them as fellow travelers will teach them a sermon in the only way they may be able to hear.

But I guarantee one thing...rejecting them...ignoring them...treating them as lepers...harping on them to repent...will almost assuredly accomplish nothing. They know the Church's position on homosexuality...I doubt that harping on them to repent will accomplish anything.

Again....we can show love and acceptance of the person without condoning the sin. I have a gay son, and I have made it clear to him that while I love and accept him as a person and that will never change, I will never compromise my beliefs. And so long as he can accept my beliefs as I accept his right to live his life in his own way even though I don't agree with it, then our relationship need not change. He agrees, and as long as that's the case, then I can live with his choice. Not like it...not agree with it...but accept it. And as long as we have a loving relationship, I have hope that I may be able to influence him for good.

I'm well aware of what Christ's concerns were - hence, what I said in my post. As for the rest of your comments, I'm glad you're so good at loving everyone in the way you interpret that word.

Edited to add: I would not attend a same-sex wedding for the same reasons I would not attend a baby shower for same-sex parents. It's hard in this world where even members of the Lord's supposed Church call evil good and good evil, but I at least try not to celebrate sin and darkness. I weep for these couples. I weep for these babies. Guess I just don't have it in me to be joyful on such sad occasions. To each their own.

EmmaLee wrote: ↑April 18th, 2019, 6:46 pm

jsk wrote: ↑April 18th, 2019, 4:53 pm

EmmaLee wrote: ↑April 18th, 2019, 4:35 pm Jesus spent time with sinners so he could plead with them to repent. Go, and sin no more. Preach nothing but repentance, etc. Or at least that's what God, in the scriptures he has given us, has commanded us to do - but that's so last millennium...

His concern was for their soul, and He very well understood that each person is at a different stage in their journey. He modified His message based on their ability to understand principles. Could it be that that Stake President and Bishop were inspired to support that baby shower? Perhaps showing them that kindness and loving them as fellow travelers will teach them a sermon in the only way they may be able to hear.

But I guarantee one thing...rejecting them...ignoring them...treating them as lepers...harping on them to repent...will almost assuredly accomplish nothing. They know the Church's position on homosexuality...I doubt that harping on them to repent will accomplish anything.

Again....we can show love and acceptance of the person without condoning the sin. I have a gay son, and I have made it clear to him that while I love and accept him as a person and that will never change, I will never compromise my beliefs. And so long as he can accept my beliefs as I accept his right to live his life in his own way even though I don't agree with it, then our relationship need not change. He agrees, and as long as that's the case, then I can live with his choice. Not like it...not agree with it...but accept it. And as long as we have a loving relationship, I have hope that I may be able to influence him for good.

I'm well aware of what Christ's concerns were - hence, what I said in my post. As for the rest of your comments, I'm glad you're so good at loving everyone in the way you interpret that word.

Edited to add: I would not attend a same-sex wedding for the same reasons I would not attend a baby shower for same-sex parents. It's hard in this world where even members of the Lord's supposed Church call evil good and good evil, but I at least try not to celebrate sin and darkness. I weep for these couples. I weep for these babies. Guess I just don't have it in me to be joyful on such sad occasions. To each their own.

Kind of harsh comments, but I understand where you are coming from.

But I have learned thru hard experience that we get further by showing common courtesy and love to those we disagree with. It’s got nothing to do with celebrating evil...it’s got to do with the Golden Rule and trying to follow the Savior’s example in how he treated people. He didn’t ostracize or ignore or shun...he just didn’t. But he also was uncompromising in his principles. It is possible to do both.

Boy, these are weird times that we live in. I remember back in the 70s when the equal rights amendment was being pushed, again, and pushed and pushed and pushed, it was relentless. Now we have a world in which a man can MARRY another man and a woman can MARRY another woman, all with the blessing of the federal and state governments. It's just weird to me that this is going on and people think it is okay and because of this we are in a position where we have to deal with people in this state of gross delusion. It's like thinking that drinking grape juice is the same as eating a sandwich, it just makes no sense. But, these things come upon us to prove what WE are made of. I often remember a very striking scripture in the Book of Mormon (it is also in the Bible) when I consider our current dilemma, "3 Nephi 19:29 Father, I pray not for the world, but for those whom thou hast given me out of the world, because of their faith, that they may be purified in me, that I may be in them as thou, Father, art in me, that we may be one, that I may be glorified in them." Clearly, those who are of the world, devotedly, that is, worldly, are in a terrible state of affairs, one of our functions is to do what we can to help them get out of there and become one with the Lord and His Father. This is a job that I never would have anticipated nor wanted to such a degree and likely it will just get more bizarre.