LDS Freedom Forum

dezNatDefender wrote: ↑May 8th, 2019, 9:11 pm

justme wrote: ↑May 8th, 2019, 8:58 pm Still trying to understand. Are men intimidated by women holding the priesthood? Do you have a problem with a hypothetical female bishop interviewing you, asking you about chastity etc? What is the problem here? I can think of many women in the ward who would make better leaders and bishops etc.

You aren't understanding. It's not about "intimidated". It's about following God. It really goes back to Adam and Eve and the difference between men and women.

Adam: I will obey all of God's commandment, Satan get out of here.
Eve: I want to obey all of God's commandments . . .hmm Satan you have some good thoughts, I'll partake.

It has nothing to do with "intimidated". Men are bigger, stronger, (on average have higher intelligence), than women. Men intimidate women simply by who they are far more than men being intimidated by women. A man who is intimidated by a woman is either a weak-willed man or a man who has been beaten into submission due to the system he resides in.

What is has to do with is ensuring my woman (i.e. my wife) isn't intimidated by other men. No, I won't be "interviewed" by a woman bishop; it has nothing to do with intimidated-I just won't do it, b/c men and women are fundamentally different and I'm not going to deal with a woman bishop.

You think women would make better leaders . . . yet society has shown that it is only in very rare cases do women make better leaders. I've had plenty of woman "leaders" in my life and I won't ever place myself in that situation again. They aren't good leaders.

MMbelieve wrote: ↑May 8th, 2019, 9:53 pm Women are different but they are not inferior. Men are different but they are not superior.

Im a woman and I love strong and confident men who pave the path and make it easier and safer for women to travel. Im happy that men are considered the “head” and I think its great. I may have a slightly different perspective of what that means though.
Men are physically stronger and have more endurance and less physical weaknesses to deal with, they can work all day and be okay to do it again tomorrow. Women cannot do what men can do, especially for any real length of time. Women have more needs and require some accommodations beyond what men will ever need. This places man in a very special role to head the wife/family with his abilities so she can be herself and tend to her duties and responsibilities. He paves the way FOR her. I think its wonderful that God provided men to women and I value and respect men who do their job right.

The blessing of having a good husband is priceless to a woman, he makes it possible for her to be a woman to the fullest.

The blessing of having a good wife is profound as it gives meaning and purpose to a man that he can get in no other way. It gives him his true sense of who he is and why he is. Without a wife/family (someone to pave life for) a man is little more than a disposable creature.

justme wrote: ↑May 8th, 2019, 9:21 pm The pride of misogyny is thick here tonight. Some of you have really exposed your true colors. And you keep digging yourself deeper. Some of you would make Lawrence Summers proud.

i'mnotspecial wrote: ↑May 8th, 2019, 10:50 pm

justme wrote: ↑May 8th, 2019, 10:18 pm

i'mnotspecial wrote: ↑May 8th, 2019, 10:10 pm

justme wrote: ↑May 8th, 2019, 8:38 pm It has been an interesting few days on the forum. I have difficulty understanding the views of many on the forum. They seem to base their misogynistic, racist, anti scientific and anti intellectual views as part of their LDS existence. But that is simply not the church that I experience on a daily basis throughout my life. I really think it must come down to weakness and insecurity. Does it make us feel better, stronger, more manly to insist that a man is the leader that reigns in the home, church and society. Do we really need to put down women to puff ourselves up. I firmly look forward to the day that we receive further light and knowledge about women and the priesthood. I crave the day that they can once again give blessings. I long for the day when we realize fully their potential and divine destiny. It does not intimidate me at all. That would indeed be weakness.

I cannot fathom racism and even anti semitism that appears on this forum. That is clearly wrong.

The anti intellectualism and anti science stands also are mind boggling. I am glad that we can look to the church and its investment in education to see that this isn't the standard for the church. Why are men so intimidated by science? That is simply weakness and insecurity also. Why can't we just stand up in strength and accept all the beauty of the gospel and the world around us. Why do we have to bunker down worrying about spectre type forces trying to take over the world. The recent move towards nationalism in our country is deeply disturbing. I am glad that the brethren have been willing to speak out against it some recently. I am glad they remind us that we really are a global church and that we are all children of God.

Once again it is weakness and insecurity manifesting itself in all of these unflattering ways. We are better than that.

As a man, I'll respond.

First, I'm not a republican. I believe in the principles of the founding as seen through the lens of the Declaration of Independence, which is the spirit of our nation's Constitution. I am not affiliated with any party. Republicans are wrong a lot. Democrats are wrong a lot more.

Yes, I am weak, which is why I need a Savior.

I might be the head, but she's the heart. It's not a competition, it's a chorus. Why should women be taught to covet what they don't have? How is that righteous? Should men be coveting what God told women they are to do? With regards to women and the priesthood, I don't know enough about that subject to comment intelligently on it. I have no idea if God's plan includes women eventually receiving a priesthood ordination. I just know that it doesn't now. I also know that feeling settled on that fact doesn't put down women. I don't understand...seriously, this boggles my mind...why ANY woman would covet priesthood office. I'm a man with the potential to be a Bishop someday, and I DON'T want that. I'm not intimidated by women leaders. In fact, I WOULD PREFER IT, but who am I to counsel the Lord. It's His priesthood, not mine. Maybe, just maybe, men are ordained to the priesthood for a good reason.

I'm not anti-science, I'm anti science religion. The hubris in contemporary science is breathtaking. It's most alarming when it comes from within the church. Latter-day Saint scientists seem to be under the impression that prophetic teachings have to bend or break to their theories. Latter-day Saint scientists also seem to be oblivious to the fact that much of contemporary scientific theory is rooted in atheism and outright hostility toward God and religion. I don't understand why our scientists are so trusting of what they learn from people who hate God. If I traveled to Iran and was instructed by them about American history, what would I learn? Would their bias in any way affect what is taught? When an article talks about the age of a dinosaur as if the scientists actually KNOW the age of the dinosaur (which is almost always how they phrase it..."dumbdinosaurusrex LIVED 30,000,000 years ago...no debate...no question...just take our word for it, because the ground around the fossils dates that old). It's alarming how trusting people are of what they're told by scientists. I love science. I love REAL inquiry. I don't love the religion of science that excommunicates people with ideas that threaten the anti-God paradigm. And I don't love how condescending the intellectuals in the church are to people who don't have as many degrees as they have, and how they constantly try to bend or break the teachings of the prophets to fit their ideas.

It is a fact that forces are trying to bring the world into captivity. Most of us weren't alive during World War 2. Do you believe there was a Hitler? Do you believe there was a Gadianton? Do you believe we're in the last days? At what point do we finally accept that the threat is real?

I appreciate your candid thoughts on women and priesthood.

I had not clued into this line of thought that the anti science sentiment that is rampant here is actually anti LDS science. I don't quite know what to make of that since it is new to me. I do know that many of my scientific heroes are LDS.

And you just demonstrated the opposite of hubris, which I appreciate.
Allow me to say that I don't hate science. I also don't hate Latter-day Saint scientists. I do think many, probably most, Latter-day Saint scientists have put themselves in a very precarious situation, and it seems many budding scientists lose their testimonies in the process because they can't reconcile what scientists teach them with what the scriptures teach.

I have more respect for the scientists who leave the faith than those who stay and try to change the meaning of scripture to fit the mold of atheistic science. Those scientists who no longer believe yet stay do more harm to the church than almost anyone, as they introduce rot to orthodoxy and undermine the doctrine of the church. I've seen the same pattern in other fields of research, like Book of Mormon geography for example. Isn't that a hot mess.

For the rest of us who aren't actual scientists, this becomes an odd debate indeed. Almost none of us have done any research ourselves. We're dependent upon what others say. For me, I never defaulted to believing scientists, because I always felt like I was being manipulated by rhetorical trickery. I still feel that way today, only today I can pick apart an article and tell you why...LOL...

I'm saying this as an INTJ personality type.

justme wrote: ↑May 8th, 2019, 9:21 pm The pride of misogyny is thick here tonight. Some of you have really exposed your true colors. And you keep digging yourself deeper. Some of you would make Lawrence Summers proud.

braingrunt wrote: ↑May 10th, 2019, 11:15 am we could ask why depraved people are attracted to left wing politics.

I'm not totally wrong either.

Fiannan wrote: ↑May 11th, 2019, 2:34 pm Well, you can't have a testimony and be a liberal.

justme wrote: ↑May 8th, 2019, 8:58 pm Do you have a problem with a hypothetical female bishop interviewing you, asking you about chastity etc? What is the problem here?

anonymous91 wrote: ↑May 11th, 2019, 6:01 pm

justme wrote: ↑May 8th, 2019, 8:58 pm Do you have a problem with a hypothetical female bishop interviewing you, asking you about chastity etc? What is the problem here?

I can see it now. Young teenage boy goes to confess, to his "female" bishop, about having a problem with porn.

Bishop tears into him, and makes the poor boy feel like he is going straight to hell. No empathy, or understanding. Don't take my word for it, take a look at what women say on this forum about it themselves.

Next thing the poor boy knows everyone seems to have heard about his problem (rumor mill).

Not saying every woman will do that, but I see it as being a valid concern.

justme wrote: ↑May 11th, 2019, 5:46 pm

Fiannan wrote: ↑May 11th, 2019, 2:34 pm Well, you can't have a testimony and be a liberal.

You can't have a testimony and be a conservative.

justme wrote: ↑May 11th, 2019, 5:46 pm

Fiannan wrote: ↑May 11th, 2019, 2:34 pm Well, you can't have a testimony and be a liberal.

You can't have a testimony and be a conservative.

Fiannan wrote: ↑May 12th, 2019, 6:36 am

justme wrote: ↑May 11th, 2019, 5:46 pm

Fiannan wrote: ↑May 11th, 2019, 2:34 pm Well, you can't have a testimony and be a liberal.

You can't have a testimony and be a conservative.

Both Harold B. Lee and Ezra Taft Benson believed otherwise:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JY9f0WIJ4Jg&t=116s