Oaks goes full Communist

[GeeR]

Having read the talk now, I didn’t get anything out of it that so many are claiming here, such as a veiled support for vaccine mandates

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=63910

Have you read the talk yet? He wasn’t talking about vaccines If anything it was about the clash between religious beliefs and discrimination about gays. Here is the complete sentence: “As advocates for religious freedom, we must yield to the fact that in a nation with citizens of many different religious beliefs or disbeliefs, the government must sometimes limit the right of some to act upon their beliefs when it is necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of all.”

That sentence could apply to the clot shot, but it could also apply to genital mutilation of children, both in Muslim communities, as well as trans people. It could apply to a lot of things, and I am not sure that no one should intercede on behalf of children. And what about Satanists. Clearly, everyone cannot have unfettered religious liberty when some religious practices abridge the God-given rights of others.

I thought it was common knowledge by now, but I guess I am wrong, that the brethren speak purposely in ambiguities or what is known as Orwellian double-talk. That way opposing parties are placated and never offended because they perceive that the speaker is on their side.

[GeeR]

The Communists call it Aesopian code and an example of it is the 17 goals of the U.N. Sustainable Development Agenda.

[Chip]

I had a chance to take a look at the talk. Oaks' address wasn't about communism. And the quoted line isn't the payload of the message.

My summary of what I saw is this:
* Oaks says religious freedom is good (implied context is traditional families)
* Oaks says nondiscrimination laws are good (implied context is gays and lesbians, I'll address this below)
* Oaks goes on for a long time and "strongly urges" certain behaviors and attitudes in order to keep both sides happy.
* Oaks urges people to settle disputes out of court <<<< (THIS IS FAR MORE TELLING, THAN THE QUOTE IN THE OP.).

My criticisms are:
* I can do without the vague platitudes and word salads
* I disagree with his premise about nondiscrimination laws. He is taking it as an axiomatic truth that nondiscrimination laws are good. But I disagree. Such laws are a major infringement on freedom of association. What right does the government have in making sure that market transactions do or don't consider the race or ethnicity or sexual orientation of those participating? That is not the government's job.

Is Oaks a communist? Maybe. But this address does not prove or disprove that.

Maybe this is just all about agenda 2030. Perhaps the words are not meant for us, but for them to meet their obligation to propagate all 17 of the sustainable development goals.

[BeNotDeceived]

Having read the talk now, I didn’t get anything out of it that so many are claiming here, such as a veiled support for vaccine mandates

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=63910

Have you read the talk yet? He wasn’t talking about vaccines If anything it was about the clash between religious beliefs and discrimination about gays. Here is the complete sentence: “As advocates for religious freedom, we must yield to the fact that in a nation with citizens of many different religious beliefs or disbeliefs, the government must sometimes limit the right of some to act upon their beliefs when it is necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of all.”

That sentence could apply to the clot shot, but it could also apply to genital mutilation of children, both in Muslim communities, as well as trans people. It could apply to a lot of things, and I am not sure that no one should intercede on behalf of children. And what about Satanists. Clearly, everyone cannot have unfettered religious liberty when some religious practices abridge the God-given rights of others.

I thought it was common knowledge by now, but I guess I am wrong, that the brethren speak purposely in ambiguities or what is known as Orwellian double-talk. That way opposing parties are placated and never offended because they perceive that the speaker is on their side.

Mastery of vaguery.

Where vaguery is the art of being vague.

[GeeR]

Orwellian double-talk=(1) ambiguity, (2) euphemism and (3) obfuscation.

(1) Ambiguity=”Black lives matter” by Dallin H. Oaks. “Lying” by Dallin H. Oaks.

(2) Euphemism=”Same sex attraction” not “sodomy,” “membership withdrawal” not “excommunication.”

(3) Obfuscation=”We don’t hide our history or doctrine, we’re an open book as proof check our Gospel Topic Essays.” Blackout suppression of church history and doctrine under Boyd K. Packer to brownout suppression of church history and doctrine a.k.a. “inoculation” and call it “transparency,” under M. Russell Ballard.

[Allison]

Having read the talk now, I didn’t get anything out of it that so many are claiming here, such as a veiled support for vaccine mandates

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=63910

Have you read the talk yet? He wasn’t talking about vaccines If anything it was about the clash between religious beliefs and discrimination about gays. Here is the complete sentence: “As advocates for religious freedom, we must yield to the fact that in a nation with citizens of many different religious beliefs or disbeliefs, the government must sometimes limit the right of some to act upon their beliefs when it is necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of all.”

That sentence could apply to the clot shot, but it could also apply to genital mutilation of children, both in Muslim communities, as well as trans people. It could apply to a lot of things, and I am not sure that no one should intercede on behalf of children. And what about Satanists. Clearly, everyone cannot have unfettered religious liberty when some religious practices abridge the God-given rights of others.

I thought it was common knowledge by now, but I guess I am wrong, that the brethren speak purposely in ambiguities or what is known as Orwellian double-talk. That way opposing parties are placated and never offended because they perceive that the speaker is on their side.

Yeah, I have a friend who has a penchant for picking fights every time she sees something wrong. She’s in our little neighborhood band of compatriots and, as much as we love her as a friend, we attend village Board of Trustees meetings without her as much as possible, because her need to dominate and put people in their place is extremely counterproductive to the equilibrium we had established with the prevailing party. We already had years of mud wrestling with them before she moved here, and they have the numeric advantage right now. Keeping a low profile is helpful at the moment.

In other words, it’s not always wrong to use a little stratagem, to deflect enemy fire, or to pick our battles. But I’m not even sure he was doing that. He seemed straightforward to me.

[dreamtheater76]

https://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtop ... 19&t=63910

Have you read the talk yet? He wasn’t talking about vaccines If anything it was about the clash between religious beliefs and discrimination about gays. Here is the complete sentence: “As advocates for religious freedom, we must yield to the fact that in a nation with citizens of many different religious beliefs or disbeliefs, the government must sometimes limit the right of some to act upon their beliefs when it is necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of all.”

That sentence could apply to the clot shot, but it could also apply to genital mutilation of children, both in Muslim communities, as well as trans people. It could apply to a lot of things, and I am not sure that no one should intercede on behalf of children. And what about Satanists. Clearly, everyone cannot have unfettered religious liberty when some religious practices abridge the God-given rights of others.

I thought it was common knowledge by now, but I guess I am wrong, that the brethren speak purposely in ambiguities or what is known as Orwellian double-talk. That way opposing parties are placated and never offended because they perceive that the speaker is on their side.

Yeah, I have a friend who has a penchant for picking fights every time she sees something wrong. She’s in our little neighborhood band of compatriots and, as much as we love her as a friend, we attend village Board of Trustees meetings without her as much as possible, because her need to dominate and put people in their place is extremely counterproductive to the equilibrium we had established with the prevailing party. We already had years of mud wrestling with them before she moved here, and they have the numeric advantage right now. Keeping a low profile is helpful at the moment.

In other words, it’s not always wrong to use a little stratagem, to deflect enemy fire, or to pick our battles. But I’m not even sure he was doing that. He seemed rather straightforward to me.

It's been blown out of proportion that's for certain. Of course the brethren make mistakes they are human beings. Some things are more frustrating than others and other things I am asking myself what in the world are they thinking. At the same time I'm glad I'm not in their position.
I don't think Oaks is a Communist. That's ridiculous.
He is probably more friendly towards the Constitution than most my friends, family members, or neighbors in the church. He is not a John Bircher or an Ezra Taft Benson. Maybe he is a KSL watered down Republican. I don't know. I don't think for him and free agency is why we all think different. That is the Saviors plan. President Oaks has his agency and I have mine. I'm 100% against vaccines and masks. I don't agree with shaming others and do not think it's Christlike at all. I don't like anything that has been said about vaccines, masks, or Covid by government, health officials, Mainstream Media, or even General Authorities.
I have never been tested more or had my testimony challenged than I have been in the last couple years.
What we really should be worrying about is how we are living our lives. Remember Captain Moroni was not a prophet, apostle, and maybe he was just an elder I don't know for certain. Today we have people like Amon Bundy, Kate Dalley, Steven Jones, Joel Skousen, Ben McClintock and many others it would be a long list if I said every name I can think of who are speaking out for freedom and liberty. I am glad people like that are out there.
I sustain the brethren despite their many flaws. They are far from perfect and are mess like you or I are a mess. I have a testimony of the gospel of Jesus Christ which is perfect.
Men are not perfect. Ezra Taft Benson was a Constitutionalist and a patriot. He was also a very flawed individual. His secretary Hulda Parker wife of S. Dilworth Young was a close friend of my grandparents. They were over for dinner on Sundays when I was growing up.
I was friends and neighbors with President Monsons grandson. He told me his grandfather was just a regular guy. But spoke as a prophet when he needed to.
They all screw up but Jesus Christ leads his church and mistakes will be corrected. Our wickedness is what concerns me. I believe only repentance will deliver us from our awful situation. I feel like Omni at times who said he hadn't lived the gospel as he should have. I'm trying to be faithful like Nephi, trying to be Captain Moroni and standing up for the Constitution and everything I hold dear.
I might not agree with everything the brethren think and do but I do know when they speak as prophets. The Spirit makes it very clear. They will continue to make huge mistakes also. They will continue to be gullible just like our friends and family who have been very frustrating through the Covid lie while we continue to lose our Constitutional freedoms.
But what are we doing about it. President Benson once said we can't wait for the church to tell us when to defend the Constitution. It's our responsibility to defend the Constitution.
We should always be defending the Constitution. Not attacking or blaming the brethren or others.
We need to get right with Jesus Christ if we are to be delivered from this terrible mess.

[GeeR]

You know to be identified as a Communist, one doesn’t have to look and act like Marx, Stalin and Nikita Khrushchev pounding the pulpit with his shoe, it only requires the ideology expressed in one sentence, like: “...the government must sometimes limit the right of some to act upon their beliefs when it is necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of all.”--Dallin H. Oakes. If you don’t know this you will be blind-sighted some day and it could cost you your life or the life of a loved one.

Let me just ask you a simple question. By the First Presidency stating that the COVID vaccine is “safe and effective” when it is not. How many people believed that one simple little lie and how many people have since died by trusting and acting on that one simple little lie. Thousands? Millions? One person would be too many, right? Yet it is happening before our very eyes. Do you think the brethren are blameless because they they didn’t stick a knife in these peoples back, it’s sanitized murder, the brethren can sit in their offices in the great and spacious build without getting blood on their hands and commit genocide, that is what communist do. Wake up from your deep sleep!

[EvanLM]

I personally think, based on my observation of these men, not necessarily based on the "spirit" that this is the group of prophets and members that will bring down the wrath of God which will begin in the church. I also think that they do speak generally because every bishop and stake president seem to hear it differently. You can see it in the way the stakes and wards are governed. What a mess I have witnessed in many wards across the US.

They can keep up the optimistic stuff all they and you want, but really nothing is going to change if we don't repent. And, at this point, in our history according to the scriptures, God is going to whip us more. Oaks would surrender the constitution before his own reputation as a man of God. I mean "his own reputation" in his mind, as he sees himself . . .not as others see him. We are the Gentile church that goes apostate. ONLY the faithful saints who DO NOT apostitize will be saved. . .individually. . .not as a church. We COJCLDS never accomplish the task of building Zion, but many of us will help the gathered House of Israel build it.

I think that his constitutional talks are a reflection of what he would do if the tables turn. What he has considered ahead of time and those talks and this speech shows a commitment to leaders of countries versus following constitutional principles. I'll tell you what I most worry about using a story from the BofM.

Mosiah 7:21-25. . .Zeniff, who was made king over this people, he being over zealous to inherit the land of his fathers, therefore being deceived by the cunning and craftiness of King Laman, who having entered into a treaty with King Zeniff, and having yielded up into his hands the possessions of a part of the land, or even the city of Shilom; and the land round about--And all this he did, for the sole purpose of bringing this people into subjection or into bondage. And behold we do pay tribute to the King of the Lamanites the King of the Lamanites. . . .half of corn. . .barley. . .flocks. . herds. . even one half of all we have. . . doth exact of us. . or our lives . . .many if our brethren have been slain. . . For if this people had not fallen into transgression the Lord would not have suffered this great evil should come upon them.

Mosiah 7:29 For behold, the Lord has said,"I will not succor my people in the day of their transgression; but I will hedge up their ways that prosper not; and their doings shall be as a stumbling block."

They repented to the point that God delivered them as they snuck out of the city by night.

In our day, Biden and all those in government who hate christianity and christians are behaving like King Laman and our prophets are silent. God will not hear us blame anyone else when we face him in judgement. He will just want to know what we did with what we gave us.

Once my eyes were opened 10 years ago I have never been able to turn off the truths of our generation. You are right about repentance but all need it from Prophets down to the lowliest saint. Then all people of the earth need to repent. We cannot stop what is coming but through repentence, we might slow it down and definitely we will save ourselves.

Time to build Zion in three years.

[dreamtheater76]

I don't agree with one word in the First Presidency Statement or anything they have said about COVID-19. I feel like the letter was tragic and disheartening in ways I can't say in words. I was furious by it and even responded to it in a letter pointing out everything that was wrong with it. Too many people I know have been blinded by ignorance. Why can't they?
Many people will die from the shot and they will have to answer for it. It's unfortunate. We make mistakes and learn from them. Unfortunately this one will be a catastrophic mistake.
I don't know who wrote the letter but I know former governor Mike Levitt is advising the brethren on these issues. I don't believe for a second the vaccines are safe and effective.
I can't figure out how or why the brethren could be this ignorant but so are my family members and people all around me everywhere I go.
We are the minority who doesn't trust government. We are the minority who believes everything KSL reports is a lie. If we were not the minority LDSFF would not exist. That's why we are here and asking questions.

[gruden2.0]

Oaks is a wolf in sheep's clothing.

He most certainly is. Him and Bednar are foremost.

[gruden2.0]

I can't figure out how or why the brethren could be this ignorant.

Maybe this will help. Short answer: they aren't ignorant.

[EvanLM]

So the port of Cape Canaveral is leased for 35 years to an Iraqi, a port in maine is also leased to a foreigner. Most of California is owned by the Chinese, not to mention Hawaii as well is mostly owned by foreigners. San Diego shipping port is China leased or owned. The coal mines form Wyoming to North Dakota have been purchased by foreign governments and the uranium that is mined in Wyoming is owned by China. Yosemite National Park, Yellowstone, Grand Targhee were used t secure loans from China, so they could call their loan anytime and just set up camp. More parks may be used as collateral as well. Most of our utilities are foreign owned, etc. There's more of this but I'm too tired of posting it.

The k cargo containers can be brought into any of these ports, again, as trojan horses since foreigners have possession of these ports. Crickets from our leaders.

[Gadianton Slayer]

954984CB-74D6-44C9-883A-41799AD46666.jpeg (527.54 KiB) Viewed 286 times

[dreamtheater76]

I can't figure out how or why the brethren could be this ignorant.

Maybe this will help. Short answer: they aren't ignorant.

Masonic greetings. I can't prove or disprove any of the Masonic stuff. I didn't take the photos and I'm not in the club either. Are they legit? I think some of them are found in books printed by the church if I am not mistaken. I think I saw the Bush one in one of the Monson books.
When the Illuminati was discovered they hid in Masonic lodges and hijacked many of them. These types of things are so secret I only know what I have read. There are excellent sources out there and many sources that are flat out false.
Good guys and bad guys in history were Masons.
That goes into everything from early church, the Founding Fathers, etc.
I guess this discussion could go into a million directions now. The Pope, Bush(Skull & Bones), Jesuits, Kabala Jews, etc, etc......
Then I guess you can get into Brent Scrowcroft the NWO guy who tried to persuade the brethren and everyone at BYU to jump in.
I really don't know how far that goes but I know where a lot of the money is going good and bad.
There could always be a Judas or a few more in our mists also.
I don't have all the answers. But what I know now and what I even knew even a year ago is a milestone.
My neighbors were Skousens growing up. My Grandfather passed down a copy of The Naked Communist which was in our home. I have been well informed but still learning the last 30+ years especially since I was a teenager when I started to wake up.
One day we will have the answers. Even the very elect will be deceived. I will say The Book of Mormon has been my best source of information exposing the elites, secret societies, Gadiantons, etc despite me having countless hours of research for decades. I can testify of it's truth.
I don't know or have all the answers and never will. But I do what I can and try and do everything I can despite my huge flaws.
Only Jesus Christ can correct things when they go wrong. He has before and He will again. Imperfect men are called to higher callings. But Jesus Christ leads His church.

[~ternal-tummim]

Why do you let these guys take up space in your heads? Why does anyone care what Oaks, Rusty or Bednar believe or say? And the only reason they care is so that these sycophants can quote one another in order to gain popularity points among the "brethren." Seriously, if they ceased to exist would your life change much?

Because it's all about being temple worthy. To pass the current temple recommend, you have to be able to sustain all leaders of the church. It's one of the questions. If you can't agree with how they are currently running the church, or their opinions, then you can't pass the temple recommend interview.

The questions changed in 2020: https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... ame=GLOB88

4. Do you sustain the president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the prophet, seer, and revelator and as the only person on the earth authorized to exercise all priesthood keys? Do you sustain the members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators? Do you sustain the other General Authorities and local leaders of the Church?

Sustaining President Oaks is a temple recommend worthiness question.

The church is showing more than ever that they intend to be apart of UN agenda 2030.

“Sustain” is an interesting word.

If you are doing your part, whatever you see that as, in order to help them to be prophets seers and revelators, would that not be true sustaining?

Unquestionably it would be.

Whether they are getting prophecy vision or revelation currently at the moment is out of your control and very basically fundamentally unrelated to whether or not you sustain them.

[Gadianton Slayer]

Why do you let these guys take up space in your heads? Why does anyone care what Oaks, Rusty or Bednar believe or say? And the only reason they care is so that these sycophants can quote one another in order to gain popularity points among the "brethren." Seriously, if they ceased to exist would your life change much?

Because it's all about being temple worthy. To pass the current temple recommend, you have to be able to sustain all leaders of the church. It's one of the questions. If you can't agree with how they are currently running the church, or their opinions, then you can't pass the temple recommend interview.

The questions changed in 2020: https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... ame=GLOB88

4. Do you sustain the president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the prophet, seer, and revelator and as the only person on the earth authorized to exercise all priesthood keys? Do you sustain the members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators? Do you sustain the other General Authorities and local leaders of the Church?

Sustaining President Oaks is a temple recommend worthiness question.

The church is showing more than ever that they intend to be apart of UN agenda 2030.

“Sustain” is an interesting word.

If you are doing your part, whatever you see that as, in order to help them to be prophets seers and revelators, would that not be true sustaining?

Unquestionably it would be.

Whether they are getting prophecy vision or revelation currently at the moment is out of your control and very basically fundamentally unrelated to whether or not you sustain them.

The typical LDS definition of sustain is that you will follow their counsel. I’ve shared several quotes from the church webpage before, I’ll have to go find them again. Pretty bizarre.

[~ternal-tummim]

so, if I don't get the shot, then do I sustain him?

That would be the best way to sustain him.

[~ternal-tummim]

Why do you let these guys take up space in your heads? Why does anyone care what Oaks, Rusty or Bednar believe or say? And the only reason they care is so that these sycophants can quote one another in order to gain popularity points among the "brethren." Seriously, if they ceased to exist would your life change much?

Because it's all about being temple worthy. To pass the current temple recommend, you have to be able to sustain all leaders of the church. It's one of the questions. If you can't agree with how they are currently running the church, or their opinions, then you can't pass the temple recommend interview.

The questions changed in 2020: https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... ame=GLOB88

4. Do you sustain the president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the prophet, seer, and revelator and as the only person on the earth authorized to exercise all priesthood keys? Do you sustain the members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators? Do you sustain the other General Authorities and local leaders of the Church?

Sustaining President Oaks is a temple recommend worthiness question.

The church is showing more than ever that they intend to be apart of UN agenda 2030.

“Sustain” is an interesting word.

If you are doing your part, whatever you see that as, in order to help them to be prophets seers and revelators, would that not be true sustaining?

Unquestionably it would be.

Whether they are getting prophecy vision or revelation currently at the moment is out of your control and very basically fundamentally unrelated to whether or not you sustain them.

The typical LDS definition of sustain is that you will follow their counsel. I’ve shared several quotes from the church webpage before, I’ll have to go find them again. Pretty bizarre.

Words have meanings. If they wanted the interview to say “do you assent to the statement that they are true prophets seers and revelators” they could very easily modify the wording. To that wording. They never have.

If they wanted to ask whether you “follow” them, they likewise could change the wording to “follow.”

They haven’t. So I will answer the questions as worded.

[Gadianton Slayer]

Because it's all about being temple worthy. To pass the current temple recommend, you have to be able to sustain all leaders of the church. It's one of the questions. If you can't agree with how they are currently running the church, or their opinions, then you can't pass the temple recommend interview.

The questions changed in 2020: https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... ame=GLOB88



Sustaining President Oaks is a temple recommend worthiness question.

The church is showing more than ever that they intend to be apart of UN agenda 2030.

“Sustain” is an interesting word.

If you are doing your part, whatever you see that as, in order to help them to be prophets seers and revelators, would that not be true sustaining?

Unquestionably it would be.

Whether they are getting prophecy vision or revelation currently at the moment is out of your control and very basically fundamentally unrelated to whether or not you sustain them.

The typical LDS definition of sustain is that you will follow their counsel. I’ve shared several quotes from the church webpage before, I’ll have to go find them again. Pretty bizarre.

Words have meanings. If they wanted the interview to say “do you assent to the statement that they are true prophets seers and revelators” they could very easily modify the wording. To that wording. They never have.

If they wanted to ask whether you “follow” them, they likewise could change the wording to “follow.”

They haven’t. So I will answer the questions as worded.

That’s fair.

Local leaders have made that distinction though...

A good friend had his temple recommend revoked over the phone a few months ago because he said that there are many prophets.

That’s a good question... I may start a thread to get people’s thoughts...

Why do we “sustain” a select few men as prophets, when we all have that capability?

[Sirocco]

Haven't core doctrines been touched in the past?

[GeeR]

But Jesus Christ leads His church.

Not so!

The Lord down-graded the early saints because they transgressed against the Law of Consecration so there was a formal meeting where Joseph Smith by revelation declared the Lord was removing his name from the church. There was no formal meeting reinstating the name of Christ back into the church; the early leadership merely took it upon themselves to take themselves off their probationary status and inject the name of Christ back into the church of their own volition while they were still under condemnation.

After the saints failed to embrace the fulness of the gospel, containing the fulness of the priesthood and the law of consecration, during a conference held on May 3, 1834, with Joseph Smith acting as moderator, “a motion was made by Sidney Rigdon, and seconded by Newel K. Whitney, that this Church be known hereafter by the name of ‘The Church of the Latter-day Saints.’ Remarks were made by the members, after which the motion passed by unanimous vote” (History of the Church 2:62-63).

On that historic occasion, by unanimous vote, the saints took the name of CHRIST out of the official name of the church!

That event acknowledged that the church was no longer worthy of being called by the name of Christ. (The Lord had told the saints that if they did not live the law of Zion they were not worthy to be called by his name and were not his people).

Of course it appears that the saints didn’t generally understand the real reason for the name change of the church.

David Whitmer, who seemed to blame all bad things on Sidney Rigdon would later imply that after being inspired by the Lord to name the church in the Lord’s name, that it would be Rigdon’s influence that got Joseph to make the name change.

[Sunain]

The Salt Lake Tribune has a report on Oaks talk. He was sweating bullets and had to stop half way through it. Why? He knows what he was saying is wrong.

It’s not recorded in the church’s official transcript of his speech, but he actually stopped in the middle, telling the audience, “I think at this point, I’ll take a brief sitting break and invite you to enjoy a brief standing break.” He resumed the speech after a short recess. He also wiped his face multiple times during the speech and just appeared … well, more uncomfortable than I ever recall seeing him.

Oh, we're listening and we don't like what he's saying. What he is saying is not what an apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ should be saying.

I think it has become the “most difficult” because he recognizes how few Latter-day Saints are listening.

Standing up for freedom is what mortality is all about. The freedom to choose is why we are here. We are not drunk. What a poor description. How insolent to refer to members as such.

And conservatives, drunk with a particular approach to “freedom” that focuses wholly on the self without any consideration of neighbor or the greater good, aren’t listening either. That has become especially clear during the pandemic, when conservative saints in the U.S. have pushed back vociferously against church leaders who advised them to mask up or get vaccinated to curb the spread of COVID-19.

[Mamabear]

The Salt Lake Tribune has a report on Oaks talk. He was sweating bullets and had to stop half way through it. Why? He knows what he was saying is wrong.

It’s not recorded in the church’s official transcript of his speech, but he actually stopped in the middle, telling the audience, “I think at this point, I’ll take a brief sitting break and invite you to enjoy a brief standing break.” He resumed the speech after a short recess. He also wiped his face multiple times during the speech and just appeared … well, more uncomfortable than I ever recall seeing him.

Oh, we're listening and we don't like what he's saying. What he is saying is not what an apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ should be saying.

I think it has become the “most difficult” because he recognizes how few Latter-day Saints are listening.

Standing up for freedom is what mortality is all about. The freedom to choose is why we are here. We are not drunk. What a poor description. How insolent to refer to members as such.

And conservatives, drunk with a particular approach to “freedom” that focuses wholly on the self without any consideration of neighbor or the greater good, aren’t listening either. That has become especially clear during the pandemic, when conservative saints in the U.S. have pushed back vociferously against church leaders who advised them to mask up or get vaccinated to curb the spread of COVID-19.

Wow. Thank you. The slt article praised him a little at the end. You know when a left leaning paper does that, it’s not a good sign. From his speech, I think he tried to please both sides, but ended up with the opposite result.

[AZRob]

"Drunk with freedom" sounds like something I could own. Kind of similar to the term "deplorables" a couple of years ago.