General Conference April 2022 - Rumors / and live thread

[farmerchick]

So you obviously then think it is appropriate for a 19 year old young woman to be paired with another 18 year old young man?

I'm not a fan of that situation, but I'd live with it

I at least appreciate your honesty.

And it is absolutely shocking how sick and twisted people have become where they have turned off their brains.

To even think that it is appropriate to pair a young single woman with another young single man in a missionary situation where they will live 24-7 together, share the same apartment, share the same room and that "I'd live with it".

Are you freaking insane? Seriously did someone turn off the light in your brain? 18, 19 year olds. Oh my goodness the amount of sexual problems for women and men would be off the charts.

My goodness, what a bunch of nutcases we've got in this Church. When the complete and utter logical fallacies of their advocacy is pointed out to them instead of saying, yeah you are right that's a bad idea, they just double down!

Any parent who would send their child in that environment deserves to get every, single thing that comes their way because of it.

We live in a world of limited options. I don't want to prevent someone who suffers from SSA to be prevented from having the magnificent experience of serving a mission.

you are kidding right??? If someone is openly gay they shouldn't be placed in positions where they would be tempted to sin or lust after another companion.....no matter what magnificent experience may await...and no, young men and young women should not be paired up living together on missions.....we do not live in a world with limited options.... Suffering from ssa shouldn't be part of the mission experience...

[spiritMan]

And what does the Handbook say about it?

SSM is not even an automatic excommunication. You can be in a ward with 2 dudes shacked up and "married" and with a liberal Bishop and Stake President they would be allowed to stay as members.

So? It's not automatic for adultery or theft or most other things. Does that mean that the church is going soft on those things too?

SSM is just a little bit more of a long-term commitment than committing adultery or theft.

Unless of course you don't actually believe that the word "marriage" means a long-term commitment.

And the church continues to say it's a sin. I don't know why you need to scream "it's a sin!!!" at the church that already agrees with you.

Openly homosexual missionaries serve missions. That's saying it's okay.

[Lizzy60]

Has the Silver Fox spoken at all this conference…??

Coming up next.

[Artaxerxes]

I'm not a fan of that situation, but I'd live with it

I at least appreciate your honesty.

And it is absolutely shocking how sick and twisted people have become where they have turned off their brains.

To even think that it is appropriate to pair a young single woman with another young single man in a missionary situation where they will live 24-7 together, share the same apartment, share the same room and that "I'd live with it".

Are you freaking insane? Seriously did someone turn off the light in your brain? 18, 19 year olds. Oh my goodness the amount of sexual problems for women and men would be off the charts.

My goodness, what a bunch of nutcases we've got in this Church. When the complete and utter logical fallacies of their advocacy is pointed out to them instead of saying, yeah you are right that's a bad idea, they just double down!

Any parent who would send their child in that environment deserves to get every, single thing that comes their way because of it.

We live in a world of limited options. I don't want to prevent someone who suffers from SSA to be prevented from having the magnificent experience of serving a mission.

you are kidding right??? If someone is openly gay they shouldn't be placed in positions where they would be tempted to sin or lust after another companion.....no matter what magnificent experience may await...and no, young men and young women should not be paired up living together on missions.....we do not live in a world with limited options.... Suffering from ssa shouldn't be part of the mission experience...

We don't live in a world of limited options???
... I've never in my life known someone to claim that. So we can have our cake and eat it too after all?

[spiritMan]

I'm not a fan of that situation, but I'd live with it

I at least appreciate your honesty.

And it is absolutely shocking how sick and twisted people have become where they have turned off their brains.

To even think that it is appropriate to pair a young single woman with another young single man in a missionary situation where they will live 24-7 together, share the same apartment, share the same room and that "I'd live with it".

Are you freaking insane? Seriously did someone turn off the light in your brain? 18, 19 year olds. Oh my goodness the amount of sexual problems for women and men would be off the charts.

My goodness, what a bunch of nutcases we've got in this Church. When the complete and utter logical fallacies of their advocacy is pointed out to them instead of saying, yeah you are right that's a bad idea, they just double down!

Any parent who would send their child in that environment deserves to get every, single thing that comes their way because of it.

We live in a world of limited options. I don't want to prevent someone who suffers from SSA to be prevented from having the magnificent experience of serving a mission.

you are kidding right??? If someone is openly gay they shouldn't be placed in positions where they would be tempted to sin or lust after another companion.....no matter what magnificent experience may await...and no, young men and young women should not be paired up living together on missions.....we do not live in a world with limited options.... Suffering from ssa shouldn't be part of the mission experience...

It shouldn't be, it didn't used to be.

It is now. The Church has openly homosexual missionaries serving today. Nothing is done. They come out-it is accepted as no big deal.

Oaks words are as dross and aren't worth the digital bits they were transmitted on given the current Church policies. They are hypocrites.

[Artaxerxes]

So? It's not automatic for adultery or theft or most other things. Does that mean that the church is going soft on those things too?

SSM is just a little bit more of a long-term commitment than committing adultery or theft.

Unless of course you don't actually believe that the word "marriage" means a long-term commitment.

And the church continues to say it's a sin. I don't know why you need to scream "it's a sin!!!" at the church that already agrees with you.

Openly homosexual missionaries serve missions. That's saying it's okay.

No. It's recognizing what is sin and what isn't. Actions and desires are what matters, not temptations.

[Artaxerxes]

I at least appreciate your honesty.

And it is absolutely shocking how sick and twisted people have become where they have turned off their brains.

To even think that it is appropriate to pair a young single woman with another young single man in a missionary situation where they will live 24-7 together, share the same apartment, share the same room and that "I'd live with it".

Are you freaking insane? Seriously did someone turn off the light in your brain? 18, 19 year olds. Oh my goodness the amount of sexual problems for women and men would be off the charts.

My goodness, what a bunch of nutcases we've got in this Church. When the complete and utter logical fallacies of their advocacy is pointed out to them instead of saying, yeah you are right that's a bad idea, they just double down!

Any parent who would send their child in that environment deserves to get every, single thing that comes their way because of it.

We live in a world of limited options. I don't want to prevent someone who suffers from SSA to be prevented from having the magnificent experience of serving a mission.

you are kidding right??? If someone is openly gay they shouldn't be placed in positions where they would be tempted to sin or lust after another companion.....no matter what magnificent experience may await...and no, young men and young women should not be paired up living together on missions.....we do not live in a world with limited options.... Suffering from ssa shouldn't be part of the mission experience...

It shouldn't be, it didn't used to be.

It is now. The Church has openly homosexual missionaries serving today. Nothing is done. They come out-it is accepted as no big deal.

Oaks words are as dross and aren't worth the digital bits they were transmitted on given the current Church policies. They are hypocrites.

"If the church doesn't act on my hobby horse than nothing else matters!!!!" is not how thinking people address issues.

[spiritMan]

I at least appreciate your honesty.

And it is absolutely shocking how sick and twisted people have become where they have turned off their brains.

To even think that it is appropriate to pair a young single woman with another young single man in a missionary situation where they will live 24-7 together, share the same apartment, share the same room and that "I'd live with it".

Are you freaking insane? Seriously did someone turn off the light in your brain? 18, 19 year olds. Oh my goodness the amount of sexual problems for women and men would be off the charts.

My goodness, what a bunch of nutcases we've got in this Church. When the complete and utter logical fallacies of their advocacy is pointed out to them instead of saying, yeah you are right that's a bad idea, they just double down!

Any parent who would send their child in that environment deserves to get every, single thing that comes their way because of it.

We live in a world of limited options. I don't want to prevent someone who suffers from SSA to be prevented from having the magnificent experience of serving a mission.

you are kidding right??? If someone is openly gay they shouldn't be placed in positions where they would be tempted to sin or lust after another companion.....no matter what magnificent experience may await...and no, young men and young women should not be paired up living together on missions.....we do not live in a world with limited options.... Suffering from ssa shouldn't be part of the mission experience...

We don't live in a world of limited options???
... I've never in my life known someone to claim that. So we can have our cake and eat it too after all?

Somehow you believe that serving a mission is a RIGHT. It is not.

All that crap about "raising the bar", just a bunch of hypocrites. "Raise the bar" on everyone else . . .unless you are a homosexual. Now you are part of a special class of God's children that everyone must bow down to and are exempt from any need to repent.

[spiritMan]

SSM is just a little bit more of a long-term commitment than committing adultery or theft.

Unless of course you don't actually believe that the word "marriage" means a long-term commitment.

And the church continues to say it's a sin. I don't know why you need to scream "it's a sin!!!" at the church that already agrees with you.

Openly homosexual missionaries serve missions. That's saying it's okay.

No. It's recognizing what is sin and what isn't. Actions and desires are what matters, not temptations.

So there is not sin in having and openly proclaiming feelings and thoughts which if enacted in the world would be condemned?

Let's see you weasel out of this one.

So according to you, having sexual/romantic desires towards the same-sex is no sin.

Is having sexual/romantic desires towards little children no sin too?

[Artaxerxes]

We live in a world of limited options. I don't want to prevent someone who suffers from SSA to be prevented from having the magnificent experience of serving a mission.

you are kidding right??? If someone is openly gay they shouldn't be placed in positions where they would be tempted to sin or lust after another companion.....no matter what magnificent experience may await...and no, young men and young women should not be paired up living together on missions.....we do not live in a world with limited options.... Suffering from ssa shouldn't be part of the mission experience...

We don't live in a world of limited options???
... I've never in my life known someone to claim that. So we can have our cake and eat it too after all?

Somehow you believe that serving a mission is a RIGHT. It is not.

All that crap about "raising the bar", just a bunch of hypocrites. "Raise the bar" on everyone else . . .unless you are a homosexual. Now you are part of a special class of God's children that everyone must bow down to and are exempt from any need to repent.

Nope. I didn't say anything like that.

Having a temptation is not a sin. Neither does it make them special.

[Artaxerxes]

And the church continues to say it's a sin. I don't know why you need to scream "it's a sin!!!" at the church that already agrees with you.

Openly homosexual missionaries serve missions. That's saying it's okay.

No. It's recognizing what is sin and what isn't. Actions and desires are what matters, not temptations.

So there is not sin in having and openly proclaiming feelings and thoughts which if enacted in the world would be condemned?

Let's see you weasel out of this one.

So according to you, having sexual/romantic desires towards the same-sex is no sin.

Is having sexual/romantic desires towards little children no sin too?

Of course it's not a sin! If someone admits to being tempted to steal, or commit adultery, or literally any sin, but not doing it, that is not a sin. It's incredibly simple. If Satan tempts you to murder someone, does that make you a murderer? We all know it would be wrong to murder. Does the fact that Satan tempted you make you bad?

[buffalo_girl]

At the time, Gospel Doctrine was being taught alternative Sunday’s by myself & a man recently moved here from another state. He was very well versed in scripture & doctrine, but could be condescending to those he felt below his personal grasp of the doctrine. I guess there may have been complaints.

I have to wonder if to spare his feelings we were both released. He was called to an administrative position with a high profile. I have not received a calling since, nearly six years.

Any theories on why the other GD teacher was given another calling right away and you have been without one for the past 6 years?

I don’t. Many Ward members have told me - even now - they miss my classes. Members visiting from areas outside the Intermountain LDS corridor also thanked me for teaching meaningful insights into scripture when I was a teacher.

I was always very careful to support principles of the Gospel directly from scripture. Sadly, I’ve come to believe that many members fail to read, study & understand scripture beyond the ‘standard’ interpretations passed along over the years through our rote official curriculum.

My religion classes at BYU were frustrating in how rigidly they held to the their own ‘official curriculum’. Study assignments had more to do with volume & memorization than with enlightenment & inspired personal goal setting. I had to find personal time outside all the other class assignments to study scripture.

[farmerchick]

I at least appreciate your honesty.

And it is absolutely shocking how sick and twisted people have become where they have turned off their brains.

To even think that it is appropriate to pair a young single woman with another young single man in a missionary situation where they will live 24-7 together, share the same apartment, share the same room and that "I'd live with it".

Are you freaking insane? Seriously did someone turn off the light in your brain? 18, 19 year olds. Oh my goodness the amount of sexual problems for women and men would be off the charts.

My goodness, what a bunch of nutcases we've got in this Church. When the complete and utter logical fallacies of their advocacy is pointed out to them instead of saying, yeah you are right that's a bad idea, they just double down!

Any parent who would send their child in that environment deserves to get every, single thing that comes their way because of it.

We live in a world of limited options. I don't want to prevent someone who suffers from SSA to be prevented from having the magnificent experience of serving a mission.

you are kidding right??? If someone is openly gay they shouldn't be placed in positions where they would be tempted to sin or lust after another companion.....no matter what magnificent experience may await...and no, young men and young women should not be paired up living together on missions.....we do not live in a world with limited options.... Suffering from ssa shouldn't be part of the mission experience...

We don't live in a world of limited options???
... I've never in my life known someone to claim that. So we can have our cake and eat it too after all?

No that's the point...all options are on the table..you can partake of any of it....you will get what eternal reward you deserve....but back to the ssa serving missions....we have a duty and obligation to our ym and yw who serve to give them a good structure within to do the serving....having ssa people in that framework is bad for all of them...lets set them up for success...right?

[Jashon]

Boy, Ἀρταξέρξης has exposed himself as someone who would jump off a cliff if a high church leader told him to.

[spiritMan]

you are kidding right??? If someone is openly gay they shouldn't be placed in positions where they would be tempted to sin or lust after another companion.....no matter what magnificent experience may await...and no, young men and young women should not be paired up living together on missions.....we do not live in a world with limited options.... Suffering from ssa shouldn't be part of the mission experience...

We don't live in a world of limited options???
... I've never in my life known someone to claim that. So we can have our cake and eat it too after all?

Somehow you believe that serving a mission is a RIGHT. It is not.

All that crap about "raising the bar", just a bunch of hypocrites. "Raise the bar" on everyone else . . .unless you are a homosexual. Now you are part of a special class of God's children that everyone must bow down to and are exempt from any need to repent.

Nope. I didn't say anything like that.

Having a temptation is not a sin. Neither does it make them special.

So it would be appropriate in your mind for someone to openly proclaim they have a "temptation" as you call it for little children.

You think someone openly proclaiming they are a "minor-attracted person" is completely fine?

[spiritMan]

you are kidding right??? If someone is openly gay they shouldn't be placed in positions where they would be tempted to sin or lust after another companion.....no matter what magnificent experience may await...and no, young men and young women should not be paired up living together on missions.....we do not live in a world with limited options.... Suffering from ssa shouldn't be part of the mission experience...

We don't live in a world of limited options???
... I've never in my life known someone to claim that. So we can have our cake and eat it too after all?

Somehow you believe that serving a mission is a RIGHT. It is not.

All that crap about "raising the bar", just a bunch of hypocrites. "Raise the bar" on everyone else . . .unless you are a homosexual. Now you are part of a special class of God's children that everyone must bow down to and are exempt from any need to repent.

Nope. I didn't say anything like that.

Having a temptation is not a sin. Neither does it make them special.

You already doubled-down once on saying it's not a big deal for young women to be companions with young men on missions.

So you might as well double-down again by saying that there is no problem with individuals who have sexual/romantic temptations to little children to openly proclaim they are "minor attracted persons".

[Artaxerxes]

We don't live in a world of limited options???
... I've never in my life known someone to claim that. So we can have our cake and eat it too after all?

Somehow you believe that serving a mission is a RIGHT. It is not.

All that crap about "raising the bar", just a bunch of hypocrites. "Raise the bar" on everyone else . . .unless you are a homosexual. Now you are part of a special class of God's children that everyone must bow down to and are exempt from any need to repent.

Nope. I didn't say anything like that.

Having a temptation is not a sin. Neither does it make them special.

So it would be appropriate in your mind for someone to openly proclaim they have a "temptation" as you call it for little children.

You think someone openly proclaiming they are a "minor-attracted person" is completely fine?

Not alright, but not a sin. Sin is a very specific thing. It's not just things we don't like.

[spiritMan]

Openly homosexual missionaries serve missions. That's saying it's okay.

No. It's recognizing what is sin and what isn't. Actions and desires are what matters, not temptations.

So there is not sin in having and openly proclaiming feelings and thoughts which if enacted in the world would be condemned?

Let's see you weasel out of this one.

So according to you, having sexual/romantic desires towards the same-sex is no sin.

Is having sexual/romantic desires towards little children no sin too?

Of course it's not a sin! If someone admits to being tempted to steal, or commit adultery, or literally any sin, but not doing it, that is not a sin. It's incredibly simple. If Satan tempts you to murder someone, does that make you a murderer? We all know it would be wrong to murder. Does the fact that Satan tempted you make you bad?

I do not self-identify with my temptations. That is the big difference.

[Artaxerxes]

We don't live in a world of limited options???
... I've never in my life known someone to claim that. So we can have our cake and eat it too after all?

Somehow you believe that serving a mission is a RIGHT. It is not.

All that crap about "raising the bar", just a bunch of hypocrites. "Raise the bar" on everyone else . . .unless you are a homosexual. Now you are part of a special class of God's children that everyone must bow down to and are exempt from any need to repent.

Nope. I didn't say anything like that.

Having a temptation is not a sin. Neither does it make them special.

You already doubled-down once on saying it's not a big deal for young women to be companions with young men on missions.

So you might as well double-down again by saying that there is no problem with individuals who have sexual/romantic temptations to little children to openly proclaim they are "minor attracted persons".

That is not what I said.

[spiritMan]

Somehow you believe that serving a mission is a RIGHT. It is not.

All that crap about "raising the bar", just a bunch of hypocrites. "Raise the bar" on everyone else . . .unless you are a homosexual. Now you are part of a special class of God's children that everyone must bow down to and are exempt from any need to repent.

Nope. I didn't say anything like that.

Having a temptation is not a sin. Neither does it make them special.

So it would be appropriate in your mind for someone to openly proclaim they have a "temptation" as you call it for little children.

You think someone openly proclaiming they are a "minor-attracted person" is completely fine?

Not alright, but not a sin. Sin is a very specific thing. It's not just things we don't like.

So tell me exactly what a sin is then?

You realize that sin literally means "missing the mark".

[Artaxerxes]

No. It's recognizing what is sin and what isn't. Actions and desires are what matters, not temptations.

So there is not sin in having and openly proclaiming feelings and thoughts which if enacted in the world would be condemned?

Let's see you weasel out of this one.

So according to you, having sexual/romantic desires towards the same-sex is no sin.

Is having sexual/romantic desires towards little children no sin too?

Of course it's not a sin! If someone admits to being tempted to steal, or commit adultery, or literally any sin, but not doing it, that is not a sin. It's incredibly simple. If Satan tempts you to murder someone, does that make you a murderer? We all know it would be wrong to murder. Does the fact that Satan tempted you make you bad?

I do not self-identify with my temptations. That is the big difference.

We have associates others, and others have associated themselves, with their sins for a long time. People are called alcoholics, adulterers, etc. I agree that people shouldn't think of themselves that way. But, again, that does not meet the Lord's definition of a sin.

[spiritMan]

Somehow you believe that serving a mission is a RIGHT. It is not.

All that crap about "raising the bar", just a bunch of hypocrites. "Raise the bar" on everyone else . . .unless you are a homosexual. Now you are part of a special class of God's children that everyone must bow down to and are exempt from any need to repent.

Nope. I didn't say anything like that.

Having a temptation is not a sin. Neither does it make them special.

You already doubled-down once on saying it's not a big deal for young women to be companions with young men on missions.

So you might as well double-down again by saying that there is no problem with individuals who have sexual/romantic temptations to little children to openly proclaim they are "minor attracted persons".

That is not what I said.

You are saying that it's totally fine for young men who openly self-identify as same-sex attracted to serve missions and be attached at the hip 24-7 with another male.

So you are obviously on board with minor attracted persons being around children 24-7.

[spiritMan]

So there is not sin in having and openly proclaiming feelings and thoughts which if enacted in the world would be condemned?

Let's see you weasel out of this one.

So according to you, having sexual/romantic desires towards the same-sex is no sin.

Is having sexual/romantic desires towards little children no sin too?

Of course it's not a sin! If someone admits to being tempted to steal, or commit adultery, or literally any sin, but not doing it, that is not a sin. It's incredibly simple. If Satan tempts you to murder someone, does that make you a murderer? We all know it would be wrong to murder. Does the fact that Satan tempted you make you bad?

I do not self-identify with my temptations. That is the big difference.

We have associates others, and others have associated themselves, with their sins for a long time. People are called alcoholics, adulterers, etc. I agree that people shouldn't think of themselves that way. But, again, that does not meet the Lord's definition of a sin.

Again, you refuse to define "sin". You seem to think that sin extremely limited.

[Artaxerxes]

Nope. I didn't say anything like that.

Having a temptation is not a sin. Neither does it make them special.

So it would be appropriate in your mind for someone to openly proclaim they have a "temptation" as you call it for little children.

You think someone openly proclaiming they are a "minor-attracted person" is completely fine?

Not alright, but not a sin. Sin is a very specific thing. It's not just things we don't like.

So tell me exactly what a sin is then?

You realize that sin literally means "missing the mark".

I don't know where you learned etymology, but I believe sin comes from sons, meaning guilt.

I always like James's definition. "Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin."

[Artaxerxes]

Nope. I didn't say anything like that.

Having a temptation is not a sin. Neither does it make them special.

You already doubled-down once on saying it's not a big deal for young women to be companions with young men on missions.

So you might as well double-down again by saying that there is no problem with individuals who have sexual/romantic temptations to little children to openly proclaim they are "minor attracted persons".

That is not what I said.

You are saying that it's totally fine for young men who openly self-identify as same-sex attracted to serve missions and be attached at the hip 24-7 with another male.

So you are obviously on board with minor attracted persons being around children 24-7.

I think that adults are different than children. I'm not sure why these things are hard to understand.