Elizabeth Smart & Chewing Gum

[SoCalCoug]

And yet we admire the martyrs who would die rather than abandon their Christian faith. Bizzare, indeed.

And the young women who struggle to their death, rather than allow someone to steal their virtue.

[SoCalCoug]

And intellectually dishonest. Don't forget that.

Not everyone is being intellectually dishonest.

[UVACoug]

I am struggling to see an example where a victim is making any voluntary choices. RGS was directing his talk to people who were abused as children/teens. To make that statement to that group is beyond insensitive, it is deplorable.

Two people very close to me have been victims of sexual abuse(one as a 5-10 year old child and the other a preteen, age 11-13). Both felt a degree of responsibility for not saying anything about the abuse to their parents. Both were ashamed that they didn't do anything to stop it as they were abused multiple times over several years by the same person. They voluntarily ended up alone with that person on many occasions. The abuse became pretty much an expected routine whenever that person was around. There was never any fear of retribution against them from that person. They simply became resigned that this was how things were going to be when that person was around. They both have said that they didn't tell anyone because they were too ashamed to tell anyone and guilt paralyzed them whenever that person made advances. No fear, no compulsion. What degree of responsibility would RGS assume that they held?

Now you are just making things up.

[SoCalCoug]

In fact, it should confirm two things: one, that the leaders are indeed teaching that (which is especially helpful if a statement is capable of being misinterpreted), and two, that the teaching is in fact from The Lord, rather than the individual.

Which leads to a whole different discussion.

[All-American]

Not everyone is being intellectually dishonest.

No, just the ones with whom you disagree.

[UVACoug]

Look at this UVA: AA here is very much a TBM but knows he's not obligated to defend every bit of semi-canonical craziness he encounters. Of course the Church corporation is never going to admit an error, but at an individual level it's fine to acknowledge errors. If Church leaders stop saying something and it never made a damn bit of sense in the first place, then I think you're on very safe ground to just say, "Church leaders were wrong. We were wrong. We now have greater light and knowledge."

When they're doing gay Temple marriages 50 years from now that's exactly what people will be saying.

Why should I accept that he said something he didn't say? I have already said I disagreed with what President Kimball and other said. Why can't you just accept the fact that you aren't the ultimate authority on all things and that it is alright if some people disagree with you?

[Jarid in Cedar]

He was merely teaching the importance of repentance when one does sin. He isn't even condemning anywhere here. He is teaching repentance, not condemnation.

WTF does the victim have to repent for? What sins have they committed?

Save the discussion of repentance and the atonement for discussions about sin, not in an talk about healing from abuse.

[Jarid in Cedar]

And yet we admire the martyrs who would die rather than abandon their Christian faith. Bizzare, indeed.

We do?

[Indy Coug]

We do?

Time to brush up on your Christian history, muchacho.

[All-American]

We do?

We don't?

[UVACoug]

And the young women who struggle to their death, rather than allow someone to steal their virtue.

Please show me the person who "struggled to their death" because of Elder Scott's talk.

[All-American]

WTF does the victim have to repent for? What sins have they committed?

Save the discussion of repentance and the atonement for discussions about sin, not in an talk about healing from abuse.

Something comparatively minor, no doubt. I'm with you; if I'm giving a talk and I'm addressing sexual abuse victims, I pick another time for that particular message.

[UVACoug]

WTF does the victim have to repent for? What sins have they committed?

Save the discussion of repentance and the atonement for discussions about sin, not in an talk about healing from abuse.

He wasn't talking about repenting for being a victim. Geez. He was talking about victims who HAVE sinned. I don't know why this is so difficult for you?

[UVACoug]

Something comparatively minor, no doubt. I'm with you; if I'm giving a talk and I'm addressing sexual abuse victims, I pick another time for that particular message.

Agree completely. It would have been better to leave it for another time. That doesn't mean that he meant something he didn't mean though.

[All-American]

Which leads to a whole different discussion.

It could, I suppose, but it doesn't need to. Somebody reading any of these quotes should feel entitled to pray to know 1) if they are understanding the message the leader intended to give, and 2) if the message as intended comes from The Lord. I think the interpretation a lot of you are giving these statements would fail test number one and test number two. Some of you feel they would only fail test number two. Probably too many think that they pass both tests, unfortunately.