2015 April Conference Thread

[Goatnapper'96]

What about the YM who decides not to serve a mission because he has a loss of faith or feels he never gained a testimony and has doubts about the church? He was raised in the church with the expectation that he would serve a mission. An argument can be made that it was the YM who changed or failed to develop a testimony. Afterall, his brothers all grew up in the same environment and served missions. What's his problem? Does the YM now have a gap to bridge? I would think there might be some feelings of resentment by the YM if his family is having a diffiuclt time respecting his decision not to serve and is now treating him differently. Or is the YM just being selfish?

What about his sister who marries outside the LDS faith? Is she being selfish when she feels resentment after being treated differently than her siblings who married in the temple. These scenerios hit close to home with me. My family had difficulty adjusting, and yes, there were hurt feelings and resentment. But time has helped heal and we still consider ourselves an eternal family. No one has yet objected in GC; at least to my knowledge.

I think most would agree that your scenarios are different, and perhaps significantly, than the impact to a relationship between husband and wife if one decides to elevate their "intellectual integrity" as their most noble pursuit - and let there be no doubt even Inigo de Montoya would tell you "intellectual integrity" is an even more noble pursuit than true love. Obviously most of mankind realizes that the two scenarios you outlined involve a child not buying into what the parents have been selling. That is part of life and we all realize it, I think. However, when two people marry and their marriage commitment as viewed as a 3 party deal that includes God/The LDS Church and devotion to its lifestyle, belief system and community and one of the spouses leave that is breaking a contract that folks made as consenting adults. While there are similar emotional feelings of a loved one being lost in your scenarios, children never make that same contractual commitment, IMO. Decisions spouses make affect much more than emotional well-being, especially to the true-blue believing mormon, whereas the influence of a lost child is limited, in my perspective, to impacting emotional well-being.

[Bo Diddley]

Prenuptial agreements, people!

[Joe Public]

Not to me, but I don't mean to sound strident.
Conscientious decisions bring consequences.
Everybody seems to want the satisfaction of standing for something, while being unwilling to take the heat.

Not everybody.

More thoughts later (I hope) . . .

[Copelius]

Not to me, but I don't mean to sound strident.
Conscientious decisions bring consequences.
Everybody seems to want the satisfaction of standing for something, while being unwilling to take the heat.

Those were my thoughts. And while saying that everybody wants that satisfaction may appear to be painting with too broad of a brush, it is a proper exaggeration that describes the societal way of thinking.

[ERCougar]

Not to me, but I don't mean to sound strident.
Conscientious decisions bring consequences.
Everybody seems to want the satisfaction of standing for something, while being unwilling to take the heat.

Wrong!
Had you paid attention to conference, you would know that freedom of religion means freedom from criticism of ones' beliefs.

[Paperback Writer]

I think most would agree that your scenarios are different, and perhaps significantly, than the impact to a relationship between husband and wife if one decides to elevate their "intellectual integrity" as their most noble pursuit - and let there be no doubt even Inigo de Montoya would tell you "intellectual integrity" is an even more noble pursuit than true love. Obviously most of mankind realizes that the two scenarios you outlined involve a child not buying into what the parents have been selling. That is part of life and we all realize it, I think. However, when two people marry and their marriage commitment as viewed as a 3 party deal that includes God/The LDS Church and devotion to its lifestyle, belief system and community and one of the spouses leave that is breaking a contract that folks made as consenting adults. While there are similar emotional feelings of a loved one being lost in your scenarios, children never make that same contractual commitment, IMO. Decisions spouses make affect much more than emotional well-being, especially to the true-blue believing mormon, whereas the influence of a lost child is limited, in my perspective, to impacting emotional well-being.

You make a good point distinguishing between marriage committments in an LDS temple between husband and wife (and diety) and choices made by their children (but also choices those children made as adults). So it comes down to a contract? Or more accurately a covenant. And I would agree that this is a big difference since it involves covenants between two people and diety. Normally, I say that the decision and consequences are between the individual and God and people should not inject their own judgements and consequences into it. But when the covenant involves a spouse, it's a different situation. I go back to waup's well expressed opinion that it should be a person's happiness that trumps everything. A spouse's unconditional love even though they leave the church. Or a spouse expressing unconditional love by remaining active in church even though they've lost faith because it is important to their spouse and they made a covenant to him/her and a God that they may no longer believe in. Maybe Katy Lied has a good point. No easy answer as to whose happiness trumps.

[Goatnapper'96]

You make a good point distinguishing between marriage committments in an LDS temple between husband and wife (and diety) and choices made by their children (but also choices those children made as adults). So it comes down to a contract? Or more accurately a covenant. And I would agree that this is a big difference since it involves covenants between two people and diety. Normally, I say that the decision and consequences are between the individual and God and people should not inject their own judgements and consequences into it. But when the covenant involves a spouse, it's a different situation. I go back to waup's well expressed opinion that it should be a person's happiness that trumps everything. A spouse's unconditional love even though they leave the church. Or a spouse expressing unconditional love by remaining active in church even though they've lost faith because it is important to their spouse and they made a covenant to him/her and a God that they may no longer believe in. Maybe Katy Lied has a good point. No easy answer as to whose happiness trumps.

When one is analyzing dueling opinions expressed by KL and Wuap remember this: "In Samoa the men do all the cooking."

[scottie]

I guess I should read his website first. All I've read is a Facebook post that a few people decided to raise their hands in objection on a sustaining vote, following in the footsteps of dozens in the early decades of the church, but apparently stepping on a lot of toes now. That people have a problem with that is weird and cultish to me. If he's publicly shaming his family, then that's on him. I was commenting more on kl's general point of following one's religious convictions, which I think is a lot more complex than a restaurant choice.

#ISustain Campaign Evolves After Vocal Oppositions at Conference to Church Leadership

[Solon]

Wrong!
Had you paid attention to conference, you would know that freedom of religion means freedom from criticism of ones' beliefs.

Ha. If I didn't know better, I would have suspected you of rock-climbing with me during General Conference. Oh wait! That totally happened.
I guess you have DVR.

I sound way more adamant than I intend. For me, this talk of personal journeys, the quests for truth, the yearning to share every minute detail of faith via facebook and podcast and etc. is way too self-centered. Everyone is selling something, whether it's a church selling salvation or a dissenter selling "a personal narrative of journey and hope." Barf.

Just keep your family happy (whether it means going to church, or avoiding all churches). Show up once in awhile to help someone move into the neighborhood. Buy the overpriced girl scout cookies & clean up after your dog. Who gives a rat's butt about "truth" and salvation in the eternities? All we have for sure is the here and now. Better make it count.

[Commando]

Ha. If I didn't know better, I would have suspected you of rock-climbing with me during General Conference. Oh wait! That totally happened.
I guess you have DVR.

I sound way more adamant than I intend. For me, this talk of personal journeys, the quests for truth, the yearning to share every minute detail of faith via facebook and podcast and etc. is way too self-centered. Everyone is selling something, whether it's a church selling salvation or a dissenter selling "a personal narrative of journey and hope." Barf.

Just keep your family happy (whether it means going to church, or avoiding all churches). Show up once in awhile to help someone move into the neighborhood. Buy the overpriced girl scout cookies & clean up after your dog. Who gives a rat's butt about "truth" and salvation in the eternities. All we have for sure is the here and now. Better make it count.

That was simultaneously mind numbingly cynical and truthy.

[Solon]

That was simultaneously mind numbingly cynical and truthy.

I'd hang with you, Commando. That would be carpe-ing the diem.

[Mormon Red Death]

Ha. If I didn't know better, I would have suspected you of rock-climbing with me during General Conference. Oh wait! That totally happened.
I guess you have DVR.

I sound way more adamant than I intend. For me, this talk of personal journeys, the quests for truth, the yearning to share every minute detail of faith via facebook and podcast and etc. is way too self-centered. Everyone is selling something, whether it's a church selling salvation or a dissenter selling "a personal narrative of journey and hope." Barf.

Just keep your family happy (whether it means going to church, or avoiding all churches). Show up once in awhile to help someone move into the neighborhood. Buy the overpriced girl scout cookies & clean up after your dog. Who gives a rat's butt about "truth" and salvation in the eternities? All we have for sure is the here and now. Better make it count.

You only get one shot on this blue pearl. Dont waste it on stupid shit.

[byu71]

As I am coming around to what so many on here think, that gay marriage is just fine, at the same time I am finding myself believing more and more Temple marriage isn't that big a deal. Except of course for determining ranking within the church.

[clackamascoug]

That was simultaneously mind numbingly cynical and truthy.

It did sound very convincing. Except for the fact that The Holy Ghost is the wildcard in the game of life. If the Holy Ghost is not a constant companion or even a erstwhile companion, Solon's observations would be 100% true. I've had enough tactile feedback that my interactions with THG prod me in directions that I would not have gone. THG speaks to my mind and comforts me when I need comforting. THG confirms things I've figured out on my own.

I am who I am... because I'm too chicken to deny the good things in my life and too selfish to want to abandon what I consider one of the best things I have going for me.

[Commando]

I'd hang with you, Commando. That would be carpe-ing the diem.