Leaderboard

It’s not a matter of letting people decide. Yes we should absolutely leave individual decisions to the individual. However what is happening among many Saints (particularly millennials and younger) is they are teaching the exceptions as being the rule. Whether it is gender roles, child bearing, word of wisdom, serving a mission, accepting callings, or obeying counsel from leaders, there is a mindset among many my age that the exceptions for each of these are actually the standard. If an individual young man says “I’m not going to serve a mission because I have a major heart condition” then great. What’s happening is now is virtually any reason to not serve a mission is becoming acceptable. It’s being taught at the lower levels of the church that it isn’t that important for young men to serve missions. Its being taught at the lower levels of the church that there are no gender roles. That our leaders are only inspired when we agree with them. That wit is appropriate in Gods eyes to wait for education to finish, a good paying job, a yearly visit to Europe to become stale and a Bugatti or two before having kids.

I'm in the position where I am working full-time from home. It's pretty cool. I, like @Suzie, enjoy using my education and training. However, I do have some issue with what I'm seeing as almost some sort of prosperity gospel. I recently chatted with a woman who would love to be a stay-at-home mom. She has a professional job that makes quite a lot of money, and her husband makes well into six figures. However, they have so much lifestyle debt they honestly can't afford for her to quit. On another note, I've often wondered what the desire to be a stay-at-home mom has cost some families. Don't get me wrong, I really will argue the stay-at-home mom thing as a worthy ideal for many, but I've seen many women (probably men as well) who want to "have it all". They want to be the pious and maternal stay-at-home mom, but they also want the fancy lifestyle. This leads to what I view as gold-digging. I'm not saying a woman must marry a jobless lazy bones who still lives in his parents' basement and can't hold down a pizza delivery gig or basic adulting, but I a seeing women panicking a bit too much over their husband's income. Living comfortably but fairly modestly is no longer acceptable. I'm actually seeing women discussing hefty price tags of income attached to potential husbands. It's not just "find a husband who will support your desire to be a stay-at-home mom while providing for the needs of the family". It's "find a husband who will support your desire to be a stay-at-home mom while making sure you live in the best neighborhood and have multiple annual vacations and this and that". I actually have heard of women crying that their home doesn't "look like they're being blessed". There's some prosperity gospel right there for you. I know I am now going off on a tangent, but it may be part of a bigger problem. I love a good comment section, but I see people in the church boasting about how hard they work and how well they provide for their families. Now, keep in mind I do not condemn hard work and even money and lots of it and if your dream career pays extremely well all the better for you and yours, but I do wonder about the growing attitude that "good members of the church make lots of money".

I watched most of the video and I don't see anything wrong with it. It is obviously a channel that is sharing commentary and/or opinion. I have a career which I enjoy immensely and have worked very hard to achieve. It is a blessing in my life because it allows me to help people. Having said that, I have been a stay-at-home mom in the past as well. I loved it very much and I have nothing but great respect and admiration for stay-at-home moms.

There's some hyperbole going on here, but I'll focus on your core point. The first thing I'll say is that I was actually a bit shocked in the 2017 Face-to-Face event with Elders Oaks and Ballard when Elder Oaks answered a question about a woman's priority for education vs. marriage. He spoke of his own mother, and how she needed to provide for her family after his father died. He made the point that she was blessed to be able to do so comfortably because she had completed her education. He then went on to state that while he did not support putting off getting married to complete an education, he did think there was a certain wisdom to waiting until her degree was completed before having children. Is it at all possible that the statements leaders make on this subject are colored by their own experiences? And might that be why so many of the statement stressing the importance of having mom in the home are so blasted old? Regardless, in more cases than you might think, the choice of whether a woman works or not is practical. Let's look at the state of affairs at present: Let's look at what it takes to buy a three bedroom home. In my area, which is fairly low cost of living, the BR houses are running at about $150,000. Let's make the goal to save enough for a 20% down payment. The following numbers breakdown what the financial situation is for a single income family with three mouths to feed. At the median income, it would take 15 years to build up that down payment. And that doesn't include costs of gasoline, car payments, or even fast offering. The hard reality is that, given current wages and market forces, if a couple wants to build financial stability and self reliance, there aren't a lot of options. And they really boil down to 1. Get a job that pays well above the median (not always within your control) 2. Move to a lower cost of living area (where gainful employment is often harder to come by--I live in such an area and unemployment here is high) 3. A combination of 2 and 3 4. Become a two income family (provided the second income can offset the cost of child care) Keep in mind that these values represent the median. By definition, half of wage earners are unable to meet even these metrics. So it would seem to me that unless we are going to increase single earner wages dramatically, the ideal of women not pursuing careers seems to be a ship that has sailed, crashed into an iceberg, and sunk. Perhaps we should give these families a break. Are there people out there that are putting off family for the sake of building wealth? Absolutely. I'm not going to deny that one bit. But that is often a completely separate issue from whether the woman is working or not. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_income_in_the_United_States#:~:text=The Bureau of Labor Statistics,sex%2C ethnicity and educational characteristics [2] https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/KY/INC110218 [3] https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/average-rent-by-state [4] https://www.valuepenguin.com/average-household-budget [5] Estimated on the same proportion as monthly income between U.S. and my state. [6] https://www.nationwide.com/lc/resources/personal-finance/articles/average-cost-of-utilities [7] https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/09/07/wscs-10-least-expensive-states/15075077/#:~:text=Kentucky&text=Numbeo estimates the average cost,restaurant at only around %248. [8] http://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/taxing-wages-united-states.pdf [9] Assuming 6% as it would be the minimum to max out most common employer matches [10] Assuming a home of $150,000, which is common for a 3BR home in my low cost of living area.

Like or hate it, the above ^^^ statement still exists. Like it or hate it, the statement "In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners." still exists. Like it or hate it, the Family Proclamation is quite ambiguous and doesn't answer nearly as many questions as it creates, and is open to a wide array of interpretations. I tend to agree with @JaneDoe, and let families and individuals strive to make decisions that best suit their own and their families' needs.

I thought I would take a crack at these. By way of disclosure, I was one of those Evangelical Christians that voted for Trump to protect religious liberty and place conservative judges. His immigration policies were ineffective, imho. HIs trade approach surprised and changed me. I've been a free trade advocate, but POTUS correctly saw China for the danger it is, and convinced me that trade should be fair, not free. His crude approach was probably needed for the four years he was in. OK, so here we are. I'm not an expert, an analyst, a pollster, or even one who's taken a Statistics course. My impression is that there were some shenanigans surrounding the election. However, President-Elect Biden won the popular vote by over 4%, and it seems pretty obvious he won the electoral college. POTUS promised to honor the electoral college vote. His campaign repeatedly promised definitive evidence. At this point, he does appear to be the sore loser. He's not exposing a new level of election fraud, he's hyping the typical level and making it appear to be more than it is. The reason that so many (I do not believe it is anywhere near half the country) believe Biden lost is because Trump says so, and they believe him. It's time for conservatives to cut our loss, and accept our major wins (the House and Senate went much better than expected, and our judges are in). Further, we should be laser-focused on winning the GA senate races, so the Senate can be a bulwark against the radical wing of the Democratic party. Further, I sincerely hope Trump settles for being a voice in the GOP, and does not seek to mount a 2024 run. That ship done left the harbor.

Since fathers are being encouraged to help mothers out more with their divinenly given roles of caring for the family at home, it doesnt seem unreasonable to expects mothers to help out fathers more with their divinely given role of providing for their families

"We of this Church know something of such groups. The Book of Mormon speaks of the Gadianton robbers, a vicious, oath-bound, and secret organization bent on evil and destruction. In their day they did all in their power, by whatever means available, to bring down the Church, to woo the people with sophistry, and to take control of the society. We see the same thing in the present situation." Gordon B. Hinckley, The Times in Which We Live

Here is what you are referencing https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/broadcasts/face-to-face/oaks-ballard?lang=eng Again, this was a specific case where it was wise. They were too poor to even get married and the. He “went off to school” while she stayed to finish hers. It isn’t being taught that this should be the standard, but rather this is a response to a question about trying to balance getting an education and starting a family. HOWEVER... The most important part here is that she got her degree before having a family. It is said nowhere that women should not be educated. What is taught is that it’s the mothers duty to nurture the family and it is the fathers duty to provide. A mother who has the option to either raise her kids or work for financial comfort and let a day care raise their kids (by standard) should choose to raise her kids full time. The standard of living is sky rocketing. A three bedroom house you say?? Most of us grew up sharing their room with their siblings. At one point it was me and 2 siblings being raised in a 2 bedroom house. What you are suggesting is waiting to be comfortable before raising kids. Its been done for generations and it can be done today. I’m doing it right now actually and my wife and I are doing it on purpose. We are in a great financial situation. We have a 3 bed home and About to have 3 kids. We are choosing to put 3 kids in one room and save the 3rd room as a play room. Having 3 kids on one room is not a sacrifice. My sister in law has 4 in 1 room despite there being a whole different room available in the home. I don’t even have to go back to pioneer times to prove people can raise a family with little money. Go back one generation and you will see countless examples of families having 1 car and raising 3-5 kids on a two bedroom home. And to drive this home one last time. This is the STANDARD. Not the law. There are plenty of cases where this is not wise and individuals can make the standard decision. My complaint is that it is being taught and believed that everyone should be waiting for an education and a job before starting a family.

I saw the Church's post and the reactions to it. I find it confirmation that there are many in the chuch that practice idolatry. They worship Trump as their prophet and deity and have the Republican Party as their TRUE religion. There have been two incidents recently that seem to go hand in hand with this. The First was when an apostle of the Lord came out and said he was speaking AS AN APOSTLE and asked (didn't command or demand, but did heavily suggest if we want to be more like the Lord) people to wear masks. The comments that were made towards him and the statement were tantamount to calling him false, that the church was false, and that he was speaking as a man. I may not agree with that, but I can actually see where people were coming from and wouldn't hold that against them. We all have things we may see differently, and though I don't agree on that point, there are also many points they may not agree with me on as well. HOWEVER... The Church then has come out with a congratulations of Biden for being his victory. They have done this congratulations to every president-elect in the past, many times far sooner than they did with Biden. It is NOT an unusual thing, and something that is basically an apolitical item in that they are simply trying to be good neighbors towards the leaders of the world and the elections that are held. The thing that alarms me, and especially when considering the comments made previously that align more towards Trumpism than anything else are the numbers of comments that called the Church fallen, false, and worse. If the Church comes out with a third statement later on that goes against the Trumpist dialogue, and people follow Trump instead of at least withholding their statements against the Church I think that would be three strikes there where we see what their true religion is. The thing is, the Church always has offered congratulations. It's not something unusual or new. This is actually a later letter of congratulations than they have made in the past in some instances. It is no reason for people to freak out or start the type of accusations they have. The fact that they are triggered this easily over something so normal in the way the church has done things in the past is a little (I'm not overly alarmed yet) alarming. I'm not saying it makes me happy (it doesn't make me sad either, it's just a press release and it normally doesn't make me feel any real feelings about it in the past or the present), but I don't see why people are flipping about something so general or typical in the Church's actions. It's like suddenly getting upset because the church is having conference in April. The church traditionally ALWAYS has Conference in April, so why flip out about it when it occurs again? The comments towards the Church over something the Church has always traditionally has done says more about those commenting in this instance (to me) than the Church itself in this instance. I think it would be more of a break in tradition if the Church did NOT offer congratulations. IF, for some reason, the electoral vote is not certified and instead it goes before Congress and Trump gets another term as President, it is possible the church would also congratulate him on his selection at a later date as well. As such, I find it more unsettling the comments that are against the Church in recent posts because it does not align with Trumpism far more than anything the Church itself has done in regards to the current situation/turmoil in the US.

You're more or less demonstrating my point. It's pretty hard to make an argument against the interpretation of equal partners not being the same as equal responsibilities. It's also hard to make an argument against equal partners and equal responsibilities. It really depends on how you feel about the transitive property, on which the Family Proclamation is pretty silent. And I find your comment about "problem causer vs problem solver" to be rather amusing. I mean, the entirety of our standard works create more problems then they answer. It's one of the strongest similarities the Family Proclamation has to scripture. And just as there are people that will fixate one one phrase to justify a woman working out of the home, there are others that will hyper focus on the mother's primary responsibility to the detriment of their family. I am personally familiar with a family where the husband, unable to hold a job and at times physically unable to work refused to let his wife get a job because "if we follow the counsel of the prophets, we will be blessed." Without going into the details, you'll just have to take my word for it that it was tantamount to spiritual abuse. The abuses of these things go in all sorts of directions.

The full quote is The bolded are were people are fixating. Yes the Fathers have divinely appointed roles Yes the Mothers have divinely appointed roles Yes they are to help each other as equal partners And Yes they can adapt as needed for their circumstances None of the statements being true negate the other statements as also being true. Fixating on just one or two leads a person into error. Someone adapting to their circumstances does not negate the divine roles, it means they have adapted. The big issue is are their people adapting without the necessary conditions? This is probably happening... But chances are if we were to make such a judgement about someone it would fall in to Unrighteous Judgement category because we generally hold no stewardship that is necessary to be making that judgment righteously.

The “standard” seems pretty clear. If it isn’t clear enough for you, here are other resources. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/eternal-marriage-student-manual/womens-divine-roles-and-responsibilities https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/the-eternal-family-teacher-manual/lesson-10-the-divine-roles-and-responsibilities-of-women https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/marriage-and-family-relations-instructors-manual/part-b-parents-responsibilities-to-strengthen-families/lesson-10-the-sacred-roles-of-fathers-and-mothers-part-1-fathers-roles https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1974/01/the-role-of-fathers https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1977/10/father-your-role-your-responsibility There are exceptions to the rule of course, nobody is arguing that. But the standard is set and that is what we should be teaching. We should not be teaching the exceptions as being the standard.

1. I suspect there will always be a measure of fraud. This side of the heavenly kingdom(s), with 10s of millions of votes, districts and states with heavy party majorities, etc. there will be a measure. Does the fraud rise to a level of significance? Could it have turned several state races, given the numbers. Could the rate of fraud have been higher than the 4% by which Biden won? I suspect far fewer than half the country believes that, even if there had been no fraud at all, Trump would have won. 2. As I understand it, they have reported, and January is the official turn-in. Also, I'm fairly certain that Trump had the December date in mind when he promised to abide. There is a real feeling that he is moving the goal posts. 3. IF the majority truly believes that a president-elect was not truly elected by a fair election then, depending on how skewed people believe the results were, we could see anything from civil war to a "We'll get them back with the next election" approach. In this case, I suspect even a significant portion of Trump-supporters believe the election was super close, and so will eventually look to proving their point in future elections.

Point of order, the Electoral College cast their votes yesterday. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mcconnell-senate-republicans-biden-president-elect-electoral-college Doesn't seem inappropriate to acknowledge Mr. Biden as the President-elect. Even Senator McConnell has done so at this point.

Well, my opinions tend to be unpopular but FWIW. First, I would like to say that we are living in different times. This is not the 1950's, some people are literally struggling to make ends meet and to stay out of debt. I don't see many women choosing a career to support lifestyles but rather help their husbands with the bills as equal partners sharing the responsibilities. However, whether women choose to work out of necessity or not, they shouldn't be judged or labeled as "bad mothers". There are women who studied hard and choose to work outside the home, I'm one of them. I love my job, it makes me feel accomplished, it inspires me and helps me to become a better partner, wife, mother, and daughter of God. And there is something really beautiful about that. I respect ALL women, whether they choose to stay at home or go to work, because I know they are trying their very best.

No, I do not think he will be president for a second term. I believe every force the Swamp can muster is being used against him despite his best legal efforts, the Swamp simply won't allow a second term to happen. What I do believe is that he should fight the fight until the very end. In the process of doing so, he will expose more and more of the Swamp. We as a citizens may become more and more aware of how things actually work, hopefully helping us out as a Nation in the long run. Every time fraudulent voting activity and security holes are presented is another chance to address and hopefully solve the issue in the future. Now that I've answered your questions... will you answer mine?

The inability of the formerly united States to conduct a presidential election perceived by the vast majority of participants to be free and fair is quite puzzling and extremely surprising to this particular outsider.

NeedleinA, I respect you and your views but sorry, I think it is very naive to think that Trump has a chance. I'm actually surprised some supporters believe he does. Yesterday was a big day, Biden WILL become the next president, there is no doubt in my mind about it. Honestly, do you truly believe Trump will have a second term in office?

The Family A Proclamation to the World: I see more and more, members 'choosing' a career over children or being a stay-at-home parent. I see them choosing a career to support life styles they desire. I'm referring to 'choosing' it versus it being a 'necessity'. These are two different things.

1. It is over once Trump concedes OR we hit the 1/20/21 swearing in of Biden, but I would call it premature to rule Trump out just because someone desperately wants it to be over with now. 2. What exactly was the SC clear about? That Texas didn't have standing. 3. Actual confirmation of the Electoral College doesn't start until 1/6/21, again premature on this point. 4. If Joe Biden accomplished his 'victory' thanks to enough fraud to affect the election outcome... should he become our next president? This really is a simple yes or no answer. We have a new AG now. Forensic audit of the Dominion voting machines in Michigan was just completed with 68% error rate. Trump legal team hasn't presented before the SC yet. Etc. Etc. Trump has been labeled a clown since 2015. That clown went against all the odds and became POTUS. I don't know what he legally has up his sleeves still, but I hope he uses every bit of it to fight against the Swamp.

I see more and more of these videos, articles, and blog posts creeping into the church membership. They all have one thing in common. No scriptural or prophetic words backing them up. It just a soapbox of their own. Read Mothers Working Outside the Home and anyone can see that the church is against what she is advocating. They took it one step further in this video. They quoted Spencer W Kimball and said he was wrong... the only mention of scripture in the whole video related to her topic. The same thing is found in their modesty video and whenever they talk about young men not needing to serve missions. This episode belongs on the Mormon Stories Podcast A good 85% of Saints Unscripted is wholesome and Christlike. But these occasional opinion videos show just how accepting of Satan’s ideals “Saints” my age are. I want a good Latter-day Saint YouTube channel that focuses on nothing but the doctrine when it comes to these controversial topics. No opinion, just what has been said... however, I don’t suppose that would be popular enough to gather any notable following.

This is not a failing of the proclamation, but a failing of the Father’s.

I have taken some issue, while trying not to judge, where the father is functionally absent from working multiple jobs so the wife can stay home. While it technically falls under the notions of the Proclamation, I wonder just how it benefits the family. How does the family emotionally connect? I compare such scenarios to where both parents work, but both also have plenty of time for each other and the children.

Day 2 of "next week". I see Mitch McConnell is welcoming President elect Biden and Vice-President elect Harris. Recent Trump Tweet from this morning: Still hopeful for a concession speech.

:::Cough::: :::Sputter:::: Well....er...uh...you're right. I am almost radical in my support of the electoral college. Perhaps what is niggling at me about Trump's challenges is that they do undermine confidence in our slightly complicated system of elections. I would hate to see Democrats use these allegations as an excuse to transition to a simplified popular vote. I'm glad Trump was President, but have to admit that HRC was the better person in this regard. FWIW, Had Trump conceded after the electoral college results were in, I suspect most would have forgiven his push. :::sigh:::

Equal partner is not the same as Equal Responsibilities. There is no ambiguity in the responsibilities of the mother and father (in the ideal scenario) it is clearly defined. Again, like it or hate it... tip toe around it... twist it to fit your personal desires, the counsel still exists. Many have attempted to discredit the Proclamation as a problem causer vs. a problem solver. If someone finds fault with it's teachings, here you go: Office of the First Presidency 47 East South Temple Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84150

All accusations he had leveled against him back when he ran the first time.. so nothing new there. It does appear he is out of time to Gain the Presidency. I do not think the House is going to challenge the College vote and I do not think the Courts will reverse it now... However I do not mind him continuing because and much as we are mortal and fraud will happen... I'm not ok with ignoring it, and his selfish interest are aligned with dealing with it at the moment.

I don't know that he's "fundamentally wrong." However, he's being a sore loser, unpresidential, stirring up unnecessary anger and conspiracy theories, and very much putting himself before all else. He's not being illegal, nor going against any official rules. He is being classless. Put simply, he's not ending well. I'm not angry at Trump. He did far better for Christians than we expected. I just find this last chapter disappointing.

Meh, it happens. In fairness, there are some in the conservative circles that are claiming it isn't _really_ done, because the House _could_ choose not to certify that electoral college. The House won't vote on that until 6 Jan, I believe. Rejecting the electoral vote, if I understand correctly, would require a sponsor in the House and in the Senate, as well as majority votes in both chambers. So doesn't seem likely, but the most DedicatedToTheCause (TM) are saying that's the only vote that matters. Of course, most of them were saying the Electoral College vote was the only one that mattered when they thought they would see swing states with Republican legislatures send their own electors. Seems like the "what really matters" goal posts keep moving....

How about we let God, whom knows the hearts and situation of every person and family, judge them?

Indeed. As it is written, I feel there is still plenty of wiggle room for the needs of individual families. But it's another thing entirely to insist, however backhandedly, women must be in the workforce.

Until "The Family A Proclamation to the World" Version 2.0 comes out, I suppose individuals will continue to justify to themselves why they 'chose' to ignore the counsel given by the Prophets. It clearing differentiates between necessity and choice. We don't simply negate the counsel of the Lord because it was given long ago, or in the 1950s or 1995. Unless it has been officially replaced, then it is the current standard and ideal expectation given to us. Like or hate it, the above ^^^ statement still exists.

I tend to agree with this assessment. Trump's fighting while for his own interests, he is bringing to light issues that need to be fully investigated not just discarded because people are impatient for the Rule of Law to finish Then I will ask you the same question other who want to rush this have also not answered. What do you think will be more damaging and hard to fix... Letting the Courts continue to shoot down the challenges, or shutting down the challenges and putting in to office a President that roughly half the country thinks did not win the election, but was not allowed to challenge it?

Asian dramas, one of the best ones out is "Its OK not to be OK."

NeedleinA, I don't believe anyone should become a president if it isn't fair and square and this is the reason why we have the courts to deal with these matters. And so far, it has been a complete failure for the Trump Team. But now they want to accuse the judges, too? So unless Trump wins, everything is a fraud? (the election, the courts, the judges, the governors, etc). Enough is enough! This is becoming so concerning to me.

Cardinal Burke just gave a talk, Forces of the 'Great Reset' have used COVID to advance 'evil agenda' I would do 10 back flips if I ever heard a modern day General Authority speak like this.

I was so busy with work that I didn't follow the news that much. I heard about this controversial show but didn't research it further. I'm obsessed with Sherlock.

It is OVER. Trump will NOT have a second term in office, it is not going to happen. He lost the election, the SC was clear and the Electoral College confirmed Joe Biden's presidential victory. And yet something tells me the circus is far from over, because a grown-up man cannot accept defeat. Really sad.

With 27 amendments, isn't it a little too late to start talking about saving the constitution? The first time it was changed/amended it ceased to be in its original condition and every change since then has only taken it further away from its original condition. Might the elders of Israel have already failed in there opportunity to save the constitution when Utah voted to repeal Prohibition?

From what I have observed the speed limit is usually reasonable on most roads. Some roads I believe the speed limit is set low in areas to generate tax revenue. It is very disgraceful in my opinion to reduce our police to tax collectors in speed trap zones.

I agree with you totally. If you think the speed limit is too slow, you should take your complaints to the Department of Transport. You should NOT vent your spleen other road users for obeying the law. It is not they who set the limit

Indeed... It shows they did not want Justices that ruled based on Law...They wanted Trump to pack the court just like Dems threaten to

My, how quickly the Trumplings have gone from “you must overlook Trump’s flaws, because Judges” to “%#$@€ RINO judges!”

Umm . . . because all races were created by, and are loved by, God. Don’t mainline Christians believe similarly? Why does such a question even need to be asked?

The one danger I see in the United States now is the threat of sedition by those millions (possibly) of people who believe in the conspiracy of voter fraud. If Americans abide by the decision of the Supreme Court then the Constitution has been preserved.

So lets say a year in to the Biden Presidency the Courts Rule he is a fraud... What is your proposed solution to a "President by Fraud"? And how would such a finding/restorative action be less disruptive then delaying things a bit?

To be fair, this is the main issue with MOST so-called “journalists” these days. News is more info-tainment than ever before. And nobody takes them to task based on their erroneous reporting. If a journalist was caught lying or misreporting in years past, they would have lost credibility and most likely their job. Nowadays the wagons of their political “team” get circled in a tighter pattern around them when their journalistic integrity is brought into question.

The following is a quote from a talk given by Elder David R. Stone of the Seventy in the April 2006 General Conference. That conference was held while I was serving as a missionary, and it is still, years later, my favorite one. "Because my wife and I have had the opportunity to live in 10 different countries, we have seen the effect of the ethos on behavior. Customs which are perfectly acceptable in one culture are viewed as unacceptable in another; language which is polite in some places is viewed as abhorrent in others. People in every culture move within a cocoon of self-satisfied self-deception, fully convinced that the way they see things is the way things really are. Our culture tends to determine what foods we like, how we dress, what constitutes polite behavior, what sports we should follow, what our taste in music should be, the importance of education, and our attitudes toward honesty. It also influences men as to the importance of recreation or religion, influences women about the priority of career or childbearing, and has a powerful effect on how we approach procreation and moral issues. All too often, we are like puppets on a string, as our culture determines what is “cool.” There is, of course, a zeitgeist to which we should pay attention, and that is the ethos of the Lord, the culture of the people of God. As Peter states it, “But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light” (1 Pet. 2:9). It is the ethos of those who keep the Lord’s commandments, walk in His ways, and “live by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God” (D&C 84:44). If that makes us peculiar, so be it." Living by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God is what we should be doing as latter-day saints...not listening to and trusting falsities spouted from children. If we believe D&C 1:38, then this includes counsel from the Lord's Prophets. I would trust Spencer W. Kimball, or any other Prophet, before I took to heart the opinion of a woke teenager who feels they are wise because of a social media platform. I get that she is just a kid, but her position on this issue, and blatant disregard for Prophetic counsel, is like storing dynamite in your home's foundation. She, and those who share her view, are on dangerous ground.

You've noticed...eh? It's been going on for a while, and while some of it is not that disturbing and could be encouraging (liberal in and of itself is not a BAD thing, our religion is not Conservative OR Liberal, it does NOT worship our political beliefs and we should not mistake political opinions or parties as our religion. Too many worship at the altar of the false idol of politics, putting forth their politics as their religion rather than having the Lord as first and foremost) there are other items which have been disturbing me for a while which are in direct conflict with what was taught and given by the Prophets and Church leaders through the centuries up until now. Some liberal ideas are reflected in the Bible and so are not terrible in and of themselves. We are to render unto Caesar what is Caesar and unto the Lord what is the Lord's for example, to be in the world but not conformed of it (Romans 12). This can be where we allow people the freedom to be who they want to be without persecution. The idea of loving your neighbor, or loving the person but not the sin I can see reflected in encouraging those who are in sin to come to our church (And hopefully repent, but that is their free agency) but still not approving of the sin. On the otherhand, there have been a great number of ideas that have been brought into the Church in the past decade. Some of it is the confusion brought on by those who have created church manuals themselves. You talk about their criticism of Spencer W. Kimball, but there is a trend to do so now that was encouraged by the Church essays and such. In it they cast down a few items taught as doctrine in the past (and even declared as such) and instead imply that the leaders of the time were speaking their opinions and that we do not know why they taught such opinions or actions that they took. This cast doubt on the prophets and their prophetic mission as obviously those at that time did not think these General Authorities were speaking only as men on these topics. This opens up the gambit where we have no idea when a Prophet is a prophet and when he is a man (Brigham Young on the other hand clarified it somewhat, but today there are items that he said as a prophet that we say he said as a man, and the same for Joseph Smith). It is very easy now for Saints to take these ideas and apply it to whatever they want in regards to prophets...including statements by Spencer W. Kimball (and ironically, to some of the ideas in the Bible itself, at least if you accept Paul as a prophet). However, these changes that go contrary to how the gospel was taught extend to many other facets of the church, and many are directly contrasting to that taught previously. Sometimes it is just in direct contradiction to things taught in our modern era but other times, they are in direct contradiction to EVERYTHING written and taught in the Church from the Beginning of the Bible, reinforced in the Book of Mormon and by our Modern prophets, and more. Some of the more disturbing in my thoughts again, is that I see it extended even into the temple and how things are done there (without going into it any more than that). I see it as driving a wedge into the Church in many ways, and this approach has shown a reduction of Baptisms, retention and many other things reflected in the Church itself...at least to my view. So...what is a member to do? What do I do? I remember that I received a testimony of the Gospel and the Book of Mormon. I remember that I have gotten a testimony of the divine calling of the Prophets and the Apostles. This testimony is MORE than just some emotional feeling that I had, or some emotion that is can be felt otherwise. It is a distinct and explicit testimony where I have heard the Holy Ghost testifying that the gospel is true. Because of this I KNOW that the Book of Mormon is the word of God and that the Gospel is true. No matter what else, I KNOW the truths given to me. It does not matter what the changes are to the Church for now. As Elder Uchtdorf has said in summary..."Where will you go?" There IS no other place to go. You stay in the boat because it is the ONLY vessel which was designated as the vessel of the Lord, at least until the Lord comes back. We do the best we can, even with what is happening around us. As you are probably not (you may be, but most of the members are not) the Prophet or the First Presidency, there is very little you can do or any of us. Instead, we follow the Prophet and if there are things that are done that lead people away or are not in accordance with what the Lord desires, it will not be held upon our heads (unless in direct contradiction to the commandments and we are directly told by the Lord not to, which has not occurred to me as of yet) but those who have caused the sins to occur due to their responsibility and power. As such, we stay in the boat (in the church) and cling as hard as we can to what we know is true. The gospel is true, and we know that in it we can find a safe haven for when the Lord comes (and he will be coming and is coming). I see a LOT of changes (or what you may call Liberal Ideas) that have crept into the Church in recent years. In fact, if you had me look at the Church today from when I joined decades ago and many of the things that it is teaching or promoting in regards to Church doctrines and to a lesser degree it's history, I may have thought it was an offshoot of the Church rather than the main Church. However, there is ONLY one church that still brings and delivers the gospel as found in the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. We can either hold to it and stay in, or give up. I don't plan on giving up any time soon. If nothing else, when I have problems or difficulties, I lean back on the testimony I have received so long ago which I cannot deny, and grab onto it in realization that despite any doubts I may have, I still have a testimony that I cannot deny and that holds me to the Church.