Leaderboard

We had a GA at stake conference not address this directly, but essentially said that if you're following the world, not the church, you'd better wake up and get onboard.

I adore my assistant principle. She's a lovely woman and a good leader. She's also a transplant from out of the Mormon Corridor, very progressive-liberal and "woke", and as far as I'm aware has never been a member of the church (as in she now and then asks "dumb questions" about our students' beliefs). Anyway, today in the group chat to inspire us through the last day of school she shared a Jeffery R. Holland quote. It's fun to see good stuff being recognized all over.

Never heard of them until today. They seem like the kind of odd LDS folk (odder than most) who made up a club of "faithful" followers who are the only ones who really understand the hidden meanings of the gospel...as if they know and understand secrets that others don't - when in fact we do, we just choose to hold certain things sacred and don't speculate about others over the dinner table to show off how enlightened we are. I'm not a fan of those who delve into "vain mysteries" and "deep doctrine", and subsequently enjoy putting forth their own interpretations of past prophets' words to match their view of how the church should be today. Best to just keep the commandments and follow the living prophet.

I teach for a charter, which many families hope to avoid the indoctrination of the state. However, Utah keeps a very tight reign on its charters and they have little wiggle room. Anywho, I was previewing next year's curriculum, and I'm already seeing the creep. I'm picturing some unhappy families next year. The good part that my job of previewing was to state my thoughts and I have a secondary role of "representing the families of Utah" to our parent organization.

That seems to be how this is being handled most of the time. Gotta have the Spirit just to understand the truth behind the words of the Apostles and Prophets of the Lord. He who hath ears to hear, I suppose.

I believe the answer was given in the 2022 General Conference by Elder Dallin Oaks on woke doctrine. ---------------------------------------------------------- Fundamental to us is God’s revelation that exaltation can be attained only through faithfulness to the covenants of an eternal marriage between a man and a woman. That divine doctrine is why we teach that “gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.” That is also why the Lord has required His restored Church to oppose social and legal pressures to retreat from His doctrine of marriage between a man and a woman, to oppose changes that homogenize the differences between men and women or confuse or alter gender. The restored Church’s positions on these fundamentals frequently provoke opposition. We understand that. Our Heavenly Father’s plan allows for “opposition in all things,” and Satan’s most strenuous opposition is directed at whatever is most important to that plan. Consequently, he seeks to oppose progress toward exaltation by distorting marriage, discouraging childbearing, or confusing gender. However, we know that in the long run, the divine purpose and plan of our loving Heavenly Father will not be changed . . . A uniquely valuable teaching to help us prepare for eternal life, “the greatest of all the gifts of God,” is the 1995 proclamation on the family. Its declarations are, of course, different from some current laws, practices, and advocacy, such as cohabitation and same-sex marriage. Those who do not fully understand the Father’s loving plan for His children may consider this family proclamation no more than a changeable statement of policy. In contrast, we affirm that the family proclamation, founded on irrevocable doctrine, defines the kind of family relationships where the most important part of our eternal development can occur.

There’s a lot I’d like to say about the Joseph Smith Foundation but that I couldn’t substantiate without waiving whatever bits of anonymity I still have in this forum. So obviously, you’ll have to take the following with the caveat that it comes from a random anonymous guy on the internet. But suffice it to say: be really, really careful with them: There are some people involved with that organization who are not as devoted to the Gospel that was taught to us, as they would like us to think they are.

Here's what I don't get... (I'm not an expert on quantum mechanics by the way. Maybe one day I'll find time to study it "properly" and put to bed these issues, but for right now please accept my observations as the witterings of a rank amateur. OK here's the scenario: Alice and Bob, together at X, create a pair particles, each in a "coherent" state, with 50% chance of collapsing (if observed) into an up state or a down spin state. The two particles are entangled, so if Alice's collapses into an up state, then Bob's instantly collapses into the down state. Alice and Bob then move to A and B, which might be several light-years apart. They still do not observe their particles, so they are still in 50/50 superposition and still entangled. Then at a point A' (in the future of A) Alice looks at her particle and collapses it into the up state. At that same instant, Bob's particle (at B') must collapse into the down state. However, that means that a "message" (of sorts) must have travelled instantly from A' to B', which defies the "rule" that information cannot travel faster than light. Most YouTube videos at this point say "Weird, huh? Maybe faster-than-light communication is possible! Wouldn't that be cool?" before moving on to something else. However if Bob does not also observe his particle, he will not know anything about its spin state. Also, even if he did look at his particle and find it in the down state, he would not know whether he caused it to collapse himself, or whether it had already collapsed due to what Alice had done. The effect would be the same either way. Or to put it another way, Alice's action would have changed Bob's uncertainty from "aleatory" (uncertainty of chance) to "epistemic" (uncertainty of knowledge). So the only way Alice could signal Bob faster-than light would be to have Bob sit looking at the box containing his particle, and when he notices his uncertainty of the box's content changing from aleatory to epistemic, he knows that Alice has signalled. But how would he tell the difference? It is only when Alice and Bob come back together (at Y) and sees Alice's particle that he receives any information at all. One might say that the uncertainty was always epistemic: that the spin-states of both particles were decided at X, and it is only Alice and Bob's knowledge which is uncertain. But this (i) makes the whole thing even more boring and mundane, and (ii) requires the "local hidden variables" theory, which was (as I understand it) disproved by John Stewart Bell. So can "action at a distance" really have any impact on reality? If so, then how? And if not, is it really any more important than the number of angels that can dance on a pinhead?

Well, their stuff is all there for everyone to see. Read a few things, watched a few videos...most of it is opinion peddled as fact. True, maybe. False, maybe. I've been around gospel radicals before, and they aren't for me. Snap judgement...perhaps. But I lose nothing by not associating with them. And for what it's worth, just being on their website doesn't feel right.

Obviously I'm a homeschooling advocate, but I have never considered myself a homeschooling evangelist. Until now. Homeschool your children. If you do a bad job, odds are it will still be better than what they get in public school. If you put any reasonable amount of effort and care into it, it will be a much better experience than what the public schools are likely to give. I come from a family of teachers, so I have given this matter a lot of thought. My recommendation is not made lightly. Protect your children above all else. Homeschool them.

Note to you and @Just_A_Guy - both of whom I respect. I use to worry a lot about the internet and maintaining my private identity. Mostly for my family. I have long had the impression (from my youth) that I would be called upon to seal my testimonial witness with my life. To be honest, I have long pasted the time I thought this would happen and in that sense I am becoming more careless with my identity on the internet. It is my impression that the LGBTQ+ culture will play a significant and primary roll in the final scenes of the Last-days prior to the return of Christ. However, it is my experience that there is a spectrum within the LGBTQ+ culture - in short not all within that culture are in harmonic agreement with their more "extreme" counter parts. I do not want to label some (that I consider friends) as my enemy. I use to think that the brother opposing brother dynamic of the Last-days would be political (similar to our Civil War) - I am more inclined toward the possibility that such divisions in our social structure will more likely follow LGBTQ+ ideologies. For myself, I am hard pressed to draw a hard line between me and anyone else. I would if I could postpone such as long as possible. Yet, I have seen the preparations for "war" in such matters accelerate exponentially and become prominent as of late. Things I thought impossible just a few years ago have become mainstream and beyond to the point of forcefully mandated. Long gone are the social morals to which I was raised. So much has changed and so much more is changing - the greatest of which is the exponential increases in violence towards opposition and the excuse of it when in support of a cause one believes in or performed by someone one cares for. I also am hard pressed to follow thinking I find illogical and emotionally based. When someone says they are following their heart - I think a train wreak is eminent. I have discovered that many live their life almost enterally based on emotions. It is impossible to debate emotions or emotional conclusions. The worse and most illogical emotions come from personal pleasures. And as much as it is or seems illogical - hate, revenge and violence are all fueled by pleasure - especially pleasure in the moment. When my children were little and we were all in the car going somewhere the most oft question was, "Are we there yet?" I use to think that particular question foolish but now I am reconsidering and finding myself asking the question - "Are we THERE yet?" We have to be close???? The Traveler

Cool - add him to the pile!

I still haven't figured out who you are. I wonder if I'm supposed to know? Am I out of the Utah loop? Anywho, I am seeing so much little things creeping up in church culture. A desire to please the world. A lot of it's earnest: how can we love and welcome all our brothers and sisters in this modern dispensation? Yet it seems a path of pins and needles and a big bad wolf if we're not watching our steps.

Hm. I'm dumber than most, but what if the experiment involved a billion particles and Alice making a billion measurements? Bob places his double-slit plate thingy in the path of his billion particles, and does nothing else to observe his stuff, besides look at the pattern. One would think at some point, the pattern would change, right when Alice starts observing, right?

I have been sharing this and pointing it out to people for some time now. Sadly, even these words taught during General Conference are insufficient to sway even some of our leaders.

Another one? We know that the family has been and always will be in Satan's crosshairs. We know that wokeness is trying to downplay how wonderful all the good things in life are because not everyone has them. Further, they even encourage celebrating the not so wonderful things because we don't want to hurt anyone's feelings or shame them in any way. The obvious conclusion is that people will no longer believe that "family values" is a good thing. It is an oppressive thing. The BLM organization decided that one of their stated goals was the destruction of the nuclear family. PREDICTION: The media, Hollywood, politicians, and social media will become complicit in the cultural shift to shame people who want to have a fully intact family with a mother and a father. This is a no brainer. It has been happening since I was a child. It has only gotten stronger and more obvious with every passing year. But I can see the brazen, obvious, intentional destruction of the family coming up over the horizon.

I finished the entire Book of Isaiah for the first time a few days ago. My eyes have now read through all sixty-six chapters for the first time.

I understand, and that’s fair. I will just say: wickedness comes in many forms. Stick closely to the Church’s living priesthood authorities, no matter what the JSF may encourage you to do either now or in the future.

There is a push in many areas of society to indoctrinate youth in the LGBT culture. It's mostly working, and if you aren't active in your schools you're allowing. Most parents aren't even aware of the extent it's happening. The Church is struggling to create a culture of love and acceptance while remaining doctrinally sound. What this means varies depending on a member's views. Organizations, such as the Joseph Smith Foundation, are popping up to oppose the cultural push.

We know that spirits who were “intended” to be one way, with relative frequency are born into bodies that fall short of the form the spirit was intended to take—people are born without limbs, or with congenital defects in this organ or that. We know that some of these defects occur at the genetic level (propensity to breast cancer, for example). People being genetically intersex is a thing (we used to have a forum participant here who claimed to be genetically intersex), and I regret not having engaged with them better to learn more about it firsthand. Similarly, there seems to be a physiological basis for many (not all) natal males who at some point identify as females—exposure (or lack thereof) to various hormones in utero seems to affect whether certain physical features of the brain develop in a particular way. But . . . There is also a subset of male-to-female transsexuals, and (from what I gather, though data in the latter case seems to be lacking as occurrence of male-to-female Gender Dysphoria in statistically significant numbers is apparently very new) nearly all female-to-male transsexuals, for whom socialization seems to play a major role. Up until a few years ago, in cases where gender dysphoria had only presented for the first time in adolescence (as opposed to early childhood), the general therapeutic approach was “watch and wait”, giving the kid space to figure things out on their own and not pushing them to prefer one potential identity over any other. When that was the approach, something over 60% of such kids eventually “grew out of it”. But now the prevailing therapeutic approach seems to be to lock ‘em into (“affirm”) a new identity early—announce new names and pronouns to all their contacts (guaranteeing that any backpedaling will result in social humiliation), give ‘em hormones (with a false promise that their effects are completely reversible), give ‘em puberty blockers (with another lie about potential reversibility), give ‘em top surgery, give ‘em bottom surgery . . . and once started down this path it becomes very, very hard for a kid to change direction. I suspect that’s one reason that the Church handbook discourages both medical *and* social transitions, and names both as grounds for the imposition of certain membership restrictions. On the other hand: it just seems like common courtesy to call someone by the name they want to be called. I transitioned from a diminutive nickname to a more “adult” nickname around middle school, so I have some appreciation for people who are conscientious about that sort of thing—but I also have little sympathy for people who make a big dramatic performance out of the fact that someone slipped up and called them by their “dead” name. These people have known and loved you all your life—have a little charity, for Pete’s sake! But pronouns . . . Yeah, except in the case in genetically intersex people: that’s perpetuating an untruth. I’ll try not to cause pain by needlessly using a pronoun they reject in their presence; but I won’t call them something they’re not. Going back to the socialization aspect: I said it in another recent thread, and I’ll say it again: if it’s legit to stay home from a ward meeting to avoid an epidemic of a disease that kills/maims virtually zero percent of the kids who get it, I think it’s legit to stay home from a ward meeting because the leadership is openly embracing an epidemic whose effects on a child’s body and future are far more catastrophic. The fact that one spreads biologically and the other socially is, to my mind, a distinction without a difference—the effect is the same. And what’s more—to all appearances, the modern mental health establishment doesn’t want it to stop. Until we understand what causes the spread and come up with some proven methodologies to counteract it—as a parent, it seems we have few options to protect our own kids from this other than isolation. And that is a tragedy.

I agree, though personally I am willing to accept a preferred name in the same way I would a nickname or common name; I myself don't use my legal name except where required because it is a somewhat complicated native Arabic name. Is it reasonable for me to expect that my children should not be taught by the example of their leaders to do differently?

If you were to take a look at a modern (2000s-plus) marketing program at your average business college, you'd be in tears for how much of it is essentially psychological warfare. The general idea is to get inside of a person's head, see what makes them tick, and use it against them in such a fashion that they're doing what you want them to do while still thinking it's their own idea. Everything from the arrangement of elements in an advertising copy to the arrangement of products in an actual store is designed to attack your grey matter and part you from your money. This overall tendency was noted as early as the 1980s (for example, Marvel Comics writer Larry Hama, himself a military veteran, made fun of this when he introduced the G. I. Joe team's psychological warfare expert in 1987), but it's really ramped up since then. Throw in the criminal justice training I've had and my 20+ years of experience dealing with cyber-bullies and other individuals online, and yeah... let's just say there are things I don't expect to be forgiven for. A big part of what I do now as a newspaper writer is break down for my readers what sorts of games companies and other entities are playing with them and how they can turn it around. As far as the transportation sector goes, this is another unpaid bill. For several generations now, kids in the US were made to dance to the drum beat of "college is for winners, trade school is for losers". To go to a trade school, even if that's where someone's aptitude lay, was seen as "failure" and could bring shame and stigma. In fact, there are college types who won't even talk to anyone who doesn't likewise have a college degree of their same level. As a result, we're desperately short-handed when it comes to many of the skilled trades, including heavy vehicle operators. There just aren't enough truckers, train conductors, forklift operators, aircraft pilots, naval crew members, and others to keep the supply lines properly running.

As I've mentioned before, I have an MBA and have been trained in what is essentially psychological warfare. This has allowed me to predict several things that have happened over the years, even if only in general terms. I've been telling everyone for some time now that we're looking at a period of great cultural, societal, and even legal upheaval as a lot of unpaid bills come due and the consequences of the last few decades' "social experiments" come about. ...And yet there are people who are *still* taken by surprise when such-and-such event happens despite my warning that such a thing could occur. It's frustrating, I agree.

I'm not sure if I'd heard of them before today, they seem to link pretty solidly to the ldsanswers.org folks. Folks who spend time speaking out against the ouija board, well, falls into a certain category of relevance for me. https://ldsanswers.org/5-reasons-our-family-does-not-celebrate-halloween/ Claims that "The dominant [church history] narrative is not true"? https://ldsanswers.org/dominant-church-history-narrative-not-true-lds-scholars-encourage-new-history-new-policy-new-church/ Hm...

As my kids get older I get far more involved with the school in both volunteer and elected positions. I really strive to know what's going on at al levels. One of the biggest wake-up calls I had was simply walking into the school library.