[LDS Church leaders restate opposition to Gay Marriage]

Did I say that there was?

Never said that you did, Wing.

[LDS Church leaders restate opposition to Gay Marriage]

CP: The prophets have also stated that homosexual attractions are not sinful. Why would something that is not a sin need the atonement? Why would anyone expect them to be "changed" if there is nothing wrong with them?

This particular question highlights the confusion that gay members of the church constantly feel. We are told that we are not broken, not sinful, yet need to be healed and changed? What are we to believe? Either same-sex attractions are sinful, or they are not. If they are not, then there is no need for the atonement, because there is nothing to overcome.

And if there is something to overcome, and some reason for the atonment, then same-sex attractions are sinful, and the prophets are liars... which I don't believe.

Personally, I feel the contradictory statements are proof that some are applying their own opinion.

GaySaint,

I am sorry for the pains that gay people experience in and out of the church. I do not want gay people to be lonely and unhappy and miserable, or to be shunned or have no rights. I have repeatedly stated homosexual relations, not homosexual attractions. We all have thoughts that we are told not to act on. We are all natural man and human, so we all have thoughts and feelings and inclinations that go against what God's will is. We have to learn to deny ourselves and take up the cross. I don't think it is confusing. We are all broken. To have homosexual attractions is not broken, just like to have any ungodly desires is not broken. My feelings are not broken, they are just there. It doesn't make me an evil person. So I am not saying that homosexual feelings are needing repentance, even. I am saying that believing that President Monson's stance on gay marriage and homosexual relationsare wrong because he is fallible, means to me that maybe the church isn't for people who believe that. If you think that a leader of a church is wrong, like PC was saying, maybe another religion where you agree with the teachings and doctrine of that religion that includes homosexual relations as okay would be more appropriate, rather than trying to push that belief that homosexual relations and marriage are okay into the LDS church. Especially if you believe your own personal revelations are leading you somewhere away from the teachings of the church.

[LDS Church leaders restate opposition to Gay Marriage]

Uh oh. Now you are saying that one church leader is right and the other one is wrong? President Monson and the 12 have never said anything to contradict Edler Wickman's statements, and he was sitting being interviewed with Elder Oaks of the 12.

If he was wrong, why would the church refer to that interview as their current policy? Why would it be in official church publications, referenced by the first presidency and the 12?

What part of his statements do you not agree with? Maybe we can clarify.

As I said, if Elder Wickman stated it was a core characteristic, did he go on to say that gay marriage is or will soon be allowed, and that homosexual relations are okay with the church?

If what he says is supported by Elder Oaks, then it does not contradict other prophets because they are all one in their stand on gay marriage and homosexual relations outside of marriage.

[LDS Church leaders restate opposition to Gay Marriage]

The reference to Elder Wickman alludes to the Church's official statement on its website, which is an interview with Elder Oaks and Elder Wickman. An official statement is typically sanctioned by President Monson.

Again, perhaps even if it were a core characteristic, there is no allowance for gay marriage or sexual relations outside of marriage between male and female.

[LDS Church leaders restate opposition to Gay Marriage]

Hemi: I don't disagree. I just don't believe that homosexuality is a sin, or a mental issue. As such it requires not repentance, nor healing (especially if we are talking only about the attraction, and not the behavior).

Lance Wickman defined it as a "core characteristic." I think this definition is a very important one.

But I realize this is one of those areas where we disagree :)

In other threads on this board about homosexuality and gay marriage, there has already been quotes from a prophet exactly about this topic. He said that if we dont' believe we have any control over homosexuality, if we believe it is who we are, then we deny the atonement's ability to heal and overcome the natural man.

I will look for it again, but I really don't think it is necessary.

[LDS Church leaders restate opposition to Gay Marriage]

Elder Wickman is a great friend and San Diegan.

With no disrespect to Elder Wickman, what President Monson, the 12, and the First Presidency say has more weight over Elder Wickman.

[LDS Church leaders restate opposition to Gay Marriage]

To me, we are going in circles again, and what PC said about believing in the Mormon church but not in it's doctrine is what is going on here.

Speculation aside as to why people are gay, the prophet clearly stated no homosexual relations, no gay marriage. If you want to pick and choose what the prophet says as true or not, when it is stated as a proclamation and in conference talks, then you still sound like you are trying to say that Pres Monson is not privy to what God really wants. So President Monson is limited, but other homosexuals in the church have more knowledge about it than him?

It reminds me of a story about Brigham Young, where a member came up to him and told him about an angelic visitation he had telling him that the church needed to do "X". Whatever "X" was, was against the direction President Young was going in. President Young told the member to tell the angel to go back to hell where he came from. The member obeyed President Young and realized he had been deceived. The member had had an actual angelic encounter, but the angel was telling him something against the Prophet of God. President Young didn't tell the member to go to hell, but to tell the angel to go to hell.

[LDS Church leaders restate opposition to Gay Marriage]

Actually I found a quote when my friend, who was a former Marine is black asked this question in a HP forum. I happen to be reading a week ago where Joseph did state based on his learning the curse of Canaan by Noah (while translating the mummy scrolls). It surprised me but I need to add it later here for others to read.

That's an entire new thread. . .

But if Joseph stated it, it was not included in scripture as a modern revelation. And my understanding is that slavery was justified by the curse of Canaan. And you said that Joseph stated this as based on his learning. It sounds like he did not preach it as a revelation from God directly telling him to withhold the priesthood. But here we go. . . If prophets make a mistake, that is one thing. An official proclamation or recording something as scripture is another.

[LDS Church leaders restate opposition to Gay Marriage]

Problem is it's not ever going to be your place to tell or know if someone has false personal revelation, as far as i remember that's between them and god. You can't tell Saint or Me we are being mislead or being lead astray by satan any more than i could say the same about you, because it's between you and god. Our revelation doesn't affect you and i don't believe it's up to you or anyone but god what we do with it. Why is it ok to tell people their revelation is satan leading them astray but it can't be them being lead astray? As for the latter day quotes...so if even the elect can be deceived, that means you could be as well right?

Yep, I could be deceived, and I am not God or a prophet, so I can't tell you. But President Monson can tell you that marriage is only between a man and a woman, and the prophets can verify the truth of the Proclamation on the Family. I am not a prophet, but I have made a covenant to defend the gospel of Jesus Christ. I did not decide that Satan was leading anyone astray. God has told us the commandments on how to live. He has prophets for his mouthpiece. He has given us the scriptures. In no scriptures, in no mouth of the prophet, in no conference talk has God EVER told us that leading the homosexual lifestyle is okay. I am repeating that to you. My knowledge is not perfect, but my faith in the prophets of God and in the scriptures is strong and I will not concede with you that a gay lifestyle, which goes directly against the scriptures, and directly against the Proclamation on the Family, and directly against the prophets, is okay for you.

[LDS Church leaders restate opposition to Gay Marriage]

I don't necessarily believe this, because I don't believe in the infallibility of prophets. They are men who are subject to prejudice and personal feelings themselves. Just because they will never lead the church astray doesn't mean that they can't be wrong in their opinions. I have never read any doctrine that protects the prophets from fallibility - except for when they speak directly for God, prefacing their statement with a "Thus saith the Lord."

Brigham young was wrong about the Adam/God doctrine, according to newer revelation. Many prophets were wrong about the "evils of monogamy." And let's not even get into the blacks and the priesthood issues. But these men with errant opinions were allowed to lead the church even while wrong because their opinions didn't mess with the ability of the church to perform its earthly and eternal missions.

I'm not saying that this is proof the church is wrong on this issue (it may very well not be), just that it is possible to disagree with a prophet, and still be faithful and in line with the Lord, especially if the prophet is speaking his opinion, and not revealed doctrine.

I don't believe that the President of the church is speaking his opinion when he issue the Proclamation on the Family. An official proclamation to the world, if way out of line, would be stopped by God. I agree that prophets are not perfect people. Blacks were never officially denied the priesthood. Joseph Smith gave them the priesthood. I have never seen or heard any offical declaration or scripture saying that blacks cannot have the priesthood. I have seen official declarations saying that marriage is only to be between a man and a woman. How can you sustain our prophet and disagree with the proclamation on the family? You are picking what you want to believe he says.

[LDS Church leaders restate opposition to Gay Marriage]

Um... Thank you? Tee hee hee.

I do have a question for you. Isn't your entire testimony based on personal revelation that you feel you received from the spirit of God himself (the holy ghost)?

If anyone can be deceived, and even the very elect will be decieved, how do you know that YOUR revelation was correct? There are many religious organizations that would say you are being decieved by your testimony in the LDS church. See how this line of thinking can lead to circles, arguments, and contention?

But you know what God has told you - and that is fine. And that is good enough for me.

GaySaint,

I don't expect you to believe in my personal revelations either. I have listened to General Conference talks on homosexuality, given by the prophets, and none of them have said that God is revealing to some people with homosexual attractions that their lifestyle is okay and to go ahead and live it. I have never heard prophets encourage us to hate people with same-sex attraction. I have never heard prophets tell us to vote for gay marriage. My testimony is based on faith, the Holy Ghost, my studying, and my life's observations. I don't expect anyone to listen to me about whether homosexuality is right or wrong. I do expect LDS people to have faith in the prophets. I don't expect people outside of the faith to believe in our prophets. I don't think that my logic, or my testimony, or my knowledge is greater than others, but I do think that President Monson's is greater than others because I have a testimony that he is God's mouthpiece, and that he is not ashamed of the gospel and will not apologize for the truth.

[LDS Church leaders restate opposition to Gay Marriage]

[

I want the church protected, i don't want them forced into performing anything that goes against doctrine. That being said they don't want to be forced to accept things that goes against them, why do they expect others to accept things forced on them and not try to fight with the same vital energy?

That is the million dollar question. You either have faith in the church leaders as following God's will, or you don't. If you believe Pres Monson is doing wrong, then you cannot have a testimony of him being a prophet of God. That is fine, as long as you are not trying to go to the temple or something, that is your right. If you question Pres Monson, pray about it, and still believe he is wrong, again, you do not have a testimony that he is following God.

A true friend sometimes doesn't accept and agree with everything their friend is saying. A true friend understands that love doesn't always equal acceptance. A true friend, I believe, is God and President Monson. He is one of the most charitable, compassionate, loving men I have ever seen. He is very interested in people and individuals. He is very unselfish and has spent his life serving other people.

[LDS Church leaders restate opposition to Gay Marriage]

I'm more talking about the people on the threads telling gay people they are wrong and going so directly against god that they'll always be wrong, even if we have reasons and answers for our actions. No matter what gays say weather it be science or spirit, we'll never have our answers accepted because they don't line up with other peoples revelations. GaySaint has been told many times in threads that he hasn't had revelation from god, just selfish personal desires cause god would never tell him he's doing right by living the life he is. One side is supposed to accept they are wrong because we are told by them god says we are wrong, and yet if we say we have answers that are different, we are misguided and out of touch.

I am sorry, but I believe in false personal revelation. Anyone can be deceived. God doesn't change. He is the same forever and ever. He doesn't call homosexual relations a sin to us heterosexuals, but privately tell homosexuals that they are not sinning.

I feel like GaySaint and other homosexuals are sincere in their beliefs and are not the scum of the earth. Everybody is a sinner. You can't think that the heterosexuals are saying homosexuals are evil and heterosexuals are good. We are all sinners. But some people transgress laws because of being deceived. The scriptures say that in the latter days, even the very elect will be deceived. It doesn't say that only the righteous elect will not be deceived.

So I can agree that people feel that they have a revelation from God telling them it's okay, but from my entire testimony and understanding of the gospel, I cannot believe this lie that God will soon tell the prophet of our church - nevermind - it is okay to live a gay lifestyle. I am not waiting or holding out for modern revelation on this.

Also, I feel that I have been blind and deceived by Satan many times in my life in my ways. I don't want people to tell me, when I am going the wrong way, that I am going the right way for me. I want the truth.

[Do I Have To Be Skinny? LDS Dating]

Oh Kids,

Stop your arguing! I join the ranks of shallow people.

I dated a guy in college for as long as I could. He was sooo nice and such a good person, and sooo skinny. I just couldn't make myself be attracted to him. I really tried because he was such a good person, but I never wanted him to even hold my hand. He was really tall and weighed probably one pound. I just don't like super skinny guys. I would rather they were a bit chubby if I had to choose. Not that any of you people care.

[questions from an investigator]

Thanks all of you for such considered (and polite!) responses. I hope I did not come off as a jerk; I'm actually a pretty nice person. : )

I hadn't read about the introductory Bible classes, so that is something to look into. I thought it was just one class for everybody.

To WmLee - Although we weren't Mormon, we had 'family night' and I only took jobs that let me spend a lot of time with my son. I had a parent who was too busy to be involved with us and I knew I didn't want that for my child, so I did everything opposite when it came to child raising! It was interesting to read how your mother has changed over the years.

I like this very much, “It is my duty to know the mind of the Lord concerning myself,” I absolutely believe this and think this is why I am drawn to learning more about Mormonism. Thank you for this quote.

If you guys don't mind another question, how can a couple of 19 yr old missionaries adequately address the searching of a middle-aged person with a child older than they are and a heavy-duty academic background? I really admire the missionaries, but they are younger than many of the college kids I teach and I'm afraid I wouldn't get much from them, especially if they were raised Mormon and not used to comparing and contrasting other religions.

Thanks again, Dahlia

The 19 year olds are just kids. They are not as wise and life experienced as older people with kids, that is true. Try talking to them anyway. They have dedicated two years to the Lord to serve their missions. Every day they are extra careful about praying, studying the scriptures, fasting, and calling on the Holy Spirit to guide them. They try and keep away from things that offend God or detract from having the Holy Spirit with them. If they are doing those things, they will not be teaching you the gospel - the Holy Ghost will teach you through them.

That is part of the greatness of the gospel. God expects us to use our heads and intellect to study things out and learn. Then the Holy Ghost will verify the truth or falseness of what we have learned. The Holy Ghost gives us a feeling inside, and/or enlightens our minds like a lightbulb brightening the thoughts in our head, or sometimes I can hear him put a thought in my mind that I know is true but that I did not think of myself.

We had the missionaries over for dinner. The dinner conversation was normal, small talk with two dumb kids, really. Then after dinner, they opened up the Book of Mormon to leave us with a scriptural thought and prayer. The entire atmosphere of the room changed. The Holy Spirit entered our hearts and verified the truth of the scripture in the Book of Mormon that they were reading. It was a noticable difference. I can't expect you to believe me, just try taking the missionaries discussions.

[How to stay uninvolved? in divorce drama in the ward]

Any time anyone, including the husband, brings it up I'd just be verbal about not wanting to hear it, the whole thing reeks of contention and gossip. Making a comment like that even when you're among friends who support the wife can have a huge impact as each member of that conversation find the strength to make similar comments in the future. He may be the one bad mouthing the wife unfairly, but conversing amongst each other about how unfair he is to do this is kind of the same thing. You didn't say you were doing this. I'm just saying that anytime the subject comes up, (unless you're the relief society president or bishop and have help requested of you) I'd just totally knock it down to the ground. Don't fuel this gossip in any way and hopefully one or two or maybe even more people will have the strength to say this to his face when he brings it up.

Oh, no I did gossip about him once. I admitted it. I made a remark about why would a man in his 20s marry a 16 year old. Now you have got me back into the drop it and stay out of it mode.

[How to stay uninvolved? in divorce drama in the ward]

I would tell the bishop and the RS president what you know and what you have observed, express that you're concerned, and leave it in their court.

We used to have a woman in our ward who would constantly badmouth her husband's ex (the mother of her stepson) right in front of the boy. EVERY time I'd interrupt her with, "Well! She can't be all bad, just look at this fantastic boy she brought into the world!" It may help the kids in your situation to hear that...and at the very least it'd probably get this jerk to avoid you.

That may be best. I just talked to the Compassionate Service lady today about them because she feels kind of like, why do we have to keep bringing meals every time the mom leaves?and added she had no idea what was going on with the family, but then made the comment - I can't believe she would do that to her kids. I just said, "she is a very quiet and private person but has her own side to the story."

Maybe I just need to tell the RS Pres and she can share with the bishop and then I can leave it be. And I like your idea of what to say to the kids, too.

My parents were divorced, and my dad publicly badmouthed my mom, and then I saw the ward turn on her, so maybe my worry was I was getting too involved in this since I have been through similar myself.

[How to stay uninvolved? in divorce drama in the ward]

True,

A good friend doesn't just sit and watch her friend's family get destroyed.

I had a dear friend that announced to me she was leaving her husband for another man. After I lectured her about how stupid she was being, we were never friends again, but then I don't care because she never ended up leaving her husband.

[How to stay uninvolved? in divorce drama in the ward]

Let me tell you a story. There once was a couple who lived in a ward we attended, the wife was a wonderful woman who did so much service to those around her not a person could question her intentions. The husband on the other hand had a tendency to speak badly not only of his wife but also of church leaders and church schools. Nearly all their children had medical problems.

While they lived in our ward the husband tried numerous times to defame his wife in the eyes of the ward. But it did not work because everyone knew who she was and what she was really like. So he found a new job in a different state and arranged for a move. When the move happened he set it up like this. He moved out to the new location first and was out there for about a month before the rest of his family followed. While he was in the new location he attended church and spoke to everyone about his wife, poisoning the entire ward against her. When the rest of his family moved out he immediately filed for divorce against his wife.

He made sure that he got custody of his children claiming that his wife had a disease where she was making the children sick just so she could get attention. (much like the woman in "6th Sense") Then he took the children and poisoned them against their mother. The wife stayed in the same area and attended the same ward for awhile, but eventually things became too much. At one point she came to church for Mother's day and her son walked up to her and said straight to her face, "What are you doing here you b*$^#?" Eventually the sickest of their children (a girl who was my age) died, the girl was about 21 when she passed away. The father didn't want the mother to know and tried to hide the information from her so that she could not attend the funeral. Thankfully a friend of the mother had received the info and gave it to the mother so she could attend. The mother still does not have access to her children and at this point most of them have been poisoned against her.

I don't know if the situation above could have been changed by someone else stepping in, I do know that it required a ward who believed the BS the husband was spewing against his wife. It required him to move to a place where no one knew his wife so that he would be able to defame her in the public eye. He tried it in the initial ward (the one I grew up in) and it did not work. The whole situation reminds me of the situation you are sharing.

This woman should not have her children and the ward poisoned against her, because even if people seem to be not talking, human behavior says they are, and even just a little gossip can damage her reputation forever.

Well, that is a sad story. That is the only problem I have, is I don't know the full story. There are lots of divorces where the spouses bad mouth each other afterwards and have custody battles, and since I don't know everything, who am I to butt in with my opinion to the bishop, without looking like this busybody nosey creepy neighbor. My heart hurts for her kids that think that the boogeyman took her away. She took her two youngest the frist time she left him, but she had to live with family that didn't want her there, and now, according to her, she has no high school degree and has never had a job before, and her husband uses that against her. Everything she says about him is that he is controlling and keeps her with him because she can't make it on her own. But his story is that she found a scuzzy guy on facebook and left him for another man. So who knows, maybe she did do that and maybe he isn't controlling? I am not a RS president or YW president, or Primary president, so should I say nothing?

[How to stay uninvolved? in divorce drama in the ward]

How long has this been going on? Obviously the husband is a loudmouth, but is he intimidating to those around him? Would it make a dent at all if you (and several others) began cutting him off by simply stating, "Dave, I know it's a tough situation that your family is dealing with right now, but I'd prefer not to hear about it, especially while at church." Would that help at all, or is he the type to turn things around and make you a bad guy?

If that wouldn't work, it seems to me that the best course of action might be to talk to the bishop and explain your concerns -- without bias as to who is at fault in the divorce -- about the damage this does to the kids and how you (and others) are uncomfortable hearing it week after week. Ask the bishop for advice. Don't necessarily ask him right away to talk to the guy, but ask him if he has any suggestions for you.

It's been going on for over a year. I don't find him intimidating, but before, when they were together, he seemed overly controlling. For example, his wife mentioned in passing that he would not allow her to paint the walls in her kitchen.

If he tried to smear me, I don't think anyone would listen or care. The ward does talk, because we keep getting asked to provide meals and childcare, and I hear things like, "Well, I just can't believe she would abandon her kids like that. But then she was only 16 when they were married. . ." Without wanting to break her confidence, I just keep saying, "there are two sides to every story and more we don't know, and her side is completely different than his." But once I opened my big mouth with the comment, "Any man in his early 20s that wants to marry a 16 year old (she wasn't pregnant) is a red flag to me and seems pretty creepy." So I guess my gut is telling me that he is trying to control the situation into making her look so bad that he can have full custody of the kids, and everyone will feel sorry for him.

[questions from an investigator]

Hi,

As far as being an intellectual, Brigham Young, the 2nd president of the church, did not join the church for a long time. He studied the Book of Mormon for two years before joining the church.

"Brigham and Miriam joined the Methodist Church the year they were married, but Brigham continued to wrestle with religious questions. He sought a church organized according to the pattern Jesus had established, after the pattern of the New Testament with a “system of ordinances” (DNW, 19 July 1866, 3) and all the gifts of the gospel. Because of the missionary efforts of Joseph Smith’s brother Samuel, Brigham Young’s family obtained two copies of the Book of Mormon in April 1830, just one month after the book was published. Some of Brigham’s brothers and sisters read it and declared its truth, but Brigham himself did not immediately accept it (see LL, 33). “ ‘Hold on,’ says I. … ‘Wait a little while; what is the doctrine of the book, and of the revelations the Lord has given? Let me apply my heart to them.’ … I examined the matter studiously, for two years, before I made up my mind to receive that book. I knew it was true, as well as I knew that I could see with my eyes, or feel by the touch of my fingers, or be sensible of the demonstration of any sense. Had not this been the case, I never would have embraced it to this day” (MSS, 15:45).

Brigham Young had to know for himself. He later taught the Saints that God did not intend them “to be led entirely by another person, suspending their own understanding, and pinning their faith upon another’s sleeve” (DNW, 24 Aug. 1854, 1). “It is my duty to know the mind of the Lord concerning myself,” he told them” (DNW, 22 Sept. 1875, 4). “It is your privilege and duty to live so that you know when the word of the Lord is spoken to you and when the mind of the Lord is revealed to you” (DNW, 22 Sept. 1875, 4)."

I think the best reason to join the church is because you believe it is God's church and you have the desire to be in his church.

[How to stay uninvolved? in divorce drama in the ward]

I don't necessarily think the divorce is all his fault, but he is the one being really vocal about it and trying to talk to everyone about it, while his kids awkwardly stand there.

I guess I will just keep them in my prayers and keep my nose out of it.

The divorce is not final so he has the kids. She has no high school degree and according to her, she left them with the dad because she has zero money. I guess it is a good thing I am not a bishop because I would not like hearing about all of these horrible problems and divorces, and I definitely do not like watching ugly things happen to little kids and just stand there watching it. That's life, though, I guess.

[How to stay uninvolved? in divorce drama in the ward]

Hopefully I don't sound too nosy or gossipy when I post this.

A couple in my ward is going through an ugly divorce. They have 4 kids - two teenagers and two little kids that are the same ages as my kids. The little kids go to the same primary classes as mine and one is in the same school class.

The father has a big mouth about his divorce and tells random people in the hallway intimate details of his marital problems and divorce, unasked for. I don't know if he is is just miserable and doesn't know what to do, or if he is trying to smear his wife because all of the talk is about her leaving. The mother is a very quiet, private person and stopped going to church when they separated. They keep separating and getting back together on and off.

The father has a completely, completely different story as for why they are divorcing and the mother (who few people know because she is really quiet and private) confided in me her reasons.

So people in the ward are helping with childcare and dinners, off and on, as she leaves, them stop when she comes back, and most people feel really sad for the kids and sorry for the couple and I don't really think anyone is gossiping. (long story, sorry!)

Anyway, the two little kids came running up to me today and said, out of the blue, "We don't have a mommy anymore. The boogeyman came and stole her from us. She lives in a scary house with a scary guy and no furniture." All I could do is hug the kids and then change the subject.

What the heck? I am tired of hearing the dad blabbing about what a horrible wife she is to everyone in the ward (in front of the kids. too) and telling his kids crazy things about her, when I know her side is that she is scared of him and he won't let her have the kids, he is telling everyone that she has abandoned them.

Do I just completely stay out of this or say something to someone? I am guessing stay out of it completely, but this is going on and on and on in the ward and although I think people don't really want to be involved in someone's personal business, we are hearing about it, unasked, at church and in the neighborhood, and I am listening to these kids saying awful things.

Ugghh!! I wish I could help those kids. . .

[Utah Drivers- revisited]

And if you have to pull over to the side of the road, people zoom by and avoid eye contact. I forgot about the lovely passing on the right, and about no one wanting to let you merge.

Then there's my friend who lived in West Virginia. She said all the time, when she was just getting ready to get on a road like from her driveway or pulling out of a parking lot onto a road, people would completely stop and wave her in, even if no one was behind them and there was no traffic.

[Utah Drivers- revisited]

I feel like I am not even moving, going 75 in a 65 zone in Utah. How fast are most people even going? 90? 100? With plenty of traffic around. I understand going crazy out on a straight stretch of freeway in the country, but what's up with Utahns?