john doe

When I read this the question that goes thru my mind is.....what are they being taught about the Priesthood in their homes ?

The bloggernacle, with few exceptions, isn't much more welcoming to conservative/orthodox Mormons than MWS has been to OW. Millennial Star has had some thought-provoking posts recently on the "you attack, we defend--for a while" paradigm that seems to permeate the 'nacle and tends to lead to conservative burn-out.And it's worth noting that MWS doesn't exist merely to provide another forum for kvetching-- er, open discussion; and as far as I know, never claimed such a purpose. OW started a Facebook group for that--and after two years, it has garnered a little over one tenth of the "likes" that MWS got in two months. I can certainly understand why OW so desperately wants to turn the MWS Facebook page into its own mouthpiece to parrot its tales of woe and historical half-truths to a captive audience of actual believing, practicing Mormons that is tenfold as wide as anything it has managed to reach to date--but MWS' organizers are by no means "extreme" for their refusal to allow their resources to be thus hijacked.
I'll take a look, thanks. You may be right, but my initial observation would be "if you don't want people to develop a bunker mentality against your ideas, don't try to assault/publicly humiliate them and don't pal around with people who do."It strikes me that the root of the problems bijulie cites are (unrighteousness use of) hierarchy, not patriarchy. I believe she even mentions an unpleasant run-in with an RS president. Ordaining women won't end that--unless you buy into the "females-are-inherently-more-righteous" argument that OW supporters are only to happy to mock when it is made by defenders of the status quo. The subtext I see in Otterson's letter is "this abuse-of-authority issue may well be a discussion worth having; but we won't be having it with them" (which should come as no surprise to OW, one of whose founders (Margaret Toscano, I believe) was excommunicated for trying to shame the church into "having a dialogue" on that issue).

Sure they can. But having been in different wards and branches in different countries, I can tell you that the "Mormon Culture" is not all the same. When I moved to Utah, I discovered a "unique" culture all its own. I personally do not equate this "culture" with what Zion is intended to be for surely in Zion all are equal in  heavenly things. My wife is very independent minded and very introverted. She struggles in the company of  fellow members in large numbers, especially in Relief Society. But she never hesitates to fill a need when she sees one whether in "church" or anywhere else in the neighborhood, in town or among strangers. One can be a private person and mourn with someone who mourns together. One can fast and pray for another and be of service to him or her without sounding a trumpet. There is something to be said, however, to being one heart and one mind with everyone is Zion. Surely in Zion, nobody is introverted. In the meanwhile, I sympathize with your plight. God bless you. 

Irreverent though it is, I often think of this.  Usually it gives me a needed moment of release, and then I can think seriously again without simply seeing red.
 

I think he's asking why women can't pass the sacrament. After all, the deacon hands it off to them all the time.

If my daughter did this, even if she truly felt uncomfortable with the Bishop's interview, I would be so ashamed--ashamed that my daughter has no regard for authority or appropriate behavior.  Did I not teach her proper behavior?  How could I as a parent fall so short of my responsibility of teaching correct manners.  If this is an actual occurrence, and not some troll trying to get a rise out of us, I would be so embarrassed over my child's behavior.  And, I as a mother, look at my children's behavior as a reflection on me.  This is not a funny joke that she perpetrated.  This is just totally uncalled for and inappropriate.  I may rile a few people here, because I understand that children can go against their parent's teachings.  But, this behavior is not acceptable.  If the Bishop's questions were a little out of line, then she should have gone to her parents.  This sounds to me like she purposefully egged him on.  And recorded it!
 
I should probably just erase what I just typed and not post this.  I usually don't get upset over posts.  And, it's not the post that is upsetting me, it's the behavior of a 15 year old girl.  Not acceptable or funny!

Since this was an adult male, if he had been ordained to the Melchizedek Priesthood (and particularly if he was endowed, whether currently active or not), the Stake President would have to be involved...that's church policy.

Every team needs the Hanson Brothers

Call me when the fights get back to how those depicted in Slap Shot, hands down the best hockey movie ever.

It is with great surprise that I find myself saying a lot of things that Archie Bunker would have said. I was a lib back then and thought he was racist (he might have been), not hip, and certainly not right thinking (liberal).
 
I belonged to the Socialist Workers Party for a while in college. One thing it taught me was that white people complain a lot. They have all the privilege in this society, but they still whine if life's not perfect for them. I realized that my step-father had come from nothing (and no big student loans back then) to be a lawyer, my other relatives had dealt with segregation and restricted access to education to become teachers and leaders in education. I just couldn't sit back and moan when I saw other people had taken life by the reins and improved themselves. I left the Socialists and voted Democrat, mostly because I'd heard all Republicans were racists.
 
Years pass and I grow up. I get a law degree. I see how the world really works. I start noticing that I'm working like a dog and some welfare princess is walking up and down Market St shopping on my dime. What's wrong with this picture? I became a small 'l' libertarian, but I'd vote big 'L' sometimes. When Clinton was elected, I didn't vote for him, but was excited to see what someone from my generation was going to do in office (answer: not much).
 
I wind up working in a building with limited radio reception. The only station I could get was the talk station, which was OK, but then Rush Limbaugh came into the market. I had heard terrible things about him, but I was a talk show junkie and started listening to him. Like a lot of his listeners, I realized that I was thinking the same way. It wasn't 'I agree with Rush,' but, 'someone is finally saying what I think.'  When I had my own law firm and had to pay taxes, etc. I really changed politcally.  I voted for George W and prayed for his election. This is the only politician I have ever prayed for. I joined a conservative website where I am still active and have thousands of posts.
 
I'm very conservative, more so than many of the candidates put up by the Republican Party. But I'm also a child of the 60's/70's and some things just don't bother me. I don't care about marijuana. I don't care too much about gay marriage (I do care about what school kids are taught about sexuality, tho). I don't care about casinos or online gambling. I will watch what movies I want to watch and listen to the music I want to hear. I am a lapsed feminist and do care about the role of women, but am OK with not having women in the priesthood. 
 
I could never be a lib again. Kennedy's type of liberalism and Democratic Party are long gone. What we have are socialists at best and racists and communists at worse (if you don't think liberalism fosters racism, take a good look at the types of legislation libs are for and against. Few political movements have destroyed a people the way liberal Democratic politics have destroyed the black family.)   I fear the loss of our American culture and the middle class.
 
It's been a "long strange trip," for sure. I don't think my 25 yr old self would recognize me now.

If someone is getting in my grill about things like that I will resort to "Well, if you MUST know, due to our conflicting schedules I plan on having marital relations with my wife at that time. I'd be glad to come over when we're done if you like, but I'm not exactly sure what time that will be.Can I call you when we're through?" That usually is enough to get the person to back off.

To be blunt, I understood what Traveler was saying and found it a bit condescending.
 
Perhaps not all will desire exaltation, but as I stated in my response, it's the reason we all chose to come down here in the first place. On top of that it's something our Father in Heaven wants for each of his children. Remember he looked on our spirits and declared them Good.
 
I find this way of thinking antithesis to the 'Good News' and totally pointless. We don't send missionaries out to warn people that they might not want to return to their Heavenly Father because we might not like living with him.
 
It also ignores the principle that desire leads to faith. It's a little odd to question someone's desire after they have worked that desire to point of faith in G-d.
 
 
 
Aren't we glad that Aaron didn't say.."are you sure you really know what you desire, because living with him might be hard work?"
 
Why do I think we naturally want to return and become like him? It's simply because his joy is fuller and greater then ours and he wants us to share in that joy.

Out loud. It helps others in the room to point at who you're laughing at too.

From everything I have learned of the gospel, I feel the opposite is true. We are fooling ourselves into thinking we don't want to live eternally with our Heavenly Father.
 
 
For what other purpose did we come to this earth, if not to progress, become like, and return to our Heavenly Father?

Out loud. It helps others in the room to point at who you're laughing at too.

Out loud. It helps others in the room to point at who you're laughing at too.

Service.  There are always people who have it worse than you do.

Elder Holland fortifying the youth against those who call the Church \"patriarchal\" and \"bigoted\"; Sister Reeves reinforcing that, yes, pornography really is a big deal; Elder Anderson encouraging Church members to hold the line on gay marriage; President Eyring confirming that the Church leadership understands its problems even better than do those who \"sound the alarm\" . . .
This is shaping up to be a rough conference for the ark-steadying crowd.