The Folk Prophet

I'd be tattling to my bishop so fast on this sort of thing! And if he blew it off I'd tattle up the chain. I'm a rat fink, apparently.

It was a fine because of taxes though, ultimately, wasn't it? I mean I haven't looked into it that thoroughly, but wasn't it a law-suit related to hiding income related to taxable income? Maybe I'm wrong.

So I just watched a clip from Michael Knowles where he talks of this LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ dude who dresses as a woman but is being lauded by the conservative right for denouncing "pronouns". Michael Knowles makes the point, which which I agree, that we, as conservatives, continually lose by this very method. Essentially, he says, 50 years ago conservatives said feminism is fine but homosexual is crazy, then 30 years ago they said, homosexual is fine, but gay marriage is crazy, then 10 years ago...gay marriage is fine, but transgender is crazy, and now they say transgender is fine, but non-binary is crazy...etc., etc... This relates to the discussion I was having with @Just_A_Guy as to when and where we draw the line. The plain fact is, we don't seem to ever draw the line. We just cave, and cave, and cave, and cave, letting the Overton window shift, and shift, and shift, and shift. It guarantees we'll lose. And we will. Because little by little, we accept the progressive narrative. Not that long back the idea of drag queen story hour for kids would have been ridiculous. Parent who exposed their children to such things would have been thrown in jail, their children taken away. Now we're arguing that it's fine, as long as contracts and parental rights are in order and as long as no actual genitalia is exposed? Hmm. How long until the exposed genitalia is fine as long as the kids aren't forced to participate? Then how long until the kids being forced to participate is fine, as long as the parents are there? Then how long until...... Of course in saying this, I'm not proposing anything. I don't have an actual proposal. I respect and appreciate what parents did in this instance. But I don't think it will do any good. But isn't that defeatist? But maybe we should be defeatist. We can't win this. Because we keep buying into the progressive narrative...bit by bit, frogs boiling in the pot. And @NeuroTypical, I accept what you shared fully. We should follow our church leaders and trust them. I trust that civility is the right course right now. But I don't understand it. I don't understand the idea that we should get along with evil. I don't know how the ideas presented by President Oakes fit in with the concepts about defense of our religion, faith, and family, as I understand them to be taught in the Book of Mormon. It seems by the church's "civil" approach to the fight that we lose. I'm not saying that as a critical thing. I trust that's right. Apparently we're meant to lose the culture war. And, likely, we'd lose anyway...even if uncivil. Even if literally going to war...we'd probably lose the culture war. I mean take what the church has done with Prop 8 and homosexuality, for example. They fought the good fight civilly and through proper politics and all that. And the result...we lost. Entirely. We lost. Gay marriage is fully culturally accepted and fully enshrined in law. Well...okay. I trust that the church's approach was still correct. And I can accept that being civil is more important than actually winning. But here's where I get confused... if we know that being civil in our fight is going to lose, and being civil is the priority, then why are we even fighting? Why don't we just be civil and quit the fight? I mean politically and legally, of course. But that doesn't fit with the counsel we're given either to get involved. So this is how it reads to me. These parents, desperate to protect children, but trying their best to do it in a legal and peaceful manner, and trying to get involved, are reprimanded and called hateful and divisive by their stake presidency. Apparently, they shouldn't be trying to protect children. Nope. They should be protecting the feelings of perverted freaks who get their kicks by dressing up as overly sexualized women in front of children. Because despite the theory that it should be handled through the law and those in charge should be fired....that is never going to happen. Efforts to that end will fail as surely as prop 8 failed. These parents know that. Which is why they acted as they did. They can't go through the proper means to protect children and have any measure of success. But doing as they did, they successfully (in this instance), protected children, and the library is reconsidering hosting such events because of concerns of escalating violence. They got results! But nope...hateful and divisive. How dare they? And I feel like in the near future, continuing along this course, my children might be forcibly (but fully legally) removed from my care so they can be transgendered and raped, because protecting my children from such is clearly hateful and divisive, and my response should be to let it happen because we believe in honoring and obeying the law. "That's ridiculous," they say. "Clearly that's not going to be the societal standard. Your slippery slope argument is a fallacy." But of course they said the exact same thing 50 years ago, and then 30, and then 10.... The writing is pretty clearly on the wall. And it scares me. And I don't know what to do. And when I do see someone stand up and fight on behalf of what feels right, they get reprimanded for being hateful and divisive? My mind cannot reconcile that. So it doesn't. I just...I don't know...blindly obey I guess. I'm going to go curl up in a blanket and suck my thumb for a while.

My thoughts: 1. Bureaucratic nonsense. 2. Taxation is theft.

I just read the news article. I've changed my view. The people involved in this protest were not stupid for protesting. They did nothing illegal or immoral. They weren't marching or shouting. They merely occupied seats open to the public. They have every right to do that.

Well now...I cannot respond to that in any way but agreement without becoming a major hypocrite. That being said, I believe I am, at times, bending the Word of Wisdom somewhat in my usage. Great googly moogly I use a lot of caffeine! But we have been counselled to not use mind or mood altering substances...so the argument really comes down to whether caffeine counts in that. Hmm. I suppose we have been counselled to not engage in Satanism too...so the argument really comes down to whether Halloween counts in that. So the question is then, are these two ideas equivalent: 1. We have been counselled to not use mind/mood altering substances. Caffeine counts. We shouldn't use it and, 2. We have been counselled to not worship Satan. Halloween counts. We shouldn't celebrate it. In my mind the arguments don't even come close to being the same, even though there are similarities. Caffeine is clearly (to my thinking) a mind/mood altering substance that should realistically be used medicinally and not recreationally.* Halloween is clearly (to my thinking) not Satanic. That being said...there are measures. I mean eating food of any sort is a mood, mind altering substance. So where's the line? Marijuana's easy. A sandwich is easy the other way. But caffeine sits somewhere in the gray that, clearly, poses a challenge in the decision making paradigm. Well, at least in my mind it does. Hmm. Or I guess what I'm saying...whenever someone's suggests in church that faithful members shouldn't use caffeine it's never really bothered me. I kind of think...yeah...I probably ought to not. But the no Halloween thing I roll my eyes at. *on a side note, I self medicate my A.D.D. with caffeine. But that's a tricky idea that I'm not always comfortable with. And despite the fact that I have that theoretical (and perhaps poor) excuse, I use it recreationally because it feels good. And that's not good. Or...does it make me feel normal and help me focus....and I just think it "feels good" because I feel so distracted and unmotivated otherwise?

Shocking. It's not like you wear it on your sleeve or anything.

I think my response stands as to basically communicating what I'm trying to. Maybe. Sort of.

Where do you draw the line then? Strip shows in front of children -- as long as the contracts are being honored? Pornographic movies? Live sex shows? When is it appropriate for society at large to step in and say, "Nope. Not allowed. I don't care about your contracts or your parental rights. This cannot stand." ??

Politics is the debate of what should be civil based on what is moral. I do not believe the majority yet considers drag shows for kids morally equivalent to missionaries preaching. We may be getting their quickly. But not yet. I agree, except perhaps with the word "deeply". Depends on what you mean by playing on the field I guess. As I've said, I think protesting is stupid. But not because what's being done isn't wrong and gross. If it comes to proper methods though...voting, establishing laws, getting people fired, etc., then that's pretty much the only field to play on. What other point can be made of the matter than it's wrong and gross and that children should be protected from that which is wrong and gross?

But it's not. It's only problematic to the cause of outreach and fellowship for a certain type of individual (progressives). To another type of individual...who are, frankly, significantly more likely to respond positively to outreach and fellowship, it's potentially quite useful.

@Just_A_Guy I was going to say something similar. Actually what I was going to say was more along the lines that protesting is STUPID! I hate it. It's not a fine American tradition. It's a childish hippy-inspired get-a-life activity. I can be forgiving of those who believe it's a good idea though. Barely. That being said...if anything ever deserved protesting, it's drag shows for kids. But I fully agree that there are better, appropriate, and correct ways to affect change that should never involve marching in circles with signs or the like. There's a flaw with just calling something hateful though. The plain fact is that I do, very much, hate drag shows for kids. I mean I hate drag shows for adults too. But especially for kids. But the narrative is that must mean I hate the individuals involved...or even worse, it implies I wish them harm. (That's also a relative word, because if it means going to jail for exposing sexual things to children, then I do wish that upon them...but if it means physical beatings or death, I do not. Of course calling something hateful always implies the latter). But the greater flaw is the equation you're making. It's buying into the lefty woke-mob logic. They would like to have us believe that protesting a bunch of dudes dressed up as over sexualized women, doing crude and suggesting things in front of children, is exactly equivalent to protesting missionaries. But it's not. I expect Putin would have us all believe that his invasion of Ukraine was exactly equivalent to the Allies invading Germany at the end of WWII. Or the people who claim putting up a Satanic display next to a manger scene at Christmas is exactly equivalent. We do not have to accept those types of claims.

So I don't necessarily disagree with you on this point per se. But just as a counter thought exercise... Sometimes some of this stuff is hilarious. And it honestly feels like wokesters just have no sense of humor about anything. And that's on them. I mean I've watched the South Park episode on Joseph Smith. And although in principle it's offensive...I have to admit it's funny. I don't support making fun of something others find sacred... but I don't exclaim my life feels threatened and demand censorship. No one posting a photoshopped picture of president Kimball with a machine gun is being serious. I don't expect everyone to join in the laughing. But the pearl-clutching, "my life is threatened", kind of response is just as much a tactic as is the poop-posting. It's also just as holier-than-thou. So if the response is to cave because offense is being caused...isn't that letting the ideological enemy manipulate the narrative in an unfair way? As I said...I actually think I agree with you...I think. But it's not so black and white really.

If it's just belief...sure. When it's posted formally on a website and preached as if it's a higher, more pure way than all the other plebs... you know, all those Satan worshipping members that fill the ranks of the church....... Hmm...... by the rancor in my tone (and heart), apparently, I just have a problem with it. Even if it's just a belief. How can anyone reasonably believe that way? Putting aside that it's SO insulting to other members (which being insulted isn't really the issue I have), it's the thought process that someone can have thinking that engaging in something that almost every faithful member engages in is Satanic and evil. Now I have to repent for said rancor.

So the advice to "follow the Spirit" is such an interesting one for me as I age. I cannot say how often I've been involved in something where I've been trying to bring to pass much righteous of my own free will only to feel like I made a mess of it, and even felt reprimanded in General Conference for my actions. (Many of those efforts people will be familiar with, as I was engaged in them in this forum...aggressively "defending" the gospel per my best understanding.) Maybe I'm overly sensitive to things. Maybe it's my just insecurities. I've fashioned myself a Captain Moroni, boldly defending the gospel to turn back the gates of hell... (though not enough to cosplay as that... but cosplay's for 10-year-olds. Grow up people!) ...but then as soon as I hear an apostle say we need to be less offensive I crawl back in my hole and cower a bit before slowly creeping back out with intent to do better. What's my point? Well...I have no idea how to follow the Spirit sometimes. I always try to. But I get on the wrong end of things. A lot. Because I have a big mouth and I'm excitable and.......call it overly zealous...or even manic...if you willl...in my enthusiasm at times. I'm simply not Captain Moroni. Or...am I? Haha...no. I'm definitely not. For sure. But what I mean is...I put Captain Moroni on a pedestal. But he was human. The fact that if all men were like him the gates of hell would have been shut doesn't mean he never made a bad choice. I mean he ripped Pahoran a new one entirely unfairly. And he didn't exactly back off when he found out he was wrong. He didn't say, "Oh...I'm so sorry man. I messed up big time in saying such terrible things and threatening you." But we don't have the full record. Maybe he did in private. But I've offended so many so often. It cannot help to start feeling like I'm doing it wrong. So if I was doing it wrong...but doing my best to follow the Spirit... was I? Can't God do His work through the foolishness of men? Even fools such as me? That being said... I've recently gained some insight on "following the Spirit" from Elder Bednar, and that's what I really wanted to share here: I've never had the moments of confirmation where my imperfect actions clearly led to a positive result...but I have to trust in the concept. I'll continue to be a fool. I know that. I'll try. I'll keep trying. I'll keep trying to try trying. But I'm going to be a fool because..... I am one. So I have to trust God can do good through me despite that reality -- even if I don't see it. I'm smarter now...but boy howdy when I was in my 20s I would have probably jumped all over the DezNat thing. Now I look at it as immaturity and unnecessary foolishness. But that's just an age thing. I'd like to give the other fools out there the benefit of the doubt as much as possible. So, as I've stated, I see both sides in a way. It's both heroic and stupid. Like the idiot Captain Moroni cosplayer. What a noble moron.

The phrase "regret mistakes made" is an interesting one. Obviously it depends on what one means by "regret".

Some people start salivating at hearing things they disagree with.

That's a great analogy. Still...something feels a bit off about coining a phrase or naming an organization that is outside of the church even if it's pro church. I can't quite place my finger on what feels off about it. It just feels off. If the church had an official movement called Deseret Nation and it was focused on bringing about Zion I'd be on board. Also...something about the usage of the word "Nation" feels...inflammatory. And if it's really about Zion, then why not use Zion. #zion. I could get behind that. But really, why isn't the church sufficient. Why not #churchOfJesusChristofLatterDaySaints or #churchOfJesusChrist or something if it's really just about supporting the gospel. I feel like there are a hundred hashtags that could do the job without A) being cryptic (I had to look up what DezNat meant after seeing it referred to somewhere) B) being weird (as you pointed out...why the z instead of the s? And why the abbreviation? Why not #DeseretNation?) and C) being inclined to be viewed as a dog whistle because of the usage of the word "nation" (naturally associated with nationalism -- which, fair or not, is associated with white supremacy, racism, etc). So, yeah. I get your point. And I agree...but there's still something wrong here to my sensibilities.

Yeah. Everyone has to decide for themselves. And I'm sure there are those who feel strongly against Halloween or Harry Potter who will be in good shape come judgement day. But it sure feels looking beyond the mark to me. But...in my family, we made the decision to keep our church clothes on all day on Sunday. We do it to help remind us that it's Sunday. But I'm sure there are others who consider that sort of approach extreme, looking beyond the mark, or otherwise weird. But one big difference...I don't suggest or even imply in ANY way that those who don't keep their church clothes on all day Sunday are inviting Satan into their lives.

If the father wasn't a counselor I'd agree. It's a bit tricky because he is. But it's also a judgment call on the bishops' part. There's no rule I'm aware of that the bishop can't make the determination that this sort of thing needs to be shared with a parent. The parent has the presiding right over their child. In a way it'd be like asking if you shared something with your Stake President could you expect him to not share it with the bishop? I could be mistaken. And were it some sort of sin then I think maybe it would be different. But when I was in ward council, we discussed members who struggled with doubts and how we could help them all the time. It's not the same sort of private matter as confessing serious sin to a bishop or the like (which the bishop would, indeed, keep to himself).

I disagree. There is very much something wrong with making such a false a terrible statement that throws faithful, righteous members under the bus by stating their desire to protect children is hateful. Edit: I just noticed you wrote "nothing more than that". I had read it as "nothing wrong with that". My view is the same...but my "disagreement" with what you said isn't. Sorry for that.

Where is the line? Is this something they would be disciplined for? Does the Church actually have a position on whether drag queen library hour is good or bad? What are your individual thoughts? Um... that quote from the Stake president is ridiculous! Like....seriously problematic.

Maybe. I don't though. I think the intent is to have fun while engaging in something that they take deadly serious. Sustaining the gospel. I don't think fun is the point. It think it's a method.

As pointed out, it's just a hashtag. So it's very hard to say what any given individual feels or things who uses that hashtag. Some may be just having fun. Some may be deadly serious.

It is something that I have found some people believe with excessive conviction. Here are the 5 reasons they give on their site re: Halloween, to which I'll respond to with my opinions: Reason #1: The power of Satan is real. Never tell your kids witches aren’t real. If you're celebrating Satan and real witches then I agree. But that's not what we do in my family. We don't conflate the entirely fictional witches and wizards of the entirely fictional Harry Potter universe with real witches either. And such a conflation has always struck me as a bit silly. That being said, even if one were to fully embrace the "never dress up as a witch" idea, then don't dress up as a witch. Problem solved. That being said, some of the most righteous, wholesome, good families I know have had their kids show up trick or treating as witches. I just find the idea that if you engage in such you're inviting Satan into your life extremely holier-than-thou from that perspective. It's just not true. Painting your face green and putting on a pointy hat has NOTHING to do with Satan or Satanism or witchcraft. It's entirely silly fiction. And, if I do say so myself, a lot of fun. Reason #2: Satan causes extreme suffering. Yep. But, once again, the correlation of Halloween and Satan is only true if one is putting Satan into the mix. Don't put Satan into the mix in your celebration of Halloween. Reason #3: Halloween and other elements of Satanism mock God & His Priesthood Absolute rubbish on the Halloween point. Obviously Satanism mocks God. But once again, Halloween does not equal Satanism unless you make it so. We don't. Reason #4: Engaging in Satanic rituals, witchcraft and so forth is condemned in the Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants & Pearl of Great Price. Same point. It's the typical logic anti-Halloweeners use. They present Halloween as if it's equivalent to a Satanic ritual. Period. No discussion. It just is. But that point is simply not true. Reason #5: I know the history of Halloween Irrelevant. Yes, it comes from a pagan ritual. So what? It is not a religious thing in my family. It's a fun family tradition involving candy, pumpkins, dress-up, neighborly visits, and love. The ghosts and ghouls are fictional fun and have nothing to do with real ghosts and ghouls. No real witch every had green skin. And zombies don't exist. In short...I grew up on Halloween and -- shockingly -- I'm not a devil worshipper, Satan lover, corrupted Pagan, or anything of the sort. Neither were my parents. In point of fact, I'm a faithful Latter-day Saint, temple recommend holding priesthood holder -- surprise surprise. I know. Shocking, right? Since, apparently, I invite Satan into my life yearly in October. When some holier-than-thou uppity gospel snob starts preaching to me that I'm NOT faithful, have invited Satan into my life, and that they have some higher way or path because they don't dress up and go trick-or-treating it is utterly laughable to me. Finally, if the prophets and apostles felt dressing up and trick-or-treating was a problem they would preach against it. They'd ban trunk-or-treating on church property. They don't do this because they're not nutty over-zealous wackos*. If they change their minds, I will too. *I realize that this is a subjective thing. According to some views, they are very much nutty over-zealous wackos. So, like I said...my opinion. Everyone has to come to their own conclusions about these things, of course. But I just find the "no Halloween" logic so bizarre. And if they don't celebrate Christmas it's even more bizarre. Because I can see, obviously, how certain parts of the world's Halloween traditions should be avoided. I mean one could apply the same to Christmas. The commercialism and greed can be problematic. That should be avoided. And another point. Neither Halloween, nor Christmas, nor Easter itself, are actually religious holidays for Latter-day Saints. The only holiday we have is Sunday each week. Otherwise, Christ is meant to be a at the core of all we do. If Christ is the core of one's Halloween traditions then it is a good thing. When my family dresses up and we take our kids trick-or-treating Christ is the center of it. First and foremost in all we do is to do as He did. Our priority is our neighbors, sharing, and giving them an opportunity to share. It's loving and laughing. It's politeness, kindness, service, and joy. It's family bonds. Halloween gives opportunity for this, even with one's face painted green while wearing a pointy hat and carrying a broom. Why on earth anyone would take such a silly, meaningless thing and apply this idea that selfless, serving, loving, Christlike, Sister So-n-so is "bringing Satan into her life!!!" is beyond me. It's ludicrous.