JohnsonJones

No idea, but I have seen a disturbing trend among academia in the past few days. They seem more than ready to condemn Israel rather than others and side against Israel. If this is a rising trend, it could signal a dangerous change of precedence in the US in it's attitude towards Israel. Much of Europe is not pro-Israel at this point either. I hope it doesn't come to War. More likely, if it does, it will be more regional with Israel going in again to the affected areas and clearing it out, and possibly to an adjoining nation. It could spread from there, though it has not in the past. Hopefully, instead they will come to some sort of more peaceful terms than what has been occurring recently.

There is a point in some services (Catholic) though I'm not sure if it is in all Christian Churches of the Protestants, where during the service you are told to socialize (to a very limited degree). You greet the person to your left and to your right, those around you. This is something that is not done in the Church (Latter-day Saints) and so in some ways, instead there are those that greet others in the chapel before the meeting even begins. In some ways it is a similar type idea, though not ritualized like it in other faiths. I think that there is the hope that such greetings would go on in the Foyer or other locations of the Church rather than the Chapel. We have various rules for the chapel (no filming...well...at least until recently with Zoom and such) of reverence and contemplation, but it can be difficult for people to do so at times.

I cannot speak for Suzie, but I have a poor example that may illuminate why this may be. I got to learn about many people over a few years in leadership, and several (more than people may think if the ward I was in is any indication of how many are in other wards) individuals that were disabled to various degrees. Many of them did not let anyone else know and I would not have found out if there had not arisen a situation where they felt I needed to be informed. Most of them felt (and I actually agree that they were correct in many instances) that the members in many instances would discriminate against them. If the members found out someone was disabled, that there would be stereotypes tossed at them either consciously or unconsciously. Some of these would be where, in the instance of physical handicap, that they would not be allowed to help in physical activities and treated as if they were an invalid. I had seen this actually occur. We had one individual that was a worker with scouting who, when the other scouting leaders found out that they had physical difficulties, asked that for that individual to be released. This individual had previously done all that was asked for them to do and was a successful leader. The difference was the membership wanting to "make their burden easier" whether the individual wanted that to happen or not. Dealing with this type of discrimination from some members is difficult. In some ways it feels as if the members do not accept those who have disabilities. I do not feel it is intentional and many times it is only seeking to try to help the individuals, or at least that is how members see it, but even situations like the one above can feel harsh. Other times they literally cannot perform certain callings or do certain things. However, they have many talents in other areas which sometimes are not realized because they have a physical disability. This failure to be accepted fully as others can lead to the individual themselves having trouble accepting themselves and their abilities to do things. This has led many that I found out about their difficulties to hide them from others. Some do not hide their disabilities. They acknowledge them openly. Initially, dealing with others and their life with a disability can be difficult, especially when moving to a new ward. Not all who do this adapt and some have problems coming to the ward...not because they cannot physically do so, but because the difficulty of facing others who do not recognize what the individual actually can do vs. what they have difficulty doing. Others flourish. These openly accept their difficulties and how others may perceive them, but some of them also recognize they have hidden talents and strengths because of these things that others would call disabilities. They accept it is part of themselves. Rather than try to do away or hide it, they show that they still can be complete members with the ability to add great meaning to our lives and the lives of others. The disability they experience in their lives may hinder them in some areas, but it can also be beneficial in others. As I said, this is a poor example (for starters, because having attractions that differ from others, or temptations that are different than what others may experience is not necessarily a disability or a sin, it is merely different things that they deal with or have in their lives), but in some ways there are similarities that I see between how the two different groups deal with who they are, acceptance of themselves, and acceptance from members. It is still not a great example, but perhaps it can help illustrate how admitting one has this as part of their lives and talking to others about it may not necessarily be a bad thing, rather it is just something different in their lives that defines them, but does not control them.

Funerals are not for the dead, but for the living. Though it is but an instant compared to the eternities, as we cannot remember the eternities, it seems an awfully long time for us when we are separated from loved ones by death. We feel grief because we will miss them. They are gone from our lives for the moment, and so most of us (I suppose there are some that can talk to those beyond the grave, such as perhaps the prophet) will not be seeing them for some time. They have gone away for a while and we will no longer see them, and so our grief is because we will miss them in our lives as we know it.

That is a terrible thing to tell someone. Unfortunately, I don't have a ton of advice to give on it. There is a trend in the Church today to teach what others call the prosperity gospel. It is the idea that the more righteous one is, the richer they get. This is unfortunately reinforced many times by who they call into leadership positions. It seems that many times the richer you are, the better chances one has of being called into higher leadership positions. This also reinforces other fallacious stereotypes among some types of members. I'm not sure how to help, but I have also felt a similar thing when I was younger. I remained an elder for many years, even as most of my peers became High Priests and several got high Church Leadership positions. There were many that equated their righteousness with riches, and ostracized me and others in the ward because we were not considered "righteous" enough as they were. This was painful. IT DID teach me a valuable lesson so that when I finally was made a leader I could understand struggles others have in the ward, but it makes it no less hard to bear. I have found there are MORE who are not rich than there are that are. Unfortunately it seems, in many instances, those with money are those that are granted all the good things in a ward at times, along with popularity and callings, while the rest are left to rot. In many places the same dozen rich individuals are constantly given the leader rotation while everyone else is left out. The implications are that only those dozen are righteous enough for the callings, while everyone else is not. I feel this is distinctly untrue and wrong, but it happens. What your daughter is experiencing unfortunately also extends into adulthood sometimes. I don't have any answers to the problem except to say continue to love them and show them that no matter what others say or do, she is still loved. Buying things at thrift stores is commendable. Being able to buy things with her own money is outstanding. I know many children do not do this or are given things abundantly by their parents. Showing one's own initiative is far better and greater. Unfortunately, hearing an adult or their parent tell them this in many instances is not good enough for a teen. The comments and statements by their peers affect them strongly. I have no answers for you unfortunately on how to make the situation better. I can only suggest what you are already doing which is to love her and help her understand that she is loved no matter what. Today there are many that try to equate how well of they are, their callings in the church, or how big their house is to how righteous they are. I have seen this attitude destroy the testimony of others. It can be a hard thing to endure. I would remind others of certain statements that the Lord has said at times (it is easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than a rich man to heaven, blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth, blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of heaven, the first shall be last and the last shall be first...etc) so that they understand that the Lord is not a lover of riches. It isn't how much we have in this life, but how we act to others and our love for others. It may be that it will be easier for the atheist or agnostic who was charitable and blessed the lives of others to get to heaven than one who was a member of the church but was full of pride and arrogance. Tradition has it that our Lord and Savior was not rich (it is more a tradition than what we actually know though). That he wandered among others teaching his gospel. He did not put on extravagant shows of wealth, or wear fine clothes. Instead he traveled among others of his station and those who were poor, sick, and in need. He had more praise for the widow's mite than all the riches of the Scribes and Pharisees, the Lawyers and Kings, and the Wealthy Merchants and Traders. I know it probably isn't what your daughter is looking for or even needs to hear, but I think the Lord looks more favorably upon the humble and loving heart than those who pride themselves in riches, and at the final days those who are humble and meek are the ones that the Lord will put on a pedestal while those who have put their pride in the world will be the ones who will wonder why they are not favored as highly. PS: And of all people, the above should be a warning to me as well as I need to show more love, compassion, and charity to others around me. I need to be more humble and loving than I have been.

Much has been said in this thread. Sometimes I think a new approach needs to be done by the membership in the US in general. Today, the general approach is to focus solely on one specific sin or the other and exclude the rest of the commandment that the sin is part of or included with. This applies today to the Law of Chastity. This thread can be shown to be an example of it. Not all the posts, but many, focus only one one part of the Law of Chastity, that of homosexual relations. This is more a cultural thing (at least my thoughts are that it is) among members. I feel that instead of focusing on whether someone is attracted to others of the same gender or sex, we need to instead focus on the Law of Chastity itself. It has a wide envelop. The basic idea is that there are NO Sexual relations outside the boundaries the Lord has set, primarily meaning that there is NO relations of that sort outside of the ordained bonds of marriage, which means that such relations are only allowed in marriages between a man and woman. This does not mean people will not have feelings stirred inside of them in this regard. WE DO counsel youth regularly in regards to this. MANY of them feel such things towards others. To feel such things is normal, however, we also counsel them that they NEED to curb these emotions so that they keep the Law of Chastity strictly and only use the power of procreation within the confines of what is now known as traditional marriage. We have speakers talk to them about this, we have others talk to them about this. There are many angles to cover this from. There are those that have attraction to those of the same sex as they are. They can be told that this is normal for some people, but that does not make them bad or terrible anymore than any other youth or individual who also has attractions to others. They are still loved and are still our Father's children. They NEED to keep these feelings in check though, and the only permissible outlet is that set by the Lord. We DO have talks and other items that discuss the attraction others have to each other, especially in a heterosexual manner. We talk about the attraction and the feelings that go with it. We do not preach that it is a sin to simply have these feelings, but we do teach that we must CONTROL these feelings and the actions that go along with it. There is a great problem within the church today. A study many years ago now showed that 25% of seminary students had premarital relations. This is a seriously bad number. This was over a decade ago. I can only imagine the numbers are worse today. When I was in leadership, I saw this firsthand. We have a MUCH bigger problem with premarital relations of an inappropriate type among your youth in regards to those of the opposite sex than we do with those who are homosexual. Both can be a problem, but I see the problems with the Law of Chastity currently as a massive problem among our youth and most of those are NOT regarding Homosexual attractions. It used to be taught that Adultery was a sin second to murder, and fornication was like unto it. They were silent on how homosexual sins fell into this. This was probably for good reason, as the bigger problems the youth had was in relation to fornication or the steps that eventually lead to it. Sometimes, unfortunately, church members are only focusing on the smaller problems of same sex attraction these days. However, the problem is FAR bigger, and many of our youth are falling into sins which have them breaking the Law of Chastity. We need to teach them more about keeping the Law of Chastity and the blessings that come from it. We also need to teach acceptance of others and to Love our Neighbors as ourselves. (Side note about this: A thought occurred to me the other day; If we really loved our Neighbors in that manner, a Christian nation could instantly eliminate poverty, hunger, and homelessness overnight. There would be no need for welfare or Social Security. The fact that we have not shows just how Christian or UnChristian we really are). WE do not love the sin, we love the sinner. We also need to understand that people are at different stages of learning and advancement in this life. When others struggle with various areas of the Law of Chastity, instead of instant condemnation, we should approach it with understanding and love to encourage the person to overcome these problems and have a more solid commitment to be faithful in their life. They need encouragement at their low points, and help in becoming better people. I think we underestimate how much compassion and love can go to encouraging the youth today (and I suppose that also includes young adults who would be the audiences at BYU today for the most part) to keep the Law of Chastity and stay on the Covenant Path.

During the height of Covid-19 a similar item occurred in the US, though I understand it was not as strictly enforced. I had thought to go to Utah to visit some family during the time when it appeared that Covid-19 was on the downward slope but found out that Utah and many other states had a ban on others entering the state at the time or travel through their states. I think it was that if you entered in the states from another (and this was from travel within the United States, not just travel from a foreign nation) you would have to quarantine for 2 weeks. Currently, the US also has had a ban from some nations where you cannot enter the US if you have a positive Covid-19 Test...citizen or not. There were stories of the US citizens that were kept in Mexico for almost two weeks or more because of a positive test from Covid-19. I think that applies to any nation out there with people trying to enter the US. I had a friend who travelled overseas recently who got vaccinated and took precautions, but still prepared just in case they were barred from entering the US due to Covid-19. I do not know the fine or what the punishment is if you defy the US ban. I have not heard much outcry from the public on this, but I have heard some concerns about it from those who travel. I am gearing up for my annual research travel and it has me concerned, though I have all the papers in order to actually do research this summer. It is somewhat talked about to various degrees for and against it by those in the community who travel, I haven't heard a ton about it from the general public though. It may not be as extreme as the Australian ban but it is similar and done for a similar reason I suppose.

Note - I did not watch the video. If she stated the comment at the beginning of your statement I know ONE reason that she may have said it and a reason why that was approved to be stated. There is an unfortunate trend in the Church at times for parents to disinherit and disown LGBTQ children. When a child comes out, or falls into that form of sin, the parents bar contact, and basically tell the child that they no longer want to see them or talk to them. This has been a discussion point among many in that community who have had troubles within the Church. It can be a VERY hard thing for parents to deal with. I have one grandchild (though I suspect another one of mine may also fall into this camp, but they have not said anything to the family as of yet) that is part of the LGBT spectrum. WE express our love for them and pray that they will stay within the church and the boundaries it has set, but regardless, we still love them as our grandkid. Not all have done this with their children or grandchildren. There has been a trend at times, as I said above, to instead think that "tough love" will convince that child to change instead and thus the parents tell them they do not want contact with their child until that child changes. In many instances, this just pushes the child further away from their family and the church. I do not feel it does them a service or helps them to remain in the Church. Unfortunately, for some, it is easier to accept a child who had an abortion, or that is self-abusing (in the true, mental health fashion which means cutting on oneself or other forms of self-abuse in the actual definition of the word traditionally speaking), or other things than it is for them if their child comes out as LGBTQ. So, it may not be the reason she said it, but I can see that it could also be at the very heart of why she said it as well as why it was allowed to be said.

Actually I know someone here said that when they counseled with their medical professional and that medical professional recommended that vaccine, they explicitly ignored that counsel. Not sure that's what is implied in the statement above. I should add the Church Handbook statements on it I suppose... Seeking guidance of the Holy Ghost IS important...but are the members going to become anti-vaxxers now? If they are...that's not necessarily a good thing and probably is going to be bad from missionary work in areas that are educated around the world (anti-vaxxers opinions against vaccination do not really have a good standing in first world nations). The church says ULTIMATELY WE ARE RESPONSIBLE...but the advice is still to encourage us to be vaccinated. MY PERSONAL opinion (and it is my personal take...so not doctrine, gospel, or any other sort of thing) is that the Lord is NOT anti-science...in fact he is the exact opposite. He's helped science to further move along so that our lives have been blessed by the advancements made. This is with medicine as well as many other facets of our lives. In this, we should not be like the anti-vaxxers of Facebook, but using it to further our lives and the purposes of the church and gospel. Now, personally speaking (and this IS personally rather than from any doctrinal viewpoint) There ARE certain circumstances which preclude vaccinations (a prime example, I have a daughter highly allergic to eggs which makes taking certain vaccines an actual danger to her life as they are made using eggs. I would note though, she has gotten the covid-19 vaccination along with all the other vaccinations in her life, though at times with the advice of medical professionals on how to actually get that accomplished), which are individual. However, they are not as widespread as the political push to avoid vaccinations or to try to stop the spread of Covid-19 in the US today. Personally, I think many are mistaking political views and listening to political pundits for medical advice over that of Medical professionals and those who are there to try to safeguard the public health.

So, you are making excuses of WHY you do not feel you will do all you can to reduce the numbers of Covid-19 along with many others on this site? Noted. I did not say you HAVE to get vaccinated according to the latest advice from conference, but you should be talking about HOW YOU ARE GOING TO ACCOMPLISH what was asked of us instead of making excuses of why you are NOT going to follow any advice at all or what you are going to do to ignore the advice. One of the easiest ways as I have noted, is the advice of the First Presidency to get vaccinated. Of course, there has been other advice, such as that from Elder Renlund to wear masks and social distance (if for no other reason than express our love of our fellow men). There has been the inference from Elder Oaks, though more interpretation dependent, to follow the advice of our government leaders which for many would mean the experts who also suggest wearing masks and social distancing. So, we understand that you are not going to get vaccinated...if that's the only thing you are doing and avoiding doing anything else, what exactly ARE you or others doing to actually listen to the words of the prophet in reducing numbers of Covid-19? Or you just hoping others reduce those numbers for you so that eventually our temples can open full time? This is the pertinent thing. I see SO MANY members going against the prophet it is ironic. It's not simply about vaccination or not, though that is one of the major ideas that have been pushed, it's about the entire idea that we are doing things to actually reduce the numbers rather than letting others do it for us or hoping that it just goes away.

When Noah was commanded to build an Ark, most of the rest of the world appears not to have been commanded. He DID warn them and probably asked them to do certain things. Instead they mocked him. When the Israelites were hit by a plague of Snakes, Moses built a bronze snake that those who looked at it would live. It was an easy thing, but many mocked him. When Joseph F. Smith stopped Polygamy in the Church, it was not with the word, command, but otherwise for the Manifesto says... Does this mean we are under no demand to refrain from Polygamy? It was given to great mockery of him and other Church leaders at the time and a schism occurred which has many of those who are called Members as different sects to this day. At the time Wilford Woodruff gave it there were many who did not undertake this advice and continued as they were. Even under Joseph F. Smith this continued for awhile. In our modern time we have been asked to have food storage. Many have not followed this advice, and indeed many have not suffered for NOT following the advice of the church...but does that mean we should disregard it? More recently, the Family Proclamation says Once again, it does not say we are commanded. Many do take the words of warning and requests seriously though. Most recently, the Prophet, Russell M. Nelson stated... In this, it actually is stronger than an urge, request, or even simply asking. It is a statement. The question is, do we follow the prophet. Once again, the above item is NOT a question, it is NOT a simple maybe, it is a statement from the Prophet regarding when our temples will be reopened. We have been blessed thus far and hopefully will continue to be blessed, but what happens when many Saints blatantly encourage others to NOT follow the Prophet? I am following that advice which is why I am here asking people to actually LISTEN and FOLLOW what he has asked us. I'm not saying you need to immediately go out and get vaccinated if personally you have gotten told not to, but the discussion should NOT BE how or why one should disregard the statement from our last conference, but HOW WE CAN FOLLOW this advice to do all we can to bring the COVID numbers down in our areas and reopen the temples. Some may already have their temples open full time as they were before the pandemic, but most do not. The non-concern with getting the temples back to full operating norms and doing what we can to get there is concerning. If you feel that this is a matter of prayer for confirmation, I can understand that, but ONLY if you have not persecuted others who have had questions in the past and called them all sorts of names when they faced similar issues with the Church. Those who have asked for others to be banned due to not following the religion of worshiping the Conservative party politics of the United States have NO PLACE to now contest the statements of the prophet and argue against them. Ironically (not all, but a majority) of those who are now fighting against the words of the prophet are the same ones who have asked for posts to be deleted, others to be banned, and showed no sympathy to those who had difficulties in the past. It is a double standard that has caused this forum over the past year or two to become more of a FAR RIGHT conservative talking forum rather than one that discusses the facets of the Church, and even now is promoting a far right veiwpoint over that of following the words of our prophet from the last conference. This should be of concern, because this is NOT a complex issue. We are discussing the words of the Prophet from the last conference. Why should I need to be on the defensive to support his statements or talk about them on a forum which is supposedly here for members to discuss this type of thing simply because it is not a popular thing among the far right? (and to be clear, it is a far right issue, as I do not think most members actually have problems with what the Prophet has asked us to try to do, even those who are conservative. Most WANT the temples to reopen, and if we have to do everything in our power to reduce the Covid Numbers, than that's what I think most are trying to do these days).

Certain other religions get a very bad rap for trying to ignore medical science and causing harm or injury to their members because of their willingness to ignore medical advice and aid. I would not want to be associated with such religions myself as I feel they are like the Catholic Church of the 15th and 16th century which would rather depress the truth and destroy those who would spread truth to help others rather than lose power or influence. I personally do not know much about therapist or therapy. I don't know how scientific it is or not in regards to their advice. However, though I do not have anything against them and feel they should be allowed to believe however they wish, when I hear certain religions (was more specific to a specific religion, but felt I should not do so as I do not wish to be insulting, only express my own thoughts) tear down psychology and psychiatry I feel it only impresses more strongly how false their ideas are in comparison to what the true gospel of the Lord would be. I do not feel that science or truth are counter to the gospel, but we just do not know enough yet to see how the two are in confluence.

People who are telling others to do the exact opposite of what the prophet and apostles have told us to do are tearing down their words. Instead of trying to explain WHY the prophet's teachings last conference should not apply to others, we SHOULD be discussing how best we can achieve them. instead of trying to make excuses why we should ignore the prophet, we should INSTEAD be discussing how what we are doing to do ALL WE CAN do stop the spread of Covid-19 so that the temples can be reopened like they used to be.

I'm absolutely opposed to this action. This is the radical far left pushing this, and if they continue they are going to seriously damage their party. Most independents I think disagree with this, and they are the ones they need to cater to if they wish to continue winning elections. It politicizes the courts.

Interesting. It sounds as if the stores were struggling already and under consideration to be closed as well. With the mandate to pay $4 more (or the $5 in Los Angeles) would indicate that this would toss them over the edge. If this is correct, and they had 300 employees, that were employed full time (doubtful, but giving them the benefit of the doubt) that would probably be around 130,000 USD a week. Close to Half a Million a month in additional pay they would have to give out. That seems awfully low for a Grocery store's margins, but it could be. With margins that close it is not a wonder why they were considering closing them to begin with and why any change in the costs would force them over the boundery to need to close instead.