ldseastcoast Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 (edited) Fair enough. Just keep in mind site rule #3, and you should be fine here. Although you probably will experience varying levels of disagreement.Got it. From my experience, most of the 'public knowledge' out there, was produced by church critics. Most of it is slanted and uncharitable, and a bunch of it is unrighteously judgemental if not flat out untrue. I'm guessing it is not what you think it is, and it does not do what you think it does. But yeah, moral agency and all that - you're free to your opinion.Actually, just to clarify one note: I do know what the STMC is. It's a committee of brethren who monitor publications and now the Internet for speech by members that is critical of leaders. They then forward the information to the member's local leaders for action, and the action, if any, is at the discretion of those local leaders.Trust me, I do NOT get my info from the hateful anti's. There was reference to it in the mainstream media, citing a Church source. If I can find the link, I will post it.In the meantime, such a committee is clearly supported by D&C 123:Doctrine and Covenants 123 Bottom line, as I said, I love anything that stymies critical speech. Oh that I were high enough on the ladder to serve on that committee. Edited September 2, 2011 by ldseastcoast
MarginOfError Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 Actually, just to clarify one note: I do know what the STMC is. It's a committee of brethren who monitor publications and now the Internet for speech by members that is critical of leaders. They then forward the information to the member's local leaders for action, and the action, if any, is at the discretion of those local leaders.Trust me, I do NOT get my info from the hateful anti's. There was reference to it in the mainstream media, citing a Church source. If I can find the link, I will post it.In the meantime, such a committee is clearly supported by D&C 123:Doctrine and Covenants 123*Bottom line, as I said, I love anything that stymies critical speech. Oh that I were high enough on the ladder to serve on that committee.I'm going to start writing stuff on my blog just to torment the committee.
NeuroTypical Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 (edited) I do know what the STMC is. It's a committee of brethren who monitor publications and now the Internet for speech by members that is critical of leaders. They then forward the information to the member's local leaders for action, and the action, if any, is at the discretion of those local leaders.Source please. Got link to lds.org that talks about it?Can you tell us which publications (and which parts of the internet) this committee monitors? How exactly does one go about "monitoring the internet" for such speech? Must be pretty long hours. Do they get paid? Do you have something recent, or is all your info from the articles and kerfuffle from the mid '90's? TIME did an article back in 1994. Daniel C. Peterson, BYU professor and FARMS guy, shared his experience with the STMC a few years back. It didn't look even the slightest bit like what you describe. This was, dang - like in the mid '90's or something. Got something else? Edited September 2, 2011 by Loudmouth_Mormon
ldseastcoast Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 I'm going to start writing stuff on my blog just to torment the committee.Then woe be unto thee. I make sure not to write anything critical of leaders or their decisions. My standing in the Church is not going to be thrown away in the name of a blog post, but you rock on if that's what you wish to do.
ldseastcoast Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 Source please. Got link to lds.org that talks about it?Can you tell us which publications (and which parts of the internet) this committee monitors? How exactly does one go about "monitoring the internet" for such speech? Must be pretty long hours. Do they get paid?Why, do you have something to hide?
skippy740 Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 Here moral agency comes into play. I believe it to be disrespectful, arrogant and prideful to in any way question the counsel of those in authority over us, past or present. When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done, as the saying goes."There are not enough general authorities to do all the thinking for the membership of the Church." - J. Golden Kimball
MarginOfError Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 Then woe be unto thee. I make sure not to write anything critical of leaders or their decisions. My standing in the Church is not going to be thrown away in the name of a blog post, but you rock on if that's what you wish to do.Meh. I'm not too worried, especially since my bishop and stake presidency seem to get a kick out of my criticisms.
ldseastcoast Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 Meh. I'm not too worried, especially since my bishop and stake presidency seem to get a kick out of my criticisms.Tell you what..you post yours, I'll post mine.
beefche Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 Yep, my bishop has already asked me why I keep licking people's screen on the internet. The committee is concerned about my adherence to the LoC with these actions.
ldseastcoast Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 Yep, my bishop has already asked me why I keep licking people's screen on the internet. The committee is concerned about my adherence to the LoC with these actions.I'm sorry you're not taking this subject matter more seriously.
Dravin Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 (edited) I'm going to start writing stuff on my blog just to torment the committee.Make sure to put in contradictory or false clues as to your real identity. Edited September 2, 2011 by Dravin
MarginOfError Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 I findeth it difficult to seriously speak amidst one who so strangely converseth.
MarginOfError Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 Make sure to put in contradictory clues as to your real identity.You mean like indicating that my name is rameumpton and I am a high councilor in the Indianapolis Stake?
Dravin Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 You mean like indicating that my name is rameumpton and I am a high councilor in the Indianapolis Stake?Well my first thought was something like indicating you are a High Councilor and you recently went in for a pap smear. Though what you suggest works.
ldseastcoast Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 So, you want a link do you? Would the Deseret News do? Laugh now:LDS Church News - First Presidency statement cites scriptural mandate for Church committee
pam Posted September 2, 2011 Report Posted September 2, 2011 Oh...my...word. This is the 2nd thread in the last week of "official news" that has become nothing but a bitter battle. This thread has gotten so far off the track of what the OP intended. Closed.
Dravin Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 · Hidden Hidden I findeth it difficult to seriously speak amidst one who so strangely converseth.Okay I won't lie, I pictured this while reading your post:
Recommended Posts