Sign in to follow this  
srmaher

Elder Packer Vindicated 21 Years Later

Recommended Posts

In a talk given to the Church Coordinating Council in 1993, Elder Boyd K. Packer identified three areas that pose a serious threat to the spiritual welfare to the members of the church. He said, “The dangers I speak of come from the gay-lesbian movement, the feminist movement (both of which are relatively new), and the ever-present challenge from the so-called scholars or intellectuals.”

 

Of all the things he could warn us about, why did he choose these three things? I believe Elder Packer was warning us about an ideology, a belief system that is incompatible with the gospel of Jesus Christ (not to mention American values). His warning has proven to be prophetic because each one of these issues (primarily feminism and gay marriage) is continually front and center in the media.

 

Because there is too much to discuss with these topics, I have divided this post into two parts. The first will cover the feminism movement and its war against gender identity and the perceived threat of the patriarchal system. The second part will continue many of the themes in this post since all of them virtually share the same values and goals.

 

Gender and the Patriarchal System

In order to understand feminism, one must understand that the cornerstone of this movement is the belief that men and women, by nature are the same, and the only reason that gender roles exist is because of “social constructs.” That is where their belief that boys like guns and girls like dolls originates, because they are taught to. This reasoning explains why men are masculine, and women tend to be feminine, not because God made us this way, but because we are socially programmed to think this way. Their stance is that since these roles are learned, they can be unlearned.

 

Feminists believe that the greatest perpetrator of these oppressive roles is the patriarchal system, where a man is the provider and protector, while the woman is the homemaker. Betty Friedan referred to the home as “a comfortable concentration camp.” “What better way to “re-educate” a generation than to do whatever is possible to destroy the traditional family?

 

Jessica Valenti, an outspoken feminist, identified this as one of their objectives in an op-ed she wrote for the Washington post; “Feminism is a social justice movement with values and goals that benefit women. It’s a structural analysis of a world that oppresses women, an ideology based on the notion that patriarchy exists and that it needs to end.” Robin Morgan, another leading feminist said, “We can’t destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage.”

 

In essence, it is the patriarchal system that they see as an obstacle to women’s liberation. Once you understand this, you can begin to see why they have such contempt for the likes of Sarah Palin and Conservative Christians, and why Betty Friedan would refer to home makers as “feeble-minded.”

 

One of the reasons that the feminist movement has been so active in the gay rights movement is that it undermines the “patriarchal system” and gender identities. What gay marriage is saying, in its essence, is that there are no gender distinctions, whether you have an actual mother and father, father and father or mother and mother, it doesn’t matter. Gay marriage only furthered the agenda of the feminists to remove any gender distinctions.

 

So important is the removal of gender distinctions to this movement that Susan Okin, an academic theorist, envisioned a time when “one’s sex would have no more relevance than one’s eye color or the length of one’s toes.” No assumptions would be made about “male and “female” roles. It would be a future in which men and women participated in more or less equal numbers in every sphere of life, from infant care to different kinds of paid work to high-level politics.”

 

If you think this is an example cherry picked from the fringe of this movement, here are but a few examples (I can provide many more);

  • The Vancouver public now allows student to choose gender-neutral pronouns such as, “Xe,” “Xem” and “Xyr.”
  • California is in the process of allowing gay men to list themselves as “mother” (how adorable) on their child’s birth certificate.
  • NPR ran a story last year, called “Young People Push Back against Gender Categories,” I quote from the report, “They refuse to be limited by notions like male and female. ‘I want you to call me Tractor and use pronouns like zee, zim and zer.” Tracker? You can’t make this stuff up.

What Does This Mean For Latter-day Saints?

The Proclamation on the Family makes it clear “Gender is an essential characteristic of individual pre-mortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.” With indisputable evidence, not to mention, common sense, one has to “will” themselves to believe otherwise. In essence, Feminism is a rebellion against nature, against what is true. That is why it can be accurately called an ideology, a religion.

 

One of the worst things about this ideology is how it contaminates ones thinking. It leads a person to perceive threats where none exists. It becomes easy, almost natural to think of oneself as a victim. This may be the reason Kate Kelly perception that the church is an “institution that is fundamentally unequal, oppressive,” and demonstrates classic symptoms of a “very aggressive serial abuser.” There will come a time when we will need to make a choice of which way we face, because it is impossible to adhere to values thatare in-congruent. For this very reason, Elder Packer warned us of their danger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if you don't live in America, Canada has different values then America, the UK has different values, France, Germany, etc...

I agree with them in that I don't believe gender is predetermained in the pre-mortal existance if such a thing exists. While I think the other gender names sound a bit silly, it doesn't bother me at all.
Why should there be a "gender distinction" I certainly don't follow what it means to be a man most of the time, I collect dolls and dislike most sports and have really always been this way. There was no drive for me to like go out hunting or play football. It was never pushed on me I was simply allowed to like what I wanted, and that's what I chose.

What evidence to you have, you claim to have a lot of it...

Edited by Lakumi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if you don't live in America, Canada has different values then America, the UK has different values, France, Germany, etc...

I agree with them in that I don't believe gender is predetermained in the pre-mortal existance if such a thing exists. While I think the other gender names sound a bit silly, it doesn't bother me at all.

Why should there be a "gender distinction" I certainly don't follow what it means to be a man most of the time, I collect dolls and dislike most sports and have really always been this way. There was no drive for me to like go out hunting or play football. It was never pushed on me I was simply allowed to like what I wanted, and that's what I chose.

What evidence to you have, you claim to have a lot of it...

Did you read the talk ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you read the talk ??

Not totally sure where to find that, so was responding to what was written in the thread.

Don't feel its nessisary to read it to ponder gender roles and the values of different countries.

 

Was there a video of this... is it on one of the LDS' sites...What's a Church Coordinating Council anyways?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not totally sure where to find that, so was responding to what was written in the thread.

Don't feel its nessisary to read it to ponder gender roles and the values of different countries.

 

Was there a video of this... is it on one of the LDS' sites...What's a Church Coordinating Council anyways?

Go to LDS.org and search for it. Then read it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if you don't live in America, Canada has different values then America, the UK has different values, France, Germany, etc...

I agree with them in that I don't believe gender is predetermained in the pre-mortal existance if such a thing exists. While I think the other gender names sound a bit silly, it doesn't bother me at all.

Why should there be a "gender distinction" I certainly don't follow what it means to be a man most of the time, I collect dolls and dislike most sports and have really always been this way. There was no drive for me to like go out hunting or play football. It was never pushed on me I was simply allowed to like what I wanted, and that's what I chose.

What evidence to you have, you claim to have a lot of it...

You are painting with a broad brush about what it means to be a man. I follow only a couple of teams in sports, own many guns but don't hunt...to old to play football, I played basketball. I did hunt small game when a teenager, but never since. My guns are because I am a collector.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are painting with a broad brush about what it means to be a man. I follow only a couple of teams in sports, own many guns but don't hunt...to old to play football, I played basketball. I did hunt small game when a teenager, but never since. My guns are because I am a collector.

What do you think it means to be a man then?

I'm generally curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Hidden by pam, September 2, 2014 - No reason given
Hidden by pam, September 2, 2014 - No reason given

They're not dolls. They're action figures.

Share this post


Link to post

What do you think it means to be a man then?

I'm generally curious.

Along the lines of what makes a man, there are some fairly well defined characteristic differences. Such as natural muscle mass, bone density, hormonal differences, and even different brain areas light up to different stimulus. Theses physical difference, and hormonal differences are a factor in inherent behaviors between the genders. Some behaviour is societal, such as some expected gender roles, and some seem very much defined physically and spiritually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Getting back to the OP, I definitely agree that he was on to something. Those who feel they know better than the general authorities and don't listen to their counsel and warnings will regret it someday. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

 

In a talk given to the Church Coordinating Council in 1993, Elder Boyd K. Packer identified three areas that pose a serious threat to the spiritual welfare to the members of the church. He said, “The dangers I speak of come from the gay-lesbian movement, the feminist movement (both of which are relatively new), and the ever-present challenge from the so-called scholars or intellectuals.”

 

 

 

my emphasis

 

I'm celibate. Not because I consider there to be virtue in that, merely because that happens to suit where I am at, right now. I do not consider that I am less of a man, because I am celibate. But celibacy, when you think about it, is probably the extreme worst of all sexual predilictions. At least all the rest have something to do with sex. Anyway, I only state this lest anyone should think I have a particular axe to grind, on this issue.

 

If you're gay, or lesbian, it comes down a mere matter of the direction of your desires. These desires are independent of our volition. I could no more cease to admire an attractive woman than I could cease to feel hungry. Homosexuals, in my experience, are similar. I can't see the sin in integrity, in being how you are, rather than how conservative society thinks you ought to be. If you're bisexual, well, you have the entire population of the world to fall in love with, in the eros sense of the word, instead of just half of it. That has to have a society-welding functionality, when you think about it, given that our closest relationships tend to be our sexual ones. If you're trans-gender, or tempted that way, if your psychology mismatches your biology, well it strikes me that the obvious thing to do is fix it. Whether you choose to work on your psychology, or your biology, should be your own choice, I feel, and no one else's.

 

It should be clear, even from a brief survey, that gender and sexuality is not a binary matter. Even among heterosexual men, there are rigidly masculine men, and men who verge more to the camp and feminine. The same is true of heterosexual women, some tomboy, some girly. The same is true of homosexuals, male and female. There is, in short, a continuum of genders and sexualities. The sooner religion (and I mean all religions, I do not single out any for particular criticism), so allegedly wedded to truth, grows up and begins to deal with the world as it is, rather than the world as it wishes it to be, because it suits some congenial primitive theology or other, well, the sooner and easier we shall find it in our hearts to love all our neighbours as ourselves, in the agape sense of the word, however unconventionally different from our own way of being they might be.

 

Let the debate commence - too much agreement is so boring!

 

Best wishes, 2RM.

Edited by 2ndRateMind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was about to write up a lengthy reply to this, but my baby just woke up. So off I go to take care of him, just like I do most weekdays. And later I'll have to decide what I'm cooking for dinner. I should probably do laundry today too. I sure hope my masculinity doesn't get in the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was about to write up a lengthy reply to this, but my baby just woke up. So off I go to take care of him, just like I do most weekdays. And later I'll have to decide what I'm cooking for dinner. I should probably do laundry today too. I sure hope my masculinity doesn't get in the way.

I could kiss you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. The sooner religion (and I mean all religions, I do not single out any for particular criticism), so allegedly wedded to truth, grows up and begins to deal with the world as it is, rather than the world as it wishes it to be, because it suits some congenial primitive theology or other, well, the sooner and easier we shall find it in our hearts to love all our neighbours as ourselves, however unconventionally different from our own way of being they might be.

 

Let the debate commence - too much agreement is so boring!

 

Best wishes, 2RM.

 

 

I believe your statement to fall victim to the confusion everyone seems to have with thinking that "love" and "acceptance" are the same thing. It is completely possible to love one's neighbours while disapproving of their decisions and even their actions. If you doubt this possibility to love another human being while not fully accepting everything they do, I suggest you talk to a parent with teenagers... most will wish the teenager would change something about themselves and yet still love them.

 

If your neighbour has a genetic predisposition toward ingesting cyanide or simply chooses to it doesn't really matter, the result is the same. To actually care for such an individual would not involve accepting death by cyanide as inevitable, but by supporting them to avoid it. Acceptance is not always so loving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my emphasis

 

If you're gay, or lesbian, it comes down a mere matter of the direction of your desires. These desires are independent of our volition.

To clarify, not to put words in your mouth, do you believe that someone who professes to be gay or lesbian does not have any control over those thoughts and desires? At what point are such desires instilled in a person?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To clarify, not to put words in your mouth, do you believe that someone who professes to be gay or lesbian does not have any control over those thoughts and desires? At what point are such desires instilled in a person?

 

This question always baffels me as it shows an inability to quite understand what's going on.  "When are such desires instilled/" The answer comes back to a similar question for others " when were the same desires instilled in you?"  Can people pin point exactly when they start noticing attraction?  Can they pinpoint what started the desires they have?  Does it start with puberty, or with your first crush, or somewhere before or after?

 

As for control, it comes back to the same idea, the level of control is the same as with others.  To what extent can others control their thoughts and desires?  Can it be ignored or turned off?  It can be, but it's just as hard as it is for others.  Can it be changed?  Suggest they idea of being in a sexual realtionship with a man to most of the men on this site and ask for their gut reaction and that will tell you their ability to change their desires.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This question always baffels me as it shows an inability to quite understand what's going on.  "When are such desires instilled/" The answer comes back to a similar question for others " when were the same desires instilled in you?"  Can people pin point exactly when they start noticing attraction?  Can they pinpoint what started the desires they have?  Does it start with puberty, or with your first crush, or somewhere before or after?

 

As for control, it comes back to the same idea, the level of control is the same as with others.  To what extent can others control their thoughts and desires?  Can it be ignored or turned off?  It can be, but it's just as hard as it is for others.  Can it be changed?  Suggest they idea of being in a sexual realtionship with a man to most of the men on this site and ask for their gut reaction and that will tell you their ability to change their desires.

Let's start by clarifying some misunderstood vocabulary. The word "instill" means a gradual, drop by drop process. My question does not ask for a pin point. It is purposely and politely vague so I can find out what the author of the OP thinks, without restricting their answer to a specific point in time.

To answer your question- yes, I can tell you the approximate period of time when "desires" were instilled upon me.

As for the control of such desires, I am asking the author what they think about it. I have my opinion based on my own experience and study. I want to know if the author feels that people with same gender attraction have no control over what they feel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder why Elder Packer didn't include pornography. I think that's a bigger (as in more wide spread)  danger to spirituality than intellectualism.

To me, pornography is less terminal to spirituality than intellectualism. Intellectualistic concepts tend to lead to apostasy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this