Same sex marriage support

[anatess2]

 

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I said "wrong-headed", not bad.

And I said it is not.  Not in the current American political climate.

 

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Well...yes.

It is not.  A family, for example, is the foundation of every society and they are Socialist.

 

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

You're the one using the wrong terms to mean the wrong things now. "The left" is not liberal and "the right" is not conservative -- not any more.

I never mentioned anything about the Left or the Right.  I only mentioned the liberals and the conservatives.

 

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

But a third wrong doesn't make a right either.

And that's what I've been trying to tell you.  A philosophy is only wrong when applied out of its usefulness.  We started the conversation with me challenging your negative connotation of a Political Philosophy as a general ideology and not as it is applied.  Libertarianism, like most other Political Philosophies is neither good nor bad.  There are no perfect Political Philosophies unless we're talking about the True Church led by Christ Himself.  All Political Philosophies are, therefore, flawed.  But Political Philosophies become good or bad as it is applied.

I do not believe that injecting Libertarian principles into today's American political climate is a bad thing.  As a matter of fact, I believe that a Libertarian win will correct the muck that it is currently in.  And no, Gary Johnson was no libertarian in the same manner that Trump is no conservative.

 

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

My honest political philosophy -- we're doomed.

Well yeah, because you said this:

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I don't do politics.

 

Edited August 16, 2017 by anatess2

[Anddenex]

1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

Exactly. If you think the government can force you to be virtuous you don't really understand how governments work.  

Here we find a catch 22 that is so often missed. The government can't force anyone to be anything; although, the government can indeed punish for breaking laws and the government is able to create new laws.

Murder is a moral issue. The government is not able force anyone from murdering their fellowmen, but they can sure place heavy consequence on someone who murders. So I find the argument of "the government can't force you to do anything" similar to "God can't force you to do anything."

Although God is not able to force any of his children to be moral he does try to move his servants to prevent a decay in morality, even through proper channels of government (Prop 8 rings a bell).

[zil]

54 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Yup. I was so naive in my younger days. I actually thought conservatives were in favor of small government and liberals were actually tolerant!

I think you are both confusing "conservative" with "republican" - though I suppose any more, the word "conservative" has been redefined as synonymous with "republican" and we can no more discuss them separately. <sigh>

[Guest MormonGator]

12 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

Here we find a catch 22 that is so often missed. The government can't force anyone to be anything; although, the government can indeed punish for breaking laws and the government is able to create new laws.

Murder is a moral issue. The government is not able force anyone from murdering their fellowmen, but they can sure place heavy consequence on someone who murders. So I find the argument of "the government can't force you to do anything" similar to "God can't force you to do anything."

Although God is not able to force any of his children to be moral he does try to move his servants to prevent a decay in morality, even through proper channels of government (Prop 8 rings a bell).

I agree totally. 

Just for the record, I'm not an anarchist. I'm one of the few libertarians who supports the death penalty. I think the government has every right to punish people who break the law, and God also has every right to punish people who break His law. However justice delayed in not justice denied-and the punishment of God has to wait for the afterlife. 

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

 

And I said it is not.  Not in the current American political climate.

 

It is not.  A family, for example, is the foundation of every society and they are Socialist.

 

I never mentioned anything about the Left or the Right.  I only mentioned the liberals and the conservatives.

 

And that's what I've been trying to tell you.  A philosophy is only wrong when applied out of its usefulness.  We started the conversation with me challenging your negative connotation of a Political Philosophy as a general ideology and not as it is applied.  Libertarianism, like most other Political Philosophies is neither good nor bad.  There are no perfect Political Philosophies unless we're talking about the True Church led by Christ Himself.  All Political Philosophies are, therefore, flawed.  But Political Philosophies become good or bad as it is applied.

I do not believe that injecting Libertarian principles into today's American political climate is a bad thing.  As a matter of fact, I believe that a Libertarian win will correct the muck that it is currently in.  And no, Gary Johnson was no libertarian in the same manner that Trump is no conservative.

 

Well yeah, because you said this:

 

You're so full you yourself that you can't see past your own blindness to what I'm actually saying, and you have to turn everything into an insult without understanding what I'm even saying. I will no longer discuss these things with you.

[Grunt]

1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

I agree totally. 

Just for the record, I'm not an anarchist. I'm one of the few libertarians who supports the death penalty. I think the government has every right to punish people who break the law, and God also has every right to punish people who break His law. However justice delayed in not justice denied-and the punishment of God has to wait for the afterlife. 

I support the death penalty in some cases, but not out of punishment.  I look at it as a matter of practicality.  Someone has done something so egregious that they can no longer function within a society.  Is it fair to make society support them to keep themselves safe?  Not in my opinion.

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

You're so full you yourself that you can't see past your own blindness to what I'm actually saying, and you have to turn everything into an insult without understanding what I'm even saying. I will no longer discuss these things with you.

Wow.  There was ZERO intention of insult in that post.  AT ALL.  If you feel I didn't understand you, then point it out.   But yeah, you can go get offended if you like.  That's your problem. 

Edited August 16, 2017 by anatess2

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, Grunt said:

I support the death penalty in some cases, but not out of punishment.  I look at it as a matter of practicality.  Someone has done something so egregious that they can no longer function within a society.  Is it fair to make society support them to keep themselves safe?  Not in my opinion.

I don't support the death penalty.  I don't believe there is a person so bad that they are out of reach of the right to life and redemption.  If there's such a person, then it would require Jesus himself (or His authorized prophet) to judge him as such.

Yes, my husband and I can argue about the death penalty non-stop on a drive from Florida to Maine.  It's one of our major disagreements.  Oh, and how Michael Jackson is not a pedophile.

Edited August 16, 2017 by anatess2

[anatess2]

7 minutes ago, Armin said:

In my opinion the death penalty is not for punishing a person for the murders he did, not even an act of deterrent, but for vengeance of the relatives or parents of the victims of his abominable deed and for their peace of mind. And vengeance, this is my absolutely belief, is legitimate. I would do everything for the right of those parents to be the witnesses of an execution of a murderer of their child sentenced to die in the electric chair. Lethal injection is some kind of mercy.

Well, vengeance is not a legitimate reason.  Vengeance is a usurpation of God's authority.  When man usurps God's authority for justice, vengeance becomes hate.   As a matter of fact, Jesus specifically taught against it in Deuteronomy 32:35, Matthew 5:39, and Romans 12:19.

I, personally, would not dishonor the memory of my own child by participating in the death of his murderer unless directed so by Jesus Christ.

Edited August 16, 2017 by anatess2

[anatess2]

16 minutes ago, Armin said:

It is. And it's not an usurpation of God's authority, because God has created us in his character. There is something like divine wrath transformed on men, and I can't see any reason why it shouldn't be legitimate. The BoM, by the way, is full of examples. I'm not a friend of "hit my cheek and rape my daughter" and do it again and I will stand still. No. You are a supporter of a post modern looking at Christianity as a weak and always forgiving doctrine. It's not absolutely wrong, but I strongly believe that it's legitimate not to forgive when you are in harmony with God not to forgive. Leave me alone with all that "God hates the sin but he loves the sinner"... The sinner creates the sin, and how should a sinner be of any worth for God, if there were billions of righteous...? Why should one sinner be more worth than the righteous only if he repents...? I think this is a devilish standpoint, created by a fallen church, just to let the greatest ursupators of God one door open. A false doctrine. Who can't bear the grilling, shouldn't have done the killing. Period.

The Old Testament and the BoM are full of examples of GOD ordering the death of people.  There are no examples of people ordering deaths of people without God's instruction and being held as righteous examples. As a matter of fact, that's how the old wars were fought - people consider themselves as instruments of God which is the reason they wage war.

Not engaging in vengeance doesn't mean you stand still while somebody rapes your daughter.  It is NOT legitimate not to forgive.  We are to forgive 70 times 7 times.  Those who do not forgive - even when in the right - God will not forgive.  All people are children of God and are precious.  They are precious so much so that God leaves the 99 to rescue the 1 lost sheep.  They are so precious that he brings out the best robes and orders a feast for the prodigal son.

 

 

Edited August 16, 2017 by anatess2

[anatess2]

Just now, Armin said:

 

Who will say it's not legitimate not to forgive? And why to forgive 70 times 7 times? That appears to be nonsense to me. It makes 490, and what about the 491's time? Than you wouldn't have to forgive, because it's the fourhundredandninetyone's time...? What a strange mathematics. And God won't forgive even when in the right? But the sinner will be forgiven instead of a righteous? You're talking about "lost sheep" as if they were poor and harmless sheep that came off the way - no, murderers, torturers, criminals and inhuman creaturers. Call them by their name and don't tell stories of pour sheep. this is not a kindergarten. It's the fairytale of a fallen church.

Okay.  Here.  Read this.  The whole chapter.

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/nt/matt/18?lang=eng

 

[anatess2]

9 minutes ago, Armin said:

Not  a  single  line,  lady. Who needs a yellowed scripture when he's in harmony with the Almighty?

You!  Before somebody thinks you're neo-Nazi!  Save yourself! 

 

[anatess2]

Just now, Armin said:

Believe what you want, lady of the "'#Alt-Left". Be assured you don't even know what you're talking about. God with you, poor spirit.

Oh no... I'm no alt-left.  Nor alt-right.  Nor alt-center.  But I might support an alt-ctrl-del of Angela Merkel policies.  And a bible smacking for you.  

 

[anatess2]

1 minute ago, Armin said:

Support who you want. There are elections here in September, and I'm not only a supporter of a new party called AfD. And I'm a supporter of the president of the United States Donald Trump. And I and my family and friends adore him. God with him. And God bless America and those ones who love America. Times are gonna change.

I take back the bible smacking!  Anybody who supports and adores Donald Trump is a friend of mine!  Okay, except for racists and neo-nazis and those people...

Times are changing!  September will be a test!

[anatess2]

2 minutes ago, Armin said:

Not to forget the violent antifa in the US, the left wing anarchists, those ones who cowardly defile memorials in Virginia and the racists against the white. You see, we're in full harmony.

Whoa!  I'm gonna forgive you for not reading your bible. 

 

[The Folk Prophet]

3 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Wow.  There was ZERO intention of insult in that post.  AT ALL.  If you feel I didn't understand you, then point it out.   But yeah, you can go get offended if you like.  That's your problem. 

I'm not offended. I'm simply not interested in having a discussion with someone who draws false assumptions about every little thing I say and then attempts to rip me a new one by tearing apart said strawmen. You are lumping me in with all other "Americans" and presuming my political views, which, frankly, you know nothing about except that I consider libertarian-ism a flawed ideology. And you draw from that a presumption about all my other ideas -- as if because I'm "American" I can't comprehend the difference between classical liberalism and conservatism and how that idea relates to the current understanding of those terms. You presume that because you have a bit of education about these classical ideas that you have some higher understanding and your responses in political matter consistently, therefore, come across as nothing but patronizing like you're impatient with dealing with stupid Americans.

If you can't understand how saying that my statement "I don't do politics" is why we're doomed is an insult it only further proves the impasse. You don't even get how you're being condescending to me.

 

Edit: Seriously...it's like you didn't even bother to consider why I said what I said, what I meant by it, how it relates to the topic at hand, or where the thought comes from and you just attack. How is this a useful conversation to me then?

Edited August 16, 2017 by The Folk Prophet

[Suzie]

12 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

In my opinion one who supports same sex marriage supports the destruction of the family and mocks God by supporting an immoral practice that is in opposition to everything God stands for. One cannot possibly be a true disciple of Christ who openly support a practice that if left unrepented will lead one to hell.

Good thing all of this is just your opinion.

I say this because if it is indeed true that someone cannot be a "true disciple of Christ" and support gay marriage, then all those members who do support it shouldn't have temple recommends (and as members we know exactly how important and sacred temple recommends are. They are certainly not given to any and all members).So If the Church agrees with your take, I believe by now they should have released a statement saying that those who support gay marriage cannot hold a Temple Recommend. However, they haven't.

For me, that alone speaks volumes. 

In another note, I just saw that the Church released a statement of support for LGBTQ concert event:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865686887/LDS-Church-issues-statement-of-support-for-LGBTQ-concert-event.html

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, Armin said:

It was in North Carolina. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uZXKOdTjQE

She's been taken in custody now. Where she belongs to, I hope for many, many years. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOHNQTltbtY

PS... forgive what you like. Anyway, you seem to forgive everything.

 

70 times 7 times, baby! 

 

[anatess2]

23 minutes ago, Suzie said:

Good thing all of this is just your opinion.

I say this because if it is indeed true that someone cannot be a "true disciple of Christ" and support gay marriage, then all those members who do support it shouldn't have temple recommends (and as members we know exactly how important and sacred temple recommends are. They are certainly not given to any and all members).So If the Church agrees with your take, I believe by now they should have released a statement saying that those who support gay marriage cannot hold a Temple Recommend. However, they haven't.

For me, that alone speaks volumes. 

In another note, I just saw that the Church released a statement of support for LGBTQ concert event:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865686887/LDS-Church-issues-statement-of-support-for-LGBTQ-concert-event.html

I betcha you and Rob do not use "support" in the same context.

[Itsme_cody]

SSM is 100% contrary to God and the gospel. The idea and practice of same sex marriage is not from God and opposes His work and glory of bringing to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. Same Sex Marriage is an idea and practice from the father of lies, Satan himself, used to confuse and detract one of the greatest doctrines of our true identity as sons and daughters of our Heavenly Father. You can not love God and Mammon.

I think every person on earth should be treated as the 1 lost sheep out of 99. Every individual is of great worth and should be sought after. When the adulteress was brought before Jesus Christ he did not support what she did BUT he did support her by standing up for HER and not what she did.

On my mission I met a man who had certain complications at birth. He had male parts and female parts. After he was baptized he wanted to receive the priesthood and pass the sacrament. The Bishop had to take his case the General authorities. They permitted and he was able to  receive the priesthood and pass the sacrament.  Because of the fall of Adam and Eve our bodies are not perfect and some people receive feelings of homosexual attraction and transgenderism. Let the leaders of the church instruct the situational matters in individuals lives.

As followers of Christ we must testify of the doctrine of our true identity as children of God. 

"True doctrine, understood, changes attitudes and behavior.

“The study of the doctrines of the gospel will improve behavior quicker than a study of behavior will improve behavior. ... That is why we stress so forcefully the study of the doctrines of the gospel” - Boyd K Packer

There is nothing enlightening about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you.

Edited August 17, 2017 by Itsme_cody

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, Suzie said:

Good thing all of this is just your opinion.

I say this because if it is indeed true that someone cannot be a "true disciple of Christ" and support gay marriage, then all those members who do support it shouldn't have temple recommends (and as members we know exactly how important and sacred temple recommends are. They are certainly not given to any and all members).So If the Church agrees with your take, I believe by now they should have released a statement saying that those who support gay marriage cannot hold a Temple Recommend. However, they haven't.

For me, that alone speaks volumes. 

In another note, I just saw that the Church released a statement of support for LGBTQ concert event:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865686887/LDS-Church-issues-statement-of-support-for-LGBTQ-concert-event.html

Well, its kind of up to bishops and stake presedencies on interpreting case by case each situation. I will stand firm though in stating same sex marriages are a gross abomination.

[Suzie]

3 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

Well, its kind of up to bishops and stake presedencies on interpreting case by case each situation. I will stand firm though in stating same sex marriages are a gross abomination.

I have no issue with you stating your opinion.

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

I betcha you and Rob do not use "support" in the same context.

Im big on semantics. If a person supports something it means they uphold it, they defend it as what they believe is right, and it also means that they promote it. That is the very definition of "support".

[Rob Osborn]

7 minutes ago, Suzie said:

I have no issue with you stating your opinion.

It wont be my opinion that bars one from heaven. Im not just basing an opinion here, Im echoing the truth. That truth will bar one from heaven.

[Suzie]

3 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

It wont be my opinion that bars one from heaven. Im not just basing an opinion here, Im echoing the truth. That truth will bar one from heaven.

Again, those in authority seem to have an issue with your opinion about those who support gay marriage not being "true disciples of Christ". It is definitely your opinion so let's not pass it as fact.

If that was the case, they wouldn't hold a temple recommend (and leaders allowing this, knowing fully well how the members feels about this particular topic).The Church has not released any statement stating that those who are in support of gay marriage are not living according to the teachings of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. So please, let us be careful how we categorize our brothers and sisters who might think differently.

We are incapable to read minds and hearts, therefore (in my view) we should refrain from making statements such as who is a true disciple and who isn't. There are enough divisions in the world right now, we don't need more in the Church. Statements like that does more harm than good and to be honest I believe it goes against what the Church has been working on for so long... which is, trying to include ALL members and make them feel welcome even if they have disagreements.

As I stated earlier, If the Church and its leaders believe what you just stated, they would have said something by now. But instead, many active LDS members who support gay marriage hold temple recommends. I believe that fact alone speaks by itself. A member who holds a temple recommend means they are in good standing before the LORD.

Isn't that enough?

'Nuff said.

Edited August 17, 2017 by Suzie