Isn’t this what we have been fighting for???

[Fether]

https://www.google.com/amp/fox13now.com/2018/06/21/utah-couple-says-foster-agency-denied-them-due-to-their-mormon-faith/amp/

I sympathize with their sadness, but some commenters on the Facebook page I read were absolutely furious and angry at the organization. My thought? “So it’s ok for us to cry religious freedom in not allowing same sex couples adopt from our adoption agency, but when it is done to us it isn’t ok?”

[Vort]

What I despair of seeing in the world is honesty and integrity. Of course, I'd like to see that from those who call themselves Saints, too. But it rankles when we are excoriated for "homophobia" (asinine word that it is), then on the other hand are openly discriminated against because we are too politically incorrect.

But the two-faced duplicity of the world is to be expected. The Lord condemned hypocrisy among the chosen people, but I don't remember him getting too upset about the hypocrisy of the Gentiles. It's almost as if he expected them to act like children of Perdition. It's those who claim to be followers of God that he expects to act better than mere animals. We should fight against such corruption, of course, but we should never be so naive as to be surprised when dogs act like dogs, bears act like bears, and fallen, wicked humans act like fallen, wicked humans.

Edited June 26, 2018 by Vort

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

6 hours ago, Fether said:

https://www.google.com/amp/fox13now.com/2018/06/21/utah-couple-says-foster-agency-denied-them-due-to-their-mormon-faith/amp/

I sympathize with their sadness, but some commenters on the Facebook page I read were absolutely furious and angry at the organization. My thought? “So it’s ok for us to cry religious freedom in not allowing same sex couples adopt from our adoption agency, but when it is done to us it isn’t ok?”

Very interesting, thanks for sharing.  I agree religious freedom is tricky, we want it for ourselves, but are we willing to accept it for others?  

[lostinwater]

Making decisions based on hyped-up sweeping, and mostly false generalizations is something just about all of us bristle at and engage in at the same time.  

Sadly, i don't think you can legislate/litigate away bias or bigotry.  The more you try, the worse it gets.  You just have to show people with kindness that you are not as evil as they were taught to believe.  Anything else just bounces off their 'armor' of righteous indignation.

[Fether]

30 minutes ago, lostinwater said:

Sadly, i don't think you can legislate/litigate away bias or bigotry

That shouldn’t even be the goal either. We live in a worksnif so many diverse ideas, religions, and cultures. As soon as we make a law enforcing the removal of biases, that opens the flood gates of forcing Christian cake makers to make satanic cakes in the name of equality. Otherwise moral Actors will be forced to play immoral roles that go against their beliefs, Christian adoption agencies will be forced to allow same sex couples and Mormons to adopt from their walls.

We must respect biases so that our own are not tampered with.

[estradling75]

10 hours ago, Fether said:

https://www.google.com/amp/fox13now.com/2018/06/21/utah-couple-says-foster-agency-denied-them-due-to-their-mormon-faith/amp/

I sympathize with their sadness, but some commenters on the Facebook page I read were absolutely furious and angry at the organization. My thought? “So it’s ok for us to cry religious freedom in not allowing same sex couples adopt from our adoption agency, but when it is done to us it isn’t ok?”

Honestly I have no problem with a business or agency choosing to withhold services for whatever reasons.  Which means I have no problem with an adoption agency that refuses service to Mormons and I have no problem with a Baker or Florist that refuses to do a gay wedding.

What I have a problem with is the hypocrisy (on either side).  Religion is a protected class just like Sexual orientation.  So those that are outraged by this but not by the baker or florist  Shame on you, Hypocrite.  For those that who are not outraged by this but where by the bakers and florist again shame on you, Hypocrite.

Of course I don't think this will be more then a blip on the news cycle and I doubt any lawsuits will happen... so Shame on those hypocritical groups too

[zil]

13 minutes ago, Fether said:

worksnif

[Sunday21]

1 hour ago, Fether said:

That shouldn’t even be the goal either. We live in a worksnif so many diverse ideas, religions, and cultures. As soon as we make a law enforcing the removal of biases, that opens the flood gates of forcing Christian cake makers to make satanic cakes in the name of equality. Otherwise moral Actors will be forced to play immoral roles that go against their beliefs, Christian adoption agencies will be forced to allow same sex couples and Mormons to adopt from their walls.

We must respect biases so that our own are not tampered with.

I hear you! Since becoming Lds, I live in a muddy moral world

Sometimes we try to force our views on others.

Sometimes others force their views on us.

Sigh! I try to be pleasant and hope that my liberal & conservative worlds don’t implode on each other!

[Overwatch]

That's unfortunate. Time for them to go to another agency to get Ukranian Foster kids.

I don't know if I could raise another person's kids...*side note. I borrowed my friend's son for a few days while they traveled (I have only daughters) I was ready to drop kick him to the moon after a few days. Mainly because he would crap his pants and roast in it for a bit before letting Queen change him... Also, I think the main heartbreak would be the day the angry words slipped out of their mouths "You aren't my real Dad!" I am not sure I could handle it. Not right now at least.

 

Edited June 28, 2018 by Overwatch

[Guest MormonGator]

6 hours ago, estradling75 said:

Honestly I have no problem with a business or agency choosing to withhold services for whatever reasons.  Which means I have no problem with an adoption agency that refuses service to Mormons and I have no problem with a Baker or Florist that refuses to do a gay wedding.

What I have a problem with is the hypocrisy (on either side).  Religion is a protected class just like Sexual orientation.  So those that are outraged by this but not by the baker or florist  Shame on you, Hypocrite.  For those that who are not outraged by this but where by the bakers and florist again shame on you, Hypocrite.

Of course I don't think this will be more then a blip on the news cycle and I doubt any lawsuits will happen... so Shame on those hypocritical groups too

My thoughts completely. 

[Sunday21]

https://www.ukrainianresourcecenter.com/about-us.html I think this is the website. I wonder why they don’t like us? Maybe they had a bad experience with a Mormon? Or they feel insulted by our views on biblical accuracy. 

Ukrainian Resource Center
112 Ewell Place
Williamsburg, VA 23188
[email protected]
Tel: (757) 206-2910

Virgina? 

Edited June 26, 2018 by Sunday21

[estradling75]

15 hours ago, Sunday21 said:

https://www.ukrainianresourcecenter.com/about-us.html I think this is the website. I wonder why they don’t like us?

The standard response is that Mormons are not Christian (or not real Christians)...   Because we do not believe in the trinity that is given in various Creeds which they take as the definition of Christ...  

[SpiritDragon]

22 hours ago, estradling75 said:

Honestly I have no problem with a business or agency choosing to withhold services for whatever reasons.  Which means I have no problem with an adoption agency that refuses service to Mormons and I have no problem with a Baker or Florist that refuses to do a gay wedding.

What I have a problem with is the hypocrisy (on either side).  Religion is a protected class just like Sexual orientation.  So those that are outraged by this but not by the baker or florist  Shame on you, Hypocrite.  For those that who are not outraged by this but where by the bakers and florist again shame on you, Hypocrite.

Of course I don't think this will be more then a blip on the news cycle and I doubt any lawsuits will happen... so Shame on those hypocritical groups too

I tend to agree. What I don`t like about this story is how far things went along letting the family get emotionally invested before pulling the rug out from under them at the last minute.

Quote

The couple worked with the center, filled out paperwork and raised all the money to cover the expenses to get the children to the U.S. But a day before the deadline, the family got a rejection letter.

I would much prefer an upfront honest policy of, ``we don`t allow Mormons to use our services`` so that people would know. It`s the same with the same-sex wedding cake business, I have no problem with a baker telling someone that they won`t make the cake, I do have a problem with them letting them believe they will make the cake and then at the last minute stating they won`t.

 

[Fether]

24 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:

I tend to agree. What I don`t like about this story is how far things went along letting the family get emotionally invested before pulling the rug out from under them at the last minute.

I would much prefer an upfront honest policy of, ``we don`t allow Mormons to use our services`` so that people would know. It`s the same with the same-sex wedding cake business, I have no problem with a baker telling someone that they won`t make the cake, I do have a problem with them letting them believe they will make the cake and then at the last minute stating they won`t.

 

I agree, but how would they let them know Mormon’s could t adopt? And maybe they did but the family just didn’t see the signs.

In a lesser transaction, I once made an account for a Christian forum. Before hitting “submit” I glanced at the terms and conditions and it said that unless I met their standard of “christian”, I would only be allowed to post in the non-christian sections. I looked at their standard and one of the things said “I believe the doctrine of the trinity”. That their disqualified me so I backed out of the process.

I assume their may have been something like that. I’m sure they had some spot where it said “You must have these beliefs”. They probably didn’t want a big sign that said “no Mormons, Muslims, Gays, Drunks, Athiests, Agnostics, or any other dirty heathen”.

Edited June 27, 2018 by Fether

[SpiritDragon]

9 hours ago, Fether said:

I agree, but how would they let them know Mormon’s could t adopt? And maybe they did but the family just didn’t see the signs.

In a lesser transaction, I once made an account for a Christian forum. Before hitting “submit” I glanced at the terms and conditions and it said that unless I met their standard of “christian”, I would only be allowed to post in the non-christian sections. I looked at their standard and one of the things said “I believe the doctrine of the trinity”. That their disqualified me so I backed out of the process.

I assume their may have been something like that. I’m sure they had some spot where it said “You must have these beliefs”. They probably didn’t want a big sign that said “no Mormons, Muslims, Gays, Drunks, Athiests, Agnostics, or any other dirty heathen”.

Yeah. what do you do? Because to actually state how they really feel would be politically incorrect and discriminating they have to try to hide it. Of course an adoption agency is going to discriminate, you can't give kids to just anyone. Now I may not agree that there would have been anything wrong with the family in question, but I agree with not only the right, but the duty of the agency to discriminate.

[Sunday21]

10 hours ago, SpiritDragon said:

I tend to agree. What I don`t like about this story is how far things went along letting the family get emotionally invested before pulling the rug out from under them at the last minute.

I would much prefer an upfront honest policy of, ``we don`t allow Mormons to use our services`` so that people would know. It`s the same with the same-sex wedding cake business, I have no problem with a baker telling someone that they won`t make the cake, I do have a problem with them letting them believe they will make the cake and then at the last minute stating they won`t.

 

I worry what such a policy would do..we won’t serve Jews, Muslims. The lds are strong, we can handle these unpleasant situations. We are incredibly blessed. But what about other religious groups? And what will the consequences be? Angry defensive young people who feel rejected by the mainstream? Do we need more hate?

[Fether]

14 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

I worry what such a policy would do..we won’t serve Jews, Muslims. The lds are strong, we can handle these unpleasant situations. We are incredibly blessed. But what about other religious groups? And what will the consequences be? Angry defensive young people who feel rejected by the mainstream? Do we need more hate?

Why can’t we just say “ok”, smile and leave? Policies that ban this would be far more dangerous than the current condition of the law

[SpiritDragon]

17 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

I worry what such a policy would do..we won’t serve Jews, Muslims. The lds are strong, we can handle these unpleasant situations. We are incredibly blessed. But what about other religious groups? And what will the consequences be? Angry defensive young people who feel rejected by the mainstream? Do we need more hate?

I can understand this perspective as well. I don't have the answers. I don't think forcing people to serve clientele they don't feel comfortable serving stops hate either though. As a service provider myself, I get concerned at the idea of not being able to refuse service to an individual for any reason by simply stating I don't think we're a good fit to work together. If a potential client chooses to access a different service provider after meeting with me they are welcome to do so, why should I not be afforded the same privilege to choose who I work with from my end?

[Sunday21]

26 minutes ago, Fether said:

Why can’t we just say “ok”, smile and leave? Policies that ban this would be far more dangerous than the current condition of the law

Yes I see your point. The lds will be fine. I hope that other religious groups will also be fine.

[Sunday21]

34 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:

I can understand this perspective as well. I don't have the answers. I don't think forcing people to serve clientele they don't feel comfortable serving stops hate either though. As a service provider myself, I get concerned at the idea of not being able to refuse service to an individual for any reason by simply stating I don't think we're a good fit to work together. If a potential client chooses to access a different service provider after meeting with me they are welcome to do so, why should I not be afforded the same privilege to choose who I work with from my end?

In Canada, you cannot discriminate based on the list of prohibited grounds: an official list of historically  disadvantaged groups. Eg race, country of origin...

I confess that I know employment law so I assume that commercial law is similar but due to legal precedent there may be some differences.   Long lecture. Everyone falls asleep.

But in employment law, other than prohibited grounds, feel free to discrimate. You can refuse to hire the smelly, the badly dressed, and people that you just don’t like. Maybe commercial law is similar? 

Edited June 28, 2018 by Sunday21

[SpiritDragon]

1 hour ago, Sunday21 said:

In Canada, you cannot discriminate based on the list of prohibited grounds: an official list of historically  disadvantaged groups. Eg race, country of origin...

I confess that I know employment law so I assume that commercial law is similar but due to legal precedent there may be some differences.   Long lecture. Everyone falls asleep.

But in employment law, other than prohibited grounds, feel free to discrimate. You can refuse to hire the smelly, the badly dressed, and people that you just don’t like. Maybe commercial law is similar? 

But what if it is an individual of minority ethnicity, color, religion etc. who also has bad breath and poor taste in clothes and shows up to the interview 15 minutes late who still insists they didn't get the job because of the former prohibited grounds and not the legally legitimate reasons? Can't they still make a lot of trouble?

On the flip side wouldn't a lot of discrimination be extremely difficult to ever prove simply by someone never calling anyone for an interview with a name like Rashad, Mohammed, or Tailfeathers?

If these antidiscrimination laws work as well as the laws that were supposed to protect my wife's job while on maternity leave they are useless.

[Sunday21]

@SpiritDragon

Right you are, the laws that are supposed to protect us often do not!

In Ontario, Complaining about discrimination starts by emailing the Ontario Rights Tribunal (Ort) so getting the process started is not that hard.  The kind of thing that they would consider are % of people in your group in the population vs percentage in the company. the ort people are quite nasty so the whole process is to be avoided. If you are medium size company in TO with very few Muslims and you never interview Muslims, this is a bad idea.

In General, the ort doesn’t bother investigating unless there is an opportunity to send a message. But if you are a medium sized company, we care.

The law is a blunt instrument. I beg people not to sue or put in complaints against their company. Doing so can really hurt your career!

Did a CBC interview today! Woohoo!

[SpiritDragon]

8 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

Did a CBC interview today! Woohoo!

That's pretty awesome! CBC radio or TV? Both? 1st time? was it intimidating?

Can you share links or does it destroy your anonymity and put you at risk or make you uncomfortable?

[Sunday21]

30 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:

That's pretty awesome! CBC radio or TV? Both? 1st time? was it intimidating?

Can you share links or does it destroy your anonymity and put you at risk or make you uncomfortable?

PM

Edited June 28, 2018 by Sunday21

[SpiritDragon]

19 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

I have over 45 interviews under my belt! Tv, radio. Cbc and then all kinds of big and little newspapers, radio, tv shows and once Readers Digest....but it is the kind of thing that I do when I am really meant to be writing academic papers. My boss wants more academic papers. I should really stop giving interviews but I find it fun! I am not going to provide a link for privacy. 

Excellent. I've only ever done small potatoes local TV interviews and I find them incredibly awkward. I completely understand the privacy issue.