Interesting MoTab guest conductor

[Grunt]

1 minute ago, bytebear said:

It was discouraged before the priesthood ban was lifted. 

 

Irrelevant to my point.  

[bytebear]

Not really.   There were certain decisions and actions that precluded you from temple blessings.  Yet, we didn't discourage full fellowship with minorities, and in fact, worked very hard to encourage participation where they could.  All sorts of decisions will diminish your gospel blessings, but we don't demand the world conform to our gospel standards.  Instead we befriend all people, and hope that our friendship will influence others to make good decisions.  I think sometimes we forget that even those fighting against gospel standards are still children of God. 

[zil]

25 minutes ago, Grunt said:

Is the church reaching out to, giving money to, and publicizing relationships with poly organizations?  

To what LGBT organization is the Church giving money?  When, and how much?

[zil]

grrr

Edited June 28, 2018 by zil

[Grunt]

22 minutes ago, bytebear said:

Not really.   There were certain decisions and actions that precluded you from temple blessings.  Yet, we didn't discourage full fellowship with minorities, and in fact, worked very hard to encourage participation where they could.  All sorts of decisions will diminish your gospel blessings, but we don't demand the world conform to our gospel standards.  Instead we befriend all people, and hope that our friendship will influence others to make good decisions.  I think sometimes we forget that even those fighting against gospel standards are still children of God. 

It IS irrelevant to my point.  My point has nothing to do with fellowshipping with sinners.  We are to fellowship with sinners. 

[Grunt]

14 minutes ago, zil said:

To what LGBT organization is the Church giving money?  When, and how much?

Not really caring enough to go and research information, off the top of my head there was a concert discussed here and The Men's Event in Boston last winter.  How much is irrelevant.

[Overwatch]

7 hours ago, Grunt said:

Personally, all this courting of the LGBT community has me concerned.  

So what do you guys think is going to happen when we [NEVER] acknowledge homosexual unions as being holy?

I kind of see it as giving false hope. I can see from both sides "Maybe being nice to the "gays" will let them feel the light of Christ and then they can repent and be clean",  perhaps. "Um, us being all buddy-buddy with the homosexuals may blow up in our face when they realize we will Never allow them to be sealed together" yeah, I can see this happening too.

At this point maybe I should just buy some heavily tinted glasses and spf 10 Billion sunscreen as I am sure a meteor is making its way to us.  Lol

There is a wickedness that has spread over the land. I have begun speaking with all my advisers: Health, Financial, Marital (yes, I keep up my fitness by speaking with other professionals) about their personal lives. Most hesitate but eventually open up; I have found that EVERY last one of them is divorced. Even the marriage counselor.  [non of them are LDS if you are wondering. I don't do business with members just in case I ever need to recoup lost funds for bad service] I hope there is time to get this sinking ship back up and running. Reestablish strong families in country. The madness is thick. 

Edited June 28, 2018 by Overwatch

[zil]

6 minutes ago, Grunt said:

Not really caring enough to go and research information, off the top of my head there was a concert discussed here and The Men's Event in Boston last winter.  How much is irrelevant.

I know nothing about "The Men's Event".  For this concert, it wouldn't be the Church taking tithing and giving it to the other choir, it would be participating with them, which might cause the event to to raise more money, some of which went to the other participants.  (At least, that's how it appears.)  I distinguish because I highly doubt the tithes would be given directly to anyone doing things contrary to Church teachings (could be wrong, it's not like I have an in).

(And I'm not dismissing one or the other, I'm trying to find out what you know that I don't, and to understand your perspective.  And yes, I understand the distinction you're making (and that other people in this thread don't appear to be understanding (yet?)).  My default position is that these decisions are above my pay grade.  I can understand benefits that would come from them.  I can imagine problems that would come from them.  Their "rightness" in the eternal scheme of things is for someone else to figure out.)

[Vort]

Consider the following people who identify themselves primarily or largely by sinful practices:

• An open pedophile, e.g. a member of NAMBLA
• A polygamist spokesman for the southern Utah fundamentalists
• A representative of a polyamory group
• The president of the National Abortion Rights Action League
• The CEO of a large cigarette company

Which of these individuals would be publicly invited and welcomed to conduct the Mormon Tabernacle Choir?

Why the difference?

[Overwatch]

2 minutes ago, Vort said:

Consider the following people who identify themselves primarily or largely by sinful practices:

• An open pedophile, e.g. a member of NAMBLA
• A polygamist spokesman for the southern Utah fundamentalists
• A representative of a polyamory group
• The president of the National Abortion Rights Action League
• The CEO of a large cigarette company

Which of these individuals would be publicly invited and welcomed to conduct the Mormon Tabernacle Choir?

Why the difference?

Stop making sense 

C; 

[bytebear]

When the church had restrictions for black members, it was a real trial for the leaders and the members.  How can you have a gospel restriction while at the same time not allowing bigotry and hatred to filter in?   I trust the leaders of the church to make the tough cultural outreach choices that members may find offensive.  I trust their love over your fear.

[Overwatch]

@bytebear

Feel free to trust in the arm of flesh. No one is stopping you. 

I am going to watch how this plays out and adjust accordingly. As of right now I am watching the leaders decisions, maybe they have a plan, maybe they will screw up. We'll see.

Even Joseph, who I hold in high esteem, went hunting for gold at one point and found none. If Brother Joseph can err anyone one of the brethren can. You rebuke our "fear", I rebuke your assumption. 

It's okay to be open minded, just don't have it open so wide your brain falls out. 

Edited June 28, 2018 by Overwatch

[BeccaKirstyn]

20 minutes ago, Vort said:

Consider the following people who identify themselves primarily or largely by sinful practices:

• An open pedophile, e.g. a member of NAMBLA
• A polygamist spokesman for the southern Utah fundamentalists
• A representative of a polyamory group
• The president of the National Abortion Rights Action League
• The CEO of a large cigarette company

Which of these individuals would be publicly invited and welcomed to conduct the Mormon Tabernacle Choir?

Why the difference?

3/5 of these examples are illegal under US law, so I don't think those are fair comparisons (assuming polyamory is in the context of polyamorous marriages)

 

Edited June 28, 2018 by BeccaKirstyn

[estradling75]

16 minutes ago, Vort said:

Consider the following people who identify themselves primarily or largely by sinful practices:

• An open pedophile, e.g. a member of NAMBLA
• A polygamist spokesman for the southern Utah fundamentalists
• A representative of a polyamory group
• The president of the National Abortion Rights Action League
• The CEO of a large cigarette company

Which of these individuals would be publicly invited and welcomed to conduct the Mormon Tabernacle Choir?

Why the difference?

Anyone of them who had a large enough focus on music that one could say that they were a musician/conductor...  rather then defining them by their sin...

We use labels as a shorts cut all the time... but people are more then just the label of their SIN... (even if they wear it with pride).  God sees them as his children... the members of his church should as well...  And that means looking for chances to build bridges through acceptable shared interests (say like through music) rather then digging moats because we will only define them by their chosen sin.

 

 

[lostinwater]

1 minute ago, estradling75 said:

Anyone of them who had a large enough focus on music that one could say that they were a musician/conductor...  rather then defining them by their sin...

We use labels as a shorts cut all the time... but people are more then just the label of their SIN... (even if they wear it with pride).  God sees them as his children... the members of his church should as well...  And that means looking for chances to build bridges through acceptable shared interests (say like through music) rather then digging moats because we will only define them by their chosen sin.

Beautifully said, @estradling75

 

[zil]

23 minutes ago, Vort said:

Consider the following people who identify themselves primarily or largely by sinful practices:

• An open pedophile, e.g. a member of NAMBLA
• A polygamist spokesman for the southern Utah fundamentalists
• A representative of a polyamory group
• The president of the National Abortion Rights Action League
• The CEO of a large cigarette company

Which of these individuals would be publicly invited and welcomed to conduct the Mormon Tabernacle Choir?

Why the difference?

It's a good and fair question.  And since I don't know the answer, I classify the decision above my pay grade.  Is MoTab running rogue?  Did the Lord himself instruct for this sort of thing to be done?  Beats me.

But maybe @estradling75 has the answer.

[bytebear]

18 minutes ago, Overwatch said:

@bytebear

Feel free to trust in the arm of flesh. No one is stopping you. 

I am going to watch how this plays out and adjust accordingly. As of right now I am watching the leaders decisions, maybe they have a plan, maybe they will screw up. We'll see.

Even Joseph, who I hold in high esteem, went hunting for gold at one point and found none. If Brother Joseph can err anyone one of the brethren can. You rebuke our "fear", I rebuke your assumption. 

It's okay to be open minded, just don't have it open so wide your brain falls out. 

I am trusting the leaders of the church who arranged this event. 

[Grunt]

2 hours ago, zil said:

 

(And I'm not dismissing one or the other, I'm trying to find out what you know that I don't, and to understand your perspective.  And yes, I understand the distinction you're making (and that other people in this thread don't appear to be understanding (yet?)).  My default position is that these decisions are above my pay grade.  I can understand benefits that would come from them.  I can imagine problems that would come from them.  Their "rightness" in the eternal scheme of things is for someone else to figure out.)

 

This is why I said early that I didn't want to argue about it.  I just stated how I felt and why I felt that way.  I sustain the church leaders.  

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, Grunt said:

This is why I said early that I didn't want to argue about it. 

That doesn't work on the internet, pal. 😉

[Grunt]

1 hour ago, estradling75 said:

because we will only define them by their chosen sin.

 

And yet they define themselves by their sin.

[BeccaKirstyn]

2 minutes ago, Grunt said:

And yet they define themselves by their sin.

I mean...I do agree with this. Even though they don't see it as a sin. But it is still a label of sexuality which I've always found very odd. 

Edited June 28, 2018 by BeccaKirstyn

[Grunt]

1 minute ago, BeccaKirstyn said:

I mean...I do agree with this. Even though they don't see it as a sin. But it is still a label of sexuality which I've always found very odd. 

It's not odd at all.  Why do we call ours the "Mormon Tabernacle Choir"?  It's branding and outreach.  We constantly talk about educating our communities about who we are and conducting outreach.  They are doing the same thing.  It's one of the reasons I have an issue with it.  We're supporting it.  How much press did this get?  How many of our own youth are well helping normalize homosexuality with?  

Regardless, I guess we'll see how it turns out.  

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, Grunt said:

It's not odd at all.  Why do we call ours the "Mormon Tabernacle Choir"?  It's branding and outreach.  We constantly talk about educating our communities about who we are and conducting outreach.  They are doing the same thing.  It's one of the reasons I have an issue with it.  We're supporting it.  How much press did this get?  How many of our own youth are well helping normalize homosexuality with?  

Regardless, I guess we'll see how it turns out.  

I'd like to see a study about that. How LDS youth view homosexuality compared to the older generation of LDS. 

Edited June 28, 2018 by MormonGator

[Grunt]

Just now, MormonGator said:

I'd like to see a study about that. How LDS youth view homosexuality compared to the older generation of LDS. 

I'd be willing to bet they don't view it as poorly as my generation does.  The LGBT community has done a great job of normalizing their sin.

[estradling75]

9 minutes ago, Grunt said:

And yet they define themselves by their sin.

They do... but we have taken Christ as our example and as hard as it is we should be better then that