bytebear Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Vort said: Not so. I doubt that the Mormon Tabernacle Choir leadership runs every decision past the First Presidency. They may well have gotten approval for this, but it's not obvious to me that they did. You're claiming he didn't know? I bet he gave a directive for it to happen. Next you'll be telling me he didn't authorize the gayandmormon.com website. Edited June 29, 2018 by bytebear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytebear Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 Just now, Overwatch said: You can be a part of Mo tab if you are having premarital sex? You can for special concerts as a guest performer or conductor. Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 Just now, Vort said: This is simply baloney. You cannot take another person's agency. Not possible. Even God cannot do that. The church defines it as, "Agency is the ability and privilege God gives us to choose and to act for ourselves." When someone rapes or abuses someone they are taking the persons ability to choose for themselves away from that person, therefore taking there agency from them, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overwatch Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 Just now, bytebear said: You can for special concerts as a guest performer or conductor. Yes. How do they know those guests are having premarital sex? Are they like wearing shirts or have a title stating they are fornicators? *side note, what if the CEO of a Porn Company asked to conduct the choir? carlimac 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytebear Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 You know what I think? I think the sin of abandoning your children is a greater sin, and I believe the church thinks so too, particularly those who's children were born in the covenant. And that is the crisis that is facing the church right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zil Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 4 minutes ago, miav said: He is saying having the thought or desire is not harmful. I think you're drawing an excessive conclusion there. I don't think he said this at all. But I'd have to go back and re-read to double check that and it's my bedtime (and I'm not sure it's worth the effort anyway). My primary point is that you seem to be taking what he said and tacking extra stuff that wasn't said onto the end of it. Presumable this is because it included the word "pedophilia". His comparison is perfectly valid, as is his point. And the point is made well enough even through the fact that no one agrees that the point is valid or comparable. SilentOne and Vort 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 5 minutes ago, MormonGator said: 6 minutes ago, Vort said: Not so. I doubt that the Mormon Tabernacle Choir leadership runs every decision past the First Presidency. They may well have gotten approval for this, but it's not obvious to me that they did. It is so-if he didn't want to happen, it wouldn't. Is it happening? If this happened without First Presidency approval, it's entirely possible President Nelson did not know about it. Or perhaps he did. Again, I am surprised, and I don't agree with the action, but I'm not complaining about it. I'm pointing out that those who voice disagreement ought not to be dismissed and their arguments hand-waved away, which (as you note) has already been done in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytebear Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 1 minute ago, Overwatch said: How do they know those guests are having premarital sex? Are they like wearing shirts or have a title stating they are fornicators? *side note, what if the CEO of a Porn Company asked to conduct the choir? I don't know. But I bet Jesus would attend. And I know that the Lord approved this event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zil Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 3 minutes ago, miav said: The church defines it as, "Agency is the ability and privilege God gives us to choose and to act for ourselves." When someone rapes or abuses someone they are taking the persons ability to choose for themselves away from that person, therefore taking there agency from them, No, they most definitely are not. You need to ponder longer on those words. Even imprisonment does not remove your agency. As far as I can tell, only mental incapacitation would do that. Vort and SilentOne 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 (edited) 26 minutes ago, bytebear said: 29 minutes ago, Vort said: Not so. I doubt that the Mormon Tabernacle Choir leadership runs every decision past the First Presidency. They may well have gotten approval for this, but it's not obvious to me that they did. You're claiming he didn't know? I bet he gave a directive for it to happen. Next you'll be telling me he didn't authorize the gayandmormon.com website. Are you actually that poor of a reader? Edited June 29, 2018 by Vort Overwatch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 2 minutes ago, zil said: and I'm not sure it's worth the effort anyway Then why comment at all? I'm not tacking anything on, just showing that the two are widely different and should not be compared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 5 minutes ago, miav said: The church defines it as, "Agency is the ability and privilege God gives us to choose and to act for ourselves." When someone rapes or abuses someone they are taking the persons ability to choose for themselves away from that person, therefore taking there agency from them, No, they are not. The rape/abuse victim can still choose for himself or herself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MormonGator Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 Just now, Vort said: If this happened without First Presidency approval, it's entirely possible President Nelson did not know about it. Disagree. If we are talking about, I'm 100% sure the first presidency has at least heard of the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zil Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 Just now, miav said: Then why comment at all? Cuz I can. 1 minute ago, miav said: I'm not tacking anything on, just showing that the two are widely different and should not be compared. From my perspective, you are amplifying what he wrote. The equivalent of he wrote a mole hill and you accused him of writing a mountain. Overwatch and Vort 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zil Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 1 minute ago, MormonGator said: Disagree. If we are talking about, I'm 100% sure the first presidency has at least heard of the issue. The question is whether they knew beforehand and approved it or whether MoTab is more autonomous than that. I have no idea which is the case. I could see it either way. Overwatch and SilentOne 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overwatch Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 6 minutes ago, bytebear said: You know what I think? I think the sin of abandoning your children is a greater sin, and I believe the church thinks so too, particularly those who's children were born in the covenant. And that is the crisis that is facing the church right now. Where did this come from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Vort said: No, they are not. The rape/abuse victim can still choose for himself or herself. At the moment of abuse, no they can not. You can not tell me that when a man is on top of a child abusing the child the child can choose to leave or can choose to say no. Therefore the child's ability to choose is taken from him. Edited June 29, 2018 by miav Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 4 minutes ago, bytebear said: But I bet Jesus would attend. The mind-reading continues, this time showing that bytebear can actually read GOD's mind. Impressive. Overwatch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytebear Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 Clearly the First Presidency is doing very deliberate outreach to the gay community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overwatch Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 5 minutes ago, bytebear said: I don't know. But I bet Jesus would attend. And I know that the Lord approved this event. Careful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlimac Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 (edited) 16 minutes ago, bytebear said: I bet they would do a concert with a well known celebrity with an active and somewhat promiscuous sex life. In fact, I can probably give examples. Yes but most concert goers wouldn't really know that. People don't really research into a person's sex life to determine if they are going to the concert or not. And most artists don't necessarily advertise their personal life before an event. But in this case the Gay Men's Choir proudly (oh that's bad) proclaims and advertises their sin. I'm not saying every member of their choir is active in the sin. I believe they accept heterosexual men into the choir, too. Another example- The Pro-Abortion Choir if there were such a thing. Would the MoTab reach a hand of fellowship there? Edited June 29, 2018 by carlimac Overwatch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytebear Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 Just now, Overwatch said: Where did this come from? It comes from a crisis within the church. Gay members are leaving. And it's pretty clear the church is making efforts to not shun them, and to keep them active and involved. At least that's the message I am reading from all of the church's activities of the last few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytebear Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 1 minute ago, Overwatch said: Careful You don't think Jesus hung out with whores? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 1 minute ago, miav said: At the moment of abuse, no they can not. You can not tell me that when a man is on top of a child abusing the child the child can choose to leave or can choose to say no. Actually, I can tell you that. But that's not what I'm saying. The fact that you don't understand that simple fact merely confirms my belief that you are incapable of nuanced discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overwatch Posted June 29, 2018 Report Share Posted June 29, 2018 (edited) 3 minutes ago, bytebear said: You don't think Jesus hung out with whores? I heard of him teaching publicans and sinners. Are you familiar with him "hanging out" with whores? Edited June 29, 2018 by Overwatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts