Recommended Posts

Posted
Quote

Those in opposition claim that those in favor are well organized and have packed the council meeting with people who don’t live in the area and don’t have a stake in the development.

This is me, taking notes, so I'll know how to act when we start this process for the Colorado Springs temple.

- Be well organized.
- Pack the council meetings, even if I live 10-20 miles away from the eventual location that gets picked.
- Prepare to be characterized as someone without "a stake in the development".

I can do those things.  

Posted (edited)

This particular controversy was amusing to me because the current lot in its undeveloped, desert-y state appears (at least, from Google) to be a rather spectacular eyesore; and the landscaping of the nearby houses is pretty barren.

I’m sure the temple will employ some degree of xeriscaping, given its location; but it’s hard to imagine a temple doing anything but improving the aesthetic of the neighborhood.

Next time people raise phoney complaints like this, the Church should immediately concede and donate the proposed site to the city on the condition it be developed as high-density, low-income housing.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Posted

The wife and I were watching one particularly vengeful woman talking during the hearing.  And i remember my wife getting upset at the presenters words and vitriol.  And one point the woman recommended that we could worship in a tent. 

I could feel my wife’s irritation flare and I stated, “Boy is she going to be disappointed.”

My wife regained her composure and then hugged me fiercely.

Posted
6 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

We could, but I don’t think she’d like that either.

image.jpeg.37404bd87161123ef19116ff4642c88d.jpeg

“Sure, we can do the tent thing.  But there will be blood.  And smoke.  And the screeching of livestock having their throats slit.”

Posted

Over on Quora there was an individual who was spamming the site with angry posts claiming that the church was trying to "force" a temple into her town and that she was so very angry about us trying to "violate" the building ordinances and whatnot. 

Basically, the church was seeking a variance so that the steeple on a proposed temple in the area could be a bit taller than what local building codes allowed. But in her eyes, that variance request was somehow all the "evidence" she needed to "know" that we were basically imperialists who were going to demand that we get our way no matter what. 

Posted

It's more or less, always like this for every temple we build in the U.S..   And it's not even an LDS-specific thing.  Any time anyone tries to build anything anywhere, there will be people mad about it, who show up to public meetings and raise a stink.

I'm not really sure why this temple has made so much news, maybe it's the "Mormons in Sin City" aspect that generates clicks or whatever.  But it's always like this.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...