The mormons are a cult religion that was invented by Joseph Smith while he was working as a huckster in the traveling circus in upstate NY. Smith was later killed by a mob that attacked the jail he was being held in for crimes committed to advance his newly created religion. The religion now recruits extensively by sending out young men knocking door to door and otherwise chasing down anyone who might be vulnerable to cult membership. Kick the little bastards if they show up at your door.
You need to com down . How could you be born gay . If you was born a man ? If God wanted you to be a girl . Dont you think he would of made you a girl ? If God made you gay . Then he would be going against his own plan . God said that man was a lone . So im gonna create him a mate . So he made the woman . Why would God make the woman ? Why didnt he just make another man . And Allow a man to get pregnant by another man . But he did not . He made woman ?
@Collinguy6 there is nothing to be freak out about you know, we are regular people just like you. My love for the same sex is the same as your love of the opposite sex, we have the same hopes and dreams as everyone else. If its an eww factor that is fine, just understand what you might find gross we like, just like I have an eww factor when i think about kissing a guy, its not right for me, but if its right for other women, then who am i to judge that.
wow, what a brave man. hope he fully realizes how corrupt this church is and leaves it. going on 1 year since i left the mormon church and religion in general, and i couldnt be happier.
its something to speak about the just thing & then sit their silently awaiting for others to do somethg about it (worst if you're on the outside). this man is the epitome of courage for he spoke against an injustice (hatered as he said) about his church, at the church. moreover, he didnt cave-in when he was 'politely' told by the bishop (or certainly someone of high authority of the church) @1goatboy2004 as he say if u dont like gay marriage-dont get gay married; not rocket science-u haters
If the Bisopric wants to silence someone...how about all those noisy children. The only ward I was ever in that didn't have chattering, screaming, squealing, Cheerio-munching kids was a Singles ward. Singles wards are where they quarantine unmarried members and tell them the only way to get into heaven is to get married in the temple to a "worthy" church member of the OPPOSITE sex and make tons of babies.
Having been raised in the church, I am absolutely appalled that members of any congregation would attempt to silence an obviously heart-felt testimony in progress. That flies in the face of everything I was ever taught about the reverence and respect that testimonies deserve.
I was also taught that free agency is an integral part of God's plan -- that making moral choices is only meaningful if there is an actual choice involved. Removing mankind's freedom to sin was Lucifer's idea IIRC.
For silencing this awesome man the church can go suck the big one. Good job buddy. There's more us than you might think supporting you. But I bet you already knew that.
That was an absolutely wonderful and brave thing this man did. It's a hard thing to challenge the belief system you've been raised in. They're support for prop 8 made me leave but what he did was so much more courageous. Beautiful.
OUTstanding! I am very impressed with the stance he has taken, and it is laughable that they had to turn his mic off cause he was speaking the truth. If this is the True Church, then why was this brother silenced? It is about time someone takes a stand for religious injustices. I renounce the church of latter Day Hypocrites(sp?) and they now join the other sects in those brainwashing, and manipulating others for their own gain, not that of the're congregations.
Good on him for taking a stand! The church only get away with things when people stay silent. Church members are taught not to view 'anti' material so they don't know what happened with Prop 8. Got to take the message to the inside!! I think there needs to be an international day organised where every congregation has some brave like this guys get up and say the truth about the awful things the morg does to the LGTBI community and those who love them
Politics aren't really appropriate for testimony meeting, but I believe this man's message was. The way the men in charge handled it is...ugh. This makes me rather glad to have separated from the church.
First, good job on this guy. What a joke on the congregations part. Turning off the mic. We want to hear your testimonies, as long as we agree with them. Thankfully they got theirs when they were investigated, found guilty, and fined for 13 counts of tax fraud for all the Prop 8 stuff.
For being led "by the Holy Spirit," this whole setup and delivery was pretty planned out & disrespective. "taking away rights of individuals" in same-sex marriage: I thot that same-sex marriage was, at this point, illegal ie has little to no rights in the first place. So how could the church take away rights that don't exist?
The claim that "God punishes people by darkening their skin" being "absolutely necessary to Mormon theology": what a joke. Other things are more important. How fallacious.
@1goatboy2004 Speeches don't have to be spontaneous to be prompted by the spirit. Obviously he felt like he was directed in his message, regardless of what preparations he made to ensure it was properly delivered. As for rights: are you suggesting that, prior to civil rights legislation, colored people didn't have a right to equality? Did women, before we passed the 19th amendment, deserve the right to vote? You're apologetic position is obscuring your logical faculties, I think.
@Ihopyourpancakes Your q's seem to appeal more to personal morals, while my comment was more political/judicial. This man claims the LDS church has taken a political role in taking away gay rights. But the truth is that gay marriage had no rights at that point, thus the church can't take away their rights. Whether you support gay marriage or not is your own opinion, not law. And regarding my "apologetic position": there was no apology in my comment. So who's "logical faculties" are obscured?
@1goatboy2004 Um, no. Gay people had the right to marry granted to them in California, and that right was later suspended as a result of Prop 8. So, yeah, the law granted them a right which was later taken away. No matter which way you twist it, either legal or moral, you are incorrect.
Look up the word apologetic. Derived from the Greek "Apologia", meaning "defense". Don't insult me. Thus far it's only made you look foolish.
@Ihopyourpancakes That's an interesting fact about California. Since I didn't know that, don't accuse me of twisting anything. However, I still support the LDS stance. I still think this man was rude to give his speech in testimony meeting. "But he was bearing testimony". No, he bore his view of politics where it isn't wanted and made people listen. And I wasn't trying to insult you. If you use words that have 2 different meanings (which it does, as I did look it up), you're bound for confusion.
@1goatboy2004 So you still agree with the Church's position although you're left with no logical reason for that position? That's ridiculous.
Your opinion of what is or isn't spiritually relevant is just that- your opinion. Don't profess to understand the spiritual aspects of another person's life, and stop judging them.
As for words- many, even most words have multiple definitions, including several you used yourself. You have to pay attention to the context in which they are used.
@Ihopyourpancakes My reason for supporting the Church (based on my belief that the Book of Mormon is a true record): 1. The BoM being true means Joseph Smith was indeed a prophet of God, just as Moses etc. 2. Thomas S. Monson is the Prophet today. 3. Prophets are God's mouthpiece to us, & we can seek confirmation of their words. 3 steps which're logical to me. And as icing, even the Bible speaks against homosexuality. 4. a Prophet delivers a message regardless of what the world says against him.
@Ihopyourpancakes (I hate this dumb limit thing) Anyways, adding on to #4, if God has views/laws, and the Prophet would be unwise to keep his mouth shut. We don't always immediately see His (God's) intentions/reasons, but He does/wants things for a purpose. So, assuming this man really was/is LDS, I'm sure he originally believed in these 4 steps, more or less. He would also know etiquette of church meetings, one of which is no politics, especially in sacrament meeting.
@Ihopyourpancakes Having ignored the etiquette, & the steps I listed, I believe I can speak up, for or against, his opinion as I wish. Read the other posts on here, they're all "ja, those damned, silencing MORmONS" etc speaking as they will. Honestly I'm sick of the lack of disrespect and ignorance. The intent of my original post wasn't to belittle him; it was really to clarify things from what I knew. Not judging. Like when a cop pulls s.o. over and gives a ticket. Violation made=ticket issued.
@1goatboy2004 In order to decide that a wrong has been committed, you must judge. You can't wash your hands free of that. Don't try.
Anyway, I'm not here to discuss what you believe is true by faith, just as you should refrain from belittling this man's own spiritual witness. I don't want to argue your religion. I just don't want you to judge others with it.
In any case, lots of Mormons don't think the prophet is infallible. And the Church opened the doors to politics when they got involved.
@Ihopyourpancakes ok, you can call it judging, and I'll call it something else. To me, judging is a lot harsher. If I spoke to this guy, assuming he really is LDS (same values/"steps"), I'd just say something like "dude, if A+B=C, then what's this all about?" At least to me, that doesn't seem like judging.
And why're you concerned w/ me "judging others w/ it"? If judging is your concern, why not reply to all these other posts who judge my faith? Am I not allowed to speak up just because I'm LDS?
@Ihopyourpancakes It's ok what other Mormons think. Active, less-active, in-active, excommunicated. In some way, I agree w/ them. I agree the prophet might not be perfect as a person. But regarding spiritual matters ie leading the church, delivering God's message etc, he is perfect. God wouldn't want an agent to represent Him, when that agent doesn't say/do things in His best interest. And if a church DOES claim to have a prophet, then I'd expect it to speak up on important political issues.
@1goatboy2004 If he speaks up on important political issues then two things happen. 1- they should not claim tax-free status. 2- they open the door to criticism by their members, like this man. Anyways, a man whose words you believe on faith is not reason enough to take a political stance, especially in a secular country like the USA. We don't subject our laws to faith-based reasoning. Anyways, what if you thought the prophet didn't make sense on the matter? Should you suspend your rationality?
@1goatboy2004 Don't play victim now. All I'm saying is that you are failing to account for the doctrines of personal revelation that your church teaches, and should refrain from criticizing people's spirituality because of it, especially with those of your own faith. AND, that he had every right to express his feelings on the matter. Lastly, and most important, I really wanted to show you why you are wrong about gay rights, which you have neglected to answer.
@Ihopyourpancakes If s.t. didn't make sense to me, then I'd try & figure it out or have faith that the leaders know what's going on. Your whole last post is pretty random. But it's clear you're preaching a double-standard. "He can criticize the church, but you can't 'criticize' him for it." If he received revelation counter to what the church/prophet has said, then I question the source of his "revelation". And you haven't asked or "shown" me how I'm wrong on gay rights, so please, enlighten me.
@1goatboy2004 This is so annoying. Faith-based rhetoric (all that jazz about revelation and spirit and whatnot) is so circular and subjective, I can't stand it. It's impossible to have a rational discussion about it. Let's just stick to reason. He said the church contributed to the removal of rights granted to gay couples. You disagree?
@Ihopyourpancakes Actually, it's not all faith-based. It ends up about a faith, but for me, I logically came to the conclusions, which is reason enough. And in doing my research, I learned a few things. 1. Gay rights of marriage were given May 15 '08. 2. They were revoked Nov 4 '08 by Prop 8. 3. LDS members donated their own money. 4. the church stood for their definition of marriage. 5. the PEOPLE of Cali voted Yes, & last I knew the people are supposed to be in charge. "We the people...".
@Ihopyourpancakes 6. marriage is an institution, not a "right". So w/ this in mind, did the LDS church help take away gay "rights"? Technically, no. If you believe yes, then you must consider that these "rights" were only had for 6 months. It's like your 90-day probation period at work & it got fired. They were given by how many men? Yet Prop 8 was supported by how many people? Oh ja, the majority. The church had a stand, & it just so happens that the People agreed. There's my answer. Satisfied?
@1goatboy2004 Anyways, one of those guaranteed rights is equality, and equal protection of law. You may not think marriage is a right, but equality is, and banning gay marriages is inherently unequal. Besides that, the supreme court has declared marriage a fundamental right 14 times since 1888, so in the eyes of the law it IS a right, not just an institution. We don't put rights of a minority up to a vote.
@1goatboy2004 Moving on, I really don't see what your getting at with your probation point. It wasn't a trial period, nor should there be any such trial period for fundamental rights (like equality). Lastly, the vote was extremely close. It was a majority only by a tiny margin. This, after the church waged an add campaign that lied incessantly about what gay marriage would mean for California in order to scare people into voting their cause.
@1goatboy2004 Today more than 53% of Americans believe that same sex couples ought to be allowed to marry. Are you still all up in arms in favor of democracy? People are only going to become more gay-friendly in coming decades. Soon you will be lumped with the racists in the 60s who wanted to prevent interracial marriage. Someday you'll remember what I tried to tell you- that this is a futile exercise of discrimination. Maybe then you'll realize how wrong you were. Only then will I be satisfied.
@Ihopyourpancakes And in the future, 76% of Americans will believe that jumping off a cliff is the best solution to life's problems. Are you gonna follow them too? I don't care about being "lumped", cuz in the end what matters is who's side you're on (I don't care if you believe in God or not). We don't hate gays, we just believe God is against it. Call it discrimination, call it politically incorrect, but maybe someday you'll realize "how wrong you were". Maybe you'll find satisfaction in that.
@1goatboy2004 That's a horrible analogy, because in the end there is nothing objectively harmful about being gay, and because I never said that it was right because a majority agrees. That was your point (about the majority), not mine, so you're arguing against yourself. What you seem to forget over and over is that it doesn't matter what you think God says, because we don't make laws based on religion. If you believe it's wrong to drink alcohol, shouldn't you also ban that too? Same thing.
@Ihopyourpancakes Wow. You must not be seeing a connection, cuz you also brought up a point of majority: "more than 53%", "people are only going to become more gay-friendly". That implies you think it's right due to majority so thanks for contradicting yourself. Also, if you're religious then it DOES matter what God says. Idk about other people, but my faith influences me in all aspects of life, & I won't hide it. And banning alcohol: funny cuz we already do that by abstaining from it.
@Ihopyourpancakes In the end, you can't argue w/ logic. If God exists, He has rules. If He has rules, we should follow/support them. The only debate you can start is if God exists, and I'm not going to debate that. You're apparently for gay marriage and supporting anything else like that, and you probably expect people to follow or respect what you think. However, if you're as politically correct as you make yourself sound, then you should also show some respect and "tolerate" the opposition.
@1goatboy2004 As for God, if he exists, then that doesn't solve our problem because there literally thousands of different ideas about who he is and what he thinks is right or wrong. If he has "rules", then how do we know or prove to others what they might be? Read the Bible? Why not the Koran? The Bhagavad Gita? The Daodejing? Old Testament? New? Book of Mormon? You can't prove in a court of law that any of these texts is factual because they are faith-based, and we don't make laws on faith.
@1goatboy2004 That's why we don't make laws based on religion. Some faiths believe it is immoral to wear symbolic garments. Should they be able to pass laws that prohibit your ability to practice your lifestyle the way you wish, based on their idea of what is or isn't moral? No.
(Just a side note, I don't think that if God exists, he must necessarily also have "rules", as you said. Who says that a God must necessarily care about human affairs at all, or take interest in "morals"? Who knows.)
@1goatboy2004 How many times must I explain this? I never contradicted myself. I don't believe that a majority should decide rights of minorities, but you said that they should so I answered by saying that even if they did/should vote, you are still wrong because 53% agree with gay marriage now. You also don't get my alcohol point. Yes, I know your church abstains. THAT WAS THE POINT. You believe it's wrong to drink, but you don't force other people not to by law. Why is gay marriage different?
@Ihopyourpancakes You're right, there are many different faiths that're centered on God. So what people should do is live after their faith, whatever it is. That's what many of us LDS people try to do. Gay marriage/alcohol is both similar and different, I think. Similar: my belief that God doesn't want either in our lives, so we try to stay away from it as best we can. Diff: I think homosexuality in general just goes against core principles of the gospel; a key reason why we're on earth.
@Ihopyourpancakes (fyi: these're just what I believe, so maybe you can understand why our stance is such) We believe that everyone on earth had a definite identity before this life, including gender. And a big goal to achieve here is to have/keep a family that'll last forever, not just 'til death do you part'. Homosexuality goes against both of those, so maybe that's why this has become such a big deal. Maybe gay marriage will become legalized like w/ alcohol, but we'll still disagree w/ it.
@1goatboy2004 Of course you'll disagree with it! I'm not saying that you shouldn't! All I'm saying is that if you don't like gay marriage, then don't get gay married, but don't take the freedom to choose to do so away from others! I believe that in the Church they call it agency, which is also a core principle of your faith. By legislating against equality you deny others their agency, which your scriptures say is the plan of Lucifer.
@Ihopyourpancakes Like I stated earlier: If there really is a prophet of God, then he should act like it. Just because agency is a core principle doesn't mean the prophet should just be quiet and let things happen. That's what all the other prophets have done. Moses: "hey, destroy all idols". Isn't that infringing upon agency as well? God has certain rules that he won't budge on, and homosexuality is one of them. However, gays still have the agency to live like they do, so your argument is void.
@Ihopyourpancakes And if you've read the Bible at all, then you'd notice that the 'faith' there usually did make legislation ie the Ten Commandments, how Israel was governed, Adam & Eve (not Steve) etc. That's how it originally was. You can talk about equality all you want, but God is no respecter of persons, so He's not going to give in to your demands because He sees the eternal consequences, not just the immediate ones.
@1goatboy2004 If there really is a prophet of your god, then you are ok with it, but what about when a prophet from another faith seeks to deny you something based off their religion? Again with the garments example. No, destroying an idol does not infringe on agency in any way. However, making it illegal to enter into a legal contract (marriage) does restrict what a couple can literally do, i.e. restricts their ability to make that choice i.e. restricts their agency.
@Ihopyourpancakes And as for your Biblical points, you are profoundly confused. I don't care if ancient Israel legislated faith-based laws. We live in modern America, where we have come to understand and institute into law that such practice is wrong. Then you make theological points using an overgeneralized "respector of persons" quote. I don't care what you think God is or what "He" believes any more than you care about what a Muslim thinks God is or believes, and neither does the law.
@1goatboy2004 Fifty years ago, several faiths believed it was wrong for interfaith couples to marry, believed that God said it was wrong, and spoke out against it by making laws preventing interracial marriage. The only difference between this and that is your belief in your church and disbelief in theirs. In other words, you are essentially saying it was OK for them to make such laws, simply because their prophets said so.
@Ihopyourpancakes k after this, I'm done arguing. All I'm trying to do is explain my views etc & it seems you just want a fight. So 1. Prophet defined is one who speaks w/ God & reveals His will to the people. Hence there can't really be multiple prophets who have different views on the same topic, if it "came from God." So you'll have to do your homework to find out who a true Prophet is. 2. You want to bring religion vs religion into this, while it's been religion vs gays? Too big to go into.
@Ihopyourpancakes 3. Destroying idols so people can't worship them DOES take away people's agency to worship them, just as much as "destroying" the bond of gay marriage takes away their agency to get married. 4. So you're saying that as long as the US government is "modern", then it's right and ok? Geez, I'd hate to hear you say that when a future president believes in making it law to bomb anyone who threatens the country. My point on faith-based laws wasn't confused & my point about it was...
@Ihopyourpancakes ...if you believe in God, that should influence your life/laws. Otherwise, what's the point in your faith. 5. IF you read the Bible at all, you'd have an understanding of the anti-racial-intermarriage idea. But being as you're kinda afraid to come out and say whether you believe in God at all, I doubt you care about that either. So the difference lies in the severity of the issue, & I've already explained that. Take it or leave it, that's the way it is. Have a good year.
@1goatboy2004 I've read the Bible many times and don't believe it is a factual account of almost anything. I'm not afraid to say I don't believe in a God, I just don't think it's necessary to bring up, and sadly it discredits me. There is no difference in severity. The Bible says the same thing about eating shrimp that it says about being gay. They are both called "abominations". You decided yourself to pick and choose which things you want to say are severe.
@1goatboy2004 This isn't religion vs. gays. This is secularism vs. nonsecularism. You want your religion to be instituted into laws. This is a bad idea. Why? Well, because if we start doing that, then any religion can do the same. You pretend like there is a way to know which church is true, but there isn't (and yes, I've taken Moroni's challenge with an open heart. Believe me or don't, but I know my heart better than you). That's why secularism is important...
@1goatboy2004 ... Because someday, someone somewhere is going to want to tell you that you can't be who you are because their religion says it's wrong. On that day, I would come to your defense. This country is changing. Soon, homophobic attitudes and laws will be a thing of the past, and the people who supported them will be looked upon with disdain. You will one day be that person. They may even want to take away your rights. Maybe then you'll understand.
@Ihopyourpancakes I'm not really saying a religion should rise and control the government. I think ultimately the issue is how religion shapes morals, or something similar. And I'm not pretending there's a way to know if a church is true or not. I've experienced it. I didn't always believe in this, but I did take Moroni's promise and eventually the answer came. That's just my experience, so I'm not going to judge yours. You're convinced that gay marriage is right; I'm not. That's just how it is.
@1goatboy2004 Oh, but you are, in a way, saying that. You are saying that religion should be allowed to influence our laws. (btw, religion doesn't shape morals People do).
As you said, there is no way to know with certainty whether a church is true. Since that is true, you can't force the morals you say you derive solely from that church upon others, because you cant give a non-faith logical reason why it ought be so. Once again, we're stuck without a good reason that such beliefs ought be law
@1goatboy2004 It doesn't really matter whether you or I think gay marriage is right or wrong. Once again, if you don't think it is right, then don't do it, but don't take away the freedom of others to choose to do so.
What if it were "You're convinced interracial marriage is right; I'm not." That's just how it is? Both are discriminatory attitudes, and both ought to be fought against.
@Ihopyourpancakes If space were no issue, I would've said a church/religion shouldn't run government, but religiously speaking when Christ returns, He will rule w/ His "church". I DIDN'T say there's no way to know if a church is true; you maybe misunderstood. Just cuz there's faith-logical reasoning, doesn't make it any less valid than anyone else's. And "that's just how it is" cuz we've had experiences to make it such. If we were to flip-flop, we ought to be politicians. I don't like that idea.
@1goatboy2004 If he returns, then sure. We still live in America, though, and we still don't make laws based off religion.
Faith "reasoning" is less valid than secular reasoning when you try to coerce it upon others. Believe what you want and that's fine, but when you try to apply it to others you run into problems because faith isn't universal. Secular logic is.
I personally think it's stupid to keep the same position contrary to logic. Flip-flopping is better than that alternative.
@1goatboy2004 Essentially, you made an argument like this "I believe all giraffes are purple", then I say, "here is a giraffe that isn't purple, can you explain that?" You say, "no, and I'm not going to, but I will continue to believe that all giraffes are purple".
@1goatboy2004 Also, transsexuals - do you believe transsexuals may have been male in the pre-existance, but were, by some accident, born into the body of a female?
@windigo77 Can you give an explanation for hermaphrodites/transsexuals? I can't, and I don't care. Maybe it's genetic. Maybe it's brought on by substance abuse. Maybe the baby didn't receive enough nutrients to produce the right chemicals. Could that also be the case for depression, down syndrome, hdd, etc? Just cuz I don't know/understand it perfectly doesn't mean I can't have an opinion or believe in it. Heck, then I guess I can't believe in physics or biochemistry, cuz I don't understand it.
@1goatboy2004 You don't have to tell me that! You don't have to be omnipotent to realize that anybody who follows a religion founded by a man who's voices in his head told him to kill his son, but then changed its mind and say, lop off the end of his penis instead is not very clever or wise.
@1goatboy2004 Oh good, you learned something. We're making progress. LDS members were urged by church leaders to donate money and time, and the church was later convicted for donating its own money as well. As for "We the people"- we don't live in a democracy, but rather a constitutional republic. We are granted certain rights that we don't put up to a vote, and for good reason, since it hardly makes sense to allow the majority to vote on what the oppressed minority can and cannot do.
They muted his mic halfway through. This man is an inspiration.
Bravo, mystery man. You are one of the men who give me hope for the Mormon church and help me to understand that bigotry is not limited to one set of beliefs. Showing me that there are people like you give me hope and help me to understand my own bigotry I've had by lumping the entirety of the Mormon church together.
"There's lots of people in this world - some of 'em good, some of 'em bad."
To answer the previous comment. I used to be Mormon and this man was most likely excommunicated from the church. So basically he was kicked out for realizing how wrong the lds church has been to treat us gays the way they have.
If this isn't an example of the church turning a deaf ear, I don't know what is. Jesus told us of those who have ears but do not hear, eyes that don't see, hearts that don't feel.
I am very supportive of this man. He should leave the church. This is a great hero and an inspiration I hope I can take a stand and speak about my doubts of the church up there.
@cheeseylemon I disagree. He should stay in the church and follow what he believes. This man is an inspiration, as you say. The more influence people like him have, the better this world will be.
Choosing to question the LDS church in this way is an incredibly arduous thing for LDS church members to do. This man is *very* brave to have thoughtfully arrived at his own realizations and to have voiced his concerns openly. We would all be better off if we encouraged this sort of dissent. Do not resist the "temptation" to reason.
Good for him to take a stand. And shame on them for turning off the mic while he was speaking. They should be ashamed. And, apparently, they are ashamed of what he was saying about them, or else they would have let him continue. That pretty much speaks volumes.
That took a lot of guts. It was also pretty cowardly to turn the microphone off. Let people have their say. And this was a helluva lot more interesting than 99% of the boring life-a-monies that usually take up the one hour testimony meeting block!
@kraaberts He would not be excommunicated for what he did but I can assure you they told him they did not want him to speak from the pulpit about any subject damaging to the church again.
You rock dude! I'm not a mormon, but I understand if you feel frustrated with the opposition. I hope you take comfort in that Jesus had to deal with the same bullshit when trying to teach to the pharisees
I wonder what he's whispering in his ear. Something like, "Son, if you don't leave the podium immediately, you may find yourself sleeping forever in a small hole in the desert somewhere."
Or maybe we'll just pull the plug on your mic. This isn't a democracy after all, you don't have freedom of speech here, it's church for cryin' out loud!
@boogins317 let's apply your logic to WW2. During WW2 Hitler and the Nazi's were pro Aryan. Hitler passed laws that led to the killing of Jews. It's not that Hitler was a bigot, he did not hate the Jews, he was just pro Aryan race. You see the problem here? Your dick church leaders don't just have an opinion, but they pushed a law to strip rights from gays.
@boogins317 I'm sorry but you are incorrect, the The First Presidency of the church announced its support for Proposition 8 in a letter intended to be read in every congregation in California. In this letter, church members were encouraged to "do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time." So you see, it's one thing to be pro... it's another thing to use your position to intentionally control other people.Your church is officially bigoted.
Give them 20 years. The LDS church tends to lag on civil rights issues, but they'll come around eventually. No doctrine is too precious to discard in the name of saving face. Bigotry will be relegated to the embarrassing doctrines of the past, just like polygamy and institutional racism.
And it is this money that is the driving force behind their oppostion of Prop 8, not relgion. While living in Salt Lake City, I was told by members to vote no against Prop 8 since the church could face lawsuits since they would not adhere to allowing homosexuals to marry and would be ruined by the lawsuits. I told them I wasn't Mormon...
Also, if anyone is interested in ousting Prop 8, look into what the speaker is talking about As the world's third largest "religion", they exact a 10% income tithe from ALL members of the church. It is one of the worlds largest "Money Making Schemes" that is protected from Government inquiry, Religious Institutes being protected by the Constitution. The higher church officials benefit from this MULTI-BILLION dollar institution at the cost of their members taken through religious conviction.
@Aiquoy2 Actually, their tax exempt status is because they're a non-profit institution. When they used funds to influence an election, they violated the law.
-cont of other peoples' opinions and beliefs, most controling and one of the most discriminating and I would add to that arrogant. I have my right to my view too. This is not an attack to you personally but my thoughts on my time in that "church"
@Krazystraw10 You wrote "We are not bigots at all in fact we have a very high tolerance level. We unlike people as yourself respect others opinions and beliefs. We do not want to control anyone. Everyone is free to make their own decisions. LOL, THAT GAVE ME A LAUGH :D No offense to you as I don't know you and I know that in your eyes you are in the true church BUT I was in that "Church" for many many years and I along with alot of people found it to be the most untolerant, most disrespectful
Paradoxes such as Celesital Marriage ( scriptures state their is no marriage after death, but they will become as angels, Luke 20:27-40) or the appointment of Apostles within their church. It is their believe that God gifted only them and any other religion is a fraud ( though I point out that Ephesians 4:11 says otherwise). Granted I am now agnostic, but as "follower of the words" they are quick to dispute it if it challenges the "Mormon Beliefs".
All the discrimnation within the church about outsiders is not exaggerated. As in many churches, there are members of strong devotion and of weak devotion. Those that are devoted to the church really are encouraged to interact only with church members and that ANY outside influence, regardless of their moral character, is a bad influence. I was often given the retort, "..we're not saying you're wrong, but we know we're right.." when I pointed out paradoxes within their scriptures.
They want all of us to go the distance and they themselves did NOTHING. I was mad about the church support of Prop 8 but I am WAY madder about how they through faithful people under the bus.
THEN came the court battle. The church has gazzillions of lawyers, Oaks is a former Supreme Court justice. You would think that the church, who told us all that this was a MORAL issue and that we had a MORAL DUTY to fight it with every resource at our disposal could have at least sent some lawyers there to argue the case or filed a friend-of-the-court brief or something. They did squat. Such PUSSIES. .
Very courageous, unlike the mormon church. What pussies. Apostles got us to all give our money and time to this issue in California. Tons of people gave huge money, I mean like five figures, thousands. The faithful paid the uttermost farthing in every sense of the word.
I was "encouraged" basicaly told to distance myself from my mother because she was not a mormon and smoked. I was told to distance myself from my old non mormon friends because "They would be a bad example on me, and I should only surround myself with people of belief and my brothers and sisters of Zion (puke) I was told only to date a mormon. The list goes on! So the church IS controlling and disrespectful of non mormons and discriminating. period
-cont of other peoples' opinions and beliefs, most controling and one of the most discriminating and I would add to that arrogant. I have my right to my view too. This is not an attack to you personally but my thoughts on my time in that "church"
This man is proof that religion isn't as terrible as people make it out to be. It's PEOPLE who give religion a bad name. It's PEOPLE who are too closed minded to find a better way. It's PEOPLE like this man who will break their chains, remain faithful to their belief in God and at the end of the day I hope it's people like him that help us find balance between faith and freedom.
@Exodus511 Just what does it take for the religious to see that religion is the problem. Your faith/religion requires you compromise your reason and then wacky things happen and you say your religion is not to blame. Your partly right. Your irrationality is to blame. But you wouldn't be as irrational if your religion didn't attack your reason.
@SamWiseGingy lol I don't go to church buddy. My religion is life and freedom so long as nobody gets hurt doing what they do. That's MY religion and it has nothing to do with the existence or lack thereof a God. What's irrational is you and anyone else like you who can't seem to find some middle ground in this like this guy did. It's a different story if he stopped being a Mormon but neither of us can confirm.
@Exodus511 Whenever people make a set of beliefs their governing principles without subjecting those principles to reason then bad things are likely to happen. The persecution of gays was one of those things.
@SamWiseGingy Did we see the same video? Because it looks like to me someone of the religious persuasion was subjecting his principles to reason. What if everyone did the same? Religion will always exists making this fight between theists and atheists irrational and redundant. This man is showing us a better way, a possible change, a means to believe in a God without enforcing personal beliefs on others. Like I said a balance between faith and freedom.
@Exodus511 Yes this person is applying reason to his faith and that is why he is losing his faith and he is on the outs with his Church. Faith and reason don't mix and that is why reason tends to heresy in every major faith.
@SamWiseGingy Oh I apologize. I didn't know you knew this man personally to be able to say he's losing his faith and he is on the outs with his church. Did he also tell you he doesn't believe in god too? Wait... What relationship do you share with this man? Just out of curiosity since you seem to know so much about his personal life.
@SamWiseGingy I really need to apologize. I don't mean to antagonize you. Neither of us can make an assumption so why not bring up both examples. If he has lost faith with his church it would be reasonable for him to do so. It has happened before. But it is also reasonable for him to still believe in god but remold the words of his faith so that there's room for improvement. Also faith isn't a specifically religious term. Scientists who believe in string theory also hold on to faith and reason.
@Exodus511 By faith I meant religious faith. Also a scientists understanding which is based on evidence and reason is not comparable to religious faith which is based on no evidence or held in contradiction to evidence.
I don't presume to know exactly what he believes but I do think he is definitely on his way out of Mormonism.
@SamWiseGingy String theory is just a theory. It isn't proven yet and scientists still believe in it. Religion I believe is a warped expansion of spirituality with antiquated traditions piled onto it. But do you cast it all out because of its exterior? Or do you start to peel away at it like this guy? We can't be arrogant enough to believe spirituality doesn't exist because it just might have more than one definition just like faith. We don't know the secrets of the universe just yet.
@Exodus511 This man is speaking out against his religion. His religion says Gays are twisted sinners. He is admirable despite his religion and it's retarding force.
@TheAtheistFuture He's speaking against a RULE associated with his religion. I once saw a guy, big religious duded, who found out his brother was gay. He decided to say to hell with the parts in the bible that had any say against homosexuality but still keeps to his bible. That's the magic of being human. The capacity to evolve and change one's perception and to adapt. Evolving, changing and/or adaption doesn't necessarily mean an exodus of everything originally associated with the subject.
Its easy to see what kind of scum holds sway in that church, The man steps forward with an honest position and the filthy reprobates are so eager to show their moral and intellectual cowardice tat they turn off his microphone.
The mormons are a cult religion that was invented by Joseph Smith while he was working as a huckster in the traveling circus in upstate NY. Smith was later killed by a mob that attacked the jail he was being held in for crimes committed to advance his newly created religion. The religion now recruits extensively by sending out young men knocking door to door and otherwise chasing down anyone who might be vulnerable to cult membership. Kick the little bastards if they show up at your door.
dane415 5 days ago
Wow. I sat through thousands of those testimony meetings and wish I had the courage to do what this guy did. That was bad ass
MrTongalata 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You need to com down . How could you be born gay . If you was born a man ? If God wanted you to be a girl . Dont you think he would of made you a girl ? If God made you gay . Then he would be going against his own plan . God said that man was a lone . So im gonna create him a mate . So he made the woman . Why would God make the woman ? Why didnt he just make another man . And Allow a man to get pregnant by another man . But he did not . He made woman ?
nizzobeats 2 weeks ago
Mad respect even though gay ppl freak me out
Collinguy6 2 weeks ago
@Collinguy6 there is nothing to be freak out about you know, we are regular people just like you. My love for the same sex is the same as your love of the opposite sex, we have the same hopes and dreams as everyone else. If its an eww factor that is fine, just understand what you might find gross we like, just like I have an eww factor when i think about kissing a guy, its not right for me, but if its right for other women, then who am i to judge that.
Fireflygamer 1 week ago
Go him >_<
1131479 2 weeks ago
can someone please quiet the baby?
CherProductions 2 weeks ago
Kudos to him. I wish I had the courage.
trionboy 2 weeks ago
Wow, they turned his mic off. Good for him for continuing.
soulure 2 weeks ago
GOOD ON HIM!! I TOO AM A MORMON AND FEEL EXACTLY THE SAME WAY. HAPPY SOMEONE SAID IT =)
redjuicyapples 2 weeks ago
That guy spoke his mind like a boss. The leader told him to shut up, they even turned the mic off, but he continued, like a boss :D
GiveCourage 3 weeks ago 8
wow, what a brave man. hope he fully realizes how corrupt this church is and leaves it. going on 1 year since i left the mormon church and religion in general, and i couldnt be happier.
isuckreallyreallybad 4 weeks ago in playlist Liked videos 5
its something to speak about the just thing & then sit their silently awaiting for others to do somethg about it (worst if you're on the outside). this man is the epitome of courage for he spoke against an injustice (hatered as he said) about his church, at the church. moreover, he didnt cave-in when he was 'politely' told by the bishop (or certainly someone of high authority of the church) @1goatboy2004 as he say if u dont like gay marriage-dont get gay married; not rocket science-u haters
nicosbsm 1 month ago 2
This takes a lot of courage!
ZenLDS 1 month ago 3
If the Bisopric wants to silence someone...how about all those noisy children. The only ward I was ever in that didn't have chattering, screaming, squealing, Cheerio-munching kids was a Singles ward. Singles wards are where they quarantine unmarried members and tell them the only way to get into heaven is to get married in the temple to a "worthy" church member of the OPPOSITE sex and make tons of babies.
batthoselashes 2 months ago
Crying babies. Yep, that's a Mormon meeting.
IWannabeJew 2 months ago
That's how cults like Mormonism operate. They shut down all questioning and logical arguments.
After all, that may lead to members realizing they are being duped by a "religion" started by the charlatan Joseph Smith..
TheSnoopy1750 2 months ago
Having been raised in the church, I am absolutely appalled that members of any congregation would attempt to silence an obviously heart-felt testimony in progress. That flies in the face of everything I was ever taught about the reverence and respect that testimonies deserve.
I was also taught that free agency is an integral part of God's plan -- that making moral choices is only meaningful if there is an actual choice involved. Removing mankind's freedom to sin was Lucifer's idea IIRC.
Oxus21 2 months ago
TURN OFF HIS MIC, HE'S SPEAKING THE TRUTH!!!! ARGGHH
gaobreaker 2 months ago
Makes me like Unitarians even more. Those authoritarian churches are always on the wrong side of history.
vonhoother 2 months ago
For silencing this awesome man the church can go suck the big one. Good job buddy. There's more us than you might think supporting you. But I bet you already knew that.
ecliptic1101 2 months ago
What happened to all that "Mormon love" I used to feel when listening to Donny & Marie?
ChrisOrDavid 2 months ago
Religion, like politics, does not want people who think for themselves! They want sheeple!
2012hereandnow1133 2 months ago 3
That was an absolutely wonderful and brave thing this man did. It's a hard thing to challenge the belief system you've been raised in. They're support for prop 8 made me leave but what he did was so much more courageous. Beautiful.
GinnyStoleMyMan 2 months ago 6
@GinnyStoleMyMan is that really why you left? or is that just part of it?
chadro85 1 month ago
Total Respect to this man for saying how he feels
MrBigballoons 2 months ago 2
OUTstanding! I am very impressed with the stance he has taken, and it is laughable that they had to turn his mic off cause he was speaking the truth. If this is the True Church, then why was this brother silenced? It is about time someone takes a stand for religious injustices. I renounce the church of latter Day Hypocrites(sp?) and they now join the other sects in those brainwashing, and manipulating others for their own gain, not that of the're congregations.
eprano 2 months ago 2
Good on him for taking a stand! The church only get away with things when people stay silent. Church members are taught not to view 'anti' material so they don't know what happened with Prop 8. Got to take the message to the inside!! I think there needs to be an international day organised where every congregation has some brave like this guys get up and say the truth about the awful things the morg does to the LGTBI community and those who love them
lisettearmstrong 2 months ago
Politics aren't really appropriate for testimony meeting, but I believe this man's message was. The way the men in charge handled it is...ugh. This makes me rather glad to have separated from the church.
Levengale 2 months ago 2
I would give a body part to meet this guy and shake his hand... except for my shakin' hand, cuz that's for shakin'.
TheReliquarian 2 months ago
First, good job on this guy. What a joke on the congregations part. Turning off the mic. We want to hear your testimonies, as long as we agree with them. Thankfully they got theirs when they were investigated, found guilty, and fined for 13 counts of tax fraud for all the Prop 8 stuff.
RedChaosLV 2 months ago 3
who's the person that had a phone out during church to record this? lol love it!
johnboo89 2 months ago 3
i would love to listen to him,
but i can't because all i hear is that fucking baby
TAKE HIM OUTSIDE BITCH
forevermau5 2 months ago 4
This guy has the balls! Thumbs up for him telling the man a real piece of his mind.
tylerjmccabe21 2 months ago 2
For being led "by the Holy Spirit," this whole setup and delivery was pretty planned out & disrespective. "taking away rights of individuals" in same-sex marriage: I thot that same-sex marriage was, at this point, illegal ie has little to no rights in the first place. So how could the church take away rights that don't exist?
The claim that "God punishes people by darkening their skin" being "absolutely necessary to Mormon theology": what a joke. Other things are more important. How fallacious.
1goatboy2004 2 months ago
@1goatboy2004 Speeches don't have to be spontaneous to be prompted by the spirit. Obviously he felt like he was directed in his message, regardless of what preparations he made to ensure it was properly delivered. As for rights: are you suggesting that, prior to civil rights legislation, colored people didn't have a right to equality? Did women, before we passed the 19th amendment, deserve the right to vote? You're apologetic position is obscuring your logical faculties, I think.
Ihopyourpancakes 2 months ago
@Ihopyourpancakes Your q's seem to appeal more to personal morals, while my comment was more political/judicial. This man claims the LDS church has taken a political role in taking away gay rights. But the truth is that gay marriage had no rights at that point, thus the church can't take away their rights. Whether you support gay marriage or not is your own opinion, not law. And regarding my "apologetic position": there was no apology in my comment. So who's "logical faculties" are obscured?
1goatboy2004 2 months ago
@1goatboy2004 Um, no. Gay people had the right to marry granted to them in California, and that right was later suspended as a result of Prop 8. So, yeah, the law granted them a right which was later taken away. No matter which way you twist it, either legal or moral, you are incorrect.
Look up the word apologetic. Derived from the Greek "Apologia", meaning "defense". Don't insult me. Thus far it's only made you look foolish.
Ihopyourpancakes 2 months ago
@Ihopyourpancakes That's an interesting fact about California. Since I didn't know that, don't accuse me of twisting anything. However, I still support the LDS stance. I still think this man was rude to give his speech in testimony meeting. "But he was bearing testimony". No, he bore his view of politics where it isn't wanted and made people listen. And I wasn't trying to insult you. If you use words that have 2 different meanings (which it does, as I did look it up), you're bound for confusion.
1goatboy2004 2 months ago
@1goatboy2004 So you still agree with the Church's position although you're left with no logical reason for that position? That's ridiculous.
Your opinion of what is or isn't spiritually relevant is just that- your opinion. Don't profess to understand the spiritual aspects of another person's life, and stop judging them.
As for words- many, even most words have multiple definitions, including several you used yourself. You have to pay attention to the context in which they are used.
Ihopyourpancakes 2 months ago
@Ihopyourpancakes My reason for supporting the Church (based on my belief that the Book of Mormon is a true record): 1. The BoM being true means Joseph Smith was indeed a prophet of God, just as Moses etc. 2. Thomas S. Monson is the Prophet today. 3. Prophets are God's mouthpiece to us, & we can seek confirmation of their words. 3 steps which're logical to me. And as icing, even the Bible speaks against homosexuality. 4. a Prophet delivers a message regardless of what the world says against him.
1goatboy2004 2 months ago
@Ihopyourpancakes (I hate this dumb limit thing) Anyways, adding on to #4, if God has views/laws, and the Prophet would be unwise to keep his mouth shut. We don't always immediately see His (God's) intentions/reasons, but He does/wants things for a purpose. So, assuming this man really was/is LDS, I'm sure he originally believed in these 4 steps, more or less. He would also know etiquette of church meetings, one of which is no politics, especially in sacrament meeting.
1goatboy2004 2 months ago
@Ihopyourpancakes Having ignored the etiquette, & the steps I listed, I believe I can speak up, for or against, his opinion as I wish. Read the other posts on here, they're all "ja, those damned, silencing MORmONS" etc speaking as they will. Honestly I'm sick of the lack of disrespect and ignorance. The intent of my original post wasn't to belittle him; it was really to clarify things from what I knew. Not judging. Like when a cop pulls s.o. over and gives a ticket. Violation made=ticket issued.
1goatboy2004 2 months ago
@1goatboy2004 In order to decide that a wrong has been committed, you must judge. You can't wash your hands free of that. Don't try.
Anyway, I'm not here to discuss what you believe is true by faith, just as you should refrain from belittling this man's own spiritual witness. I don't want to argue your religion. I just don't want you to judge others with it.
In any case, lots of Mormons don't think the prophet is infallible. And the Church opened the doors to politics when they got involved.
Ihopyourpancakes 2 months ago
@Ihopyourpancakes ok, you can call it judging, and I'll call it something else. To me, judging is a lot harsher. If I spoke to this guy, assuming he really is LDS (same values/"steps"), I'd just say something like "dude, if A+B=C, then what's this all about?" At least to me, that doesn't seem like judging.
And why're you concerned w/ me "judging others w/ it"? If judging is your concern, why not reply to all these other posts who judge my faith? Am I not allowed to speak up just because I'm LDS?
1goatboy2004 2 months ago
@Ihopyourpancakes It's ok what other Mormons think. Active, less-active, in-active, excommunicated. In some way, I agree w/ them. I agree the prophet might not be perfect as a person. But regarding spiritual matters ie leading the church, delivering God's message etc, he is perfect. God wouldn't want an agent to represent Him, when that agent doesn't say/do things in His best interest. And if a church DOES claim to have a prophet, then I'd expect it to speak up on important political issues.
1goatboy2004 2 months ago
@1goatboy2004 If he speaks up on important political issues then two things happen. 1- they should not claim tax-free status. 2- they open the door to criticism by their members, like this man. Anyways, a man whose words you believe on faith is not reason enough to take a political stance, especially in a secular country like the USA. We don't subject our laws to faith-based reasoning. Anyways, what if you thought the prophet didn't make sense on the matter? Should you suspend your rationality?
Ihopyourpancakes 2 months ago
@1goatboy2004 Don't play victim now. All I'm saying is that you are failing to account for the doctrines of personal revelation that your church teaches, and should refrain from criticizing people's spirituality because of it, especially with those of your own faith. AND, that he had every right to express his feelings on the matter. Lastly, and most important, I really wanted to show you why you are wrong about gay rights, which you have neglected to answer.
Ihopyourpancakes 2 months ago
@Ihopyourpancakes If s.t. didn't make sense to me, then I'd try & figure it out or have faith that the leaders know what's going on. Your whole last post is pretty random. But it's clear you're preaching a double-standard. "He can criticize the church, but you can't 'criticize' him for it." If he received revelation counter to what the church/prophet has said, then I question the source of his "revelation". And you haven't asked or "shown" me how I'm wrong on gay rights, so please, enlighten me.
1goatboy2004 2 months ago
@1goatboy2004 This is so annoying. Faith-based rhetoric (all that jazz about revelation and spirit and whatnot) is so circular and subjective, I can't stand it. It's impossible to have a rational discussion about it. Let's just stick to reason. He said the church contributed to the removal of rights granted to gay couples. You disagree?
Ihopyourpancakes 2 months ago
@Ihopyourpancakes Actually, it's not all faith-based. It ends up about a faith, but for me, I logically came to the conclusions, which is reason enough. And in doing my research, I learned a few things. 1. Gay rights of marriage were given May 15 '08. 2. They were revoked Nov 4 '08 by Prop 8. 3. LDS members donated their own money. 4. the church stood for their definition of marriage. 5. the PEOPLE of Cali voted Yes, & last I knew the people are supposed to be in charge. "We the people...".
1goatboy2004 2 months ago
@Ihopyourpancakes 6. marriage is an institution, not a "right". So w/ this in mind, did the LDS church help take away gay "rights"? Technically, no. If you believe yes, then you must consider that these "rights" were only had for 6 months. It's like your 90-day probation period at work & it got fired. They were given by how many men? Yet Prop 8 was supported by how many people? Oh ja, the majority. The church had a stand, & it just so happens that the People agreed. There's my answer. Satisfied?
1goatboy2004 2 months ago
@1goatboy2004 Anyways, one of those guaranteed rights is equality, and equal protection of law. You may not think marriage is a right, but equality is, and banning gay marriages is inherently unequal. Besides that, the supreme court has declared marriage a fundamental right 14 times since 1888, so in the eyes of the law it IS a right, not just an institution. We don't put rights of a minority up to a vote.
Ihopyourpancakes 2 months ago
@1goatboy2004 Moving on, I really don't see what your getting at with your probation point. It wasn't a trial period, nor should there be any such trial period for fundamental rights (like equality). Lastly, the vote was extremely close. It was a majority only by a tiny margin. This, after the church waged an add campaign that lied incessantly about what gay marriage would mean for California in order to scare people into voting their cause.
Ihopyourpancakes 2 months ago
@1goatboy2004 Today more than 53% of Americans believe that same sex couples ought to be allowed to marry. Are you still all up in arms in favor of democracy? People are only going to become more gay-friendly in coming decades. Soon you will be lumped with the racists in the 60s who wanted to prevent interracial marriage. Someday you'll remember what I tried to tell you- that this is a futile exercise of discrimination. Maybe then you'll realize how wrong you were. Only then will I be satisfied.
Ihopyourpancakes 2 months ago
@Ihopyourpancakes And in the future, 76% of Americans will believe that jumping off a cliff is the best solution to life's problems. Are you gonna follow them too? I don't care about being "lumped", cuz in the end what matters is who's side you're on (I don't care if you believe in God or not). We don't hate gays, we just believe God is against it. Call it discrimination, call it politically incorrect, but maybe someday you'll realize "how wrong you were". Maybe you'll find satisfaction in that.
1goatboy2004 2 months ago
@1goatboy2004 That's a horrible analogy, because in the end there is nothing objectively harmful about being gay, and because I never said that it was right because a majority agrees. That was your point (about the majority), not mine, so you're arguing against yourself. What you seem to forget over and over is that it doesn't matter what you think God says, because we don't make laws based on religion. If you believe it's wrong to drink alcohol, shouldn't you also ban that too? Same thing.
Ihopyourpancakes 2 months ago
@Ihopyourpancakes Wow. You must not be seeing a connection, cuz you also brought up a point of majority: "more than 53%", "people are only going to become more gay-friendly". That implies you think it's right due to majority so thanks for contradicting yourself. Also, if you're religious then it DOES matter what God says. Idk about other people, but my faith influences me in all aspects of life, & I won't hide it. And banning alcohol: funny cuz we already do that by abstaining from it.
1goatboy2004 2 months ago
@Ihopyourpancakes In the end, you can't argue w/ logic. If God exists, He has rules. If He has rules, we should follow/support them. The only debate you can start is if God exists, and I'm not going to debate that. You're apparently for gay marriage and supporting anything else like that, and you probably expect people to follow or respect what you think. However, if you're as politically correct as you make yourself sound, then you should also show some respect and "tolerate" the opposition.
1goatboy2004 2 months ago
@1goatboy2004 As for God, if he exists, then that doesn't solve our problem because there literally thousands of different ideas about who he is and what he thinks is right or wrong. If he has "rules", then how do we know or prove to others what they might be? Read the Bible? Why not the Koran? The Bhagavad Gita? The Daodejing? Old Testament? New? Book of Mormon? You can't prove in a court of law that any of these texts is factual because they are faith-based, and we don't make laws on faith.
Ihopyourpancakes 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 That's why we don't make laws based on religion. Some faiths believe it is immoral to wear symbolic garments. Should they be able to pass laws that prohibit your ability to practice your lifestyle the way you wish, based on their idea of what is or isn't moral? No.
(Just a side note, I don't think that if God exists, he must necessarily also have "rules", as you said. Who says that a God must necessarily care about human affairs at all, or take interest in "morals"? Who knows.)
Ihopyourpancakes 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 What makes you think that God has rules? That right there is a leap of logic. You really haven't thought much about this, have you?
windigo77 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 How many times must I explain this? I never contradicted myself. I don't believe that a majority should decide rights of minorities, but you said that they should so I answered by saying that even if they did/should vote, you are still wrong because 53% agree with gay marriage now. You also don't get my alcohol point. Yes, I know your church abstains. THAT WAS THE POINT. You believe it's wrong to drink, but you don't force other people not to by law. Why is gay marriage different?
Ihopyourpancakes 1 month ago
@Ihopyourpancakes You're right, there are many different faiths that're centered on God. So what people should do is live after their faith, whatever it is. That's what many of us LDS people try to do. Gay marriage/alcohol is both similar and different, I think. Similar: my belief that God doesn't want either in our lives, so we try to stay away from it as best we can. Diff: I think homosexuality in general just goes against core principles of the gospel; a key reason why we're on earth.
1goatboy2004 1 month ago
@Ihopyourpancakes (fyi: these're just what I believe, so maybe you can understand why our stance is such) We believe that everyone on earth had a definite identity before this life, including gender. And a big goal to achieve here is to have/keep a family that'll last forever, not just 'til death do you part'. Homosexuality goes against both of those, so maybe that's why this has become such a big deal. Maybe gay marriage will become legalized like w/ alcohol, but we'll still disagree w/ it.
1goatboy2004 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 Of course you'll disagree with it! I'm not saying that you shouldn't! All I'm saying is that if you don't like gay marriage, then don't get gay married, but don't take the freedom to choose to do so away from others! I believe that in the Church they call it agency, which is also a core principle of your faith. By legislating against equality you deny others their agency, which your scriptures say is the plan of Lucifer.
You still can't legislate faith.
Ihopyourpancakes 1 month ago 8
@Ihopyourpancakes Like I stated earlier: If there really is a prophet of God, then he should act like it. Just because agency is a core principle doesn't mean the prophet should just be quiet and let things happen. That's what all the other prophets have done. Moses: "hey, destroy all idols". Isn't that infringing upon agency as well? God has certain rules that he won't budge on, and homosexuality is one of them. However, gays still have the agency to live like they do, so your argument is void.
1goatboy2004 1 month ago
@Ihopyourpancakes And if you've read the Bible at all, then you'd notice that the 'faith' there usually did make legislation ie the Ten Commandments, how Israel was governed, Adam & Eve (not Steve) etc. That's how it originally was. You can talk about equality all you want, but God is no respecter of persons, so He's not going to give in to your demands because He sees the eternal consequences, not just the immediate ones.
1goatboy2004 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 If there really is a prophet of your god, then you are ok with it, but what about when a prophet from another faith seeks to deny you something based off their religion? Again with the garments example. No, destroying an idol does not infringe on agency in any way. However, making it illegal to enter into a legal contract (marriage) does restrict what a couple can literally do, i.e. restricts their ability to make that choice i.e. restricts their agency.
Ihopyourpancakes 1 month ago
@Ihopyourpancakes And as for your Biblical points, you are profoundly confused. I don't care if ancient Israel legislated faith-based laws. We live in modern America, where we have come to understand and institute into law that such practice is wrong. Then you make theological points using an overgeneralized "respector of persons" quote. I don't care what you think God is or what "He" believes any more than you care about what a Muslim thinks God is or believes, and neither does the law.
Ihopyourpancakes 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 Fifty years ago, several faiths believed it was wrong for interfaith couples to marry, believed that God said it was wrong, and spoke out against it by making laws preventing interracial marriage. The only difference between this and that is your belief in your church and disbelief in theirs. In other words, you are essentially saying it was OK for them to make such laws, simply because their prophets said so.
Ihopyourpancakes 1 month ago
@Ihopyourpancakes k after this, I'm done arguing. All I'm trying to do is explain my views etc & it seems you just want a fight. So 1. Prophet defined is one who speaks w/ God & reveals His will to the people. Hence there can't really be multiple prophets who have different views on the same topic, if it "came from God." So you'll have to do your homework to find out who a true Prophet is. 2. You want to bring religion vs religion into this, while it's been religion vs gays? Too big to go into.
1goatboy2004 1 month ago
@Ihopyourpancakes 3. Destroying idols so people can't worship them DOES take away people's agency to worship them, just as much as "destroying" the bond of gay marriage takes away their agency to get married. 4. So you're saying that as long as the US government is "modern", then it's right and ok? Geez, I'd hate to hear you say that when a future president believes in making it law to bomb anyone who threatens the country. My point on faith-based laws wasn't confused & my point about it was...
1goatboy2004 1 month ago
@Ihopyourpancakes ...if you believe in God, that should influence your life/laws. Otherwise, what's the point in your faith. 5. IF you read the Bible at all, you'd have an understanding of the anti-racial-intermarriage idea. But being as you're kinda afraid to come out and say whether you believe in God at all, I doubt you care about that either. So the difference lies in the severity of the issue, & I've already explained that. Take it or leave it, that's the way it is. Have a good year.
1goatboy2004 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 I've read the Bible many times and don't believe it is a factual account of almost anything. I'm not afraid to say I don't believe in a God, I just don't think it's necessary to bring up, and sadly it discredits me. There is no difference in severity. The Bible says the same thing about eating shrimp that it says about being gay. They are both called "abominations". You decided yourself to pick and choose which things you want to say are severe.
Ihopyourpancakes 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 This isn't religion vs. gays. This is secularism vs. nonsecularism. You want your religion to be instituted into laws. This is a bad idea. Why? Well, because if we start doing that, then any religion can do the same. You pretend like there is a way to know which church is true, but there isn't (and yes, I've taken Moroni's challenge with an open heart. Believe me or don't, but I know my heart better than you). That's why secularism is important...
Ihopyourpancakes 1 month ago
Comment removed
Ihopyourpancakes 1 month ago
Comment removed
Ihopyourpancakes 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@1goatboy2004 ... Because someday, someone somewhere is going to want to tell you that you can't be who you are because their religion says it's wrong. On that day, I would come to your defense. This country is changing. Soon, homophobic attitudes and laws will be a thing of the past, and the people who supported them will be looked upon with disdain. You will one day be that person. They may even want to take away your rights. Maybe then you'll understand.
Ihopyourpancakes 1 month ago
@Ihopyourpancakes I'm not really saying a religion should rise and control the government. I think ultimately the issue is how religion shapes morals, or something similar. And I'm not pretending there's a way to know if a church is true or not. I've experienced it. I didn't always believe in this, but I did take Moroni's promise and eventually the answer came. That's just my experience, so I'm not going to judge yours. You're convinced that gay marriage is right; I'm not. That's just how it is.
1goatboy2004 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 Oh, but you are, in a way, saying that. You are saying that religion should be allowed to influence our laws. (btw, religion doesn't shape morals People do).
As you said, there is no way to know with certainty whether a church is true. Since that is true, you can't force the morals you say you derive solely from that church upon others, because you cant give a non-faith logical reason why it ought be so. Once again, we're stuck without a good reason that such beliefs ought be law
Ihopyourpancakes 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 It doesn't really matter whether you or I think gay marriage is right or wrong. Once again, if you don't think it is right, then don't do it, but don't take away the freedom of others to choose to do so.
What if it were "You're convinced interracial marriage is right; I'm not." That's just how it is? Both are discriminatory attitudes, and both ought to be fought against.
Ihopyourpancakes 1 month ago
@Ihopyourpancakes If space were no issue, I would've said a church/religion shouldn't run government, but religiously speaking when Christ returns, He will rule w/ His "church". I DIDN'T say there's no way to know if a church is true; you maybe misunderstood. Just cuz there's faith-logical reasoning, doesn't make it any less valid than anyone else's. And "that's just how it is" cuz we've had experiences to make it such. If we were to flip-flop, we ought to be politicians. I don't like that idea.
1goatboy2004 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 If he returns, then sure. We still live in America, though, and we still don't make laws based off religion.
Faith "reasoning" is less valid than secular reasoning when you try to coerce it upon others. Believe what you want and that's fine, but when you try to apply it to others you run into problems because faith isn't universal. Secular logic is.
I personally think it's stupid to keep the same position contrary to logic. Flip-flopping is better than that alternative.
Ihopyourpancakes 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 Question for you, if that's what you believe, can you please give an explanation for hermaphrodites?
windigo77 1 month ago
@windigo77 No, I can't. And I'm not going to do the research on it either. Can you?
1goatboy2004 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 Can I what? How can you believe that then, if you don't have an explanation for it?
windigo77 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 Essentially, you made an argument like this "I believe all giraffes are purple", then I say, "here is a giraffe that isn't purple, can you explain that?" You say, "no, and I'm not going to, but I will continue to believe that all giraffes are purple".
windigo77 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 Also, transsexuals - do you believe transsexuals may have been male in the pre-existance, but were, by some accident, born into the body of a female?
windigo77 1 month ago
@windigo77 Can you give an explanation for hermaphrodites/transsexuals? I can't, and I don't care. Maybe it's genetic. Maybe it's brought on by substance abuse. Maybe the baby didn't receive enough nutrients to produce the right chemicals. Could that also be the case for depression, down syndrome, hdd, etc? Just cuz I don't know/understand it perfectly doesn't mean I can't have an opinion or believe in it. Heck, then I guess I can't believe in physics or biochemistry, cuz I don't understand it.
1goatboy2004 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 Wow, talk about missing the point...
windigo77 1 month ago
@windigo77 Please, mr. omnipotent, you'll have to excuse my lower sense of understanding. I'm just not as clever and wise as you.
1goatboy2004 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 You don't have to tell me that! You don't have to be omnipotent to realize that anybody who follows a religion founded by a man who's voices in his head told him to kill his son, but then changed its mind and say, lop off the end of his penis instead is not very clever or wise.
windigo77 1 month ago
@windigo77 well said for someone who clearly doesn't understand anything about it other than a few minute details.
1goatboy2004 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 There is nothing more that need be understood.
windigo77 1 month ago
@1goatboy2004 Oh good, you learned something. We're making progress. LDS members were urged by church leaders to donate money and time, and the church was later convicted for donating its own money as well. As for "We the people"- we don't live in a democracy, but rather a constitutional republic. We are granted certain rights that we don't put up to a vote, and for good reason, since it hardly makes sense to allow the majority to vote on what the oppressed minority can and cannot do.
Ihopyourpancakes 2 months ago
This is so sad
coconinodave 2 months ago
They muted his mic halfway through. This man is an inspiration.
Bravo, mystery man. You are one of the men who give me hope for the Mormon church and help me to understand that bigotry is not limited to one set of beliefs. Showing me that there are people like you give me hope and help me to understand my own bigotry I've had by lumping the entirety of the Mormon church together.
"There's lots of people in this world - some of 'em good, some of 'em bad."
danceswithchihuahuas 2 months ago 5
To answer the previous comment. I used to be Mormon and this man was most likely excommunicated from the church. So basically he was kicked out for realizing how wrong the lds church has been to treat us gays the way they have.
timecriminal15 2 months ago
I want to know what happened to this guy after his brave speech lol
Cry4Tanelorn 2 months ago 2
of course there are like ten thousand babies crying in the background. not obnoxious at all.
580Topher 2 months ago 3
If this isn't an example of the church turning a deaf ear, I don't know what is. Jesus told us of those who have ears but do not hear, eyes that don't see, hearts that don't feel.
coxhere1 2 months ago 3
I am very supportive of this man. He should leave the church. This is a great hero and an inspiration I hope I can take a stand and speak about my doubts of the church up there.
cheeseylemon 2 months ago
@cheeseylemon I disagree. He should stay in the church and follow what he believes. This man is an inspiration, as you say. The more influence people like him have, the better this world will be.
danceswithchihuahuas 2 months ago
Choosing to question the LDS church in this way is an incredibly arduous thing for LDS church members to do. This man is *very* brave to have thoughtfully arrived at his own realizations and to have voiced his concerns openly. We would all be better off if we encouraged this sort of dissent. Do not resist the "temptation" to reason.
AntipodalBrink 2 months ago 3
Good for him to take a stand. And shame on them for turning off the mic while he was speaking. They should be ashamed. And, apparently, they are ashamed of what he was saying about them, or else they would have let him continue. That pretty much speaks volumes.
LorenScott69 2 months ago 4
That took a lot of guts. It was also pretty cowardly to turn the microphone off. Let people have their say. And this was a helluva lot more interesting than 99% of the boring life-a-monies that usually take up the one hour testimony meeting block!
4Corpus7 2 months ago 4
Good for him seeing that the Mormon church's political agenda is a disturbing fact of life.
adrianruizov 2 months ago
Comment removed
adrianruizov 2 months ago
Pretty brave to speak out against a cult when you're surrounded by them.
doctim11 2 months ago 2
did he get excommunicated after this? what happened?
kraaberts 2 months ago
@kraaberts He would not be excommunicated for what he did but I can assure you they told him they did not want him to speak from the pulpit about any subject damaging to the church again.
BlueSageDave 2 months ago
HELL YEA!!! being from Utah i know how brave this man is!! rock on for him!
10sAdict 2 months ago 2
Bastards for not letting him talk with a microphone!
TheDiamondWoman1 2 months ago
You rock dude! I'm not a mormon, but I understand if you feel frustrated with the opposition. I hope you take comfort in that Jesus had to deal with the same bullshit when trying to teach to the pharisees
agenesir 2 months ago
im an ex mormon and i know how this guy feels, i left the church a long long time ago because of ignorance and bigotry. plus its all hoohah anyway
rallyfan916 2 months ago
I wonder what he's whispering in his ear. Something like, "Son, if you don't leave the podium immediately, you may find yourself sleeping forever in a small hole in the desert somewhere."
Or maybe we'll just pull the plug on your mic. This isn't a democracy after all, you don't have freedom of speech here, it's church for cryin' out loud!
ChipArgyle 2 months ago
@ChipArgyle he'll get his throat slit and his guts removed. Look for temple rituals.
PrincessKathy70 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ChipArgyle he'll get his throat slit and his guts removed. Look for temple rituals.
PrincessKathy70 2 months ago
Comment removed
jsamari 2 months ago
@boogins317 let's apply your logic to WW2. During WW2 Hitler and the Nazi's were pro Aryan. Hitler passed laws that led to the killing of Jews. It's not that Hitler was a bigot, he did not hate the Jews, he was just pro Aryan race. You see the problem here? Your dick church leaders don't just have an opinion, but they pushed a law to strip rights from gays.
truthaboutflu 2 months ago
@boogins317 I'm sorry but you are incorrect, the The First Presidency of the church announced its support for Proposition 8 in a letter intended to be read in every congregation in California. In this letter, church members were encouraged to "do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time." So you see, it's one thing to be pro... it's another thing to use your position to intentionally control other people.Your church is officially bigoted.
whanethewhip 2 months ago
Just like church... to silence a dissenting opinion.
deSkepticon 2 months ago 14
bastards turned his mic off :(
punkonater 2 months ago
5 bigot Mormons didn't agree with this mans speech
charles030981 2 months ago
Brave man!
sergiostease 2 months ago
Give them 20 years. The LDS church tends to lag on civil rights issues, but they'll come around eventually. No doctrine is too precious to discard in the name of saving face. Bigotry will be relegated to the embarrassing doctrines of the past, just like polygamy and institutional racism.
bjjolley 2 months ago 2
@bjjolley I really hope that's the case. It looks almost impossible for the church to someday progress that much, but I really hope they can...
Ihopyourpancakes 2 months ago
The fucking cowards turned of the microphone!
morg52 2 months ago 2
These are the words of a great man. He cares more about truth and morality that the pressure of his church.
TucsonDave111 2 months ago 3
yes, close the mics. He was supposed to echo back, not state an individual opinion
darkmater4tm 2 months ago 10
So, they try to get the guy to step down and since he wouldn't they turn off the mic.
Blackmark52 2 months ago 2
And it is this money that is the driving force behind their oppostion of Prop 8, not relgion. While living in Salt Lake City, I was told by members to vote no against Prop 8 since the church could face lawsuits since they would not adhere to allowing homosexuals to marry and would be ruined by the lawsuits. I told them I wasn't Mormon...
Aiquoy2 2 months ago
@Aiquoy2 The Mormons lied. There was never anything in Prop 8 that would compel a church to marry anyone. They're lying bigots plain and simple.
dan91709 2 months ago
Also, if anyone is interested in ousting Prop 8, look into what the speaker is talking about As the world's third largest "religion", they exact a 10% income tithe from ALL members of the church. It is one of the worlds largest "Money Making Schemes" that is protected from Government inquiry, Religious Institutes being protected by the Constitution. The higher church officials benefit from this MULTI-BILLION dollar institution at the cost of their members taken through religious conviction.
Aiquoy2 2 months ago
@Aiquoy2 Actually, their tax exempt status is because they're a non-profit institution. When they used funds to influence an election, they violated the law.
dan91709 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
-cont of other peoples' opinions and beliefs, most controling and one of the most discriminating and I would add to that arrogant. I have my right to my view too. This is not an attack to you personally but my thoughts on my time in that "church"
michihere 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Krazystraw10 You wrote "We are not bigots at all in fact we have a very high tolerance level. We unlike people as yourself respect others opinions and beliefs. We do not want to control anyone. Everyone is free to make their own decisions. LOL, THAT GAVE ME A LAUGH :D No offense to you as I don't know you and I know that in your eyes you are in the true church BUT I was in that "Church" for many many years and I along with alot of people found it to be the most untolerant, most disrespectful
michihere 2 months ago
Paradoxes such as Celesital Marriage ( scriptures state their is no marriage after death, but they will become as angels, Luke 20:27-40) or the appointment of Apostles within their church. It is their believe that God gifted only them and any other religion is a fraud ( though I point out that Ephesians 4:11 says otherwise). Granted I am now agnostic, but as "follower of the words" they are quick to dispute it if it challenges the "Mormon Beliefs".
Aiquoy2 2 months ago
All the discrimnation within the church about outsiders is not exaggerated. As in many churches, there are members of strong devotion and of weak devotion. Those that are devoted to the church really are encouraged to interact only with church members and that ANY outside influence, regardless of their moral character, is a bad influence. I was often given the retort, "..we're not saying you're wrong, but we know we're right.." when I pointed out paradoxes within their scriptures.
Aiquoy2 2 months ago
They want all of us to go the distance and they themselves did NOTHING. I was mad about the church support of Prop 8 but I am WAY madder about how they through faithful people under the bus.
SpencerFieldingSmith 2 months ago
THEN came the court battle. The church has gazzillions of lawyers, Oaks is a former Supreme Court justice. You would think that the church, who told us all that this was a MORAL issue and that we had a MORAL DUTY to fight it with every resource at our disposal could have at least sent some lawyers there to argue the case or filed a friend-of-the-court brief or something. They did squat. Such PUSSIES. .
SpencerFieldingSmith 2 months ago
Very courageous, unlike the mormon church. What pussies. Apostles got us to all give our money and time to this issue in California. Tons of people gave huge money, I mean like five figures, thousands. The faithful paid the uttermost farthing in every sense of the word.
SpencerFieldingSmith 2 months ago
I was "encouraged" basicaly told to distance myself from my mother because she was not a mormon and smoked. I was told to distance myself from my old non mormon friends because "They would be a bad example on me, and I should only surround myself with people of belief and my brothers and sisters of Zion (puke) I was told only to date a mormon. The list goes on! So the church IS controlling and disrespectful of non mormons and discriminating. period
michihere 2 months ago
-cont of other peoples' opinions and beliefs, most controling and one of the most discriminating and I would add to that arrogant. I have my right to my view too. This is not an attack to you personally but my thoughts on my time in that "church"
michihere 2 months ago
It takes guts to speak out like that. Thanks from truth seekers and free thinkers everywhere.
SamWiseGingy 2 months ago
Did they turn off his microphone halfway through?
What dicks.
Starbat88 2 months ago
This man is proof that religion isn't as terrible as people make it out to be. It's PEOPLE who give religion a bad name. It's PEOPLE who are too closed minded to find a better way. It's PEOPLE like this man who will break their chains, remain faithful to their belief in God and at the end of the day I hope it's people like him that help us find balance between faith and freedom.
Exodus511 2 months ago
@Exodus511 Just what does it take for the religious to see that religion is the problem. Your faith/religion requires you compromise your reason and then wacky things happen and you say your religion is not to blame. Your partly right. Your irrationality is to blame. But you wouldn't be as irrational if your religion didn't attack your reason.
SamWiseGingy 2 months ago
@SamWiseGingy lol I don't go to church buddy. My religion is life and freedom so long as nobody gets hurt doing what they do. That's MY religion and it has nothing to do with the existence or lack thereof a God. What's irrational is you and anyone else like you who can't seem to find some middle ground in this like this guy did. It's a different story if he stopped being a Mormon but neither of us can confirm.
Exodus511 2 months ago
@Exodus511 Whenever people make a set of beliefs their governing principles without subjecting those principles to reason then bad things are likely to happen. The persecution of gays was one of those things.
SamWiseGingy 2 months ago
@SamWiseGingy Did we see the same video? Because it looks like to me someone of the religious persuasion was subjecting his principles to reason. What if everyone did the same? Religion will always exists making this fight between theists and atheists irrational and redundant. This man is showing us a better way, a possible change, a means to believe in a God without enforcing personal beliefs on others. Like I said a balance between faith and freedom.
Exodus511 2 months ago
@Exodus511 Yes this person is applying reason to his faith and that is why he is losing his faith and he is on the outs with his Church. Faith and reason don't mix and that is why reason tends to heresy in every major faith.
SamWiseGingy 2 months ago
@SamWiseGingy Oh I apologize. I didn't know you knew this man personally to be able to say he's losing his faith and he is on the outs with his church. Did he also tell you he doesn't believe in god too? Wait... What relationship do you share with this man? Just out of curiosity since you seem to know so much about his personal life.
Exodus511 2 months ago
@SamWiseGingy I really need to apologize. I don't mean to antagonize you. Neither of us can make an assumption so why not bring up both examples. If he has lost faith with his church it would be reasonable for him to do so. It has happened before. But it is also reasonable for him to still believe in god but remold the words of his faith so that there's room for improvement. Also faith isn't a specifically religious term. Scientists who believe in string theory also hold on to faith and reason.
Exodus511 2 months ago
@Exodus511 By faith I meant religious faith. Also a scientists understanding which is based on evidence and reason is not comparable to religious faith which is based on no evidence or held in contradiction to evidence.
I don't presume to know exactly what he believes but I do think he is definitely on his way out of Mormonism.
SamWiseGingy 2 months ago
@SamWiseGingy String theory is just a theory. It isn't proven yet and scientists still believe in it. Religion I believe is a warped expansion of spirituality with antiquated traditions piled onto it. But do you cast it all out because of its exterior? Or do you start to peel away at it like this guy? We can't be arrogant enough to believe spirituality doesn't exist because it just might have more than one definition just like faith. We don't know the secrets of the universe just yet.
Exodus511 2 months ago
@Exodus511 This man is speaking out against his religion. His religion says Gays are twisted sinners. He is admirable despite his religion and it's retarding force.
TheAtheistFuture 2 months ago
@TheAtheistFuture He's speaking against a RULE associated with his religion. I once saw a guy, big religious duded, who found out his brother was gay. He decided to say to hell with the parts in the bible that had any say against homosexuality but still keeps to his bible. That's the magic of being human. The capacity to evolve and change one's perception and to adapt. Evolving, changing and/or adaption doesn't necessarily mean an exodus of everything originally associated with the subject.
Exodus511 2 months ago
Its easy to see what kind of scum holds sway in that church, The man steps forward with an honest position and the filthy reprobates are so eager to show their moral and intellectual cowardice tat they turn off his microphone.
SagaciousNJ 2 months ago
he needs to learn to project his voice, or yell. I'd love to know what the second half of his speech was. Good man, smart man.