Oh wow kids. This is a pack of wild Mormon haters. You can tell it's them because most claim to be Christians but do not seem to do what Christ said or do as Christ did. Like love your enemy as you would yourself or to show forgiveness as Christ did to those who crucified him. But it's OK kids Christ told us that we would be prosecuted even as he was. Just like Christ had the Pharasies we have people like these.
Ad hominem attacks much? I guess thats all they teach you in church: anyone who disagrees with the church is a bitter hater. Yeah, I guess you're right, when an organization is hypocritical and destructive (to families), you shouldn't call them out on it. just let evil organizations do their own thing, and just ignore all the little bad things they do. Love them by saying they are the greatest, even if you don't agree with what you are saying.
No they didn't teach me in church how to see that Mormon bashers are bitter haters. I can do that on my own by just reading what you people write. I am curious though as to why it is ok for you to make hateful remarks yet when I use sarcasm I am the bad guy? And I am a Mormon and most of the remarks made here are clearly from people who nothing about the LDS church. And the LDS church is the biggest supporter of families. You are the one making Ad Hominem attacks not me.
In my response, I only accused you of an Ad Hominem attack. I didn't call you any names. My post was not an Ad Hominem attack. Look it up if you don't understand it. I'm sorry if I generalized a bit, also, I would like you not to generalize about me. I know a ton about the church because I was recently a missionary. It's when I found out about the 'deep doctrine' that I realized the church wasn't true.
Well I cannot comment about "Deep docterine" as I have never heard of it before. And since you were kind enough to apologise I will as well. I am sorry if any of my comments seemed offensive.
and I have to comment about "Biggest supporter of Families".
I have seen personally many conflicts arise in families because of my converts on my mission. It splits families up when some choose not to believe. In my opinion, there can not be one true church, because all organized religion does is split people up.
My friend is getting kicked out of her house because her parents found out about her disbelief of the mormon church. (they found her journal and read it)
If families break up because of prejudices against the church then that isn't the church's fault. And as for Mormon families who turn against a family member that is not Mormon well they aren't a good example of Mormons in my opinion. All I have seen is pro family.
Some children have parents who are not members of the LDS faith. These parents cannot participate in one of the most important events in their own children's lives: the marriage ceremony. They get to wait in the temple lobby while their children wear baker's hats and green aprons and begin their own families. LDS missionaries are only allowed to talk with their families twice a year. Bishops and other leaders do not get to sit with their families at church, and have time through the week . . .
. . . absorbed by callings. Other church callings work similarly; they take time away from the family instead of adding to it. I also am a recent returned missionary for the LDS faith, and have personally witnessed these things since my childhood. My father was almost never around because he worked during the day and had to do interviews / other church meetings & events at night. He was always at church almost all day on Sundays. The church tells of the importance of families, but they . . .
. . . require so much time that such claims become hollow slogans that they use to make members think that their church is focusing on families, when in actuality, the focus is all on the church. When I recently got married (in the temple), my wife and I were told in both the interview we had with our stake president and the discussion we had with our temple president of how Jesus was to be a *central part* of our marriage; we were basically told that we were marrying each other AND the church.
I do not think you realize how exclusive the LDS faith is, or how little they actually do to promote families in action and not just word (even *family home evening* is time the church expects members to use to promote faith in the church; you cannot even eat something without having to first think about the church by praying). You, much like I once did, are only looking at what your church leaders are saying, and not what they are doing.
The church is about the church, and not about families.
@7he7ruthHurts Well first off you are wrong about the marriage ceremony. They can attend a marriage ceremony it is a Sealing ceremony that some cannot attend. There is a difference. And as for the missionaries they are grown adults who can deal with seperatioon from their families. Distance in a Mormon family does not break the bonds. And as for Bishops sitting with their families the same can be said for any minister in a church.
No, I am not wrong about the marriage ceremony: Non-members cannot attend an LDS marriage ceremony if it is performed in the temple. Marriage in the temple entails a sealing if you want to be picky, but it is a legally binding marriage in all aspects of the word. You are not allowed to be sealed in the temple and then be married outside of it; similarly, if you are married outside of the temple you must wait 1 year before you can be sealed inside of it, even if you both have temple recommends.
As for missionary communication with their families; I have many friends that are converts, and their families are not members. The families were very upset to find out that they were *not allowed* to call their own children but twice a year. Everything else had to be done by mail or email, and to be even more exclusive friends who weren't relatives were only allowed to send letters (no phone calls or email). This is an excellent way to estrange friends, so that when one returns from their . . .
. . . mission, the thing closest to them is the church, and not their family or friends.
Just because other churches do not allow their ministers to sit with their families (or even get married depending on the religion) does not mean that what the LDS church is doing is family-oriented. All religions are just hoaxes that want your time and money, so it makes sense that they are similar in this regard.
@7he7ruthHurts A mission is only two years it's not like they are denied speaking to their families for 20 years. Your are making a mountain out of a molehill on this one.
The amount of time doesnt matter. You are turning a mountain into a molehill on this one; what *family oriented* organization would discourage children from talking with their parents for any amount of time? I had one companion on my mission, who is still a very close friend of mine, whose widowed mother (she was in her mid-60s at the time, and had given birth to my friend later in life) went into depression because she was told that she couldn't talk to her son but 4 times for the next 2 years.
That companion struggled with his testimony throughout his mission because the state of his lonely mother, who wasn't able to get out and walk around that much (she was not a member, and my companion was a convert), seemed to be getting worse; even so, our mission president refused to let him call her (or vice versa) except on the appointed Mothers' Day & Christmas Day calls. He was unable to find a valid reason why a loving god would ever estrange families in such a way.
@7he7ruthHurts The fact that you must wait a year between marriage and a sealing proves there is a difference between the two so you proved my point not yours. If they were the same thing then there wouldn't be a need for two ceremonies would there?
I did not prove your point; you obviously have no clue what you are talking about. The sealing ceremony, if done as the church recommends, also functions as a marriage ceremony. My wife and I were *sealed* in the temple, and do you know what we got? A marriage certificate!! When filling our her paperwork to get her green card (she is not a US citizen), guess what our legal *date of marriage* was? That's right! The day we were sealed in the temple!!
Anyway, by playing semantics you are trying to avert the topic away from the fact that the church is exclusive. If you do not believe that people get *married* and not just *sealed* in the temple, you should read one of your prophet's talks: *Temples and Eternal Marriage* by the late prophet, Spencer W. Kimball. If you don't have the Ensign this talk was in, you can easily find the talk at lds(dot)org, your church's website (there are many other talks there that confirm my point as well).
"Am I your enemy because I tell you the truth" (-St Paul, Gal 4:16). You Mormons have 50,000 missionaries telling people that their present religion is false. Are they "non-Mormon haters"?
Your scriptures call all other religions "abomination" and "the whore of all the earth" and "the church of the devil." Now THAT's "hate." This video says NOTHING that bad about Mormonism. Apparently you Mormons are the real "haters." You cannot bear to have anyone disagree with you, however politely!
Firstly I was not disagreed with politely until very recently. And I have yet to hear a missionary tell any one that there faith is wrong. I am not saying it has never happened because I don't know every missionary. And you have no idea what I can and cannot bear. I saw hate and called it what it was. And I have yet to hear any of the hate you claim we are about. Nice try though.
does Prop 8 ring any bells? I hope that you didn't support that for a few reasons. 1. seperation of church & state. 2. it was a bill specifically removing rights from a minority. I call that hate and bigotry.
yes the church endorses conditional love. If anyone in your family leaves the church, it is not easy for them. If they are openly apostate, family won't think twice before not letting their children see them.
Yep prop * rings a bell. And I am glad it passed. But that is just because marriage is not a right so gays have lost nothing. If marriage were a right then one person could not divorce another without violating that right. Plus marriage is a religious ordinance. Seperation of church and state remember. I do support civil unions though. If people straight or gay want to register their union with the government then I am fine with that.
See I can't even understand what line of thinking justifies that in your view. Especially coming from those who were persecuted for having a central belief in polygamy, which was outlawed. Does religion own marriage? Not since it mixed with government. Yes it became a weird issue when religion mixed with government that way, but saying you are the authority on marriage is ridiculous, and that's what prop 8 does. many atheists get married, should we take it from them too?
What about the seperation of church and state you mentioned earlier or does that only count when it offends liberals? Marriage got it's start as a religious ordinance it is as simple as that. If you are going to pick and choose what parts of church and state to seperate then that is what is rediculous. And I never said I was the autority on marriage. I thought we weren't going to generalize each other or do you get to pick and choose that as well?
Where am I picking and choosing? If in america, religion owned marriage, then atheists wouldn't be able to marry. If certain churches choose not to marry certain people (gays), that is fine.
You are picking and chossing. Just because it mixed with government does not change it's religious origin and therefore it's religious nature. One of the reasons YOU gave for opposing prop 8 was separation of church and state. And i agree the state should be seperated from marriage as it is a religious ordinance. I bet you don't support prayer in schools. That is picking and choosing what counts as seperation of church and state.
Somewhere in provo, some people do a faux Jewish passover annually. Should Jews have the right to ban this? Jews own passover, right? No, they don't. Just like Christians don't own marriage. Voting for prop 8 is essentially saying that religion owns marriage.
Just because people use a ceremony that has religious origins, it doesn't mean they have authority over whoever uses these ceremonies.
Doing a optional passover on your terms, and doing a prayer in public schools are two different things. Schooling is mandatory, we shouldn't force religious things in public institutions.
So you ask why can't gays do their own "marriage" in their backyard? Because the rights of 'Married couples' and 'Civilly Wed' couples are different. I can prove it.
see marriagefairness (o \ r \ g)
If there wasn't a difference between the two, that site wouldn't exist.
I will look at the site. And even if there is no difference there could still be a site. Because so long as a difference is perceived eihter real or imagined then there will be people with websites. I go to a fathers rights website even though feminists say that fathers need no rights to their children.
ok well i just meant the many stories i've heard of there being problems. not specifically that one site. of course take grains of salt anywhere you go. :)
Why mormons get blame? I thought thousands of man-hours door to door and $20,000,000 would speak for itself. apparently not. Also, if it was the atheists behind the agenda, they'd get their share of the blame. Religion was behind this one.
But alas, thanks for the conversation. I would rather people talk than fight. toodles friend.
You are welcome. Though I disagree with your points I do appreciate the civil conversation and very stimulating debate. Be well and God bless and keep you.
It would be relevant to note that the LDS church hasn't always been for "civil unions". Why not? Because it gives recognition to evil. I don't understand how you can spin this into "religion hating liberals"
I didn't have to spin anything. Liberals tend to hate religion and blame it and nearly everything else on religious white hetero men. Beside you do know that there are not enough Mormons in CA to pass any law on their own right? So why do you think the church gets the blame for prop 8? Why because liberals love to blame religious white hetero men for any thing and everything. Well I think we are going to disagree no matter what the other says so I will wish you farewell and many blessings.
If I had my way, I would separate marriage from government. I'd say that marriage would not be recognized at any political level.
There would be civil unions allowed at political/state level for straights or gays with the benefits/role that marriage currently has.
But since this isn't my world, I want to see gays get marriage and full benefits rather than having them be put on the short bus, or "civil unions". Because if they really were equal, we wouldn't need "Civil unions".
I believe the government has no business in marriage. If people either straight or gay want the gov. to recognize their union then I am fine with that. Based on what you say then they wouldn't need marriage either. So what is the problem then? Is it that liberals hate religion so much that they want to ruin it for the rest of us? Why isn't civil unions good enough if all they want is the benefits of marriage? A civil union would accomplish that.
anyway the root problem is that gays want recognition as being valid in society. and the church has fought damn hard that they don't get it. This is oppression and discrimination at its roots. The church has always been against civil unions or anything of the like.
but honestly, honestly... what harm can it do to give them marriage? would it hurt religion's pride? oh God forbid. Religion can be so thin skinned as to see anything as an attack on it.
Really religion is thin skinned? I am amazed you said that. That is hilarious. And to keep a religious observance within it's religious bounds is not oppressive. What is oppressive is to tell religious people that their holy ordinances must be changed to fit others. Making the majority accept something they don't want is oppressive. And we all know liberals are the thinned skinned ones or did you forget the defacement of the churches temples by liberal.
THe Mormon Polygamy Revelation nullifies all non Mormon Marriages and contracts. It threatens JS wife with death. it defines innocent blood. NOW: why dont you tell us what your homosexual rights bill does. Tells us of the implications of homosexual marriage. Sometimes you must dig a little deeper than the surface of feelings and our right to express ourselves and our sex with impunity
They do not make Mormons/ LDSs look good. They make people question. That makes LDS Inc. very angry. As well there is no way for LDS Inc to make effective copy right claims against these videos. That means things are not fair. Things are only fair when MORmONS get to be the designate victim so they can whine, cry, complain until they get their way.
This has been flagged as spam show
Brilliant! Mormons are stupid because of what they believe.
elfhammer 6 months ago
Well, here's a switch...two Mormons going at it...?
wannawatchu66 1 year ago
This is all wrong, endorphin rushes are from God!
VictorLepanto 2 years ago
The spirit is real.
You have been deceived by the Devil.
There is always a message when you feel that feeling.
In the movie or the game, You just wern't listening.
Man has suckered you back to beer and sin.
Sad day!
wilfordwoodruff 2 years ago
Ah yes, Mr. wilfordwoodmuff .
I'm worthy!
I can feeeel it.
He's certainly worthy to his church.
Do you know why God said that he would not accept any works for his grace?
Because he didn't want any self righteous idiots insulting him with their pride.
Now excuse me while I wipe the mormon crap off my shoes.
GiftoAll 2 years ago
Ah yes, patriotic elevation! That's what the Mormon holy spirit is.
GiftoAll 2 years ago
What is this program called?
stargateproductions 2 years ago
where do i purchase this program feel free to use some of my songs if you like for your audio lol.
thesingersofyore 2 years ago
Oh wow kids. This is a pack of wild Mormon haters. You can tell it's them because most claim to be Christians but do not seem to do what Christ said or do as Christ did. Like love your enemy as you would yourself or to show forgiveness as Christ did to those who crucified him. But it's OK kids Christ told us that we would be prosecuted even as he was. Just like Christ had the Pharasies we have people like these.
Chevrobert 2 years ago
Ad hominem attacks much? I guess thats all they teach you in church: anyone who disagrees with the church is a bitter hater. Yeah, I guess you're right, when an organization is hypocritical and destructive (to families), you shouldn't call them out on it. just let evil organizations do their own thing, and just ignore all the little bad things they do. Love them by saying they are the greatest, even if you don't agree with what you are saying.
fairenough999 2 years ago
No they didn't teach me in church how to see that Mormon bashers are bitter haters. I can do that on my own by just reading what you people write. I am curious though as to why it is ok for you to make hateful remarks yet when I use sarcasm I am the bad guy? And I am a Mormon and most of the remarks made here are clearly from people who nothing about the LDS church. And the LDS church is the biggest supporter of families. You are the one making Ad Hominem attacks not me.
Chevrobert 2 years ago
In my response, I only accused you of an Ad Hominem attack. I didn't call you any names. My post was not an Ad Hominem attack. Look it up if you don't understand it. I'm sorry if I generalized a bit, also, I would like you not to generalize about me. I know a ton about the church because I was recently a missionary. It's when I found out about the 'deep doctrine' that I realized the church wasn't true.
fairenough999 2 years ago
Well I cannot comment about "Deep docterine" as I have never heard of it before. And since you were kind enough to apologise I will as well. I am sorry if any of my comments seemed offensive.
Chevrobert 2 years ago
and I have to comment about "Biggest supporter of Families".
I have seen personally many conflicts arise in families because of my converts on my mission. It splits families up when some choose not to believe. In my opinion, there can not be one true church, because all organized religion does is split people up.
My friend is getting kicked out of her house because her parents found out about her disbelief of the mormon church. (they found her journal and read it)
Is it really about families?
fairenough999 2 years ago
If families break up because of prejudices against the church then that isn't the church's fault. And as for Mormon families who turn against a family member that is not Mormon well they aren't a good example of Mormons in my opinion. All I have seen is pro family.
Chevrobert 2 years ago
Some children have parents who are not members of the LDS faith. These parents cannot participate in one of the most important events in their own children's lives: the marriage ceremony. They get to wait in the temple lobby while their children wear baker's hats and green aprons and begin their own families. LDS missionaries are only allowed to talk with their families twice a year. Bishops and other leaders do not get to sit with their families at church, and have time through the week . . .
7he7ruthHurts 1 year ago
. . . absorbed by callings. Other church callings work similarly; they take time away from the family instead of adding to it. I also am a recent returned missionary for the LDS faith, and have personally witnessed these things since my childhood. My father was almost never around because he worked during the day and had to do interviews / other church meetings & events at night. He was always at church almost all day on Sundays. The church tells of the importance of families, but they . . .
7he7ruthHurts 1 year ago
. . . require so much time that such claims become hollow slogans that they use to make members think that their church is focusing on families, when in actuality, the focus is all on the church. When I recently got married (in the temple), my wife and I were told in both the interview we had with our stake president and the discussion we had with our temple president of how Jesus was to be a *central part* of our marriage; we were basically told that we were marrying each other AND the church.
7he7ruthHurts 1 year ago
I do not think you realize how exclusive the LDS faith is, or how little they actually do to promote families in action and not just word (even *family home evening* is time the church expects members to use to promote faith in the church; you cannot even eat something without having to first think about the church by praying). You, much like I once did, are only looking at what your church leaders are saying, and not what they are doing.
The church is about the church, and not about families.
7he7ruthHurts 1 year ago
@7he7ruthHurts Well first off you are wrong about the marriage ceremony. They can attend a marriage ceremony it is a Sealing ceremony that some cannot attend. There is a difference. And as for the missionaries they are grown adults who can deal with seperatioon from their families. Distance in a Mormon family does not break the bonds. And as for Bishops sitting with their families the same can be said for any minister in a church.
Chevrobert 1 year ago
No, I am not wrong about the marriage ceremony: Non-members cannot attend an LDS marriage ceremony if it is performed in the temple. Marriage in the temple entails a sealing if you want to be picky, but it is a legally binding marriage in all aspects of the word. You are not allowed to be sealed in the temple and then be married outside of it; similarly, if you are married outside of the temple you must wait 1 year before you can be sealed inside of it, even if you both have temple recommends.
7he7ruthHurts 1 year ago
As for missionary communication with their families; I have many friends that are converts, and their families are not members. The families were very upset to find out that they were *not allowed* to call their own children but twice a year. Everything else had to be done by mail or email, and to be even more exclusive friends who weren't relatives were only allowed to send letters (no phone calls or email). This is an excellent way to estrange friends, so that when one returns from their . . .
7he7ruthHurts 1 year ago
. . . mission, the thing closest to them is the church, and not their family or friends.
Just because other churches do not allow their ministers to sit with their families (or even get married depending on the religion) does not mean that what the LDS church is doing is family-oriented. All religions are just hoaxes that want your time and money, so it makes sense that they are similar in this regard.
7he7ruthHurts 1 year ago
@7he7ruthHurts A mission is only two years it's not like they are denied speaking to their families for 20 years. Your are making a mountain out of a molehill on this one.
Chevrobert 1 year ago
The amount of time doesnt matter. You are turning a mountain into a molehill on this one; what *family oriented* organization would discourage children from talking with their parents for any amount of time? I had one companion on my mission, who is still a very close friend of mine, whose widowed mother (she was in her mid-60s at the time, and had given birth to my friend later in life) went into depression because she was told that she couldn't talk to her son but 4 times for the next 2 years.
7he7ruthHurts 1 year ago
That companion struggled with his testimony throughout his mission because the state of his lonely mother, who wasn't able to get out and walk around that much (she was not a member, and my companion was a convert), seemed to be getting worse; even so, our mission president refused to let him call her (or vice versa) except on the appointed Mothers' Day & Christmas Day calls. He was unable to find a valid reason why a loving god would ever estrange families in such a way.
7he7ruthHurts 1 year ago
@7he7ruthHurts The fact that you must wait a year between marriage and a sealing proves there is a difference between the two so you proved my point not yours. If they were the same thing then there wouldn't be a need for two ceremonies would there?
Chevrobert 1 year ago
I did not prove your point; you obviously have no clue what you are talking about. The sealing ceremony, if done as the church recommends, also functions as a marriage ceremony. My wife and I were *sealed* in the temple, and do you know what we got? A marriage certificate!! When filling our her paperwork to get her green card (she is not a US citizen), guess what our legal *date of marriage* was? That's right! The day we were sealed in the temple!!
7he7ruthHurts 1 year ago
Anyway, by playing semantics you are trying to avert the topic away from the fact that the church is exclusive. If you do not believe that people get *married* and not just *sealed* in the temple, you should read one of your prophet's talks: *Temples and Eternal Marriage* by the late prophet, Spencer W. Kimball. If you don't have the Ensign this talk was in, you can easily find the talk at lds(dot)org, your church's website (there are many other talks there that confirm my point as well).
7he7ruthHurts 1 year ago
"Am I your enemy because I tell you the truth" (-St Paul, Gal 4:16). You Mormons have 50,000 missionaries telling people that their present religion is false. Are they "non-Mormon haters"?
Your scriptures call all other religions "abomination" and "the whore of all the earth" and "the church of the devil." Now THAT's "hate." This video says NOTHING that bad about Mormonism. Apparently you Mormons are the real "haters." You cannot bear to have anyone disagree with you, however politely!
Mudras35149 2 years ago
Firstly I was not disagreed with politely until very recently. And I have yet to hear a missionary tell any one that there faith is wrong. I am not saying it has never happened because I don't know every missionary. And you have no idea what I can and cannot bear. I saw hate and called it what it was. And I have yet to hear any of the hate you claim we are about. Nice try though.
Chevrobert 2 years ago
does Prop 8 ring any bells? I hope that you didn't support that for a few reasons. 1. seperation of church & state. 2. it was a bill specifically removing rights from a minority. I call that hate and bigotry.
yes the church endorses conditional love. If anyone in your family leaves the church, it is not easy for them. If they are openly apostate, family won't think twice before not letting their children see them.
fairenough999 2 years ago
Yep prop * rings a bell. And I am glad it passed. But that is just because marriage is not a right so gays have lost nothing. If marriage were a right then one person could not divorce another without violating that right. Plus marriage is a religious ordinance. Seperation of church and state remember. I do support civil unions though. If people straight or gay want to register their union with the government then I am fine with that.
Chevrobert 2 years ago
See I can't even understand what line of thinking justifies that in your view. Especially coming from those who were persecuted for having a central belief in polygamy, which was outlawed. Does religion own marriage? Not since it mixed with government. Yes it became a weird issue when religion mixed with government that way, but saying you are the authority on marriage is ridiculous, and that's what prop 8 does. many atheists get married, should we take it from them too?
fairenough999 2 years ago
What about the seperation of church and state you mentioned earlier or does that only count when it offends liberals? Marriage got it's start as a religious ordinance it is as simple as that. If you are going to pick and choose what parts of church and state to seperate then that is what is rediculous. And I never said I was the autority on marriage. I thought we weren't going to generalize each other or do you get to pick and choose that as well?
Chevrobert 2 years ago
Where am I picking and choosing? If in america, religion owned marriage, then atheists wouldn't be able to marry. If certain churches choose not to marry certain people (gays), that is fine.
fairenough999 2 years ago
You are picking and chossing. Just because it mixed with government does not change it's religious origin and therefore it's religious nature. One of the reasons YOU gave for opposing prop 8 was separation of church and state. And i agree the state should be seperated from marriage as it is a religious ordinance. I bet you don't support prayer in schools. That is picking and choosing what counts as seperation of church and state.
Chevrobert 2 years ago
Somewhere in provo, some people do a faux Jewish passover annually. Should Jews have the right to ban this? Jews own passover, right? No, they don't. Just like Christians don't own marriage. Voting for prop 8 is essentially saying that religion owns marriage.
Just because people use a ceremony that has religious origins, it doesn't mean they have authority over whoever uses these ceremonies.
fairenough999 2 years ago
Then prayer should be allowed in schools since no one owns prayers and therefore cannot say that it isn't allowed right?
Chevrobert 2 years ago
Doing a optional passover on your terms, and doing a prayer in public schools are two different things. Schooling is mandatory, we shouldn't force religious things in public institutions.
So you ask why can't gays do their own "marriage" in their backyard? Because the rights of 'Married couples' and 'Civilly Wed' couples are different. I can prove it.
see marriagefairness (o \ r \ g)
If there wasn't a difference between the two, that site wouldn't exist.
fairenough999 2 years ago
I will look at the site. And even if there is no difference there could still be a site. Because so long as a difference is perceived eihter real or imagined then there will be people with websites. I go to a fathers rights website even though feminists say that fathers need no rights to their children.
Chevrobert 2 years ago
ok well i just meant the many stories i've heard of there being problems. not specifically that one site. of course take grains of salt anywhere you go. :)
Why mormons get blame? I thought thousands of man-hours door to door and $20,000,000 would speak for itself. apparently not. Also, if it was the atheists behind the agenda, they'd get their share of the blame. Religion was behind this one.
But alas, thanks for the conversation. I would rather people talk than fight. toodles friend.
fairenough999 2 years ago
You are welcome. Though I disagree with your points I do appreciate the civil conversation and very stimulating debate. Be well and God bless and keep you.
Chevrobert 2 years ago
Could you answer my question above please.
Chevrobert 2 years ago
It would be relevant to note that the LDS church hasn't always been for "civil unions". Why not? Because it gives recognition to evil. I don't understand how you can spin this into "religion hating liberals"
fairenough999 2 years ago
I didn't have to spin anything. Liberals tend to hate religion and blame it and nearly everything else on religious white hetero men. Beside you do know that there are not enough Mormons in CA to pass any law on their own right? So why do you think the church gets the blame for prop 8? Why because liberals love to blame religious white hetero men for any thing and everything. Well I think we are going to disagree no matter what the other says so I will wish you farewell and many blessings.
Chevrobert 2 years ago
If I had my way, I would separate marriage from government. I'd say that marriage would not be recognized at any political level.
There would be civil unions allowed at political/state level for straights or gays with the benefits/role that marriage currently has.
But since this isn't my world, I want to see gays get marriage and full benefits rather than having them be put on the short bus, or "civil unions". Because if they really were equal, we wouldn't need "Civil unions".
fairenough999 2 years ago
I believe the government has no business in marriage. If people either straight or gay want the gov. to recognize their union then I am fine with that. Based on what you say then they wouldn't need marriage either. So what is the problem then? Is it that liberals hate religion so much that they want to ruin it for the rest of us? Why isn't civil unions good enough if all they want is the benefits of marriage? A civil union would accomplish that.
Chevrobert 2 years ago
sorry, accidentally clicked too early.
anyway the root problem is that gays want recognition as being valid in society. and the church has fought damn hard that they don't get it. This is oppression and discrimination at its roots. The church has always been against civil unions or anything of the like.
but honestly, honestly... what harm can it do to give them marriage? would it hurt religion's pride? oh God forbid. Religion can be so thin skinned as to see anything as an attack on it.
fairenough999 2 years ago
Really religion is thin skinned? I am amazed you said that. That is hilarious. And to keep a religious observance within it's religious bounds is not oppressive. What is oppressive is to tell religious people that their holy ordinances must be changed to fit others. Making the majority accept something they don't want is oppressive. And we all know liberals are the thinned skinned ones or did you forget the defacement of the churches temples by liberal.
Chevrobert 2 years ago
THe Mormon Polygamy Revelation nullifies all non Mormon Marriages and contracts. It threatens JS wife with death. it defines innocent blood. NOW: why dont you tell us what your homosexual rights bill does. Tells us of the implications of homosexual marriage. Sometimes you must dig a little deeper than the surface of feelings and our right to express ourselves and our sex with impunity
IExposeMormonism 2 years ago
the heart of man is eternally deceitful as JS's BofM proves. as does JS himself...
IExposeMormonism 2 years ago
LDS Inc. is furious about these videos.
They do not make Mormons/ LDSs look good. They make people question. That makes LDS Inc. very angry. As well there is no way for LDS Inc to make effective copy right claims against these videos. That means things are not fair. Things are only fair when MORmONS get to be the designate victim so they can whine, cry, complain until they get their way.
genexrollins 2 years ago
Whatever dude
AnarchyTelevision198 2 years ago