Mormon Church Backs LGBT Rights

Zero, everything you're describing here is either human sociology or anecdotal evidence. At least pick a real fact to work with instead of trying to squeeze stuff to fit a weak agenda.

Oh boy, they allow gay scouts now, too bad they've still destroyed the organization since it's takeover, and the years of documented bigotry.

Let me know when they stop being bigots towards the unreligious and the gay scout masters as well, and apologize to those who they forced out.

It still won't be equal, but it will be a change.

As for their wanting to be bigots and claiming religious freedom /rollseyes, there's no "attack on religion" people confuse that with not always getting what they want.

Human sociology and religion is the whole point. To claim it is a weak agenda instead of a fact of reality let alone history is quite daft. But hey if you want to say they don't go hand in hand or that historical truths are false then hey that's you.

Your "facts" are open to interpretation, which is the problem. So I don't agree with you? Welcome to life.

Not like I care, it's just fun. Welcome to the internet.

But that being said,


dumbest *** rebuttal to a point regarding an institutions documented social policies. Like seriously get a clue, what are ya a maroon?

Again, subject to interpretation. You spoke of discrimination, which could give the impression that the blacks in the church were treated with segregation-era disdain. I was pointing out that, from everything I've heard/read, it was nothing close to that. The large conference where the proposal was given that blacks should receive the priesthood was met with unanimous approval, followed by celebrations from members around the world. Sure sounds like a highly discriminate society to me.

That decision also happened a few months before a Mormon Temple was opened in Sao Paulo Brazil. Where there was a large portion of the Mormon population of mixed race converts i.e African Descent.

Which would mean that if the decision wasn't made these same converts wouldn't be able to enter or be inclined to help fund the the Temple.

Which basically circles back to my original post in this thread:

A lot of these shifts are about money.

Because, I'm *** cynical like that.

Well, even if I'm not as cynical as you (usually), that at least gives me something new to research and draw my own conclusion on. I really don't see how giving more people access to temples has anything to do with money, though, because the temples don't collect money and tithing doesn't have much to do with temple attendance beyond it being a general commandment. Regardless, I'll look into it.

Honestly, whether as a result of having been raised to think of religion a certain way (Roman Catholic, so long traditions of rituals and formulaic stuff written by people long since lost to living memory) or as a result of being non-theistic, I don't see a huge difference between LDS and Scientology. I'd love to say that Hubbard is a more obvious charlatan than Joseph Smith but that's like trying to find the difference between a pigeon and a dove: they're the same beast with different feathers.

And I was just kind of poking fun at you, by the way.

Who gets to decide how bad is bad? My father is Scottish and English with orange-auburn red hair. He was a kid in the late 50s and into the 60s, well past the point when systematic discrimination against the Irish (which, again, he is not) was mostly done, and he still got beaten up and harassed for being the red-headed son of an immigrant. Is it right to disregard his individual experience simply because he wasn't actually the target culture and the historical impetus for it had died down?

Because that's basically what you're trying to say with regards to people who have left or been kicked out of LDS. Their individual experiences can't possibly be true because... reasons. And the things that LDS supporters say are definitely true because... reasons.

It's a pretty safe bet that any demographic completely denied access to being clergy of their religion is going to experience a lot more than just that, though. I'm not saying LDS members habitually lynched colored folk or anything as extreme as that, but in the tightly-knit culture of LDS that deliberately excluded African-Americans for over a century, it's ridiculous to assume that everything was hunky-dory for the very few dark-skinned converts who stuck around.

The antagonistic monoculture of Utah's Mormons is another reason why I treat their claims of reaching out a hand of peace across the wide gap they themselves created with extreme skepticism. Indeed, there's no religion in the world that seems more keenly aware of the power of marketing (does anyone not remember the constant LDS ads on Saturday morning TV? I didn't have a clue what they were advertising, but I sure remember the constant barrage), so I'm basically cynical of everything they do that looks like it's a publicity grab.

Simple example: there's a Yoruba (Nigerian culture) Christmas carol called "Betelehemu." I performed it this past Christmas, feeling no small amount of discomfort. To prepare, though, I watched the Mormon Tabernacle Choir's video of the same track, which can be readily found on YouTube. The few non-white singers spend a conspicuous amount of time on camera. Maybe I'm being over-sensitive, but I've grown up with advertising inserted into literally everything (which has made me probably immune to the stuff), so I'm not inclined to think so.

Yeah, I hate advertising. I don't know of any church that advertises as heavily as that one, but it's growing quickly which I guess means it's working. Also, I can't really speak for the culture of a people during an era before I was even born, so there isn't much for me to rebut you on aside from using anecdotes. There are bad apples in every group, religious or not, so there you go.

You people in this thread are so ignorant. You guys are oblivious to being part of the issue the LDS church is trying to stray away from. The amount of ignorance and most of all, hypocrisy, is astonishing in this thread. They mention trying to find a way to basically co-exist yet they are doing something wrong? Get off your guys high horse and stop reading only what you want to read or believing what you only want to believe.

Also it seems most of you don't know the churches philosophies or doctrine at all so should probably stray away from acting like you do. It just shows actual Mormons how much of a tool you guys are.

The church is doing nothing different. This is transparent PR ***.

This is the height of ignorance and hypocrisy incarnate.

The issue, is that the Church of Latter Day Saints, is issuing conditional support - They'll respect that people are LBGT, so long as the LDS doesn't feel the reprimand or consequences of openly saying and/or doing things such as lobbying, donating, or saying things that persecute people for being LBGT, such as being fired from private entities, under the pretext of religious freedom.

Large evangelical churches in the south are big on advertising too.

Advertising marketing works, that's why it is used by businesses.

Did a mormon just call somebody else a tool? for serious?

What's the difference?

No, seriously. I grew up neck-deep in the Roman Catholic Church. I have (now deceased) relatives who were clergy. I am friends with a retired priest. One thing he says he'll never miss is the business of running his parish and other diocese activities. We can debate about whether or not a church generates a profit, but we should all know that a profit is not necessary to run a business, even a successful one, especially since non-profits and churches are both 501(c) organizations.

I don't see what the big deal is. I think the Lettuce, Guacamole, Bacon, Tomato sandwich is delicious. :/

There isn't. I was going to throw non-profits in but the majority of advertising expenses are paid by businesses. So, I just left it out.

But, advertising by proselytizing/stopping to sign petitions is mostly unpaid (unless traveling abroad, as far as I know) so lots of expenses for a business are done at cost or for free for churches/non-profits.

The morman church has extensive holdings in both non-profit and for profit irganizations

Yeah, it's only ok to be fired or discriminated against if you don't agree with LGBT rights.