Comments on: Major address by Elder Oaks on religious freedom

By: Jon Miranda

Jon Miranda — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 12:16:40 +0000

Nick:
You dance with the Devil, the Devil don’t change. The Devil changes you.

By: Greg

Greg — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:35:03 +0000

I thought this may be of use to some – a transcript of Elder Dallin H. Oaks’ talk about Religious Freedom – along with links to many of his source citations – can be found on Believe All Things.

By: Geoff B.

Geoff B. — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 04:24:16 +0000

Nathan, I know literally dozens of people in California who had experiences similar to yours. Your point is well taken.

I would like to see proof that Prop. 8 supporters displayed anything like the hoodlum-like behavior of Prop. 8 opponents. I have not yet seen that proof.

By: Juliann

Juliann — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 03:38:24 +0000

I wonder how many more times I will be told that I was intimidated by “the church” rather than the downright thuggery that occurred during and after this election.

By: Nathan

Nathan — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 03:27:36 +0000

As someone who participated in the “Yes on 8″ coalition, I have to completely disagree with Nick Literski on his assertion that a small minority of the prop 8 opponents were “violent” or “intimidating” or that there were only “isolated instances of vandalism.”
Dallin Oaks was absolutely correct in calling on church members to “not be deterred or coerced into silence by threats” after what was witnessed a year ago.
During the Prop 8 debate and the ultimate post-vote protests, I was a regular witness to violent and intimidating behavior against those who voiced their support of Prop 8, and I even witnessed theft and vandalism of personal property on a regular basis by Prop 8 opponents (including slurs against church members painted on walls).
On numerous occassions I witnessed verball and, yes, physical abuse by Prop 8 opponents; I never once saw any retaliation or rudeness from the Prop 8 supporters:
Regularly, I (and others) were screamed at, sworn at, told we were ignorant or hateful, had trash thrown at us and, yes, were even pushed and punched.
Unless Nick personally participated in some manner in the Prop 8 debate process it would be disnigenuous of him to assume he knows what went on during the lead-up to (and the aftermath of) the vote.
Though I’m sure Nick will assume my view is biased, the only hatred I ever witnessed came from people who claimed to be “tolerant” protectors of human rights while raising a middle-finger to those of us with views that somehow differed from their own; this was the worst from of intolerance and hypocricy I have ever withnessed.
I want to make it clear to Nick that I was personally intimidated on more than one occassion and violence was part of the tact used to intimidate me.

@Nick Literski

By: Politics and Religion « Course Correction

Politics and Religion « Course Correction — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 02:30:16 +0000

[...] in a Mormon community which quietly hopes he will go away. And while Oaks’ recent BYU-Idaho address was likely not specifically aimed at Reid, the apostle’s over-the-top analogy likening backlash [...]

By: Geoff B

Geoff B — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:14:09 +0000

TOBJ, excellent point! This is exactly what I have been saying since the beginning of the SSM debate. The important point is not whether we win because in the end society is on a downward slide and we can’t win all of the battles. Instead, the issue is “do we follow the prophet?” even though it seems difficult to understand sometimes why we should do that. Personally, I could care less what two gay people want to do, and it is certainly true that heterosexuals have done more to ruin the institution of marriage than gays and lesbians. But at the end of the day, the direction from the Church has been clear, and as Elder Oaks points out there are important issues of religious freedom involved.

By: The other Brother Jones

The other Brother Jones — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:07:14 +0000

Just another comment on a different tack:
I think it is likely that same-sex-marriage will eventually become legal. Although not because I want it that way. I think one of the major points through the Prop8 and other similar campaigns in the church is that it is a test.

We may not eventually win this war, but the Lord wants to see how we react, how we follow the Lord’s counsel through his prophet, how much we are willing to sacrifice, how individuals conduct themselves in the face of various levels of opposition, etc.

By: Geoff B.

Geoff B. — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:20:37 +0000

wreddyornot, I would remind you of M*’s comment policy:

http://www.millennialstar.org/comments-policy/

There are many other blogs that would probably be happy to publicize your dispute with your bishop on this issue. This blog takes the default position that the Brethren’s position is correct and is inspired by the Lord. That does not necessarily mean that your bishop is always right — he is human and is capable of making mistakes. But we are not interested in being a forum for publicizing and discussing such disputes. Based on my experiences, I would strongly advise you to work this out privately with your bishop rather than continue to air it publicly. Your bishop has made a sacred covenant not to discuss personal issues with anybody else except the appropriate people inside the Church. My advice to you would be to do the same thing — keep it private. There is a process inside the Church for you to take disputes to your stake president if necessary.

In my experience, it is the people who make these kinds of disputes public who usually suffer the most.

Good luck to you.

By: wreddyornot

wreddyornot — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:10:33 +0000

Oh, the irony.

Thanks. I bow out from commenting. I’ll just read, although I suspect that a real dialogue can’t exist here with such an attitude. You will have better results communicating with someone outside the fold who differs with you than with someone trying to be in the fold with questions and concerns. My best to you and everyone else.

You are possibly right about the recommend, although agency, and the liberties implicit in it, seem quite important to me.