I just read on this blog that the blogger got an email from a reliable source that said the First Presidency is going to issue a statement that says they do NOT agree with Packers talk.


http://jsethanderson.com/?p=3190

While I doubt that this is going to happen, this blog has a very interesting conversation going on. Scroll down to the bottom for this bit about the First Presidency.

Talks at conference are approved by the First Presidency. They are written out, word-for-word, and distributed to the media after they pass inspection. The media gets them in advance of the session they are covering. I know this because I got assigned to cover conference once for a newspaper. They literally read them exactly as they are written. I can't imagine they would let the talk go through that they didn't like, although I know they have altered at least one after the fact so maybe things slip through.

I think that they made Boyd the fall guy. He looks half-dead anyway. Why not send him in to test the waters, since he has a reputation for being a tight@ss anyway? Maybe it's even a case of bad cop/good cop. Allow Boyd to make a fool of himself so that the good first presidency can make things all better with the gay community. The problem is, they are clueless about how to really make things better, being all about appearances.

You mean they don't agree with the embarrassment Packer has caused them.

All GC talks are prescreened and the official word of the LDS Church. Packer was not speaking off the cuff, so Monson preapproved his message. He just doesn't approve of how FB is ripping into the Mormons today.

the latest version of BKP's talk has been censored and changed.

Certainly there have been some edits. From what I can tell, though, they are fairly minor and don't cover any of the items in the talk that we hoped would be changed.

Found a comparison here: http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=299

Only one change stands out to me, and this in reference to the state of the Proclamation on the Family:

Old: It qualifies according to the definition as a revelation and would do well that members of the church to read and follow it.
New: It is a guide that members of the Church would do well to read and to follow.

Does anyone know of anything else substantial that has been modified?

Found one other change that I think is huge:

Old: Some suppose that they were preset and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn tendencies toward the impure and unnatural. Not so! Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone! Remember, God is our Heavenly Father.

New: Some suppose that they were preset and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn temptations toward the impure and unnatural. Not so! Remember, God is our Heavenly Father.

The line removed was probably one of the most offensive. This is a large change.

Given that the talk is in the past, I'm not seeing how edits indicate anything but subterfuge and weaselry. Why would you hope for edits after the fact?

I certainly wouldn't hope for them, but could understand that some could happen that would be entirely benign. Most of the changes in talk are just simple grammatical flourishes that don't alter the substance of the talk. I could even see a number of these being part of the original talk on the teleprompter but were just garbled by the speaker. I definitely don't think that *any* discrepancy is necessarily noteworthy.

However, the big two that I mentioned certainly go beyond this. These are backpeddling changes that can't really be written off as anything other subterfuge and weaselry, as you put it.

I don't think Poelman gave any more talks after that.

They even put duplicate flowers around the podium, and spliced in the audience noise.

Somewhere on you tube, there used to be both talks, side-by-side. But this was probably erased long ago.

http://mormonmessenger.org/22/the-gospel-and-the-churchelder-poelman-of-the-seventy/

First is the transcript of the original talk. Scroll halfway down to find the side-by-side comparisons.

As I have posted before : i was in the Tabernacle in the 1984 October conference . I was visiting from another country .This was before the days of internet and live broadcasting ..Good old VHS videos Fedexed to the foreign chapels. I was sat in the tabernacle in a clearly visible seat ..When i got back to my home Stake i went next Sunday to watch the conference. There i was --GONE-- and someone was sitting in the my seat.

I heard from insiders that the church called in local stake congregations and had him represent the talk to a new audience. Then they cut the video and hadit spliced in before sending them out.

AMAZING

JB

Did he read it wrong or did they edit it based on PR info?

It's ALL about appearances.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/08/2010 08:50AM by WiserWomanNow.

A few changes to the transcript of Packer's talk were made in order to slightly soften the Church's otherwise hardline gay-H8 PR image.

(Couldn't get this to go under the second post, where it belongs.)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/08/2010 08:52AM by WiserWomanNow.

I think its important that someone gets the origonal talks and transcribes them for keeping records before it can be alterd. This is happening to much.

I only knew it got changed when my parants got totaly diffrent messages in thair ensighn than what you guys talk about.

If you think the high penishood doesn't agree with every concept he spewed forth from the podium, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you. Rid yourselves of your gullible natures, my Brothers and Sisters. That's what got you hoodwinked my TSSC in the first place. :)

Just sayin'...

Ron

It's dishonesty of the highest order. Say what you want to get the masses whipped up, then edit to present a better media image, especially with mormon candidates of both parties running for office.

longgone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's dishonesty of the highest order. Say what you
> want to get the masses whipped up, then edit to
> present a better media image, especially with
> mormon candidates of both parties running for
> office.


Maybe, but don't spin it to state the old farts don't agree with him.

Just sayin'...

Ron

The old farts way agree.

The FP does agree, and the message got through to those who are gung-ho enough to attend it in SLC. Those are the targeted audience, those and the hard-cores who drive out to a Stake Center to watch it on satellite tv.

The hard-cores got the intended message.

The rest who are not as valiant will have to get the PR version of the message and will be told to believe that the enemies (who also heard the original) are lying.

They probably winced when they heard him say all that junk, but didn't think anything of it UNTIL the media started ripping into it. After spending millions of dollars on those stupid "Mormons are normal" commercials, Packer has negated anything positive that it might have done. They don't want bad press; they are VERY concerned with their image. Of course they changed the wording, and it's completely dishonest. I am going to post it all over FB so my Moron friends know all about their precious church trying to hide these kinds of details. I wondered if they would change the wording, and a lot of people said "oh no, they wouldn't do that." It's kind of naive to think that after all the terribly dishonest stuff that they have done in the past, that they wouldn't make changes to try to improve their image.

Thanks for the links. I like to have a printed copy ready to show any TBM who says 'its not so', or 'they didn't say that'.
To Fallenangelblue.. I think that's a good idea to post it on FB, all the morgs youth are on there all the time saying/sharing their thoughts on all manner of activities that are not in keeping with the morg. What will the leaders say??
Keep up the good work KKK you can shut the morg down singlehandedly.

speeches given in the USA.

Hells bells even the current POTUS is more off the cuff and his tele-prompters are dummy-corded to his suit.

So any thought that Packer was "winging it" or that he went "off-script" is nuts.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/08/2010 10:52AM by jw the inquizzinator.

They had this talk for a long time, and nothing was changed. Perhaps they didn't realize how Packer would look reading it, like the devil himself. They probably also thought they could just blame whatever backlash they would receive on Packer and not have to feel the damage as a church and as individual members as they have.

I thought the changes were interesting. They didn't soften the impact of what Packer said. They took out the part where Packer said that the Proclamation on the Family qualifies as a revelation. I detect some internal politics there. Maybe that had been a point of contention which Packer put back in after the final review. They also removed the part where he said "Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone?" I suspect Packer added that part in the spur of the moment, and perhaps it wasn't a change to the transcript. It made him look gullible and naive. I can't see it passing a final review in this polished church.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/08/2010 11:01AM by Makurosu.

and a copy of the Ensign, showing the differences, the Momos would just say that the original wasn't true and had been altered by evil, anti-Mormon hate groups. The only way to catch them at their crap would be to TiVo conference. Even newspaper articles printed the next day would be accused of being quoted incorrectly. In Mormonism, the only thing that is correct is what the leadership tells the members is correct. Everything else is an evil plot of Satan to discredit the "Saints".

Somebody else pointed this out the other day...
Packer is on his last legs. He's going to die, then they can claim he was speaking as a man, and start to forget the controversy. Yes it was said at conference, but that was years ago, and Packer was speaking his opinion.
It accomplishes the need to keep the Christian Right thinking the Church is on their side, plus, as attitudes change over the next couple of years, the Church will be able to distance itself from the talk.

I think they are throwing the old guy under a bus

I just laugh. It sounded good to all those old farts when it was written but when the words were spoken out loud they found out it was a spike in the church's heart.

about his talk is all about PR. Nothing else. It's about countering the national media like ABC that did that poll.
I doubt any of them could predict this kind of thing would happen.
These are mostly quite elderly men, probably not "cooking on all four burners" as my mother used to say!
I do wonder if anyone in that group warned them that they were going to start a fire storm.

Big "God-hates-gays" speech to please those big Prop 8 doners and America's Rabid Right-wingers.

Then deniablilty already in place to cool down everyone else.

Bait and Switch still alive in Mormon Land - Joe and Brigand would be so proud.