http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/57396344-78/church-lds-marriage-mormons.html.csp

Be sure and comment accordingly.

I wonder if things would have been handled in a completely different way with the Danzigs if it happened today. I suspect it would. But glad it was the catalyst that got them out.

Indeed, whatever works. But know what? I'm happy it turned out like it did with the Danzigs. They have grown so much because of the crappy thing that happened to them, and have affected far more people for good than they could have by remaining good little Mormons in the Orchestra on Temple Square. And Peter rocks that beard. Look at the old pics. Look at the new pics. Keep that beard, Peter!

One should add, here, that it worked out for US, possibly not as well for Peter and Mary. Their stake president ensured that Peter would no longer be allowed to work in his home town, so he was drummed out of his job and had to find another. This was traumatic and upsetting to a small family. Still, years later, we are happy to see them doing what they are doing, and their folk music career seems to have taken off. And the are so good at it, what with their largely LDS-provided professional-style musical background. Everyone needs to hear Mary nail "Old Joe Clark" on the fiddle, or hear Peter do his mandolin solo of "Fisher's Hornpipe." Thank you, Temple Square!

Or my very very very favorite, "I'm Building a Bomb For Jesus."

My favorite Otter Creek song is Devil's Boots, Sister San Rafael and iron horse are very good too.

Don't forget to pick up their CDs at the door on the way out.

Isn't there something in the interview about associating or aligning your views with the enemy--er pro-equality people?

I don't remember the wording but it always sounded like an interview to be a CIA operative more than an interview for permission to go play dress-up and Ring Around the Rosie with your "brothers and sisters."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/15/2014 10:41AM by blueorchid.

What you're looking for is, "Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?"

Note the words "...or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary or oppose those accepted by the church..." This is what freaked out DW. You know how believing TBMs over-think stuff, worry, and wring their hands. DW genuinely feared for her recommend when I became a dissident.

Say... Wait just a dadburn minute. Do you think this is why they're charging the $200 monthly flat fee for keeping the recommend? Because she's affiliating with a damn "anti?"

Yes. They've got her right where they want her now. You walked right into their trap cludgie.

Geez. That is so "me."

I always had to lie on that question because my whole family, including my father whom I loved dearly, were unabashedly anti-Mormon. I may not have agreed with them but I most certainly supported and affiliated with them heavily. Gosh, Dad was supporting me at BYU! What did they want me to do, run away from home? I always thought it was just the stupidest question ever constructed. The temple recommend interview gives LDS, Inc. plenty of room to deny you the temple on almost any basis they choose. They've got you by the gonads if a temple recommend is necessary for you or your job.

Pulled from the google god: 7.Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

Thank you iris. Doesn't that sound like an interview for a CIA operative?

Technically, this would mean that if you support gay rights, especially if you openly support them, you don't get a temple recommend. However, I don't see the church being able to enforce such a rule, so they probably just try not to specifically bring up marriage equality in interviews, and then try to ignore the monster in the room, whenever they interview someone that they know does support it.

I have an aunt and uncle who are open supporters of SSM. He's a bishop in the UK. But so few people show up to church there, they'll take anyone they can get. Plus, they are really, really wealthy, so I doubt TSCC will rock the boat on that amount of tithing income.

In the True Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ, wealth soothes all wounds.

Big tithing trumps big worthiness every time.

I sure hope not.

The LD$ church is a fraud, so it's better they don't go to the temple.

I guess technically, if your bishop is a real jerk, he could probably use that line to prevent you from getting a TR. However, I know several hard-core TBMs who openly support marriage equality, but are still allowed to go to the temple.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/15/2014 01:33PM by nickname.

Can you imagine how much it would impact them if they withheld temple recommends from anyone who backs SSM?

Not only just the $$$ people pay for the recommend, which there would be no reason to pay. But if you're not going to be able to go to the temple, why worry about cleaning toilets? Why waste your Sunday at the most boring of church services on the planet? It's not like they wouldn't love to do that, but as with ALL things LDS, follow the money.

I think you can't truly back same sex marriage while still doing what it takes to get a temple recommend. Paying a full tithe knowing that the church is using that money to fight equal rights puts you squarely against the fight for same sex marriage. The two are mutually exclusive in my mind.
That being said, the church will definitely give you a temple recommend as long as you claim to obey the three great commandments of Mormonism, Tithing, Word of Wisdom, and Law of Chastity. Everything else can be excused.

Your conclusion just proves that to be successful as a Latter-day Saint you must be delusional. One must delude oneself into thinking that which is irrational is rational. Took me a long time to figure that one out.

Members may be able to back SSM, however, I believe bare backing in SSM is frowned on.

Here's an interesting story from the comment section:

"I don't know if my experience is unique but my wife and I were called into our stake president's office this past weekend to account for our support of gay marriage. We were told that our temple recommends were in jeopardy. We stuck to our conviction that everyone in our society should be given the same rights. We walked out with our recommends but were relieved of all callings. As a life-long member of the church it was one of the most discouraging and humiliating experiences I've ever had. I'm still trying to sort out why our bishop and stake president singled us out considering how many Mormons in fact support marriage equality and why a person I considered a friend turned on my family as our bishop did. I don't know where this will end up but my feelings toward church leadership is forever altered."
-go273rivermiles

They will be shooting themselves in the foot if they start refusing recommends or "disciplining" those that support SSM. They will start losing members even faster. There are so many that support it, Even if they personally believe TSCC has it morally right a lot of members support SSM as a civil right in this country. Go ahead COJCOLDS.....start punishing those who don't tow the line, and watch the resignations and protests start lining up.

Sad matter is that by giving that 10% you are fighting against having compassion for those who are LGTB. I could have kept that temple recommend but voluntarily resigned. The church lost me and several million dollars along with me.

Yes, but in CA, it wasn't until AFTER the prop 8 vote that they said members were free to vote however they wanted. Until then it was "the prophet says vote yes on 8" and "do you sustain your prophet?" I was guilted into voting for the prop as a tbm even though I disagreed with it. I was livid after the fact when they said members could choose, cuz that was bs.

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/interview-oaks-wickman-same-gender-attraction

"PUBLIC AFFAIRS: On the issue of a Constitutional amendment prohibiting same-gender marriage, there are some Latter-day Saints who are opposed to same-gender marriage, but who are not in favor of addressing this through a Constitutional amendment. Why did the Church feel that it had to step in that direction?"

"Decisions even for members of the Church as to what they do with respect to this issue must of course rest with each one in their capacity as citizens."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/15/2014 07:08PM by order66.

Please excuse the ignorance of this ordinary old woman from Oz, but I just don't GET all this stuff.

Fact 1. TSCC has 'softened' its stance on gay people (BIG of them in my humble opinion - what right do they or anyone else have to tell ANYONE who they can or cannot love? or bonk for that matter!!!)

Fact 2. Because of this 'softening' good ole mormons run around talking about 'loving' their gay mates and family members.

Fact 3. When SSM thingey hits Utah, there are all sorts of back and forthing. As of now, NO ssm in Utah right?

Fact 4. No gay couple can be married either in the temple or a church building, BUT they can come to church if they wish (WOW!!). Umm where is the 'softening'???

Sorry but there is NOTHING clear to me here. I am sort of wishy washing around trying to figure out just what tscc is doing. BUT THEN what else is new????

All I can think is that there are an awful lot of mormon leaders and members who have blisters on unmentionable parts of their bodies from sitting on the fence and then squirming slightly from one side to other whenever someone else in authority says to do something.

PHEW!!!

32% of Utah Mormons now support gay marriage. If TSCC pissed enough of them off and they left TSCC, TSCC would risk losing control of the State of Utah.