We know it's not revelation. We know their policy was a clusterfuck that drew a lot of unwanted attention. We know the church is never wrong. We know the church never apologizes. So? What changed their minds?
My guesses are threefold. One, their discriminatory practices risked losing their tax exempt status. Two, they were losing existing members and the youth's future market. Or three, Utah has a very high rate of youth suicide. Last year alone, 7 kids from Herriman High School (a very LDS populated High School), committed suicide. This brought a lot of national scrutiny. Including this report, pointing to the LDS church;
https://www.kuer.org/post/can-lds-church-be-blamed-utah-s-lgbt-suicides#stream/0

To most of the civilized world, religious dogma goes out the window when kids start killing themselves.
I'm guessing it's a combination of all 3 or maybe more factors. The last thing that the church wants is negative PR. Worldwide backlash= revelation of church policy.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/04/2019 01:46PM by stillanon.

I don't think we will ever know unless a wikileak is exposed.

I do believe that there is some set of data that scared them to change. They rarely reverse their decisions no matter how wrong they are.

I think it was politically expedient to NOT be the last church standing against the LGBT community. Mormons and homophobia were being linked together too often. So they ditched the name and the policy (well, a little of it) and will try to repair the damage.

and of course . . . tithing is always at risk if you leave anybody out.

I don't know HOW members can continue to believe they have a modern-day prophet who is the mouthpiece of God. Or are they getting away from that too? They should.

Well I hope they can explain it to all of us because at this point I have no idea which side of the issue is right. They need to show some actual studies of gay families and children and see what their lived experience actually is. Are the kids treated right? The mormon leaders need to actually sell their postition to the members instead just expecting everyone to obey. Because up to this point many members thought that the old way was right.

Now it's even more confusing.

They are not going to show anyone anything. Don't ask questions, just bow your head and say yes.

In no way do I mean to attack you... you seem like a sincere person in your post. But why wait for 'them' to do a 'study'? Why not go ask a gay person, a gay family what their life is like? Why not get to know a gay person, a 'gay family'? Why wait for 'THEM' to bring you some sort of resolution? Why not go and find out for yourself? I promise you, the results of your own 'study' will far outweigh anything 'they' will show you. Gay people are people just like you... 'Gay families' are families just like your own family.

Don’t forget to bring a rainbow colored clipboard.

There are two elements of this post that are confounding.

First, you seem unaware that there have been scores of studies on the topic of gay people as parents and their effects on children. There is an academic and psychological consensus out there. In the event that you care to discover that consensus, I append below a simple google search that yielded over 20 pages of citations.* The truth is out there.

Second, even if gay people were suboptimal parents--a counterfactual if ever there were one--what good would it do to punish the children for that? The LDS church wasn't penalizing the gay parents: it was harming the children, who had no responsibility for their situation. Those children, the church decided, would be denied the status of their peers, ostracized from their community, and treated as inferior. They would be denied the priesthood and other standard privileges, the chance to go on missions, etc., and suffer considerable disadvantage in their romantic lives.

In what possible circumstances does discrimination against innocent children make sense? This is BYU-level punishment of victims: stupid in the extreme.


*https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=gay+parents+children&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart

Exactly what we've been talking about for a long time here. There must be members of the higher ups that patiently wait for their turn to make changes they know need to be made but would jeopardize their chance to take the top position(s) if they were to make their thoughts known beforehand.

This is a good thing. If you're going to be mormon, despite how obviously false it is, then the more changes like this the better.

"This is a good thing. If you're going to be mormon, despite how obviously false it is, then the more changes like this the better."

Yeah, but what's to stop the next drooling octogenarian to change it back?

Even if the next "drooling octogenarian" changed it back, that wouldn't change the fact that this move was a good one.

justkeepswimming Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...would jeopardize
> their chance to take the top position(s) if they
> were to make their thoughts known beforehand.


No, their chance at the big chair is determined/guaranteed by seniority and outliving those in line ahead of them, nothing else.

The same as what drives all of Mormonism today.

"When you are dead you do not know that you are dead. It is difficult only for others. It is the same with stupid." Phillip Geluck.

The leaders of the Mormon church are emotionally and intellectually and spiritually stupid. And it is a problem for everyone else. The Gerontocracy are doing just fine as they prove ignorance really is bliss.

Oh, goodgawd, don't dig up the "they were going to lose their tax-exempt status" canard again.

The Westboro Baptist Church still has their tax-exempt status. That should give you some idea how hard it is to lose tax-exempt status for being homophobic.

And do you in a million years think that the current administration would yank the tax-exempt status of the religion that is one of the major voter blocks supporting it? And while evangelicals are not big fans of Mormons, if they saw the Mormon Church lose its tax-exempt status over being homophobic, they would get extremely nervous. The current administration is not going to freak them out.

There is zero chance their tax-exempt status was/is in any danger.

BTW, the Church still discriminates against women. That also poses zero threat to their tax-exempt status. I know "they're going to lose their tax-exempt status" is an RFM wet dream. Get over it.

"BTW, the Church still discriminates against women. That also poses zero threat to their tax-exempt status. I know "they're going to lose their tax-exempt status" is an RFM wet dream. Get over it."

It's not written policy. Like their LBGTQ policy was. Or their Blacks on the priesthood ban. No member of the Westboro baptist church was a lawsuit threat. Unlike the LDS church. It's not the current administration they're worried about. It's the SCOTUS.

What's not a written policy? Their discrimination against women in the priesthood? It most certainly is written. They refuse Temple "blessings" to same-sex couples. Hell, they refuse them to people who smoke. None of this threatens their tax status in the least. If you can cite any precedent to the contrary, have at it.

Ⓜⓞⓝⓔⓨ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>


Hahahahahaha!

Well done!!

LOL $ $ $ The only driving force in LD$, Inc.

The suicides SHOULD be a reason, but Mormons have never considered that. They completely absolve themselves of any blame. Mormons are masters of denial. I've talked to TBM parents of TBM suicides, and they say that the victim's problems began only when he/she began to "drift away" from the fold--never when they were still in the cult. (After all, isn't the act of suicide itself against the laws of the Mormon church?) The blame was always on "outside influences." Otherwise, how could parents of a suicide live with themselves. How could they continue on as paying members of the cult?

Here's a business fact: 2 gay male spouses with 2 male incomes can pay more tithing that 1 male and 1 female. Moreover, I'm sure the Mormon discrimination against gays has caused many tithe-payers to leave the cult. I know of 3 couples who quit over the issue, and I don't think they had any gay family members--it was the principle of the thing. The cult leaders are idiots not to know that you don't attack CHILDREN. Mormons think it's fine to target women--but never children!

I doubt the cult's changing this policy will bring these 3 couples and their children back into the fold, however. You can't un-ring a bell.

You have elaborated what the church has been missing all along--that businesses everywhere figured out years ago. Gay people had a lot of expendable income because for the most part they were high earners with no kids and nothing to hold them back from getting ahead in careers. A lot of the acceptance that led to equality started because big business wanted our bucks. Hotels, cruise lines, travel industry, etc, opened their arms to receive our cash. Why ignore one of the richest veins in the mine?

All I know is the next time some Mormon says God is the same yesterday, today, and forever I am going to laugh so hard in their face.

And all my gay expendable cash goes to animals--especially old dogs.

Done & Done Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> ...expendable cash goes to animals--especially old dogs.

Oh me too!! There are so many charities to assist humans but animals especially unwanted pets are on their own in a cruel world! Hugs to you, Done, for helping the dogs!!! :) :) :)

A portion of my former tithing money goes to shelters and a pet rescue organization.

Mine as well! Glad to see others doing the same!!

Thank you, D&D and Mel!!! Always happy to be of use.

Oh . . . you're always of use EOD. Trust me.

Done & Done Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And all my gay expendable cash goes to
> animals--especially old dogs.

Thank you, Done & Done!

Thank you SO MUCH!

D&D,

Old Lumpy and Jack say you're their hero!

They worship money.

At the very bottom of it, the policy was somehow costing them money.
It was a business decision.


Suicides?
They care not one whit.

I believe that everything that Rusty is doing is aimed at a) retaining the Millennials, and b) sending as many young missionaries out as possible and keeping them on the mission (which also helps to retain the Millennials.)

Life has changed, and Rusty has come to realize that the church hasn't kept up. The church is bleeding young people. Hence the shorter church meetings, the improvement for women in the temple endowment ceremony, and the change in LBGTQ policy (something that is very important to young people.)

IMO it won't be enough, but it may stem some of the losses.

My guess is back in 2015 they didn't want to "normalize" gay marriages by barring gay families, including the kids, from full participation in the church. They were probably worried members might see that these kids were just fine being raised by gay parents and that they didn't want sympathy from members or issues with kids that might get raised. Probably thought the best thing was to completely cut them out so they wouldn't have any problems.

It backfired and many members were upset with the policy. It continued to be a problem and they are stuck with this policy which makes them look bad, not letting kids get baptized just because their parents are gay.

Just dumping a bad policy like blacks and the temple.

Yeah, apparently they forgot their trip about men being punished for their own sins and not for the sins of their parents.

Part of it, IMO, is the current crop of potential legal action against the Honor Code Office at BYU. Misdirect, misdirect, misdirect.

It'll be interesting to see what, if anything, they say about it this weekend.

I'm trying to figure out why they announced it just before GC, not during or after.

Because they will justify it at GC. Everyone will go-"Oh. It was divinely inspired. I get it".

I had to run to my car during my first break at work today and I sat and listened to KSL while I was waiting for my break to be over and they announced this. Just this simple little statement that they had reversed a policy that ripped my heart out. I cried for a few months over it, even being a resigned mormon.

They told me to marry my ex and then they tell me my children are second-class citizens? WTF? AND IT WAS NELSON who was behind the policy. The way it has not been reversed. There is definitely some reason they did this, Why would Nelson change his mind?

As for whoever up there wondered about kids being raised my 2 dads, etc., or 2 moms. AS LONG AS A KID IS LOVED, that is all we need. There are so many kids out there who get no love at all or very little. Why would we make it so that kids can't be loved by those who want to. These kids aren't like all the babies some girls have so they can get welfare or all the ones who are aborted. The children of gays are WANTED and LOVED. And being raised by gays does not make someone gay. They are BORN THAT WAY. Even my bigoted dad told me that. He just couldn't believe I'd marry someone gay. He said I was too intelligent to do that as THEY ARE BORN THAT WAY. My ex is a very good man. He didn't handle things perfectly, but he loves his kids. He couldn't survive without them. And his TBM daughter adores him, as does his son, but mostly his daughter. GAYS MAKE GOOD PARENTS. I often think much better than straight people as they had to go to such lengths to have children.

I hope that a lot of the kids will say, "Thanks, but no thanks. You rejected my parents and now I'm not interested in being a part of your organization anymore."

I agree. But your phrasing is a lot more diplomatic and polite (and improbable) than the kid's just saying "Fuck You!"

Probably afraid they were going to loose there tax exempt status.

Church doctrine & practices are not subject to anti-discrimination laws. Period. I know it's a common misconception that the LDS church changed the black priesthood policy because of the law, but it did not. Such laws simply do not apply.

This latest change is most likely an attempt to slow the exodus of people from the church and make it more attractive to potential converts.

The church was subject to discrimination by the NCAA and other private organizations. BYU could also see its tranche of federal subsidies both generally and for specific programs curtailed or eliminated. And the church could see its tax exemption go away.

Some of that is legal, some of it is government agency discretion, and some of it is private-sector action. It all matters.

Outside Observer is right. It's too late for me to write up the full orchestration. BYU having legal exposure is extremely unlikely, but a far-fetched argument can at least be made. The legal exposure of the Church itself is zero.

BoJ,

I'm not sure why you are employing a black-and-white framework to address the question. Was the NCAA going to start restricting BYU playing rights? Yes. Do universities get their grants and subsidies reduced because of behavior that, while not strictly illegal, is offensive? Yes. Could tax-exempt status be adjusted or revoked? Yes, though that is a step further than the foregoing examples.

None of this rises to the level of BYU or the church having "legal exposure." But it is political exposure, and such things do get punished administratively both by private bodies like the NCAA and by the public agencies that allocate grant money. The church faced concrete threats from groups acting under a legal aegis.

The situation is analogous to how the BYU police are having their wings clipped for abusing their authority. Will anyone be charged with a crime? Probably not. But the university and the church are undergoing severe punishment by government organs exercising their discretionary powers.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/05/2019 03:30AM by Lot's Wife.

Yes, there is political exposure. Other schools refusing to associate with BYU was serious pressure. Just within the last few years, to organization that accredits law schools looked disapprovingly at the BYU policy of expelling students who left the LDS church. As I understand it, BYU changed their policy, at least for the law school, and law students can as a matter of conscience resign from LDS Inc and stay in the law school.

BYU has caved on other issues. They got sued over requiring that non-students in BYU approved housing sign an Honor Code standards agreement to live there. They settled out of court, and changed their policy such that non-students can not live in BYU-approved housing (I believe that was the settlement).

In the 1990s (I believe) BYU freshman Michelle Warner got expelled for resigning her membership. She sued, asserting that (a) the expulsion policy was not uniformly enforced, and (b) the BYU catalog, which is a part of the contract that the student agrees to when they enter BYU, did not specify that leaving the LDS Church would result in expulsion from school. She got an out of court settlement, where she got to take her BYU scholarship to another university, and BYU explicitly put the expulsion policy in their catalog.

And of course all the people who resigned their LDS membership when The Policy we are discussing right now put substantial social pressure on the church.

Bob Jones University lost their tax exemption for a while. their specific problem was that as a condition of enrollment, students had to practice racial discrimination. They were not allowed to date or marry interracially, on pain of expulsion from school. They fought the ruling, and there are hundreds of pages of various court decisions in that case on the internet. They eventually exhausted all appeals and lost. They changed their policy, stating opposition to interracial dating/marriage, but not expelling students, and got their tax exemption reinstated.

BYU of course was looked at while that case was going on (early 1970s). The IRS/DOJ decided that BYU did not have a problem because, while LDS Church policy was racially discriminatory, there were no institutional policies at BYU that were racially discriminatory. Black students could enroll at BYU, attend, graduate, and neither black nor other students would be sanctioned by the university for interracial dating or marriage. BYU did not have the same problem that Bob Jones U had.

I'm running out of time, or I'd insert several paragraphs here about churches that have lost their tax exemption, but I have a busy day and no time. Short version: it was always about money that got them in trouble, and The Policy of LDS Inc had nothing to do with how LDS Inc was spending its money. I can't think of a single church that lost a tax exemption over doctrine or non-financial practice. (BJU was a school, not a church)

OK, so it is possible to sue church schools and win, it of course is possible to sue and criminally charge church officials in sexual abuse cases. There are lots of ways social pressure can be applied. I get all that.

What I am being black and white about is the claim, often dragged out here, that they changed the policy because they feared losing their tax-exempt status. Two reasons. the bar is spectacularly high on that. And if the IRS were to propose such a thing, LDS Inc would fight it tooth and nail, for years on end. Kirton McConkie would rack up enough frequent flier miles to Washington to qualify for a first class seat upgrade to Alpha Centauri. There would probably be literally a freight car's worth of paper generated. Everybody on the planet would know that the IRS was trying to strip LDS Inc's tax exemption. There is no way in hell they would just fold at the barest hint of a threat.


People have claimed that Jimmy Carter and SWK had each other's phone numbers, and Carter told Kimball that the IRS was about to cancel the LDS tax exemption over the priesthood issue. First of all, that is not how the IRS does things. I had a typo that the IRS made when they transcribed one of my 1099s a few years ago. They sent me a bill for $13,000, I sent them a WTF, and long story short, it took about 6 months and about a quarter inch stack of paper to fix a one line typo that they made. Trying to strip the tax exemption of one of the largest single religious denominations in the US would generate paperwork. Lots of it.

Besides, Jimmy Carter is still alive. Somebody could just ask him if he ever called SWK to warn that LDS Inc was about to lose its tax exemption, which would have been the biggest church-state news story of the second half of the 20th century. He'd probably remember something like that.

Sorry, that story is so preposterous it doesn't even qualify as a decent urban legend.

I think this is all about money. The church did the right thing for the wrong reason. They're whores. The church has sold its tokens for money. They don't care about the suicides. They don't care about children. They do care about the resignitations and the lost tithing revenues.

Members leaving in droves equals money problems as well as church positions not being filled.

I believe these issues are growing by leaps and bounds (I read somewhere that over 50% of young adults are not active), hence this LGBTQ Policy Change arrives, along with Mormon Rescues, and talks given at three Mormon universities to students preaching and pleading that they not give into doubt nor DARE! to abandon ship.

Add to these the fact that the cult has definitely taken steps to bring dusty, hidden information out of the darkness and into the light of day---like the weird seer stone (you know, the one that works like a cellphone), Joseph's Smith's papers, and the sort-of revealing-12-essays.

Yep, something is blowing in the wind and its not hungry seagulls. Nope, whatever is blowing stinks and smells like vain, scared, rotten attempts for a cult's survival.

It always comes down to one thing -money. Sure, legal impingement, bad PR, less popularity, less attendance, etc may be the precursor, but it always boils down to concerns of being less profitable before LD$ inc takes any action.

I wonder how many suicide victims had Beneficial life insurance.

You know the church is in serious financial trouble when they send a so-called prophet to an African country and to beg for money from some of the poorest people on earth. It doesn't matter that these people were supposedly fence-sitters during the war in heaven, the church still wants their money.

President Nelson also said tithing can break cycles of poverty in poor nations and families.

"We preach tithing to the poor people of the world because the poor people of the world have had cycles of poverty, generation after generation," he said. "That same poverty continues from one generation to another, until people pay their tithing."

Sick!!!

stillanon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> To most of the civilized world, religious dogma
> goes out the window when kids start killing
> themselves.


Well, that is what you are saying, and its probably true in your MORmON world, However in the MORmON world that I was raised in, the super ass hole MORmON enforcement agent that I had as a male parent saw Abraham as an inferior due to abraham's inherent reluctance to off (Kill) Isaac when it was deemed necessary for religious purposes. His attitude was: hurry!! just plunge the knife into that little bastard and get it over with!!!! what is the hold up and worry, stabbing your kid, will NOT hurt you one bit !!!!

......besides, according to MORmON doctURine, we all know that human suffering is a mere trifle compared to what MORmON Jesus went through at where ever, so screw it. we got other important stuff to do, like baptizing dead people !!!!

The same super ass hole MORmON enforcement agent longed for some way to skirt the law so he could "properly" shed my blood according to MORmON temple covenants for me violating my MORmON temple covenants by daring to openly say that his THE (MORmON) church was a load of bull $hit and that his MORmON leaders were garbage.

MORmON kids killing themselves would be of sooooo little concern to him in all of his MORmON majesty. They were OBVIOUSLY grossly substandard, so good riddance!!!!

When the qualifier that the dead kids were gay is added, he'd be utterly disgusted that any one had any spent any time on the matter above and beyond the necessity of properly disposing of the deceased bodies. He has a one and only true church to support, so stop wasting time by sniveling about old garbage.

Weren't they going against their own teachings, i.e., freedom to worship as one see fit, and you alone are responsible for your transgression.

A child couldn't be blessed or baptized because of something the parent(s) do or did.

Talk about talking out of both sides of their mouth.

(Formerly You Too? formerly god knows what)

I really think the Gay youth suicide has got the old farts' attention and this is a further effort to demonize LGBTQ people less.

But it's been replaced with an all out attack on Trans people.

I think they got a lot of pressure from Sam Young and other people.

I watched the Mormon Stories live podcast on the policy change (or revelation change LOL!). What came up from some people who spent years working for the church and know the leaders pretty well is it's the church not growing and members leaving that has the church leadership concerned. I really don't know how the church is doing financially. They spend a lot of money and not always on things that generate a return profit.

I don't know if they have gone into a hole on building so many expensive buildings and I don't know if stupid commercial real estate projects like City Creek in SLC have hurt them.

Maybe the church is in worse shape than we think because they seem to be willing to change policy rather quick to try and appease people. It's no longer "I'm the prophet and do what I say!" Too many members are revolting and a church is only as powerful as it's members and if people ignore you, your authority and power of being prophet diminishes.

In other words, the church no longer can call the shots as much as they used to. The world has changed.

I want to add that I think all the negative publicity which has hit the cult hard and fast has definitely played into the actions the cult has take. There has been a constant stream of news reports, as in covering the policy of interviews of children by the bishops, the LGBTQ policy of the church, sexual scandals such as the one with Mission Training President Bishop, members being excommunicated, and members leaving the church.

This negative publicity does not fair well with a cult trying to be more Christian mainstream as well as one where its goal of receiving all the grand attention it, BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT!, deserves is ever constant and foremost.

Rusty, king Oaks, Jowels, and sly Bednar all love to have "their" church look good and be the number one best of all the rest. They are not happy campers when the truth pops out (think of the Boise and Swedish Rescue where words were not minced as the cult tried to squash the revolts).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/05/2019 04:15PM by presleynfactsrock.

This just in from another exmo board.

A gentleman claiming to have been part of it says that an unspecified time prior to the Nov. 2015 announcement, the church bought OracleSQL, and got a huge discount, based on a "Humanitarian" designation. Then after the Nov. 2015 very un-humanitarian announcement, Oracle (owned by Larry Ellison, about whom the joke is bruited, 'What's the difference between Larry Ellison and God? God doesn't claim to be Larry Ellison) said, "hey, you're not a humanitarian organization: you have three years to either migrate from our software platform or pay full price."

According to the source, the church swallowed their revelatory pride and walked back to a stance they figure will get them back their discount.

True? I have no idea, but I love the story because it is SOOOOOO apostley! It reeks mormon apostley!!

God did not change her mind:


The 2015 "revelation" was for the Mormon Church

The 2019 "revelation" is for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Fakes.

Brother of Jerry is right, the religious community still has substantial influence in Congress & in the states.
If that was a real threat, other churches would join the chorus.