So, the op on Facebook shared a link to mormon.org where it is profiling an evolutionary geneticist, with the caption from the guy that says "You know, that's one of the things I love about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is you can study anything you want. Anything above the earth, below the earth."

I decided to be naughty, so I posted this comment: "He must not have been around during the September Six. Most religions are pretty open about people studying whatever they want, so that's nothing special, but mormonism has jumped on the bandwagon in the past two decades in a really positive way, and doesn't come down against dissent nearly as much as it used to."

A TBM was incensed with my comment and replied "are you going to make a negative church-bashing comment like this EVERY time (the op) makes a positive comment about the church and science? It's getting kind of old. (The op) has faith and loves science. I'm sure you don't realize how often you're doing it, but it's really a drag."

My response: "then please have him insert a note to this post that says 'no dissenting comments, please'".

Ok, I don't understand the Op's comment. How does
He think that the great thing about TSCC is you can study anything about the earth?

And I hate Mormon.org. Everyday I see a post like: Molly McMormon and ten other friends like Mormon.org. So annoying. All of the sudden everyone is liking Mormon stuff. I guess I didn't get the memo. I'm not in the loop.

Also, why is Mormon.org profiling a evolution geneticist? Isn't that against the teachings?

here
http://www.pewforum.org/Science-and-Bioethics/Religious-Differences-on-the-Question-of-Evolution.aspx

Oh, he does, and a couple of TBM evolutionary biologists have piped in as well. Apparently, every anti-evolution statement ever made by a leader of the church has been "vague." For instance, when they said that evolution was a "theory of man" they weren't necessarily saying it was false, and when the church said that Adam was the "primal parent of the race" it didn't mention that race is a cultural distinction, and not a genetic one. They are also claiming that these and many other explanations are unbiased.

Nice rejoinder, K. lol

How about a study of the history of the church?
How about a study of evoloution?
How about a study of racism in the church?
How about a study of polygamy?
How about a study of the translation of the book of Abraham?
How about explaining the facimile(s) found in the Book of Abraham?

I always run into rationalizations like, "I don't know that we teach that.." or the famous, "It will be worked out in heaven"

Or people calling you apostate because you are studying apostate or books written by, "enemies of the faith".

In my opinion the LDS inc does NOT let or encourage the study of any topic, idea, or teaching that does not promote their ideology.

If Mormons were truly free to study anything, then gospel doctrine teachers would be encouraged to use resources beyond their manuals when planning lessons.

Well, things must have changed fairly recently. Approximately 90 days ago, I distinctly heard Henry B. Eyring rail against evolution in General Conference. Sure, you can study it and talk about it in a non-church setting, but don't believe it... don't take it seriously.. It's Steven Jay Gould's Non-Overlapping Magisteria writ large. Just put on your scientist hat when studying that.. but of course we all know that's a stage hat, just for make-believe. It's not considered proper church attire.

You stated the truth and you did so in a very balanced manner. As much as I love positivity, there are times when you need to tell it like it is.