I don't think I've ever done that (or similar) in my whole life.
Most Mormons. I don't know if the figure is 95%, but it's definitely at least half, and probably over 75%, if my experience is any indication.
Seeing as how only about 33% of Mormons are active, I doubt your experience is a good indicator.
I simply remind you what is and is not doctrine as per the Church's own statements. You have a vested interest in pet theories, therefore, you avoid the Church's own statments all the while complaining the Church has no such statement.
Of course the Church is going to say that the most unpalatable things its leaders have taught are not doctrine.
That's not what it says at all. They simply define what is and is not a doctrinal work. I'm quite sure a critic could find something unpalatable to him in official doctrine.
The question is, does this jibe with what the Church thinks are sources of truth? The critic would say, no.
An honest critic would not. The reason why is because D&C 107, in which it is seen that the FP and Qo12 are equal in authority, predates much of what a critic might find unpalatable.
I believe it. One of the truths is that homosexual acts are sin.
Mormonism is a sin. Living in Utah is a sin. Not drinking wine is a sin. Not keeping a healthy prostate is a sin. Your mom is a sin.
See how dumb "It's a sin!" arguments are?
I didn't make any argument here. I simply demonstrated that I accept LDS doctrine.