skippy the dead wrote:You know, I hated when the church did this for Prop 22 years ago, and I hate it even more now. Just butt the hell out, I say.
If we aren't going to listen to the guidance of the prophets, then what's the point of being a member? Yes, I wish God would let me try a little wine or coffee, but since I wanted His guidance, I'm going to follow it.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
Brother of Mahonri wrote:No that is not true. It is legal for churches to campaign for ISSUES. Like Prop 8. It is only illegal for them to campaign for candidates.
I suppose it's foolish of me to think they should have allowed equal time for both sides to present their information, so the members would have the opportunity to make up their minds for themselves.
How silly of me.
No it was just foolish of you to think that it was ILLEGAL for churches to do something like support an issue that their doctrine supports or opposes is up for a vote.
And it was silly of you to try and change the topic thinking I wouldn't notice.
skippy the dead wrote:You know, I hated when the church did this for Prop 22 years ago, and I hate it even more now. Just butt the hell out, I say.
If we aren't going to listen to the guidance of the prophets, then what's the point of being a member? Yes, I wish God would let me try a little wine or coffee, but since I wanted His guidance, I'm going to follow it.
SO do you follow the guidance of the prophets who said that Adam is god or the prophets who said Adam is not god?
p.s. According to "His" words, its OK to drink coffee, as long as its iced coffee. Its the temperature that matters, not what the drink is. Well OK wine and Strong drinks are also proscribed even if they are cold. So if you want to obey "His" words and drink alcohol, you should stick to an ice cold beer. Cheers!
Brother of Mahonri wrote:No it was just foolish of you to think that it was ILLEGAL for churches to do something like support an issue that their doctrine supports or opposes is up for a vote.
And it was silly of you to try and change the topic thinking I wouldn't notice.
*blink* you haven't been here long, have you?
And you've obviously never spent much time in Relief Society.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
Actually beer is fine according to the words of the Word of Wisdom, but not according to its official interpretation.
As opposed to strong drink (distilled spirits), mild drinks made from barley are apparently just fine for man - and it wasn't talking about Postum.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
The Nehor wrote: As foolish as expecting Jesus to step down from the Sermon on the Mount and introduce Satan to share his views to give a balanced perspective.
Isn't the former a registered Democrat? I mean after all, he cared about the poor and downtrodden.
skippy the dead wrote:Yeah, that is silly. The church has made it very clear to its members how they should vote on this. It has made the members' minds up for them. There is no other side, short of opposing the brethren.
Whatever happened to "I teach them correct principles and let them govern themselves"?
You know, I hated when the church did this for Prop 22 years ago, and I hate it even more now. Just butt the hell out, I say.
I hated it when they did it for the ERA. Well, not when.. but now!
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
Brother of Mahonri wrote:No it was just foolish of you to think that it was ILLEGAL for churches to do something like support an issue that their doctrine supports or opposes is up for a vote.
And it was silly of you to try and change the topic thinking I wouldn't notice.
*blink* you haven't been here long, have you?
And you've obviously never spent much time in Relief Society.
Do you think the fact that you have more posts than I do impresses me enough to ignore the inanity of your arguments?
And speaking of inane, I have spent time in Relief Society meetings, but not much since the 1960s.
asbestosman wrote:If we aren't going to listen to the guidance of the prophets, then what's the point of being a member?
This is more true than you know.
asbestosman wrote:Yes, I wish God would let me try a little wine or coffee, but since I wanted His guidance, I'm going to follow it.
You're now equating what has become a commandment in the church to how to vote on a political issue? I think this goes to the root of the problem. I do not believe it is the place of this church or any other church to tell its members how to vote. The LDS church has no business calling or appointing its members to campaign and raise cash on behalf of this misguided ballot measure. And it has even less business telling its members how to vote on it.
I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe / But at least I'm enjoying the ride.
-Grateful Dead (lyrics by John Perry Barlow)