Oaks: Almost Good

[Guest]

Tchild,

Oaks spoke of abuse, neglect, starvation, and poverty, too. He also addressed abortion, adoption, and population decline. He spoke of children being conscripted and being kidnapped and forced into prostitution and sex trades. The talk was essentially about providing for and protecting children and he listed a wide array of issues impacting children and family.

In other words, he didn't avoid topics of real concern. The talk was very broad in scope and included, but was hardly limited to, comments on the makeup of the family.

Cate

Do you have to be Mormon to have parental concern towards your children, the young in the community or the whole world? What fairly well-balanced adult or parent doesn't wish that for all children?

Oaks stated:

and they need decision-makers who put their well-being ahead of selfish adult interests."

So what is a 2-4 billion dollar mall if not a "selfish adult interest" (on an institutional level) when compared to providing material means to the very children that Oaks perceives as being harmed? Is the LDS church a religious organization dedicated to following the teachings of Jesus Christ, or a corporation with economic interests thinly veiled by the scantest of humanitarian aid?

Hey Oaks: put your money where your mouth is, or shut your yap. If you, as a concerned person decide to donate 3% or more of your money to some worthy cause, you are giving more on a percentage basis than does the LDS church.

Give, don't give, it is a personal or organizational perogative, but DON'T preach one thing, then do another. Hypocrites!

[_brade]

Speaking of humanitarian aid, I'd be interested to see a comparison of how much money members have donated to same sex marriage legislation over, say, the past decade versus how much humanitarian aid was given since 1985 (the Fact Sheet time frame).

[_bcspace]

I disagree with Oaks that

So you agree then that fornication and adultery are not sin?

[_mercyngrace]

Why are they in the same talk on protecting children?

For the same reason he spoke about divorce among heterosexuals - these are issues that impact children.

[_lulu]

Why are they in the same talk on protecting children?

For the same reason he spoke about divorce among heterosexuals - these are issues that impact children.

But that's not a juxtapostion?

[Guest]

As for abortion -- until our human society loves, feeds, protects and nourishes the children that are alive now, it should shut its collective mouth about whether someone aborts or not.

Lets focus on helping the millions (or is it hundreds of millions?) that are starving and dying now, then we can focus on saving those unborn babies.

[_mercyngrace]

Do you have to be Mormon to have parental concern towards your children, the young in the community or the whole world? What fairly well-balanced adult or parent doesn't wish that for all children?

Did he say that only Mormons have parental concern? If so I missed that.

As for your second question, I guess that depends on your definition of "fairly well-balanced adult". I'd also add that I think the fact that "wishing" doesn't translate to "acting" might have been the point of his talk.

He did speak of adults putting their personal interests ahead of the interests of children. I thought he spoke of that in the context of divorce, though it may have come up in other parts of the talk as well.

Regarding the mall, that's a whole separate issue about which I have unresolved concerns of my own. I won't pretend to defend that decision with the limited knowledge I have about it.

[_mercyngrace]

But that's not a juxtapostion?

It didn't come across that way to me. It was a long talk and there were certain issues that came up in clusters. The whole traditional family makeup part was later in the talk, separate from the opening mentions of the more horrid abuses like conscription, prostitution, etc.

You'd have to give the talk a listen and decide for yourself but I didn't get the impression that he was equating certain issues as it's being presented in this thread. Not even close. I'm open to the fact that I may think differently after I've seen the talk in print but it did not seem to me that he drew parallels between the issues you mentioned in your first post earlier in the thread.

[_sock puppet]

Marriage rights for Lesbians and Gays linked to the child sex trafficing and child soldiers?

Oh hell no.

Just hell no.

To my recollection, he did not link those issues nor where they juxtaposed verbally in any way. They were separate issues, among many others, that impact children.

Why are they in the same talk on protecting children?

bingo

[_sock puppet]

I disagree with Oaks that

So you agree then that fornication and adultery are not sin?

I believe what you call adultery to be a breach of my promise to my wife. God--and 'sin'--has nothing to do with it. As for fornication, no, it is not a 'sin' for an unmarried, consenting adult to have sex with another consenting adult.

This is your brain like an egg in the frying pan of reason. Any more questions?