TR revoked for #metoo apostasy

[_Water Dog]

I don't know how you could read that story and side with the stake president.

Yes, that's how the story is designed. It presents things out of context. Listen to the audio, from there it's not hard to fill in the blanks.

[_tapirrider]

she wanted to leverage the church social structure for revenge.

Kind of like she was just being a public nuisance and needed to be silenced. Nauvoo Expositor.

[_Nightlion]

In the audio the Stake President 'LDS Conference Speaks' as if with the Spirit. What a rube.

[_Lemmie]

It seems to me that she wasn't seeking support, she wanted to leverage the church social structure for revenge. Understandably she's hurt, but we also don't know anything about her or the situation. There seems to be this assumption that she's the "victim" in all this. Says who? I'm not convinced. Just looks like an emotional lady having a tantrum.

Over a non-physical affair, no less. It's hard to determine if person expressing emotion is really having a tantrum though, without more information. "Emotional lady having a tantrum" is such a loaded phrase.

[_consiglieri]

Without knowing anything much about the situation, it strikes me as a situation where the stake president is trying to get this woman to hide her feelings from other members in the name of making the church be a place where members are shielded from the reality of what is going on in the lives of other members.

While I can understand the stake president not wanting the members divided up into warring factions, it does seem like another instance of the old refrain of telling members they can think whatever they want, but they just can't talk about it.

[_consiglieri]

Just listened to some of the audio.

What a cluster.

The first problem is not just having the other sister go to another ward. I don't care where she lives. Legalism over pragmatism.

I mean, the stake president (and bishop) want them to keep going to church; but they have to attend the same ward? That's nonsense.

The second is exerting unrighteous dominion by taking away this sister's temple recommend; and then by threatening her membership.

Maybe this sister is overreacting. It has been over a year since the divorce was finalized in April of 2017.

Maybe she is causing problems by talking to her friends about it.

The solution is not to tell her to stop talking about it.

The solution is not to take away her recommend.

The solution is not to threaten her membership.

The solution is not to victimize the victim.

That's my take, anyway.

[_Gadianton]

'Dog,

What other organization tells you to both a) study out all truth yourself, you are morally obligated to do so and b) if you come to a different answer in your truth finding than anyone in your organization with a higher rank, you are morally obligated to keep it to yourself?

[_Meadowchik]

Is it social shaming or is it seeking support? Does it have to be one or the other? And, why be afraid of the natural fall-out of someone's bad choices? How about letting the grown ups work through it instead of calling for silence?

Did you actually listen to the interview? It seems to me that she wasn't seeking support, she wanted to leverage the church social structure for revenge. Understandably she's hurt, but we also don't know anything about her or the situation. There seems to be this assumption that she's the "victim" in all this. Says who? I'm not convinced. Just looks like an emotional lady having a tantrum.

"Just an emotional lady having a tantrum," them's fightin' words.

[_Shulem]

"Just an emotional lady having a tantrum," them's fightin' words.

Yep, the dog stuck his foot in his mouth on that one. Imagine the dog saying that in a locked room with nothing but women? Oh my. You better run dog because those emotional ladies are going grab you, tie you up, and do some nasties until you beg for mercy.

[_Craig Paxton]

Again we seem to have an institutional detachment from reality within the churches all male hierarchy. Church claims that there is zero tolerance for abuse and that they always believe the women who are reporting abuse. Reality shows something quite different. Women are reporting multiple incidence of having reporting their abuse to their bishops only to run into brick walls, being told its their fault and told to stay in these abusive marriages and victimizing the victims of the abuse. The SP mentioned in this thread is only being consistent with what his institutional male peers are doing to other women in similar situations throughout the church.

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2018/02 ... tal-abuse/