...the Temple towers are usually illuminated by lights that shine up on them toward the sky.
Terry Skinner is a member of a group called Preserve our Cody Neighborhoods. He lives near the proposed Temple site. Most of the homes in his neighborhood and others nearby are large and expensive.
They have a view of the mountains. Many neighbors are concerned the church will leave the light on 24 hours.
“This is a big issue because people are very possessive of the dark night skies, and it’s very important to them,” Skinner said.
Dianne Kaelberer is another member of the Preserve Our Cody Neighborhoods group.
“That is not the location for a bright temple that is going to encroach on neighbors,” she said.
Kaelberer and Skinner said they are not against the temple in Cody, they just think it belongs somewhere else.
“One might ask where can one put a hundred foot tall tower church in an applicable zone where they wouldn’t have to go through a conditional use permit or a special exemption for the height,” Skinner said. “That answer’s pretty easy. It’s a D3 commercial zone.”
this is what is so odd about this. Why couldn't the LDS church respect the established zoning laws and respect the established masterplan, and build accordingly?
It was suggested earlier in one of these threads that Cody residents should compromise and work with the LDS church, I assume so the LDS church can get their way peacefully. What should actually happen is that the LDS church should be respectful of the laws of the land already in place, and 'compromise' by abiding by the zoning laws and the Cody master plan, already in place for its community. The bullying and threatening engaged in by the lawyers representing the LDS church is inexcusable.
MG wrote:Do you think he is ‘elite’ because he was already rich and decided to donate land to the church?
I think you're missing the point. The point is a single proponent for the project with all the appearances of putting a feather in his cap can't establish street cred for the case that the typical church member of Cody is deeply personally invested in the new temple getting built.
MG wrote:When members sing Praise To the Man, however, they are not singing Happy Birthday to Joseph Smith. They are singing praises to the Lord for calling and sustaining a prophet
wrong. If that were the case, they'd be singing, "Praise God for the man who communed with Jehovah."
We can't take farmers and take all their people and send them back because they don't have maybe what they're supposed to have. They get rid of some of the people who have been there for 25 years and they work great and then you throw them out and they're replaced by criminals.
Marcus wrote:Why couldn't the LDS church respect the established zoning laws and respect the established masterplan, and build accordingly?
If the land was donated by a wealthy member then isn't the answer that the Church is too cheap to give up the free ride?
Maybe Nielson can sell his land and then buy land for the Church in the right zone and the Church would be cool with it?
We can't take farmers and take all their people and send them back because they don't have maybe what they're supposed to have. They get rid of some of the people who have been there for 25 years and they work great and then you throw them out and they're replaced by criminals.
One would think. When members sing Praise To the Man, however, they are not singing Happy Birthday to Joseph Smith. They are singing praises to the Lord for calling and sustaining a prophet…and succeeding prophets…in the latter days.
No, they're not singing praises to the Lord. No, they're not sustaining succeeding prophets. Nowhere in the lyrics are either of these things evident. The lyrics were written as a eulogy to honor and praise Joseph Smith.
One would think. When members sing Praise To the Man, however, they are not singing Happy Birthday to Joseph Smith. They are singing praises to the Lord for calling and sustaining a prophet…and succeeding prophets…in the latter days.
No, they're not singing praises to the Lord. No, they're not sustaining succeeding prophets. Nowhere in the lyrics are either of these things evident. The lyrics were written as a eulogy to praise Joseph Smith.
OK. I see where you’re coming from. I was considering my thoughts and feelings as I’ve sung this song over the years. I have always seen it as a hymn written to revere the prophet and giving thanks to God for calling a prophet to ‘commune’ with In Jehovah these the latter days.
Marcus wrote:Why couldn't the LDS church respect the established zoning laws and respect the established masterplan, and build accordingly?
If the land was donated by a wealthy member then isn't the answer that the Church is too cheap to give up the free ride?
Maybe Nielson can sell his land and then buy land for the Church in the right zone and the Church would be cool with it?
If I’m not mistaken it wasn’t the temple that people (most anyway) were concerned with as much as the tower and the lighting. Those issues are being negotiated and will most likely be resolved. The brouhaha will end up being water under the bridge.
You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time.
If I’m not mistaken it wasn’t the temple that people (most anyway) were concerned with as much as the tower and the lighting. Those issues are being negotiated and will most likely be resolved. The brouhaha will end up being water under the bridge.
maybe you should go tell this to DCP...
We can't take farmers and take all their people and send them back because they don't have maybe what they're supposed to have. They get rid of some of the people who have been there for 25 years and they work great and then you throw them out and they're replaced by criminals.
No, they're not singing praises to the Lord. No, they're not sustaining succeeding prophets. Nowhere in the lyrics are either of these things evident. The lyrics were written as a eulogy to praise Joseph Smith.
OK. I see where you’re coming from. I was considering my thoughts and feelings as I’ve sung this song over the years. I have always seen it as a hymn written to revere the prophet and giving thanks to God for calling a prophet to ‘commune’ with In Jehovah these the latter days.
I take your point.
Regards,
MG
This is how it aways happens. Dragged into facts and retrench.
If I’m not mistaken it wasn’t the temple that people (most anyway) were concerned with as much as the tower and the lighting. Those issues are being negotiated and will most likely be resolved. The brouhaha will end up being water under the bridge.
OK. I see where you’re coming from. I was considering my thoughts and feelings as I’ve sung this song over the years. I have always seen it as a hymn written to revere the prophet and giving thanks to God for calling a prophet to ‘commune’ with In Jehovah these the latter days.
I take your point.
Regards,
MG
This is how it aways happens. Dragged into facts and retrench.
I’m willing to monitor and adjust where warranted/necessary as I’m sure you are also.
