Elder Oaks. So sad.

Hagoth · Post by **Hagoth** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 11:15 am

It is so sad that a man who has so much opportunity and potential to inspire people and provide an example of love and inclusion, has instead chosen to dedicate his life to persuading people to join him in his pursuit of intolerance, exclusion and hate. His legacy will be an embarrassment.

Zack Tacorin Dos · Post by **Zack Tacorin Dos** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:24 pm

So, what is it exactly he said? I saw something over on Reddit that he was saying Mormons must reject anything that doesn't meet their standards (or something like that). Is it more preaching to strengthen the "us vs. them" and black-and-white thinking?

Hagoth · Post by **Hagoth** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:26 pm

Is it just me, or did Elder Oaks spin language and half-truths in a way that was intended to create the illusion that the proclamation originated as a revelation rather than a legal document?

Hagoth · Post by **Hagoth** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:27 pm

Zack Tacorin Dos wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:24 pm So, what is it exactly he said? I saw something over on Reddit that he was saying Mormons must reject anything that doesn't meet their standards (or something like that). Is it more preaching to strengthen the "us vs. them" and black-and-white thinking?

It was basically a call for LDS people to stand against same-sex marriage and to crank up their persecution complex for doing so.

Hagoth · Post by **Hagoth** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 1:01 pm

I am really having a bad day because of this man. I have no use for a self-proclaimed apostle of Jesus Christ who apparently didn't receive his bosses' Love One Another memo.

Hagoth · Post by **Hagoth** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 1:07 pm

I am really having a bad day because of this proclaimed apostle of Jesus Christ who apparently didn't receive his bosses' Love One Another memo. I feel like telling him to _ _ _ _ my _ _ _ _, but given his obsession with homosexuality he would probably take it literally.

ETA: to fellow mods: if this evil speaking of the Lord's anointed is over the line feel free to censor, I have censored myself to the limit of my ability.

Hey, I just noticed that the subject line of this post has been changed! Oh, I get it. whenever you type Elder O_A_K_S it gets automatically changed. Tricky. My question: which is least disrespectful?

StarbucksMom · Post by **StarbucksMom** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 2:30 pm

This made headlines:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/mormon ... li=BBnbcA1
Gay marriage is legal. It is over and done. Mormons lost. Time to move on. He's just banging his head against a brick wall and making an ass out himself. (and potentially causing irreversible emotional damage to vulnerable youth.)

Mormorrisey · Post by **Mormorrisey** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 7:13 pm

Yeah, until tonight's priesthood session, this was the only talk I was steamed at. Can't you get it? YOU LOST. MOVE ON. Your views will soon be relegated to the dustbin of history, where it should be. It was the GC equivalent of "get off my lawn, you lousy kids." Yeesh.

Mormorrisey · Post by **Mormorrisey** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 7:15 pm

Hagoth wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:26 pm Is it just me, or did Elder Darth Vader spin language and half-truths in a way that was intended to create the illusion that the proclamation originated as a revelation rather than a legal document?

Yeah, I caught that too. A great write up here:

http://rationalfaiths.com/from-amici-to-ohana/

Check out all the links on the article, it's quite illuminating.

wtfluff · Post by **wtfluff** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 9:18 pm

Darth Vader!

Darth Vader!

Darth Vader!

(Sorry, I had to. It's hilarious!)

Edit: Ah man... Not hilarious at all without the "auto-correct". In fact, I may have to delete the entire post because I don't want to support Darth Bigot in any way.

Culper Jr. · Post by **Culper Jr.** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 10:01 pm

Hagoth wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:26 pm Is it just me, or did Elder Darth Vader spin language and half-truths in a way that was intended to create the illusion that the proclamation originated as a revelation rather than a legal document?

yep, taking a page from the Nelson playbook. Not a "revelation" outright, like an official D&C "revelation", but revelation (warm, fuzzy feelings they had during the writing process) was involved tacitly making it a "revelation". So there you go haters, the church IS led by revelation!

AllieOop · Post by **AllieOop** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 10:41 pm

Hagoth wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2017 11:15 am It is so sad that a man who has so much opportunity and potential to inspire people and provide an example of love and inclusion, has instead chosen to dedicate his life to persuading people to join him in his pursuit of intolerance, exclusion and hate. His legacy will be an embarrassment.

This is so odd. I swear this has been a big deal over on the MD&D for quite awhile. There's been an on going argument about how the proclamation has never been called a revelation and the TBMs fight and claim that it is a revelation even though no Apostle has ever stated such. I really wonder if the leaders read those discussions or at least have gotten feedback that it's a big point of discussion (no revelation regarding SSM, etc.). Members over there are gleeful over Oak's talk today ("see, we told you so!").

22 years later, and now it's being revealed that it was actually a revelation? Why didn't President Hinckley tell the members that it was a revelation when he announced the proclamation back in 1995? Why are we just hearing about this now? I think it's really strange.

Some are saying Oak's never used the word "revelation" in his talk today. I didn't hear him speak but does anyone know if he did or if was just inferred?

This also reminds me of how PresNelson came out after all the upset over the new policy and claimed it was actually a revelation.

Culper Jr. · Post by **Culper Jr.** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:45 am

AllieOop wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2017 10:41 pm Some are saying Oak's never used the word "revelation" in his talk today. I didn't hear him speak but does anyone know if he did or if was just inferred?

This also reminds me of how PresNelson came out after all the upset over the new policy and claimed it was actually a revelation.

If I remember correctly, he used the word, but it was used in exactly the same way Nelson used it with the November policy. He didn't state that it was a revelation (as in an official D&C type of revelation), but that as they crafted the wording and decided what to put in the proclamation, they were somehow guided by revelation in the process. He threw it in there really quickly as he listed the things they did to come up with the Proclamation.

The "Nelson Maneuver" makes me insane. They use these weaselly ways of implying things without explicitly saying them. TBMs believe they are saying one thing that satiates their faith, but if the GA is ever called out on it, well, they didn't actually SAY it, people just assumed that's what they meant.

Rob4Hope · Post by **Rob4Hope** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:08 am

DAMN!

Conference is this week?......CRAP! I thought it was next week.....
Missed the whole thing!!!!

moksha · Post by **moksha** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:38 am

Elder Oaks reaffirmation might be in response to speculation that Mormons will at some point in the future let go of their policy against same-sex marriage. Elder Oaks sought to nail the LDS shoes into the corner with this for time and eternity pronouncement. I can understand his reasoning: Once the Soviet Union fell, there needed to be some issue to keep the LDS John Birch animus alive. Shifting their animosity from Commies to homos seemed to do the trick. This makes sense if you buy the argument that Mormons gotta hate on somebody.

Who changed the spell checker so that ApostleDallinOaks name comes up as Darth Vader? Change it back, please. I do not want to be disrespectful with my serious posts.

Corsair · Post by **Corsair** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 12:17 pm

The talk from Oaks is the current front runner for the most despised talk of this conference. Reddit certainly is certainly collecting the anger towards Oaks this weekend.

blazerb · Post by **blazerb** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 12:43 pm

Corsair wrote: ↑Sun Oct 01, 2017 12:17 pm The talk from Oaks is the current front runner for the most despised talk of this conference. Reddit certainly is certainly collecting the anger towards Oaks this weekend.

This was the one that struck me as the most awful. His wasted intellect should be mourned.

Not Buying It · Post by **Not Buying It** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 2:09 pm

Meh. Fifty years ago this month Elder Ezra Taft Benson gave this compassionate talk in October 1967 General Conference saying that the Civil Rights movement was a communist plot and prophesying a race war:

http://scriptures.byu.edu/gettalk.php?ID=1569&era=yes

That talk has gone down the memory hole - just as Elder Oaks' will have 50 years from now. I hereby prophesy, in 50 years you will find no trace of Elder Oaks' talk on any Church website.

Hagoth · Post by **Hagoth** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:07 pm

Wasn't Oaks the president of BYU when they were shocking the genitals of young gay men? Did he have any direct input on this?

Jeffret · Post by **Jeffret** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 5:28 pm

blazerb wrote: ↑Sun Oct 01, 2017 12:43 pmHis wasted intellect should be mourned.

I think he's using it for the things he thinks are the most important. Sadly. He's been in this fight a long time. There's little reason to think his prejudices will disappear now. Sometimes progress is made by the passing of the older generation.

NOM

Elder Oaks. So sad.

Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Darth Vader. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.

Re: Elder Oaks. So sad.