Question about conference

[Nonny]

Hi guys. I’m really trying to put Mormonism in the rear-view mirror, but about twice a year (conveniently) I check back in here to get the conference overview. I so appreciate the effort y’all put in on this. Sounds excruciating to me.

I heard that DHO made a comment that mocked a woman who had concerns about polygamy. This reminded me that in a past conference, GBH made a similar gaff. He made some comment that had the congregation laughing, but perhaps in an uncomfortable way. Does anyone recall what Hinckley’s comment was, or to what was he referring?

When I get these random thoughts I figure there is someone at NOM who will know the answer. Thanks in advance.
—nonny

[Red Ryder]

I don’t know what you're referring to but just wanted to say:

Hi Nonny! We’ve missed you around here!

[Nonny]

Thanks!! It’s nice to be remembered.

[A New Name]

Oaks also said in the RS session that if you act on your LGBT feelings, you'll go to a lesser Kingdom, but thats OK becasue they are still a great place!

[slk]

HOAKS just needs to STFU now about LGBTs and the afterlife. If he doesn't know all the answers about polygamy then he sure as hell doesn't know the answers to LGBTs. Did his shock therapy treatment ever work on gays? Nope...fuck him!

[Culper Jr.]

The only thing I remember about GBH concerning polygamy was the Larry King Live interview where he said polygamy wasn't doctrinal. He's taken some heat over that one, because, you know, it was and is doctrinal and for many years was pretty much the defining characteristic of mormonism. He often cited letters from women he'd receive but one about polygamy doesn't stand out.

[Nonny]

Thanks for all the comments. The answer came to me in the middle of the night, as good ideas often do.

I do remember the GBH interview and the “we don’t know much about this or that, we don’t teach it anymore (that might have been the becoming gods? question).

But the one I was specifically thinking of was when the GA (might have been Eyring or Holland?) told a story about a man on his deathbed to whom the GA gave a blessing, and the man actually expected to be instantly healed. And the audience laughed.

This sort of story hurts my heart. First, because when men of power and influence belittle other people’s experiences it reveals a lack of sensitivity and compassion. And second, because when the audience takes it as a laugh line, which is not refuted, they are validated in their own lack of sensitivity and compassion. I just think getting a laugh at the expense of another person is a low blow and unbecoming to one who thinks he speaks for God or the church in some way. That was why the DHO incident triggered me, as do most of the words that come out of his mouth these days.

[hmb]

Here is GBH's statement from that above mentioned Larry King show.

"I condemn it [polygamy], yes, as a practice, because I think it is not doctrinal. It is not legal. And this church takes the position that we will abide by the law. We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, magistrates in honoring, obeying and sustaining the law."

Funny that the church claims to obey the law of the land, but not obey/accept the inclusion of the LGBTQ community. Even in civil marriage they are sinning if they "do it." (Wasn't that SWK's big statement? JUST DO IT!) Law of the land is law of the land.

[Advocate]

Thanks for all the comments. The answer came to me in the middle of the night, as good ideas often do.

I do remember the GBH interview and the “we don’t know much about this or that, we don’t teach it anymore (that might have been the becoming gods? question).

But the one I was specifically thinking of was when the GA (might have been Eyring or Holland?) told a story about a man on his deathbed to whom the GA gave a blessing, and the man actually expected to be instantly healed. And the audience laughed.

This sort of story hurts my heart. First, because when men of power and influence belittle other people’s experiences it reveals a lack of sensitivity and compassion. And second, because when the audience takes it as a laugh line, which is not refuted, they are validated in their own lack of sensitivity and compassion. I just think getting a laugh at the expense of another person is a low blow and unbecoming to one who thinks he speaks for God or the church in some way. That was why the DHO incident triggered me, as do most of the words that come out of his mouth these days.

The deathbed story was Eyring in a priesthood session, likely 2015 or 2016. And I agree that story was painful on many levels. What struck me as really weird is that as a church we (supposedly) believe in miracles and the power of the priesthood, yet the whole conference center laughed at the story of someone actually hoping for a miracle through the priesthood.

[Hermey]

Thanks for all the comments. The answer came to me in the middle of the night, as good ideas often do.

I do remember the GBH interview and the “we don’t know much about this or that, we don’t teach it anymore (that might have been the becoming gods? question).

But the one I was specifically thinking of was when the GA (might have been Eyring or Holland?) told a story about a man on his deathbed to whom the GA gave a blessing, and the man actually expected to be instantly healed. And the audience laughed.

This sort of story hurts my heart. First, because when men of power and influence belittle other people’s experiences it reveals a lack of sensitivity and compassion. And second, because when the audience takes it as a laugh line, which is not refuted, they are validated in their own lack of sensitivity and compassion. I just think getting a laugh at the expense of another person is a low blow and unbecoming to one who thinks he speaks for God or the church in some way. That was why the DHO incident triggered me, as do most of the words that come out of his mouth these days.

The deathbed story was Eyring in a priesthood session, likely 2015 or 2016. And I agree that story was painful on many levels. What struck me as really weird is that as a church we (supposedly) believe in miracles and the power of the priesthood, yet the whole conference center laughed at the story of someone actually hoping for a miracle through the priesthood.

Sad, but a spot-on observation. ^^^

I would say that for most of these people, it is about belonging rather than actually believing.