Screen Shot 2015-11-13 at 12.08.12 PM

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has really been through the mud this past week. Their leaked policy prohibiting the children of gay parents from baptism (and requirement for 18-year-old children of gay parents to disavow their parents’ relationship before being permitted church membership) has completely reversed any small steps the church took in recent years to appear more loving of homosexuals, and has instead pushed them further into the “hate group” category of organizations.

The church never planned to make their new Handbook policy public, so they were ill prepared to defend it so publicly. On Friday, after several hours of delay, they released a video of a staged interview between Michael Otterson (head of church PR) and Elder Christofferson (taking one for the team because he has a gay brother.) This video was an opportunity for an “apostle of the Lord” to speak to the world about this widely-despised new policy, and calm down members of the church who failed to see Jesus Christ in this change from so-called inspired men.

The video did a poor job of doing that. Rumors circulated that even certain bishops and stake presidents did not stand by the new policy, with some suggesting that they wouldn’t be implementing it in their ward/stake. National and international news covered the story, with the general response from the world being something along the lines of, “Go figure. We already knew they hated the gays.” Resignations poured in by the thousands, and the whole thing was generally just a bit of a Nauvoo Expositor.

After what I’m sure was a tornado week at church HQ (that poor PR department), the church released a “clarification” to the new policy today. This band-aid over a bullet hole, as John Dehlin said, “has downgraded the new policy change from terminal to chronic”.

The statement from the First Presidency said that the policy would not apply to those who had already been baptized, or to those whose primary residence was not with a gay couple. Never mind that this puts insane social, emotional, and familial pressure on kids from divorced families to live with their straight parent so they can be accepted by their peers in LDS-dominated communities — no, this policy is all about “protecting families”.

The church had the opportunity to “clarify” these things a week ago when Elder Christofferson filmed his little video, but for whatever reason, they didn’t feel the need to. From that, I can only assume that they genuinely didn’t expect the public outcry to be so widespread for so long, and were forced to further tweak things as people continued protesting. (Like when the XBoxOne was announced and people had complaints so they made a few tweaks, as one Redditor said.)

In true victim-blaming style, Mormon Newsroom felt it necessary to mention, “the dangers of drawing conclusions based on incomplete news reports, tweets and Facebook posts without necessary context and accurate information.” One of your apostles had the chance to provide the necessary context and accurate information you speak of a week ago, and failed to do so! Can you really blame anyone for their reactions?! It’s the “We all knew about the seer stone and if you didn’t it’s your fault!” all over again. Oh, and you really want to play the “accurate information” game, Mormon Newsroom?

I don’t believe the church ever had any intention of making these “clarifications” — I think it’s pretty clear that they came in response to upset members’ and non-members’ reactions to the leaked policy. Churchsplaining Mormons who are currently using this new statement from the First Presidency to demonstrate how biased and inaccurate the media can be fail to realize that these clarifications probably wouldn’t have even been given had it not been for those who were brave enough to speak out against the injustice of this new policy. Just like the convenient new revelation on blacks and the priesthood wouldn’t have been given had people not began speaking out against the church’s institutional racism.

In their final paragraph, Mormon Newsroom was bold enough to claim that, “Church doctrine is consistent with the life and teachings of Jesus Christ.” Ok, cool. So show me where Christ taught about polygamy. Or polyandry. Or needing to know certain Masonic handshakes to get into heaven. Or special underwear. Heck — even show me where he talked about the sinfulness of gay people! Show me where he mentioned that you should obey church leaders before him. Show me what he said about little children. Now show me your doctrines, and try and convince me they are aligned.


Further Reading: “The Brethren Don’t Take Opinion Polls”

Zina Jacobs-Smith-Young
Zina Jacobs-Smith-Young
Zina Jacobs-Smith-Young would have been a millennial blogger, but she died in 1901. The wife of Brigham Young, and prior to that Joseph Smith, and prior to that Henry Jacobs, who was sent on a mission by Brigham before he married her, Zina loves writing, long walks on the beach, and playing the field.
  • Shem

    Well said! The believing bots won’t be able to comprehend the issue at hand.

  • Abe Resurrection

    LDS a garbage cult for garbage people. Let Mormons wallow in their bullshit of stupidity, but segregated from any respectability, so that they only victimize their own kids and not the rest of society.

    • Jonathan Joseph Reddoch

      Nice stone casting.

      • Abe Resurrection

        what’s this? A garbage cultist opines and tries to squirm out of his own complicity with the garbage LDS cult of liars? Say it ain’t so, Joe.

    • Nancy

      I m glad I’m not a Mormon any mor lol

    • fides quaerens intellectum

      ^This guy! Zelph, you’re getting the whole crew back together again. 😉 Now where did the guy go who was claiming all Mormons were secretly Satanists….? He is the only one missing! Informed, clearly rational, and obviously intellectual.

  • I’m just sad Jesus made so many people without a moral compass so they’d have to join a religion just to know what’s right and what’s wrong. Come on, Jesus!

  • Arwen Undomiel

    the LDS Church idiot leaders just did a great job destroying the image of the church with their stupidity and lack of inspiration. From now on the Mormon church is going to be known as “Mormon church children hater Inc.”

    • fides quaerens intellectum

      And yet, that doesn’t quite roll of the tongue… Perhaps a bit of workshopping? I’m sure the comment thread will gladly provide feedback. Carry on to your final destination!

  • Nancy

    The children who suffer the most and have always suffered are gay children of unaccepting straight parents. They will suffer much more under this policy.

  • Christine Ortega

    This isn’t a discussion this is a haters gonna hate group period! But since I’m Mormon what do i know right so let’s see what Romans verse 26 through 28 says shall we and as far as that goes. The church did this believe it or not to keep contention out of a home so a child isn’t getting tought conflicting doctrine open your eyes people!

    • Steven Lee

      If it was really the intention of the church to keep contention out of the home then church policy would also include numerous other familial configurations that meet criteria where conflicts would arise. For example, all hetero sexual parents who are “apostates” or non believing, single sexually active parent homes, atheist parents homes, any strongly religious non lds homes that hold beliefs contrary to Mormon docrine… the list goes on. It is easy however to make the statement as you did looking through a very narrow “defend the church at all costs” mentality. Make no mistake this policy is not about protecting children, rather it is about the church making efforts to distance itself from the growing acceptance of homosexuality and gay marriage

  • Sker

    Q: How many Mormon apologists does it take to screw it the lightbulb?
    A: 2. One to screw it in and one to explain how nothing changed.

  • Pingback: aquadynamic()

  • Pingback: where can you buy anabolic steroids()

  • Pingback: 4cyn5et4m5t94c5t9m4vn54cx65()

  • Pingback:

google-site-verification: google2cac8eb5ff86e577.html