A History of Mormon Opposition
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 сен 2024
- The History of Common Consent in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the history of a democratic vote turned autocratic and theocratic loyalty test.
DONATE
donorbox.org/n...
VIDEO SOURCES
Sustaining of Church Officers
www.churchofje...
Opposing Votes
• Opposing Vote - LDS Ge...
First General Conference
www.josephsmit...
Articles and Covenants
www.josephsmit...
D&C 26:2
www.churchofje...
D&C 20:65-66
www.churchofje...
Common Consent Topical Guide
www.churchofje...
Common Consent Church History Topic
www.churchofje...
Doctrine and Covenants Student Manual
www.churchofje...
Nelson Announced as Prophet
newsroom.churc...
• A Message from Preside...
Solemn Assembly 2018
• Solemn Assembly
John Taylor 1880
journalofdisco...
Past Opposing Votes
• The Sustaining of Chur...
www.churchofje...
www.ldsliving....\
• The Sustaining of Chur...
FAIR USE DISCLAIMER
The Media in this video (including the thumbnail) is used in a transformative way, for the purpose of review and critique. The images in the thumbnail are used as the primary means of visually identifying the subject matter of the video.
#LDS #Mormon #History
A Case for Church Discipline
drive.google.com/file/d/1hW6Lk-jTLkIcOAmcaNWFlnX7yfNolJEZ/view?usp=drivesdk
My letter is being emailed to the bishop and stake president in the morning.
Having spent most of my life serving in ward and stake leadership positions within the LDS church, I have personally observed on multiple occasions that the church has always taken a zero tolerance policy for the financial 'sins' of local church leaders who intentionally violate their duty of care over church finances thereby causing a financial loss to the church. In every such instance I have observed that the perpetrators, who were local church leaders, have been immediately released from their calling and excommunicated from the church. I therefore find it hypocritical that there have been no changes in church leadership, and no disciplinary action taken, against the church's general authorities for their intentional, repeated acts of fraud and mismanagement of church funds that have resulted a $5 million loss to the church. This appears to be a double standard that I find distasteful, as it implies that the men in control of the church consider themselves to be above the rules that govern the general church membership.
Back when I was a member, I remember first hearing people shout "opposed" in general conference and being shocked and offended that they would be so rude. Now, I hear them and feel impressed by their courage and determination to stand for what they believe.
What courage is required to disagree? If a person knows some reason that a person is unworthy to hold an office they are obligated to say so and the issue will be looked into. If you oppose doctrine then you go and find a church that teaches what you want to hear. The Lord will not change his divine doctrine to suit someone's opinion.
I was remembering that too! Same thought. As someone who was inspired by Nemo to let my voice be heard as opposed to the first presidency and their dishonest financial practices and more, it took a ton of courage for me to stand and raise my hand opposed. I have never in real life seen it happen before I did it and neither has any of the elderly life long members in my ward. I was shaking and sweating and I did it! When the stake president spoke to me afterwards it's like my tongue has been taken over by the spirit and I was able to make my case passionately and with all things being brought to my remembrance. Certainly didn't sound like the normal me. But definitely takes courage to fight the good fight
@@billiebone7513Nothing wrong with that, when 'what you want to hear' is right.
@@Themanyfacesofego
It doesn’t matter what is said, people will hear what they want to hear.
Reality is observer bias, humans do not see the same world as each other, how we see the world is rooted in our own personal history and biases, it’s why how someone sees things can change within the snap of a second. Change the way you look and what you’re looking at changes.
I’m in a political position about disability rights, my perception illustrates that the vast majority of ‘disorders’ are culturally generated and socially constructed, especially since the time of Francis Galton and Adolphe Quetelet.
That is how the mysteries of Godliness work. When you apostatize then the light and knowledge, that you once had the privilege of enjoying, are taken from you in the absence of repentance. I invite you to pick the scriptures back up with the intent to follow the commandments and the keys of the priesthood and you will be able to regain the light you once had.
Your problem Nemo is.... you are using logic. You suggest that leaders of the church are working with some kind of integrity.
Can't get any clearer, Nemo!!
Hats off, bro👍
Thank you so much 😀
You have clearly and eloquently stated your case.
Thanks Richard!
Thank you Nemo for doing this
My pleasure!
I would add to this discussion the example of the time when Joseph Smith was outvoted on a particular issue (I believe he was trying to expel a member of the 12 from his office, or something similar) by the quorum, and he honored the objection. Not only is there precedent for votes for common consent in the Church, there is actually precedent for opposing the President and winning.
Nemo, you are awesome!
Cheers!
Wow, you put a lot of work into this! Thank you so much for this. This is very important for all of us to understand.
Thank you!
When it’s all made up. Leaders can do what ever they want
I think you've just summarized the whole thing.
Yup, it all boils down to the kid who owns the ball at the park gets to make the rules and change them during the game to favor himself. Nothing more than sophisticated playground antics.
Just like voting. The powers that be don't care about what people think
When I was young, the local bishopric would excommunicate all those who dared to apposed the sustaing of any leaders. They would give ear to the reason why a person who opposed and if they would not change their minds, they were excommunicated. Their excommunication was announce at the next meeting and the general reason why they were excommunicated.
Wow....not cool at all.
@Slave...
Is the mormon church the only one that routinely ex's their members for not going with the flow? Does anyone know?🤔
@@alaska-thelastfrontier6624 jehovahs witnesses too probably other cults too
@@alaska-thelastfrontier6624 Excommunication is a practice that was established by the Roman Catholic church over a millenia ago. It has a long history of being used in cases of dogmatic disagreement.
@@alaska-thelastfrontier6624 jw's
I applaud your courage. You set an amazing example for the rest of us about being true to our selves. Thank you ❤
Here’s to Dissent becoming Common to the point of embarrassment for The Brethren that they cancel this meaningless ritual.🤞
Another well researched video! I greatly appreciate your thoroughness, Nemo!
My pleasure
What is their reasoning for saying, “those opposed, if any”. It seems unnecessary to add “if any”. They should just ask for those opposed. It bothers me, why do they phrase it that way?
It's like "if any are brave enough".
It's a shaming phrase
iI agree it doesn't need to be said.
I can't vote 😢 I'm an apostate 😂😂😂
Always great to see an upload from you, Nemo. Cool Britannia! 🤣
Thanks! 😁
I used to be on a stake high council and I voted "No" on a couple of occasions. The stake president took me aside and told me he would release me if I did it again. I looked up the calling of high councilman in the General Handbook and found that my role was to discuss and sustain. That made me wonder why anything was put to the high council for a vote.
I noticed they were just directing us to our stake presidents, so I made an appointment with mine. But that didn´t really work either, because the letter I wrote and asked that he direct to the apostles was instead sent to the area seventy. I have no idea if it went anywhere else, never got a response.
It seems that giving non-answers and delaying is the only way to avoid admitting that they are or aren't accountable to anyone.
They would prefer to have the benefits of both. The idea of being accountable, without actually being accountable.
They will not accept accountability, but they also cannot accept people knowing that they are accountable to no one.
Oh, an update between you and President Oaks! Which video shows that?
My train of thought was that if I could not sustain the leaders of the church, why would I stay in the church?
I didn't know there were women who opposed Kimball over the ERA. Cool!
Nemo well this video is like two weeks old so you’re still a member of the church and active? Or should I email you and ask you that question
Haha, wow, I think it took some balls for that one guy in the 70s to try calling the authority out by name and having a loud across-the-hall discussion with him! I think I would have a tough time daring to do that; these days I think security guys would come looking for you and maybe eject you (quietly, unless you made them get physical) from the meeting for disrupting the reverence!
I opposed the sustaining of the stake president in 2013 and they completely ignored me. Like it didn’t happen
Great presentation
Thank you!
Yeah, it might've been fun to meet an apostle in those days but I wouldn't want to have to think of some opposition excuse just to do it. Now it's the stake president because it's more and more infeasible for members, especially out in other countries, to be scheduled to meet with an apostle for that.
Wow, what was the sentence that that one sister said to conclude her opposition?
Esta Conferencia General de Octubre 2023 votaré en contra. Gracias por tu explicación Nemo. Es bastante clara.
Joining the church for me seemed like a complete waste of time and tithing money that could of gone to paying what I owed the irs. I had no “blessings” coke my way, I’ve been shunned and blocked on Facebook from my missionary (for who knows why because they ignored me), every LDS lady has rejected me for dating. 18 months after joining I stopped going. I guess god hates me and there’s nothing I can do about it
God loves you.❤
Doug, why do you sometimes say "two thousand eighteen," etc., even though you sometimes say the easier version, "twenty-eighteen," etc.?
Great video. I think this is really low-hanging fruit for the church. It´s not like complying with what the scriptures say about the law of common consent would radically change the church. So why not just do it?
To oppose you have to have a strong conviction normally by seen such person “ which is being considered for a calling in the church” which means you have the liberty to show by actions that you are worthy of such a calling.
I oppose!
Or oppose by the same sign, actually. Nothing wrong with standing and speaking it, but it's not necessary.
Vote with your resignation and taking your tithing to widows and orphans like God wants.
church can do that and even better
20 yrs ago I sent my letter requesting membership removal; so, as a nonmember, yet as a member of the human race I still feel a moral obligation to send a copy of your letter to LDS Corp HQ. Thanks for articulating and compiling this letter. Sincerely, TT, AKA Trombone Trouble, AKA Jay Larsen. 😊
I definitely support you in voting NO. The question I have is that both of the first two prophets served in office for months before they were sustained. Why did they serve in leading the church before they were sustained? Was this a time for members to see how they would lead before sustaining them?
Technically the first presidency is supposed to be the presidency of the center place itself as well as the whole church, the high council of the center place was also supposed to preside over the various stake high councils.
The twelve apostles were technically supposed to be the presiding high council in areas without stakes; stakes were cities at the time and didn't include large areas as they do now. So basically small towns with not enough members to form a stake would be overseen by the twelve apostles rather than the high council in Zion.
Technically the twelve apostles and the seventies cannot have authority over the stakes because stakes are governed by high priests whereas the twelve and seventy are apostles which is a special type of elder not high priests.
In fact Joseph explicitly released men from a quorum of seventy who had previously been ordained high priests because high priest is a higher office than elder.
The church is out of order and will soon be set back in order, although this will likely lead to the splintering of the church because people have very hard hearts and very blind eyes...
I read somewhere - I can't find a source so I can't be 100% sure - that Joseph Smith presented a certain candidate for Quorum of the Twelve Apostles for a sustaining vote in a conference. The candidate failed to secure enough sustaining votes and so did not become an Apostle.
😂🤣😂 no wonder I don't recognize "the church" of my ancestors! I left in 1978😅
I was a member in 1978, and left the church recently. I can tell you that in my life-time I have observed that the church has been 'correlated', re-branded, and homogenized into a standardized, boring 'product' like some kind of spiritual Chicken McNugget wrapped up in a card-board picture of Jesus.
I never understood why a "no" was such a big deal. I mean so what, it's several hundred or thousand to maybe a few at best? Even if it's truly democratic the no's still lose. Why Mormons lose their minds over this is quite odd.
Section 132 was added wo the consent of the Saints. It was not voted on, it was just announced.
All who opposed on the highway to hell as sung by ACDC😂😂
Do you still go to church (LDS), or to another?
"...Hence why...
* hence
Yay! A new Nemo video!
amazing idea my friend.
You are so brave. We should get all of the exMormons to go to conference and stand up
In mass and vote opposed, so people actually understand it’s not just a few guys.
When the prophet commits a crime he loses his authority.
Maybe what we should also consider the scripture that we will know those who follow Jesus by their fruits of the spirit. I don’t think people who set up shell companies to avoid detection of their wealth and break the law, are actually following Jesus. Maybe if they repented of their sins we could consider seeing this a different way, but I don’t see law breakers as followers of Christ.
Oooh. Oookdork has a sexy German accent. The Church must be true if it can pull that level of Celeb.
The sustaining vote system is a means to identify the compliant. Those who oppose the so called decision of God by raising the right hand can be identified and removed from membership.
I haven’t been removed yet!
@@NEMOTHEMORMON God said to me 'Bill, that Nemo chap in Daventry is skating on thin ice and the ice is about to thaw!'
Maybe I lived a sheltered life when I was active LDS but that was the most opposition I have ever seen in a video. Are members really starting to wake up and voice their opinion to be noticeable?
Steve Smith,
No, these people aren’t waking up, if they were awake they would not be bothered what the church leaders say or do, anyone for that matter. The money being hidden wouldn’t mean anything.
A human awake is always in happiness regardless of life’s circumstances, happiness is the natural state of a human. The reason I have never been bothered about my mother disowning me just because I’m disabled is because I am not blinded by the illusion that I need someone to love me. When children we were all what I call ‘culturally conditioned’ to believe numerous illusions, and it’s about reversing that conditioning back to living in the state of a natural human instead of some mechanical robot, in science they often do compare humans to a machine don’t they? I think it would be more accurate to compare humanity to an ecosystem.
I’m not sure what NEMO thinks should happen when someone opposes. It’s Common Consent, not unanimous consent. Should the church be like “Well someone opposed so I guess we can’t go forward with conference “. If someone opposes, they take their concerns to their assigned Stake President. Only a narcissist would think they know better in handling concerns especially when the extreme majority sustain.
This puzzles me as well. Not the only instance where a tiny minority thinks their view overrides all others.
Nemo is a one trick pony, this opposition stuff is hardly new.
The problem is that Mormons are discouraged from voting to oppose. So, many of those votes to sustain are really out of pressure to conform.
"Those apposed may manifest it..."
Mormon theocracy is cult bullshit of the highest insult; in fact, let me just make myself clear and succinct... "I appose" -- marcus
Hi Nemo, seeing your videos for the first time. Are you still a believing member of the church?
Interesting question. I believe Nemo is a member in good standing. His beliefs are likely varied depending on each topic. Might have watch more videos to get a better idea.
Misconception: Members are not voting. They are covenanting to support the person in their calling.
Thanks for commenting, however the scriptures and church precedent disagree
Nemo the mormon do you personally sustain president Nelson?
No
Well with a spirit of love and humility i would invite you to repent and do so. I didn’t see a time constraint on the quotes provided in your video, if i am remembering correctly. And there is an existing vehicle for the membership to voice their objections currently in place in our church. Furthermore there is precedence for the right of a prophet to change policy/commandments in the scriptures. So a prophet could change the way they are sustained without denying the doctrine that they need to be sustained. Think of Moses giving the commandment to not kill and then Joshua issuing the command to utterly destroy. Policy can be lawfully changed but doctrine or eternal truths can not.
@@blakesanchez376 why don't you ask him for his reasons for a no vote before you call him to repentance? It seems that you might be the one in need of repentance for misjudging Nemo.
@@nickdipaolofan5948 The reasons for someone being critical of the prophet really do not matter. Without the priesthood keys everything we do would be in vain. So someone has to stand at the head. That system requires the membership to be humble and obedient to the leadership in order for the kingdom to function. The prophet Joseph Smith taught “I will give you one of the Keys of the mysteries of the Kingdom. It is an eternal principle, that has existed with God from all eternity: That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives.”
Inviting someone to follow Jesus Christ by keeping their covenants in a non-confrontational manner is a not sin and thus does not require repentance.
@@blakesanchez376 you are assuming several premises as fact, but they are debatable. Joseph said a lot of things. He lied a lot also. He lied to Emma constantly regarding who he was marrying behind her back. He lied publicly regarding how many wives he had. He lied about having sufficient capital for the bank he opened. He changed several revelations in 1835. He changed the first vision story. I could go on.
And yes, one of his biggest pet peeves was ANYONE questioning his authority........ imagine that.
Joseph Smith tried to make hyrum the prophet, but common consent wasn't accomplished.
Why do you put your podcasts on so late. 11.30pm
Do you know what country he lives in?
He's in England I think and it's 23:30 over there. It's late mate
I imagine he's doing it to better align with american time for greater engagement.
Hey, on Kolob Time it’s early, like Seminary.🥴
As the wagon train moves on the barking dogs of dissent continue their tiresome howl….Fools mock but they shall mourn. Sadly, those who leave can’t leave it alone.
I am confused. Please enlighten me.
Are you or are you not a believer/practitioner of the Mormon faith?
I have binged a number of your videos as I have been investigating the LDS church and faith recently, and you come off as an atheist ex-mormon yet consistently refer to yourself as a lifelong mormon.
Could you please elucidate your beliefs and affiliations?
El Grando Jabro,
According to his own words on various videos he is trying to reform the church, change it to what he and others want it to be.
I agree with some of his objections, even though he uses church material, I don't trust everything he says because some of it is used in manipulative ways. As a couple of examples, he quotes the church leaders from two separate speeches and it appears the church leaders are contradicting themselves, but no, one quote is from over a decade ago and the other more recently, and the speeches were on two entirely different topics.
That's manipulating public opinion.
In this video when a few women oppose, they are violating the church doctrine allowing politics to mingle with the church's doctrine. So he supports members' violations, but won't accept violations from leaders.
So he can't be bothered by violations since he supports opposers who violate, all his letters are directed at the 15 leaders, they are not the only ones who've made mistakes. He is fixated on the 12 apostles and first presidency.
I assume the reason he targets them is because it is they who decide what changes get made and he wants to change the church from the inside.
What’s the actual goal here? Even accepting the common consent as a vote per se, entitling members to be heard and even accepting the Church has gone rogue in this respect, what’s the actual, feasible suggestion? Are you suggesting any individual who objects to the calling of a leader shall invalidate the calling?
Do you want an entire questions and comment period on every policy or leadership sustaining? A hearing for each and every member to intervene and plead their case? Appeals processes? Like what’s the actual mechanism you seek or would is equitable?
Surely you’re not implying the millions are members are entitled to a face to face hearing in front of General Presidency. Clearly that’s not feasible, especially with the advent of the internet.
You've missed the real point here. The real question is, what was god's goal when he revealed the law of common consent to the church? Since this law was given by revelation and has been a part of the church's bylaws since it was first organized, there must have been some actual reason for it, other than to function as a de facto rubber stamp of everything the church leaders do and say. Did god actually intend that the church to function as a complete theocracy, in which the members have no actual influence or control over the decisions of church leaders? Or did he intend to make church leaders ACCOUNTABLE to the membership for their actions?
@@kaijusushi8165 sure, but the manner in which one can expressing opposition within a church of a couple hundred people and a church of millions of people, who, today can readily “voice” their commentary from all corners of the world is a very different how a such a church can receive such a expression.
Sure, common consent presumedly has some rationale in collective decision making and unity, but it never was a purely democratic process. The whole federal system of the United States’ use of democratic processes is in some ways a distortion of democracy. How do we hold appointed judges accountable? In the United States, you nor I certainly don’t have say in holding them directly accountable but rather impeachment is an entirely trusted to the another political branch to initiate and prosecute…. But you can write letters to your local representatives.
Again, what is Nemo suggesting the Church implement? A member on the books is entitled to a hearing with the general authorities? He’s personally already gone back and forth with at least one about various things that stick in his craw, still not feasible for the rest?
Unless he’s hoping for common consent to “influence or control” the decisions of the church, as your comment suggests, slim chance such a scheme would be implemented in any organization this size, and I don’t see how that’s closer to what the Church as Smith idealized, where unilateral, top-down management was commonplace.
It’s a great question. I was very lucky to be a co-host for an interview with Staci Cramm, a member of the Community of Christ first presidency. We go into what common consent looks like for them and I think it would be worth you taking a look.
ruclips.net/user/liveD6PnmIxf8hw?feature=share
@@kaijusushi8165
I can understand the point been made, there's major issues with the point though, this is not as simple as most of you are acting.
When people oppose there's two sides of course, which side do we agree with as we can't have it both ways?
According to the traditions of society the majority is granted their vote.
Then what about variation of interpretation and cultural diversity?
What someone says can be misinterpreted, perhaps the people been opposed did not mean what the opposer thought. Then various cultures around the globe are brought up with various policies, so there's bound to be disagreements with policies.
The arguments about dishonesty, I would say that the point they are humans like the rest of us proves it's not always intentional dishonesty, and sometimes it's not dishonest at all, when people are trying to make a point they can get carried away and fall for the monkey business illusion.
Let's say I were one of the church leaders and I said one thing in October, and the opposite this April in General Conference. Look at human vulnerabilities such as memory, how life experiences change the way we see things, changes in circumstances, emotions etc...
I saying one thing in October and the opposite in April does not automatically make it a lie. Lots of things would of happened during that 6 months period so to think someone would see things the same way as 6 month prior is plain irrational.
If saying something contradictory to what we said in the past makes it a lie it can be said all the opposers are liars since they said the opposite in the past.
Since the opposers are not telling lies I would say that proves my point, those opposing have had experiences between the two periods that made them move from sustaining to opposing.
I won't go too deep into it, but I'll let you know the subject of 'what is consciousness?' shows a lot of other short comings of the arguments on both sides.
For example, the way a person sees reality is 'observer dependent', there is no objective reality, there is no definite past, and there is no definite future. Not many people in my area know about the church been fined which is why I've been telling them, I can bet they saw two different churches (different realities), and chose the one they preferred to see.
The question 'where did life come from?', have you ever considered we've got things back to front and it's actually life that produces reality?
If we did not observe the universe would we see the universe as reality, no because we wouldn't even be aware it's here.
@@GabeClendenning - my response to your analogy is that within the united states constitution checks and balances were intentionally included for all 3 branches of the government to make sure that each of them had some check on its power to govern. Within the LDS church, as it currently functions, there is no effective check on the power of the general authorities who are accountable only to themselves for their decisions. Nemo's point is that this is not the way god intended his kingdom to function. If we are going to make allowances for church leaders to be imperfect and to make mistakes, then we should also make allowance for the voice of the members to be heard in opposition to those incorrect decisions.
In addition to being baffled by you apparently thinking common consent means you get to dictate anything, you've already deconstructed the foundation of the church and have established that the church is not led by men who commune with God, so why persist?
(Full disclosure: I 've left the church but still miss the community I felt in my teens and early twenties. However, that isn't coming back and I have rather profound disagreements over [modern] LDS theology and practices.)
This church protects child predators. Opposed.
Nemo, I must confess the direction you are heading no longer interests me. I have enjoyed your style and comments but now I feel you are a mission I don't care for anymore. It appears you are trying to enact some sort of reform by nailing your videos to the doors of the conference center.
Fair enough, I’ve always been aiming for reform alongside calling out dishonesty and fact checking, I’m sorry you don’t enjoy the former but hopefully you can continue to enjoy the latter?
@@NEMOTHEMORMON - I'm not sure, but I think you've just been compared to Martin Luther. Congratulations!
I for one appreciate the attempt at reform. I don’t hold any hope that it will be successful, and this have “voted with my feet” and no longer consider myself a member rather than implicitly support the lies and fraud, but I respect you for trying to change from within.
Satan opposed Gods plan even before the foundation of this world
Lehi stated..there is an opposition in all things...
The final victory is of The Lord
the question is.???
Are you on The Lords side?
That's a fallacy. Your are conflating the "Lord" and the LDS church/church leaders. Despite the fact that church leaders frequently resort to this kind of gaslighting, they are absolutely not the same thing. Disagreeing with or voting against the sustaining of a church leader is not the same thing as opposing or not believing in the Lord.
@@kaijusushi8165 So my question is if all the prophets are bad and the church is off course, where are you going? And where is God‘s organization on earth? Where is the stone cut out of the mountains that’s rolling towards the millennium? What other church in the world is the fastest growing? Has the largest missionary work in the world? Is gathering Israel? Baptizing for the dead? Redeem the dead? Requiring sacrifice? (not blood sacrifice) what other church is global, and so well organized? You all sound to me like the same people who left the church when the bank went belly up and they blamed it on Joseph Smith. Where are you going to go? If the Priesthood is corrupt, Where do you find it? The truth is the wheat and the tares God is going to sift them all out. Please also keep in mind that I am not a follow the prophet blindly kind of person. Would you guys are looking at this whole thing through a small lens.
@@kaijusushi8165 whose kingdom are you trying to build?
To whom shall you go?
@@kaijusushi8165
A rather pathetic argument.
The Bible teaches prophets are both called of God and fallen men. So if someone opposes a prophet called of God they are opposing God's choice.
@@crisantocabrerajr.8540 - the kingdom of god is within us and all around us. There is nothing to build and no place to 'go', because we are already there. the kingdom of god is not located on some distant planet (named kolob), neither is it located inside a great and spacious building that can be purchased with a $200 billion hedge fund.
This video is deceptive or misguided, based on the inaccurate portrayal of “Common Consent” it articulates.
In what way is it inaccurate? Is it because it doesn’t match what you believed common consent to be? All the information presented is from church scripture and manuals, and other LDS sources. Please tell me which of those is incorrect so I can fix the video.
@@NEMOTHEMORMON
The framework you set for this video made you too selective that at 13 minutes when sharing negative votes you supported the three opposers in their violation of the D&Cs 134.
An equality rights movement is societal, D&Cs 134 forbids religious influences mingling with society which includes societal influences mingling with religion.
By standing against the church leaders violating the laws of the church with their fraud, while supporting other violations by opposers just because they're opposing supports your point shows you're working from a bias framework.
By being so selective and limited of the information you share you can come off as deceptive as well.
When working from a bias framework in research you are more susceptible to what's called 'the monkey business illusion'.
@@danielmoore4024 Thankfully 70% of Mormons already VOTED with their feet. And more and more of them are doing it daily in this deceptive corporation. They won't be coming back.
NEMO - do u have a lazy eye 👁️
He's a "lazy learner! "
Actually, he speaks clearly and does thorough research.
if you don't like the Mormon church, just leave and cut ties with them. there's no point in arguing with them. to be clear, I don't like the Mormon chruch.
Honestly I agree… I don’t often subscribe to the “you’re better off leaving for x view or y view” but if you’re honestly just filming yourself opposing sustaining like some bishop and make impassioned speeches about the lack of “democracy” when the Church next has presented itself a a democracy.
God loves you but his word still stands whether you agree or not. People have trouble cutting ties because they know deep down that they are fighting the truth and are desperate to prove that they are not. Otherwise why not go and find another place to worship like you suggest.
All opposed on the highway to hell as sung by ACDC😂
@@billiebone7513 This is a rationalisation you are giving yourself for why people oppose the brethren. It does not deal with the actual reasons why they do. Watch the upload again!
@@billiebone7513 many members feel they are "stuck' in the church because their spouses might divorce them if they leave the church, their parents or adult children might disown them, or their entire social circle would abandon them. I know of a handful of members who have served as bishops, stake presidents, RS presidents, mission presidents, etc that do not literally believe the church claims but look at the church more of a social club they are members of.
Many do not "deep down know it is true" and I am also talking about many who preside over your temples, missions, stakes, and wards.