LDS church chides Affirmation
 

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_10172283

The church is upset that Affirmation had a news conference in which they publicized what they intend to request of President Monson and the church. Doing so is just "posturing." Huh?

This is like dealing with the Chinese Politburo. You have to go very slow and not go to the media, or else relations will be harmed.

This is what Affirmation wants:

This list strikes me as a very soft request.

I am opposed to attempts to strong-arm the Church. It is somewhat presumptuous to ask that someone address this or that topic in the next General Conference.

That being said, if I had my list of demands....

* Admit the worth/importance/economic impact of the California Saints during the Church's semiannual General Conference
* Tell mothers, during a conference session, that it is not their fault if their sons or daughters do not get their Eagle Scout or Young Women's Medallion
* Arrange a meeting between mikewaters and a member of the First Presidency or the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.
* Invite an LDS general authority to post on Cougarguard (dupes will be deleted)
* Develop training materials and consistent guidelines for LDS bishops to use regarding caffeine, gross v net, blue shirts, beards, R rated movies, and using ward lists for MLM efforts.

It sounds like the folks involved with Affirmation are starting to look for a reason to leave the LDS church and then blame the LDS church for them having to leave.

Isn't that always the case?
 

Blame someone else for your actions? I wonder how long the brethren were laughing on the floor when they read a list of their demands. Geez, they sound like modern day terrorists/hijackers. This knuckleheads just shot themselves in the foot.

It does seem like a pretty soft list of requests. But really--why take it directly to the press? Unless the church is refusing to give them a forum, this is posturing/strong-arming, and I would say they're not really in a position to do that. I do wonder if IPU's right.

I think part of it is that the church has said the meeting must be delayed from 6months to 1 year (the time it will take to get a new director of social services).

They probably feel like the church is jerking them around, and probably specifically delaying the meeting until after the California vote.

That may very well be the case.

Still, going to the press for something like this causes me to think they're trying to position themselves as martyrs to gain sympathy, though the only folks who will show sympathy will be those who are already on their side. This isn't going to convince anyone who believes that the homosexual community is on the moral low ground to think otherwise.

Where do you get that from? Their list seems exceptionally reasonable to me, not just as something Affirmation would want, but something the church should be interested in as well, assuming they mean what they say when they claim that they do, as an institution, love homosexuals and strive to find ways to be compassionate towards them.

let's face it Cali, there are A LOT, maybe even a supermajority of LDS that hate homosexuals and have no interest in being compassionate to these people that are intent on destroying marriage and causing the church to lose the most important battle (It's "Gettysburg" per the prophet) in its history.

So yes, that is why you are seeing a negative reaction to these frighteningly benign and no-brainer requests.

Just once I'd like to hear, from the pulpit at GC, that it's the fathers fault for not pushing them enough to play sports. Just once!