I had a family member, and a "friend" post a like link to the PR statement in response to the petition about Packer.

I was going to respond, but then decided that doing that to a family member would really get them into shunning mode. So I didn't.

Then I read one of his friends responses: "It'll be interesting to see the responses to this. Amazingly, those who decried the original message are mute as of yet."

That was it, I decided I wasn't going to sit on it, and this is how I responded. Let the shunning begin.

------------------------------


I wondered if it would be wise to comment, and thought it may not be. Then Dallin made me think that perhaps I should voice my thoughts.

I've Got to wonder if they really had their heart in what was said.

In the church's own publication called "To The One", Pres Packer refers to gays using these words.

unnatural, bad habit, enslavement, twisted, afflicted, deviation, indulgence, destructive, abnormal; it is an affliction, immoral, It is a transgression, condemned, misled, perversion, correctable, disorder, ugly, indulgence, Pervert, devilishly bad, dangerous, deluded, predator, addiction, sad, selfish, very sick, brutal, enslavement

I have a hard time reconciling the PR statement, with the published pamphlet that was directly printed for gay people to read (To the one refers to Pres Packer's assertion that only 1 in 100 are gay, and the pamphlet was directed at that one gay person).

I'm left with what Pres Packer directly says to Gay's himself, and what the PR dept comes out with, and trying to decide whether it's Packer or the PR guys that more accurately portray the real attitude.

It's easier to think that Pres Packer might have misspoke during his speech, and needed to make clarification in the printed version, than it is to think that a carefully worded pamphlet that was printed for years was wrong.

If I had a Gay family member, I'd hope they only heard the PR statement, not the type of wording and characterization of the pamphlet.

I like your response.

If your reply gets you shunned by your family member, then the church not you is their family. It is probably best to know this so you can set reasonable expectations.

Good job! Sometimes you have to stand up to assholes, no matter what the reaction.

You should use that as a letter to the editor for every publication that covers the "retraction" or edit of that conference talk.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/15/2010 08:47PM by Laban's Head.

I logged on this morning thinking that my post would have been deleted from his facebook wall, but it's still there.

He hasn't posted on facebook at all since then, so perhaps he hasn't even seen it yet. I wonder if other family members have.

I'll have to see if I have the same number of friends today.

Excellent response.

I did respond to her. She was saying how his words were being "twisted" and how unfair it was.

I couldn't keep quiet. I had to respond. Only one person responded after that and it seemed to be in support of what I said. this is what I wrote


"what he said wasn't twisted. He meant what he said. If he didn't mean what he said then he wouldn't be standing up for what he believes in which are the basic points of what the church believes. Especially concerning homosexuality. It doesn't make it right just because he said it. Men are fallible I signed the petition that was delivered to the church. In this time of children killing themselves because of words LIKE his it was an absolute wrong decision to say the things he said and in the way he said them. How many closeted gays are in the church and had to hear that and loathe themselves more? I think it is sad."

I was pretty sure he'd delete it. He never responded to it, and neither did anyone else at all.

Seems that it's an ignore it and maybe nobody will notice it thing.

I have the same number of friends on there right now, so perhaps the family is just making a mental note of how awful I am to quote the big guys when they say stupid stuff.

but at the same time can not admit that you are right because doing so would mean saying that TSCC is wrong and we all know how hard that can be for a TBM.