Tomorrow at 1:15 PM Oaks will appear on Trib Talk, and the Salt Lake Tribune is asking for questions that can be submitted at "hashtag #TribTalk on Twitter and Google+ or texting 801-609-8059." See http://www.sltrib.com/news/2112602-155/tomorrow-at-115-pm-lds-apostles
I think we should ask:

"Mr. Oaks, you previously wrote a Law Review Article entitled "The Popular Myth of the Victimless Crime," University of Chicago Law Alumni Journal (1975): 3–14. Within that article you argue that Homosexuality should remain a crime to be investigated by law enforcement. Do you still support this position? Would the LDS church support such a law?"

Wow. Great question. How did you find that information? I bet money your question is not asked. But I would love love love to see how Mr. Oaks tries to wiggle his way out of that one. Good job.

antilehinephi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wow. Great question. How did you find that
> information? I bet money your question is not
> asked. But I would love love love to see how Mr.
> Oaks tries to wiggle his way out of that one. Good
> job.


Why do you think that question wont be asked?

We'll find out what type of a reporter she is. She asked John Dehlin questions that are raised by TBM's regarding his church membership.

These guys have walked into a land mine in my opinion. A few good questions will just add fuel to the fire.

I agree. Does she want to keep her job, or prove she's a legitimate reporter/journalist?

See also here for a quote Oaks gave on this issue:

"sex crimes such as adultery, fornication, prostitution, homosexuality, and other forms of deviate sexual behavior." He further states: "I concede the abuses and risks of invasion of privacy that are involved in the enforcement of such crimes and therefore concede the need for extraordinary supervision of the enforcement process. I am even willing to accept a strategy of extremely restrained enforcement of private, noncommercial sexual offenses. I favor retaining these criminal penalties primarily because of the standard-setting and teaching function of these laws on sexual morality and their support of society's exceptional interest in the integrity of the family... Preservation of the public health, safety, and morals is a traditional concern of legislation. This does not justify laws in furtherance of the special morality of a particular group, but it does justify legislation in support of standards of right and wrong of sufficient general acceptance that they can qualify as "collective morality." In the exercise of its important but underestimated standard setting function, the law should teach observance of that collective morality, thus preserving the essential relationship between the moral values of citizens and the requirements and teachings of law..."

http://www.heraldextra.com/news/opinion/utah-valley/af-law-may-backfire/article_691c86b2-1c79-5b4f-88d2-208d4d9dde58.html A little more than half-way down the page.

He's just dying to get into everyone's bedroom.

I have one: "How do you live with yourself?"

Why is he so homophobic?

oaks is so homophobic because i believe he is a closeted homosexual. i say this because i was cruised by him in the salt lake intl. airport, to which my never-mo gay friend, who was standing next to me, asked if i had just seen that (the brazen cruising). when i told my friend who oaks was, he was gobsmacked. in my opinion, the reason the church is so homophobic is because it still harbors old-school closeted gays who created a society wherein they could operate, much like the catholic priesthood.

What a self righteous prick this guy is. I know exactly how he lives with himself. He thinks he was born to tell the rest of us what to do.

+1. He is incredibly ego-centric. He believes everything he tells himself.

My question is "Why don't you release the church financial records?"

My question would be "do you plan to apologize to all of the people who had their genitals electrocuted on your watch, in the name of keeping them from being gay?"

But I like Deluded's question too. Probably more likely to get answered than mine.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/28/2015 11:08PM by ferdchet.

This question is a no-brainer. I see this as a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for this reporter to put herself on the map. We'll see what she's made of. She doesn't have to be rude. Just ask simple questions. Your suggestion is perfect.

Jurassic Park called, they want their dinosaur back.

deluded - please submit that question and report back to us if he actually gets asked it.
I wonder if they have someone monitoring the questions which get asked. If so, it will all be watered down and not worth watching.

I think these mormons will be hung tomorrow. I'm not expecting it to be some stuttering admission or for the reporter to hammer them.

If she just asks some straight ahead questions and let's them talk, these guys won't be able to help but expose themselves.

You said the Church doesn't apologize. Yet there were two apologies issued during your apostolic tenure. One was for the Mountain Meadows Massacre, and the other was for baptizing Holocaust victims. Why did you say the Church doesn't apologize?

Good one.

I predict that this will be scripted and that he will not tolerate questions shot from the hip.

According to you, Elder Oaks, the Church neither seeks nor offers any apologies. So could you explain again the repentance process as you see it and explain why it is so important for your membership to do something that the church itself sees as completely unnecessary?

I'd just like to hear a response to how blacks and LGBT differ in the eyes of the church leaders.

If you can claim religious exemption to discriminate against LGBT, would you also support the "religious freedom" to discriminate against blacks? Please tell me how these two situations are any different?

Why does a self proclaimed apostle of Jesus Christ only answer pre-screened pre-approved questions?

I submitted the question. Bet it does not get asked.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2015 02:34PM by jiminycricket.

And Oaks made that statement in 1975! Not that long ago. Hard to believe the Mormon church is so far behind the times. If not for the Internet,they would still be stuck in 1975.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2015 02:34PM by jiminycricket.

I would ask him if he thinks it's ok for employers to fire people based on their sexual orientation.