Thomas S. Monson, president of Mormon church, dies at 90
Source: ABC
For more than 50 years, Thomas S. Monson served in top leadership councils for the Mormon church making him a well-known face and personality to multiple generations of Mormons.
A church bishop at the age of 22, the Salt Lake City native became the youngest church apostle ever in 1963 at the age of 36. He served as a counselor for three church presidents before assuming the role of the top leader of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in February 2008.
Tuesday night, 90-year-old Monson died at his home in Salt Lake City, according to church spokesman Eric Hawkins.
The next president was not immediately named, but the job is expected to go to next longest-tenured member of the church's governing Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, Russell M. Nelson, per church protocol.
Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/thomas-monson-president-mormon-church-dies-90-52110431
Aristus
(66,468 posts)n/t
niyad
(113,596 posts)dalton99a
(81,635 posts)FreeState
(10,584 posts)Raster
(20,998 posts)...how fucking presumptuous and ostentatious... No one under the age of 60 and not a woman among them... oh, that's right, the patriarchy is strong in this church.
Disclosure: Born and raised in the church and escaped at 15.
niyad
(113,596 posts)aeromanKC
(3,328 posts)I guess Heaven will just have to do.
SpankMe
(2,970 posts)Raster
(20,998 posts)FreeState
(10,584 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)of Cain, and started allowing them into the temples at all.
Attrition levels suggest no people of color have had an opportunity yet. Undoubtedly at some point the church will induct black person or anything other than pasty white European into the council, and it'll be hailed as some massive improvement in inclusion, when in reality it's bouncing along somewhere behind the caboose of the Civil Rights movement because it's just too fucking hard to explain it away anymore.
bucolic_frolic
(43,342 posts)what does a 22 year old know about life or people that qualifies for assumption of the Bishop office?
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)You are in the wrong place.
Monson led the efforts to pass Prop 8, and anti-marriage efforts in Arizona, basically making in mandatory for Mormons in those states to donate time and money to TERRORIST gay Americans.
Monson was fILTH. A terrorist who is in HELL if it exists.
FUCK HIM and anyone that thinks he did any good in this world.
bucolic_frolic
(43,342 posts)I am sorry you've included me in your invective
I don't agree with him, I don't follow his principles, I was merely pointing to his life's achievements
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)Mussolini made the trains run on time.
For evil people like Monson, the evil they did far outweighs any good they might have accidentally done.
GoneOffShore
(17,342 posts)'The evil that men do lives after them; The good is oft interred with their bones.'
In this case there is very little good that will be interred.
FreeState
(10,584 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)This is not Democratic open mindedness and acceptance of people who are good but different, it's pure trumpianism.
20% of Mormons are Democrats or lean Democrat, and in 2016 25% voted for Clinton. These Mormons are our people.
Also, as very conservative churches go, this one's been relatively socially advanced and responsible. Relatively definitely being the key word here, but gender issues are not the only rights we fight for, and the difference between them and the knuckledraggers at Church of God up my road is far to real to throw them all in the same dumpster.
As for this guy, Mormons ultimately voted for Trump against the teachings of their church under him. I can tell you it's very different among many congregations here in the south, where many leaders set morality aside for political partisanship as surely as they did in any secular groups.
FreeState
(10,584 posts)and the church, not individual Mormons. Most of the LDS Democrats I know would agree with most of this thread by the way, Monson was not loved by all Mormons.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)him personally or not. We've known a lot of Mormons. They are very attuned to bigotry aimed at them, and no, this one man is not the sole target here.
But if he were, that would not make it all right.
Mormons are not the only DUers who are very good at recognizing bigotry where it pops up. Religious bigotry is every bit as bad as racial, political, and sex-orientation bigotry and comes from the same place -- inside each person.
FreeState
(10,584 posts)I am the only non-member in a family of 160 (counting first cousins). I am well aware of what bigotry is aimed at the individuals and what is aimed from the church at those they deem less worthy.
Pointing out that their leaders act in unethical or bigoted ways is not bigotry.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)might not have been thinking of Mormons at all, just this one man. I can see it.
One could, though, wonder how this one man became so incredibly well known to so many and so hated and despised. All by himself.
But perhaps you're right -- maybe all this vitriol has nothing to do with the religion he was temporary head of, really, at all.
Btw, did you hear the one about the Hispanic 26-year-old who's running for Maxine Waters' seat with the support of Joe Arpaio? Punch line: Bigotry plays no role, only principled disapproval of specific people. (They both don't like her.)
FreeState
(10,584 posts)You obviously don't know what it is like growing up gay and Mormon or how the church leaders bigotry gets inserted into doctrine. Or how that Churches doctrines, which can only be changed by the Prophet, take precedence over families. I do, as do many on this thread.
StevieM
(10,500 posts)How many brothers and sisters do you have? How many brothers and sisters do your parents have? Have many children did your aunt and uncles have? How many children do you, your siblings and cousins all have?
Sorry for all the questions. I am just amazed.
I had a mother, father, brother, sister, 4 grandparents, 3 aunts, 2 uncles by marriage, 5 cousins, 4 nephews&nieces, and 7 cousins-once-removed. I also have a brother-in-law, an ex-sister-in-law, 3 cousin-in-laws and an ex-cousin-in-law. Even if we count the exes that ads up to 36 people, including me. And my cousins have cousins on their father's side of the family who I know fairly well and have shared family holidays with.
FreeState
(10,584 posts)I dont want to dox myself, but basically my Grandma on one side had 12 kids and on the other 11. (Members all the way back to the very beginning on one side and about 1840 on the other).
StevieM
(10,500 posts)It never occurred to me that it could be risky, or identifying, to write the stuff I wrote.
Are you saying that you had ancestors who were in Kirtland and Nauvoo with Joseph Smith?
FreeState
(10,584 posts)I don't generally give out specifics in order to maintain relationships with my family. It sucks, but even making one negative comment equates apostate on occasion...
I had ancestors before Kirtland and the other side joined during Kirtland and immigrated to the US then.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Otherwise, I wouldn't even notice them. Not my circus. Not my monkey. They MAKE it an issue, and then 'oh we HAVE to take these positions because <dogma>'. Ok, fine then. Now we make the veracity and origins of your religion an issue.
That's not 'from inside me'. It's self-defense.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)It brought us (along with the Catholics) Prop-8 in California.
As an organization it's not 'our people'. Yes there are some members that are Democrats/Progressives. An outnumbered minority in a church that gives not a whit for the members that have differing political opinions.
Raster
(20,998 posts)...and then tried to lie about it.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Their donations were a little bit less, and therefore didn't hit the radar. It was a difference of like 10% of the funding.
Raster
(20,998 posts)...all across the United States and solicited funds for Prop-Hate in their churches... and then, of course, lied about.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)there, blacks, Hispanics, immigrants, LGBT, that would somehow make that rejection of all in a group, no matter what kind of people they are, sound respectable?
What we're talking about here is the very definition of bigotry. It's also the very enactment of stupidity. We would like to win in 2018 and 2020, you know. Convincing people to vote Democratic is going to be a big part of that, and if we don't it'll be because those looking at us failed to understand there is a difference between Democrats and Republicans.
One that's invisible on this thread.
Just wished none looking for answers wandered in here, but of course many do. Every day.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)If so, then I'd oppose them. But they don't so, um... your point isn't clear.
Also, all of those things you listed are what people ARE, not what they choose to endorse. You aren't born any particular religion. No one is. We adopt a religion, or we are inculcated into one by our parents or society. They are malleable and mutable. Race, gender, sexuality, these things are not mutable. Not something we can just snap our fingers and change on a whim.
So, while religions have official dogma and doctrines that are actively hostile to civil rights, they will be targets of criticism for it.
You don't see me in here complaining about Pagans, or Unitarian Universalists, or Buddhists, etc. Religion(TM) isn't the problem, and I am not 'bigoted' toward it. I simply have a comprehensive list of reasons to criticize certain religions AS ENTITIES, not individuals, who may or may not adhere to their claimed religion's official dogma/doctrine/precepts, etc.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)It's a human condition. No group is immune. Certainly not this one, but we can fight it in ourselves.
demopilot
(50 posts)the first scammer bumped into the first gullible dope.
Raster
(20,998 posts)If so, you'd be very hard pressed to see the "relatively socially advanced and responsible."
DISCLOSURE: From an Old-line Arizona Mormon family, ancestors crossed the plains with Brigham Young, etc, etc, etc.
Born and raised in the church.
Lecture someone else.