Mayor rescinds offer to place homeless shelter in Draper after push-back from residents

[accadacca]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170330/c374a1f07ee6ed9dc9e3343c9e273949.jpg

https://www.google.com/amp/fox13now.com/2017/03/29/mayors-face-angry-crowd-at-meeting-about-proposed-homeless-shelter-sites-in-draper/amp/

[Iceaxe]

Draper mayor = total dumbass

He committed political suicide.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[rockgremlin]

Backpedal, backpedal, backpedal...

"Give us your homeless, your needy, your........er....nevermind"


Personally, I think the actions of the draper residents was shameful. At the end some homeless guy got up to plead his case and everyone booed him off the stage.

[double moo]

channel 2 actually had Axe's ugly mug on for a word...

[accadacca]

Wow...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrXrSrzu_JA

[Iceaxe]

Take a trip to The Road Home in downtown SLC and you will know why no one wants this magnet for drugs, violence and crime in their neighborhood.

#NotInMyNeighborhood

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[tallsteve]

Take a trip to The Road Home in downtown SLC and you will know why no one wants this magnet for drugs, violence and crime in their neighborhood.

Yup. I rarely go downtown anymore. I had to attend a multi-day business conference at the Salt Palace a couple of weeks ago. I decided to ride Front Runner then Trax to get there. I was shocked at the homeless population the transit route passed on the way. I honestly had no idea. Scary looking and acting people. In the 3 days I rode the transit system I was panhandled more times than I can recall, solicited twice (the one obviously meth addicted woman got really mad when I told her I wasn't interested. So much so that I thought she was going to attack me) and saw drug paraphernalia on the floor of Trax. The temps were cold those days. Trax was full (because it's free to ride downtown) of homeless people who just hop on board and ride the circuit because it's heated and a way for them to get warm. I felt sorry for them. At the same time though, Trax was jammed with them. I made the comment to my co-worker that Trax is more of a mobile heating shack than a transit system.

[Iceaxe]

My kids have been calling Trax a rolling homeless shelter for years.

[Goat]

Just to go off of what Steve pointed at, a problem that is all too often ignored is the extreme rate of mental illness among the homeless population. These are the "scary people" on Trax that harass, threaten, and at times attack other passengers.

It's not just a rolling homeless shelter, it's the county's low-income mental hospital.

[accadacca]

South Central Salt Lake is pissed too. Bringing the ghetto the the ghetto.

http://kutv.com/news/local/mayor-mcadams-submits-location-recommendation-for-a-third-homeless-shelter-outside-of-slc

[hank moon]

I would not be surprised if the ATL overpass-collapse fire turns out to have been started by "the homeless".

[Scott P]

#NotInMyNeighborhood

OK, but what is the solution? Shoot all the homeless?

Personally, I think that we should bring back the CCC, but it won't entirely solve the problems.

[Brian in SLC]

OK, but what is the solution? Shoot all the homeless?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWO4JxM3nDc

[jman]

Wow...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrXrSrzu_JA

Paid Protestors... :P


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DiscGo]

OK, but what is the solution? Shoot all the homeless?

I think the solution is to provide more mental health support. People who are sharp and healthy seldom remain homeless. It is usually those who struggle with something else like drug addiction or mental health. .

Example: We went and played discgolf on Thanksgiving. I walked up to a homeless man to offer him money for a nice meal and he pulled out a knife and was very threatening to me. He didn't want my money, he didn't seem capable of speech. He just wanted me gone.

[Iceaxe]

OK, but what is the solution? Shoot all the homeless?

I can guarantee you 100% the solution is not to take one huge problem (Closing The Road Home) and spreading it out to create a bunch of small problems.

Bottom line is we need to improve our mental health services. Which coincidently is the same solution the NRA advocates for fixing many of our gun violence problems.

[emoji631]

[phatch]

Where ever you put a shelter, it becomes an attractive nuisance to whatever is around it.

Homelessness is a chronic problem because the people who are homeless aren't proactively solving their problem, they're living with it--as a generalization. Certainly some do solve it alone or with the aids in place. So for the most part, it's something we have to continue to live with no matter what solution we choose. If we want to avoid the concentration issues that our current service system creates, then distribution is the other option. But it should be a very fine grained solution. Distribute them at the family level or two or three to a location. One per apartment building maybe by code for low income housing and such.

Tons of push back because then its in everyone's backyard, not just a few. But it solves the problems that our concentrated system creates. And will create it's own problems for access to services and similar.

[uintafly]

Draper residents went nuts when a DI was slated to go in and yet the mayor thought his folks would accept a women and children shelter??? He must be out of touch or was somehow set up to make bank if the deal went through. I guess there is a small chance that he felt obligated to help his fellow man but as a politician I can't give him the benefit of the doubt. It is a tough situation, there are places around Rio Grand that are full on shanty towns. Many of which seem to be mainly 18-45 year old able bodied people and the thought of my tax dollars going to them is a tough pill to swallow and I certainly don't want a shelter down the street from my house, but what do you do about the people with legitimate mental health issues?

Quick question for LDS people on the board. Not a member myself so I went skiing during conference, but a coworker of mine said that he felt more than a few of the speeches seemed to be aimed at Draper, and the need for people to be empathetic and take care of the poor. Any truth to what he got out of things?

[devo_stevo]

Yeah, I thought it was strange that Draper even put their hat in that ring when it happened. I haven't spent a ton of time there, but it doesn't strike me as the place to welcome a bunch of homeless people in with open arms.

As for the talks in conference, I don't know. I didn't get that out of it, but we often hear what we want to hear when listening. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some talks that did in fact mean to direct their words at Draper and the current situation. There were a couple of talks at the conference last October regarding refugees that I thought were pretty directly tied to the humanitarian crisis in the middle east. So I would guess that they would certainly address homelessness in Salt Lake.

As for the problems in Salt Lake, I agree with uintafly. I see lots of able bodied people that could probably get up and get a job and pay rent and live like the rest of the adults if they wanted to, but there is also a real problem with mental illness that I'm not sure how to address. It's a tough decision to make, for sure and I don't pretend to know enough about it to tell anyone how to handle it.

[rockgremlin]

I cringe every time someone says "The homeless just need to get a job and stop leeching off society!"

I know of exactly ZERO employers that are overly excited to hire someone who lives in a cardboard box under the freeway exit ramp, who hasn't bathed in three months, can't afford deodorant or soap, and have no means of transportation.

Quit claiming they just need to get jobs. Our society is set up to ensure an almost 100% failure rate for the homeless. Saying their problem is due to lack of initiative or motivation only absolves us of responsibility, and serves to sooth a guilty conscience.

Nobody aspires to be homeless. Nobody enjoys being homeless. But they're homeless due to a variety of reasons - not just personal. It's a personal as well as societal problem - and as such, society ought to contribute to a viable solution.

[jman]

Nobody aspires to be homeless. Nobody enjoys being homeless. But they're homeless due to a variety of reasons - not just personal. It's a personal as well as societal problem - and as such, society ought to contribute to a viable solution.

I agree with what you are saying but my anecdotal run ins with transients and homeless along north temple (I work close to the airport) have been different than what you might guess.

Walking into an Arby's restaurant a guy said out of the blue to us as we were walking in, that he has been homeless for the last 20+ years (as if it was a good thing). A few times at Subway, Carl's Jr., That Sandwich Shop, and Wendy's along North temple had a few of the transients on the inside of the restaurant sitting down in the corner just minding their own business. Of course I feel empathy for them and walk to them and say "hey man, do you want a sandwich or burger or something?" Out of the 6 or more times I have asked them, their reply has been "no thanks, Im just looking for a place to sit down in a warm place" and "no thanks, I don't want to burden you" and "that's nice of you to offer but I just want to be were other normal people are".

Maybe these have been the outliers in my experience but most people where I offer to help have refused my little money or offer of lunch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rockgremlin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmr-NRCbnus


Louis CK does a perfect job at describing exactly how the average American citizen treats the homeless. So freaking hilarious. "America happened," LMAO.

PG-13 For some coarse language...

[rockgremlin]

Maybe these have been the outliers in my experience but most people where I offer to help have refused my little money or offer...


Sounds like he's completely disillusioned and discouraged to the point of extreme apathy. He knows a simple stupid sandwich isn't going to solve his problem. Maybe he suspects your motives. Maybe he thinks you're only offering to soothe your conscience, not necessarily to actually help him. I'm absolutely certain that he feels an utterly enormous amount of shame and embarrassment. It can't be easy to live the life of a paria.

Lots of moving parts. It's not black and white...lots of grey areas when stepping through this issue.

[Iceaxe]

The number one reason I moved to Draper is so I don't have to deal with poor people. Yeah, I know that kind of makes me an ass, but I don't really give a shit as long as you keep the homeless out of Draper.

[rockgremlin]

The number one reason I moved to Draper is so I don't have to deal with poor people. Yeah, I know that kind of makes me an ass, but I don't really give a shit as long as you keep the homeless out of Draper.


Based on the response of the angry mob that showed up to protest the shelter it appears you're in the majority.

[Iceaxe]

WARNING! I am a Draper resident and I'm an asshole, if you don't want your feelings hurt just walk away.

LMAO....

[uintafly]

WARNING! I am a Draper resident and I'm an asshole, if you don't want your feelings hurt just walk away.

LMAO....

I am not a Draper resident but I will admit to being an asshole. Especially to the homeless problem. There is a little piece of me that feels bad for them, but mainly for most of them I place the blame of their situation on themselves. But maybe that is just my own coping mechanism so I don't feel guilty about offering no help. It does make me glad to be non religious since I don't have to do the required mental gymnastics necessary to square my feeling for the homeless with the teachings of any of the major religions. I may be an asshole but at least I am not a hypocrite right? :twisted:

[oldno7]

I am not a Draper resident but I will admit to being an asshole. Especially to the homeless problem. There is a little piece of me that feels bad for them, but mainly for most of them I place the blame of their situation on themselves. But maybe that is just my own coping mechanism so I don't feel guilty about offering no help. It does make me glad to be non religious since I don't have to do the required mental gymnastics necessary to square my feeling for the homeless with the teachings of any of the major religions. I may be an asshole but at least I am not a hypocrite right? :twisted:


No--not a hypocrite--just a social conservative--Welcome.

[rockgremlin]

^^^ LOL, well at least you're not in denial about it. What really irks me are people that are completely delusional about the issue. Some people have told me in the past that they're constantly helping out the homeless because they pay a full tithe [insert eye roll here].

[oldno7]

Liberal/progressives are who make homeless people, it's the dependency thing.(entitlement)

We're here from the government and we come to help...............

[Brian in SLC]

Liberal/progressives are who make homeless people, it's the dependency thing.(entitlement)

We're here from the government and we come to help...............

No. Its folks who cut spending on programs for the mentally ill and drug treatment. Who allow folks to go into debt on mortgages with no consumer protections who find themselves homeless after foreclosure. Or, who lose their house to afford health care (#1 reason for bankrupty). Those aren't "liberal policies".

So, its cause and effect. What causes people to be homeless? A sense of entitlement? That's just silly to think that.

Its a given that a portion of the population will be unemployable. Part of that same population will be mentally ill.

Its another given that some folks are victims of domestic situations out of their control. A woman escaping her insane right-wing conservative asshole husband who's armed and has threatened her and their kids. You think she feels "entitled"?

On the flip side, you think a vet with PTSD that's homeless shouldn't feel entitled? About 10% of the homeless population? You gonna use your cute little, "we're with the government and we're here to help" phrase on some of those guys?

Hey, I'm no saint when it comes to this...last guy that panhandled me downtown got told to see his caseworker. And, when choosing where to live, I chose a neighborhood far away from "affordable rental housing". But, I support social programs, both federally and locally, that try to provide help for the homeless. And, I'm aware of the cause and effect. And, I also personally know folks who where homeless in the recent past.

So, what's the solution? I think these shelters can help. So do things like drug court, rehab, department of workforce services, etc. Yeah, they cost society money. Taxes. Should Americans take care of their own or let them live in camps downtown and in the floodplain of the Jordan River (that'll be interesting during runoff this spring)?

Part of the problem is unfortunately Utahans are very generous. And, I think that's partly why folks beg for money. Its effective. They get money. And, that word is out so we get folks from all over to take advantage of that situation. Vouchers were a good idea. At least if the free money would dry up, they may get help. If there's help to be got.

Plenty of blame to go 'round for this...

[uintafly]

No--not a hypocrite--just a social conservative--Welcome.

Do I still get the welcome package if you find out I support gay marriage, drug decriminalization, assisted suicide and abortion rights? :ne_nau:

[oldno7]

On the flip side, you think a vet with PTSD that's homeless shouldn't feel entitled? About 10% of the homeless population? You gonna use your cute little, "we're with the government and we're here to help" phrase on some of those guys?
.

Just yesterday, I gave a veteran a $600 loan on a handshake.
So go cry your liberal blather on those of you who talk and do nothing!!!
He needed a leg up, not a handout...
I did so, with no expectation of getting my money back.
He said he would pay me more than I lent..
Time will tell, I was glad to help.

[oldno7]

Oh--and he was homeless, isn't any more...

[oldno7]

And not related to me in any way, I had only met the day before..

[Brian in SLC]

Just yesterday, I gave a veteran a $600 loan on a handshake.
So go cry your liberal blather on those of you who talk and do nothing!!!
He needed a leg up, not a handout...
I did so, with no expectation of getting my money back.
He said he would pay me more than I lent..
Time will tell, I was glad to help.

Oh, there's no cryin' going on over here. Just listening to more conservative whining and braggadocio.

I'd call that a handout. Does calling it a "leg up" make it sound better? Like, you "taught a man to fish"?

Did he have a puppy? Is that what won you over? What did his sign say? Did it say "God bless America"? (That really sucks 'em in).

Did you do it 'cause you felt guilty for being a conservative Grinch? Did it make your tiny conservative heart swell with pride?

Gave him a "leg up", eh? I guess I'd call that "fake news". Not even from the liberal news media!

Does spraggin' here make you hope we'll think your a big ol' generous softie?

Conservative buys one homeless guy off, feels good about himself, considers homeless problem (cause by a liberal entitlement no doubt) solved.

600 bucks per homeless person...no more problem! Geez, why didn't the liberals think of that?

Your a hero! Did you get in line for your medal? Where's the medal ceremony?

[Iceaxe]

Do I still get the welcome package if you find out I support gay marriage, drug decriminalization, assisted suicide and abortion rights? :ne_nau:

Hey, I also support all those items. I told you I was pretty middle of the road. It seems we agree on many items.

I just wish liberals understood money, or at least understood someone has to pay for all that free shit. Somehow I always end up on the paying side of that equation.

[emoji631]

[Brian in SLC]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2017/01/30/still-please-dont-suddenly-pretend-care-homeless-veterans-just-long-allows-oppose-helping-refugees-thats-hurting-veterans-refuge/

86725

Did you give him a pepsi too?

[oldno7]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2017/01/30/still-please-dont-suddenly-pretend-care-homeless-veterans-just-long-allows-oppose-helping-refugees-thats-hurting-veterans-refuge/

86725

Did you give him a pepsi too?


Says the gay/anti gun/baby killer progressive.

yea, you have a big mouth and no heart, it's all good.

[oldno7]

did you get down on your knees for last months check from the gov--again??

entitled you are--freebies are you.

Get a real job and off the government tit, boy.

[oldno7]

I just wrote out a yuge check for taxes, so worthless, dependent people like you can survive, we're getting tired of paying for your blood sucking,

[Brian in SLC]

Says the gay/anti gun/baby killer progressive.

yea, you have a big mouth and no heart, it's all good.

Project much?

http://changingminds.org/explanations/behaviors/coping/projection.htm

[Brian in SLC]

I just wrote out a yuge check for taxes, so worthless, dependent people like you can survive, we're getting tired of paying for your blood sucking,

Now you're not making sense. Trump says he was smart for not paying taxes. What's that make you?

How does you foolishly paying taxes help blood sucking dependents? You gonna fund some program to teach folks how to fish? Oh, that's a liberal entitlement. So, you're willing to just perpetuate getting your blood sucked? That doesn't sound that smart to me.

I guess that's what happens when small minded conservative don't have a plan...(like, "repeal and replace").

Big talk, no action, no change for the better.

4 more years...4 more years....!

[oldno7]

As long as theres losers like you in dead end government, entitled, can't be fired, jobs, us taxpayers will pay our fair share--until Trump cancels your contract:roflol:

[rockgremlin]

Gettin' spicy in here...:popcorn:

[accadacca]

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/17814294_10212223869969283_6409933887967493759_o.j pg?oh=553ea86abf746ab077feb8622e481601&oe=599494DD

[tallsteve]

6 APRIL 2017 - SALT LAKE CITY

Responding to the Needs of the Homeless in Our Communities
The First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has authorized the release of the following statement:
Homelessness is a tragic condition that afflicts individuals and even families in many places, including Utah. The causes are varied, and solutions are often difficult, but whether homelessness stems from conflict, poverty, mental illness, addiction or other sources, our response to those in need defines us as individuals and communities.
We are grateful for the willingness of government, community and civic leaders to tackle this issue. We applaud their continuing efforts to find solutions that will not only relieve the suffering inherent in homelessness but also implement measures that will help homeless individuals become self-reliant and deal with criminal elements that prey on the homeless.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints feels keenly a responsibility to help in a Christlike way and has participated in efforts to address homelessness for many years, particularly in the Salt Lake Valley. Our farms and facilities provide food, clothing and resources. We have partnered with government, relief organizations, community groups and other faiths to care for those in need and to help address the underlying causes of homelessness.
Over the last decade, the Church has donated cash and commodities totaling more than $42 million to eight community and religious organizations that serve the homeless in Salt Lake City. There are dozens of partners that draw upon the Church’s food reserves at bishops’ storehouses on a monthly basis. In addition, the Church offers counseling services, employment training, job placement and personal ministering to the homeless. To support the current efforts of city and county officials, the Church earlier agreed to sell its Deseret Industries facility at 130 East 700 South to Salt Lake City for use as one of three or four planned homeless resource centers. In addition, we are in active discussions with community partners to identify where the greatest needs exist and how the Church may offer additional help.
The Church’s institutional response is made possible by the ongoing generous humanitarian and other contributions of Church members. In addition, many members do what they can as individuals and families to support community efforts designed to assist the homeless, for which we express our gratitude.

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/responding-needs-homeless-communities

[rockgremlin]

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/17814294_10212223869969283_6409933887967493759_o.j pg?oh=553ea86abf746ab077feb8622e481601&oe=599494DD

^^^^ This. This right here is GOLD!! LOL!!!

[Scott P]

aaaaa

[Scott P]

6 APRIL 2017 - SALT LAKE CITY

Responding to the Needs of the Homeless in Our Communities


The First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has authorized the release of the following statement:
Homelessness is a tragic condition that afflicts individuals and even families in many places, including Utah. The causes are varied, and solutions are often difficult, but whether homelessness stems from conflict, poverty, mental illness, addiction or other sources, our response to those in need defines us as individuals and communities.
We are grateful for the willingness of government, community and civic leaders to tackle this issue. We applaud their continuing efforts to find solutions that will not only relieve the suffering inherent in homelessness but also implement measures that will help homeless individuals become self-reliant and deal with criminal elements that prey on the homeless.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints feels keenly a responsibility to help in a Christlike way and has participated in efforts to address homelessness for many years, particularly in the Salt Lake Valley. Our farms and facilities provide food, clothing and resources. We have partnered with government, relief organizations, community groups and other faiths to care for those in need and to help address the underlying causes of homelessness.
Over the last decade, the Church has donated cash and commodities totaling more than $42 million to eight community and religious organizations that serve the homeless in Salt Lake City. There are dozens of partners that draw upon the Church’s food reserves at bishops’ storehouses on a monthly basis. In addition, the Church offers counseling services, employment training, job placement and personal ministering to the homeless. To support the current efforts of city and county officials, the Church earlier agreed to sell its Deseret Industries facility at 130 East 700 South to Salt Lake City for use as one of three or four planned homeless resource centers. In addition, we are in active discussions with community partners to identify where the greatest needs exist and how the Church may offer additional help.
The Church’s institutional response is made possible by the ongoing generous humanitarian and other contributions of Church members. In addition, many members do what they can as individuals and families to support community efforts designed to assist the homeless, for which we express our gratitude.

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/responding-needs-homeless-communities

I guess I never understood why the above is what is being taught in church and the many of the same people that go to the same church and profess 100% belief in it are the first ones to light the torches against the poor and homeless.:ne_nau:


Liberal/progressives are who make homeless people, it's the dependency thing.(entitlement)

I strongly agree with you in that people should try to get off public assistance whenever possible and that government handouts can and do create dependence. I guess that's the conservative side of me.

Many conservative groups, especially churches also encourage welfare situations though. They do this by saying that people should have as many babies as possible, regardless if they can afford them or not. The (very conservative) church I belong to also does this, but they don't hammer on it quite as hard in the last few years. This also creates a lot of welfare problems, especially among the young. If even unemployed college students are encouraged to have as many children as possible, there will be welfare.

Anyway, I said it earlier in the thread, but I think we should bring back the CCC.

The CCC was a welfare program during the depression where jobs were provided for people that couldn't find other jobs. The jobs paid enough so that the families wouldn't go hungry, but intentionally paid less than the private market so there was an incentive for people to get off them as soon as possible.

Many people do need help, but many (most) people on welfare are capable of working more. We should bring back a welfare system where help is provided, but that people still have to work for it.


I just wrote out a yuge check for taxes

Me too, but according to the federal pie chart most of it went to military, social security, and medical spending. Since social security really isn't an entitlement since it was paid into, it seems like the biggest entitled groups are the ones who supported the Iraq War and other lose-lose wars that have nothing to do with freedom or protecting people who share our values.

The supporters of the Iraq War (regardless of political affiliation) were a far bigger drain on taxes than are the homeless.

[Scott Card]

Many conservative groups, especially churches also encourage welfare situations though. They do this by saying that people should have as many babies as possible, regardless if they can afford them or not. The (very conservative) church I belong to also does this, but they don't hammer on it quite as hard in the last few years. This also creates a lot of welfare problems, especially among the young. If even unemployed college students are encouraged to have as many children as possible, there will be welfare.

Hum. I'm a Mormon. My church doesn't say anything like what you said, Scott. In fact, it is quite the opposite. From the Handbook 2: Administering the Church: it says the following:

" The decision as to how many children to have and when to have them is extremely intimate and private and should be left between the couple and the Lord. Church members should not judge one another in this matter." Section 21.4.4

I've attended a bunch of meetings in my life and presided over a congregation or two but I have never heard anyone say that a couple should have as "many babies as possible, regardless if they can afford them or not". If that was said to you, I would question whether that person understand doctrine, policy and the welfare program of the church.

Now, I recognize that there are those members who may believe what you said but the church certainly does not teach that.

[Goat]

Hum. I'm a Mormon. My church doesn't say anything like what you said, Scott. In fact, it is quite the opposite. From the Handbook 2: Administering the Church: it says the following:

" The decision as to how many children to have and when to have them is extremely intimate and private and should be left between the couple and the Lord. Church members should not judge one another in this matter." Section 21.4.4

I've attended a bunch of meetings in my life and presided over a congregation or two but I have never heard anyone say that a couple should have as "many babies as possible, regardless if they can afford them or not". If that was said to you, I would question whether that person understand doctrine, policy and the welfare program of the church.

Now, I recognize that there are those members who may believe what you said but the church certainly does not teach that.

Scott, I see where you're coming from, but this is an excerpt taken from the October 2011 General Conference in a talk entitled "Children" delivered by Neil L. Anderson of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles:

"Many voices in the world today marginalize the importance of having children or suggest delaying or limiting children in a family. My daughters recently referred me to a blog written by a Christian mother (not of our faith) with five children. She commented: “[Growing] up in this culture, it is very hard to get a biblical perspective on motherhood. … Children rank way below college. Below world travel for sure. Below the ability to go out at night at your leisure. Below honing your body at the gym. Below any job you may have or hope to get.” She then adds: “Motherhood is not a hobby, it is a calling. You do not collect children because you find them cuter than stamps. It is not something to do if you can squeeze the time in. It is what God gave you time for.

...

“Marie and I had rationalized that to get me through medical school it would be necessary for her to remain in the workplace. Although this was not what we [wanted] to do, children would have to come later. [While looking at a Church magazine at my parents’ home,] I saw an article by Elder Spencer W. Kimball, then of the Quorum of the Twelve, [highlighting] responsibilities associated with marriage. According to Elder Kimball, one sacred responsibility was to multiply and replenish the earth. My parents’ home was [close to] the Church Administration Building. I immediately walked to the offices, and 30 minutes after reading his article, I found myself sitting across the desk from Elder Spencer W. Kimball.” (This wouldn’t be so easy today.)
“I explained that I wanted to become a doctor. There was no alternative but to postpone having our family. Elder Kimball listened patiently and then responded in a soft voice, ‘Brother Mason, would the Lord want you to break one of his important commandments in order for you to become a doctor? With the help of the Lord, you can have your family and still become a doctor. Where is your faith?’”

It seems to me that, just from this General Conference talk encourages couples to have children despite economic security or feasibility.

[Scott P]

Hum. I'm a Mormon. My church doesn't say anything like what you said, Scott. In fact, it is quite the opposite

Um, no. I am a Mormon and before November when they dissolved out ward, I had been in the Bishopric for many years.


From the Handbook 2: Administering the Church:it says the following:The decision as to how many children to have and when to have them is extremely intimate and private and should be left between the couple and the Lord. Church members should not judge one another in this matter." Section 21.4.4

Yes, the Handbook does say that. The Handbook is a set of directions for Ward and Stake Leaders that guides them in their leadership duties. What the above is saying is that Church members are not to judge someone else based on the amount of children than they have.

There are good reasons for this. My wife and I, for example, took 9 years to have our first child, though no fault of our own (obviously we heard a lot from ward members and family though!). After more than seven years we put ourselves on the adoption list. After my wife got pregnant we took ourselves off the list (only infertile couples were allowed to adopt through the church), but she miscarried. Only days after the miscarriage, we get a call from the Bishop and he says that he wants to talk to us privately about children. Naturally, we assumed that he heard about the miscarriage and he wanted to talk to us about that. So, we both show up at the Church and asked us which one of us wants to go first. I volunteered and got in there and was shocked when he stated (perhaps gently) chastising me for not having kids (he apparently did not know about the adoption attempt and miscarriage). I am so glad that my wife didn't go first as it would be upsetting. She was already upset about the miscarriage and did a lot of crying.

The Handbook is to prevent those types of situations.


I've attended a bunch of meetings in my life and presided over a congregation or two but I have never heard anyone say that a couple should have as "many babies as possible, regardless if they can afford them or not". If that was said to you, I would question whether that person understand doctrine, policy and the welfare program of the church.

Here are just some of the official statements concerning birth control directly off lds.org (color and bold type added by me for emphasis). Since you are a lawyer, I'd be curious as to exactly how you would interpret them.

https://www.lds.org/manual/eternal-marriage-student-manual/birth-control?lang=eng

The Lord has told us that it is the duty of every husband and wife to obey the command given to Adam to multiply and replenish the earth, so that the legions of choice spirits waiting for their tabernacles of flesh may come here and move forward under God’s great design to become perfect souls, for without these fleshly tabernacles they cannot progress to their God-planned destiny....

You came to get for yourself a mortal body that could become perfected, immortalized, and you understood that you were to act in partnership with God in providing bodies for other spirits. … And so you will not postpone parenthood. There will be rationalists who will name to you numerous reasons for postponement. Of course, it will be harder to get your college degrees or your financial start with a family, but strength like yours will be undaunted in the face of difficult obstacles. Have your family as the Lord intended. Of course it is expensive, but you will find a way, and besides, it is often those children who grow up with responsibility and hardships who carry on the world’s work”....

Too many young people set their minds, determining they will not marry or have children until they are more secure, until the military service period is over; until the college degree is secured;until the occupation is more well-defined; until the debts are paid; or until it is more convenient. They have forgotten that the first commandment is to ‘be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it.’ (Genesis 1:28 (https://www.lds.org/scriptures/ot/gen/1.28?lang=eng#27).) And so brides continue their employment and husbands encourage it, and contraceptives are used to prevent conception. Relatives and friends and even mothers sometimes encourage birth control for their young newlyweds. But the excuses are many, mostly weak. The wife is not robust;the family budget will not feed extra mouths; or the expense of the doctor, hospital, and other incidentals is too great; it will disturb social life; it would prevent two salaries; and so abnormal living prevents the birth of children. The Church cannot approve nor condone the measures which so greatly limit the family.


I have never heard anyone say that a couple should have as "many babies as possible, regardless if they can afford them or not".

The above in so many words does say just that, but as I said earlier, they don't hammer on it as much as they used to (the link is from 2003).


Now, I recognize that there are those members who may believe what you said but the church certainly does not teach that.

I would have to disagree. They haven't emphasized it quite as much in recent years, but it is still in their teachings and still actively taught.

[Brian in SLC]

Hum. I'm a Mormon. My church doesn't say anything like what you said, Scott.

I'm not, but, I've always thought the reason that the LDS faithful have larger families (the largest of any group in the US) is because that's been the culture and what's been taught. Not difficult to find an enormous number of examples:

"There are multitudes of pure and holy spirits waiting to take tabernacles, now what is our duty? -To prepare tabernacles for them; to take a course that will not tend to drive those spirits into the families of the wicked, where they will be trained in wickedness, debauchery, and every species of crime. It is the duty of every righteous man and woman to prepare tabernacles for all the spirits they can" (Discourses of Brigham Young, p. 197).

"I regret, I think it is a crying evil, that there should exist a sentiment or a feeling among any members of the Church to curtail the birth of their children. I think that is a crime wherever it occurs, where husband and wife are in possession of health and vigor and are free from impurities that would be entailed upon their posterity. I believe that where people undertake to curtail or prevent the birth of their children that they are going to reap disappointment by and by. I have no hesitancy in saying that I believe that is one of the greatest crimes of the world today, this evil practice." (Quoted in Doctrines of Salvation 2:88,89).

When a man and a woman are married and they agree, or covenant, to limit their offspring to two or three, and practice devices to accomplish this purpose, they are guilty of iniquity which eventually must be punished" (Doctrines of Salvation 2:87). On the same page, President Smith offered what could quite possibly, under present circumstances, be an indictment against his own church! He went on to say, "Unfortunately this evil doctrine is being taught as a virtue by many people who consider themselves cultured and highly educated. It has even crept in among members of the Church and has been advocated in some of the classes within the Church."

"Too many young people set their minds, determining they will not marry or have children until they are more secure, until the military service period is over; until the college degree is secured; until the occupation is more well-defined; until the debts are paid; or until it is more convenient. They have forgotten that the first commandment is to ‘be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it.’ (Genesis 1:28.) And so brides continue their employment and husbands encourage it, and contraceptives are used to prevent conception… The Church cannot approve nor condone the measures which so greatly limit the family" (Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 328).

In a conference address given in April of 1969, 13th LDS President Ezra Taft Benson said, "The first commandment given to man was to multiply and replenish the earth with children. That commandment has never been altered, modified, or canceled" (Conference Report, April 1969, p. 12).

[Brian in SLC]

Interesting article on the subject:

https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/religion-and-family-connection-social-science-perspectives/chapter-6-four-c-s-mormon-family

[qedcook]

Off topic? New thread?

[Scott P]

...

[Scott P]

Off topic? New thread?

It is related in a way. For better or worse, having more children than you can afford does create welfare situations.

[jman]

I find it odd when people quote our own sources when they are not a member of the LDS faith.

I mean it's fine to a certain degree, but just be careful when stating it as fact, especially when it comes to history and opinion of said of our apostles, prophets, teachers, ministry, etc.

Take this for an example, just because I'm a lawyer and an expert in law doesn't mean that automatically my wife is an expert too just by affiliation. Sure, she may know a bit more than the rest of the public but she still isn't an expert. (I'm not a lawyer btw)

All I'm saying is be careful when you try to use our own sources...for or against...LDS members.

:P


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Scott P]

I find it odd when people quote our own sources when they are not a member of the LDS faith.

I am LDS, but why? Now this is getting a bit off topic, but if people want to learn about a religion, they should quote that religion's own sources rather than go to someone else.

This is true of any group or ideal, not just a religion.

[Sombeech]

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/17814294_10212223869969283_6409933887967493759_o.j pg?oh=553ea86abf746ab077feb8622e481601&oe=599494DD

Why are the anti mormons always so angry?

[twotimer]

Man, am I glad that Jesus and Santa Clause equally rank in credibility so I don't have to worry about this crap!

I wouldn't want to live near these ate up people, either. Enough of these people are dangerous for it to be a concern. We've got them jumping out of bushes grabbing joggers here. I never give any of them so much as a nickel.

Scott's idea of the CCC is brilliant. It isn't a cure all, but it would give them places to go and something to do, at least.

[rockgremlin]

Why are the anti mormons always so angry?

I don't know about angry. But you can see the hypocrisy illustrated in this image, right? It perfectly characterizes the sentiment of many Draper Mormons. Yeah for more temples, but f**k the homeless. Dirty sunsabitches can go find somewhere else to live, preferably far away.

[devo_stevo]

I love the idea of the CCC. My only problem with it is that I think that we as a population have changed too much for it to work anymore. Back in the days of the CCC, people had a drive within them to care for themselves. If they didn't, nobody would and they died. as a result, they would take the job and worked their butts off. I'm not suggesting that we go back to the days of no help for anyone and letting people die when they run out of money. I think that it's a sign of prosperity and humanity for a country to take care of it's people who need help. It's just an observation.

The idea that paying people enough to eat and not die, but not enough to get ahead will motivate them to reach higher is not as universally true anymore. The evidence of that is written large everyday in the news with everybody holding rallies to bitch about minimum wage and how they deserve to make more money than EMTs and fire fighters because they can't afford to feed their 5 kids and still pay for cigarettes and booze while working at McDonalds.

That's not to say that there are not people that would take the work and it would help them out, but I think that the number would be far smaller today than it was 90 years ago.

I do think that there should be some sort of work requirement to get a welfare check, where possible. When I was looking to hire someone, I tried out the workforce services. I was extremely disappointed. There are resumes on there that only have a person's name on them with no further information. I contacted 7 people from there and got exactly zero responses. It's just a dumping ground for resumes so that people can tell there case worker that they are looking for a job. At least that was my impression. I could be totally wrong, and obviously this is not true of everyone in that system. It just seems that way on the surface.

[jman]

I am LDS, but why? Now this is getting a bit off topic, but if people want to learn about a religion, they should quote that religion's own sources rather than go to someone else.

This is true of any group or ideal, not just a religion.

Because context always matter. And people who do not practice that religion or belong that organization or business, whatever...usually don't have context, so things are assumed, or rattled off as "true", or believe thats just how it is.

I have had numerous people tell me to my face "that's not what you believe in...let me tell you what you believe in" type of thing. Uh..

It's similar to Sombeechs thing when a member on Bogley said that he "hates the outdoors" because of his opinions on the OR show leaving the state. He said that he was okay with them leaving and then that member said that if you believe that then Sombeech "must hate" the outdoors.

This is where that context matters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Brian in SLC]

Because context always matter. And people who do not practice that religion or belong that organization or business, whatever...usually don't have context, so things are assumed, or rattled off as "true", or believe thats just how it is.

I have had numerous people tell me to my face "that's not what you believe in...let me tell you what you believe in" type of thing. Uh..

It's similar to Sombeechs thing when a member on Bogley said that he "hates the outdoors" because of his opinions on the OR show leaving the state. He said that he was okay with them leaving and then that member said that if you believe that then Sombeech "must hate" the outdoors.

This is where that context matters.

Who you talkin' 'bout, Willis?

Ha ha.

Sometimes a poke at hypocrisy is misinterpreted as something else I suppose. But, can stimulate conversation and maybe its overly optimistic to think that folks will become more enlightened.

Anyhoo, having lived here for over 30 years, we all craft our own context for issues. I get the inside jokes at the lunch table (!).

Fact: Utah has the largest families in the United States. Another fact: LDS families have the largest families in the US.

Cause and effect? Probably so.

Anyhoo, when it comes to poverty and homelessness, some folks have kids they just can't afford. In some social situations, like, having strong family or church support, keeps folks from becoming homeless. And...that's a good thing. Its a part of the culture here.

Just interesting to poke at the NIMBY thing when it comes to homeless shelters.

But, message received. I'll try to be more sensitive. No offense meant.

[Sombeech]

I don't know about angry. But you can see the hypocrisy illustrated in this image, right? It perfectly characterizes the sentiment of many Draper Mormons. Yeah for more temples, but f**k the homeless. Dirty sunsabitches can go find somewhere else to live, preferably far away.

Oh both top and bottom are Mormons? That's weird they took off their shirt and tie and put on black shirts. Why would they go through all that trouble for a meme?

[qedcook]

As far as the meme goes, it does seem like an oversimplification to make fun of religious people for not wanting a homeless shelter in their backyard...

[tallsteve]

I'm pretty sure those meme photos aren't of Utah Mormons. There aren't that many black people here. :roflol:

[rockgremlin]

Oh both top and bottom are Mormons? That's weird they took off their shirt and tie and put on black shirts. Why would they go through all that trouble for a meme?

I think you're taking the meme literally. What it's intending to say (or at least how I interpreted it) is that there do exist plenty of good upstanding religious Mormons who out of one side of their mouth cheer the announcement of temple construction while out of the other side of their mouth vilify the homeless.

And I'm not speaking in generalities. I know a few people personally that are like this. I've directed their attention at their perceived hypocrisy and it's always just shrugged off.

[twotimer]

I know a few people personally that are like this. I've directed their attention at their perceived hypocrisy and it's always just shrugged off.Well of course it is! It makes friggin' sense!

[Sombeech]

I know a few people personally that are like this. I've directed their attention at their perceived hypocrisy and it's always just shrugged off.

Yeah me too, there are both extremes, the one side who will freak out at seeing a homeless person like they contained gluten. And then the other annoying side that is constantly posting about how often they visit the homeless shelters, although it's great for them but damn we get it, you're charitable. And a third, some won't give unless there are witnesses with a camera social media proof.

But in all honesty, the various LDS groups do a ton of charity, work, and service for the homeless. And, yes there are always those few that are massive hypocrites,and they should be called out too.

One undeniable fact though, as inconvenient and harsh as it sounds, the immediate surrounding area near the homeless shelter is in all reality a sketchy place. It is a prime place for drug use and other fun stuff.

I mean bless the homeless, most of them are humble, they have less than us and we can learn from them a lesson in gratitude. But we still can't deny that we wouldn't want our 10 year old girl walking past the shelter without supervision. No way. Nothing directly against the good unfortunate homeless folks, but it's a common characteristic of a shelter. This didn't stop my family and I from doing 2 projects with the food bank in bountiful, and giving 10 massive bags of clothing to 2 different shelters this winter, and they were "non facebooked" so I've got no proof, which is exactly the way charity was meant to be.

The shelter would undoubtedly lower any nearby home value, but that being said, the Mormons and their 5 new temples would be among the most involved in service projects.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

[qedcook]

And I'm not speaking in generalities. I know a few people personally that are like this. I've directed their attention at their perceived hypocrisy and it's always just shrugged off.

I obviously don't know the people you are referring to; but I guess I would ask, is it possible to 1) be religious, 2) not want a homeless shelter in your city, and 3) still not be a hypocrite? I personally would say that yes, it is possible.

[hank moon]

I obviously don't know the people you are referring to; but I guess I would ask, is it possible to 1) be religious, 2) not want a homeless shelter in your city, and 3) still not be a hypocrite? I personally would say that yes, it is possible.

Every human is a hypocrite - it's one of our defining features :-)


https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/04/170410154808.htm?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

[Scott P]

Every human is a hypocrite - it's one of our defining features :-)


https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/04/170410154808.htm?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

I used to be conceited, but now I'm perfect.

[jman]

I used to be conceited, but now I'm perfect.

Ha. "The downside of being perfect, is that everyone thinks you are being pretentious" -Despair Magazine


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rockgremlin]

Every human is a hypocrite - it's one of our defining features :-)


https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/04/170410154808.htm?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

Unfortunately, he's 100% correct. Hypocrisy is the one human flaw that I despise the most. But at the same time if I was on trial for hypocrisy even Johnny Cochran couldn't pull my dumb ass off death row.

[Sombeech]

I'll say what we are all thinking, if there was a vote to build a homeless shelter around the block from my house, I would go Russian Hacker and try to destroy that notion.

We may try to play up the tolerance card, but when it comes down to it, I don't think any of us would want a homeless shelter built in our neighborhood, for some of the reasons I mentioned earlier. It has nothing to do with how charitable you may be, or how big of a heart you have, neither of these things can combat the environment rich in drug abuse, prostitution, and even violence.

This may be a problem with the shelter setup, or local laws, or something else, but if I don't want a homeless shelter built in my neighborhood, it has nothing to do with how I serve and help these unfortunate people.

[rockgremlin]

My mom insists that all of the homeless folks in the shelters got that way of their own accord, and that they're all druggies and junkies.

She's also one of the most staunchly religious people I know. Practically lives at church.

I tried to point out that many of those homeless folks wound up there because of circumstances outside of their control.

I was then accused of being naive. I think many people think like her, unfortunately.

[Iceaxe]

^^^Listen to your mother^^^

Certainly not all.... but a large number of homeless are in their current position because of poor life choices. Without doubt the majority are homeless because of poor life choices, and that's just a fact.

Dropped out of school, started drinking, married the wrong person, started using drugs, not having a back-up plan.... those are all poor life choices.

Poor life choices have consequences.

[devo_stevo]

I'll agree with Iceaxe on this one. Choices have consequences. If you don't have a purpose and a plan for your life and you simply live from one moment to the next, chances are good that one day, it'll come back to haunt you and one day, you'll end up in a place that you don't want to be in.

There are some that end up there through no fault of their own, it's true. But I'd guess that's a small number compared to those who just plain screwed up too many times.

[Sombeech]

I tried to point out that many of those homeless folks wound up there because of circumstances outside of their control.

Well, I would disagree that they were victim to circumstances outside of their control. I would say it's because they didn't fully understand the consequences from their choices.

A great many of them are addicts, and currently they may feel powerless and limited, as a consequence to the poor choices they made in the past.

I know all about addiction, for more reasons than what I'll get into, and I attend Narcotics Anonymous with 2 friends of mine, different classes, different locations. Nobody was held down and injected with Heroin and became addicted. But it is still very unfortunate, none of these guys and gals could have imagined the monstrosity of addiction.

So I would say they had full control over the choices they made, but they were not fully aware of how impossible addiction can be.

And aside from the whole addiction thing, I would still fight like hell to keep a homeless shelter out of my neighborhood, being fully aware of the risks, like being called intolerant, hateful, hypocrite. But for those who call others intolerant and mean spirited towards the homeless, I still stand my ground in claiming that not one of those people would want a homeless shelter built in their neighborhood either.

[Iceaxe]

Build it and they will come.

If you want your neighborhood and/or state over run with herds of homeless from other states just build great homeless shelters and become known as a friend of the homeless. It's easier than attracting fat kids with free donuts.

Downtown bracing for 'tidal wave' in homeless population as SLC looks for solutions
http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=43920406&nid=1070

[tallsteve]

You had me at "free donuts"! I think I'll join the homeless ranks.

86839

[Scott P]

I just opened up Amazon this morning:

https://www.amazon.com/p/feature/z4sbqvckkdgq4w9?pf_rd_p=79452266-7a91-43dc-8636-64371e9eb082&pf_rd_r=5WNMWG2J653QP61RVJKS

Amazon to Build a Permanent Mary's Place Family Shelter Within its Seattle HeadquartersMay 10, 2017
Mary's Place announced today (http://www.marysplaceseattle.org/blog/amazon-marys-place-announcement/) that Amazon will donate more than 47,000 sq. ft. of space within Amazon’s newest headquarters building as a permanent location for a Mary's Place Family Shelter. This first-of-its-kind partnership will include 65 rooms, which will shelter more than 200 homeless women, children, and families each night.