• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Mormon/Ex-Mormon Thread of 3 hour blocks and salvation flowcharts

W

Wafflecakes

Member
Also think that the missions are different lengths is pretty stupid. Makes no sense.

Dem poor soft gurls cannot handle dat extra couple months.
 
R

ronito

Member
Zerokku said:
Probably still want them to try and get married first :p
Click to expand...

That was my initial thought but a year isn't going to make much difference on that front even for mormons.

I think it might have to do with change inertia. They had given them a gap earlier so they'll keep a gap even if it's just a year. Personally I don't get it. I also don't get the difference in length. Personally I think all missions should be 18 months. But if not that then they all should be 24 months.
 
R

ronito

Member
So conference is now over. What's the general take from members?

For me I've noticed that people are WAY more into conference now than ever. I mean before it was something you'd have on and maybe be cleaning while it's on or something.

Now it's not unusual for people to pop popcorn and even cheer when they announce the next speakers. It's very strange to see the recent fervor.

Maybe it has to do with the fact that since people are leaving the ones that stay are more committed? And the internet gives voice to others that are way into it making people think they have to be too?

As to the policy change (I don't know if I'd really call it a revelation) about mission ages. I do think it's a smart move for the church but I do worry about the cultural implications. I think the culture had finally started to recover from the "every worthy young man a missionary!" kind of thinking. I think this will push them back a few steps in that regard.
 
Y

Yoritomo

Member
The internet makes virtual Conference Hype possible. There's not just the echo chamber of a single household but the echo chamber of every mormon facebook post in existence raised in exultant Hosannas at the idea of Monson saying "As a young boy... I... often..." or Uchtdorf basing an entire talk around flying planes.

Edit: Changed Hallelujahs to Hosannas. Hallelujah isn't as mormon as Hosanna
 
R

ronito

Member
Yoritomo said:
The internet makes virtual Conference Hype possible. There's not just the echo chamber of a single household but the echo chamber of every mormon facebook post in existence raised in exultant hallelujahs at the idea of Monson saying "As a young boy... I... often..." or Uchtdorf basing an entire talk around flying planes.
Click to expand...

I really think that might be it. I had what I called the "positive feedback loop" thing about the church but really it just seems that GC for many has become indiscernible from a football game. Which I shouldn't really care about, but it just seems a little irreverent.

Also:
9AAq8.jpg
 
R

ronito

Member
The church made CNN with the mission age thing:

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/...could-open-doors-for-more-women-missionaries/
Big news broke in the Mormon world this weekend, when the president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints announced a lowered minimum age requirement for missionary service, most notably for women.

Women can now go out in the field to serve their church at 19, instead of 21. Though this may not seem monumental to outsiders, some Mormons say it's a game-changing moment that may rewrite women's futures and even influence broader dynamics within the LDS Church community.

“The narrative of young women has been that marriage trumps everything else as your most important spiritual pursuit,” explained Joanna Brooks, scholar, blogger and author of “The Book of Mormon Girl: Stories from an American Faith.” This shift “signals a reorganizing of expectations for women’s lives. … It changes the storyline.”

By 21, many Mormon women are either too deep in their search for a husband, if not already married, or too entrenched in their education or career path to step away for a Mormon mission, Brooks said. With the lowered age requirement, they have more choice. They, too, can go out in the world, study their faith intensely, follow spiritual callings and grow as individuals before they marry. And, Brooks said, they can be viewed more as equals when they return and start dating.

The surprise announcement by President Thomas S. Monson, who’s considered a "prophet, seer and revelator" by Latter-day Saints, left Brooks in tears. She wasn't alone. The Universe student newspaper at Brigham Young University reported that dorm halls "filled with shrieks, tears and disbelief." The announcement was made Saturday morning at the semiannual LDS Church General Conference, as more than 20,000 gathered in a Salt Lake City conference center to hear from church leadership. Millions of other Mormons tuned in via satellite, the Internet and television.

Not since the 1978 announcement that black men were able to serve in the priesthood has a revelation been greeted with such excitement, Brooks suggested in a blog post. That sentiment was echoed in the BYU newspaper, where an 18-year-old student drew the same parallel to '78: “It feels like one of those days. There are so many opportunities for so many more people now.”

There are 58,000 Mormon missionaries currently proselytizing in the field, of whom generally about 15% are young women, a church spokesman said. There are also older couples serving in these ranks, but the vast majority of missionaries are young men. Previously able to start service at 19, men can now answer a call to serve at 18 – giving them the option to head out right after high school, a move that The Salt Lake Tribune reported would affect admissions, scholarships and recruiting at Utah colleges. But that decision, too, is a shift that church officials hope will increase missionary numbers.

“We affirm that missionary work is a priesthood duty – and we encourage all young men who are worthy and who are physically able and mentally capable, to respond to the call to serve,” Monson told Latter-day Saints on Saturday. “Many young women also serve, but they are not under the same mandate to serve as are the young men. We assure the young sisters of the church, however, that they make a valuable contribution as missionaries, and we welcome their service.”

The expectation of women to serve may not be the same, as they do not hold the priesthood. And their missions, if they do serve, are still limited to 18 months, while men serve for two years.

It's details like that that dampen enthusiasm about the age change among some Mormon women.

"We were told today that it's a vital time for the Lord's work and we need all hands on deck. Why are some hands valued more?" wrote Jana Riess, a prolific Mormon blogger and author of, among other books, "Mormonism for Dummies" and "Flunking Sainthood: A Year of Breaking the Sabbath, Forgetting to Pray, and Still Loving my Neighbor."

"It's progress for women. It's just not equality," said Riess, who initially shared in the tears of joy. "And after a few glorious moments of believing it would be, that stings."

But providing more equity in opportunity, in a church where change happens slowly, is the big takeaway, said Brooks, a feminist and activist who, as a college student and beyond, faced her own struggles to find her place in the only church she’d ever known.

“I would have relished the chance to get out early and put my faith to work,” she said. “Subtle changes can produce wide effects.”
Click to expand...
 
R

ronito

Member
Oh so I should give an update that Elder's Quorum president ended up stopping by afterall.

He said that usually he wouldn't have but he was intrigued by the fact that I was so up front with him about not being active and not wanting to be active and not angry/confrontational about it. So out of curiosity he stopped by.

We ended up talking for about two hours both me and my wife going through our stories and where we were and all that. He was genuinely interested and frankly surprised to find people like us that had left the church were plenty happy and had no problem talking to anyone from the church without forcing their non-belief down their throat.

He was a pretty cool guy. Might invite him over for dinner.
 
R

ronito

Member
So I'm in Houston this week and met a mormon guy at the lounge. He said said that he wasn't voting for Romney because it's obvious that Anne Romney doesn't wear garments. I was like "WTF man? Romney's as wonderbread mormon as they come."

He pointed me to these pics:
a_2x-vertical.jpg


main-qimg-f198888b1f24a7cd0123f69048497184


And a few others saying that he doesn't care about whether they're mormon or not, but he does mind that they come off as very staunch mormon and then she doesn't wear garments. I guess it's starting to be a "thing" now.

Personally from those pics unless she's got safety pins all over the place I don't see how she could be wearing "gs"
 
A

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
Well, they don't really seem to engender mormon values. What, with all the lying and shady dealings. Plus, he eats Coffee ice cream. Case closed... :p
 
R

ronito

Member
Bornstellar said:
That's odd considering Mitt is constantly rocking the celestial smile.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly!
I was like, "Dude, Romney's got that 'eternal u' going all the time."

but no, the guy was insistent that didn't matter.
Personally if it was just that, frankly Anne's not running for president.

There's plenty to ding Romney for on his front, don't see the need to be like 'His wife doesn't wear gs and talks about the importance of church all the time!' line.
 
H

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
ronito said:
The church made CNN with the mission age thing:

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/...could-open-doors-for-more-women-missionaries/
Click to expand...
The changes to the temple endowment in 1980 were covered in the New York Times. I've pulled the article from microfilm.

ronito said:
Honestly. I'm no Peter Priesthood but even I don't like the taste of coffee. Mocha with 3x chocolate at least.
Click to expand...
Coffee quality can vary wildly depending on the beans used and preparation. A good cup for me just takes a pinch of sugar but short of that then yeah I'll work to hide it some. Hazelnut mocha is nice.
 
C

CorvoSol

Member
So Ronito called me to repentance for not posting, and I was actually thinking about posting here for awhile when lo and behold, the thread resurfaced!!!

So I was there for the MEGATONS at Conference, but that's all I saw, because afterward I left for Provo to attend my Mission Reunion. Which was a lot of fun and a great pick-me-up at a time where I'm feeling somewhat down. It was really good seeing everyone again. I miss those knuckle-heads a lot.

Also, I'm in this weird situation where there's this cute girl who I am kinda into is reciprocating to some extent, but I'm completely put off because her big-brother was my Young Men's president and the resident Ward Bad-Ass when I was a teen. I . . . don't know that I have the guts for that. I post this here mostly because I can't think of anywhere else to explain to get off our chest.


Aaaaaanyway, school is going well here in Rexburg. I regret not having yet seen Elder Holland's talk. We had an interesting discussion today in American Foreign Policy about the views of the Twelve and First Presidency on the League of Nations, which branched into an interesting discussion about some of the rather radical views of some members of the Twelve during the Red Scare and afterward, which in turn segued into a brief reminder on how even Apostles and Prophets can err.

Otherwise little to really say. I haven't been social at all these days because I am SWAMPED with homework. We had Stake Conference, which was cool, I guess.
 
A

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
Yeah, not a line i personally would cross, but not my life to live. I flipped out on Snapple once for not labeling a tea product as containing tea. I bought it, drank a bit, then started looking at the label and said, "oh, come on!" called them up and told customer service. :p
 
C

CorvoSol

Member
AlteredBeast said:
Yeah, not a line i personally would cross, but not my life to live. I flipped out on Snapple once for not labeling a tea product as containing tea. I bought it, drank a bit, then started looking at the label and said, "oh, come on!" called them up and told customer service. :p
Click to expand...

Tea is the weirdest for me, because in Brazil it is ONLY Black Tea, and in America it's all Tea except Herbal.

So weird.
 
A

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
CorvoSol said:
Tea is the weirdest for me, because in Brazil it is ONLY Black Tea, and in America it's all Tea except Herbal.

So weird.
Click to expand...

I have a relation that is an apostle, I am thinking about writing him up and asking what is the actual line. In my mission, for a sore throat or an upset stomach, they would recommend mate de coca (coca tea, or what they derive cocaine from), despite being a requirement that people give up chewing coca to get baptized.

Tea was always easy to teach, though. We said if it was made from tea, its no good. Green tea, red tea, white tea, etc. are all derived from the tea plant. I am just wondering where the line is.

That and I have always had questions about foods cooked with alcohol, any type of coffee in desserts or other dishes, etc.

I have a feeling that there will be no delineation, but it would be interesting nonetheless.
 
R

ronito

Member
Fathead said:
Female garments are super short anymore, so those pics mean nothing.
Click to expand...

quoi? Since when.
My wife's come to right above the knee and that's where they're supposed to be. I don't see them making daisy duke gs.

And these aren't the only pics. There were more that he showed me.

Besides dude, Coffee ice cream. Game over man, game over.
 
A

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
ronito said:
quoi? Since when.
My wife's come to right above the knee and that's where they're supposed to be. I don't see them making daisy duke gs.

And these aren't the only pics. There were more that he showed me.

Besides dude, Coffee ice cream. Game over man, game over.
Click to expand...

lol. yeah, garments are not getting shorter in any conventional sense. Women might be buying shorter lengths to suit fashions, but the standard is knee length and anything less is a deliberate miswearing.
 
M

mik

mik is unbeatable
I'm just happy I got to go through before they took out pantomiming slitting your own throat and disemboweling yourself. Good times. :\
 
C

CorvoSol

Member
Alternatively, I'm glad I went through without knowing these things because making up stories about what you thought you overheard your dad and Stake President whispering about is so much more fun.

So I had a member down in Brazil try to set me up with a girl tonight. I did my best to politely decline, but it's hard to do that without being offensive. I'm a lonely 24-year old trapped in the lone and dreary wastes of Rexburg, but even I know that trans-continental relationships are way too much stress.
 
F

Fathead

Member
AlteredBeast said:
lol. yeah, garments are not getting shorter in any conventional sense. Women might be buying shorter lengths to suit fashions, but the standard is knee length and anything less is a deliberate miswearing.
Click to expand...

They are much shorter in the sleeve and in the leg. . Even the men's leg lengths are shorter today than they were 10 years ago. I have the same waist size as I did in 2002, and the garments are much shorter. Same style, before that gets thrown out.
 
R

ronito

Member
Fathead said:
They are much shorter in the sleeve and in the leg. . Even the men's leg lengths are shorter today than they were 10 years ago. I have the same waist size as I did in 2002, and the garments are much shorter. Same style, before that gets thrown out.
Click to expand...

I know they're shorter in the sleeve but come now, they're not this short:

ann_romney_underwear.jpg
 
C

CorvoSol

Member
I don't mean to be the guy, but analyzing pictures to determine what Anne Romney is wearing under her cardigan is probably the weirdest thing I have EVER seen in this thread.

I . . . honestly hope that even on Judgment Day when the Books are opened I STILL never have to know what Anne Romney wears under her dress. Frankly, as an exalted, omniscient being I STILL WOULD NOT LIKE TO KNOW.

I just, ew.
 
A

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
I do like that Romney rocks the smile, though. Those crew necks are no fun and never have been. I didn't wait 19 years of my life to wear a t-shirt!
 
S

speculawyer

Member
I don't know why this hadn't occurred to me until now . . . but . . .

Well with the whole old dark skinned lamanites stuff in the Book of Mormon and Romney, the first big Mormon presidential candidate, running against Obama . . . well, a dark-skinned guy. Are there going to be some hardcore believers particularly upset if Mitt loses?

I assume that the vast majority of the LDS don't see anything to it and are beyond any racial stuff. And maybe it doesn't apply at all since Obama's black from an African father not a native American.

But are there some hardcore LDS people that will be particularly upset if the white horse guy is beat by a dark-skinned guy? (Forgive my ignorance here, I'm just trying to understand.)
 
K

Klocker

Member
speculawyer said:
I don't know why this hadn't occurred to me until now . . . but . . .

Well with the whole old dark skinned lamanites stuff in the Book of Mormon and Romney, the first big Mormon presidential candidate, running against Obama . . . well, a dark-skinned guy. Are there going to be some hardcore believers particularly upset if Mitt loses?

I assume that the vast majority of the LDS don't see anything to it and are beyond any racial stuff. And maybe it doesn't apply at all since Obama's black from an African father not a native American.

But are there some hardcore LDS people that will be particularly upset if the white horse guy is beat by a dark-skinned guy? (Forgive my ignorance here, I'm just trying to understand.)
Click to expand...

annnectdotal but every LDS member I know in my area (more than a few) disregard, disrespect and more or less loathe Obama and are praying for a Romney win daily.
 
C

CorvoSol

Member
speculawyer said:
I don't know why this hadn't occurred to me until now . . . but . . .

Well with the whole old dark skinned lamanites stuff in the Book of Mormon and Romney, the first big Mormon presidential candidate, running against Obama . . . well, a dark-skinned guy. Are there going to be some hardcore believers particularly upset if Mitt loses?

I assume that the vast majority of the LDS don't see anything to it and are beyond any racial stuff. And maybe it doesn't apply at all since Obama's black from an African father not a native American.

But are there some hardcore LDS people that will be particularly upset if the white horse guy is beat by a dark-skinned guy? (Forgive my ignorance here, I'm just trying to understand.)
Click to expand...

I wouldn't think so. But I'm never really sure anymore if my entire life experience constitutes a typical Mormon experience or not. Fact of the matter is, though, that one of my best friends who is a born and raised Utahn Mormon still isn't voting for the guy. I'm really unsure on voting for him.

And I'd like to say that race really doesn't matter to a lot of them anyway. I can't be sure, but I mean, I grew up with a black man who had joined the Church before blacks could have the priesthood, and his very powerful descriptions of the transition had a pretty big impact on me as a young man. The guy was my family home teacher for years, too. So to me, it isn't a big issue.

I was always of the opinion that the dark skin of the Lamanites was 1)not meant to mean black and 2)irrelevant following a certain point in the Book of Mormon when the two nations have interbred and who is and is not a Nephite or Lamanite and what it means has shifted completely.

Especially since as of the end of 3rd Nephi the distinction between Nephite and Lamanite is completely abandoned until the end of 4th Nephi, when it reemerges as a political and not racial term.

That's what I understood anyway. That said, I 1) Am unsure if I and the people I know really represent American Mormons (the question gets harder the further out you go) and 2) We've had some long and interesting discussions (here at BYUI) on how, in the past, there have been Church Leaders who have made mistakes and been wrong politically or scientifically.

Mormons are a pretty weird lot, though. I see kids with Confederate flags on campus and I just shake my head.

I think it would be pretty cool if we had a Mormon President, but on the other hand, I think I honestly like Obama more, so either way I don't mind.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
Klocker said:
annnectdotal but every LDS member I know in my area (more than a few) disregard, disrespect and more or less loathe Obama and are praying for a Romney win daily.
Click to expand...
But that can just be conservative politics and the favorite son.

I'm wondering if there are people who see a theological issue in the election, not just politics.
 
K

Klocker

Member
speculawyer said:
But that can just be conservative politics and the favorite son.

I'm wondering if there are people who see a theological issue in the election, not just politics.
Click to expand...

yes believe me, does not matter who is running they want nothing more than a Mormon to be President.

Not to offend or threadjack, I call it as I see it and I see it everyday where I live (and hear it). I would venture a guess across theological lines seldom seen, similar to voting along racial lines. The candidate looks like you, sounds like you, reveres the same God and belief system and lives by same (unique) narrowly defined set of rules. My friend told me that they talk about the election in their ward every week in some form or another and how important it is for Mit to win.


I'd wager 99%.


Hopefully actual LDS members will chime in and be open about what they are hearing.
 
Y

Yoritomo

Member
That's a Utah thing. Utah is special.

Mormons have really skewed conservative since the Benson/Birch days. Blind orthodoxy has really jacked with the church. Especially considering that Utah's vote helped end prohibition even against specific instruction from the head of the church. Seeing any group vote along religious or racial lines really pisses me off, so it saddens me to see Romney win by such huge margins in Utah.

I'd wager 99%.
Click to expand...

Then Harry Reid would get a pass as well. This has more to do with politics than theology, however Romney is far more orthodox when it comes to aligning with mormons who are generally socially conservative and staunchly corporatist.
 
R

ronito

Member
speculawyer said:
But that can just be conservative politics and the favorite son.

I'm wondering if there are people who see a theological issue in the election, not just politics.
Click to expand...

Well you do have those that do believe that Mitt Romney is the "white horse" that was prophesied. (Joseph Smith made a prophecy that the "us constitution would hand by a string" and that a "white horse and a red horse" would save it). Some people think that the white and the red horse were Regan and Gorbachev and that it was about the fall of communism.
Most honestly don't know about the red horse mentioned at all and think it's just a white horse, and some of those believe that's Mitt Romney.

Personally, I think he was talking about himself. It's not terribly surprising to find that after he made this prophecy about a white horse saving the constitution Joseph Smith ran in the very next presidential election.
 
C

CorvoSol

Member
ronito said:
Well you do have those that do believe that Mitt Romney is the "white horse" that was prophesied. (Joseph Smith made a prophecy that the "us constitution would hand by a string" and that a "white horse and a red horse" would save it). Some people think that the white and the red horse were Regan and Gorbachev and that it was about the fall of communism.
Most honestly don't know about the red horse mentioned at all and think it's just a white horse, and some of those believe that's Mitt Romney.

Personally, I think he was talking about himself. It's not terribly surprising to find that after he made this prophecy about a white horse saving the constitution Joseph Smith ran in the very next presidential election.
Click to expand...

On the other hand, he could have made the prophecy and thought it applied to himself mistakenly. It would not be the first time in the history of the world that a prophecy was made and a leader thought it applied to them. Even him making it and then thinking it applied to him isn't beyond question. If I knew that "the constitution was hanging by a thread" or would be, I would do what I could to prevent it, too.

I have never heard the horse part of this prophecy, though. And I have not heard anyone mention it at all here. Nor does every single person here want to vote for Romney. Last time I was in town, they were all about Ron Paul here.

And I suppose there could be a difference because 1)The population is much younger and therefore hopefully the product of the newer and more lenient Mormon practices and beliefs, 2)Even if it's BYUI it's still a university and they just all happen to lean left a bit more than regular areas anyway and 3)since so many here are so young, it's entirely possible that, like myself, they're unaware of all manner of things. You'd be surprised how few people opt to take Church history as a course.

But I dunno, I mean, I'm here in one of the big bastions of the Corridor and I really do not hear people saying they'll pray for Romney because he is the Prince that Was Promised. One of my roommates is a staunch Republican, plenty of people here are, but the "Crazy Cult of Romney Mormons" aren't as wide-spread as people want to think.
 
K

Klocker

Member
Yoritomo said:
That's a Utah thing. Utah is special.

Mormons have really skewed conservative since the Benson/Birch days. Blind orthodoxy has really jacked with the church. Especially considering that Utah's vote helped end prohibition even against specific instruction from the head of the church. Seeing any group vote along religious or racial lines really pisses me off, so it saddens me to see Romney win by such huge margins in Utah.



.
Click to expand...


Im in Arizona (Utah light) ;)
 
R

ronito

Member
CorvoSol said:
On the other hand, he could have made the prophecy and thought it applied to himself mistakenly. It would not be the first time in the history of the world that a prophecy was made and a leader thought it applied to them. Even him making it and then thinking it applied to him isn't beyond question. If I knew that "the constitution was hanging by a thread" or would be, I would do what I could to prevent it, too.

I have never heard the horse part of this prophecy, though. And I have not heard anyone mention it at all here. Nor does every single person here want to vote for Romney. Last time I was in town, they were all about Ron Paul here.

And I suppose there could be a difference because 1)The population is much younger and therefore hopefully the product of the newer and more lenient Mormon practices and beliefs, 2)Even if it's BYUI it's still a university and they just all happen to lean left a bit more than regular areas anyway and 3)since so many here are so young, it's entirely possible that, like myself, they're unaware of all manner of things. You'd be surprised how few people opt to take Church history as a course.

But I dunno, I mean, I'm here in one of the big bastions of the Corridor and I really do not hear people saying they'll pray for Romney because he is the Prince that Was Promised. One of my roommates is a staunch Republican, plenty of people here are, but the "Crazy Cult of Romney Mormons" aren't as wide-spread as people want to think.
Click to expand...
You know I think you touched on something really important here.

There's a big difference between the older mormons and the younger set, and it's much more so than the typical generational gap.

My wife's family is as mormon as they come. I mean they can trace their ancestors back to the pioneers that came across with Brigham Young even to Joseph Smith. And have so much genealogy done that they don't even try anymore because they've gone back so far they can't find anything else. One thing that my father in law said sticks with me. He said, "The church as it is now is not the same church."

And I get that. Religion changes as time goes on but it's a very drastic change. If you look at my father in law's father the church is a little different but not much really. Compare him to his father and you'll find the same. But the church we have now compared his church is very different.

Heck, even the church now compared to the church I grew up with is very different. Soda ok, mastrbation now in "questionable" area instead of a damnable sin, the church not being involved in married couple's bedrooms, "mormon doctrine" out of print for good, no more talk about 'less valiant/more valiant' in the pre-existence. white and delightsome is essentially gone, prophets saying that they don't know if man can become gods, no more blood oaths. And I mean that's just in the last 15-20 years.

I mean talking with my wife's uncle he was talking about how Polygamy was a divine practice that we stopped because people couldn't handle it (just like the law of consecration). And I think if most mormons heard that today they'd be really creeped out. But honestly, where I grew up in very conservative utah county that wouldn't have been even out of place. I remember one of my BYU professors talking about how he knew he had a very righteous granddaugther because she said if polygamy was brought back she'd gladly take part for god. And no one batted an eye at it. that was in like 97. Now I doubt a BYU professor could say it and not have some sort of push back.

More and more I see the church "genericizing" itself pushing away from the doctrines that it taught and changing so quickly. I think it's a bit of a problem.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
ronito said:
More and more I see the church "genericizing" itself pushing away from the doctrines that it taught and changing so quickly. I think it's a bit of a problem.
Click to expand...
I think the Internet may have increased the pace of cultural change. Things can be brought up anonymously, groups forms, anonymous discussions take place, things can move to actual interest groups, campaigns form . . . all pretty quickly with messageboards, social media, etc.

Gay Marriage has gone from something no one would even consider an issue worth discussing, to a wedge issue for conservatives, to an issue at the 50% mark in about 15 years.

So if there are various issues that many people find troubling they are probably brought up online, discussed, and change happens faster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Poll
Alan Wake 2 | Review + Prediction Thread
Analysis Review 7 8 9 10 11
524
41K
Ev1L AuRoN replied
  • Locked
Help a NeoGAF member become a better NeoGAF member...
10
969
Kev Kev replied
  • Locked
  • Poll
FF XVI IGN Interview Triggers ResetERA Into MADNESS (Diversity/Representation)
Opinion Drama Cringe 2 3
130
10K
TheInfamousKira replied
Every “chronically online” conversation is the same [Vox]
Social Opinion Drama
47
5K
Lord Panda replied
Interview From Team Asobi's (Astro Bot) Nicolas Doucet
28
3K
CaptainSlayAHo replied
Top Bottom