I liked the talk by the guy that sounded like Count Dracula.
What's more important, a person's initial overreaction to something, or the fact that they listened with reason to the opposition and then, in fairness, adjusted their tune? For me it's the latter.
This has been brought up before and it is true to a point. Most families I know (including ours) have gone to the "Late-Nights" instead of sleepovers. Kids hangout til late and then go home.
I noticed that as well. It amazes me how quickly the speakers will go from humor to serious stuff. That guy was kind of hard to listen to when he'd get choked up.I liked the one where everyone started busting up laughing at the speaker's "stupid cow" who ate itself to death, followed by said speaker holding back tears as he expressed what a difficult moment that was.
Seems to me that the "applause", "laughter", and "reverence" signs in the conference center need to be tweaked.
No question a lot of bad stuff for me went down at sleepovers.What was funny, is I slept-over at one of my friend's house in Park City to watch conference along with a bunch of other people, so we got a kick out of that when it was brought up.
I'm in college, so it's not like my life is not one huge sleepover to begin with, but that was just kind of coincidental.
I think that is a very valid observation though. I know I was introduced to some stuff at sleepovers in my youth-- and did some introducing myself. It also protects children, you may trust the parents of your kid who is sleeping over, but do you trust the uncle from out of town who was "just stopping by." I was introduced to far more other things at concerts, so I wonder if the church will take a stand against those in the near future (I'm not being cynical, just making an observation).
As a parent now I am more concerned with the dangers of my girls sleeping over somewhere else (like you said with the uncle). But they are getting older so now it's getting to be less an issue of safety and more an issue of what are they doing. There's a balance in there somewhere that doesn't intrude too much on their agency.
I think each prophet put his own personal stamp on how business is conducted even though they all speak to the same god.
When Benson was in charge I could watch conference as the speakers would inject humour into their talks which made them so much more enjoyable to listen to. Once Benson died and Hunter took over he took a firm stance that conference was to be solemn and reverent and not a place of laughter and joking. The talks were to be serious and devoid of humour. Conference became unbearable to watch. Once Hinckley took over it went back to being more enjoyable. And it wasn't just conference. It was extended to all church meetings.
Did God all of the sudden decide the laughter and humour were bad when Benson passed? Did he decide that once Hunter died laughter and humour were a good thing again? I don't think so. This was strictly an individual injecting his own beliefs into how things should be done.
I have some strong feelings on personal beliefs directing what the Word of Wisdom has evolved into over the years but we'll leave that for another conversation.
Fact is, these men of god are still men and have a personal opinion that dictates how things are done outside of what god would necessarily want.
You and I could probably have a 6 hour discussion on the WoW, Marcus.