<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Interview with Michael Glatze</title>
	<atom:link href="http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/</link>
	<description>A College Psychology Professor&#039;s Observations About Public Policy, Mental Health, Sexual Identity, and Religious Issues</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 15:26:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lifesitenews article: An exercise in confirmation bias &#8212; Warren Throckmorton</title>
		<link>http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/comment-page-2/#comment-248590</link>
		<dc:creator>Lifesitenews article: An exercise in confirmation bias &#8212; Warren Throckmorton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:28:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/#comment-248590</guid>
		<description>[...] one being Peter LaBarbera. My reason for hedging on Glatze is that he began his ex-gay journey as a member of the LDS church and is listed as an “Executive Assistant” at the Buddhist inspired Shambhala Mountain Center in [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] one being Peter LaBarbera. My reason for hedging on Glatze is that he began his ex-gay journey as a member of the LDS church and is listed as an “Executive Assistant” at the Buddhist inspired Shambhala Mountain Center in [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: I</title>
		<link>http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/comment-page-2/#comment-222829</link>
		<dc:creator>I</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 23:01:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/#comment-222829</guid>
		<description>From my own experience, sexuality is so fluid.
Many stupid persons believe that it&#039;s innate and non changeable. A mùinority knows that it&#039;s far away to be innate. 
People tend to believe what activists say to them without analysing it.
Many resarches concluded that homosexuality is not innate, and it can be changed. But in vain.
I understand why Galileo was killed whan he said that the earth is turning around. The reason that they dont&#039; believe him is that they don&#039;t feel that it&#039;s true. 

Warren, i agree with you, i readed many topics in your website and they are amazing.

Cordially</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From my own experience, sexuality is so fluid.<br />
Many stupid persons believe that it&#8217;s innate and non changeable. A mùinority knows that it&#8217;s far away to be innate.<br />
People tend to believe what activists say to them without analysing it.<br />
Many resarches concluded that homosexuality is not innate, and it can be changed. But in vain.<br />
I understand why Galileo was killed whan he said that the earth is turning around. The reason that they dont&#8217; believe him is that they don&#8217;t feel that it&#8217;s true. </p>
<p>Warren, i agree with you, i readed many topics in your website and they are amazing.</p>
<p>Cordially</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aksehl</title>
		<link>http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/comment-page-1/#comment-149319</link>
		<dc:creator>Aksehl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 02:16:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/#comment-149319</guid>
		<description>In response to those that bring up Roy Masters I wish to attest to the fact that his meditation does seem to work. It&#039;s not an overnight thing although it did make it possible for me to give up gay &quot;hook up&quot; web sites overnight. Before meditating I could not make it through a day without visiting a couple such sites, often spending hours on them. After just a couple times of doing the &quot;be still and know&quot; meditation I was no longer feeling the need to log on to them and I dropped my profiles and haven&#039;t been back in over a year. After a few weeks of meditating I wasn&#039;t able to tolerate the sexual touch of another man, even if I still desired it, which is odd. I&#039;d get into a situation where I&#039;d be alone with a guy I thought I was attracted to but when it got sexual he didn&#039;t look good to me anymore and I couldn&#039;t go through with it. Also,after a  couple months of meditating I had a dream about swimming with three naked women and woke up with a strong erection. This actually scared, confused me and I stopped meditating for awhile, then started again, then stopped again. It seems I still look at men with &quot;women&#039;s eyes&quot; as Roy puts it, but the draw is nowhere near as strong as it used to be, unless I resent the attraction or get upset with myself, then it get&#039;s stronger. One has to have a care free attitude as this affliction is fed and grows stronger through resentment. Roy is clearly onto something.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In response to those that bring up Roy Masters I wish to attest to the fact that his meditation does seem to work. It&#8217;s not an overnight thing although it did make it possible for me to give up gay &#8220;hook up&#8221; web sites overnight. Before meditating I could not make it through a day without visiting a couple such sites, often spending hours on them. After just a couple times of doing the &#8220;be still and know&#8221; meditation I was no longer feeling the need to log on to them and I dropped my profiles and haven&#8217;t been back in over a year. After a few weeks of meditating I wasn&#8217;t able to tolerate the sexual touch of another man, even if I still desired it, which is odd. I&#8217;d get into a situation where I&#8217;d be alone with a guy I thought I was attracted to but when it got sexual he didn&#8217;t look good to me anymore and I couldn&#8217;t go through with it. Also,after a  couple months of meditating I had a dream about swimming with three naked women and woke up with a strong erection. This actually scared, confused me and I stopped meditating for awhile, then started again, then stopped again. It seems I still look at men with &#8220;women&#8217;s eyes&#8221; as Roy puts it, but the draw is nowhere near as strong as it used to be, unless I resent the attraction or get upset with myself, then it get&#8217;s stronger. One has to have a care free attitude as this affliction is fed and grows stronger through resentment. Roy is clearly onto something.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: As I See it &#187; Jones and Yarhouse study: Homosexuals can change!</title>
		<link>http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/comment-page-1/#comment-47773</link>
		<dc:creator>As I See it &#187; Jones and Yarhouse study: Homosexuals can change!</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2007 14:05:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/#comment-47773</guid>
		<description>[...] An Interview with Michael Glatze. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] An Interview with Michael Glatze. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: idea macht versehentlich Werbung für Mormonen &#124; SkepTicker</title>
		<link>http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/comment-page-1/#comment-42097</link>
		<dc:creator>idea macht versehentlich Werbung für Mormonen &#124; SkepTicker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2007 12:08:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/#comment-42097</guid>
		<description>[...] k&#246;nnen die Mormonen f&#252;r sich verbuchen. Michael Glatze best&#228;tigte in einem Interview, dass er dieser, von Evangelikalen und Katholiken als unchristlich bezeichneten Religion, [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] k&#246;nnen die Mormonen f&#252;r sich verbuchen. Michael Glatze best&#228;tigte in einem Interview, dass er dieser, von Evangelikalen und Katholiken als unchristlich bezeichneten Religion, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jayhuck</title>
		<link>http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/comment-page-1/#comment-38676</link>
		<dc:creator>jayhuck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2007 04:06:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/#comment-38676</guid>
		<description>Yes Russell - just like heterosexuality - and as of yet, there is evidence of a gene or set of genes influencing orientation - though there isn&#039;t definitive proof, the evidence we do have leads in that direction - but like all things, genes are never really the final word.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes Russell &#8211; just like heterosexuality &#8211; and as of yet, there is evidence of a gene or set of genes influencing orientation &#8211; though there isn&#8217;t definitive proof, the evidence we do have leads in that direction &#8211; but like all things, genes are never really the final word.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Russell</title>
		<link>http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/comment-page-1/#comment-37575</link>
		<dc:creator>Russell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:31:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/#comment-37575</guid>
		<description>As an orthodox and educated Latter Day Saint myself, I am pretty well-acquainted with the Church literature on the topic.  Homosexual orientation--bot in public and &quot;behind the scenes&quot; IS ACKNOWLEDGED as being a possibility.  What that orientation means, however, is what is questioned.  In a recent interview with Dallin H. Oaks and Lance Wickman on the lds.org website, they offer a qualified comparison of homosexual orientation to a physical limitation, like being confined to a wheelchair or being born without a limb.  The BYU honor code (which school I attend) also makes a clear distinction between orientation and behavior, stating that &quot;orientation is not an Honor Code issue.&quot;

One might summarize the Church&#039;s stance as being ambiguous--some things we really don&#039;t know.  You may quote past leaders with various opinions, insights, but the bottom line is that we do not know.  That, my friends, is the Church&#039;s stance.  

Re: biological elements, while there is no gay gene per se (no &quot;inherited&quot; trait--to use genetics terminology), there might be some element of &quot;heritable&quot; traits behind homosexuality.  Of course, these traits are subject to numerous other factors--environment, biological/chemical makeup, personal choice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As an orthodox and educated Latter Day Saint myself, I am pretty well-acquainted with the Church literature on the topic.  Homosexual orientation&#8211;bot in public and &#8220;behind the scenes&#8221; IS ACKNOWLEDGED as being a possibility.  What that orientation means, however, is what is questioned.  In a recent interview with Dallin H. Oaks and Lance Wickman on the lds.org website, they offer a qualified comparison of homosexual orientation to a physical limitation, like being confined to a wheelchair or being born without a limb.  The BYU honor code (which school I attend) also makes a clear distinction between orientation and behavior, stating that &#8220;orientation is not an Honor Code issue.&#8221;</p>
<p>One might summarize the Church&#8217;s stance as being ambiguous&#8211;some things we really don&#8217;t know.  You may quote past leaders with various opinions, insights, but the bottom line is that we do not know.  That, my friends, is the Church&#8217;s stance.  </p>
<p>Re: biological elements, while there is no gay gene per se (no &#8220;inherited&#8221; trait&#8211;to use genetics terminology), there might be some element of &#8220;heritable&#8221; traits behind homosexuality.  Of course, these traits are subject to numerous other factors&#8211;environment, biological/chemical makeup, personal choice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Boo</title>
		<link>http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/comment-page-1/#comment-37313</link>
		<dc:creator>Boo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2007 12:06:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/#comment-37313</guid>
		<description>Woo-hoo! Thread derailment!

&lt;i&gt;We do not believe that God asked Christ and Satan to come up with two plans (an outright false idea of LDS doctrine that is explicitly condemned by Church leaders), but rather that God had ONE plan, embodied in His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ (who was his Beloved and Chosen from the beginning), and that Satan rebelled against that plan.&lt;/i&gt;

From the LDS scripture &quot;Book of Moses&quot;:

&quot;And I, the Lord God, spake unto Moses, saying: That Satan... is the same which was from the beginning, and he came before me, saying—Behold, here am I, send me, I will be thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore give me thine honor.
&quot;But, behold, my Beloved Son, which was my Beloved and Chosen from the beginning, said unto me—Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever.
&quot;Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, and also, that I should give unto him mine own power... I caused that he should be cast down&quot; (Moses 4:1-3.)

From ldsfamilies.com:

&lt;i&gt;Long before the world was formed, we lived with our Father in Heaven, our Savior, Jesus Christ, and all our other brothers and sisters. A plan was laid forth by our Heavenly Father whereby we might have the opportunity to become like Him. There were two who stepped forth to fulfill the plan. One, Jesus Christ, willing to execute the plan in accordance with our Father, and another, Satan, who wished to force all of the Father&#039;s children to return and in exchange for this, wished for all the glory. The Father chose Jesus Christ, which was ratified by all in attendance, to carry forth the plan, whereby all of His children might be returned to Him. A great war took place, as is outlined in Revelations. Jesus Christ, Michael and their followers won this battle and Satan and the one third of the hosts of heaven were forever cast out of the presence of Heavenly Father.&lt;/i&gt;

&lt;i&gt;We believe that Christ is God, not just “a perfect man.”&lt;/i&gt;

But not in the same sense as mainstream Christianity, as Jesus being of one substance with The Father, correct? 

And that&#039;s not even getting into the whole as we are God once was, as God is we may become thing.

Anyone wanna place bets on how many posts until Warren steps in and returns us to our regularly scheduled argument?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Woo-hoo! Thread derailment!</p>
<p><i>We do not believe that God asked Christ and Satan to come up with two plans (an outright false idea of LDS doctrine that is explicitly condemned by Church leaders), but rather that God had ONE plan, embodied in His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ (who was his Beloved and Chosen from the beginning), and that Satan rebelled against that plan.</i></p>
<p>From the LDS scripture &#8220;Book of Moses&#8221;:</p>
<p>&#8220;And I, the Lord God, spake unto Moses, saying: That Satan&#8230; is the same which was from the beginning, and he came before me, saying—Behold, here am I, send me, I will be thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore give me thine honor.<br />
&#8220;But, behold, my Beloved Son, which was my Beloved and Chosen from the beginning, said unto me—Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever.<br />
&#8220;Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, and also, that I should give unto him mine own power&#8230; I caused that he should be cast down&#8221; (Moses 4:1-3.)</p>
<p>From ldsfamilies.com:</p>
<p><i>Long before the world was formed, we lived with our Father in Heaven, our Savior, Jesus Christ, and all our other brothers and sisters. A plan was laid forth by our Heavenly Father whereby we might have the opportunity to become like Him. There were two who stepped forth to fulfill the plan. One, Jesus Christ, willing to execute the plan in accordance with our Father, and another, Satan, who wished to force all of the Father&#8217;s children to return and in exchange for this, wished for all the glory. The Father chose Jesus Christ, which was ratified by all in attendance, to carry forth the plan, whereby all of His children might be returned to Him. A great war took place, as is outlined in Revelations. Jesus Christ, Michael and their followers won this battle and Satan and the one third of the hosts of heaven were forever cast out of the presence of Heavenly Father.</i></p>
<p><i>We believe that Christ is God, not just “a perfect man.”</i></p>
<p>But not in the same sense as mainstream Christianity, as Jesus being of one substance with The Father, correct? </p>
<p>And that&#8217;s not even getting into the whole as we are God once was, as God is we may become thing.</p>
<p>Anyone wanna place bets on how many posts until Warren steps in and returns us to our regularly scheduled argument?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DW</title>
		<link>http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/comment-page-1/#comment-37291</link>
		<dc:creator>DW</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2007 07:31:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/#comment-37291</guid>
		<description>As a devout LDS person (who also happens to be an instructor of psychology of gender at BYU), I am upset but not surprised at the ignorance of LDS beliefs reflected in this discussion board. We Mormons of course are used to this, and I do not take offense.

Just a couple corrections I offer here. First, the name-calling remark about Mormons being &quot;pagans&quot; is bigoted and does not deserve a response.

Second, the idea that Glatze needs to speak against homosexuality as part of is &quot;penance&quot; is ridiculous. No. It may be an outgrowth of his conversion, but if you think that the LDS Church is looking down this guy&#039;s neck, watching his every move, making specific demands about repairing the damage he&#039;s done, then you have a VERY wrong idea of the LDS Church. I have NEVER seen anything like this in my 25+ years as a member. In fact, the suspicions that brood about such an idea are LOL ridiculous. I think that many of you might be surprised at how uninterested the Church and its leaders are at micromanaging its members&#039; lives.

Third, I think that many of you might be surprised at how similar LDS views are to evangelical Christians regarding Christ (while also different in important ways). We believe that Christ is God, not just &quot;a perfect man.&quot; We believe that He atoned for our sins, died for us on the cross, and rose on the third day, using very similar language to other Christians. We do not believe that God asked Christ and Satan to come up with two plans (an outright false idea of LDS doctrine that is explicitly condemned by Church leaders), but rather that God had ONE plan, embodied in His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ (who was his Beloved and Chosen from the beginning), and that Satan rebelled against that plan. Also, the view that some &quot;testing&quot; comes from an inability in the pre-world to fully stand on the side of Jesus is completely false (and such views have been explicitly condemned by recent Church leaders). Also, Aaron, the &quot;double-speak&quot; you refer to regarding public and private views of LDS views on homosexuality is changing. Our leaders and members have had false notions regarding homosexuality in the past (e.g., that reparative therapy and heterosexual marriage are THE answer). Please forgive us for these wrong views--we&#039;re trying to move forward; please let us and not harbor resentment for the past. Such views you longer see being repeated by Church leaders, at least at the very top. Unfortunately, the trickle-down process can take some time. Moreover, more understanding and compassionate views regarding homosexuality and SSA have been anything but quiet--as one person suggested--among Church leaders, at least at the top level of leadership (but yes, we certainly have many members who are not fully on board).

Fourth, Latter-day Saint doctrine does not incorporate a view in which one saves her- or himself. We believe that Christ is the only way to salvation, that humans are sinners who are utterly incapable of saving themselves, and that any of the works involved in the Church are simply an expression of one&#039;s &quot;coming to Christ.&quot; The entire mission of the Church is encapsulated in the coming of Christ and is entirely grounded in His divine nature, His Atoning sacrifice, and His glorious resurrection. We worship Christ. If you have a hard time believing this, read the Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ (as opposed to simply reading about it). Read it for yourself. See what it says about belief in Christ. I think you might be surprised. Here is just one little excerpt, entirely consistent with the entire theme of the book: &quot;And if Christ had not risen from the dead, or have broken the bands of death that the grave should have no victory, and that death should have no sting, there could have been no resurrection. But there is a resurrection, therefore the grave hath no victory, and the sting of death is swallowed up in Christ. He is the light and the life of the world; yea, a light that is endless, that can never be darkened; yea, and also a life which is endless; that there can be no more death ... And now, ought ye not to tremble and repent of your sins, and remember that only in and through Christ ye can be saved? ... Redemption cometh through Christ the Lord, who is the very Eternal Father. Amen&quot; (Mosiah 16: 7-9, 15).

I apologize if this comment deviates too much. My hope, however, is that my perspective will be valued and help to counter some false views regarding the LDS Church. Thank you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a devout LDS person (who also happens to be an instructor of psychology of gender at BYU), I am upset but not surprised at the ignorance of LDS beliefs reflected in this discussion board. We Mormons of course are used to this, and I do not take offense.</p>
<p>Just a couple corrections I offer here. First, the name-calling remark about Mormons being &#8220;pagans&#8221; is bigoted and does not deserve a response.</p>
<p>Second, the idea that Glatze needs to speak against homosexuality as part of is &#8220;penance&#8221; is ridiculous. No. It may be an outgrowth of his conversion, but if you think that the LDS Church is looking down this guy&#8217;s neck, watching his every move, making specific demands about repairing the damage he&#8217;s done, then you have a VERY wrong idea of the LDS Church. I have NEVER seen anything like this in my 25+ years as a member. In fact, the suspicions that brood about such an idea are LOL ridiculous. I think that many of you might be surprised at how uninterested the Church and its leaders are at micromanaging its members&#8217; lives.</p>
<p>Third, I think that many of you might be surprised at how similar LDS views are to evangelical Christians regarding Christ (while also different in important ways). We believe that Christ is God, not just &#8220;a perfect man.&#8221; We believe that He atoned for our sins, died for us on the cross, and rose on the third day, using very similar language to other Christians. We do not believe that God asked Christ and Satan to come up with two plans (an outright false idea of LDS doctrine that is explicitly condemned by Church leaders), but rather that God had ONE plan, embodied in His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ (who was his Beloved and Chosen from the beginning), and that Satan rebelled against that plan. Also, the view that some &#8220;testing&#8221; comes from an inability in the pre-world to fully stand on the side of Jesus is completely false (and such views have been explicitly condemned by recent Church leaders). Also, Aaron, the &#8220;double-speak&#8221; you refer to regarding public and private views of LDS views on homosexuality is changing. Our leaders and members have had false notions regarding homosexuality in the past (e.g., that reparative therapy and heterosexual marriage are THE answer). Please forgive us for these wrong views&#8211;we&#8217;re trying to move forward; please let us and not harbor resentment for the past. Such views you longer see being repeated by Church leaders, at least at the very top. Unfortunately, the trickle-down process can take some time. Moreover, more understanding and compassionate views regarding homosexuality and SSA have been anything but quiet&#8211;as one person suggested&#8211;among Church leaders, at least at the top level of leadership (but yes, we certainly have many members who are not fully on board).</p>
<p>Fourth, Latter-day Saint doctrine does not incorporate a view in which one saves her- or himself. We believe that Christ is the only way to salvation, that humans are sinners who are utterly incapable of saving themselves, and that any of the works involved in the Church are simply an expression of one&#8217;s &#8220;coming to Christ.&#8221; The entire mission of the Church is encapsulated in the coming of Christ and is entirely grounded in His divine nature, His Atoning sacrifice, and His glorious resurrection. We worship Christ. If you have a hard time believing this, read the Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ (as opposed to simply reading about it). Read it for yourself. See what it says about belief in Christ. I think you might be surprised. Here is just one little excerpt, entirely consistent with the entire theme of the book: &#8220;And if Christ had not risen from the dead, or have broken the bands of death that the grave should have no victory, and that death should have no sting, there could have been no resurrection. But there is a resurrection, therefore the grave hath no victory, and the sting of death is swallowed up in Christ. He is the light and the life of the world; yea, a light that is endless, that can never be darkened; yea, and also a life which is endless; that there can be no more death &#8230; And now, ought ye not to tremble and repent of your sins, and remember that only in and through Christ ye can be saved? &#8230; Redemption cometh through Christ the Lord, who is the very Eternal Father. Amen&#8221; (Mosiah 16: 7-9, 15).</p>
<p>I apologize if this comment deviates too much. My hope, however, is that my perspective will be valued and help to counter some false views regarding the LDS Church. Thank you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mary</title>
		<link>http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/comment-page-1/#comment-37253</link>
		<dc:creator>Mary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2007 03:12:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wthrockmorton.com/2007/07/04/interview-with-michael-glatze/#comment-37253</guid>
		<description>It is up to us to stand and be counted for ourselves - we are not truer beings because we demolish someone else.   Calling others the equivalent of liars, bogus, frauds, etc... is akin to mud slinging and does not prove that your position is more valid.   Just my opinion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is up to us to stand and be counted for ourselves &#8211; we are not truer beings because we demolish someone else.   Calling others the equivalent of liars, bogus, frauds, etc&#8230; is akin to mud slinging and does not prove that your position is more valid.   Just my opinion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

