Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

8403NEWS -- 2014.04.13.Sunday School Lessons

Expand Messages
  • James Martin
    Apr 13 2:49 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Saw the movie "Captain Phillips".  It's a good demonstration of how efficiently and effectively our government lies whenever it needs to.  The military did an outstanding job of lying to the Somali pirates.  The NSA does an outstanding job of lying to all America.
      Here lies the truth. 
      1) Do same-sex couples have right to wed? Appeals court hears first post-DOMA case
      2) UMass basketball player announces he's gay
      3) Mississippi Sex-Ed Law Permits Teachers To Instruct Students That Homosexuality Is Illegal
      4) Jimmy Carter: Southern White Men Turn To The GOP Because Of 'Race'
      5) Man cleared of NYC murder after 25 years in prison
      6) Here's What Happened When Antigay Photographers Took Their Case to the Supreme Court
      7) Greenwald, Poitras, and Snowden 
      8) Mormon theological mythology
      Extra ---
      As I said, there’s an extraordinary ugliness of spirit abroad in today’s America, which health reform has brought out into the open.

      Do same-sex couples have right to wed? Appeals court hears first post-DOMA case

      A potential landmark case from Utah testing whether same-sex couples enjoy a constitutional right to marry arrives Thursday before a federal appeals court panel in Denver.

      By Warren Richey, Christian Science Monitor, Thursday 10 April 2014
      The question of same-sex marriage has divided the country, and the issue is inevitably headed to the US Supreme Court, perhaps as early as next year.

      Currently, 17 states and the District of Columbia recognize same-sex marriages. In contrast, 33 states restrict marriage to one man and one woman through bans enacted by statute or constitutional amendment.

      Thursday’s hour-long argument at the Tenth US Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver involves a challenge to a 2004 constitutional amendment in Utah banning gay marriage. It won 66 percent of the vote.

      On Dec. 20, US District Judge Robert Shelby declared the Utah amendment unconstitutional. His was the first such ruling since the Supreme Court struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in a landmark decision last June.

      “The state’s current laws deny its gay and lesbian citizens their fundamental right to marry and, in so doing, demean the dignity of these same-sex couples for no rational reason,” he ruled.

      Judge Shelby said the state had no justifiable reason to treat same-sex couples differently than heterosexual couples in Utah. And the judge went substantially further. He declared that the US Constitution itself requires that Utah allow same-sex couples to marry.

      If upheld by the Tenth Circuit and then the US Supreme Court, Judge Shelby’s decision would mean that every same-sex marriage restriction and ban across the country must fall.

      Since the Utah decision, federal judges in Oklahoma, Texas, Virginia, Michigan, and Ohio have issued nearly identical rulings that same-sex marriage bans in those states violate a fundamental right to marry protected by the US Constitution. All are under appeal.

      In addition to hearing the Utah case Thursday, the same three-judge panel on the Tenth Circuit is set to hear an Oklahoma marriage case on April 17. The other four appeals are also underway in the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Circuits.

      These cases are only the tip of a litigation iceberg involving nearly 60 lawsuits filed in state and federal courts in 27 states and Puerto Rico challenging same-sex marriage bans.

      This inundation tactic is part of a national strategy by gay rights groups to flood the country with cases and build a sense of momentum and inevitability for national recognition of same-sex marriage and gay rights.

      Many states and traditional marriage groups are fighting back, hoping to preserve the status quo view of marriage in their own states. They argue that the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the issue and that it is premature for federal judges and appeals courts to opine on a US constitutional right to same-sex marriage.

      Supporters of the traditional definition of marriage also say that states are entitled to restrict marriage to male-female unions as long as their citizens and elected representatives deem them acceptable and appropriate.

      These supporters say that if, or when, states embrace broader definitions of marriage it should come about through debate, public campaigns, and popular votes, rather than being imposed by unelected federal judges.

      At its most basic, the Utah case is a fundamental test of who gets to decide how the same-sex marriage debate is to be resolved. Will it be decided by judges and justices, or by the states and voters?

      Gay rights advocates insist that the right to marry is a fundamental right that all citizens enjoy. They are not asking for creation of a new constitutional right, just a broader application of the existing right, they say.

      Lawyers for Utah counter that there is no fundamental right to same-sex marriage. They say regulation of marriage is within the traditional authority of each state to decide. Under principles of federalism, the national government has no business imposing its view in areas reserved to the states.

      Rather than trying to impose a solution through the courts, they say, allowing the issue to proceed on a state-by-state basis through democratic means is more likely to result in compromise and accommodation.

      “Public opinion is apparently in flux,” Washington appellate lawyer Gene Schaerr wrote in his brief to the Tenth Circuit on behalf of Utah.

      “No one knows what the ultimate outcome will be, either nationally or in any given state. But the fact that different states have thus far chosen different paths is not a sign of political weakness; it is a sign of a healthy and diverse national republic,” he wrote.

      The constitutional structure of government is designed in part to foster experimentation and democratic participation within the states during times of rapid social change, Mr. Schaerr said. The federal judge’s decision in Utah, if affirmed, would bring that activity to a “screeching halt,” he said.

      Federal imposition of a one-size-fits-all solution, the lawyer said, would alter the balance of power between the states and the national government.

      Schaerr said that such an approach would “destroy any opportunity for the kind of democratic compromise and accommodation that could otherwise ultimately produce, in each state, a peaceful and relatively harmonious resolution of what is now, in many places, a highly contentious issue.”

      “The state respectfully asks this court to allow the people of Utah to choose for themselves how to strike the proper balance,” Schaerr said in his brief to the Tenth Circuit.

      Lawyers for same-sex couples in Utah counter that principles of federalism do not exempt states from the requirement that they uphold the constitutional rights of their citizens.

      A state’s power to legislate, adjudicate, and administer all aspects of family law are subject to scrutiny by the federal judiciary, they say.

      “Even when regulating in areas that are properly subject to their regulatory authority, states must respect fundamental constitutional rights,” Kathryn Kendell of the National Center for Lesbian Rights wrote in her brief to the Tenth Circuit.

      “Indeed, the entire purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment is to prohibit states from exercising their traditional authority in ways that deprive their citizens of liberties guaranteed by the federal Constitution,” she added.

      Ms. Kendell quoted Judge Shelby as having correctly framed the question: “The issue the court must address in this case is … not who should define marriage, but the narrow question of whether Utah’s current definition of marriage is permissible under the Constitution.”

      Much of this posturing is based on a few paragraphs written by Justice Anthony Kennedy in last summer’s Supreme Court decision in US v. Windsor invalidating DOMA.

      In that case, the court ruled 5 to 4 that the federal government had improperly intruded into the state’s traditional authority to regulate marriage. At issue was the fact that same-sex couples who had legally married in their home states were nonetheless barred under DOMA from receiving the same federal benefits as opposite-sex spouses.

      The court said the federal government had to respect the decisions of the states in conferring equal status and dignity to same-sex married couples.

      But what the court did not do is decide the larger, more basic question of whether same-sex couples have a right under the US Constitution to marry or whether that is a decision to be left to each state to determine.

      That hasn’t stopped federal judges and lawyers on both sides of the issue from drawing from portions of Justice Kennedy’s decision in the Windsor case to support their legal arguments.

      Now the task falls to a three-judge appeals court panel in Denver to assess and judge their work.

      The case is Kitchen v. Herbert (13-4178).


      UMass basketball player announces he's gay

      By HOWARD ULMAN, AP, Wednesday 09 April 2014

      Derrick Gordon had kept his secret for too long.

      He couldn't be himself. He considered giving up the sport he loved. Because he was gay, he distanced himself from teammates.

      "I was living life in shame," the UMass guard said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. "It took a toll on me."

      Gordon became the first openly gay player in Division I men's basketball on Wednesday, making the announcement on ESPN and Outsports. Now he hopes to inspire others in similar situations.

      "It's crazy that I'm the first," he told the AP. "I didn't know that it would be this long, but if I'm the first, then I'll start it off."

      Previous announcements by NBA player Jason Collins and Missouri All-American defensive end Michael Sam made his decision easier. Gordon said he talked with Collins several times before making his announcement.

      --- click on URL to continue ---

      Mississippi Sex-Ed Law Permits Teachers To Instruct Students That Homosexuality Is Illegal

       | by  Shadee Ashtari
      Posted: 04/08/2014

      Under Mississippi’s mandated sex-education curriculum, teachers are permitted to instruct students that homosexual activity under the "unnatural intercourse" statute is illegal, while enforcing that a "monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the only appropriate setting for sexual intercourse."

      While the law allows teachers to opt out of presenting programs related to the state’s anti-gay sex policy, any instruction contradicting the statute is prohibited under the state’s sex-ed curriculum.

      Since 2012, Mississippi has required all school districts to offer an abstinence-centered sex-ed curriculum, although 12 percent of districts have not yet implemented any sex-ed courses, according to a recent study by the Center for Mississippi Health Policy.

      The law also requires male and female students to be instructed in separate classrooms and prohibits condom demonstrations in schools.

      Despite the Supreme Court's 2003 ruling in Lawrence v. Texas invalidating all state laws against gay sex as unconstitutional, several states maintain various anti-sodomy laws on the books, including Alabama, Louisiana and Utah.

      A November 2013 Public Policy Polling survey found that “Mississippi probably continues to be the most conservative state in the country when it comes to same sex marriage." Only 22 percent of Mississippi voters said they support marriage equality, with 69 percent thinking it should be illegal.

      On Thursday, Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant (R) signed a contentious bill potentially legalizing anti-LGBT discrimination throughout the state under the auspices of religious freedom.

      "It's the first time in my life that I've actually considered moving out of Mississippi," Jeff White, a founder of the Mississippi Gulf Coast Lesbian and Gay Community Center, said on Thursday. "It made me physically ill the past few days, realizing what they're trying to do."

      See also
      Sex education stumbles in Mississippi
      Even a law requiring schools to teach sex ed is falling short in a state with one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the U.S.
      By Alana Semuels
      April 2, 2014
      TUNICA, Miss. — Marie Barnard was delighted when, after decades of silence on the topic, Mississippi passed a law requiring school districts to teach sex education. But the lesson involving the Peppermint Pattie wasn't what she had in mind for her sons.
      --- click on URL to continue ---

      Jimmy Carter: Southern White Men Turn To The GOP Because Of 'Race'

       | by  Sara Bondioli
      Posted: 04/10/2014 11:12 am EDT Updated: 04/10/2014 11:59 am EDT

      Race is the primary reason white Southern men support the Republican Party, former President Jimmy Carter told Salon in an interview posted Thursday. Carter also pushed back against using the Bible to trample human rights.

      When asked why white male Southerners have turned to the GOP, Carter said: "It’s race. That’s been prevalent in the South ... . Ever since Nixon ran -- and ever since Johnson didn’t campaign in the deep South, the Republicans have solidified their hold there."

      Republican proposals, such as cutting food stamps and assuming the guilt of minorities and the mentally ill who are in jail, appeal to the rich, he said.

      "Those kind of things just exalt the higher class, which is the whites, and they draw a subtle, but very effective racial line throughout the South," Carter said.

      Carter also rejected interpretations of the Bible that are used to oppress women. He said individuals can find verses that belittle women but also many that pronounce the equality of all people.

      "So, you know, you could find verses, but as far as Jesus Christ is concerned, he was unanimously and always the champion of women’s rights," he said. "He never deviated from that standard. And in fact he was the most prominent champion of human rights that lived in his time and I think there’s been no one more committed to that ideal than he is."

      Carter has railed against religious groups using sexist interpretations of the Bible to trample human rights in other interviews as well. Carter's Thursday comments come on the heels of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee's (R) statement that his opposition to same-sex marriage is on "the right side of the Bible."

      Read more at Salon.

      How / why was he convicted?

      Man cleared of NYC murder after 25 years in prison

      By JENNIFER PELTZ, Wednesday 09 April 2014
      NEW YORK (AP) — From the day of his 1989 arrest in a deadly New York City shooting, Jonathan Fleming said he had been more than 1,000 miles away, on a vacation at Disney World. Despite having documents to back him up, he was convicted of murder.

      Prosecutors now agree with him, and Fleming left a Brooklyn court as a free man Tuesday after spending nearly a quarter-century behind bars.

      Fleming, now 51, tearfully hugged his lawyers as relatives cheered, "Thank you, God!" after a judge dismissed the case. A key witness had recanted, newly found witnesses implicated someone else and prosecutors' review of authorities' files turned up documents supporting Fleming's alibi.

      "After 25 years, come hug your mother," Patricia Fleming said, and her only child did.

      "I feel wonderful," he said afterward. "I've always had faith. I knew that this day would come someday."

      The exoneration, first reported by the Daily News, comes amid scrutiny of Brooklyn prosecutors' process for reviewing questionable convictions, scrutiny that comes partly from the new district attorney, Kenneth Thompson. He said in a statement that after a monthslong review, he decided to drop the case against Fleming because of "key alibi facts that place Fleming in Florida at the time of the murder."

      From the start, Fleming told authorities he had been in Orlando when a friend, Darryl "Black" Rush, was shot to death in Brooklyn early on Aug. 15, 1989. Authorities suggested the shooting was motivated by a dispute over money.

      Fleming had plane tickets, videos and postcards from his trip, said his lawyers, Anthony Mayol and Taylor Koss. But prosecutors at the time suggested he could have made a quick round-trip plane jaunt to be in New York, and a woman testified that she had seen him shoot Rush. He was sentenced to 25 years to life in prison and was due to have his first parole hearing soon.

      The witness recanted her testimony soon after Fleming's 1990 conviction, saying she had lied so police would cut her loose for an unrelated arrest, but Fleming lost his appeals.

      The defense asked the district attorney's office to review the case last year.

      Defense investigators found previously untapped witnesses who pointed to someone else as the gunman, the attorneys said, declining to give the witnesses' or potential suspect's names before prosecutors look into them. The district attorney's office declined to comment on its investigative plans.

      Prosecutors' review produced a hotel receipt that Fleming paid in Florida about five hours before the shooting — a document that police evidently had found in Fleming's pocket when they arrested him. Prosecutors also found an October 1989 Orlando police letter to New York detectives, saying some employees at an Orlando hotel had told investigators they remembered Fleming.

      Neither the receipt nor the police letter had been provided to Fleming's initial defense lawyer, despite rules that generally require investigators to turn over possibly exculpatory material.

      Patricia Fleming, 71, was with her son in Orlando at the time of the crime and testified at his trial.

      "I knew he didn't do it, because I was there," she said. "When they gave my son 25 to life, I thought I would die in that courtroom."

      Still, she said, "I never did give up, because I knew he was innocent."

      Thompson took office in January, after unseating longtime District Attorney Charles "Joe" Hynes with a campaign that focused partly on questionable convictions on Hynes' watch. Hynes had created a special conviction integrity unit to review false-conviction claims, but some saw the effort as slow-moving and defensive.

      Thompson has agreed to dismiss the murder convictions of two men who spent more than 20 years in prison for a triple homicide. He also dropped his predecessor's appeal challenging the 2013 release of another man who had served 22 years in prison on a questioned murder conviction.

      On Tuesday, Jonathan Fleming left court with an arm around his mother's shoulders and the process of rebuilding his life ahead of him.

      Asked about his plans, he said: "I'm going to go eat dinner with my mother and my family, and I'm going to live the rest of my life."


      Reach Jennifer Peltz on Twitter @jennpeltz

      View Comments (6324)
      One of the comments ---

      Its scary to think about the morality of people in positions that can ruin your life. Seems like its more of a "win" thing with a prosecutor rather then making sure they put the real killer behind bars. as long as they get their conviction, they don't care an innocent man is in jail while a killer is still out there. As long as it makes them look good. too often we hear similar stories as this. Everybody makes mistakes, but when there is evidence that was ignored just to get a conviction and make his job easier at the expense of ruining someone's life, I feel like the prosecutor should face charges himself.

      My comment ---
      Prosecutors should be charged.

      Here's What Happened When Antigay Photographers Took Their Case to the Supreme Court

      By Hayley Fox, Takepart.com, Tuesday 08 April 2014Takepart.com
      With gay marriage legal in 17 states, same-sex couples face a new series of court battles as business owners across the country attempt to invoke “religious freedom” as a basis for discrimination. 
      Which is why advocates are cheering the latest victory—albeit a muted one: The U.S. Supreme Court decided Monday not to review the appeal in a highly publicized case of a New Mexico photography studio that refused service to gay customers. 

      The owners of Elane Photography, Elaine and Jonathan Huguenin, refused to shoot a gay commitment ceremony in 2006 because it clashed with their beliefs. They said their decision was protected under religious freedom laws and the First Amendment and claimed that taking photos is expressive and a form of free speech.

      But New Mexico’s Human Rights Commission and the state’s supreme court disagreed. Elane Photography, artistic business or not, is still subject to the regulations and antidiscrimination laws of any commercial business. The Supreme Court's refusal to hear the appeal upholds that finding.

      It's hardly the first time religious freedom has been used as a defense for discrimination, said Ross Murray, director of news at GLAAD. What was once invoked to support anti-integration efforts is being used years later to “put up impediments and barriers” for lesbians and gays, he said.

      “It’s not just trying to exploit the lack of protections for someone but actually sort of trying to carve out a new loophole,” said Murray.

      Antigay groups fear they can’t “stop the tide of marriage equality,” so they’re proposing state legislation and filing lawsuits. Just last week in Mississippi, Gov. Phil Bryant approved a measure that allows residents to sue the government over laws that hinder their ability to practice their religion—making the state one of 18 with such "religious freedom" laws. 

      In a brief statement that made no mention of the controversy, Bryant said the law would "protect the individual religious freedom of Mississippians of all faiths from government interference."

      But advocates fear laws like Mississippi’s could open the door for unabashed discrimination against gays and lesbians. This was a concern in Arizona earlier this year, when the state legislature passed a bill that would have allowed business owners to cite their religious beliefs as reason to refuse service to gay customers. Protests spread, and conservative Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed what many called an antigay bill.

      "Discrimination has no place in Arizona, or anywhere else," said Alessandra Soler, executive director of the ACLU of Arizona. "We're grateful that the governor has stopped this disgraceful law from taking effect."

      In addition to state legislation, court cases across the country have been setting precedents for where religious freedom ends and discrimination begins. In December, Colorado baker Jack Phillips was ordered to “cease and desist from discriminating” against gay couples after he refused to make a wedding cake for two men. Last year in Washington, a florist was sued after she said she could not provide wedding arrangements for a gay couple because of her “relationship with Jesus Christ

      This year, Oregon’s Protect Religious Freedom Initiative could land on the fall ballot. According to a statement from the Oregon Family Council, the initiative was filed “in order to safeguard religious freedom in Oregon and to allow conscientious objectors or persons with deeply held religious beliefs to decline to participate in same-sex ceremonies.”

      “That means it's going to play out in terms of a campaign instead of a legislation process,” said Murray.

      Many “religious freedom” lawsuits revolve around the refusal of wedding services. But they indicate a dangerous trend, said Murray, one that could affect individuals’ ability to live and do business in their own town.

      First it’s flowers and wedding cakes, he warns, but if someone can cite religion as a reason to refuse service, next it could be groceries or gas or other everyday needs. 

      Related Stories

      Related stories on TakePart:

      • Home Is Where the Hate Is: When Homophobic Parents Kill

      • Young Republicans Buck GOP's Stance Against LGBT Marriage Rights

      • 10 Gay-Friendly U.S. Companies: Shop and Work the LGBT Way

      • Watch a Brilliant Senior Citizen Call Out the NFL's Ridiculous Homophobia

      • Awesome Gay Dads Instagram Their Way to LGBT Visibility

      Original article from TakePart

      View Comments (1326)
      Greenwald, Poitras Enter US Freely, But This Is No Time to Celebrate
      By Natasha Lennard, Salon
      13 April 2014
      Snowden, Greenwald urge caution of wider government monitoring at Amnesty event
      By Karl Plume, Reuters, Saturday 05 April 2014
      Theological mythology used to hide the man behind the curtain --->
      By BRADY McCOMBS, Associated Press,  April 6, 2014 5:34 AM

      SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — A top Mormon leader reiterated the church's opposition to gay marriage Saturday during the church's biannual general conference.

      The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' stance on homosexuality has softened in recent years, but this marks the second consecutive conference in which leaders took time to emphasize the faith's insistence that marriage should be limited to unions between a man and a woman, as God created.

      "While many governments and well-meaning individuals have redefined marriage, the Lord has not," said Neil L. Andersen of the Quorum of the Twelve. "He designated the purpose of marriage to go far beyond the personal satisfaction and fulfillment of adults, to more importantly, advancing the ideal setting for children to be born, reared and nurtured."

      In the October 2013 church conference, Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum said human laws cannot "make moral what God has declared immoral."

      The church sent a letter to local leaders that includes that message, Andersen said Saturday. "As the world slips away from the Lord's law of chastity, we do not," he said.

      During the first of five sessions held over the weekend, LDS leaders on Saturday also encouraged missionaries to stay strong amid the inevitable personal abuse they will encounter and parents to shelter their children from the damaging effects of pornography.

      The conference brings more than 100,000 Latter-day Saints to Salt Lake City to find out church news and soak up words of guidance and inspiration from the faith's top leaders. Thousands more will listen or watch from around the world in 95 languages on television, radio, satellite and Internet broadcasts. More than half of all 15 million Latter-day Saints live outside of the U.S., church figures show.

      The conference is widely followed and analyzed on social media, with many using the Twitter hash tag, "#LDSconf."

      Gay marriage has been an especially hot topic in Utah since December, when a federal judge overturned Utah's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage. More than 1,000 gay and lesbian couples married until the U.S. Supreme Court issued a stay on marriages pending a ruling from a federal appeals court in Denver. A hearing is set there for Thursday.

      Andersen encouraged church members not to buckle under the pressure of a growing movement on social media and elsewhere by advocates who want to make gay marriage legal. He offered the example of a woman who articulated her support for "traditional marriage" on Facebook and refused to take it down despite backlash.

      Andersen is a member of the church's Quorum of the Twelve, which is the second-highest governing body of the church. Modeled after Jesus Christ's apostles, the 12 men serve under the church president and his two counselors.

      Andersen said church members who "struggle with same-sex attraction" should be of special concern. He said he admires people who confront this "trial of faith and stay true to the commandments of God."

      "But everyone, independent of their decisions and beliefs, deserves our kindness and consideration," Andersen said.

      The church teaches that while same-sex attraction itself isn't a sin, succumbing to it is.

      The church's message on homosexuality has evolved since it was one of the leading forces behind California's Proposition 8, a ban on gay marriage. A website launched last year encouraged more compassion toward gays, implored them to stay in the faith and clarified that church leaders no longer "necessarily advise" gays to marry people of the opposite sex in what used to be a widely practiced Mormon workaround for homosexuality.

      In May, church leaders backed the Boy Scouts' policy allowing gays in the ranks. Some gay Mormons who left or were forced out of the church say they are now being welcomed back — even though they remain in same-sex relationships.

      It may seem like negligible progress to outsiders, but Mormon scholars said 2013 was landmark year for the religion on gay and lesbian issues.

      Jeffrey Holland of the Quorum of the Twelve delivered a message Saturday directed at the faith's nearly 85,000 missionaries, more than any time in church history.

      He relayed the story of a young woman who was spit on and had food thrown at her during her mission by a man who didn't want to hear their message. He highlighted the fact that she resisted the urge to retaliate.

      "If you haven't already, you will one day find yourself called upon to defend your faith or even endure some personal abuse," Holland said. "Such moments will require both courage and courtesy on your part."

      The spike in missionaries was triggered by the lowering of the minimum age for missionaries in the fall of 2012. Men can begin serving at 18, instead of 19, and women at 19, instead of 21. That has led to new, younger missionaries joining older ones.

      Holland told missionaries that it's worth it to serve and remain faithful despite a world around them where many people are drawn to comfortable gods who demand little of them.

      "It is obvious that the bumper-sticker query, 'What would Jesus do,' will not always bring a popular response," Holland said.

      Church president Thomas Monson opened the morning session by talking about the progress of temple construction around the world. He said a new one in Gilbert, Ariz., became the 142nd temple and that there will be 170 when construction is completed on all the current projects.

      No new temples were announced.

      Linda Reeves, one of the three highest-ranking female leaders in the church, urged parents and leaders to help prevent children from falling into "Satan's trap of pornography." Reeves is the second counselor in the general presidency of the church's Relief Society, the organization for women. 

      "They need to know the dangers of pornography and how it overtakes lives, causing loss of the spirit, distorted feelings, deceit, damaged relationships, loss of self-control, and nearly total consumption of time, thought and energy," Reeves said. "Pornography is more vile, evil and graphic than ever before."

      A Mormon's women group pushing the church to allow females in the priesthood plans to demonstrate outside an all-male meeting Saturday afternoon, reprising a similar protest from last year.

      Church leaders have asked the group to reconsider or gather in a zone designated for protesters that is off church property. Church leaders have also barred media from going on church property during the demonstration.


      Follow Brady McCombs at https://twitter.com/BradyMcCombs

      Related Stories