Alr I think I need to say something. I am a member of this church and will prove it because I’m going to actually speak FOR us instead of claiming to be a part of the church and speaking AGAINST us. I understand where the people are coming from, truly. However, many of the claims they make we have a fair rebuttal to. 1. We haven’t been in contact with them. The leaders in Fairview refused to meet with our lawyers up until meet HOURS before this meeting in which the Mayer ultimately agreed to postpone the decision till August before he even ‘asked’ them 2. The nature claims are reasonable as well but a study was conducted by the church showing that no shadows would cover the homes and no residencies will be over casted so that claim is void 3. they say we won’t be reasonable but when we later made changes to the height and lowered it 20 something feet and all the mayor had to say is ‘your not putting a temple in my city’ - okay but u can’t keep lying to the people of your city and saying we aren’t making changes! 4. They constantly complain about us not communicating and making propaganda. Then- we make flyers to educate people about what our temple will look like and they tell us we could have spent the money on charity I’m sorry to who I run wrong but my church can’t do ANYTHING right in peoples eyes. I understand the situation and people’s viewpoints but as soon as we fix an issue they complain about another one starts. maybe both sides are lying a little bit and being unfair 🤷♀️ Pls just stop pretending you know what’s happening behind the scenes. A woman in that meeting called the temple a monstrosity. If you said that about ANY other religion that would be unacceptable and I know you guys know it.
As a member of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints I think this is ridiculous. I watched the meeting last night and heard the speakers from both sides. I was impressed by the residents of Fairview. They had facts figures and knew the laws they were abiding by. I didn’t hear any disrespect against the temple or my religion. In fact no one I heard opposed the temple at all as long as it was built according to the “laws of the land”. On the other hand “members of the church” all spoke with emotional and personal stories that really had no basis on this decision. It’s shameful for one part of a community to push their own desires on everyone else. Follow the zoning laws for the temple, follow the teaching of the Savior and “Love the Neighbor”.
@@loganskiwyse7823 Nah, I’m more of of a Minarchist Libertarian who thinks that taxes should be voluntary. But I would gladly take anarchy over tyranny any day. Anyway, no king but Christ!
Here are two quotes by the LDS prophet and an apostle that were shared during the meeting. A prophet and apostle whom the LDS members sustain as prophets, seers, and revelators. "It's NOT the location, it's NOT the architecture, it's the ordinances inside." - President Russell M. Nelson (2022) "WHO CARES what the size is if you have access to the same covenants and ordinances." - Elder David A. Bednar (Small Temples, April 2023) The actions of the local LDS leaders are not in harmony with the prophets and apostles of the church and they have been asking members of the local areas to lie on their behalf about the height of the steeple being part of their religious observance when in fact, it is not.
@@zachalbretsen6383 Then what would be the point of making church buildings? Temples are meant to glorify God and for humans to reach their fullest potential by the grace of Christ. Like a cathedral, temples are made to look aesthetically pleasing to represent the beauty of God’s creation. This doesn’t take away from the fact that the body is a temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:19) but rather adds to it. Have a wonderful day and God bless!
Stop lying about the "height of the steeple". It has zero significance religiously and no local LDS Leader has said otherwise. The height is solely an architectural design feature attempting to create a feeling of ascending to Heaven. As for the ridiculously stringent zoning laws - they have no place in a Free society. No person that understands Freedom supports those laws - especially not against a religious building. Maybe against a hog farm, a steel plant or a refinery. But certainly not against a church or a hospital or an office building.
The church really needs to revise their proposal if they want it built. I would bet that if those leaders in Salt Lake actually came down and met face to face with the residents of Fairview who are opposed to this they would be more likely to compromise and at least scale back the size of this building. Also, the building is called the McKinney Texas Temple, why not actually put it in McKinney then? From what I've heard the city of McKinney might actually be a better location in terms the Temple's design blending in.
Hey now the tallest building in the city seems pretty prideful. Arent mormons, at the foundation, supposed to be humble? As someone that grew up in the mormon church i can tell you most rational thinking mormons would agree to follow the zoning laws, aka RESPECTING YOUR NEIGHBOR. Irrational emotional types are the ones making this a mess and that really should be fixed within the organization and not left up to being th public's problem
ROFL! no religion is rational. at all. ever. thats why they call it "faith" and not 'proof' all religions are controlling, dishonest, and greedy...which was on full display at this meeting
@@DavidPeel-fo9xv How is it unjust to have codes. I live in Utah and these temples are GINORMOUS and create so much light. I understand members and maybe some others find them beautiful but some don't. They have told them the codes to adhere to get their temple. It is the church that refuses to follow a law or the majority of the community wishes.
I understand that more than one authority has stated that the height of the steeple is not at all dictated by their religious beliefs. I am amazed by the false statements by several Mormons to the contrary.
We have done that before, but this is America. A church shouldn't have to compromise the height of a steeple or size of a religious structure. Christianty, in general, has compromised enough. When was the last church building built with a bell tower steeple? Yet when the First Amendment was drafted, those were commonplace on churches. The compromise I propose to them is to get with the Constitution or get out of America
It seems people would rather build giant new casinos than something sacred to so many. It's an epidemic of see who can persecute the church members the most.
The "spire" is a very narrow part of the building. Look at the picture, why would this bother anyone? They say it is 16 stories tall, but the part of the building over about 4-5 stories looks like it is about 10 feet wide??? It is a spire as in pole, not a 16 story office building.
Temples are massive buildings and produce a ton of light. Spire included. Community has a right to enforce codes and say it is too big. Church can adjust or go somewhere where the size isn't a problem.
I am confused why so many people are saying “comply with zoning laws”, I mean, isn’t that precisely what the church is trying to do by going before the board to request permission for the temple plans before they build it? The church will not break the law to build its temple.
Then why can’t they make it smaller to fit the laws of that community? Why are they breaking the “dark skies” law with the temple lights at night? I am hoping to see these issues addressed when the church sends the town another proposal. We can’t just railroad a community in the name of the Lord.
@@Elizabeth-js7hd Again, I repeat, the church will not break any laws. They will either get approval or they won't do it. It's really not that complicated. If they get approval, then how can you say they are breaking the law?
@jeremyjohnolson1 No, the church is not “complying with zoning laws”. If they were, there’d be no board meetings necessary. They are trying to argue AGAINST the zoning laws for the steeple to be higher than what is allowed in Fairview. If they were complying, the temple would not exceed the height the laws already state. They are in front of the board trying to get an exemption from the zoning laws; not complying with them. There’s a difference.
@@SRayn2012That is a standard practice… it is a mechanism provided by government. There is nothing wrong in seeking an exemption. They will comply with the final decision or not build.
The LDS church, among other churches like the Catholics, fund humanitarian relief better than any government would. God forbid we voluntarily build a society on morals and allow people to worship and consecrate their money for a good cause through religion! But all is well in DC when the government rapes the common citizen of their hard-earned cash and wastes it “for the greater good!”
The church can do with its money as it please, this is America. It's the governments job to build infrastructure but you got likes. Sounds like even Texas has its commies
Churches have traditionally been the safety net of society. So your statement is the typical socialist vision for society - build more gov'ment programs. The U.S. today is what happens when gov'ment programs usurp the role of churches. Your demand for more bureaucracy and less churches is a demand for the continuation of failed social engineering projects. It is a double down on the cause of the mess we have today. Try rethinking your demand.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has the money and willingness to build more. Complain to the government if you want more infustructure complain to the government and ask why their failing
'growing up' has been put on pause in favor of 'burning down'. Perhaps the next civilization to rise will have better luck. personally, I'm rooting for the squid to take over.
Can you grow up as a person? While I am not a Mormon, I do respect their RIGHT under the U.S. constitution to worship God the way they choose. That said, it is unneighborly of them to impose this giant building on the city in violation of code. Architecture does not fall under the first amendment. It is within the city's purview to dictate how they want buildings to look within the city limits.
@@Robert-rw5lm"... except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians" This is what the BoM taught, until someone (from the apologist department?) changed it.
I would think that the retail “abomination” that Fairview okayed, between Greenville and 75, is a larger “black eye” on their “keep it country” slogan. If these residents TRULY cared about what a temple would do to/for their community, they should talk to the neighbors of the Dallas Temple. The non-members of the church, whose homes surround the Kansas City Temple, absolutely love it. This is really about ignorance and/or religious intolerance.
@@DavidPeel-fo9xv Don’t trust the pastors that run them with young people. Community centers would be far better, offering different activities and programs. Far too many “churches” setting up to avoid paying taxes.
To big for the amount of occupancy. My opinion, keep it within city code. Keep everyone happy. Who could hate keeping everyone happy except the evil one of course.
Dont understand how thats disrespectful its not a night club where theyre going to be intoxicated every weekend at and theyre not building a train and forcing people out of their houses. I just dont understand i guess
So they actually let businesses build in subdivisions in your area? Night club? You realize the Mormon church is an organization write a business that has billions of dollars and takes people money owns tons of land worldwide? It's as much a business as a nightclub.
So an organization legally buys property, and wants to legally construct a building on that property, and a bunch of people who have nothing to do with the transaction are making a bunch of demands over what the property owners are allowed to do with the property? The sniveling entitlement of this generation. . . Go buy your own plot of land so you can not build something on it, and leave people alone.
I like how you are ignoring how they are ignoring code and the building is much higher than code. Also ignoring that many in the community do not want a ginormous light producing building. Build it smaller or elsewhere.
I’m speaking for myself and not the Church here, but the steeple means more to me than just an expression of faith in eternity (which it is). It is a symbol that my faith is allowed to be seen and take up space in this society. It’s a symbol that my community accepts and celebrates my right to worship and build the best edifice to God that I can. It’s a symbol that a major religious denomination intends to stay and grow in this community. It means I’m allowed to be noticed. And yes, some of our other temples don’t have spires. A spire is not required for the temple’s function. But when the community of members is large enough and where significant space in the temple is required, they need to be large buildings to meet the needs. Why should the temple have to be smaller than it needs to be to accommodate the local membership? I’d just ask that this community treat us like other denominations who aren’t relentlessly scrutinized about what architectural elements are “absolutely necessary” for their worship or always forced to take up the absolute minimum space necessary. There are other temples being designed for much smaller communities in the US that are MUCH smaller than this proposal (less than 10K sq. ft.) and are STILL facing similar fierce opposition, stirred up by some of the same sources you see at work here-people who dislike anything the Church does and will find some flash point to galvanize opposition. As a member of the church, I wish our worship and way of life were not shouted down so much. I’m tired of being told that we have equal rights to worship and being treated so unequally. There are protestors at our conferences. There are protestors when we plan temples. There are detractors online. We try our best (not perfectly) to follow our Savior’s admonition to be peacemakers and love our neighbor, to speak kindly, to be good citizens. And these very traits are often used by the Church’s enemies to shout us into a corner so they can feel comfortable. People keep insisting that they’re not disrespecting our beliefs or our right to assemble and worship, but that they just don’t like the architectural plan for the building we designed for that purpose. But what is a right to assemble and worship worth if you’re not allowed to be SEEN or NOTICED doing it? What do property rights mean if a protest movement gets to dictate every move you make on your own property, with your own money? Do you really respect our right to worship if you demand that we always have to go somewhere else, out of sight in order to do so?
I agree, religious freedom includes housing the worship in a building designed for that purpose--and not having to cater your worship and your own buildings to the protesters that want you to stay out of sight.
@@skaughtsman nobody is asking them to stay out of site. I have seen much smaller and still beautiful temples that fit the area. As president Nelson himself has said, it isn't the size that matters, it's the ordinances inside that matter. Build it shorter and no issue.
What’s funny is the church did a study and the shadow of the temple would never touch anyone’s land or block the sun. however the response to that information is that we should spend the money on charity instead of information that they have been hammering us abt 😑
@@Morstorpod No, that's not accurate...well it is on the opposite side, did you know some anti Mormon came all the way here from England and spoke at our meeting???? That was bad taste. We actually got a letter from the area presidency that only members from the temple district should show up to the meeting. I have a friend in Wylie that was planning on attending with me, he's only 15 minutes away from the temple site, but he decided not to go because he was outside the district. This has blown up into a circus, and honestly as someone on the front lines, it's been primarily from the other side where we are getting folks from outside the area. Again bad taste Nemo.
@@soneedanap Nemo is not anti-mormon. He is a member of the church that is trying to change it from the inside (much like the church has had to be pressured to make advancements in equality relating to racism, sexism, LGBTQ, etc. over its history). But you are correct that he came from outside the area. I agree that somebody local should have made the same points instead. But his points weren't wrong! He was quoting apostles! [Removed inaccurate portion of comment - see other comment that I made after this]
Whoa, nevermind. I just noticed that you said "temple district". The temple district extends much beyond the city limits, so as I said, "many came from outside the area".
@@Morstorpod The temple district is Allen, Sherman, McKinney and Frisco. As these are communities that are impacted by the temple, I don't see anything wrong with them showing their support. Why would the church be in the wrong to want to defend their building design to the planning and zoning board? They absolutely have a right to do so, especially when there are certain rights that they have a claim to. Let them defend it, and let those that oppose oppose it. But let's not involve all these true outsiders coming into Texas from out of state...even out of the country to come air their grievances in front of my freaking neighbor's. It makes them look crazy and I don't want to be associated with those clowns. I agree it should only be a matter between the actual parties involved. The church and the community. I really don't care if the church gets its steeple or not, I just want the circus over and the opportunists gone and out of Texas.
So I’m a member of the LDS church, but I don’t come here to fight. However, I’m curious as to the necessity of building codes such as the one that limits the height of the spire. Much love and God bless!
The question should be. Why does the spire need to be so tall? There are a lot of temples that have shorter ones. Elder Bednar said as recently as 2023, It doesn't matter how big a temple is. What matters is what happens on the inside. Building codes are put in place for reasons. Nobody is saying they can't build a temple. It just doesn't need to be so big and tall.
@@rabbithole2015 Sure. I guess the next question is, why are the regulations the way they are, and why do they have to be? For example, why would a larger spire be such a bad thing to the community? To me, it doesn’t seem like such a big issue compared to, say, parking concerns. Thanks for your comment!
@@rabbithole2015 what video exactly? I looked up “Fairview city council meeting lds church” and couldn’t find the minutes. Could you provide me a video name please? Much obliged!
