129 replies to this topic

[semlogo]

Oh, my.

[Ahab]

Darin, on 23 November 2010 - 07:38 PM, said:

Whether or not California Boy, I, or anyone else from "the gay community" personally believe that you are "being delusional" and "living a lie" is really totally irrelevant--just as the personal religious convictions of Wade, Ahab, or any other heterocentric Latter-day Saint who opposes same-sex relationships as sinful, evil, or abominable are irrelevant to my life.  They, after all, think I and CB are as "delusional" and are "living a lie" (we who are, according to both their and your belief, sons of God with inherently heterosexual eternal potential, deceived by a cunning and evil Lucifer) as you feel/fear that "the gay community" thinks of you.

Just to be clear, the only sense in which I think you (and other homosexuals) are "delusional" and "living a lie" is in the sense that you think something which is actually evil is good and the best way to live your own life, and I feel that way because I know for a fact that it isn't, by personal experience, having experienced what you are now going through, Darin.

I hope that is clear enough without getting into any more detail, because I'd personally like to leave my past in the past and get on with a glorious future.

Quote

Save for the power to raise my own voice in testimony of the inherent goodness of my life and the manner in which I love and express that love, I have no power to change their or your beliefs to the contrary.  The reverse is also true, of course.  And isn't it wonderful that neither of us have that power...?  Isn't it wonderful that, even though our laws allow for other viewpoints, our laws do not require mandatory alteration of our own personal beliefs to fall into alignment to the whim of others?

It's a double-edged sword, though, because while nobody (including God) has the power to change someone else's beliefs or feelings about something, save for the power to raise our own individual voice in testimony, you either win or you lose based on what you choose to stick with, with no good ever coming from something which is evil save for the ability to replace what is evil in favor of what is good.

Quote

In my view, "respecting others' agency" does not mean compromising our own personal beliefs by being forced to agree with someone else.  Respect, however, does mean (in my view) that we allow others to choose to live their lives as they see fit, according to the strength of their own convictions, in spite of our disagreement with their chosen religious or relational life "style" (or lives).

Don't forget the fact that there are going to be consequences if you do anything which is evil, though, even if you choose to repent, because you will likely always have all of your memories of what you've done with you.

For example, if homosexuality is evil (as I know it is) and you engage in that kind of behavior, there are and there are going to be consequences to those evil actions even if you later repent from engaging in that kind of behavior, and even if you repent and are forgiven for those past sins, because you will likely always have your memories with you to remind you of what you have done in your life.  And even worse, if you don't repent you will suffer in Hell, because that's where all people go when they refuse to repent of their sins.

And yes, I know the example above is relevant only if homosexuality is actually evil, but given the fact that I know it is, even if you don't, I'm not going to be messing around in that way as if to take a chance that it might be good (in which case I would now be the one who has been deluded, even though I know I have suffered for that in the past) with a faint hope that I won't have to suffer for doing that later.

Quote

In fighting equal civil marriage rights for gay couples, however, Latter-day Saints go far beyond allowing others to live as others believe--they seek to impose their own religious morality upon others who do not subscribe to their own belief.

I don't see raising my voice in testiimony as "imposing" my morality upon you, even when I vote against homosexuality to express my testimony regarding homosexual behavior.  I'm simply saying it's wrong, and evil, and should not be condoned, and that people who engage in that behavior will suffer for it either now or sometime later.

You don't really expect me or someone else who feels the same way I do to say it's "okay" or "good" if you do it... when I know and believe it isn't... do you???

Quote

Do you know of examples of "the gay community" seeking to strip you of any similar type of rights?   Are gays and lesbians calling upon you (or others who have or may have ever 'struggled with attraction to a member of your own gender") to remove, prevent, or prohibit your heterosexual civil marriage rights?

Hence my question: what type of "recognition, dignity, and respect" do you feel you are being denied...?

Darin

As long as you feel I am entitled to share my testimony regarding homosexuality, whatever my testimony of it may be, No, I won't feel you are trying to deny me of any of my rights which God has given to me.

[Daniel2]

Ahab, on 29 November 2010 - 11:46 AM, said:

Just to be clear, the only sense in which I think you (and other homosexuals) are "delusional" and "living a lie" is in the sense that you think something which is actually evil is good and the best way to live your own life, and I feel that way because I know for a fact that it isn't, by personal experience, having experienced what you are now going through, Darin.

Fair enough.  I don’t have a problem with you thinking I am “delusional” or “living a lie,” regardless of  however you interpret or apply those words to my life.  You’re certainly entitled to your beliefs, just as I am to mine, and both of our views are likely affected by the sum of our uniquely personal life experience.

Quote

I hope that is clear enough without getting into any more detail, because I'd personally like to leave my past in the past and get on with a glorious future.

It’s clear enough.   Like you, I look forward to my own glorious future, as well.

Quote

It's a double-edged sword, though, because while nobody (including God) has the power to change someone else's beliefs or feelings about something, save for the power to raise our own individual voice in testimony, you either win or you lose based on what you choose to stick with, with no good ever coming from something which is evil save for the ability to replace what is evil in favor of what is good.

Although we approach this issue differently (not to mention “good” and “evil,” and even “God” him/her/itself), I think we’re both on the same page that our choices affect and determine our own ability to find peace and happiness in life.

Quote

Don't forget the fact that there are going to be consequences if you do anything which is evil, though, even if you choose to repent, because you will likely always have all of your memories of what you've done with you.

I never have forgot that “fact.”  I hope you don’t, either.

Quote

For example, if homosexuality is evil (as I know it is) and you engage in that kind of behavior, there are and there are going to be consequences to those evil actions even if you later repent from engaging in that kind of behavior, and even if you repent and are forgiven for those past sins, because you will likely always have your memories with you to remind you of what you have done in your life.  And even worse, if you don't repent you will suffer in Hell, because that's where all people go when they refuse to repent of their sins.

And, if homosexuality is amoral (as I know it is), and it’s morality—whether it becomes a force for “good” or “evil”—as we, ourselves, make it through our own actions, then there will be either “good” consequences or “evil” consequences—and will create either uplifting memories, or unpleasant memories that, nevertheless, make one all-the-wiser, and hopefully, more compassionate.  Sadly, too many people end up experiencing Hell in this life, because of their own poor choices (even if well-intentioned).  Conversely, I believe we don’t have to hope to experience Heaven in an afterlife, but can choose to experience that every day of our existence while on this earth.

Quote

And yes, I know the example above is relevant only if homosexuality is actually evil, but given the fact that I know it is, even if you don't, I'm not going to be messing around in that way as if to take a chance that it might be good (in which case I would now be the one who has been deluded, even though I know I have suffered for that in the past) with a faint hope that I won't have to suffer for doing that later.

In a similar vein, I know my comments will only make sense if one accepts that homosexuality is amoral, and capable of being only as good or evil as one makes of it, as I know it to be.  And, even if you don’t, I’ll choose to live my life in the manner that offers me the greatest opportunities to experience a life well-lived—while simultaneously recognizing and respecting your own self-autonomy, and the hope that you will likewise find ways to live to avoid suffering, as well.

Quote

I don't see raising my voice in testiimony as "imposing" my morality upon you,

I don’t see your act of “raising your voice in testimony” as “imposing your morality on me,” either.

Quote

even when I vote against homosexuality to express my testimony regarding homosexual behavior.

When people seek to prevent others who don’t share their beliefs (ergo, “having a different morality”) from having access to the same civil rights that they enjoy, I would label that as “imposing their morality upon others.”  I recognize that is probably a distinction we'll disagree on.

Quote

I'm simply saying it's wrong, and evil, and should not be condoned, and that people who engage in that behavior will suffer for it either now or sometime later.

If individuals seek to enshrine their morality into civil law, then that goes far beyond “simply saying” anything—but is, rather, an attempt to enforce one’s opposing morals into civil law.

Quote

You don't really expect me or someone else who feels the same way I do to say it's "okay" or "good" if you do it... when I know and believe it isn't... do you???

It doesn’t bother me if you adamantly proclaim that “you know that homosexuality is evil and can never be good” until your dying breath.  In hoping for equal civil marriage rights, I’m not asking you to agree with my morality—but to respect my own autonomy, in the same way that even though I don’t agree with LDS morality, even though I support civil marriage equality for LDS, temple-married, straight couples.

Quote

As long as you feel I am entitled to share my testimony regarding homosexuality, whatever my testimony of it may be, No, I won't feel you are trying to deny me of any of my rights which God has given to me.

On this point, I believe we are agreed—I certainly feel you are entitled to “share your testimony regarding homosexuality, whatever your testimony of it may be.”

In closing, Ahab, I also wanted to add that I am sorry that your experience with gay relationships has been so negative.  Similarly, I have also had extremely negative experiences in both my most profound opposite-sex relationship (through a temple-marriage to a woman); as well as several distasteful experiences with same-sex partners, as well.  It’s never easy to pass through experiences that cause us to become exposed to some of the worst of human behaviors.  Despite having been harmed through any such relationships, my hope for any and all of us would be that at the very least we may use any such experiences to become more compassionate, loving, I’d-even-dare-say “more Christ-like” people.

Best to you,
Darin

[Analytics]

LeSellers, on 29 November 2010 - 09:57 AM, said:

Why? They have spoken clearly on the matter, and no one here has shown that any new counsel has been received. Virtually every prophet and many Apostles in the modern Church have told us to keep our children away from the grasp of government-controlled schools....

I happened to grow up a few blocks away from Boyd K. Packer, who happens to have a son my age.  I went to public school with his son K-12.  Is that an anomaly?  Do you have any statistics on how many modern-day GA's keep their kids out of public schools?

If "the Brethren" were really opposed to public education, I would think that public school wouldn't be so prevalent in Utah.  If public schools were really evil, I would think the Church would work with high school administrators to have release time for seminary just as readily as they’d work with casino operators to put Mormon chapels in casinos.

[Ahab]

Darin, on 15 December 2010 - 01:40 PM, said:

... if homosexuality is amoral (as I know it is), and it’s morality—whether it becomes a force for “good” or “evil”—as we, ourselves, make it through our own actions, then there will be either “good” consequences or “evil” consequences—and will create either uplifting memories, or unpleasant memories that, nevertheless, make one all-the-wiser, and hopefully, more compassionate.

In my perspective, and in harmony with dictionary definitions, amoral means pretty much the same thing as immoral, with both referring to unprincipled, unethical, dishonorable acts... which I generally simply refer to as "evil"... and there is no way to make those acts good, because they are evil acts, in themselves.

Quote

Sadly, too many people end up experiencing Hell in this life, because of their own poor choices (even if well-intentioned).

Yes, that is true, and sadly too many people find pleasure in doing things that are evil while thinking those evil acts are good.

Quote

Conversely, I believe we don’t have to hope to experience Heaven in an afterlife, but can choose to experience that every day of our existence while on this earth.

True, but wickedness never will lead to happiness, so instead you must do what is righteous.

Quote

In a similar vein, I know my comments will only make sense if one accepts that homosexuality is amoral, and capable of being only as good or evil as one makes of it, as I know it to be.

If by "amoral" you mean "neutral", as if it's neither good or bad, in itself, you're not only wrong about what the word, itself, means, but you're also wrong in thinking you can do something to make it good, or that you can do it in such a way that it is good.  You'll never be able to do that, Darin, even though you may find it "pleasurable" if you do it one way while "not pleasurable" if you don't do it that way.  The act, itself, is evil, and nothing can make it good.

Quote

When people seek to prevent others who don’t share their beliefs (ergo, “having a different morality”) from having access to the same civil rights that they enjoy, I would label that as “imposing their morality upon others.”  I recognize that is probably a distinction we'll disagree on.

Yes, we do disagree on that.

Quote

If individuals seek to enshrine their morality into civil law, then that goes far beyond “simply saying” anything—but is, rather, an attempt to enforce one’s opposing morals into civil law.

Morality isn't something that varies from person to person, as if it's up to each person to define what is moral or immoral.  A particular act, in particular circumstances, is something that is either good or evil, rather than both at the same time, and all of us should seek to promote and uphold laws that are in harmony with morality.

Quote

It doesn’t bother me if you adamantly proclaim that “you know that homosexuality is evil and can never be good” until your dying breath.  In hoping for equal civil marriage rights, I’m not asking you to agree with my morality—but to respect my own autonomy, in the same way that even though I don’t agree with LDS morality, even though I support civil marriage equality for LDS, temple-married, straight couples.

I respect your right to choose, even if you use that right to choose to do something evil, but any evil act you choose to engage in will never be something good and I will always be opposed to what is evil.

Quote

In closing, Ahab, I also wanted to add that I am sorry that your experience with gay relationships has been so negative.

I'm not, because through my experiences with "gay relationships" I've learned that relationships involving sexual relations between people of the same sex are negative acts that never can or could have been anything else but evil and I appreciate the knowledge of evil I've gained.

Edited by Ahab, 15 December 2010 - 04:00 PM.

[Libs]

Amoral and immoral have very different meanings, actually.

Amoral:  1. not involving questions of right or wrong; without moral quality; neither moral nor immoral.

Immoral:  1. not moral; broadly : conflicting with generally or traditionally held moral principles

Someone who holds the view that homosexuality is "amoral", believes it is neither right nor wrong.  Kind of like skin color or eye color are neither right nor wrong.  It's just a quality someone is born with.  Nothing moral or immoral about those kinds of qualities.

Edited by Libs, 15 December 2010 - 11:59 PM.

[Daniel2]

Ahab, on 15 December 2010 - 03:47 PM, said:

In my perspective, and in harmony with dictionary definitions, amoral means pretty much the same thing as immoral, with both referring to unprincipled, unethical, dishonorable acts... which I generally simply refer to as "evil"... and there is no way to make those acts good, because they are evil acts, in themselves.

As Libs has pointed out, dictionary definitions of “amoral” are actually not the same as “immoral,” but I understand that, from your perspective, it appears that the distinction is unimportant.

I use the term according to the dictionary definition Libs quoted; specificially, I don’t think “homosexuality” is, in fact, “an action,” at all—but a state of being.  One can simply sit still without performing any discernable or physical action, and still simply be homosexual, due to the innate attractions and/or ‘susceptibilities’ inside one’s own being.

As I attempted to explain, previously, what one does with that state of being—or those attractions---may then become either “good” or “evil.”

Your mileage, of course, seems to differ from my view.

Quote

Yes, that is true, and sadly too many people find pleasure in doing things that are evil while thinking those evil acts are good.

I believe the statement above is a universal truth on many fronts.

Quote

True, but wickedness never will lead to happiness, so instead you must do what is righteous.

These words break down in my world paradigm, because they are strongly associated in a sense of morality that depends on a God who embodies and teaches what is “righteous” vs. what is “wicked.”  Given that I do not believe in God the same way that you do (nor, in fact, in a sentient, external ‘God,’ at all), the semantics make the concepts clunky and not particularly useful/relevant, to me, though I understand they are meaningful to and for you.

I don’t view the world through the lenses of “righteous” vs. “wicked,” but prefer to use the lenses of “life-affirming” vs. “harmful.”  Those words have greater meaning and relevance, in my paradigm—though, of course, it’s likely you won’t, and will continue to prefer your concept of righteous vs. wicked; good vs. evil, because those concepts make sense when one believes in a Supreme Creator, and the source of an external morality.

Quote

If by "amoral" you mean "neutral", as if it's neither good or bad, in itself, you're not only wrong about what the word, itself, means,

I think we’ve laid to rest that I actually am using the word correctly, even if you disagree with the philosophy that underlies my use of it.

Quote

but you're also wrong in thinking you can do something to make it good, or that you can do it in such a way that it is good.  You'll never be able to do that, Darin, even though you may find it "pleasurable" if you do it one way while "not pleasurable" if you don't do it that way.  The act, itself, is evil, and nothing can make it good.

I get a sense, here, that your emphasis on “pleasurable” vs. “non-pleasurable” acts (either of which is “evil,” in your view) is referring, mostly and/or specifically, to sexual actions (feel free to correct me if I’m off base, there).

If that is the case, it isn’t surprising, as many Latter-day Saints see “homosexuality” and automatically mentally jump to “SEXUAL ACTS with the same gender.”

My mental association of “homosexuality” and “sex acts” is that a healthy approach is and should be that it’s no more nor less about “sex acts” than a healthy approach to “heterosexuality” and “sex acts” is and should be.

Quote

Morality isn't something that varies from person to person, as if it's up to each person to define what is moral or immoral.

I understand the above as an underlying philosophical underpinning of each of our views of morality.  However, when it comes to practical application (or outwards expressions) of “morality” in real, every-day life, “morality” very much is a function that will “vary from person to person,” and it is “up to each person to define what is moral or immoral,” so far as their actions are concerned.

Quote

A particular act, in particular circumstances, is something that is either good or evil, rather than both at the same time, and all of us should seek to promote and uphold laws that are in harmony with morality.

And yet, despite the fact that you feel there’s an external reality that dictates a universal morality that exists independent of what individuals may feel, there seems to be little consensus among humanity, at large, to always agree on the nitty-gritty details.

Yes, I realize I’m advocating moral relativism, which is mostly alien to the way many Latter-day Saints feel they approach morality.  It’s my belief, however, that Latter-day Saints are just as morally-relative as any of the rest of us are—your goal posts are simply located in a different spot.

Quote

I respect your right to choose, even if you use that right to choose to do something evil, but any evil act you choose to engage in will never be something good and I will always be opposed to what is evil.

I would say the same of my attitudes towards you and your right to choose something that is foolish and superstitious, even though any foolish and superstitious belief you choose to act upon will never be something wise, and I will always be opposed to foolishness and superstition.  

So although our paradigms are different, it sounds like we at least share the realization that it’s important to try to respect others’ “right to choose” for themselves.

Quote

I'm not, because through my experiences with "gay relationships" I've learned that relationships involving sexual relations between people of the same sex are negative acts that never can or could have been anything else but evil and I appreciate the knowledge of evil I've gained.

As I’ve said, your life experiences are uniquely yours, and the lessons you learn from them will inform your life, beliefs, attitudes, and choices—and the same is true, of myself.

I note the use of “ “ around “gay relationships.”  Along with those quotes, your ongoing focus on the sexual behaviors between members of the same sex seems to indicate to me that you haven’t necessary experienced the kind of healthy, balanced same-sex relationship that I believe is life-affirming.  Rather, it appears to me that you’ve been hurt, betrayed, and potentially either physically, emotionally, and spiritually been harmed by some illicit sexual behaviors with members of your same gender, and have therefore understandably arrived at the conclusion that illicit sexual acts are harmful, even if you may be projecting that belief into a grander scale than I would feel is appropriate (asserting, based on your bad experiences, that “relationships involving sexual relations between people of the same sex are negative acts that never can or could have been [emphasis mine] anything else but evil.”

I’m sorry you seem to have suffered so much as a result of what appear to be harmful, illicit, and probably reckless and irresponsible sexual behaviors.  I think we’d share the same belief that those kinds of behaviors are harmful, whether committed with individuals of our same gender, or with individuals of the opposite gender.  While I recognize that you are appreciative of the knowledge you’ve gained of evil, I hope you’re also finding emotional, spiritual, and physical healing, as well.

Best,
Darin

Edited by Darin, 16 December 2010 - 10:02 AM.

[SilverKnight]

Darin, on 16 December 2010 - 10:01 AM, said:

SNIP
Best,
Darin

Darin,

This is really just a tangential question, but hypothetically...

What if shortly after your estrangement from the LDS church, Gordon B Hinkley announced a new revelation had been received and unanimously approved by the FP and Q12: Homosexual members were now entitled to all temple blessings, including the sealing same-sex-couples for time and all eternity, with any children they might adopt being likewise sealed to them as well.

Would you have returned to the church?

[Daniel2]

SilverKnight, on 16 December 2010 - 11:21 AM, said:

Darin,

This is really just a tangential question, but hypothetically...

What if shortly after your estrangement from the LDS church, Gordon B Hinkley announced a new revelation had been received and unanimously approved by the FP and Q12: Homosexual members were now entitled to all temple blessings, including the sealing same-sex-couples for time and all eternity, with any children they might adopt being likewise sealed to them as well.

Would you have returned to the church?

There was a time when I would have, but that day had passed long before I took steps to formally leave the church.

Today, I am very grateful for my LDS heritage, and proud of my pioneer ancestry, including the values of ingenuity, thrift, integrity, self-sufficiency, honesty, hard work, etc.  As with every endeavor involving humanity, there are some things from Mormon history and culture than I'm less than thrilled about.  I will always self-identify as Mormon, though I never see myself returning to activity as a believing member of the LDS Faith.

I am no longer LDS based on beleifs that are unrelated to gay issues within Mormonism, so my separation goes far beyond that, today.

I will always be fond of Mormons, in general, and love my very LDS family, in particular.   They are, in all honestly, "my people" (and one's with whom I identify) far more than those of the so-called "gay community."

Darin

Edited by Darin, 16 December 2010 - 02:41 PM.

[SilverKnight]

Darin, on 16 December 2010 - 11:30 AM, said:

There was a time when I would have, but that day had passed long before I took steps to formally leave the church.

Thanks Darin.
Your thoughtful and kind responses are refreshing.