178 replies to this topic

[california boy]

I taught seminary for many years.  Part of each morning was devoted to students quoting a scripture.  The most often quoted scripture in seminary was also the shortest scripture in the Bible.  "Jesus wept"  This scripture comes from when Mary and Martha plead for Christ to come heal their brother Lazarus who is gravely ill.  Before Christ gets there, Lazarus dies.  When Christ arrives, Mary is a bit unhappy with Christ. "Why didn't he come sooner to heal his brother.  Did Christ not love Mary, Martha, and Lazarus enough to bother to come?"  

Christ could have said a lot of things to Mary.  He could have chastised her for not believing in the plan of salvation.  He could have scolded her for her lack of faith.  He could have preached a sermon on what his atonement would mean to Lazarus.  Instead, the scriptures simply say "Jesus wept".

Sometimes showing compassion and love is the most important thing we can do.  I have grown to love this scripture and feel that it has an important lesson for me when responding to other peoples situations.  Perhaps it might shed light on what this video is about.

[calmoriah]

Quote

I don't see the vid as needing to be about the church or the Restored Gospel according to the LDS church.

But it targets LDS as its audience, does it not?  It is not just a generic appeal.

If the video itself identifies membership in the Church as a qualification of its intended audience, then it seems that the message must have implications for the Church, either why is there any need for that identification?

[mercyngrace]

calmoriah, on 23 April 2012 - 09:44 AM, said:

However, some judgment must be undertaken if we are to judge what is the best way to help others.  Loving someone isn't always enough.

Condemning someone is inappropriate, but ignoring that some actions are sinful can be harmful for all involved.

edit:  off topic, perhaps another thread....

Keep getting drawn back in...

Agreed, Cal,  however, there is a time and place as I tried to point out here.

[Gillebre]

I don't usually find myself agreeing with something Jaybear said, but in this case, I do believe he is correct. I don't really see the ambiguity.

The path for a Latter-day Saint who faces same gender attraction has not changed: obedience to the law of chastity, and the things proclaimed by the Gospel of Jesus Christ.


The effort to make it known that there is unconditional love for them, despite their struggles, is welcome and inspired, in my belief.

Your ability to resist temptation is strengthened when you know that you are loved no matter what, that they are always there for you. That you are not alone, and that it is possible to walk in the Lord's way and still be tempted by homosexuality.

So when they say "it gets better", I believe they're referring to greater efforts at understanding, compassion, and charity towards those who struggle with attraction to their own gender. Sometimes, that compassion, that pure love...it can make all the difference.

Just my thoughts.

[Valentinus]

calmoriah, on 23 April 2012 - 11:13 AM, said:

But it targets LDS as its audience, does it not?  It is not just a generic appeal.

If the video itself identifies membership in the Church as a qualification of its intended audience, then it seems that the message must have implications for the Church, either why is there any need for that identification?

The church is a physical institution. The vid is directed toward a specific group of people. The vid was not about LDS doctrine.

[calmoriah]

Gillebre, on 23 April 2012 - 11:18 AM, said:

So when they say "it gets better", I believe they're referring to greater efforts at understanding, compassion, and charity towards those who struggle with attraction to their own gender. Sometimes, that compassion, that pure love...it can make all the difference.

I think Smac's point is that if one is required to say "I believe they are referring to..." instead of "they are referring to" for accuracy sake's, then there is enough ambiguity for him to be concerned.

[calmoriah]

Valentinus, on 23 April 2012 - 11:20 AM, said:

The church is a physical institution.

I disagree.  The Church in my view is primarily its membership.  Burn down all the buildings and possessions of the Church, but leave the people be.  Does the Church still exist?  Maybe it doesn't function as well, but I don't see how anyone could deny its existence.

PS:  I doubt that explicit discussion on the Law of Chastity or the covenants we make or whatever behaviour is taught as appropriate by the Church leadership is necessary in such a video as long as it hasn't included confusing remarks that blur the line between the Church and society in general.  Including a 'this is where you can go to figure out what to do next' is sufficient imo....though such action does require the individual to open up him/herself to others and not all are ready to do that, but in most cases I suspect they would already know what they can do on their own (and likely it hasn't been enough for them if they are feeling suicidal).

Edited by calmoriah, 23 April 2012 - 11:33 AM.

[epiginosko]

Jaybear, on 23 April 2012 - 07:53 AM, said:

The message is loud and clear.
The message is directed to young gay LDS members.
The message is you are loved, please don't kill yourself.

If you want to look for subtext,  you can imagine any thing you wish.

Amen.  That's what I took from it.

I didn't read into it that these were a bunch of radical members going against what the Priesthood leaders have declared and calling for LDS acceptance of homosexual lifestyles.  I took it as an appeal for self-dignity.  The fact is that 75% of gay students at BYU have contemplated suicide and 25% have attempted it.  This is an epidemic.  I don't see the agenda of this video being anything other than "We love you.  There is support.  Don't hurt yourself."  How is that going against anything declared by the Prophets and Apostles?

[epiginosko]

calmoriah, on 23 April 2012 - 11:13 AM, said:

But it targets LDS as its audience, does it not?  It is not just a generic appeal.

If the video itself identifies membership in the Church as a qualification of its intended audience, then it seems that the message must have implications for the Church, either why is there any need for that identification?

The very opening words are "I don't know you, but I feel like I do."  To me that clearly indicated that this video was aimed at a gay LDS audience.

[Senator]

Gillebre, on 23 April 2012 - 11:18 AM, said:

I don't usually find myself agreeing with something Jaybear said, but in this case, I do believe he is correct. I don't really see the ambiguity.

The path for a Latter-day Saint who faces same gender attraction has not changed: obedience to the law of chastity, and the things proclaimed by the Gospel of Jesus Christ.


The effort to make it known that there is unconditional love for them, despite their struggles, is welcome and inspired, in my belief.

Your ability to resist temptation is strengthened when you know that you are loved no matter what, that they are always there for you. That you are not alone, and that it is possible to walk in the Lord's way and still be tempted by homosexuality.

So when they say "it gets better", I believe they're referring to greater efforts at understanding, compassion, and charity towards those who struggle with attraction to their own gender. Sometimes, that compassion, that pure love...it can make all the difference.

Just my thoughts.

And very poignant ones at that!

I'm actually a bit suprised that anyone, after listening to that vid would find issue with it. The spirit was very strong in that message, (at least it was to me).

To many people the church represents a line drawn in the sand; a line that to them, at least at that particular time in their life, seems insurmountable. It seems entirely counter-productive to me, that to individuals that are so afflicted by the line in the sand to the point of closing the doors on life, that the means of offering them hope at that critical moment, would be to remind them of the line.

Edited by Senator, 23 April 2012 - 12:23 PM.

[cinepro]

smac97, on 22 April 2012 - 10:33 PM, said:

I don't agree that celibacy = "pretending they aren't gay."  Heterosexual church members who are celibate aren't "pretending they aren't heterosexual."

Heterosexual church members have many avenues of accepted and appropriate heterosexual expression outside of marriage (and "sexual intimacy"), such as dating, dancing, hand holding, and kissing.

What are the accepted and appropriate expressions of homosexual affection for gay LDS?

[Senator]

epiginosko, on 23 April 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

How is that going against anything declared by the Prophets and Apostles?

Because it wasn't a church correlated production.

Heck, the church has even instructed members to not speak publically to the media on church related issues.

[epiginosko]

california boy, on 23 April 2012 - 11:09 AM, said:

I taught seminary for many years.  Part of each morning was devoted to students quoting a scripture.  The most often quoted scripture in seminary was also the shortest scripture in the Bible.  "Jesus wept"  This scripture comes from when Mary and Martha plead for Christ to come heal their brother Lazarus who is gravely ill.  Before Christ gets there, Lazarus dies.  When Christ arrives, Mary is a bit unhappy with Christ. "Why didn't he come sooner to heal his brother.  Did Christ not love Mary, Martha, and Lazarus enough to bother to come?"  

Christ could have said a lot of things to Mary.  He could have chastised her for not believing in the plan of salvation.  He could have scolded her for her lack of faith.  He could have preached a sermon on what his atonement would mean to Lazarus.  Instead, the scriptures simply say "Jesus wept".

Sometimes showing compassion and love is the most important thing we can do.  I have grown to love this scripture and feel that it has an important lesson for me when responding to other peoples situations.  Perhaps it might shed light on what this video is about.

This was beautiful.  Thank you!

[Jaybear]

calmoriah, on 23 April 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:

I disagree.  The Church in my view is primarily its membership.  Burn down all the buildings and possessions of the Church, but leave the people be.  Does the Church still exist?  Maybe it doesn't function as well, but I don't see how anyone could deny its existence.

PS:  I doubt that explicit discussion on the Law of Chastity or the covenants we make or whatever behaviour is taught as appropriate by the Church leadership is necessary in such a video as long as it hasn't included confusing remarks that blur the line between the Church and society in general. Including a 'this is where you can go to figure out what to do next' is sufficient imo....though such action does require the individual to open up him/herself to others and not all are ready to do that, but in most cases I suspect they would already know what they can do on their own (and likely it hasn't been enough for them if they are feeling suicidal).

I suspect that not all of those who participated in the video, would agree that the LDS Church is the best place to go "to figure out what to do next."  
That was not the point or purpose of the video.

[epiginosko]

Senator, on 23 April 2012 - 12:14 PM, said:

Because it wasn't a church correlated production.

Heck, the church has even instructed members to not speak publically to the media on church related issues.

And what do you think Christ would advocate more?  Correlation or compassion?

This reminds me of the good samaritan story with the Pharisees being instructed according to the law to not touch a dead body.  Only the (uncorrelated) Samaritan was merciful enough to care for this wounded man.  What was Christ teaching us in this parable if not to place mercy and compassion first?  We have the Priesthood of God.  What use is it if not to administer unto those who suffer and are in pain?  Does the Lord want us to wait for a correlated message before using His gifts?

[calmoriah]

I think it is comments like this one on the youtube link that smac is concerned about:

Quote

I am a member of this church, and i am glad to see members on their own, support me and people like me. If enough members support, rules can be changed, and so can lives.

I am a 17 year old girl living in Southern California, i am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and i am a lesbian. I believe that one day, we can change this church.

I don't think we have to 'fight that particular fight' in every instance we discuss this topic.

However, I think we need to be careful not to raise false expectations because then when reality hits, people may feel betrayed or lied to and whatever help such things brought, it may end up with someone being in a worse place in the long run.

I've seen disappointment and then anger in some cases where something was reported inaccurately with this issue (and other issues), false hope is dangerous imo.

I also believe that when throwing out a lifeline it is important not to attach conditions to them grabbing it, but we need to make sure the lifeline is anchored to something of substance and not to the boat going down next to them.

Edited by calmoriah, 23 April 2012 - 01:17 PM.

[phaedrus ut]

Jaybear, on 23 April 2012 - 07:53 AM, said:

The message is loud and clear.
The message is directed to young gay LDS members.
The message is you are loved, please don't kill yourself.
If you want to look for subtext,  you can imagine any thing you wish.

I think there may be a second message to LDS parents of gay children.  The promised blessings to members who remain faithful, obedient, magnifying their calling, can be misinterpreted as failures when member has wayward children.  I have a large number of gay LDS friends and a recurring theme that I've noticed is the guilt of the parents.  They wonder what they did wrong or what they could have done better.  More than once they've told me they first tried to fix their child's gayness by increasing their own spirituality and faithfulness.

I think it's tough for everyone involved and for the parents it's good to see that it also "gets better".


Phaedrus

[smac97]

calmoriah, on 23 April 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:

I think it is comments like this one on the youtube link that smac is concerned about:



I don't think we have to 'fight that particular fight' in every instance we discuss this topic.

However, I think we need to be careful not to raise false expectations because then when reality hits, people may feel betrayed or lied to and whatever help such things brought, it may end up with someone being in a worse place in the long run.

I've seen disappointment and then anger in some cases where something was reported inaccurately with this issue (and other issues), false hope is dangerous imo.

I also believe that when throwing out a lifeline it is important not to attach conditions to them grabbing it, but we need to make sure the lifeline is anchored to something of substance and not to the boat going down next to them.

Well said.

Here are a few more comments about the vid that, in my view, suggest that the vid is indeed sending out mixed messages:


Of course God embraces all, but His followers should not embrace gayist teachings that lead people away from their potential. Certain truths are mixed into this message and allow people to come to wrong conclusions. Their message is deceptive and hurtful, even if they are doing what they are doing out of love.  There are plenty of good Latter-day Saints who love their homosexually inclined friends and family. No need to reject the teachings of the Church like some of these people have.

___



The question is what is the real purpose of this video. To tell LGBT people we love you but you are morally inferior to us is an insidious and hateful act. No one here advocates same sex marriage and that is ultimately the act of love. Anythimg less than that is patronizing. The same tactic used by the catholics. If they cannot accept that the love between 2 men or 2 women is as sascred as the love between a man and a woman, then they are perpetuating the hate and the violence?

___

And will the time when you can have a same sex marriage in a Mormon temple?

___

One of their tricks are clever videos like these claiming their love and moral superiority. When all is said and done, the real issue of love is same sex marriage in Mormon temples. If you are sincere, then your tactic of showing the human harm the church causes is the right one. And I support your efforts.

___

Why did you get the impression he doesn't consider love and marriage between any two adults as sacred? Mormon culture is family-oriented and those of us who want gay equality of course want gay people to be able to form their own families and have them legitimized by their church.

___

Loving our LBGT brothers and sisters means that we embrace them without caveat and without trying to "fix" them to put them on the path that is most comfortable for our own prejudices.

___

If only the church leadership could be persuaded... and then allow lgbt individuals the opportunity to seek romantic relationships... you know, something to look forward to.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited by smac97, 23 April 2012 - 01:41 PM.

[zerinus]

cinepro, on 23 April 2012 - 12:10 PM, said:

Heterosexual church members have many avenues of accepted and appropriate heterosexual expression outside of marriage (and "sexual intimacy"), such as dating, dancing, hand holding, and kissing.

What are the accepted and appropriate expressions of homosexual affection for gay LDS?

Repenting!

[zerinus]

Jaybear, on 23 April 2012 - 12:22 PM, said:

I suspect that not all of those who participated in the video, would agree that the LDS Church is the best place to go "to figure out what to do next."  
That was not the point or purpose of the video.

I think that some of the people who took part in that video might have been duped, and weren't aware of the true motivation behind it.