Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
flameburns623

GLBT+ Protest planned for Fast Sunday?

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

That's not all it's about, and I think you know it.

No, I don't "know it."

Here we've got a group of people trying to do what they can, what their conscience and personal revelation drives them to do.  They are trying to stand for something that is important to them without usurping authority and causing disruption.  And you suggest that they can't possibly be operating under noble motivations.  That's unfair judgment, Scott.

From President Uchtdorf:  "Brothers and sisters, dear friends, we need your unique talents and perspectives. The diversity of persons and peoples all around the globe is a strength of this Church."

I believe that.  Do you?

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Mystery Meat said:

Perhaps we can reach a compromise?

I will concede that wearing a ribbon is not the bad, terrible thing I have ascribed to it if it is only done to show love. If there are other motives in play by those who wear the ribbons, such as making a statement of opposition to, rejection of, or defiance to the policy, the Church's stance on SSM and the prophets and apostles themselves, then wearing them in Sacrament meeting is entirely inappropriate.

Can we agree to that much?

Personally, I don't believe that any opposition to that horrid policy is inappropriate but I understand how it can be seen so by my fellow members.  But I agree that Sacrament Meeting is an in appropriate place for any visible or vocal opposition to Church teachings or our leaders.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Mystery Meat said:

We should always be loving and welcoming for every sinner, no matter their sins, and hostile towards their sins (just as we should all be hostile towards our sins). The challenge arises here, when people don't view their clearly defined sins, as sins. The result is a feeling of being unwelcome or not accepting them for who they think they really are.

Being LGBT is not a sin.  It's responses like this one that you made to Daniel that are part of what we need to change.  He mentions LGBT and you automatically jump to "sin".

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, JAHS said:

That might be considered the ideal way to take it; but how many members are really going to see it that way when they see someone wearing the ribbon? Whether they are right or wrong it is going to arouse feelings of contention in Sacrament meeting for some members who see it as a sign of protest; unless someone makes some kind of announcement in church that they accept the policy change and only mean it as a sign of love and support. 

We've been counseled by our leaders to show love to those who are LGBT.  If someone sees a ribbon and feels a spirit of contention, they ought to look inward.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, rockpond said:

Being LGBT is not a sin.  It's responses like this one that you made to Daniel that are part of what we need to change.  He mentions LGBT and you automatically jump to "sin".

I wasn't identifying being LGBT as a sin. Having sex with someone of the same sex or being married to someone of the same sex is a sin, and even apostasy. I had the latter in mind, not the former. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

I wasn't identifying being LGBT as a sin. Having sex with someone of the same sex or being married to someone of the same sex is a sin, and even apostasy. I had the latter in mind, not the former. 

Daniel's post didn't mention sex or gay marriage and yet you jumped right to "sin" in your response.  Again, this is why there is a need to work on "change" that creates more safe spaces.  The church is still a hostile place for many LGBT members.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Personally, I don't believe that any opposition to that horrid policy is inappropriate but I understand how it can be seen so by my fellow members.  But I agree that Sacrament Meeting is an in appropriate place for any visible or vocal opposition to Church teachings or our leaders.

I am glad we could find some common ground. Here is where we disagree. From a practical standpoint, I don't think you will find many, if any, ribbon wearers who do not oppose the policy and also want their ribbon wearing to be a statement of their stance relating to the policy and the Church's stance on SSM. So while I agree in theory that wearing the ribbon to show love is not bad in and of itself, in practice I don't think there will be many, if any, of such folks. Based on my Facebook feed, those expressing support are doing so primarily as a way of demonstrating opposition, and not to show love. Additionally, as has been previously mentioned, I think people will wear the ribbons knowing that it will incite division. I think that is also inappropriate behavior.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Daniel's post didn't mention sex or gay marriage and yet you jumped right to "sin" in your response.  Again, this is why there is a need to work on "change" that creates more safe spaces.  The church is still a hostile place for many LGBT members.

I am happy to work on creating these safe spaces. But if by safe spaces you mean that gay members of the Church should be encouraged to enter into SSM or have sex with members of the same sex or celebrating the same, then I believe such safe spaces come at the cost of having a safe space for the Spirit. If creating a safe space means we cant decry the evils of SSM or having sex with members of the same sex, then I believe such safe spaces come at the cost of having a safe space for the Spirit. 

I agree, people who have attractions to the same sex, should feel safe and welcome at Church. But the Church and its members should continue to preach against SSM and homosexual sex and the eternal consequences of the same. I am not you or other SSM advocates think such is possible.

Edited by Mystery Meat

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

I am glad we could find some common ground. Here is where we disagree. From a practical standpoint, I don't think you will find many, if any, ribbon wearers who do not oppose the policy and also want their ribbon wearing to be a statement of their stance relating to the policy and the Church's stance on SSM. So while I agree in theory that wearing the ribbon to show love is not bad in and of itself, in practice I don't think there will be many, if any, of such folks. Based on my Facebook feed, those expressing support are doing so primarily as a way of demonstrating opposition, and not to show love. Additionally, as has been previously mentioned, I think people will wear the ribbons knowing that it will incite division. I think that is also inappropriate behavior.

I disagree.  And as I said to Scott, I think it is unfair for you to place all that baggage on people who are trying to do what they can without being inappropriate.  If there is nothing that these folks can do for the suffering that they see around them then you are effectively telling them to sit down, shut up, and pretend that their souls are hurting.  I return, again, to what President Uchtdorf said:

"Brothers and sisters, dear friends, we need your unique talents and perspectives. The diversity of persons and peoples all around the globe is a strength of this Church."

I believe that.  Do you?

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

I am happy to work on creating these safe spaces. But if by safe spaces you mean that gay members of the Church should be encouraged to enter into SSM or have sex with members of the same sex or celebrating the same, then I believe such safe spaces come at the cost of having a safe space for the Spirit. If creating a safe space means we cant decry the evils of SSM or having sex with members of the same sex, then I believe such safe spaces come at the cost of having a safe space for the Spirit. 

I agree, people who have attractions to the same sex, should feel safe and welcome at Church. But the Church and its members should continue to preach against SSM and homosexual sex and the eternal consequences of the same. I am not you or other SSM advocates think such is possible.

No, that is not what is meant by safe spaces.  And this response, along with your others (wherein you jump right to "sex" and "sin") demonstrate why efforts like the Rainbow Initiative are needed.  You can't seem to think about LGBT persons without it being all about them having sex.  There is so much more to LGBT persons than that just like there is so much more to heterosexual people.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, rockpond said:

I disagree.  And as I said to Scott, I think it is unfair for you to place all that baggage on people who are trying to do what they can without being inappropriate.  If there is nothing that these folks can do for the suffering that they see around them then you are effectively telling them to sit down, shut up, and pretend that their souls are hurting.

I don't think I am saying that there is nothing they can do. I just don't think advocating at Church is the place to do it. There are lots of ways to show forth an increase measure of love. A facebook post, might be more effective in reaching more people, and doesn't invade the sacred halls of the Church. You can disagree, but the people I am aware of, as I mentioned, are wearing ribbons to show that they oppose the policy, not to show love. 

 I return, again, to what President Uchtdorf said:

"Brothers and sisters, dear friends, we need your unique talents and perspectives. The diversity of persons and peoples all around the globe is a strength of this Church."

I believe that.  Do you?

I do believe that, but I don't see the applicability here. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, rockpond said:

No, that is not what is meant by safe spaces.  And this response, along with your others (wherein you jump right to "sex" and "sin") demonstrate why efforts like the Rainbow Initiative are needed.  You can't seem to think about LGBT persons without it being all about them having sex.  There is so much more to LGBT persons than that just like there is so much more to heterosexual people.

I guess I don't understand, then. I assumed, apparently incorrectly, that we all understand and appreciate that people who are attracted to members of the same sex should be welcomed and loved and that identifying as Gay is not a sin. Therefore, I guess I thought the only difference was in how we view acting on that sin. For that I apologize. In a sincere effort to understand, what do you think a safe place looks like? I assume you think the Church can have a safe space and still condemn SSM and homosexual sex, so I would like to know what you think that looks like.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

I don't think I am saying that there is nothing they can do. I just don't think advocating at Church is the place to do it. There are lots of ways to show forth an increase measure of love. A facebook post, might be more effective in reaching more people, and doesn't invade the sacred halls of the Church. You can disagree, but the people I am aware of, as I mentioned, are wearing ribbons to show that they oppose the policy, not to show love. 

I do believe that, but I don't see the applicability here. 

The applicability is that we welcome diversity.  Not everyone is supposed to be the same.

If someone is wearing a ribbon to show opposition rather than love, than that is on that person.  But it is not the point of the Rainbow Initiative.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Daniel2 said:

Any concept of god that would include advocating or condoning violence or hatred or ill-will towards others, for starters...

What gods would those be in your definition?

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

I guess I don't understand, then. I assumed, apparently incorrectly, that we all understand and appreciate that people who are attracted to members of the same sex should be welcomed and loved and that identifying as Gay is not a sin. Therefore, I guess I thought the only difference was in how we view acting on that sin. For that I apologize. In a sincere effort to understand, what do you think a safe place looks like? I assume you think the Church can have a safe space and still condemn SSM and homosexual sex, so I would like to know what you think that looks like.

A safe space at church would start by helping our LGBT youth understand that they aren't the "only one".  That they aren't alone.  That they aren't hated by God.  That there are people that they can talk to.  That they can come out of hiding.  There are probably more and better ideas that that but those are the important ones I can think of after having counseled several gay young men.

You can claim that we welcome and love all, including LGBT youth, but my experience in working with them is that they don't feel that yet.  And I don't think the policy helped.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, rockpond said:

The applicability is that we welcome diversity.  Not everyone is supposed to be the same.

If someone is wearing a ribbon to show opposition rather than love, than that is on that person.  But it is not the point of the Rainbow Initiative.

Saying that we welcome diversity is not enough. Christ himself said we must be one. There is still a system of order, covenants, and obligations that need to be followed. I don't believe wearing the ribbon to Church is appropriate, that doesn't mean I don't welcome those who want to help build Zion by showing love to LGBT members.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Mystery Meat said:

Saying that we welcome diversity is not enough. Christ himself said we must be one. There is still a system of order, covenants, and obligations that need to be followed. I don't believe wearing the ribbon to Church is appropriate, that doesn't mean I don't welcome those who want to help build Zion by showing love to LGBT members.

I do believe you are welcoming to all.  And I believe that those involved in the Rainbow Initiative are trying to do what they can to help within the established "system of order".

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

 

You don't think that taking talents,perspectives and exchange if ideas for the good would be of any strength to the church?  The church for all its wonder and many talents and diverse membership has a chance to be a guiding light for love of all..welcoming and supportive to so many.  There are different ways to teach gospel principles than just ignoring subsets and even small groups of people.  The Savior loves each and everyone..so should this church.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, rockpond said:

A safe space at church would start by helping our LGBT youth understand that they aren't the "only one".  That they aren't alone.  That they aren't hated by God.  That there are people that they can talk to.  That they can come out of hiding.  There are probably more and better ideas that that but those are the important ones I can think of after having counseled several gay young men.

You can claim that we welcome and love all, including LGBT youth, but my experience in working with them is that they don't feel that yet.  And I don't think the policy helped.

I guess we just have different experiences and opinions then. I think the Church does a good job, generally speaking, of showing forth that love. I don't see what more can be done without sacrificing eternal truths. The only way I think the policy could be interpreted as not providing a safe space is that it makes LGBT members uncomfortable that the Church would potentially disqualify them and their family from entering into covenants, but that comes back to sinful behavior and condoning it. 

Edited by Mystery Meat

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

I guess we just have different experiences and opinions then. I think the Church does a good job, generally speaking, of showing forth that love. I don't see what more can be done without sacrificing eternal truths. The only way I think the policy could be interpreted as not providing a safe space is that it makes LGBT members uncomfortable that the Church would potentially disqualify them and their family from entering into covenants, but that comes back to sinful behavior and condoning it. 

I am sure we do have different experiences and opinions.  When was the last time you sat with a 19 year old young man who lived worthily, mission-call in hand, raised in a loving LDS family, and yet he is bawling his eyes out as he explains how utterly alone he feels and unloved by God and anyone who might find out his "secret"... all because he is gay and couldn't change?

When was the last time an LGBT young man or young woman told you, in all seriousness, "I hope that I am killed during my mission.  That is what would be best for everyone."?

When was the last time an LGBT BYU grad told you that they are leaving the church because "there just isn't a place for them"?

These were all real experiences for me.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, rockpond said:

We've been counseled by our leaders to show love to those who are LGBT.  If someone sees a ribbon and feels a spirit of contention, they ought to look inward.

The point is that it is inappropriate to do it in Sacrament meeting. It's not the right time to try and force people to look inward on such a controversial issue.  If they could at least wait and do it after Sacrament meeting (ie during the other two hours) it might not be so distracting to one's worship. Can we really be certain that those wearing it are not doing it in the spirit of contention? For some, I don't think so. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I am sure we do have different experiences and opinions.  When was the last time you sat with a 19 year old young man who lived worthily, mission-call in hand, raised in a loving LDS family, and yet he is bawling his eyes out as he explains how utterly alone he feels and unloved by God and anyone who might find out his "secret"... all because he is gay and couldn't change?

When was the last time an LGBT young man or young woman told you, in all seriousness, "I hope that I am killed during my mission.  That is what would be best for everyone."?

When was the last time an LGBT BYU grad told you that they are leaving the church because "there just isn't a place for them"?

These were all real experiences for me.

Your experiences break my heart Rockpond.  What do you say to young people who are doing all they can do..and never feel like they have measured up?  I am sorry for them and sorry too that you have to deal with this face to face.  That is the difference..they are real people.  In your bishopric and in your calling, you must have a special gift that lets them share such heartbreak.  For this you are a man of God.

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I am sure we do have different experiences and opinions.  When was the last time you sat with a 19 year old young man who lived worthily, mission-call in hand, raised in a loving LDS family, and yet he is bawling his eyes out as he explains how utterly alone he feels and unloved by God and anyone who might find out his "secret"... all because he is gay and couldn't change?

When was the last time an LGBT young man or young woman told you, in all seriousness, "I hope that I am killed during my mission.  That is what would be best for everyone."?

When was the last time an LGBT BYU grad told you that they are leaving the church because "there just isn't a place for them"?

These were all real experiences for me.

None of the above, but some that are similar. The LGBT members I am closer to are actually no longer practicing. So the conversations have been quite different.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I am sure we do have different experiences and opinions.  When was the last time you sat with a 19 year old young man who lived worthily, mission-call in hand, raised in a loving LDS family, and yet he is bawling his eyes out as he explains how utterly alone he feels and unloved by God and anyone who might find out his "secret"... all because he is gay and couldn't change?

When was the last time an LGBT young man or young woman told you, in all seriousness, "I hope that I am killed during my mission.  That is what would be best for everyone."?

When was the last time an LGBT BYU grad told you that they are leaving the church because "there just isn't a place for them"?

These were all real experiences for me.

I am still not sure how to create this safe space that you envision. I am open to your further recommendations.

Share this post


Link to post
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...