Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Church Statement - LBGTQ concert - is this sincere?


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Would opposing incestuous marriage be considered judgmental?

 

Well it appears that the children of Adam and Eve participated in incestuous marriage. It is not a marriage I would participate in however.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, kllindley said:

But doesn't this ignore the fact that Heavenly Father knows which of his children will develop same-sex attractions?  That's not random.  You are saying that these individuals are randomly selected to have a different outcome than the rest of the population.  That is exactly the opposite of what the Church teaches. 

 

You actually said "5% of our straight youth."  So, do you mean the ones who identify as straight regardless of actual sexual orientation?  Or just the ones that "really are straight?"  If the former, then there is 30-50% chance that any particular youth would have some degree of attraction to the same sex anyway.  If the latter, we are talking about as few as 50% of the population to begin with.  This is part of why hypothetical situations in which people are "straight" or "gay" are very poor at reflecting reality.  

 

You believe that more than 2.5% of the population is exclusively homosexual with no fluidity?  If so, I guess you can believe anything you want.  I choose to believe the scientific literature.  

 

Again, this hypothetical posits two(3) types of eternal marriages: MF, MM, FF.  I'm not seeing how this is a reversal since the Church teaches that there will only be (and has only ever been) one eternal marriage.  

I just don't see how they are similar.  And I'm part of the 5% you are trying to get people to empathize with! :)   

Over analyzing.  I believe my point was made.  You are free to agree or disagree.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, bluebell said:

The Brethren don't chose who 'can no longer follow the plan of happiness they had been taught their whole lives' though.  From that perspective, it seems like a weird analogy because it makes it implies that the brethren want a certain percentage of the membership to suffer.  

If they sincerely believe that God has expressed that SSM is not o.k. though, their hands are completely tied, aren't they?  Is there an analogy which acknowledges that the church is only doing what they believe God has told them to do?  If you can find one, I think you'd have a better chance at people understanding your point. :) 

I think that is the point.  5% of the youth of the church are suffering by not being allowed to participate in the Plan of Happiness.

Church leaders sincerely believe that if a gay person married someone of the opposite sex, they would no long be gay.  Think about all the heartache mistrust and sadness that decision brought into the lives of those that trusted them when they told them that it was a promise from God.  How anyone can now trust those same leaders that this time, they know the will of God is beyond me.

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

I also have to respect the person who comes to a conclusion through the same kind of deep self reflection, that to follow God they need to leave the church.  Another option would be for someone feeling impressed to follow God by trying to help the church to change through grass roots efforts and education.  

I also have nothing but the deepest respect and compassion for individuals who come to different conclusions.  I have worked hard to create change in the culture of the Church by organizing opportunities for leaders and members to gain more education, including an Area-wide fireside event.  I speak openly in my ward and stake about the experience of being LGBT in the Church. 

 

12 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

I feel like the church is causing pain and suffering that is unnecessary damage on the LGBT community, and I don't believe it is God's will that this continues.

Thank you for owning this as your feeling/experience, rather than trying to state it as an absolute fact.  I have a different experience, but that doesn't mean yours is any less valid, less real, or even less true.  

I acknowledge that my perspective is limited.  I also know that I haven't always believed the way I do now.  There were periods when I did hate the Church and God.  I now believe that my anger came from a lack of understanding and personal conviction.  But I can also admit that at the time, my pain and anger seemed fully justified.  While I do know that I am not the only one who feels this way, that only proves that I'm not alone in my delusion if I'm wrong.  

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, california boy said:

I find your insult to the gay community to be annoying especially coming from a member of TCoJCoLDSUIOPXYZ.  

Sounds kind of childish and disrespectful doesn't it.  It is too bad you choose that approach.  So much of the discussion on this issue has been very respectful and a solid good faith effort from different points of view to understand what others are feeling.  

I didn't interpret this comment to be disrespectful at all.  A message that "pain and sadness on earth is only temporary and that Heavenly Father will compensate us for all suffering with eternal joy" is insulting? 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, rockpond said:

I'm confident that if the Brethren randomly chose 5% of our straight youth from the church and told them that they could no longer follow the plan of happiness they had been taught their whole lives and that, instead, they would have to be completely celibate with the promise of a spouse of the same gender in the next life we'd have similar results as we are currently seeing with our LGBT members.  

I also imagine that many of the straight members would be asking for some sort of revelation to back up such a "commandment".

What is your point exactly?

First of all, the policies have already been proclaimed as a revelation from God.  What more can be said?

Quote

 

Then President Thomas S. Monson, considered a "prophet, seer and revelator" in the 15 million-member Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, declared "the mind of the Lord and the will of the Lord."

That led to the Utah-based faith's new policy regarding same-sex Mormon couples — that they would be labeled "apostates" and that their children would not be allowed baptism and other LDS religious rites until they turn 18.

http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=3391057&itype=CMSID

 

Quote

In a speech to young adults within the LDS faith, Apostle Russell M. Nelson, head of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, announced that President Monson received the instructions regarding the decision directly from God. 

Second of all, I always find it interesting when people demand a revelation from the prophet.  Should they not be using their own knees for that?  Anything else would amount to blind faith.  

Link to comment
46 minutes ago, pogi said:

Let me answer the question before imposing judgment at least.  Believe it or not, I have wrestled with this issue for quite some time.  I have tried to place myself in the position of a gay member, to see things from their perspective.  Could I endure?  Would I endure such difficult trials?  My heart hurt imagining it.  What would I do in their position?  

I am a naturally compassionate person, and am incredibly sensitive to the suffering of others.  I have honestly sat in meditation imagining the reverse scenario, to better understand my brothers and sisters with SSA.  What if heterosexual marriage and sexual relations was forbidden of the church?  Where would I stand?  After spending much time reading, and listening to podcasts about the experiences of gay Mormons who have struggled to endure; listening to the experiences of those who chose to leave, and from those who chose to stay.  After attempting to appreciate the gravity of what is being asked, I always worked my way back to a few foundational questions: 

1) God, are you there?

2) God do you love me and have my best interest at heart?

3) God, do you expect me to bear this burden?

If I could not answer those questions in the affirmative with a firm conviction, I would follow my own path.  However, with a conviction of those 3, I would submit my will to the Lord's and pick up my cross in faith.  I have had such deep and profound experiences from having those questions answered before (with unrelated burdens), that he has earned my trust. 

And what if there was a 4th question.  God, did the leaders of the church know your will when they promised you that if you just got married then you would become straight?  And what if that ended up to not be true.  Would you now believe that the church leaders had it right this time around.  So sure that you would be willing to give up a full and happy life shared with a person you could love and care for?  Or would you start trusting God more and trusting church leaders less.

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, kllindley said:

I didn't interpret this comment to be disrespectful at all.  A message that "pain and sadness on earth is only temporary and that Heavenly Father will compensate us for all suffering with eternal joy" is insulting? 

It was this that I found disrespectful,  childish  and completely uncalled for.

Quote

 

Scott Lloyd

The Church of Jesus Christ has the same message for the LGBTQWERTYUIOPXYZ community

 

 

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, california boy said:

And what if there was a 4th question.  God, did the leaders of the church know your will when they promised you that if you just got married then you would become straight?  And what if that ended up to not be true.  Would you now believe that the church leaders had it right this time around.  So sure that you would be willing to give up a full and happy life shared with a person you could love and care for?  Or would you start trusting God more and trusting church leaders less.

That's why I purposely leave any question of reliance on another man's revelation out.  I understand that the prophets are fallible and that policies have been corrected before.  In regards to a situation of such personal weight, I would not rely on blind obedience of my leaders.  Question number 3 would suffice:  "God, do you expect me to bear this burden?"

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, pogi said:

What is your point exactly?

First of all, the policies have already been proclaimed as a revelation from God.  What more can be said?

Second of all, I always find it interesting when people demand a revelation from the prophet.  Should they not be using their own knees for that?  Anything else would amount to blind faith.  

I have "used my own knees" (along with fasting, study, and reflection) to receive my own revelation on the matter.  And, from your own statement, I assume that you respect that I have arrived at a different conclusion than you.

The claimed revelation was regarding a policy.  Not the Lord's will regarding His plan for His homosexual children.

 

Link to comment
50 minutes ago, california boy said:

I think that is the point.  5% of the youth of the church are suffering by not being allowed to participate in the Plan of Happiness.

Church leaders sincerely believe that if a gay person married someone of the opposite sex, they would no long be gay.  Think about all the heartache mistrust and sadness that decision brought into the lives of those that trusted them when they told them that it was a promise from God.  How anyone can now trust those same leaders that this time, they know the will of God is beyond me.

Hopefully no one is trusting these leaders alone, and everyone has gotten confirmation that these leaders truly are called of God.  I understand that the idea of fallible prophets is difficult for some people to understand.  Truly it would be much much easier if we didn't have to deal with imperfect people's inability to always know God's will (and our own imperfect ability to always know His will) and God just sent angels to each of us declaring His will.  

Apparently God isn't interested in that kind of easy though.  He allows us to 'see thru the glass darkly' and face the consequences of that imperfect sight.

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, pogi said:

That's why I purposely leave any question of reliance on another man's revelation out.  I understand that the prophets are fallible and that policies have been corrected before.  In regards to a situation of such personal weight, I would not rely on blind obedience of my leaders.  Question number 3 would suffice:  "God, do you expect me to bear this burden?"

I really appreciate all the time and effort you have made on this issue.  It is so easy to make a judgement and carry on with your life since it is not your burden to bear.  While I have lost complete faith that church leaders know the will of God on this issue, I have not lost faith in God.  If anything, it has certainly taught me to put my trust in Him and take what church leaders say with a grain of salt.  

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Hopefully no one is trusting these leaders alone, and everyone has gotten confirmation that these leaders truly are called of God.  I understand that the idea of fallible prophets is difficult for some people to understand.  Truly it would be much much easier if we didn't have to deal with imperfect people's inability to always know God's will (and our own imperfect ability to always know His will) and God just sent angels to each of us declaring His will.  

Apparently God isn't interested in that kind of easy though.  He allows us to 'see thru the glass darkly' and face the consequences of that imperfect sight.

I assume you see the epistemological dichotomies in your statement above. :)

 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, california boy said:

I really appreciate all the time and effort you have made on this issue.  It is so easy to make a judgement and carry on with your life since it is not your burden to bear.  While I have lost complete faith that church leaders know the will of God on this issue, I have not lost faith in God.  If anything, it has certainly taught me to put my trust in Him and take what church leaders say with a grain of salt.  

Amen.  That is a good description of where I am at as well.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Just go ahead and point them out.  I'm not even going to bother looking that phrase up to see what it means.  :lol:

 
 
 
Quote

 

e·pis·te·mol·o·gy
[əˌpistəˈmäləjē]
 
NOUN
  1. the theory of knowledge, especially with regard to its methods, validity, and scope. Epistemology is the investigation of what distinguishes justified belief from opinion.

 

 
"Epistemology" is a fancy way of sayin' "How we 'know' stuff ..." ;):D 
Link to comment
5 hours ago, california boy said:

Well it appears that the children of Adam and Eve participated in incestuous marriage. It is not a marriage I would participate in however.

We know very little of the circumstances or marriage practices of Adam's children. Would you oppose others entering into such a relationship if they consented to it?

Do you have any limits?

Link to comment
5 hours ago, california boy said:

I think that is the point.  5% of the youth of the church are suffering by not being allowed to participate in the Plan of Happiness

I have a good friend who is gay, celibate, and active LDS, but he does not feel he is being excluded from anything. Do you suppose he is the only one who feels this way?

Edited by Bernard Gui
Link to comment
14 hours ago, california boy said:

I find your insult to the gay community to be annoying especially coming from a member of TCoJCoLDSUIOPXYZ.  

Sounds kind of childish and disrespectful doesn't it.  It is too bad you choose that approach.  So much of the discussion on this issue has been very respectful and a solid good faith effort from different points of view to understand what others are feeling.  

I didn't insult the gay community. It's meant merely as a comment on this convoluted and unwieldy abbreviation, one that keeps growing in length with each, passing month, it seems. Just when one gets used to the alphabet soup, another couple of letters are tacked on, making it necessary to re-learn the whole thing. If abbreviations are supposed to be both convenient and memorable as a brand, this one is an epic fail. 

I don't think it was well thought-through. You all need to get together in a summit meeting or something and come up with something better, more elegant. Surely there's a clever marketing wiz within the LGBTQWERTYUIOPXYZ community who could be of service. 

Afterthought: Perhaps you could borrow the computer convention and use asterisks as a wildcard for those who can't remember or simply don't want to type out all forty-eleven letters, e.g. "LG**". 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
6 hours ago, kllindley said:

I didn't interpret this comment to be disrespectful at all.  A message that "pain and sadness on earth is only temporary and that Heavenly Father will compensate us for all suffering with eternal joy" is insulting? 

I think he had reference to my whimsical and satirical rendering of LGBTQWERTYUIOPXYZ. I have explained it was a comment on an unwieldy abbreviation that keeps growing in length.

I didn't think a member of the community would be so humor-impaired. 

Link to comment
9 hours ago, kllindley said:

I also have nothing but the deepest respect and compassion for individuals who come to different conclusions.  I have worked hard to create change in the culture of the Church by organizing opportunities for leaders and members to gain more education, including an Area-wide fireside event.  I speak openly in my ward and stake about the experience of being LGBT in the Church. 

 

Thank you for owning this as your feeling/experience, rather than trying to state it as an absolute fact.  I have a different experience, but that doesn't mean yours is any less valid, less real, or even less true.  

I acknowledge that my perspective is limited.  I also know that I haven't always believed the way I do now.  There were periods when I did hate the Church and God.  I now believe that my anger came from a lack of understanding and personal conviction.  But I can also admit that at the time, my pain and anger seemed fully justified.  While I do know that I am not the only one who feels this way, that only proves that I'm not alone in my delusion if I'm wrong.  

I think your voice needs to be heard as well.  You come at this issue with a different perspective that may very well be extremely helpful for some that are still struggling with this issue.  I think the two of us would make for a very interesting fireside.  And I hope more than anything the thing that people would take away from such a fireside is that they need to find the answers to these questions for themselves.  No one else gets a say in how they end up knowing the will of God for their lives.  

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

We know very little of the circumstances or marriage practices of Adam's children. Would you oppose others entering into such a relationship if they consented to it?

Do you have any limits?

Bernard, I come at this issue from a very different perspective than you do.  For you, the answers are simple.  There is only one path and you are firmly on that path.  I get that.  And I get that you want everyone to acknowledge that the path that you are on is one of righteousness.  The one that God has chosen.  Any deviation from that path is to be challenged.  You have prophets and apostles on your side that speak for God Himself.

I come from an entirely different life experience.  I too thought that there was only one path and I was cursed by God to not be able to follow that path.  I too believed that there were apostles and prophets that knew God's will.  I put my life into their hands.  They did tell me that they spoke for God and His promise to me was that if I just married a woman then this attraction to men would go away.  So I went down that golden path.  It turned out that these men had no right to claim that they knew the will of God.  Because they didn't know the will of God, nor did they have any right to make such a promise.  .  

Whose marriage is valid?  Who's marriage is unholy?  Whose marriage should we condemn?  Whose marriage should we embrace?  I certainly am not going to ever assume that someone knows the will of God.  Nor would I presume to be such an authority.  It is between God and them.  I am not an intermediator.  No man is.  And those that claim to be so are not either.

Link to comment

 

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I didn't insult the gay community. It's meant merely as a comment on this convoluted and unwieldy abbreviation, one that keeps growing in length with each, passing month, it seems. Just when one gets used to the alphabet soup, another couple of letters are tacked on, making it necessary to re-learn the whole thing. If abbreviations are supposed to be both convenient and memorable as a brand, this one is an epic fail. 

I don't think it was well thought-through. You all need to get together in a summit meeting or something and come up with something better, more elegant. Surely there's a clever marketing whiz within the LGBTQWERTYUIOPXYZ community who could be of service. 

Afterthought: Perhaps you could borrow the computer convention and use asterisks as a wildcard for those who can't remember or simply don't want to type out all forty-eleven letters, e.g. "LG**". 

Then I will leave you to your snide remarks and not try to point out your insults or your assumptions that are false.  

Edited by california boy
Link to comment
20 hours ago, pogi said:

Let me answer the question before imposing judgment at least.  Believe it or not, I have wrestled with this issue for quite some time.  I have tried to place myself in the position of a gay member, to see things from their perspective.  Could I endure?  Would I endure such difficult trials?  My heart hurt imagining it.  What would I do in their position?  

I am a naturally compassionate person, and am incredibly sensitive to the suffering of others.  I have honestly sat in meditation imagining the reverse scenario, to better understand my brothers and sisters with SSA.  What if heterosexual marriage and sexual relations was forbidden of the church?  Where would I stand?  After spending much time reading, and listening to podcasts about the experiences of gay Mormons who have struggled to endure; listening to the experiences of those who chose to leave, and from those who chose to stay.  After attempting to appreciate the gravity of what is being asked, I always worked my way back to a few foundational questions: 

1) God, are you there?

2) God do you love me and have my best interest at heart?

3) God, do you expect me to bear this burden?

If I could not answer those questions in the affirmative with a firm conviction, I would follow my own path.  However, with a conviction of those 3, I would submit my will to the Lord's and pick up my cross in faith.  I have had such deep and profound experiences from having those questions answered before (with unrelated burdens), that he has earned my trust. 

I Appreciate your thoughtful reply pogi. And I can see that you have arrived at your position honestly. We're I still a believer I would more than likely share your perspective. Please understand I understand why the church has taken such a harsh stance against the lgbtq community...I just believe strongly that they are wrong. Moves like this PR release give me hope that someday the church will claim a revelation and heal this wound. 

Edited by Johnnie Cake
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...