bluebell

I don't know who that is. His 'exit testimony' greatly annoys me.

It would likely depend on the bishop.

After all these years of having conversations with him and reading his posts, do you really not know that Duncan is an active member of the church?

It seems pretty obvious though that sexual orientation is assigned by God as well. Or at least that people have no control over it.

I think it's the difference between facing that trial of celibacy and a lack of romantic companionship with the hope that the trial could end during mortality and facing that trial knowing that there is no hope of it ending during mortality (and depending on the person's perspective, believing it won't end after they die either). I think that trials with hope of an end are easier to endure than trials with no hope of an end. Hope is an amazing thing. And yes, i realize that there are lots of trials that endure for the length of mortality. I'm specifically and solely comparing heter

I think one good way to express empathy is to say something like "Yeah, that would be so hard." or "I can see why that would be a difficult struggle." Etc.

In the proclamation on the family we learn that certain parts of us are eternal (like our sex--which the PoF mistakenly refers to as gender) and are not meant to be messed with or changed. But you seem to be saying that while our sex is eternal and an innate part of ourselves that cannot be changed and should not be wished to be changed, our sexual orientation is something that we need to be ready to jettison in heaven so that we can become like our Savior. According to our doctrine, it is not possible to hold too strongly to our sex but we can hold to strongly to our sexual orientatio

I get what you are saying and agree with the theory, but honestly, if someone told you you would be married to a man for eternity, would that be any kind of incentive? Even if you believed that ultimately you'd be ok with it (and ignored the teachings that we have about how the spirit that we die with is the same spirit that we have in the next life, including their desires and personality), is that promise at all appealing? That's the point of this line of discussion--that eternal promises are often perceived differently by lgbtq, for whom the promise of being straight in heaven is no m

I'm coming from the perspective that physical attraction/physical affection is an eternal part of who we are, because for me, marriage is way more than a good level of teamwork and communication. And there is not one cell in body that is physically attracted to women.

Good point. I know that for me, and afterlife where I would have to marry a woman sounds truly awful.

We can agree to disagree on my main point, but to clarify, i'm only comparing heterosexuality and the teachings of the church and homosexuality and the teachings of the church. I'm not comparing all possible trials and homosexuality. And I'm not saying that in any way dismisses anyone else's cross.

I agree.

What I mean by it being harder is that for most people, a purely celibate life, without any romantic physical touch of any kind, and no hope of it for their entire lives, while being surrounded by people who would be very willing to be in a physical and loving committed relationship with them, would be an incredibly difficult cross to bear. It's a cross that is unique to lgbtq members and not one that heterosexuals are asked to carry. Even for those heterosexuals that must live a celibate life against their will, the hope of it remains, and they are not surrounded by people willing to h

I'm not forgetting the law. I'm suggesting that perhaps there is a way to include our gay brothers and sisters in the church while still recognizing and adhering to the law. It would take a revelation to clarify how it could be done, because as we understand things now there isn't really space for it "practicing homosexuals". That is the mercy that I'm talking about--the mercy of being open to their getting some kind of seat at the table instead of always exclaiming how they can never have one.

I don’t think any doctrine would need to be reversed.