Steven Snow and LGTQ

[ZealouslyStriving]

"Pearson also shared the story of a bishop in her area who ministers to a lesbian couple in his congregation. “The bishop has said, ‘If I am ever instructed by somebody in authority above me to do anything to discipline those women, I would before that resign my post as bishop.’”

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2025/06/28/retired-lds-general-authority/

** So let me see if I have this straight... That Bishop would refuse to take some type of disciplinary action against the Lesbian couple, and would resign if asked to- would he afford the same leeway to a heterosexual couple engaged in behavior contrary to the Law of Chastity?

[Tacenda]

21 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

"Pearson also shared the story of a bishop in her area who ministers to a lesbian couple in his congregation. “The bishop has said, ‘If I am ever instructed by somebody in authority above me to do anything to discipline those women, I would before that resign my post as bishop.’”

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2025/06/28/retired-lds-general-authority/

** So let me see if I have this straight... That Bishop would refuse to take some type of disciplinary action against the Lesbian couple, and would resign if asked to- would he afford the same leeway to a heterosexual couple engaged in behavior contrary to the Law of Chastity?

Good things in that article, why the negativity? If you had two gay granddaughters would it somehow give you a different insight? 

[ZealouslyStriving]

12 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Good things in that article, why the negativity? If you had two gay granddaughters would it somehow give you a different insight? 

You didn't notice my extremely specific quote from the article?

There is a difference in helping people people feel as comfortable as possible and condoning/overlooking transgressions. If we are going to excuse it for a "marginalized" group, it should be excused for other consenting adult arrangements... Am I wrong?

[longview]

But the Salt Lake Tribune is not asking the pertinent questions:

If the gay couple are living together in their home or apartment, are they living the homosexual lifestyle?

Do they understand the importance of the Law of Chastity? If they do, they have the problem of the "appearance of evil" in their living arrangement.

People can agree with Pearson to FIRST consider everyone to be children of God. But that bishop needs to prioritize the future potential Celestial relationships over the temporal and carnal worldly circumstances. And to teach and counsel accordingly. The couple can still remain close friends. Hopefully they will strengthen each other in their efforts to draw closer to the Lord.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

1 hour ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

engaged in behavior contrary to the Law of Chastity?

Such as? Not all violations of the law of chastity require church discipline. What is the equivalent heterosexual behavior/ violation to married consensual sex between partners?

Edited June 29, 2025 by SeekingUnderstanding

[Rain]

There is one huge advantage heterosexuals have in the church. They are allowed to marry each other. So I see nothing wrong in treating them differently in "discipline". 

 

 

[ZealouslyStriving]

4 minutes ago, Rain said:

There is one huge advantage heterosexuals have in the church. They are allowed to marry each other. So I see nothing wrong in treating them differently in "discipline". 

 

 

So we pretend like they are married because that can't get married.

Do I have that right?

[SeekingUnderstanding]

9 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

we pretend like they are married

Um newsflash, they are married. You need to stop confusing facts with your feelings.

[longview]

18 minutes ago, Rain said:

There is one huge advantage heterosexuals have in the church. They are allowed to marry each other. So I see nothing wrong in treating them differently in "discipline". 

Please avail yourself the opportunity to ponder again the Proclamation on the Family. Which is the Basic Unit consisting of husband and wife and children. Children need the masculinity of fathers and the nurturing/comforting care of mothers. Homosexual relations cannot produce offsprings and they really should NOT adopt. Hetero marriages sanctioned by God lead to the top degree of the Celestial Kingdom. Homo relations devolve to the telestial murkiness.

Edited June 29, 2025 by longview

[ZealouslyStriving]

2 minutes ago, longview said:

Please avail yourself the opportunity to ponder again the Proclamation on the Family. Which is the Basic Unit consisting of husband and wife and children. Children need the masculinity of fathers and the nurturing/comforting care of mothers. Homosexual relations cannot produce offsprings and they really should NOT adopt. Hetero marriages sanctioned by God lead to the top degree of the Celestial Kingdom. Homo relations devolves to the telestial murkiness.

👆🏻👍🏻

[Rain]

19 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

So we pretend like they are married because that can't get married.

Do I have that right?

No, you do not have it right.  You realize their circumstances are different, that they are adults and you let God take care of it.

[Rain]

10 minutes ago, longview said:

Please avail yourself the opportunity to ponder again the Proclamation on the Family.

I don't appreciate you patronizing me.

10 minutes ago, longview said:

Which is the Basic Unit consisting of husband and wife and children. Children need the masculinity of fathers and the nurturing/comforting care of mothers. Homosexual relations cannot produce offsprings and they really should NOT adopt. Hetero marriages sanctioned by God lead to the top degree of the Celestial Kingdom. Homo relations devolve to the telestial murkiness.

I do not share your beliefs.

[ZealouslyStriving]

6 minutes ago, Rain said:

that they are adults and you let God take care of it.

Why shouldn't that apply to everyone than?

[Rain]

2 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Why shouldn't that apply to everyone than?

I actually think it should.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

5 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Why shouldn't that apply to everyone than?

Which law of chastity violations require a church discipline and why?

[ZealouslyStriving]

5 minutes ago, Rain said:

I actually think it should.

So no standards, no commandments - just everyone deciding for themselves yet still being allowed to participate fully in all the Church offers, including Temple Covenants?

[Rain]

46 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

So no standards, no commandments - just everyone deciding for themselves yet still being allowed to participate fully in all the Church offers, including Temple Covenants?

I think that maybe you are seeing me very differently than I am?  I understand that I have misunderstood you at various times and I am trying to better understand you. 

I definitely think there should be standards, in and out of the church.  I do think everyone should decide for themselves - that actually is a part of agency as the church teaches it, but I do think that those who are wise will try to learn from those, people or God, the Spirit, who are wiser than themselves and use that learning when making those choices. 

The church, as an organization, gets to decide what rules you need to follow to do things, like go to the temple, just as in karate there are skills you need for a black belt. 

But I think there is a difference in disciplining someone and having specific rules someone needs to live in order to do things within specific organizations. 

The Church's teaching is that the church is God's organization to help his children get back to him. The more the church calls in, instead of calling out, the more people will stick close, learn more of its teachings and more likely start to follow them. 

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

So no standards, no commandments - just everyone deciding for themselves yet still being allowed to participate fully in all the Church offers, including Temple Covenants?

Rain is not a believing member and does not believe in temple covenants. So your questions won’t be relevant to her

[Rain]

26 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Rain is not a believing member and does not believe in temple covenants. So your questions won’t be relevant to her

To be clear, I don't believe in them as the church teaches them - that God set them up for everyone. I do think that those who have made them should discuss with God, if they still believe in God, before breaking them as to whether He thinks they are still good for the individual.  While in one sense people may feel that if one party breaks the agreement the other party doesn't need to continue with it, a wise person will also look to see if what they promised to do will help them be a better person.

[MustardSeed]

Del

Edited June 29, 2025 by MustardSeed

[ZealouslyStriving]

6 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I’ve never met Steve nor have I heard of him til now so I’m not sure what hills he’s willing to die on.  
it’s by possible he believes that all married folks should be able to choose to be or not be sexual.  And it’s possible he also believes unmarried folks should not be sexual.  Or maybe he thinks they should be and he’d die on that hill for them as well.  
im not dying on any hills personally but then again ill never be a bishop so its easy for me to sit back and live and let live, thank goodness .

TBC... Elder Snow isn't the Bishop in question.

[MustardSeed]

2 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

TBC... Elder Snow isn't the Bishop in question.

Del

Edited June 29, 2025 by MustardSeed

[sunstoned]

5 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

So we pretend like they are married because that can't get married.

Do I have that right?

We don't have to pretend anything. Gay marriage is legal in the US. 

[Duncan]

6 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

"Pearson also shared the story of a bishop in her area who ministers to a lesbian couple in his congregation. “The bishop has said, ‘If I am ever instructed by somebody in authority above me to do anything to discipline those women, I would before that resign my post as bishop.’”

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2025/06/28/retired-lds-general-authority/

** So let me see if I have this straight... That Bishop would refuse to take some type of disciplinary action against the Lesbian couple, and would resign if asked to- would he afford the same leeway to a heterosexual couple engaged in behavior contrary to the Law of Chastity?

you're implying they are doing something wrong, how do we know that? Discipline for what? It isn't the Bishopric's job to sniff around into people's lives, if the couple came to the Bishop and said whatever then that's fine. 

My sense is a Bishop would or should be on the receiving end of confessions, not going out and finding out problems, besides it isn't repentance if you got found out anyways, humbling yourself is different from being humbled

[sunstoned]

6 minutes ago, Duncan said:

you're implying they are doing something wrong, how do we know that? Discipline for what? It isn't the Bishopric's job to sniff around into people's lives, if the couple came to the Bishop and said whatever then that's fine. 

My sense is a Bishop would or should be on the receiving end of confessions, not going out and finding out problems, besides it isn't repentance if you got found out anyways, humbling yourself is different from being humbled

This is a very good point.