Rivers Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I was reading the Law of Chastity chapter in the new Gospel Principles manual. I was a little confused about a statement on homosexuality.Like other violations of the law of chastity, homosexualactivity is a serious sin. It is contrary to the purposes ofhuman sexuality (see Romans 1:24 Link to comment
oremites Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 How does homosexuality distort loving relationships? This doesn't answer your question, but it doesn't say "homosexuality". It says "homosexual activity". Link to comment
Rivers Posted March 3, 2011 Author Share Posted March 3, 2011 This doesn't answer your question, but it doesn't say "homosexuality". It says "homosexual activity".Heterosexual activity can distort loving relationships too. Link to comment
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Remember that when things are spoekn of in the chruch they are talking about the rules not expetion to rules. In general homosxual activity is a destrcitve life style. Are there expetions? yes. But suicide rates are higher in the gay community and the amount of partners a gay persons has is stagering. I am fully aware of the issues that hetero marriages has too. Link to comment
todd520 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Heterosexual activity can distort loving relationships too.Exactly, sex outside of marriage is deemed a serious sin, be it homo or hetero activity.Rivers, so what are you really objecting to- no sex outside marriage?- no marriage for same sex people?They are very different discussions, so you should be explicit. Link to comment
Rivers Posted March 3, 2011 Author Share Posted March 3, 2011 Remember that when things are spoekn of in the chruch they are talking about the rules not expetion to rules. In general homosxual activity is a destrcitve life style. Are there expetions? yes. But suicide rates are higher in the gay community and the amount of partners a gay persons has is stagering. I am fully aware of the issues that hetero marriages has too.Interesting. Thanks for the insight. Do you know where I can find these statistics? Link to comment
daz2 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 The language about distorting relationships tracked the language in the handbook of instructions at the time. The handbook has been revised to remove that language. I suspect that the language will be gone from the next edition of Gospel Principles. http://loydo38.blogspot.com/2010/11/homosexuality-in-2010-church-handbook.html Link to comment
Jason Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 It isn't an ignorant statement. Doing anything contrary to human sexuality will in fact distort your regular relationships. Indulging in pornography, for instanace.Entering a homosexual relationship and refusing to be part of a heterosexual relationship or refusing to repent will in fact deny you the blessings of a family life (for instance, children) and the saving ordinances. Temple marriage is a saving ordinance, and you can't have it if you aren't marrying someone of the opposite sex. Link to comment
BCSpace Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 How does homosexuality distort loving relationships?By introducing sex into the relationship which is reserved for husbands and wives.The handbook has been revised to remove that language. I suspect that the language will be gone from the next edition of Gospel Principles.I don't think so and my evidence would be the work one is refered to in the CHI. The Church is merely presenting a different aspect and hasn't changed it's doctrine or attitude one whit on this subject.This doesn't answer your question, but it doesn't say "homosexuality". It says "homosexual activity".To self identify as a homosexual means one has given in to some degree to one's thoughts, therefore homosexuality itself is indeed a sin.Exactly, sex outside of marriage is deemed a serious sin, be it homo or hetero activity.Yes. That is why homosexuality is just another form of adultery or fornication (both sins) depending on the circumstances. Link to comment
David T Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 To self identify as a homosexual means one has given in to some degree to one's thoughts, therefore homosexuality itself is indeed a sin.Would you say to self identify as a heterosexual means that one has given in to some degree to one's thoughts in sinful lust, therefore, heterosexuality itself is therefore indeed a sin? Link to comment
cinepro Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I was reading the Law of Chastity chapter in the new Gospel Principles manual. No you weren't. Link to comment
thesometimesaint Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 nackhadlow:As a Church we don't know the causes homosexual attraction any more than we know the causes of stealing is an attraction to some people. But only those who actually engage in homosexual behavior, and those that actually steal are held accountable by the Church. Link to comment
daz2 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Thanks cinepro. It looks like the language about distorting loving relationships was removed from the Gospel Principles manual before it was removed from the handbook.Is it still the doctrine of the Church? To paraphrase: I don't know that we teach it anymore because it is not in current manuals. Link to comment
daz2 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 To self identify as a homosexual means one has given in to some degree to one's thoughts, therefore homosexuality itself is indeed a sin.Self-identification as gay or lesbian is not sin as long as one does not act on it. Thoughts or feelings that one is drawn more to the same sex than the other is not sin.From CHI 2:If members feel same-gender attraction but do not engage in any homosexual behavior, leaders should support and encourage them in their resolve to live the law of chastity and to control unrighteous thoughts. These members may receive Church callings. If they are worthy and qualified in every other way, they may also hold temple recommends and receive temple ordinances.The key is what one does, not what one feels. Link to comment
David T Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 nackhadlow:As a Church we don't know the causes homosexual attraction any more than we know the causes of stealing is an attraction to some people. But only those who actually engage in homosexual behavior, and those that actually steal are held accountable by the Church.I'm well aware. I was responding to BCSpace's "logic". Link to comment
cinepro Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Thanks cinepro. It looks like the language about distorting loving relationships was removed from the Gospel Principles manual before it was removed from the handbook.Is it still the doctrine of the Church? To paraphrase: I don't know that we teach it anymore because it is not in current manuals.Just so everyone's clear, here's what the new Gospel Principles manual says about homosexuality:Like other violations of the law of chastity, homosexual behavior is a serious sin. Latter-day prophets have spoken about the dangers of homosexual behavior and about the Church Link to comment
blackstrap Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Unfortunately we will be judged by our deeds AND our thoughts so as far as Christ is concerned that boundary line is very thin . Link to comment
blackstrap Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Also ,there are many who seem to have solved the "family" problem through adoption,witness Elton et al Link to comment
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I was reading the Law of Chastity chapter in the new Gospel Principles manual. I was a little confused about a statement on homosexuality.How does homosexuality distort loving relationships? Gays are capable of having normal loving relationships as much as straight people. Am I missing something?The Church is there to teach God Link to comment
frankenstein Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 To self identify as a homosexual means one has given in to some degree to one's thoughts, therefore homosexuality itself is indeed a sin.a very ignorant and unsupportable statement to make. homosexual is being attracted to members of the same sex. Now we can always change a definition, but selective changing definitions to fits ones agenda isn't exactly kosher.It is not a sin for a person to admit that they are attracted to members of the same sex. I would dare say, it would be sin to lie about being attracted to members of the same sex. ----------------------------------as for "blessings of family life" the "blessing" are eternal having an eternal family; which blessing is not available to those who do not live accordingly. ----------------------------------can a homosexual have a loving homosexual relationship, yep. Does the LDS teach a loving homosexual relationship or even a homosexual relationship at all is God what intended for anyone, Nope.Are people born heterosexual or homosexual, as far as the LDS Church is concerned from the mouth of its most former Prophet "we do not know". Are we "given weakness", yes we are, we are given weakness to teach us humility. Could someones "weakness" be homosexual desire, its possible and most certainly plausible. Does that mean God intended that person to live in a homosexual relationship or that God would justify a person in their acts of homosexuality? No, it does not. Link to comment
Jason Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Also, it's "manual", not "Manuel". Link to comment
Calm Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I was reading the Law of Chastity chapter in the new Gospel Principles manual. I was a little confused about a statement on homosexuality.You were apparently confused about the manual as well. Where were you reading this actually? Link to comment
cinepro Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 You were apparently confused about the manual as well. Where were you reading this actually?Even more strange is that the old manual didn't mention "homosexuality" at all! Link to comment
Calm Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Even more strange is that the old manual didn't mention "homosexuality" at all! Well, I now know where it is mentioned, I am curious about why Rivers thought it was in the GP manual. Link to comment
Sleeper Cell Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Now we can always change a definition, but selective changing definitions to fits ones agenda isn't exactly kosher.Does that mean that you are opposed to changing the traditional definition of marriage? Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.