Wiggle room for changing church teachings on homosexuality

[semlogo]

I must say I got quite a chuckle out of attributing the “saying that women think their children gay” in light of my posts #185, #202 and #226! To review, I observed that androgen in the womb can be brought about by the mother’s mental or emotional stress, which you had already asserted in #15 is a biological factor in homosexuality! LOL. I'm just not going to get into it again!

You have not demonstrated a link between whatever level of androgen may or may not they may be able to "think" vs specific conditions favorable to homosexuality, especially considering the additional levels of correlation (birth order, whether first child was male, etc). As I said, you have no evidence for your conclusion. Perhaps you will in the future, but there are some hurdles to jump first.

[Vance]

1 Cor 7:8

I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.

I can see why you think that means that Paul was unmarried. But it doesn't say he was unmarried ever. To claim that he was never married and remained so until his death is without support. It is far more apparent that he was living in a state of abstention and fully dedicated to the Lord. After all the "widows" had been married.

Let's add some context.

1 Cor 7:6 But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment.

7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.

8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.

9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.

D&C 132 was written about polygamy, but the parts about sealing apply to monogamous marriages as well, not to mention family sealings. In any case, I fail to see what point you're trying to make.

Simple, exaltation (eternal life) is limited to the MARRIED faithful.

How does this relate to homosexuality?

It doesn't. THAT is the point. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with homosexuality, because homosexuality has absolutely NOTHING to do with exaltation/eternal life.

[CV75]

You have not demonstrated a link between whatever level of androgen may or may not they may be able to "think" vs specific conditions favorable to homosexuality, especially considering the additional levels of correlation (birth order, whether first child was male, etc). As I said, you have no evidence for your conclusion. Perhaps you will in the future, but there are some hurdles to jump first.

Wow! You mean your conclusion! My comment is that androgen surges can be caused by stress, after you asserted a connection between androgen levels and the gestation of homosexual children! This is really too funny! But if you really want to bicker about this point and not discuss what kind of evidence it would take to change church teachings, you'll have to get your fix for an androgen surge (or estrogen surge, whatever the case may be!) with someone else! LOL!

[Mordecai]

For an impressionable group, they do not seem very impressed with the arguments your side is making.

That's because we're not making the manipulative arguments you make, e.g. "People who disagree with gay-marriage dogma are hate-filled!" Young people are easily manipulated but tend to lack critical thinking.

75% of France is Catholic, and 10% of the population is Muslim.

Catholicism doesn't influence people's politics, statistically speaking. They vote as if they're not Catholic. France is mostly atheist, too, statistically.

To prove your point, you cite a poll which shows that 58 % of French support gay marriage, which is higher than in the US, yet you claim that the French have rejected gay marriage.

The French, older than 30, have rejected gay marriage, which supports my point that most young people are sheep. Did you ignore the part where 75% of people under 30 support "gay marriage"? To only have 58% support overall, despite that, and the fact that the gov't doesn't recognize "gay marriage," really illustrates what I'm saying. France's gov't has rejected "gay marriage," based in part on their support of the U.N. children's rights bill. People there older than 30 have rejected it and support is in decline by 4% in the past few years.

The other statistic that is telling is that they reject gay adoption "rights." Clearly, they at least can think critically enough to realize that gay couples are not the same as a real marriage. That alone strongly suggests that to some degree or another, they agree with me. While perhaps they haven't grasped that giving a gay union the same name as a real marriage is contrary to their acceptance that gay unions are profoundly different with regard to child-rearing, they're still on the right track. After some thought, I decided they're doing okay, even as a whole, despite the under-30 crowd mistakenly supporting government adoption of gay dogma. It's only on a linguistic level for them, apparently, and they haven't been dumb enough to think gay unions are literally the same.

If it weren't for young people being so prone to listen to insane rants about being on the right side of history, without a single rational reason to take away the unique status of heterosexual unions, we'd be destroying you guys. Unfortunately, young impressionable people will often hold onto their childish adoption of elitist lefty dogma, so we do have a fight on our hands.

I had a political science professors quote that saying, "If you're young and conservative, you have no heart. If you're old and liberal, you have no brain." The professor followed that up with, "And that's true." LOL

[california boy]

That's because we're not making the manipulative arguments you make, e.g. "People who disagree with gay-marriage dogma are hate-filled!" Young people are easily manipulated but tend to lack critical thinking.

Catholicism doesn't influence people's politics, statistically speaking. They vote as if they're not Catholic. France is mostly atheist, too, statistically.

The French, older than 30, have rejected gay marriage, which supports my point that most young people are sheep. Did you ignore the part where 75% of people under 30 support "gay marriage"? To only have 58% support overall, despite that, and the fact that the gov't doesn't recognize "gay marriage," really illustrates what I'm saying. France's gov't has rejected "gay marriage," based in part on their support of the U.N. children's rights bill. People there older than 30 have rejected it and support is in decline by 4% in the past few years.

The other statistic that is telling is that they reject gay adoption "rights." Clearly, they at least can think critically enough to realize that gay couples are not the same as a real marriage. That alone strongly suggests that to some degree or another, they agree with me. While perhaps they haven't grasped that giving a gay union the same name as a real marriage is contrary to their acceptance that gay unions are profoundly different with regard to child-rearing, they're still on the right track. After some thought, I decided they're doing okay, even as a whole, despite the under-30 crowd mistakenly supporting government adoption of gay dogma. It's only on a linguistic level for them, apparently, and they haven't been dumb enough to think gay unions are literally the same.

If it weren't for young people being so prone to listen to insane rants about being on the right side of history, without a single rational reason to take away the unique status of heterosexual unions, we'd be destroying you guys. Unfortunately, young impressionable people will often hold onto their childish adoption of elitist lefty dogma, so we do have a fight on our hands.

I had a political science professors quote that saying, "If you're young and conservative, you have no heart. If you're old and liberal, you have no brain." The professor followed that up with, "And that's true." LOL

It is difficult to have a coherant argument with someone who claims France is an athistic country and doesn't support gay marriage is point number 1

A 2004 poll by ELLE found that 64% of those polled in France supported same-sex marriage and 49% supported adoption by same-sex couples.

75% of France is Catholic, and 10% of the population is Muslim.

To also assert that you have to be uneducated to support gay marriage is point number 2

According to the prop 8 exit polls, those who voted against Prop 8 included:

People with grad degrees: 60%

People earn over $150K: 53%

People earn over $200K: 55%

White college Grads: 58%

By contrast:

Those not attending college: 42%

To say that young people have been indoctrinated via schools and media is point number 3

When in fact, young people have been indoctrinated to be heterosexual frim the moment they can speak. Virtually ever movie they are exposed to shows a straight couple. Virtually every televison program is centered around straight people. Their parents and role models are straight. Their scout leaders are straight. And their churches tell them they are going to hell if they are gay. And through all of this, you are telling me that they are easily manipulated to support gay marriage. HAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.

Yeah, because young people have been indoctrinated via the schools and media. Look at the states. If you're under thirty, not only are you part of the "dumbest generation," but you support "gay marriage" by a wide margin. People that are older than that, more often than not, see through the incredibly arrogant "history is on our side" rhetoric.

You may support one persons opinion that the younger generation is the dumbest generation, I do not. Is there anyone else on this entire board that also thinks this generation is the dumbest? I certainly have not heard that from any church official. So speak up if you agree with Mordecal that this generation of fAmericans is the dumbest ever.

[Jaybear]

That's because we're not making the manipulative arguments you make, e.g. "People who disagree with gay-marriage dogma are hate-filled!" Young people are easily manipulated but tend to lack critical thinking.

Funny, I don't remember anyone on my side making that argument. You seem to have a very fertile imagination Mordy.

Catholicism doesn't influence people's politics, statistically speaking. They vote as if they're not Catholic.

Perhaps Catholocism means different things to different people.

The French, older than 30, have rejected gay marriage, which supports my point that most young people are sheep.

If the young were sheep, wouldn't they they follow their parents?

But the fact is support for gay marriage has grown in every age demographic.

You are on the losing side of history. But its not to late to change.

[Nathair/|\]

Funny, I don't remember anyone on my side making that argument. You seem to have a very fertile imagination Mordy.

Perhaps Catholocism means different things to different people.

If the young were sheep, wouldn't they they follow their parents?

But the fact is support for gay marriage has grown in every age demographic.

You are on the losing side of history. But its not to late to change.

Others on the "wrong side of history:"

Noah

Nephi ben Helaman

William Wallace

Abinadi

King Leonidas

The signers of the Declaration of Independence

[Jaybear]

Others on the "wrong side of history:"

Noah

Nephi ben Helaman

William Wallace

Abiding

King Leonidas

The signers of the Declaration of Independence

I am not sure why you consider signers of the Declaration of Independence on the wrong side of history, or Noah for that matter.

Your more modern conservative kindred spirits include those ...

Who supported slavery:

Who opposed the right of women to vote or own property;

who oppossed interracial marriages

Who favored segregation of schools, hotels, churches, restaurante, neighborhoods.

Opposed public education and child labor laws.

History is not kind to those who vocally stand in the way of social progress.

You would be wise to take a lesson from Mr. Martinelli, and recognize that you can aggressively seek to protect holy matrimony, while still support civil marriage equality. Its not to late.

[Mansquatch]

“We are sons and daughters of God, possessing seeds of godhood. We are not limited by instinct as are the beasts. We have godly power to grow and to overcome and become perfect. Sin was permitted in the world, and Satan was permitted to tempt us, but we have our free agency. We may sin or live righteously, but we cannot escape responsibility. To blame our sins upon the Lord, saying they are inherent and cannot be controlled, is cheap and cowardly.” - Spencer W. Kimball

[Jaybear]

“We are sons and daughters of God, possessing seeds of godhood. We are not limited by instinct as are the beasts. We have godly power to grow and to overcome and become perfect. Sin was permitted in the world, and Satan was permitted to tempt us, but we have our free agency. We may sin or live righteously, but we cannot escape responsibility. To blame our sins upon the Lord, saying they are inherent and cannot be controlled, is cheap and cowardly.” - Spencer W. Kimball

If gay marriage is a sin, by denying gays the freedom to marry, aren't you denying to them the freedom to sin?

Whatever happened to ... teach them the correct principles and let them govern themselves.

Its seems to me that you and people like you who seek to interfere in the lives of others can't handle the fact that most gays have rejected your teaching that homosexuality is sinful, knowing full well the consequences if they are wrong.

[TAO]

Jaybear, Noah was preaching strongly against the people and their sins, and the writers of the DoI were going against one of the most powerful nations. Both did what they did despite that. So did MLK Jr as well, I suppose. Just because something is popular doesn't make it right... oftimes, it isn't as good as one likes.

Best Wishes,

Tao

[Rivers]

God allows many people go through various afflictions but he never allows any biological, physical, or emotional deformity to ever give them no option besides sinning, to do so is for him to no longer be God.

This is pretty much what President Packer said and the church changed his words in the Ensign.

[Rivers]

. . . .no one is made to be a homosexual, they choose to be homosexual.

This is one of the most ignorant bullcrap statements I've ever heard.

[Jaybear]

Jaybear, Noah was preaching strongly against the people and their sins, and the writers of the DoI were going against one of the most powerful nations. Both did what they did despite that. So did MLK Jr as well, I suppose. Just because something is popular doesn't make it right... oftimes, it isn't as good as one likes.

Best Wishes,

Tao

You seem to forget, those who advocated for marriage equality, did so when it was not so popular. It has become, an will continue to be more popular, because of their efforts.

Social movements, from abolition, suffrage, labor rights, integration and now marriage equality, were all led by those who had the foresight and courage to fight against the status quo.

In this fight, you are on the side of the status quo, fighting agaisnt social progress.

[Rivers]

Where do you get that from? The church isn't anti-science, and I don't think any GA would make the claim you're making. Facts do indeed come from scientific studies.

You're absolutely right. Dallin H. Oaks recently quoted Brigham Young in an Ensign article:

Latter-day Saints have a great interest in pursuing knowledge. Brigham Young (1801–77) said it best: “[Our] religion … prompts [us] to search diligently after knowledge. There is no other people in existence more eager to see, hear, learn, and understand truth.”⁶

On another occasion he explained that we encourage our members “to increase [their] knowledge … in every branch of [learning], for all wisdom, and all the arts and sciences in the world are from God, and are designed for the good of his people.”⁷

[Rivers]

They always had an option, because God cannot remove the agency of man, if he does so he is evil and ceases to be God.

Also we are not Adam and Eve...

Sounds like you need to pay more attention in the temple ceremony.

[Mordecai]

You'd probably find similar statistics in the 60s about support for black rights.... But don't forget, those under 30 are the chosen generation. NOT the dumbest generation.

Again with the, "Gay people are like Black people." The analogy is so racist. The gov't isn't discriminating against people due to their biological urges nor their sex lives. It's simply a matter of children's rights and recognition of genuine differences. Is lead being discriminated against, because the gov't doesn't call it, "gold?" Insanity.

Also, statistically, they are the dumbest generation. Their IQ's are lower than all previous generations.

[Mordecai]

You are on the losing side of history.

I guess you, having the benefit of hindsight, being the god of objectivity, are the one to tell us that. I will just stick to being rational. That seemed to work well for past generations, even in hindsight. (And we can actually use hindsight for that). You with your "fertile imagination," apparently already have hindsight... yet you have no rational arguments in favor of calling lead, "gold," metaphorically speaking. One would think that hindsight would allow you to make coherent arguments in favor of calling a gay union, "marriage," if it were a true dogma. But it's not. It's obviously false to suggest that a gay union is the same in all relevant sociological ways. Obviously.

[semlogo]

Again with the, "Gay people are like Black people." The analogy is so racist. The gov't isn't discriminating against people due to their biological urges nor their sex lives. It's simply a matter of children's rights and recognition of genuine differences. Is lead being discriminated against, because the gov't doesn't call it, "gold?" Insanity.

Also, statistically, they are the dumbest generation. Their IQ's are lower than all previous generations.

MLK's widow made the same analogy. Discrimination based on biology is no more praiseworthy when it's based on melatonin content in the skin than it is based on having opposite sex physical characteristics.

What's your source again that all kids are stupid? I hope it's not your grumpy old neighbor next door.

[semlogo]

I guess you, having the benefit of hindsight, being the god of objectivity, are the one to tell us that. I will just stick to being rational. That seemed to work well for past generations, even in hindsight. (And we can actually use hindsight for that). You with your "fertile imagination," apparently already have hindsight... yet you have no rational arguments in favor of calling lead, "gold," metaphorically speaking. One would think that hindsight would allow you to make coherent arguments in favor of calling a gay union, "marriage," if it were a true dogma. But it's not. It's obviously false to suggest that a gay union is the same in all relevant sociological ways. Obviously.

Are you saying gay people are like lead and straight people are like gold? I hope not.

[Mordecai]

MLK's widow made the same analogy.

She was wrong to do so. Argument from authority fallacy, by the way.

Discrimination based on biology is no more praiseworthy when it's based on melatonin content in the skin than it is based on having opposite sex physical characteristics...

It's not sexual discrimination either, according to the Supreme court. Swing and a miss. It's really about behavior. Can two men reproduce naturally? Do men domesticate other men? No and no. Do children need both a mother and father? Are children more likely to feel secure and loved with both biological parents in the home? Yes and yes. Those things are important to society... at least if you want society to function and survive.

What's your source again that all kids are stupid? I hope it's not your grumpy old neighbor next door.

I have no source for that, because I never said that. People don't develop their identities fully until about 26 years of age, so really, you could say that the vast majority of people, prior to that age, are more easily manipulated due to their insecurity. My source is my college sociology professors.

As far as "the dumbest generation," I got that from the author of the book The Dumbest Generation, Mark Bauerlein. He cites numerous studies to illustrate his point and blames it on the overuse of technology, interestingly. I would also blame it on bad teachers.

Are you saying gay people are like lead and straight people are like gold? I hope not.

No, I am not. I would not say that, because many straight people are pretty monstrous while many gay people are people that are plenty likable and decent folks. I'm saying that a gay union, as far as its value to society, is pretty much like lead. In its ideal, straight unions are invaluable to society, more so than gold.

[Jaybear]

I guess you, having the benefit of hindsight, being the god of objectivity, are the one to tell us that. I will just stick to being rational. That seemed to work well for past generations, even in hindsight. (And we can actually use hindsight for that).

It doesn't take a prophet of God to predict that those over 65 will grow old and die well before those under age 29.

You with your "fertile imagination," apparently already have hindsight... yet you have no rational arguments in favor of calling lead, "gold," metaphorically speaking. One would think that hindsight would allow you to make coherent arguments in favor of calling a gay union, "marriage," if it were a true dogma. But it's not. It's obviously false to suggest that a gay union is the same in all relevant sociological ways. Obviously.

I have not advocated calling lead, gold. I am in favor of allowing gay couples to marry.

The fact is, marriage means different things to different people. Unlike you, I don't see that its my business that Adam wants to marry Steve rather than Eve. Likewise, if Adam want to marry Eve and Abby, that is fine with me.

[LeSellers]

Are you saying gay people are like lead and straight people are like gold?

I believe he's saying that marriage is gold, and so-called same-sex "marriage" is lead. A position with which I heartily agree.

Lehi

[Vance]

I believe he's saying that marriage is gold, and so-called same-sex "marriage" is lead. A position with which I heartily agree.

Lehi

I was thinking that same-sex "marriage" is more like iron pyrite.

[semlogo]

She was wrong to do so. Argument from authority fallacy, by the way.

She was there. You weren’t. It’s exactly the same issue, just shifted to the newest hated minority.

It's not sexual discrimination either, according to the Supreme court. Swing and a miss. It's really about behavior. Can two men reproduce naturally? Do men domesticate other men? No and no. Do children need both a mother and father? Are children more likely to feel secure and loved with both biological parents in the home? Yes and yes. Those things are important to society... at least if you want society to function and survive.

I see a lot of argument by assertion here, but not many facts. Children do great with gay parents - that's a fact.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07161/793042-51.stm

I have no source for that, because I never said that. People don't develop their identities fully until about 26 years of age, so really, you could say that the vast majority of people, prior to that age, are more easily manipulated due to their insecurity. My source is my college sociology professors.

As far as "the dumbest generation," I got that from the author of the book The Dumbest Generation, Mark Bauerlein. He cites numerous studies to illustrate his point and blames it on the overuse of technology, interestingly. I would also blame it on bad teachers.

I can’t speak to Bauerlein’s credibility because I’m not familiar with him or his book. But I will say that IQ isn’t the same as intelligence, and that according to church leaders, this dumb generation, as you call them, is a chosen and special generation.

No, I am not. I would not say that, because many straight people are pretty monstrous while many gay people are people that are plenty likable and decent folks. I'm saying that a gay union, as far as its value to society, is pretty much like lead. In its ideal, straight unions are invaluable to society, more so than gold.

More argument by assertion. This really doesn’t sound any different from the old arguments against miscegenation. I’m not sure how you would argue that monogamy has no value to society, though.