Should Those With Homosexual Preferences Serve Missions?

[katherine the great]

Why Me: Life is full of uncertainties. LIfe is not perfect so of course there will be imperfect situations. However, I think I'm right in thinking that far more missionaries have gotten in trouble on their missions with members of the opposite sex than members of the same sex. Yes, missionaries are human and some are not particularly righteous and act on their basic instincts while they are missionaries,but I think these cases are rare. It would be a far greater injustice to just place an outright missionary ban on all young men and women with SSA then to encourage full disclosure to Bishop and Mission President and let the Mission President assign appropriate companions and roommates. If they feel the call to serve a mission and they are morally clean and spiritually prepared then they should have the opportunity of missionary service just like everyone else.

[frankenstein]

After giving it a lot of thought, I would have to say that if the person self-indentifies as homosexual, he or she should not serve a mission because self-identification means one is resigned to the "fact".

While I agree with "don't buy trouble".

The terminology ssa is just plain silly, and it seems a fabrication or rather simply a made up term.

Homosexual is attraction to members of ones same gender, oh wait I mean ssa. To try and distinguish between to the two is like saying "I support a complete and total ban on dihydrogen-monoxide. Furthermore, I believe the government should mandate consumption of 64ozs of water a day"

Homosexual and ssa are the same thing.

If we are going to base missionary fitness on fact, should then all missionaries be enuchs? How often to do male missionaries end up teaching single females when the fact is that most if not the majority of male missionaries have resigned themselves to the fact that they are attracted to females.

[california boy]

I first want to say how happy I am that many people on this board are not so quick to paint a broad brush that every gay man is a sexual predator. When I first read this thread, I was not inclined to post anything. But after reading the dialogue back and forth, I thought that it might be helpful to have a gay person who has experienced serving a mission explain his feelings. Yeah I know this is antidotal and it is not intended to make an argument one way or another. I only write this post in hopes that it might provide greater understanding.

Just by way of background, I served a mission because I felt it was at least something I could do to balance these feelings I had that I was told at the time was evil and from satan. I thought maybe by serving the Lord he would somehow see my desire to be righteous and help rid me of these feelings. I was a very dedicated missionary, called to be a district leader after only 3 months on my mission and a zone leader before my first year was up. I was also one of the top baptizers on my mission. I say this in no way to brag or to point attention to myself. I just wanted to serve. Leadership did not matter one bit to me. But I felt if that is what God asks of me, then I was willing to accept what was asked. Simply put, I loved serving God and I loved being on a mission.

What is it like being gay and being on a mission? This was quite a while ago, and no one knew I was gay. I kept that between me and God. Fear can be a powerful emotion. Was I ever attracted to a companion. Well there were a few that were quite cute. Did I ever think of them in a sexual way? Not really. This They were more like my brother than someone I should date. Here is how emotions kinda work. You may be attracted to someone, but to move a relationship forward to something more than just attraction, the other person has to respond. We all see people we are attracted to in life. But if they walk on by or are married etc, then it just remains an attraction. For a straight Mormon, is it common for them to make sexual advances to a married woman that they are attracted to? Just think how you feel about that situation. It is the same for someone who is gay. I never fantasized about being sexually active with one of my companions.

Now I might say here, I don't think it is a good idea for a gay missionary to be put with another gay missionary. That is a different situation and not a good idea in my opinion. It is that kind of situation that temptation would be increased way too much.

Oddly enough the most difficult situation I had to deal with on my mission was a woman who I taught and joined the church. She became obsessed with me. Eventually I had to ask for a transfer not because of my feelings, but because she was just getting out of hand.

I hope this helps some of you understand the dynamics a little more.

[Daniel2]

Two things Daniel…no many things.

What does my faith and my love for my child have to do with anything? Which should I abandon, Sir? This is so ridicules; I don’t know what to say, with all due respect. I would not want my sons to “seek” a romantic sexual relationship outside of marriage, or through adultery, as my biological bigamist father did and then left us homeless. You have compared my faith in God and my love for my child as competing.

As for you statement about people who are in the service of God, who “do so agreeing to the conditions” living in close quarters for two years tells me you do not know anything about biology. Face it in a heterosexual community two men sleeping together or kissing is something they would rather die than do (unless brothers biologically)…women, are (in many cases) are comfortable with it, my wife and her best friend (who is her Visiting Teacher) kiss on the cheek when she leaves, me and my home teacher do not. Sister missionaries often feel like sisters…when my oldest daughter served a mission and with her companion and her lived in a bad neighborhoods, they would often would share the same bed out of fear…and thought nothing of it.

You do not know what is in my heart…my daughter who is Gay told me without provocation, that, “her lifestyle would never be brought into our faith, and despises those who attack it”. I would think that my comment on her encouraging of her little brother to serve a mission and insisting on helping to pay” are self evident, you don’t know her either …to this day, if I or anyone in our family is speaking in Sacrament she is there. Just like I did not share my Father’s faith, but if ever he preached…I was there! Also no one speaks ill of her and gives her warm embraces…most (even in our New Ward) have known her all her life. If my State President (who is a close friend) he will not leave the Chapel until he sees her. When my son spoke at his farewell she cried most of the time with pride. They correspond weekly. I am sorry this not fit you idea of “we backward Southern folk or the Church and Ward we attend”, but as I said, “I would give my soul for her”. Sorry for the term…but “bigotry noted”. I don’t mean to be so passionate, but you are speaking about on of my babies, while insulting me, as well as my Faith!

Pa Pa, Calmoriah, Pahoran, and others,

I was busy with my own three children last night, and so I didn’t visit the board until this morning.

Honestly, I was flabbergasted at the tone and hostility of the responses I received.

In my response to Pa Pa’s first post on this thread, I wanted to specifically acknowledge and share my appreciation for the love that Pa Pa obviously and has consistently shown for his lesbian daughter. I chose to what I thought was emphasizing how apparent his love is.

As a father myself, I can totally understand and appreciate that we love our children, no matter how wayward we feel they might become, should they choose separate paths than the ones we might wish for them. In such cases, the best we as parents can do is try to love them as best we know how. When our love clashes with the individual agency of our kids, I imagine it often provokes sadness on both sides of the issue; parents may feel sadness that their children have abandoned some core principle or value that the parents cherish (and which the child may have also once cherished, in times past); children may feel sadness at what they might perceive as a lack of understanding or appreciation from their parents.

As I chose to acknowledge Pa Pa’s obvious love for his daughter, despite the fact that I am in a similar dynamic that he and his daughter may be feeling, my intention was to give Pa Pa props—kudos—encouragement—and express gratitude for his ongoing attempts to love, despite difference of value.

I also choose to acknowledge the sadness I feel when I hear of the challenges that face families who are divided by different comfort-levels about acceptance of a family members’ spouse of choice when it clashes with religious principles.

I meant no condemnation. I meant no insult. I certainly meant no commentary or insinuation of any lack of love by Pa Pa towards his daughter (in fact, just the opposite). And I certainly did not intend to come across as “bigoted” (an accusation of which I was stunned to read from Pa Pa, himself). It was not my intention to come across as patronizing, all-knowing, or holier-than-thou.

My intention was to simply acknowledge the sadness that comes from such challenges in families. If I were to expound on that point even more, based on what I experience in my own family: my parents feel sadness over my choice to have left the LDS Faith and my decision to pursue my hopes of one day having a same-sex spouse. Their sadness is motivated by their sincere belief that same-sex romantic relationships are wrong. In a similar fashion, I feel sadness that my parents struggle to know how they will integrate or welcome the husband I someday hope to marry and make part of my own nuclear family. Both my parents and I feel sadness about the choices we each make: they, because of my choice to fully embrace and pursue a same-sex relationship; me, because of their choice to fully embrace and pursue their LDS beliefs. Neither their sadness or mine illustrates any “lack” of love for one another, per se. It merely indicates that we are not always certain how “to love one another” in the face of profound differences of belief.

I’m not sure how my feelings, above, got turned on their head by Pa Pa and others, in their reading. I apparently used inadequate or inflammatory words. So let me publically say: Pa Pa, I apologize. My words were intended as the exact opposite of how they were perceived. I hope this post helps clear up what I was intending to say, in my previous post, especially by using myself and my parents to further illustrate what I was trying to say.

Is it only possible to fully love someone if you accept and support everything about them in your view?

If my son fell in love with a married woman and desired her to get a divorce and marry him, would I not fully love him unless I fully supported him in his choice of marriage partner?

And there we have it. According to the "gay" agitators, we can't love the sinner unless we also love the sin. And embrace and encourage it.

This agitprop is false, of course.

Daniel, you are always courteous and rarely confrontational, but you are peddling poison nonetheless.

Regards,

Pahoran

In response to the above, Calmoriah and Pahoran (NOT about Pa Pa, specifically), as well as an attempt to address Pa Pa's accusation of “bigotry" —and whether or not I was displaying such, in my previous post:

Loving LDS parents and families often struggle with understanding how to accept, tolerate, or show some appropriate level of love to the same-sex spouse of their gay child or sibling.

Some LDS families choose to welcome such a spouse in their midst, so long as their sibling and his/her spouse refrains from physically intimate behaviors that are viewed to be inappropriate. This, in my opinion, is the best compromise that illustrates a desire by both the family and child/sibling to respect the choices, beliefs, and relationships of all involved. This position best illustrates where my mother and father are, today (though they haven't always been here). Of course, others may feel differently.

Some families refuse to accept or tolerate the presence of such a same-sex spouse, at all. I struggle most in trying to understand and respect that type of attitude—which is the attitude that two of my own family members espouse (pun intended).

I love my LDS family. I don’t believe in Mormonism at all—and some of the actions and expressions of Mormonism are deeply offensive to me (usually those referring to same-sex relationships and the inherent worth, or implication of a lack of worthiness, of such). However, despite the offense I sometimes feel from LDS teachings (and even some of the things that my family, themselves, say or do), I honor and respect my family. For me, that respect means that I bow my head and say, “Amen,” at the dinner table. It means sitting together with my family during family home evenings on Sunday evenings, smiling, singing hymns together, and showing interest in and appreciation for the effort and care my family puts into such “together time,” even if/when it’s interlaced with LDS teachings that I might wish were not present. It means kneeling with my family in family prayer to show my love for them, despite my difference of belief, opinion, and sensibilities. I love my Mormon family. Their Mormonism defines them, as it once did me. It would be virtually impossible for me to “love my family, hate their Mormonism.” It is part of who they are, and, for me, loving them means accepting their practice of Mormonism, even if it contradicts and offends my sensibilities.

In similar fashion, I wish those members of my family who adamantly oppose the idea of me bringing a same-sex husband to family functions would recognize a need to “meet in the middle” by accepting at least his (platonic) presence, given he and I would be “family,” together. For me—that is an illustration of love. As I mentioned previously—others may feel differently. That’s ok.

Well… that’s a long post. I figured I’d try to answer everyone’s objections in one email. I hope it better explains my position—and, Pa Pa, I hope it’s clear that I did not intend to offend.

Best,

Daniel2

Edited September 29, 2011 by Daniel2

[IloveaMormon]

My hats off to any homosexual who wants to spread the word of the love of God and the LDS church they believe in. In my view, doing this is akin to an African American wanting to go around telling the world to join and support the KKK. I'm ashamed to say I've experienced more bigotry in several forms in my home state of Utah than anywhere else. I am aware of LDS gay brothers and lesbian sisters who sincerely adore their church and are trying the best they can to adhere to its principles while facing such discrimination and adversity.

A gay or lesbian Latter Day Saint who offers two years of missionary service to a doctrine which asserts they are 'less than' is puzzling and yet an amazing thing to me.

God knows what is in the hearts of all His children so why do we think it’s our job to do His job and judge these people?

If I understand it right all missionaries are supposed to adhere to the same rules of conduct while on a mission so what does it matter if they are gay or straight? During one of my 'lessons' a 'straight' missionary admitted to me he didn't even have a testimony a year after he had started his mission. I’d prefer a gay or lesbian with a testimony to speak to me rather than a missionary with no real connection to the gospel.

[Daniel2]

I had a gay roommate in college. I didn't know it at first, but after several unusual things happened, including him getting physically close and touching me, I figured out what was happening. After that, I was very uncomfortable when we were alone in our dorm room. Eventually, I was able to switch roommates with a guy down the hall who was experiencing similar behavior from his roommate. This would have been much worse if we had been missionaries or soldiers sharing bunk space.

Bernard

I dated a girl like that, once (who also happened to be our BYU bishop's dauther). She was always flirting and touching me--a few times quite inappropriately. It was always highly uncomfortable and awkward for me. Getting yourself out of that situation was the right thing to do. Similarly, I eliminated the problem with this young woman by avoiding her in all social settings. I figure it's always wise to avoid individuals who don't appreciate social boundaries and project their romantic feelings onto others without understanding the need to be respectful.

Thankfully, in my experience, most people (straight and gay) aren't so socially inept and understand the need to keep one's hands and uncomfortable advances to themselves.

My view,

Daniel2

Edited September 29, 2011 by Daniel2

[why me]

God knows what is in the hearts of all His children so why do we think it’s our job to do His job and judge these people?

If I understand it right all missionaries are supposed to adhere to the same rules of conduct while on a mission so what does it matter if they are gay or straight? During one of my 'lessons' a 'straight' missionary admitted to me he didn't even have a testimony a year after he had started his mission. I’d prefer a gay or lesbian with a testimony to speak to me rather than a missionary with no real connection to the gospel.

We just heard from a gay person who served a mission without a serious problem. However, we did hear him say that it would have been difficult if he served with another gay missionary. How is the lds church to know who is gay and who isn't gay? Now as for myself, it would certainly be difficult to share an apartment with a woman that I were attracted to. And it would not matter if she were interested in me or not. Now I am no prude and I am certainly not a great member of the lds church. But if I were, I can see myself thinking all sorts of lustful thoughts about my woman roommate as she pranced around in her PJs.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Pa Pa, Calmoriah, Pahoran, and others,

I was busy with my own three children last night, and so I didn’t visit the board until this morning.

Honestly, I was flabbergasted at the tone and hostility of the responses I received.

Best,

Daniel2

Daniel, i don't think I have ever been more misunderstood by anyone...you view my passionate response for my child as hostility. I don't know you therefore, you do not know the dynamics of my family." You are saddened for me", as you implied...which should I abandon (as i asked) my daughter and or my Church and beliefs? Why do you think that I am required to chose? I am saddened that you saw anything I wrote here a "hostile". I just don't know what to say...is this one of those "praise me then kick me" kind of thugs. You praise me for my love for my daughter, and then imply, I do not love her enough...I just cannot think of anything more to say to you one this...except to say that apparently as a homosexual man you seem to imply that you have more insight, more love and more intelligence than I do, I guess you have everything in life figured out and feel I need a sermon. If I could be blut with all due respect; what arrogance???

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I first want to say how happy I am that many people on this board are not so quick to paint a broad brush that every gay man is a sexual predator.

Why would we, we are not Westoro Baptist Chruch? Also i have never heard any Mormon in my 32 years in the Church make such a claim. BTW...thank you for your service to God.

Edited September 29, 2011 by Bill “Papa” Lee

[why me]

why me:

Every one of us has had an inappropriate sexual feeling. Nearly all of us refrain from giving into that feeling. The Church, and Jesus, have repeatedly said that the sin is not in the temptation. Do you really want to claim that temptation is a sin?

Okay. Now lets just say that you are my bishop. I come to you and say: Bishop, I am living with a woman who I am not attracted to. So, I see no problem with it.

What would you say to me?

[why me]

Why Me: Life is full of uncertainties. LIfe is not perfect so of course there will be imperfect situations. However, I think I'm right in thinking that far more missionaries have gotten in trouble on their missions with members of the opposite sex than members of the same sex.

You are probably right.

But young people have sex on the brain and it is not easy to control that aspect of the mind at all. I gave up a long time ago. Young men go out on a mission and they do see beautiful women here and there. Heck, if I were a 19 year old missionary in Russia I would be a goner for sure. The women are simply beautiful and they don't wear much in the summer. I know this from my own experience.

However, how would it be for a gay missionary who is attracted to his companion? Not easy. Now of course he could get a transfer. And that would be fine. But how is the mission president going to know just who and who not the gay missionary will be attracted to? And attraction can come with time as one lives with the other person. It is certainly not an easy situation for sure.

To tell the truth, I don't really care if gays serve missions. But to think that the situation will not be complicated is a mistake. We are more or less sexual beings and at 19, more so.

Edited September 29, 2011 by why me

[Daniel2]

Daniel, i don't think I have ever been more misunderstood by anyone...you view my passionate response for my child as hostility. I don't know you therefore, you do not know the dynamics of my family." You are saddened for me", as you implied...which should I abandon (as i asked) my daughter and or my Church and beliefs? Why do you think that I am required to chose? I am saddened that you saw anything I wrote here a "hostile". I just don't know what to say...is this one of those "praise me then kick me" kind of thugs. You praise me for my love for my daughter, and then imply, I do not love her enough...I just cannot think of anything more to say to you one this...except to say that apparently as a homosexual man you seem to imply that you have more insight, more love and more intelligence than I do, I guess you have everything in life figured out and feel I need a sermon. If I could be blut with all due respect; what arrogance???

Pa Pa,

I am sorry you find my response arrogant. I’m surprised that rather than acknowledge the apology I previously offered, you instead choose to deepen your level of offendedness. It seems to me that you may be slightly trigger-happy on the “defensive” button. Whether or why that's the case, my signature line illustrates the approach I try to take.

I did not say that “I am saddened for you.” I said I was “saddened for you both” (you, and your daughter)—and attempted to explain that I am saddened for any family that struggles with such divisions, because such stresses on a family make life often even more challenging than it already is.

I have not suggested or implied that you should abandon either your daughter OR your beliefs. That has never been my point. Hold on to both, as you are doing--which is what I'm doing, too. As I said, I've no doubt you are doing the best you know how--which is exactly how I would characterize myself, as well (given that I am FAR from perfect ).

As I said previously, I do not feel I have more insight than you—in fact, I specifically acknowledged that parents are just as likely to be saddened by the choices of their wayward children as LGBT children are likely to be saddened that their parents struggle to accept their same-sex spouse. There may be feelings of struggling and sadness on both sides—and both deserve understanding and support, not condemnation. Again, I did not intend to “kick you” after “complimenting you.” Rather than persist in your offendedness at me, I’d hope you would put it down long enough to recognize that such was and is not my intent.

I’ve no doubt that if you and I were to discuss this matter in person, you may see that I’m not the haughty, eager-to-condemn individual you may think I am, and that we’d likely have some pretty great discussions about the issue.

I feel you’re a good man, Pa Pa, and am sure are a great Dad. I strive to be those same things, as well, and hope that we’ll both continue to grow towards those ends throughout our lives.

I think ongoing discussion about the particulars of this offense may detract from the thread, but feel free to have the last word on the subject.

Best to you.

Daniel2

Edited September 29, 2011 by Daniel2

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Okay. Now lets just say that you are my bishop. I come to you and say: Bishop, I am living with a woman who I am not attracted to. So, I see no problem with it.

What would you say to me?

I will answer...move out. The Bible teaches "we should avoid the very appearance of evil". One of the things i loved about Billy Graham...(although I would take things this far), he would not drink any soda from a can for fear that another Christian or someone he might teach would mistake it for a beer. He did not want to "even accidentally", become a stumblingblock to anyone also from the Bible. He also would never accept very large salaries. Him and his wife (now departed) are overflowing with integrity.

[Calm]

The situation between men and women is complicated by two things...cultural standards that have taught women to be more passive and submissive to men and the biological difference in strength. This adds a danger to the relationship that is not likely present between two males, otherwise I personally would have no problem with coed missionary couples who demonstrated the spiritual, mental and physical self control that kept their thoughts from wandering where they shouldn't....as said above, it's not simply that they are not attracted to their partner, but that they are not harboring such thoughts at all. Continued attraction would occur only in cases where that control failed for some reason, from what I've heard over the years, this is a rare occurrence for an individual, so coupled with the actual numbers of SSA missionaries out there, the logistics for the occasional transfer is not that big of a deal. However, in the case of heterosexuals, especially with those who were romantically active prior to their missions, due to the much higher frequency (we are talking 98% of the population instead of 1 or 2%) this would create a much higher number of transfers required.

There is a significant difference for me between what happens on a mission where we are basically requiring our missionaries to be asexual and what happens in normal life where we encourage people to encourage their romantic and sexual feigns with the intent of getting married. The body and mind's reactions are much harder to control if one is applying different standards from moment to moment than if one is consistently demanding total control.

I would encourage anyone with SSA who consistently experienced attraction to a roommate to make the choice to live alone or with family rather than intentionally place themselves in that situation.

Edited September 29, 2011 by calmoriah

[katherine the great]

However, how would it be for a gay missionary who is attracted to his companion? Not easy. Now of course he could get a transfer. And that would be fine. But how is the mission president going to know just who and who not the gay missionary will be attracted to? And attraction can come with time as one lives with the other person. It is certainly not an easy situation for sure.

This is why I also favor full disclosure to Bishop and Mission President. "Hey President, I am not attracted to women but I am attracted to the occasional man. My Bishop knows all about it and still cleared me for missionary service. Please work with me and place me with a companion isn't into dudes, doesn't hate gays and who I can work well with." Yes, this is an extra thing for the mission president to deal with,but he's kind of a father figure to these kids and shouldn't mind helping them out a little if possible.

[Calm]

Just to be clear, I would not send out any individual (higher frequency in young men due to maturation rates) who did not demonstrate the emotional, mental and physical maturity that would allow him sufficient self awareness and control to stay out of potentially dangerous situations. Unfortunately, this does impose a somewhat stricter restriction on those with SSA in that I see it as taking greater maturity to act responsibly in a roommate situation than an investigator, but I would not be surprised if having to learn to control SSA imparted a great deal of maturity to those individuals who are successful in doing so.

[cinepro]

Okay. Now lets just say that you are my bishop. I come to you and say: Bishop, I am living with a woman who I am not attracted to. So, I see no problem with it.

What would you say to me?

I've known at least 3 single LDS who had co-ed roommates and it didn't seem to affect their spiritual status one bit.

Edited September 29, 2011 by cinepro

[Calm]

This is why I also favor full disclosure to Bishop and Mission President. "Hey President, I am not attracted to women but I am attracted to the occasional man. My Bishop knows all about it and still cleared me for missionary service. Please work with me and place me with a companion isn't into dudes, doesn't hate gays and who I can work well with." Yes, this is an extra thing for the mission president to deal with,but he's kind of a father figure to these kids and shouldn't mind helping them out a little if possible.

While I don't think someone who has demonstrated sufficient control in the past should feel obligated to do so (unless this is the standard for all...to inform leaders about any potential difficulties, then yes I think this should be included), I think it would be wise for them to do so AND it will definitely help those young men who may have overestimated their self-control.

Edited September 29, 2011 by calmoriah

[california boy]

We just heard from a gay person who served a mission without a serious problem. However, we did hear him say that it would have been difficult if he served with another gay missionary. How is the lds church to know who is gay and who isn't gay? Now as for myself, it would certainly be difficult to share an apartment with a woman that I were attracted to. And it would not matter if she were interested in me or not. Now I am no prude and I am certainly not a great member of the lds church. But if I were, I can see myself thinking all sorts of lustful thoughts about my woman roommate as she pranced around in her PJs.

Just curious, would you have a difficult time sharing a room with a woman that was a lesbian? Because that is actually what the similar senerio would be. You would be sharing a room with a woman that not only was attracted to you, but not the least bit attracted to men. A gay missionary shares a room with a straight missionary that is not the least bit attracted to the same sex.

So does that make the situation a little more deifned??

[california boy]

Why would we, we are not Westoro Baptist Chruch? Also i have never heard any Mormon in my 32 years in the Church make such a claim. BTW...thank you for your service to God.

Are you kidding me?? I have heard plenty of posts on this board comparing gays to pedophiles, recruiting straight men to be gay, stating that they can't be trusted with straight men etc. There are Mormons who have posted that they would not want a gay man teaching their children in school because they think he will turn their kids gay. You haven't seen any of these posts? Do you want me to copy a few for you???

[Calm]

Are you kidding me?? I have heard plenty of posts on this board comparing gays to pedophiles, recruiting straight men to be gay, stating that they can't be trusted with straight men etc. There are Mormons who have posted that they would not want a gay man teaching their children in school because they think he will turn their kids gay. You haven't seen any of these posts? Do you want me to copy a few for you???

I think Pa Pa is probably defining sexual predator differently than you are, as someone who has sexually abused another.

Even if one believes all homosexuals are also pedophiles...totally wrong...that does not mean that they believe that all pedophiles act on their inclinations and thus would not be predators.

Edited September 29, 2011 by calmoriah

[california boy]

Just curious. Has anyone ever heard of a gay missionary having sex with a straight missionary and them being sent home? Are we making an issue here where there is none? Personally I think it is HIGHLY unlikely that a straight missionary would have sex with his gay missionary companion. I am pretty sure everyone on this board can relate a story where a straight missionary was sent home for having sex with a straight woman. You don't have to be companions for that to happen.

Has anyone heard of a Morman man sharing a house with a lesbian and having sex with her? Do you get that there might not be any problem here at all?

[california boy]

I think Pa Pa is probably defining sexual predator differently than you are, as someone who has sexually abused another. Even if one believes all homosexuals are also pedophiles...totally wrong...that does not mean that they believe that all pedophiles act on their inclinations and thus would not be predators.

Personally I would call that kind of person a rapist.

[Calm]

Just curious. Has anyone ever heard of a gay missionary having sex with a straight missionary and them being sent home? Are we making an issue here where there is none? Personally I think it is HIGHLY unlikely that a straight missionary would have sex with his gay missionary companion. I am pretty sure everyone on this board can relate a story where a straight missionary was sent home for having sex with a straight woman. You don't have to be companions for that to happen.

Has anyone heard of a Morman man sharing a house with a lesbian and having sex with her? Do you get that there might not be any problem here at all?

I have read studies that have stated that lesbians on average have sex with more men than heterosexual women do...can't remember if it is more frequent as well (I would assume this is not true at least for married women), so I don't think we can discount a couple having sex just because they aren't physically attracted to each other. People have sex for other reasons. Prisons are full of heterosexual men having gay sex.

There is also the possibility where someone is not aware of their sexual inclinations until they have been placed in a situation where they are stimulated sufficiently. From what I have heard from several gay men, that they assumed they were straight or rather 'like everyone else' or 'normal' until their first sexual experience at which time they realized they were gay and this has included being molested. Whether this is imposing an assumption (I've had gay sex so I must be gay) or somehow those who molested them picked up somehow they were 'wired' for same sex attraction, I am not sure one can determine after the fact.

My brother in law has worked extensively with homosexuals in his practice, I asked him one day (due to my awareness of molestation in the background of several gay men that I knew) if molestation was a common element in the history of his patients. He said when he began about 25 years ago it was present in almost every case (it is understandable that those who were sexually molested might be unhappy about their sexual orientation, there is a high report of sexual abuse by men among lesbians IIRC), it is much less common now.

Edited September 29, 2011 by calmoriah

[Calm]

Personally I would call that kind of person a rapist.

And so would I. I would think of anyone who selfishly manipulated a situation without regard to the others' well being for sexual purposes a sexual predator, but probably be more circumspect in how I used it publicly to avoid misunderstandings.

Edited September 29, 2011 by calmoriah