Youtube Vid: It Gets Better With Mormon Family And Friends

[cinepro]

I don't agree that celibacy = "pretending they aren't gay." Heterosexual church members who are celibate aren't "pretending they aren't heterosexual."

Heterosexual church members have many avenues of accepted and appropriate heterosexual expression outside of marriage (and "sexual intimacy"), such as dating, dancing, hand holding, and kissing.

What are the accepted and appropriate expressions of homosexual affection for gay LDS?

[Senator]

How is that going against anything declared by the Prophets and Apostles?

Because it wasn't a church correlated production.

Heck, the church has even instructed members to not speak publically to the media on church related issues.

[epiginosko]

I taught seminary for many years. Part of each morning was devoted to students quoting a scripture. The most often quoted scripture in seminary was also the shortest scripture in the Bible. "Jesus wept" This scripture comes from when Mary and Martha plead for Christ to come heal their brother Lazarus who is gravely ill. Before Christ gets there, Lazarus dies. When Christ arrives, Mary is a bit unhappy with Christ. "Why didn't he come sooner to heal his brother. Did Christ not love Mary, Martha, and Lazarus enough to bother to come?"

Christ could have said a lot of things to Mary. He could have chastised her for not believing in the plan of salvation. He could have scolded her for her lack of faith. He could have preached a sermon on what his atonement would mean to Lazarus. Instead, the scriptures simply say "Jesus wept".

Sometimes showing compassion and love is the most important thing we can do. I have grown to love this scripture and feel that it has an important lesson for me when responding to other peoples situations. Perhaps it might shed light on what this video is about.

This was beautiful. Thank you!

[Jaybear]

I disagree. The Church in my view is primarily its membership. Burn down all the buildings and possessions of the Church, but leave the people be. Does the Church still exist? Maybe it doesn't function as well, but I don't see how anyone could deny its existence.

PS: I doubt that explicit discussion on the Law of Chastity or the covenants we make or whatever behaviour is taught as appropriate by the Church leadership is necessary in such a video as long as it hasn't included confusing remarks that blur the line between the Church and society in general. Including a 'this is where you can go to figure out what to do next' is sufficient imo....though such action does require the individual to open up him/herself to others and not all are ready to do that, but in most cases I suspect they would already know what they can do on their own (and likely it hasn't been enough for them if they are feeling suicidal).

I suspect that not all of those who participated in the video, would agree that the LDS Church is the best place to go "to figure out what to do next."

That was not the point or purpose of the video.

[epiginosko]

Because it wasn't a church correlated production.

Heck, the church has even instructed members to not speak publically to the media on church related issues.

And what do you think Christ would advocate more? Correlation or compassion?

This reminds me of the good samaritan story with the Pharisees being instructed according to the law to not touch a dead body. Only the (uncorrelated) Samaritan was merciful enough to care for this wounded man. What was Christ teaching us in this parable if not to place mercy and compassion first? We have the Priesthood of God. What use is it if not to administer unto those who suffer and are in pain? Does the Lord want us to wait for a correlated message before using His gifts?

[Calm]

I think it is comments like this one on the youtube link that smac is concerned about:

I am a member of this church, and i am glad to see members on their own, support me and people like me. If enough members support, rules can be changed, and so can lives.

I am a 17 year old girl living in Southern California, i am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and i am a lesbian. I believe that one day, we can change this church.

I don't think we have to 'fight that particular fight' in every instance we discuss this topic.

However, I think we need to be careful not to raise false expectations because then when reality hits, people may feel betrayed or lied to and whatever help such things brought, it may end up with someone being in a worse place in the long run.

I've seen disappointment and then anger in some cases where something was reported inaccurately with this issue (and other issues), false hope is dangerous imo.

I also believe that when throwing out a lifeline it is important not to attach conditions to them grabbing it, but we need to make sure the lifeline is anchored to something of substance and not to the boat going down next to them.

Edited April 23, 2012 by calmoriah

[phaedrus ut]

The message is loud and clear.

The message is directed to young gay LDS members.

The message is you are loved, please don't kill yourself.

If you want to look for subtext, you can imagine any thing you wish.

I think there may be a second message to LDS parents of gay children. The promised blessings to members who remain faithful, obedient, magnifying their calling, can be misinterpreted as failures when member has wayward children. I have a large number of gay LDS friends and a recurring theme that I've noticed is the guilt of the parents. They wonder what they did wrong or what they could have done better. More than once they've told me they first tried to fix their child's gayness by increasing their own spirituality and faithfulness.

I think it's tough for everyone involved and for the parents it's good to see that it also "gets better".

Phaedrus

[smac97]

I think it is comments like this one on the youtube link that smac is concerned about:

I don't think we have to 'fight that particular fight' in every instance we discuss this topic.

However, I think we need to be careful not to raise false expectations because then when reality hits, people may feel betrayed or lied to and whatever help such things brought, it may end up with someone being in a worse place in the long run.

I've seen disappointment and then anger in some cases where something was reported inaccurately with this issue (and other issues), false hope is dangerous imo.

I also believe that when throwing out a lifeline it is important not to attach conditions to them grabbing it, but we need to make sure the lifeline is anchored to something of substance and not to the boat going down next to them.

Well said.

Here are a few more comments about the vid that, in my view, suggest that the vid is indeed sending out mixed messages:

Of course God embraces all, but His followers should not embrace gayist teachings that lead people away from their potential. Certain truths are mixed into this message and allow people to come to wrong conclusions. Their message is deceptive and hurtful, even if they are doing what they are doing out of love. There are plenty of good Latter-day Saints who love their homosexually inclined friends and family. No need to reject the teachings of the Church like some of these people have.

___

The question is what is the real purpose of this video. To tell LGBT people we love you but you are morally inferior to us is an insidious and hateful act. No one here advocates same sex marriage and that is ultimately the act of love. Anythimg less than that is patronizing. The same tactic used by the catholics. If they cannot accept that the love between 2 men or 2 women is as sascred as the love between a man and a woman, then they are perpetuating the hate and the violence?

___

And will the time when you can have a same sex marriage in a Mormon temple?

___

One of their tricks are clever videos like these claiming their love and moral superiority. When all is said and done, the real issue of love is same sex marriage in Mormon temples. If you are sincere, then your tactic of showing the human harm the church causes is the right one. And I support your efforts.

___

Why did you get the impression he doesn't consider love and marriage between any two adults as sacred? Mormon culture is family-oriented and those of us who want gay equality of course want gay people to be able to form their own families and have them legitimized by their church.

___

Loving our LBGT brothers and sisters means that we embrace them without caveat and without trying to "fix" them to put them on the path that is most comfortable for our own prejudices.

___

If only the church leadership could be persuaded... and then allow lgbt individuals the opportunity to seek romantic relationships... you know, something to look forward to.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited April 23, 2012 by smac97

[zerinus]

Heterosexual church members have many avenues of accepted and appropriate heterosexual expression outside of marriage (and "sexual intimacy"), such as dating, dancing, hand holding, and kissing.

What are the accepted and appropriate expressions of homosexual affection for gay LDS?

Repenting!

[zerinus]

I suspect that not all of those who participated in the video, would agree that the LDS Church is the best place to go "to figure out what to do next."

That was not the point or purpose of the video.

I think that some of the people who took part in that video might have been duped, and weren't aware of the true motivation behind it.

[Log]

Heterosexual church members have many avenues of accepted and appropriate heterosexual expression outside of marriage (and "sexual intimacy"), such as dating, dancing, hand holding, and kissing.

What are the accepted and appropriate expressions of homosexual affection for gay LDS?

You have a short memory.

[Calm]

Heterosexual church members have many avenues of accepted and appropriate heterosexual expression outside of marriage (and "sexual intimacy"), such as dating, dancing, hand holding, and kissing.

What are the accepted and appropriate expressions of homosexual affection for gay LDS?

How is refraining from homosexual behaviours automatically pretending one is heterosexual? If one is not engaging in heterosexual or homosexual behaviours, then while others may assume one is heterosexual due to sheer probability, one is still not presenting oneself as heterosexual and therefore not pretending to be heterosexual or even not gay (one does not have to display outward behaviour of internal states). The only conclusion that one can draw from observing someone engaging in celibate (as in total nonsexual, nonromantic, nonphysical) behaviour is that they are celibate unless more info is given.

Edited April 23, 2012 by calmoriah

[Jaybear]

How is refraining from homosexual behaviours automatically pretending one is heterosexual?

To be fair, Cinepro said:

Gay LDS have always been able to find acceptance in the Church by pretending they aren't gay.

Which Smac deliberately miscontrued when he said:

I don't agree that celibacy = "pretending they aren't gay."

[smac97]

I suspect that not all of those who participated in the video, would agree that the LDS Church is the best place to go "to figure out what to do next."

That was not the point or purpose of the video.

Ya know, that's the vibe I got as well. The purpose of the video doesn't seem to be pointing young Latter-day Saints to the precepts of the Restored Gospel. As I said in the OP: "The subtext of this vid, then, appears to be 'ignore the prophets and listen to us instead.' If so, I find such a stance problematic. Church members should not set themselves up as voices of moral authority at odds with the priesthood leaders of the Church."

Thanks,

-Smac

[Sky]

I just finished watching the video, and I’m torn. On the one hand, it is good to get this issue out in the open and express love towards our brothers and sisters who deal with this. But I didn’t get the impression that they were trying to encourage LDS gays to live the law of chastity as taught by the Church. While that may not be the easiest choice, I believe it will bring the most happiness in the end.

I mean, aren’t we taught that keeping the commandments of God is what will bring us the most happiness? Does this somehow not apply if you are attracted to your own gender?

And the entire “It gets better” project is to help further the cause of the LGBT movement – so the argument can be made that it subtly encourages same-sex relationships.

[smac97]

I just finished watching the video, and I’m torn. On the one hand, it is good to get this issue out in the open and express love towards our brothers and sisters who deal with this. But I didn’t get the impression that they were trying to encourage LDS gays to live the law of chastity as taught by the Church.

Yes, that's the vibe I got as well. It's possible, of course, that the vid is intended as a "talk them down off the ledge" sort of exhortation, and that further advice would include encouragement to live the law of chastity. I certainly hope so.

While that may not be the easiest choice, I believe it will bring the most happiness in the end

Agreed.

I mean, aren’t we taught that keeping the commandments of God is what will bring us the most happiness? Does this somehow not apply if you are attracted to your own gender?

Well, the ambiguity in in the vid allows for a yes or a no to that question.

And the entire “It gets better” project is to help further the cause of the LGBT movement – so the argument can be made that it subtly encourages same-sex relationships.

Yep.

Thanks,

-Smac

[cinepro]

How is refraining from homosexual behaviours automatically pretending one is heterosexual? If one is not engaging in heterosexual or homosexual behaviours, then while others may assume one is heterosexual due to sheer probability, one is still not presenting oneself as heterosexual and therefore not pretending to be heterosexual or even not gay (one does not have to display outward behaviour of internal states). The only conclusion that one can draw from observing someone engaging in celibate (as in total nonsexual, nonromantic, nonphysical) behaviour is that they are celibate unless more info is given.

I agree. I acknowledged both options being the current choice for gay LDS who desire acceptance in the Church. They can either pretend they are heterosexual (by talking and acting as if they were interested in people of the opposite gender), or they can choose to present themselves as totally sexless, as if they were eunuchs.

These have always been their choices, and no matter how much we "talk" and tell them "it gets better", it looks like 100 years from now, they will still have only these two choices.

The Church might become more open about acknowledging the difficulty of either choice, and LDS might say "Yay for the gay LDS who are either trying to act heterosexual or totally subsuming their desires for physical affection and intimate companionship!", and we'll have books and firesides presented by gay LDS who have made either choice.

But I'm still not sure that's the "improvement" the gay LDS are looking for. But maybe it is? Maybe they just want people to acknowledge the difficulty of their predicament, and still love and accept them. Maybe this would be a big improvement...?

Edited April 24, 2012 by cinepro

[Calm]

But I'm still not sure that's the "improvement" the gay LDS are looking for.

I would assume that the improvement a faithful LDS, whether gay or hetero, is looking for is being able to truly align his own will with God's, whatever that may mean for him. Becoming humble enough to realize and accept that this may not be what we want for ourselves here and now and being willing to sacrifice that part of our self on the altar so that we may come closer to our eternal selves that exist as one with the Lord is part of becoming a true Saint. Edited April 24, 2012 by calmoriah

[phaedrus ut]

I agree. I acknowledged both options being the current choice for gay LDS who desire acceptance in the Church. They can either pretend they are heterosexual (by talking and acting as if they were interested in people of the opposite gender), or they can choose to present themselves as totally sexless, as if they were eunuchs.

There is a third possibility. God could stop making gay people. That would eliminate the problem all together.

Phaedrus

[cinepro]

There is a third possibility. God could stop making gay people. That would eliminate the problem all together.

Phaedrus

:help: :help: :help: :help: :help:

[cinepro]

I would assume that the improvement a faithful LDS, whether gay or hetero, is looking for is being able to truly align his own will with God's, whatever that may mean for him. Becoming humble enough to realize and accept that this may not be what we want for ourselves here and now and being willing to sacrifice that part of our self on the altar so that we may come closer to our eternal selves that exist as one with the Lord is part of becoming a true Saint.

That's not an "improvement." That's exactly what they've already been trying to do for the last 182 years. You can't do the same thing and call it an "improvement".

[Calm]

I am not talking about improvement in the Church (though that comes in time as members work on becoming closer to the Lord), I am talking about the improvement most meaningful to any personal, personal improvement.

IMO, faithful LDS are generally aware that the best thing they can do to change the world is to change themselves into the kind of human beings God has meant us to be, whatever it takes.

There are some it is true who think it's their calling to go out and change the world into what they want it to be, most thankfully are more prone to look closer by for something to work on.

Edited April 24, 2012 by calmoriah

[epiginosko]

I personally know four of the people in the video. While I will say that most of them are advocates for the LGBT cause as well as marriage-equality, none of them are trying to openly refute the church's doctrines on the matter. I think all four of them would agree that if you want to be an active Latter-Day Saint, maintain a temple recommend, serve in a calling, etc., then you choose to obey the law of chastity (along with tithing, word of wisdom, etc.) However, I don't believe any of them feels the need to enforce the same covenants on non-members or those who choose to remain connected to the Mormon community but not live the lifestyle. But, first and foremost, I believe that this message was intended towards those who are suicidal and is pointing them towards a specific non-church resource (the Trevor Project) where they can find help.

Is it the right thing to do? I can't say. It would be nice of the Priesthood Leaders came out with a correlated message on the matter, but until then these members did what they felt they could do to help. I can't fault them for the effort.

[smac97]

I personally know four of the people in the video. While I will say that most of them are advocates for the LGBT cause as well as marriage-equality, none of them are trying to openly refute the church's doctrines on the matter.

The vid participants are not "openly" refuting the church's doctrines? Tacitly, then? Circuitously? Secretively? Are you admitting something here?

I think all four of them would agree that if you want to be an active Latter-Day Saint, maintain a temple recommend, serve in a calling, etc., then you choose to obey the law of chastity (along with tithing, word of wisdom, etc.).

Yes. "If." But it sounds like these folks are also in favor of not obeying the Law of Chastity, since they support same-sex marriage, which would necessarily include behavior utterly prohibited by the Church, even if that behavior is allowed under secular law.

However, I don't believe any of them feels the need to enforce the same covenants on non-members or those who choose to remain connected to the Mormon community but not live the lifestyle.

First, I reject the notion that living up to one's covenants can be described as a mere "lifestyle."

Second, the vid is not directed at non-members. It is specifically directed at Latter-day Saints. It is specifically directed at an audience all of whom have made covenants to God.

Third, your comment here seems to confirm my concern about the vid: That the participants in the vid are not concerned about encouraging young Latter-day Saints to live in accordance with the precepts of the Restored Gospel. That the participants in the vid view gospel covenants as optional, as things which can be dispensed with or disregarded.

But, first and foremost, I believe that this message was intended towards those who are suicidal and is pointing them towards a specific non-church resource (the Trevor Project) where they can find help.

Okay.

Is it the right thing to do? I can't say. It would be nice of the Priesthood Leaders came out with a correlated message on the matter

Huh? The Church Handbook of Instructions is rather clear on this:

Homosexual behavior violates the commandments of God, is contrary to the purposes of human sexuality, and deprives people of the blessings that can be found in family life and in the saving ordinances of the gospel. Those who persist in such behavior or who influence others to do so are subject to Church discipline. Homosexual behavior can be forgiven through sincere repentance.

If members engage in homosexual behavior, Church leaders should help them have a clear understanding of faith in Jesus Christ, the process of repentance, and the purpose of life on earth.

While opposing homosexual behavior, the Church reaches out with understanding and respect to individuals who are attracted to those of the same gender.

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.

Affirmation, a "gay rights" group specifically for gay Mormons, has rather astonishingly presumed to instruct the Church that this language (which reflects recent changes to the CHI) does not go far enough because "the policies in the new Church Handbook of Instruction continue to class homosexual behavior as a choice and as a sin," and objects to the LDS Church teaching that "in order to be considered ‘worthy,’ an LGBT church member must refrain from all sexual activity throughout their life," and that "evidence has shown that being a lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender person is a biological function that takes place prior to birth – something that comes from God – and is not a choice, and therefore cannot rationally be considered a sin."

Again: "The policies in the new Church Handbook of Instruction continue to class homosexual behavior as a choice and as a sin." (And notice the sleight of hand here: The Church clearly labels homosexual behavior as sin, but Affirmation tries to paint "being gay" as the sin.)

Affirmation is demanding that the LDS Church change its doctrines to conform to popular notions of sexual morality. Affirmation is presuming to dictate doctrine to the LDS Church.

How many of the people in that vid are affiliated with Affirmation, I wonder?

but until then these members did what they felt they could do to help. I can't fault them for the effort.

Well, I can. If they are sending an ambiguous message to young Latter-day Saints with SSA, and if within that ambiguity lies a suggestion that engaging in homosexual conduct is okay, and if that ambiguity was intentionally created to mask this suggestion, then I find fault with that.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited April 25, 2012 by smac97

[Senator]

Okay.

Okay what? You agree? If you agree that the main thrust of the vid is to "talk people down off the ledge", then why do you keep harping on a perceived subtext which is of less importance.

Maybe we need to ask; which is the greater sin to someone on the ledge; to take one's own life, or, their homosexual behavior or even the mere contemplation of engaging in such behavior?

If you think driving home the line in the sand (the covenants and commandments of God, and their need and/or failure to comply with such) is an effective stategy to getting someone down off the ledge; then let me just say, please don't man a suicide hotline!

Edited April 25, 2012 by Senator