Is Being Gay A Sin? Does It Need Amelioration?

[CASteinman]

Again, that is not what I said. If that were actually what I thought, then that is what I would have wrote.

Here is what you said, exactly:

My problem is when people use their personal moral views to justify their efforts to control the behavior of others....

What precisely is the functional difference between my paraphrase and what you said exactly? Make sure that you do not include the notion of "others who do not share the same moral beliefs" because that is a red herring. All laws impose things on some people that they do not believe are right for them. Sociopaths for example may not think that the laws regarding torture, mayhem and murder should apply to them. The mere fact that people do not share the same moral beliefs is irrelevant to the issue as raised.

I ask myself whether such a law would be in the best interest of society.

In other words, you are using your moral judgment about what is the "best interest" of society.

[CASteinman]

Unlike the BSA and Red Cross, the church set up this organization.

Call for Reference that the Church set up this organization.

Please note.. this is the second call for reference.

Edited July 23, 2012 by CASteinman

[Jaybear]

Here is what you said, exactly:

What precisely is the functional difference between my paraphrase and what you said exactly?

To start, you removed the word "personal".

I don't consider murder to be be a "personal" moral decision, nor torture as they by necessity require the participation of unwilling third parties, hence they are very poor analogies.

Nonetheless, if you don't see the difference, why paraphrase? If you are going to attempt to state my beliefs, is it that unreasonable to ask that you use the precise words that I chose to describe my beliefs?

In other words, you are using your moral judgment about what is the "best interest" of society.

That is not how I would phrase it. I am not a fan of using the word "moral," as to most, it implies the existence of God, or some other moral arbitrator.

My opinion is driven by libertarian principles not biblical morals.

[CASteinman]

To start, you removed the word "personal".

Moral decisions are always personal, even if collective. They cannot be any other way. So, I do not see this as a significant difference. But if you do.. Ok. On that basis -- that its not a personal moral decision, you should really have no problem if Latter-day Saints as a group oppose gay marriage because of their moral views on the matter. It should not bother you at all.

I don't consider murder to be be a "personal" moral decision, nor torture as they by necessity require the participation of unwilling third parties, hence they are very poor analogies.

Even though you do not consider this a personal moral decision, that is really irrelevant. It is, of course, a personal decision not to murder, torture or cause mayhem. It is also a personal decision to do those things. It is always personal, regardless of your odd view of this matter.

Nonetheless, if you don't see the difference, why paraphrase?

Because a paraphrase was sufficient and did not require me to page back through 60 posts to find your exact words.

If you are going to attempt to state my beliefs, is it that unreasonable to ask that you use the precise words that I chose to describe my beliefs?

Not unreasonable to ask it. But it is unreasonable to insist that there is a functional difference between the paraphrase and your exact words - without showing a functional difference that makes sense.

That is not how I would phrase it. I am not a fan of using the word "moral," as to most, it implies the existence of God, or some other moral arbitrator.

My opinion is driven by libertarian principles not biblical morals.

Right. I am sure of that. That is why I object to your views. To me, libertarianism is evil. And I am saying that as a former libertarian. I also do not consider "biblical morals" to be opposite of libertarian principles either. Just different -- and more malleable.

[california boy]

Call for Reference that the Church set up this organization.

Please note.. this is the second call for reference.

What I was told by my stake president when I was sent to Evergreen was that it was an organization set up by the church to help members with SSA. Perhaps he lied to me about this. I didn't fact check it on Google when he told me that. I am willing to admit that I might have been told a lie since I cant find much information at all about how Evergreen was started. Since I can not find much information on how Evergreen was initially started, I will withdraw that claim as being fact.

Are you willing to agree that Evergreen is closely tied to the church? Can we at least agree with that?

[CASteinman]

Are you willing to agree that Evergreen is closely tied to the church? Can we at least agree with that?

I will agree that Evergreen is run by people who are LDS and who try to use LDS Principles in their efforts.

I hope you will understand that my problem with this complaint about Evergreen is that Evergreen is not the Church.

However, with that being said, I do not think it is a bad thing that the local Church leadership may recommend people to Evergreen. I mean, they could always just wring their hands and do nothing constructive at all. Or they could say.. hey, see if this can be helpful.

[Robert F. Smith]

I will agree that Evergreen is run by people who are LDS and who try to use LDS Principles in their efforts.

I hope you will understand that my problem with this complaint about Evergreen is that Evergreen is not the Church.

However, with that being said, I do not think it is a bad thing that the local Church leadership may recommend people to Evergreen. I mean, they could always just wring their hands and do nothing constructive at all. Or they could say.. hey, see if this can be helpful.

Evergreen was apparently founded by eight LDS men in 1989 as a non-profit effort to help gay men. See http://www.thessavoice.com/ .. I don't know the legal or tax status of that organization, although the NorthStar Community is a 501©3 non-profit which is not owned or operated by the LDS Church ( http://northstarlds.org/ ), and it was founded in Dec 2006. It may be that LDS Family Services sometimes sends people to either of these organizations -- or simply recommends it.

[Robert F. Smith]

All well and good, but all I'm saying is that they are not "oppressed" in America or other Western societies, any more than blacks, woman, or other minorities are (even though they once were, to varying degrees).

The problem of course is that gay men and lesbians are being beaten and killed right and left just for being gay. The time when Jewish kids were beaten in this country on a daily basis for being "Christ-killers" (I've had friends who were victims) may be long past, but some groups are more hated than others at present.

[Tacenda]

The problem of course is that gay men and lesbians are being beaten and killed right and left just for being gay. The time when Jewish kids were beaten in this country on a daily basis for being "Christ-killers" (I've had friends who were victims) may be long past, but some groups are more hated than others at present.

Thanks for this quote, I believe gays can be oppressed just as the blacks and Jews, merely on the premise of being born that way and some in the world believing them to be sinful and beyond reproach.

[Robert F. Smith]

Homosexuals are hardly oppressed, and, at least in the last third of the 20th century to the present, never have been. Homosexuals, as a group, are among the most successful, economically and socially, in American society. If, of course, we raise the bar for definitions of "oppression" high enough for specific groups, the entire group will never be able to clear the bar.

This is as false as the notion that Jews were successful and rich, so they must not have been persecuted. A blatant non sequitur.

If you read the newspapers and listen to the news, you know that homosexuals are regularly oppressed and victimized. Jews may no longer have to put up with that sort of misconduct and crime, but others are still victimized. Fortunately, we have the USDOJ and organizations like the SPLC to take the sick miscreants to court.

While I don't believe homosexuality per se is a sexual addiction (although sexual fetishisms of various kinds have a prominent place within the subculture), the problem of homosexuality is the problem of the modern concept of sexual orientation, which takes homosexuality out of the range of the law of chastity and places it in a privileged place beyond the reach of its regulatory boundaries.

Ever heard of the 11th Article of Faith?

What occurs, according to Kimball?

Pres. Kimball was discussing homosexuality, saying that "With relatively few accidents of nature, we are born male or female." I take that as an admission of the obvious: congenital defects clearly occur, and they run the gamut. Whether the reason is genetic, maldevelopment in-utero, etc., the result can be problematic, even leading sometimes to spontaneous abortion. That's why the question put to Jesus in John 9:2 is so important: "Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?" Someone is always trying to play the blame game.

I think the bio/psycho-social model of addiction is the best model we are probably going to have for understanding the genesis of SSA. There is no central, discreet, definable "cause" of SSA, and certainly not one centered in genetics. It would be far better, in my view, to move away from reductionistic "cause" talk regarding homosexuality and admit that we don't have the slightest idea, for any given individual, what leads one to homosexual ideation and to homosexual behavior, and that the origins (not cause) of SSA are highly complex and nuanced processes deeply and perhaps subtly interconnected within biological sensitivities, family dynamics, intrapersonal psychology, and social environment. We are then talking, not about what causes SSA, but what biases, predispositions, and tendencies are inherent in an entire bio/psycho/social framework

Based on this paragraph, and on your use of the phrase "bio/psycho/social framework," one might think that you are reflecting the general attitude that homosexuality can be attributed to almost anything and yet to nothing in particular -- "certainly not one centered in genetics." If this lack of knowledge is so pervasive and our incapacity to deal with homosexuality so thoroughgoing, how can we deal effectively with it -- if at all?

[Calm]

Perhaps he lied to me about this.

Or maybe he just made an unfounded assumption as you may have done by assuming he was right.

[Calm]

Went to the ADL site to see what it had to say about whether or not Jews were still targeted physically for being Jewish these days and found an article about kids being assaulted for being Mormon. Turns out the attackers were likely anti-semitic as well: http://regions.adl.org/arizona/pdfs/2008-05-12-attacks-on-mormons-prompt-arizona-forum-on-hate-crimes-ktar.pdf (from 2008 so thankfully not happening all that much)

In general: http://www.adl.org/main_Anti_Semitism_Domestic/default.htm

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/ASUS_12/5633_12.htm

Edited July 24, 2012 by calmoriah

[CASteinman]

The problem of course is that gay men and lesbians are being beaten and killed right and left just for being gay.

I don't think so.

[CASteinman]

Thanks for this quote, I believe gays can be oppressed just as the blacks and Jews, merely on the premise of being born that way and some in the world believing them to be sinful and beyond reproach.

Are you sure that homosexuals were born that way? I am of the opinion that it can appear that way but that it is not likely.

Edited July 24, 2012 by CASteinman

[CV75]

Its bad logic anyway. the BSA policy is supported by a wide swath of BSA membership of all ages. It is based on the ability to freely associate with others who share similar moral and intellectual beliefs. Forcing the BSA to change policy would be the true attempt at legislating morality and an affront to libertarian principles.

Yes, and this point was ignored way back in post #153 and its related posts fore and aft...

[Tacenda]

Are you sure that homosexuals were born that way? I am of the opinion that it can appear that way but that it is not likely.

YES. My niece and nephew on different sides of the family are gay. My nephew wanted to take his life constantly. He didn't want to be gay. This wasn't a chosen lifestyle. Of course I'll agree there are some who do.

[CASteinman]

YES. My niece and nephew on different sides of the family are gay. My nephew wanted to take his life constantly. He didn't want to be gay. This wasn't a chosen lifestyle. Of course I'll agree there are some who do.

But how do you know that they were born gay? I am not asking "How do you know that they are gay?" Nor am I asking, "Do they claim to be born gay?" Nor am I asking, "Did they choose to be gay?"

I am asking "How do you know that they were born gay?"

To me, this is not a question that only pertains to people who are homosexual. It also relates to people with other disorders who do not ever recall being some other way. One example is people who have felt, from their earliest years, that they need to lose a limb and feel utterly unsatisfied until they do. Then, once they find a way to have it removed, they feel "complete" at last.

I feel inclined to reject that this is simply a birth disorder. But the fact that people have these urges and traits from very early ages argues for something besides active choice as well.

Edited July 24, 2012 by CASteinman

[djholmess]

But how do you know that they were born gay? I am not asking "How do you know that they are gay?" Nor am I asking, "Do they claim to be born gay?" Nor am I asking, "Did they choose to be gay?"

I am asking "How do you know that they were born gay?"

To me, this is not a question that only pertains to people who are homosexual. It also relates to people with other disorders who do not ever recall being some other way. One example is people who have felt, from their earliest years, that they need to lose a limb and feel utterly unsatisfied until they do. Then, once they find a way to have it removed, they feel "complete" at last.

I feel inclined to reject that this is simply a birth disorder. But the fact that people have these urges and traits from very early ages argues for something besides active choice as well.

Intresting point. You could take this further. I have heard many people who are homosexual say they were born that way. ok. So what if that is true and we were to find a 'gay gene.' What would those same people then say if some parents wanted to remove such a gene in vitro?

It seems to me that making such an argument is 1) based on no evidence to date and 2) dangerous to their very cause as if there was evidence then some would say it is just like other 'disorders' that we can treat in vitro.

[KevinG]

Lady Gaga was born this way.

[california boy]

But how do you know that they were born gay? I am not asking "How do you know that they are gay?" Nor am I asking, "Do they claim to be born gay?" Nor am I asking, "Did they choose to be gay?"

I am asking "How do you know that they were born gay?"

To me, this is not a question that only pertains to people who are homosexual. It also relates to people with other disorders who do not ever recall being some other way. One example is people who have felt, from their earliest years, that they need to lose a limb and feel utterly unsatisfied until they do. Then, once they find a way to have it removed, they feel "complete" at last.

I feel inclined to reject that this is simply a birth disorder. But the fact that people have these urges and traits from very early ages argues for something besides active choice as well.

Do you think you were born heterosexual? Or perhaps you were recruited into being heterosexual by society that teaches children a a very early age that they should be attracted to the opposite sex. This brainwashing is found in the schools, churches, on TV, in the movies, in advertisments. Everywhere a poor kid looks he is being recruited into the heterosexual world. This strategy must be working. Look how many heterosexuals believe they were born that way.

[CV75]

Do you think you were born heterosexual? Or perhaps you were recruited into being heterosexual by society that teaches children a a very early age that they should be attracted to the opposite sex. This brainwashing is found in the schools, churches, on TV, in the movies, in advertisments. Everywhere a poor kid looks he is being recruited into the heterosexual world. This strategy must be working. Look how many heterosexuals believe they were born that way.

My personal theory that I think applies any accountable person:

I was born with a blank slate. To my knowledge, I didn’t have sex with anyone until later in life. If I recall correctly, I experienced sexual feelings before the age of accountability, sometimes spontaneously and sometimes in connection with those of the opposite sex, but never toward anyone of my own sex.

The portion of my sexuality that is spontaneous and independent of any kind of external stimulus from the opposite sex can be harnessed so as to procreate regardless of whom the Lord directed me to partner with, whether I personally beleive I am heterosexual or homosexual. He has left this direction about as general as He could make it: a woman to whom I am married.

That portion of my makeup that prefers, is dependent on, or submits to external stimulus for a sexual response, partnering, romance and intercourse is a product of acculturation instilled in me from my infancy onward, the consequences of personal choices and “training” in this aspect of my life and being.

Some people tend to oppose their acculturation; some go along with it. Some people have a stronger spontaneity instinct or impulse than an acculturated one, and vice-versa. And of course, there are degrees of spontaneity and acculturation, and conflicting cultural, counter- and anti-cultural messages (internal and external) and so forth. As precious as life itself these propensities are, whichever one is most aligned with one’s self identity is the one that will have to be “lost” to some degree ot another in order to “find” oneself.

[california boy]

The problem of course is that gay men and lesbians are being beaten and killed right and left just for being gay.

I don't think so.

Unbelieveable. Does carving the word Dyke into the stomach of a lesbian by three masked men work for you as a hate crime????Would you like to read more about gays being beaten up, bashed in the face and murdered? I certainly could give you as many as you feel you need to change your mind. Just tell me how many you would need to realize this is a real problem in this country. This one is from a week ago.

Police have no suspects in reported hate crime.

[KevinG]

Minority groups are often the target of hate crimes and violence. Hispanics, Mormons, Gays... you name it.

Distinguishing between crimes of hate and hate crimes (crimes committed because of someones minority identity) is more difficult. No one is saying hate crimes don't exist against gays.

I still think the use of the work oppression which implies a widespread effort to keep a population down is too strong. There is as much support for gays as there is opposition in our culture.

The idea that the culture "recruits" for homosexuality or heterosexuality is a farce. Media and culture are a reflection of us more than a force that creates us.

The argument of nature or nurture has no bearing on the fact that there are people with same sex attraction. They deserve the same civil liberties and civility as anyone else, what they do not deserve is the right to force change on those who do not share their religious or moral viewpoint. All groups get to influence law and culture. None get to deny others their voice.

[CV75]

The argument of nature or nurture has no bearing on the fact that there are people with same sex attraction.

I agree, but I took the question on this to do with personal experience with moral choices and accountability in light of fundamental sexual feelings (not necessarily the focus of them), whether they are spontaneous or learned.

[KevinG]

While I have not struggled with same sex attraction I have struggled with many other tendencies of the carnal man that are in opposition to the Gospel. I think some of them are just part of who I am and my biological build. Others may be learned behaviors. Most are a combination of both.

Being a Saint requires us to overcome or change our carnal nature, not ask the church to change to accommodate it. This is common to all who would be Saints not just special groups.