Could We Discuss The Podcast In My Post After Listening With Open Minds?

[USU78]

USU, there is no more basic unit of support than the family. Removal of that basic support can be extremely devastating, regardless of other kinds of support. Not saying support groups are not helpful, but they are certainly not helpful on the same level as full family support (including one's church family).

I quite agree: which is why I decry the practice I mentioned and which I assumed and assume you had no knowledge of before I brought it up. Families are put into no-win situations by such practices: The "out" youth continue to raise the stakes upon each encounter, ending each with, "If you really loved me you'd ______." Knowing the family, at some point, will decide they can no longer countenance "______," the self-fulfilling prophecy of 'rejection' adds a false narrative to a troubled life, and the youth gets thus used by advocates . . . being wrested from true support to reduction to mere means to a political end.

[KevinG]

Sin is destructive. That is why God has given us covenants and laws to protect ourselves.

Excusing sin, even as a society will not remove the destructive effects of sin.

Excusing sin and making excuses (like false claims of suicide) is not love and will not bring joy.

[USU78]

I believe the term you are looking for is "stigma".

"Stigmata"- as I understand the term- refers primarily to the marks and wounds Christ suffered prior to and during his crucifixion.

To use that term in regards to the self-imposed and utterly predictable consequences of self-destructive behavior strikes me as more than slightly offensive.

I share your disgust, and used it purposefully to show how profoundly distressing Tacenda's argument was: she, and the narrator in the linkee, share a common theme: gay youth are trampled and abused just as Christ was, by the unscrupulous and hypocritical religious orthodoxy of their times.

Sorry if I caused you distress.

[Tacenda]

Translation: "Shut up-your hurting our feelings!"

To which I riposte, "The wicked often take the truth to be hard."

You want to talk about "un-Christ-like" behavior?

Fine- let's talk about bearing false witness against the Saints of God. Let's talk about calling evil "good", and good "evil". Let's talk about perverting the laws of God to lead his children into sin.

Deal with these- and then when your own skirts are lily-white, you can come back and complain about the alleged spots on our garments.

This is a Faithlessness Promoting Rumor and self-serving slur that has zero backing from scientific evidence.

In point of fact, these social ills actually increased among homosexuals in European countries where same-sex marriage was legitimized and mainstreamed.

It is a dishonest, deceitful, and propagandistic effort to pass off the consequences of one's own choices and actions onto others.

One of the mantras of the "enlightened Left" has been "Don't like gay marriage? Don't marry a homosexual."

Let's apply the same standards to your hobby horse:

• Don't like being told that your behavior is sinful? Stop rubbing our noses in it.
  
• Don't like being told that God considers your conduct an abomination? Stop telling us that our Churches must conform to your opinion.
  
• Don't wanna die nearly thirty years younger than a comparable heterosexual? Don't engage in homosexual practices.
  
• Don't wanna be in a relationship that is three times as likely to result in domenstic violence? Avoid homosexual counterfeits.
  
• Do you want to avoid a culture that is plagued by rampant promiscuity, epidemic levels of sexually transmitted disease, drug use, and a corrosive effect on self-esteem? Stop drinking the pro-homosexual Kool-aid.
  

You are engaged in a hateful, deceitful, dishonest, and bigoted effort to conflate "contradiction" with "persecution".

You are attempting to silence the ideas of people who disagree with you. That is the province of the book-burners and the thought police. Is that where you really want to go?

You are attempting to blame the people shouting a warning against these behaviors for the very ills of the behaviors they are decrying.

The people of Zarahemla engaged in exactly the same behavior towards Nephi (Helaman 7 and that you are engaging in now.

Such an attempt is foolish, vain, and frankly, contrary to the Laws of God.

Whoa....I'm not ashamed of doing that which the Lord has asked us to do and that is to not judge.

[selek1]

I share your disgust, and used it purposefully to show how profoundly distressing Tacenda's argument was: she, and the narrator in the linkee, share a common theme: gay youth are trampled and abused just as Christ was, by the unscrupulous and hypocritical religious orthodoxy of their times.

Sorry if I caused you distress.

Outta rep points for the day.

+1 Bravo Zulu.

[KevinG]

I quite agree: which is why I decry the practice I mentioned and which I assumed and assume you had no knowledge of before I brought it up. Families are put into no-win situations by such practices: The "out" youth continue to raise the stakes upon each encounter, ending each with, "If you really loved me you'd ______." Knowing the family, at some point, will decide they can no longer countenance "______," the self-fulfilling prophecy of 'rejection' adds a false narrative to a troubled life, and the youth gets thus used by advocates . . . being wrested from true support to reduction to mere means to a political end.

Because I love my children I didn't capitulate to that kind of argument when they were small. "I will hold my breath until you give me more cookies". By the time they are older they know I won't let them harm themselves in order to have peace with them.

[selek1]

Whoa....I'm not ashamed of doing that which the Lord has asked us to do and that is to not judge.

False.

We are commanded to judge- and to be careful to judge righteously.

Of course, your pious mask does not hide the fact that you failed to engage a single one of my points.

Edited August 14, 2012 by selek1

[KevinG]

Whoa....I'm not ashamed of doing that which the Lord has asked us to do and that is to not judge.

CFR- use the scriptures please.

[KevinG]

CFR- use the scriptures please.

False.

We are commanded to judge- and to be careful to judge righteously.

He got there first.

[selek1]

Sin is destructive. That is why God has given us covenants and laws to protect ourselves.

Excusing sin, even as a society will not remove the destructive effects of sin.

Excusing sin and making excuses (like false claims of suicide) is not love and will not bring joy.

Outta rep points. +1. BZ

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

False.

We are commanded to judge- and to be careful to judge righteously.

Of course, your pious mask does not hide the fact that you failed to engage a single one of my points.

Funny I just had this conversation with my Mom on Sunday. We are to make judgments we are to make righteous judgments.

[Tacenda]

False.

We are commanded to judge- and to be careful to judge righteously.

Of course, your pious mask does not hide the fact that you failed to engage a single one of my points.

I couldn't stomach reading over half of your comments to me. And some are pointless. I'm not asking anyone on this board to accept homosexuality personally. I'm asking you to take the approach that the church has and be careful how you speak about God's children.

[ERayR]

Whoa....I'm not ashamed of doing that which the Lord has asked us to do and that is to not judge.

That is a common misconception. The scripture you are referring to is - judge not (unjustly) that ye be not judged (unjustly) for with what judgement ye mete so shall ye be judged.

[selek1]

Funny I just had this conversation with my Mom on Sunday. We are to make judgments we are to make righteous judgments.

It's equally funny when one considers that this "thou shalt not judge" meme is used singularly (almost exclusive) to silence critics of sin.

Neither Libs, nor Tacenda, nor Valentinus, nor any of the other LGBT water carriers were insisting their fellow travellers "not judge" Dan Cathy, or Chick-Fil-A, or Mitt Romney, or the Mormon or Catholic Churches.

None of these stalwart souls hastened to chastize the Southern Poverty Law Center for declaring anyone who disagree with them to be "haters".

Nope- this standard is used exclusively (almost universally) to silence just one side of the debate- those who would decry evil.

[Tacenda]

CFR- use the scriptures please.

My CFR is from the mouths of my parents.

[Tacenda]

It's equally funny when one considers that this "thou shalt not judge" meme is used singularly (almost exclusive) to silence critics of sin.

Neither Libs, nor Tacenda, nor Valentinus, nor any of the other LGBT water carriers were insisting their fellow travellers "not judge" Dan Cathy, or Chick-Fil-A, or Mitt Romney, or the Mormon or Catholic Churches.

None of these stalwart souls hastened to chastize the Southern Poverty Law Center for declaring anyone who disagree with them to be "haters".

Nope- this standard is used exclusively (almost universally) to silence just one side of the debate- those who would decry evil.

Speaking for myself, I am on a different side of the issue and it is the forefront of my mind. It's the same thing with you Selek1 you have never conceded to anything I've said on the matter.

[ERayR]

I couldn't stomach reading over half of your comments to me. And some are pointless. I'm not asking anyone on this board to accept homosexuality personally. I'm asking you to take the approach that the church has and be careful how you speak about God's children.

If that is your intention I would say you have failed to communicate it well, that is not what your posts seem to say. It is strange that all seem to be getting the same message from you and it isn't what you have just expressed.

Edited August 14, 2012 by ERayR

[USU78]

My wife and I just bought the OT on CD so I can listen while I commute, and we can listen when we're out and about . . . [actually she bought it for me day before yesterday, and I bought her the BoM yesterday]. While listening to the terrified Lot trying to negotiate his way out of a homosexual rape-gang's impositions upon him, his family, and his guests, I was struck by the argument used by the men of Sodom:

Genesis 19:9 And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to ^asojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door.

They made being "judgmental" a hanging offense . . . much as today's homophile orthodoxy does. If you judge me, I am justified in doing whatever to you I judge sufficient. I will burn down your house. I will destroy your business. I will p!$$ on your crucifix. I will do what I please. Your judgmentalism gives me license to kill.

Edited August 14, 2012 by USU78

[KevinG]

My CFR is from the mouths of my parents.

A tradition you may now build upon with greater knowledge.

I have taught my children carefully that they should love their fellow beings and not "freak out" because their beliefs are different. It started at a young age when I taught them that the man smoking was not bad because he was not taught like we were of the Word of Wisdom. However, it would be good for him not to smoke but it is not our place to tell him since we aren't his Dad or his Bishop.

As they got older their homosexual friends found them an unusual source of friendship and support if someone picked on them. Without condoning their actions they were still stalwart friends.

I have a very close friend who my children refer to as Uncle ___. He is homosexual. We love each other very much, like brothers. I support him unconditionally without agreeing with all of his beliefs as he does me. I was accused of having made him up by another poster because I supported Dan Cathy's right to have his opinion on tradition marriage.

Now who is having trouble with open mindedness and diversity of belief?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I'm asking you to take the approach that the church has and be careful how you speak about God's children.

Ok lets get to the heart of the debate. Just exactly how are we not approaching the issues like the church has?

And why do we need to be careful how we speak about God's children. What exactly did we say that was bad? You asserted it pls back it up with facts.

[selek1]

I couldn't stomach reading over half of your comments to me. And some are pointless. I'm not asking anyone on this board to accept homosexuality personally. I'm asking you to take the approach that the church has and be careful how you speak about God's children.

Bull.

You decried everyone who disagrees with your justifications and rationalizations of sin as contributing to their suicides, drug abuse, and assorted other evils. You are against hateful generalizations only when it is your ox being gored.

You are the one who is arguing that any dissent from the LGBT orthodoxy is inherently and inescapably destructive to innocent third-parties.

You are the one who is attempting to censor ideas that you don't like.

You are the one who is attempting to demagogue this issue to the exclusion of reason, logic, and fact.

You are the one attempting to demonize and dehumanize those who disagree with you- and then hiding behind a mask of piety to justify your hypocrisy.

You threw the hateful accusation that we are responsible for the tragedies of suicide, drug abuse, domestic violence, and a host of other ills.

You will bear the stigma of that false accusation.

[wenglund]

In regards to the c/p below, I'd like to request that the stigmatization of gays be stopped. It's un-christlike and those in our church who are in authority, have never been coersive or stigmatized our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters in the church. But some on the MD&D board are continually stigmatizing ruthlessly.

2. Unfortunate incidents like suicide, depression, homelessness, illegal drug use, unsafe sex practices, HIV...come primarily from stigmatization (see def. above) of gays/lesbians and societal disapproval that they face. (IMO, they've been branded)

You really need to get through to your mind the important distinction between SSA and SS desires/behaviors/relationship, because your unqualified statement above is at once both correct and incorrect. What I mean by this is that you are correct in regards to SSA. It should not be stigmatized. You are incorrect in regards to destructive and dysfunctional desires/behaviors/relationships. They rightly should be stigmatized.

For you to not draw this important distinction, is to unwittingly become the pawn of propagandist and uncritically perpetuate debunked myths.

It is also important for you to realize that the notion of social stigmas is not inherently right or wrong or good or bad. What makes it one way or the other, is the thing being stigmatized. If the thing being stigmatized is good, then the stigmatizing is bad, and vice versa.

For example, it was good, and not un-Christlike, for Jesus to stigmatize the moneychangers in the temple as well as the "whited sepulchers" who were out to denigrate him and his followers. Conversely, it was wrong and un-Christlike for the Scribes and Pharisees to stigmatize the Saviour and his disciples.

Furthermore, your point #2 above is demonstrably false, as pointed out to you and others multiple times. The rate of suicides among homosexuals have continued to increase while the stigma of homosexuality has decreased. This inverse relationship busts the myth that suicides are primarily caused by stigmas.

Please. With all your good intents, you really need to put down the Kool-aid and start thinking more critically. It would be in your interest as well as those you kindly wish to help.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited August 14, 2012 by wenglund

[KevinG]

...can I just like Chick-fil-a sandwiches without being a hater?

[USU78]

...can I just like Chick-fil-a sandwiches without being a hater?

No. Haven't you been paying attention?

[selek1]

It's the same thing with you Selek1 you have never conceded to anything I've said on the matter.

You are (to the best of my recollection) correct that I have not.

That having been granted, we are left with a binary solution set:

Either the "fault" lies with your arguments.

--or--

The fault lies in my mindset.

As others can happily attest, I am more than happy to concede where my error or ignorance is made manifest.

That kinda narrows down the possibilities, dunnit?