Mormonsandgays

[volgadon]

How many times on this board have I read gay marriage compared to marrying a dog? And there is Tao right above you saying it is his duty to use the argument that gays are just like pedophiles. Just what do you think the new church web site is about? Just who do you think it is addressing? And just what kinds of dialogue do you think the church is trying to eliminate within the church?

Once you have calmed down, please show me where I have compared gay marriage to marrying a dog.

[Sky]

As most of you know I am gay. I also was a member of the church for many years. When I first heard about the web site mentioned in the op, I was pretty happy. My first thought was wondering if that attitude had been in the church when I came out maybe I would have stayed in the church. It gave me hope that there actually was a place for being a gay member. But after reading the members reactions, I realize that nothing really has changed. The same old attitudes remain. Why is it that almost every thread about gays compares them to pedophiles. Do you ever hear single women compared to pedophiles because they also can't act on their sexuality? Nope, it is only gays that are like pedophiles. And then of course gay relationships are like wanting to marry your dog or cat. Yet no one says your marriage is the same as marrying a cat or dog.

I often think of the verse in 1 Nephi. "Men are that they might have joy" And the verse in Alma, "Wickedness never was happiness" I also think of the verse in Genesis "It is not good for man to be alone" And the verse in Matthew "By the fruits ye shall know whether it be good or evil" I think often about how unhappy my life was while I was so active in the church, trying to please others. Trying to pretend to be something that I wasn't. Knowing that if the members of the ward knew I was gay, their attitudes towards me would change. I was well liked, and had many friends in the church. When I came out, I could count on one hand the number of members that ever talked to me again. That was the reality of being gay in the church.

Since leaving the church, I have found someone in my life that loves me not only for who I am, but because of who I am. I can not tell you how much happier my life is. Sure things are not perfect, but I am sharing my life with someone who loves me and supports me for who I am, not for who they want me to be. Something that I can never become. If this is wicked, why am I so happy. If this is evil, why is the fruit so good. And why am I so darn happy. Aren't I suppose to have some horrible life where all I care about is lust and sexual depravity? Yet my life is nothing like that. I still fill the love of God and I still feel the Spirit. I am not a heathen. I don't worship satan. I am not his spawn. I just happen to be a gay son of God. Would I trade my life for a life where I could never get close to another man for fear that I would fall in love with them and have to break up our friendship time and time again so I could be alone and share my life with no one? No, never. not ever. Do you know why so many gay members leave the church? It is to find happiness, not to run from it.

Things are changing slowly, hopefully for the better. Old ways of thinking die hard. But don't condemn all of us just because of a few off-handed remarks on here. I don't believe your relationship is akin to marrying a cat or dog. And if you're happy, then who am I to tell you any differently? I wish the Church could offer you something more than celibacy, but I'm not sure what that would be. Hopefully if you ever do come back to the Church, you will find a more welcoming atmosphere and a better place than before you left. At least that's what I think we're trying to achieve, and at least that's something.

[RobertAC]

California Boy,

In the short time that I have been on this forum, I have really enjoyed a lot of your posts. I agree with you. A lot of the discussion on any thread here dealing with GLBT people tends to follow a pattern: (1) quick derailment from original post, (2) disagreement about gays/gay marriage, (3) liberal citing of scripture, (4) accusations and sharp words, (5) rinse and repeat. Consequently, I don't tend to participate much beyond the original post.

But back to the original subject of this thread -- I think you would agree with me that this is -- to use an overused phrase -- an historical moment for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and perhaps for a number of religions and denominations that have historically condemned gay people. This is perhaps the first website where the top leadership of a major church has openly discussed gay people and their issues without resorting to smug, arrogant assertions.

This was a bold statement by the First Presidency. To my knowledge, the Roman Catholic Church has not made similar statements; there is no website with the top Cardinals acknowledging that their church has not handled issues relating to gay people well. There is no similar site put up by imams of the Muslim denominations. Nor have the Hasidic rabbis made any conciliatory statements about gays and lesbians.

I have been fortunate in that I have never had a crisis of faith, or a sharp disagreement with my church. So what I am saying may be naive. However, it appears from this website that the LDS leadership, at the highest level of the church, is not asleep at the wheel as the leadership of other major religions are. They know there are religious and temporal issues that their GLBT members must deal with, they realize that their non-GLBT members may be alarmed at recent legal victories for gay marriage and are concerned that there will be same sex marriages in the temples, and the church is attempting to carefully, compassionately, and directly deal with these very different concerns.

Even through the eyes of a nonbeliever, that is a bold and courageous move. It's also the right move.

[california boy]

Things are changing slowly, hopefully for the better. Old ways of thinking die hard. But don't condemn all of us just because of a few off-handed remarks on here. I don't believe your relationship is akin to marrying a cat or dog. And if you're happy, then who am I to tell you any differently? I wish the Church could offer you something more than celibacy, but I'm not sure what that would be. Hopefully if you ever do come back to the Church, you will find a more welcoming atmosphere and a better place than before you left. At least that's what I think we're trying to achieve, and at least that's something.

Thank you for offering a bit of hope. When someone can give me an upside to leaving someone that I deeply love and thank God every day that he is in my life to rejoin the church then maybe I will. At this point, there is no up side to being a member of the Mormon church if you are gay. "Men are that they might have joy" does not apply to gay members.

[california boy]

California Boy,

In the short time that I have been on this forum, I have really enjoyed a lot of your posts. I agree with you. A lot of the discussion on any thread here dealing with GLBT people tends to follow a pattern: (1) quick derailment from original post, (2) disagreement about gays/gay marriage, (3) liberal citing of scripture, (4) accusations and sharp words, (5) rinse and repeat. Consequently, I don't tend to participate much beyond the original post.

But back to the original subject of this thread -- I think you would agree with me that this is -- to use an overused phrase -- an historical moment for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and perhaps for a number of religions and denominations that have historically condemned gay people. This is perhaps the first website where the top leadership of a major church has openly discussed gay people and their issues without resorting to smug, arrogant assertions.

This was a bold statement by the First Presidency. To my knowledge, the Roman Catholic Church has not made similar statements; there is no website with the top Cardinals acknowledging that their church has not handled issues relating to gay people well. There is no similar site put up by imams of the Muslim denominations. Nor have the Hasidic rabbis made any conciliatory statements about gays and lesbians.

I have been fortunate in that I have never had a crisis of faith, or a sharp disagreement with my church. So what I am saying may be naive. However, it appears from this website that the LDS leadership, at the highest level of the church, is not asleep at the wheel as the leadership of other major religions are. They know there are religious and temporal issues that their GLBT members must deal with, they realize that their non-GLBT members may be alarmed at recent legal victories for gay marriage and are concerned that there will be same sex marriages in the temples, and the church is attempting to carefully, compassionately, and directly deal with these very different concerns.

Even through the eyes of a nonbeliever, that is a bold and courageous move. It's also the right move.

Certainly it is a huge leap from the words of Spencer W. Kimball in "Miracle of Forgiveness" that is more to my fathers liking of how to deal with gay sons. And I do hope that the church continues to move toward a more loving and compassionate place. I hope it eventually moves my family to accept a more loving relationship with me. I think this more is more in line with the teachings of Christ. Gays are still children of God. I believe there is a reason why God created me gay. And I don't think it was so I could live an empty life without love or friendship. Or at least in the constant fear that friendship would turn into feelings of love.

The truth is, I believe we are placed on this earth to learn to be more Christ-like. We each follow a different path to learn that lesson. Nothing else in my life has taught me to be more charitable, more compassionate, less willing to judge others or to try and work out someone else's salvation In the end than being gay, I have quit blaming God for making me gay, and now thank Him for the lessons He constantly gives to me because of this one issue in my life.

Edited December 7, 2012 by california boy

[Daniel2]

Did anyone else experience the problem that after "Danille's" video-story, the remaining video links didn't play the intended (statically displayed and summarized) videos, but only kept repeating the "Danielle" video?

Can't tell if it's my system or a link issue.

Daniel

[Kemara]

How many times on this board have I read gay marriage compared to marrying a dog?

I would think about as many times as I have read:

1. That homosexual sex is probably acceptable to God within the bounds of homosexual “marriage”.
   
2. That because Christ does not explicitly state that homosexual “marriage” is an abomination then it is probably acceptable to him.
   
3. That homosexual “marriage” is a matter of human and civil rights.
   
4. Etc. etc. etc.
   

And there is Tao right above you saying it is his duty to use the argument that gays are just like pedophiles.

You failed to keep Tao’s statement within its intended context:

1. It is his duty to unashamedly and without reservation declare the truth.
   
2. In fulfilling this duty he uses extreme examples to counter the extreme nonsense pedalled by homosexual propagandists to justify and excuse an abomination.
   

Tao is using the same logic that homosexual propagandists use. If you and other proponents of the homosexual lifestyle don’t like the logic then stop using it and it will not, of necessity, be used in response.

(Did I get that about right Tao?)

Just what do you think the new church web site is about?

According to the website one of the purposes is to “help Church members respond sensitively and thoughtfully when they encounter same-sex attraction…” This does not mean that anyone should simply accept the perverted justifications used by proponents of homosexuality and homosexual “marriage”. As stated, out of necessity, the same logic that homosexual propagandists use is being used in response, if you don’t like the logic then stop using it. .

Though the tactic has been very successful in other places your attempt to silence opponents of homosexuality by trying to shame them is not going to work here. There is no shame in standing for what is right.

The website also states:

This complex matter touches on the things we care about most:...how we treat each other, and what it means to be disciples of Christ.

As a disciple of Christ, or at least as someone who feels the love of God and feels the spirit, how should you personally be treating others in relation to this matter?

Just who do you think it is addressing?

Everyone including you, what do you think the website is trying to tell you in light of the following?

From a public relations perspective it would be easier for the Church to simply accept homosexual behavior. That we cannot do, for God’s law is not ours to change.

And just what kinds of dialogue do you think the church is trying to eliminate within the church?

Outlandish, extreme and unjustifiable claims made by proponents of God’s law and opponents of God’s law.

One of the websites stated purposes is to:

…reflect the feelings of Church leaders as to how we should treat each other as part of the human family.

I am as much a member of the human family as you, how should you treat me in regards to this issue? Should you try to silence me by trying to shame me? Should you pervert and wrest the scriptures? Should you use extreme measures to justify your lifestyle? Should you be able to use these extreme measures and yet not allow me the same privilege when I respond? Should you be intolerant of others beliefs?

Edited December 7, 2012 by Kemara

[Kemara]

Did anyone else experience the problem that after "Danille's" video-story, the remaining video links didn't play the intended (statically displayed and summarized) videos, but only kept repeating the "Danielle" video?

Can't tell if it's my system or a link issue.

Daniel

All working fine for me.

[Linda]

"The experience of same-sex attraction is a complex reality for many people. The attraction itself is not a sin, but acting on it is. Even though individuals do not choose to have such attractions, they do choose how to respond to them. With love and understanding, the Church reaches out to all God’s children, including our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters."

Replace homosexuality by heterosexuality. Does it make a senseto you? A " good gift of God " is sexuality, and every man has a right to live these responsibly. On the one hand forbids the church homosexual people a marriage, on the other hand the church forces homosexual people tocelibacy. I do not think that this is fair.I by the way am a former member of the church. I was excluded because of transsexualism in 1992. And it was said tome, that if I would not regret my thinking and conduct that I can be never baptized again. And every step of my surgery.

[Linda]

About the Church and transsexuality (unfortunally in German):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSA_rt6uSsU

[Chaos]

The Church’s approach to this issue stands apart from society in many ways. And that’s alright. Reasonable people can and do differ. From a public relations perspective it would be easier for the Church to simply accept homosexual behavior. That we cannot do, for God’s law is not ours to change. There is no change in the Church’s position of what is morally right. But what is changing — and what needs to change — is to help Church members respond sensitively and thoughtfully when they encounter same-sex attraction in their own families, among other Church members, or elsewhere.

There are a few hot button topics that we have had to take aggressive measures to control. This is one of them. Insensitive and unthoughtful comments about same sex attraction are not going to be accepted on this board. That includes any comparisons to animals or criminals. Likewise, those that disagree with the Mormon church on this matter are expected to do it respectfully. We have been fortunate to have soft spoken and patient posters willing to speak from a gay perspective.

One poster has been banned. We do not tolerate race baiting and we will not tolerate gay bashing under the guise of defending the church.

[canard78]

There are a few hot button topics that we have had to take aggressive measures to control. This is one of them. Insensitive and unthoughtful comments about same sex attraction are not going to be accepted on this board. That includes any comparisons to animals or criminals. Likewise, those that disagree with the Mormon church on this matter are expected to do it respectfully. We have been fortunate to have soft spoken and patient posters willing to speak from a gay perspective.

One poster has been banned. We do not tolerate race baiting and we will not tolerate gay bashing under the guise of defending the church.

Thank you for making the point so strongly. I hope that this is able to stay open for as long as possible. I appreciate that it's something that people feel passionately about, but agree that the comparisons being made were insensitive at best and aggressively insulting at worst.

It would be nice if this thread could have been a for people to discuss this new statement by the church. It still could be.

In the hope of taking it towards that, here's my take:

I welcome and celebrate this website. I recognise that in years past I was probably too quick to judge and condemn homosexuals. I was ill-informed and, in part, influenced by the prejudices and occasional bigotry in adult members around me. I recognise I was wrong in that perception. I am grateful the church is taking steps to educate the membership of the reality of homosexual preferences and how to show love and support to those with a same sex attraction.

As I stated earlier in the thread, I hope that one day there will be a scenario where gay marriage may be endorsed by the church. While it is not I will sustain the prophet and the policy and welcome their bravery in going this far. I recognise it will recive a negative reaction from some quarters and possibly even a falling away for some.

In addition to sustaining the prophet I also support a gay person's right to balance what they may consider a God-given tendency with their desire to worship God. I don't believe the church has an exclusivity on truth or opportunity to help God's children find peace, joy and God's love during this mortal experience.

If Gay mormons feel a married life outside the church offers a more spiritually uplifting and fulfilling mortal probation then I understand that and respect their reasons for doing so.

I cannot begin to imagine how challenging the experience of being a homosexual Mormon must be and my thoughts, support and good wishes extend to them.

(I am not a political activist or campaigner. I have no vested interest in policy/doctrinal change. In my home country, gay-marriage is already legal)

[CV75]

Sin is only breaking the law of God, and now the law is precisely specified to be completely fullfilled by this single statement: http://bible.cc/galatians/5-14.htm

Thus anything at all that is not specifically at least slightly hateful is not a sin.

Please provide your definitions of love and hat and how they are manifeste, and of sin and goodness and thow hey are manifest, and how each plays out in our relationship with one another, including God. Thank you.

[Tacenda]

Certainly it is a huge leap from the words of Spencer W. Kimball in "Miracle of Forgiveness" that is more to my fathers liking of how to deal with gay sons. And I do hope that the church continues to move toward a more loving and compassionate place. I hope it eventually moves my family to accept a more loving relationship with me. I think this more is more in line with the teachings of Christ. Gays are still children of God. I believe there is a reason why God created me gay. And I don't think it was so I could live an empty life without love or friendship. Or at least in the constant fear that friendship would turn into feelings of love.

The truth is, I believe we are placed on this earth to learn to be more Christ-like. We each follow a different path to learn that lesson. Nothing else in my life has taught me to be more charitable, more compassionate, less willing to judge others or to try and work out someone else's salvation In the end than being gay, I have quit blaming God for making me gay, and now thank Him for the lessons He constantly gives to me because of this one issue in my life.

As the old expression goes..... right on California boy!

[TAO]

This about makes me throw up. There is no other group or argument that gets compared pedophiles more than gays by Mormons on this site, and you say it is your duty to do so?

How do you propose dealing with the poor arguments that are brought up then?

That Mormon web site is working for you isn't it.

Huh?

[Darren10]

The focus on love and kindness is not new, but the particulars of how we approach gay people, especially our children, has changed. No longer do we teach that homosexuality is a choice. No longer do we try to cure homosexuals through therapy or heterosexual marriage. Instead, we accept them as they are and ask them to remain celebate for life. That is quite a change. And it sets the table for eventual inclusion of homosexuals in the plan of salvation.

It's the same process as with the racial priesthood ban. Once we removed the idea that black people were responsible for the ban due to choices in the pre-existence, once we removed the idea that black people will eventually be turned white, once we simply accepted blacks as they are - well, that inevitably lead, over time, to questioning why they couldn't receive all priesthood blessings in this life even though our doctrine had said they would not receive the priesthood until all whites had a chance. Questioning lead to desires for something better. Desires lead to prayer and revelation. And the doctrine changed. No longer would blacks need to wait until all whites had a chance.

Again, I am confident that as members of the church interact with and get to know gay people - in particular gay families - we will see the Lord's hand guiding the church on this issue. We will find answers previously unknown.

"Our doctrine" was that blacks will not get the priesthood until all white "had a chance"? Huh? Is this part of the cultural perception Mormons had regarding blacks and the priesthood? Me very confused on this though I agree that key to this and any issue is to turn to the Lord for guidance.

[Senator]

The only "movement" I can forsee the church making in regards to the issue of homosexual individuals that wish to remain in the church and live in celibacy, is to reinstitute the practice of, shall we call, "ordinance only sealings". Therefore an individual who has chosen a life of celibacy can still partake of and receive of all the ordinances offered by the church.

These sealings would be made with the understanding of no temporal, or earthly bind or obligation. Strictly for eternal fulfillment.

What do you think?

[TAO]

And there is Tao right above you saying it is his duty to use the argument that gays are just like pedophiles.

Removed since some don't like it.

Alas, I don't think the mods are too happy with me in this thread, so I'll retire. Bye.

Edited December 7, 2012 by TAO

[TAO]

You failed to keep Tao’s statement within its intended context:

1. It is his duty to unashamedly and without reservation declare the truth.
   
2. In fulfilling this duty he uses extreme examples to counter the extreme nonsense pedalled by homosexual propagandists to justify and excuse an abomination.
   

Tao is using the same logic that homosexual propagandists use. If you and other proponents of the homosexual lifestyle don’t like the logic then stop using it and it will not, of necessity, be used in response.

Well kinda... it's more like I'm using the argumens used to justify homosexuality to justify things people don't like. It doesn't seem to be making some happy at all though.

[Dcharle]

It appears that the church is changing it's rigid stance on weather people are born gay. - Faust, among many others clearly proclaimed that being born gay is a "false belief" the church now correctly affirms that these individuals did not chose. Funny how quickly the "revealed" word of god can reverse itself!. Times are a changing!

Apostle James E. Faust, "Serving the Lord and Resisting the Devil," Church Gerneral Conference, Spring 1995.

"There is some widely accepted theory extant that homosexuality is inherited. How can this be? No scientific evidence demonstrates absolutely that this is so. Besides, if it were so, it would frustrate the whole plan of mortal happiness. Our designation as men or women began before this world was. In contrast to the socially accepted doctrine that homosexuality is inborn, a number of respectable authorities contend that homosexuality is not acquired by birth. The false belief of inborn homosexual orientation denies to repentant souls the opportunity to change and will ultimately lead to discouragement, disappointment, and despair."

The Mormon church has launched a new campaign encouraging its members to be more compassionate toward the LGBT community.

On Thursday, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints launched the websitemormonsandgays.com, in which it calls for Mormons of all stripes to "love one another."

the new campaign reflects an "evolution from [the church's] past teachings" as it asserts that sexuality is not a personal choice.

An official statement posted on the new website reads:

The experience of same-sex attraction is a complex reality for many people. The attraction itself is

not a sin, but acting on it is.

Even though individuals do not choose to have such attractions,

they do choose how to respond to them. With love and understanding, the Church reaches out to all God’s children, including our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters.

[canard78]

I said it was my duty to use analogies to dismiss poor arguments, and thus, I often used analogies. I did not compare gay people to pedophiles in the way you insinuated. In fact, the only real comparison I made (or at lest intended to make) was that they are both socially rejected groups. You see, it's somewhat contradictory, that's what I have been trying to point out; that some see their gay relationship as loving, and justified because of that loving, and yet you don't see pedophilic relationships as possibly loving. Those are the sort of analogies I am using; I look for contradictions. Understand?

It is a contradiction and you have already been warned against offensive parallels (pedophilia is a crime and Chaos directly banned that) but you continue to make them. For the sake of those who would like to discuss how to support and promote the new policy rather than continue to oppose and insult gay people, please leave the thread alone to stop it being locked.

How can a sexual relationship between a 5 year old and a 45 year old be anything other than abusive and abhorrent? The 5 year old is in no position to make a mature choice and their innocence is being grossly abused. Two consenting adults who are fully able to make a mature decision on their actions can not be compared to a pedophile.

[BlueDreams]

California boy,

For what its worth, I think a lot of middle voices get drowned out by those who use offensive analogies. At least, I'm less likely to post when that is so. I do not agree that the church will be changing it's stance on homosexuality any time soon, I wouldn't be throwing in my lot with odd analogies that are offensive. So I stay out, even though I certainly have an opinion.

Tao,

It isn't a contradiction. It's a really crappy analogy that is offensive. I don't care how indirect it is. There is no really good dialogue that can occur when you feel like your relationship is denigrated to the level a paraphilia and an actual sexual disorder that is criminal. I have my disagreements with Cali Boy's arguments, but to go to that extreme appears as a insensitive or prejudicial judgment, nothing more. Take it from someone who have felt the ramifications of both homosexuality and pedophilia with friends and family. They are in no way comparable. Pedophilia is a manipulative means for sexual gratification that tears families apart and often leaves deep psychological struggles for years to come. There is nothing loving or mutual or justifiably redeemable about it. It's a form of abuse and exploitation. If someone is in a loving, committed, consensual relationship between 2 adults, whatever that be they do not deserve any form of comparison to such a practice no matter the level of social acceptance. You're not even comparing apples to oranges. You're comparing apples to the fungus covered rot that was once an orange and saying, look they're both sort of fruit.

With luv,

BD

[TAO]

For the sake of those who would like to discuss how to support and promote the new policy rather than continue to oppose and insult gay people, please leave the thread alone to stop it being locked.

I will leave, to keep the peace. But please respect me by not making the faulty arguments like the one you make later on in this post. Consenting and adults are relative opinions.

[canard78]

I will leave, to keep the peace. But please respect me by not making the faulty arguments like the one you make later on in this post. Consenting and adults are relative opinions.

Ok, I'll try to. It's not my intention to be offensive and I try to be reasonable in my posts. I'm just trying to help people appreciate the arguments and comparisons being made are not positive nor considerate. I think BlueDreams has expressed better than I could why it's an unfair comparison.

[california boy]

I would think about as many times as I have read:

1. That homosexual sex is probably acceptable to God within the bounds of homosexual “marriage”.
   
2. That because Christ does not explicitly state that homosexual “marriage” is an abomination then it is probably acceptable to him.
   
3. That homosexual “marriage” is a matter of human and civil rights.
   
4. Etc. etc. etc.
   

You failed to keep Tao’s statement within its intended context:

1. It is his duty to unashamedly and without reservation declare the truth.
   
2. In fulfilling this duty he uses extreme examples to counter the extreme nonsense pedalled by homosexual propagandists to justify and excuse an abomination.
   

Tao is using the same logic that homosexual propagandists use. If you and other proponents of the homosexual lifestyle don’t like the logic then stop using it and it will not, of necessity, be used in response.

(Did I get that about right Tao?)

Except I have never said that homosexuality was accepted by Christ or that gay marriage is acceptible to God. I have ONLY pointed out two things.

1. Christ was on the earth for 3 years. If Paul knew so much about what was happening in the culture at that time with gays, it is safe to assume that Christ would as well, yet at not time in His recorded three year ministry did He condemn homosexuality. He had no problem telling pedophiles that a millstone should be tied around their neck and dropped in the ocean. He didn't say that gays should suffer the same fate.

2. There is no place in the scriptures nor in modern times where any prophet in the church has claimed to have a direct revelation on the issue of gay marriage.

I have never advocated that the church change it's position on gay marriage. If the church wants to have such a policy, then I defend their right to have such a policy.

According to the website one of the purposes is to “help Church members respond sensitively and thoughtfully when they encounter same-sex attraction…” This does not mean that anyone should simply accept the perverted justifications used by proponents of homosexuality and homosexual “marriage”. As stated, out of necessity, the same logic that homosexual propagandists use is being used in response, if you don’t like the logic then stop using it. .

The way to influence gays is not telling them they are the same as pedophiles, and telling them their marriage is the same as marrying a dog, but rather to love and support them. The church can devote an entire web site to this issue, yet I did not find one statement by the church telling gays that they are just like pedophiles. Maybe it is time for members to take their que from church leaders on how to treat gays.

Though the tactic has been very successful in other places your attempt to silence opponents of homosexuality by trying to shame them is not going to work here. There is no shame in standing for what is right.

Ok now you are really stretching things. No one is silencing anyones views on homosexuality. Is all I am asking for is a bit more civility. If you can not make your arguments against homosexuality without comparing them to pedophiles, perhaps you should get better arguments. The church seems to make their point without using such degrading language. Members that resort to this type of behavior are not changing anyones minds concerning homosexuality. It just makes them feel better to think of gays the same way as they think of pedophiles.

The website also states:

This complex matter touches on the things we care about most:...how we treat each other, and what it means to be disciples of Christ.

As a disciple of Christ, or at least as someone who feels the love of God and feels the spirit, how should you personally be treating others in relation to this matter?

Oh I don't know. Why not follow the example of Christ. He was able to go through his entire ministry without telling anyone they reminded Him of pedophiles or that their relationships were about like marrying a cat. You just don't get it do you. If your goal is to love and influence gays both within and outside the church to come unto Christ, you should be rethinking your approach. You can simply say the church does not accept homosexual behavior nor does it support gay marriage without telling them they are like pedophiles. That is what the Spirit is telling me.

Everyone including you, what do you think the website is trying to tell you in light of the following?

From a public relations perspective it would be easier for the Church to simply accept homosexual behavior. That we cannot do, for God’s law is not ours to change.

I would conclude that the church has no intentions of accepting homosexual behavior at this time and maybe forever.

Outlandish, extreme and unjustifiable claims made by proponents of God’s law and opponents of God’s law.

One of the websites stated purposes is to:

I am as much a member of the human family as you, how should you treat me in regards to this issue? Should you try to silence me by trying to shame me? Should you pervert and wrest the scriptures? Should you use extreme measures to justify your lifestyle? Should you be able to use these extreme measures and yet not allow me the same privilege when I respond? Should you be intolerant of others beliefs?

I think it is clear from the message of the church that it is time for members of the church to stop comparing gays to pedophiles and telling them their marriage is like marrying a cat. I think the church is telling the world that they will treat gays with respect and dignity and hope that members do as well. I think you can have a discussion about belief without resorting to dialogue that is degrading and unjustified. I think that we can all respect that we have different beliefs on this subject without resorting to crude language. If you have an argument against gay marriage, then state it. Comparing their relationship to marrying a cat is not an argument, it is just insulting. Do you think any gay person sees such analogy as being the least bit compelling?

I think gays should treat the church and its beliefs with respect and dignity. I think that gays should not resort to name calling or crude language when discussing the beliefs of the Mormon church. That is what the Spirit is telling me and that is what I have always tried to do on this board.