Dating Website For Mormons With Same-Sex Attraction

[Sethbag]

Sethbag, tried to PM you, but your box is full or something?

Hang on, I'll look into it. I haven't been on this board very much in (in its various incarnations) for the last 5 years or so. Let me see what state the mailbox is in.

By the way, I do have to compliment the various board admins over time. When I first started here, it was the FAIR board, and then the MADB board, and now this. And it's possible I skipped a board incarnation in there somewhere. And yet my login is preserved, my post count, PMs, etc. It's pleasantly surprising how they've been able to keep some continuity even as they've changed the board so much.

[smac97]

This is the main complaint I have with what comes across to me as an in-your-face style of defending the Church's stance on the morality of homosexual behavior used by smac et al. It is simply not the same thing to ask a heterosexual woman with no willing marriage partners to abstain from sex than it is to ask a gay man to avoid forming such a relationship to any degree (unless someone is willing to state the church would allow gay relationships that are abstinent?)

I don't get this complaint. So you want me to ... what? Express compassion? I've done that. Understanding? I've tried to do that, too, though not too much, lest I be accused by people like you along the lines of "How dare you claim that you understand the plight of homosexuals in the Church! You don't know their pain!" I'm darned if I do, darned if I don't, darned no matter what I say, as long as what I say includes a firm support of the Law of Chastity.

And please no one say that the single woman could always pay for a whore (gigolo?) or that a married man may well have a willing adulterer. Don't insult anyone's intelligence in claiming that is the same in any way shape or form.

What on earth are you talking about?

If a gay person is able to follow the church's requirements, which are undoubtedly beyond those asked of any heterosexual member,

My radar goes off any time someone claims their own opinion to be "undoubted."

You are speaking in broad generalities. And you are trivializing the struggles of other Church members. And to what end? To create martyrs. To foment division within the Church. To point to your preferred pet project and say "Those people suffer more than some other group in which I do not have a vested interest."

I see no value in lionizing the struggle of homosexual members of the Church. Recognizing that struggle, yes. Working to show compassion and love, yes. Assisting the Church in its efforts in this regard, yes. But is there value in people like you bloviatingabout this struggle being harder than others? I don't think so. It comes across almost as a plea for attention. And not a healthy type of attention, but in a weird "Look at me and my struggle, and give me more attention than you give to others" type of way.

Luke 18 speaks of a pharisee who prayed to God by saying "God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess." The pharisee what wrong to do this, not because his actions were wrong, but because his motives were wrong, and because he used his actions to build up his pride.

Meanwhile, a nearby publican, "standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner." No pride. No calls for attention. Just a sinner who recognizes himself as such, and seeks mercy as such. In humility.

Again, I have compassion for those who struggle with same-sex attraction. But I question the value of elevating their struggle by demeaning the struggles of others.

I have been accused of being "callous" in this thread. I suppose I can see bluntness being construed as callousness. Online text can only convey so much subtlety and nuance, you see. But I am not callous to this issue. I have given it a great deal of thought and study, and I have come to the conclusion that the LDS Church's stance is correct and appropriate. As for my failure to pour my heart out in commiseration and sympathy on an online message board, yeah, I don't do that. And to the extent my comments have been adversely viewed, I invite readers to re-read the thread. You will find that my "callousness" has not been directed at homosexuals, but as people who, in sympathizing with homosexuals, vilify the LDS Church by accusing it of fomenting suicide, etc.

then they have my respect and sympathy for what must be a difficult burden bear.

They have my respect and sympathy as well. But that respect and sympathy does not extend to the point of capitulation on the Law of Chastity. Again, this thread started out as a discussion about a website designed to encourage members of the LDS Church to break the Law of Chastity. Some participants in this thread support this endeavor. I do not.

Not sympathy that they have chosen the church's path, because I hope they chose it becasue it brings them happiness, but sympathy that they have to deal with a very difficult challenge in order to attain that happiness.

Same here.

I also have sympathy for one of my students, who has a learning disability, hearing loss, and leg and spinal impairments.

I also have sympathy for one of my other students, who recently lost her son to suicide.

I also have sympathy for my grandmother, who lived as a widow for 27 years.

I also have sympathy for friends who have never married.

I also have sympathy for friends and family who have been through a divorce, lost custody of their children, and so on.

I also have sympathy for friends and family who struggle with substance abuse.

I also have sympathy for parents who lose their children to illness or accident, or children who lose parents to illness or accident.

I also have sympathy for my brother, who in a few years will have spent half of his life in prison.

I see people all around me with struggles. Struggles objectively great and small, and subjectively great and small.

I see no value in demeaning some struggles in favor of others. It is not a useful exercise. If anything, such comparisons come across, strangely enough, as an exercise in pride.

-Smac

Edited January 17, 2013 by smac97

[Ahab]

The thing is, I find myself sympathizing with many of Smac's and Sethbag's arguments, while also not completely agreeing with either of them. But how can this be, seeing as how they are on the opposite sides of the issue? I'm rather torn at the moment - help!!

The reason why I can sympathize with and understand both arguments is because I have experienced firsthand and continue to experience same-gender attraction in my own life. I'm also an active member of the Church. Yes, I'm gay, if that's the terminology you prefer to use (it makes no difference to me either way). Some of you are aware of this, others not. I'm not one to advertise it much. But my orientation is what it is, and has been what it is for almost my entire life. I didn't choose it anymore than any of you straight guys chose to wake up and like girls.

Unfortunately, I don't foresee my orientation changing anytime during my lifetime here. So, the approach that I try to take is "what can i learn from this?" "How can I best live my life so as to be in harmony with what my understanding is of God's expectations?" Some days I am better at it than other days. Sometimes I fail miserably at it. Sometimes I want to quit. I understand full well, firsthand what the Church expects of me, and it is not exactly equivalent of what they expect from a straight person. I am unable to have a completely fulfilling, satisfying sexual relationship in the same way that I would be able to have if I were a straight person. And please spare me the argument that what is being asked of me is no different than if I were a single, hetero sister, and the opportunity to get married simply passed me by. They may have some parallels to each other, but they are not the same thing.

And I can't just get up and leave the Church, either, as logical and sane of a decision as that may seem to some. The Church has been able to help fill a spiritual void in my life that I don't think I would be able to find elsewhere. Through my membership in the Church, I have learned that I am a son of my Heavenly Father and that I am a part of something much larger than just myself or my current situation. I'm no different than anybody else in the sense that we all have struggles and that I have to work out my own salvation with fear and trembling before the judgement bar of God. I just happen to struggle with something that is poorly understood. There has got to be a more reasonable middle ground than the extremes of either Smac's or Sethbag's positions...

My life is a work in progress; I don't have all the answers to this, and I'm okay with that. That's all I have to say for now...

I can actually empathize with you, because I had and sometimes still have similar thoughts of attraction to other people of the same sex as I am, even though I'm now happily married to someone of the opposite sex. Those thoughts and desires can be overcome, though. I'm living proof that it can happen, and without any so-called professional help.

For me it's just about realizing what is good for me and other men, and what isn't, and then choosing only what is good for me and other men. It's as simple and as complex as that. It involves some effort to control my passions, so it's not something I can always do on auto-pilot without thinking about what I'm thinking, and it also requires an understanding of why it is bad for people of the same sex to have sexual relations together. If you don't understand why it is, I'm sure you can find people to explain it to you, other than me, but I can also help you with that if you want.

Food lovers are attracted to certain types of food that aren't good for them, too, but that doesn't mean they have to eat everything they can think of that they think they would enjoy eating, and just because I can see a lot of good in other men that makes them desirable to me, much like women do I imagine when they see something good in a man, that doesn't mean I should want to have or even think about having sexual relations with men who I find attractive. That man should be with a woman, not me or any other man, so that each person can enjoy the best things that can be enjoyed by any person of any sex. An eternal family, for one thing, but also for each person to be able to enjoy everything each person of the opposite sex has to offer.

Edited January 17, 2013 by Ahab

[Chaos]

There is too much backbiting going on. Talk respectfully no matter what side you are on or the thread will be closed.

[Gillebre]

Maybe I'm weird, because I struggle with same sex attraction and find every point Smac made to be appropriate and authentic. I've been following his posts in this thread, and I sincerely believe he has been careful in his words, and answered with integrity.

The truth is that same sex attraction is a terrible affliction. I call it an affliction because that's how I see it. It's a barrier between me and my eternal destiny as a son of God, if I let it.

What I will say about it is this: it is misunderstood, significantly so, by most, imo. It feels completely normal, and the most natural thing to one who has such feelings. The commandments are the same regardless of our attractions, although I will always testify that of all the sins under heaven with which we are inclined to act upon, SSA is really in the danger zone. Why? If followed to it's natural conclusion, it is opposite in every aspect to the Plan of Happiness.

If someone who struggles with feelings of same sex attraction were to ask me what I do in order to stay faithful to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, this is what I'd tell them:

Read your scriptures daily. Pray every morning, and every evening, and every moment in between in which you stand in need of the grace of God. Make a conscious choice to be in control of your actions, and not let them be controlled by anything else (addictions, lust, etc...). Repent often, and behave in such a way to be open to every blessing under Heaven. Dedicate every day to living a life like the Savior lived. If these things are done with sincerity, and you apply the Atonement in your life, you will find real changes and real success in all things.

You might call some of those things seminary answers, but I testify in the name of the Savior that if you seek to overcome the trials of your life, whether they be same sex attraction, or any other thing, that's how you do it. Day by day. It's not easy, but because of the Atonement it is possible.

I have great empathy for my brothers and sisters with this set of trials, and I pray for them every single day. I know what it's like, and I know the path isn't easy, but with His help, we can walk it.

As far as this website originally referenced in the OP, I agree with Smac's conclusions thus far. It only serves to sift the people, to lead their hearts away from the Lord and the bounds He has set for all of us.

Sky, I admire your courage in remaining faithful to the gospel standards, and want you to know that you're far from alone in the struggle. Thank you for your example.

[The Nehor]

I think we have left the original topic so I would just like to say that I now have a date tonight due to this website. She looks a little masculine but we will see how it goes.

[Ahab]

SSA is really in the danger zone. Why? If followed to it's natural conclusion, it is opposite in every aspect to the Plan of Happiness.

That's a good way to put it, but there are other terms that can apply just as well. It can also help someone to explain how it does that, too, instead of just saying it does and then leaving it at just that. But then some people are hyper sensitive and don't want o hear about any of that.

[Ahab]

I think we have left the original topic so I would just like to say that I now have a date tonight due to this website. She looks a little masculine but we will see how it goes.

Crocodile Dundee showed a way to find out if it's a bloke or a sheila. You might want to keep that in mind while you're out.

[Gillebre]

That's a good way to put it, but there are other terms that can apply just as well. It can also help someone to explain how it does that, too, instead of just saying it does and then leaving it at just that. But then some people are hyper sensitive and don't want o hear about any of that.

Well, I figure that if someone wants to know more about my thoughts on something I posted about, they'll message me privately. As you said, some of our brothers and sisters can be sensitive, and I want to take a balanced approach. I will defend the truth with all that I have, and explain it in as compassionate a way as I can, but I forbear on boldness of speech.

I'm not wise enough to be bold and maintain the things He would have me say, in the way they should be said.

So, to any person who reads posts that I make, if you wish to know more about my position on the matter at hand, I invite you to message me privately, and I promise to share the things the Lord has in mercy given me.

Edited January 17, 2013 by Gillebre

[Ahab]

Well, I figure that if someone wants to know more about my thoughts on something I posted about, they'll message me privately. As you said, some of our brothers and sisters can be sensitive, and I want to take a balanced approach. I will defend the truth with all that I have, and explain it in as compassionate a way as I can, but I forbear on boldness of speech.

I'm not wise enough to be bold and maintain the things He would have me say, in the way they should be said.

So, to any person who reads posts that I make, if you wish to know more about my position on the matter at hand, I invite you to message me privately, and I promise to share the things the Lord has in mercy given me.

Bold? I suppose that's one way to look at it. I've been told often enough that I'm direct and outspoken, but I prefer to describe myself as just "open". I don't see any good reason to hold back what I think, as long as I try to be nice. I don't ever intend to be rude but when I don't like something I have no problem letting others know about it, while trying to be nice. To me being respectful is all about being nice to people, whether or not I have a high regard for the thoughts of others.

Anyway, still, some people don't like it when I let them know what I think, even when I'm trying to be nice, so in places like this I have to be aware that some people, call moderators, can ban or suspend me when they don't like what I say as I try to be nice while sharing my thoughts with others.

[Kemara]

Actually the crisis was seeded by Joseph Smith pretending to be a prophet, inventing scriptures, producing revelations on demand to achieve his own personal ends, and so forth. The incident to which you refer is literally a drop in the bucket. But that won't stop you from inventing your own narrative of my apostasy, one that will achieve your ends of delegitimizing it.

Its difficult to keep up with you on this Sethbag, the story of your tragic and heroic struggle changes so often and is so full of contradictions that invention is probably a good word all round.

[The Nehor]

Its difficult to keep up with you on this Sethbag, the story of your tragic and heroic struggle changes so often and is so full of contradictions that invention is probably a good word all round.

The story could benefit if you add demon zombie nazis. Just saying.....

[Kemara]

The story could benefit if you add demon zombie nazis. Just saying.....

Just wait a while, it wont be long before the demon zombie nazis are in there, probably riding on dragons.

[The Nehor]

So does the website have personality tests?

[Ahab]

Just wait a while, it wont be long before the demon zombie nazis are in there, probably riding on dragons.

Dragons. Yeah! That always helps to make a story more interesting. Even God has a story about a battle against... well, at least one dragon. More dragons would make a story even more interesting.

[The Nehor]

Dragons. Yeah! That always helps to make a story more interesting. Even God has a story about a battle against... well, at least one dragon. More dragons would make a story even more interesting.

Michael fights the dragon though it was more of a hydra with the multiple heads.

[Gillebre]

Bold? I suppose that's one way to look at it. I've been told often enough that I'm direct and outspoken, but I prefer to describe myself as just "open". I don't see any good reason to hold back what I think, as long as I try to be nice. I don't ever intend to be rude but when I don't like something I have no problem letting others know about it, while trying to be nice. To me being respectful is all about being nice to people, whether or not I have a high regard for the thoughts of others.

Anyway, still, some people don't like it when I let them know what I think, even when I'm trying to be nice, so in places like this I have to be aware that some people, call moderators, can ban or suspend me when they don't like what I say as I try to be nice while sharing my thoughts with others.

I understand what you mean, I share your feelings about being direct. I want to be careful with what I say, and I know that even though someone will always take it in a way it wasn't meant, I feel led to be more cautious. I love the way Elder Holland speaks, too. haha.

[Ahab]

I understand what you mean, I share your feelings about being direct. I want to be careful with what I say, and I know that even though someone will always take it in a way it wasn't meant, I feel led to be more cautious. I love the way Elder Holland speaks, too. haha.

Just a different approach to communications, not that either one is better or worse, I think. I hold back sometimes too when I think the person doesn't want to know what I know or think what I think. My main goal is to try to help people, and I think I've learned a lot which can help other people, but sometimes I think it's better to let people learn or not learn through their own experiences.

Even God won't strive forever to teach people what they don't want to learn.

[Ahab]

Michael fights the dragon though it was more of a hydra with the multiple heads.

There's a lot more to the story about the dragon than just that little bit. The serpent in the garden of Eden was that very same dragon, although in Genesis it is referred to as a serpent, and the battle is still going on now between God and that dragon. I'm pretty sure I know how the story will end, at least up to the point where he'll be cast into outer darkness, but it's still a nail biter for me. And it's all live, even better than Dolby Digital.

[Calm]

.

So, to any person who reads posts that I make, if you wish to know more about my position on the matter at hand, I invite you to message me privately, and I promise to share the things the Lord has in mercy given me.

You are a good hearted person, Gillebre.

[Calm]

The story could benefit if you add demon zombie nazis. Just saying.....

Any story can benefit if you add demon zombie nazis....should go without having to say.

[Ahab]

Any story can benefit if you add demon zombie nazis....should go without having to say.

Yeah, but doesn't it make you look forward to hearing a story if it has some demon zombie nazis in it... and riding dragons? I wonder if anyone will be riding a dragon in any of the upcoming additions to the Hobbie movie? I'm really in the mood for some demon zombie nazis riding dragons now. Any suggestions? And no, I don't want to have to think up my own movie.

Hey Sethbag!!! When are you going to come back here and tell us more of your story???

[Sethbag]

I don't know if this surprises you guys, but I do think that Smac's ideas in this thread are true to the vast bulk of Mormon thought on the subject of homosexuality going back quite some time. If Mormonism could be said to have doctrine on the subject, I agree he probably is in accordance with it. Some of my fellow apostates would probably scream at me for saying this, Smac must be wrong! Well I agree that Smac is wrong, but not because he's out of step with the church. I think the church is wrong too, and Smac is a product of its wrongheadedness.

I don't know what it's like to be the guys who've posted in this thread saying, basically, that they're gay and think that's bad and they're trying mightily to live the LDS lifestyle so they can go to the Celestial Kingdom and, presumably, not be gay anymore. I've never been gay before, never will, and I can only attempt to empathize with them, but will never truly understand.

I would say it makes me a little sad that Gillebre says he "struggles with same sex attraction" rather than saying he's gay, but that always comes across as patronizing, and I hate it when Mormons do that with apostates (oh you've left the church? that makes me sad!), so I'll try to say this as respectfully as I can: you guys are grown men, you know what you're doing, you've thought through this as best you can, you've got the first-hand experience of a life situation that people like Smac and myself can only imagine. You're trying to live the LDS dream life, which is always going to be very, very difficult for people like you. My hat's off to you. By way of anti-testimony, let me just say you don't need to consider yourself "afflicted with same sex attraction". The reason why it doesn't feel like an affliction to you is because it isn't one. It's just one of the ways people are, entirely through whatever natural processes dictate our development. You learn to think of it as an affliction because people tell you that's what it is. The people telling you this are basing this claim, ultimately, on misunderstanding and bigotry, either their own, or more likely the misunderstanding and bigotry of the pepole who originated those teachings.

Whether you choose to continue subjecting yourself to such teachings is entirely up to you. You don't have to. It's a choice that you must make, and nobody can or should make it for you. It is my opinion that you are not "afflicted with SSA" so much as you are "afflicted with unnecessary and misguided guilt" over the way you just happen to be. Unlike homosexuality, which you didn't choose and didn't ask for, the guilt, shame, and misguided teachings regarding how you are are all something that only need to afflict you if you choose to continue to accept and believe them, and let them rule you/.

I say this in the name of chocolate bars and Macedonian shish kebab, amen.

If you continue lecturing posters you will be removed from the thread.

[Sky]

I don't know if this surprises you guys, but I do think that Smac's ideas in this thread are true to the vast bulk of Mormon thought on the subject of homosexuality going back quite some time. If Mormonism could be said to have doctrine on the subject, I agree he probably is in accordance with it. Some of my fellow apostates would probably scream at me for saying this, Smac must be wrong! Well I agree that Smac is wrong, but not because he's out of step with the church. I think the church is wrong too, and Smac is a product of its wrongheadedness.

I don't know what it's like to be the guys who've posted in this thread saying, basically, that they're gay and think that's bad and they're trying mightily to live the LDS lifestyle so they can go to the Celestial Kingdom and, presumably, not be gay anymore. I've never been gay before, never will, and I can only attempt to empathize with them, but will never truly understand.

I would say it makes me a little sad that Gillebre says he "struggles with same sex attraction" rather than saying he's gay, but that always comes across as patronizing, and I hate it when Mormons do that with apostates (oh you've left the church? that makes me sad!), so I'll try to say this as respectfully as I can: you guys are grown men, you know what you're doing, you've thought through this as best you can, you've got the first-hand experience of a life situation that people like Smac and myself can only imagine. You're trying to live the LDS dream life, which is always going to be very, very difficult for people like you. My hat's off to you. By way of anti-testimony, let me just say you don't need to consider yourself "afflicted with same sex attraction". The reason why it doesn't feel like an affliction to you is because it isn't one. It's just one of the ways people are, entirely through whatever natural processes dictate our development. You learn to think of it as an affliction because people tell you that's what it is. The people telling you this are basing this claim, ultimately, on misunderstanding and bigotry, either their own, or more likely the misunderstanding and bigotry of the pepole who originated those teachings.

Whether you choose to continue subjecting yourself to such teachings is entirely up to you. You don't have to. It's a choice that you must make, and nobody can or should make it for you. It is my opinion that you are not "afflicted with SSA" so much as you are "afflicted with unnecessary and misguided guilt" over the way you just happen to be. Unlike homosexuality, which you didn't choose and didn't ask for, the guilt, shame, and misguided teachings regarding how you are are all something that only need to afflict you if you choose to continue to accept and believe them, and let them rule you/.

I say this in the name of chocolate bars and Macedonian shish kebab, amen.

I think the vast majority of people out there probably share your views, even amongst many members of the Church.

But some of us happen to love Mormonism and all that it has to offer, and even find a measure of happiness in our faith. Shocking, I know! You don't believe in the Church at all, and I realize that you probably think that I'm totally deluded or brainwashed, and that's fine. I think it would probably be pointless to try to win some kind of argument with you. So, we'll have to agree to disagree and leave it at that. But I don't think badly of you.

[Kenngo1969]

Seth,

With all due respect, despite the fact that you make it perfectly clear, above, that you think the Church of Jesus Christ and its leaders condescend to its members on the issue of same-sex attraction/homosexuality, the only condescension I see here is yours. It kinda puts the lie to your, "Aw, shucks! Sure, the Church isn't for me, but hey, if it floats your boat, fine and dandy!" persona. Just because you can't imagine a world/circumstance in which someone might actually want to live the Gospel of Jesus Christ even if s/he has homosexual tendencies doesn't mean that no such world/circumstance exists. And at bottom, you just can't help yourself: for all of your "Live and let live, you go your way and I'll go mine, and we'll both be happy" protestations regarding the Church, its leaders, and its members, your contempt shows through. And yes, that's exactly what it is.