Internal Conflict Over Lgbt Protest By Lds

[thesometimesaint]

We have waited a lot shorter time than we waited for Sections 137 and 138 to be added to the standard works. In the meantime, the church has put out the proclamation in a format "suitable for framing", and I have heard it referred to numerous times in conference talks and in church publications.

As the divide between the standards of the gospel and the standards of the world widen, I suspect that the Proclamation will become more cited and more relevant, not less.

Aside from the gender eternal issue. I think that a bigger issue is one of our Heavenly Mother. While I believe she exists there is certainly not enough Scripture to establish her.

[Tacenda]

http://mormonexpression.com/voices/

This time I'm staying on topic a little better. Just wanted to post this very insightful interview of a gal that turned to transgenderism. Like Cal has mentioned, it is most common for females to change to males. "Jack" grew up LDS, he moved to Utah Valley when he was 7. He was very active in church (YW's, etc.). But inside he always felt something was wrong. He started out being gay and then decided he needed to go transgender. I often wonder if this isn't what the majority go through, but feel it would be too life altering to have surgery. My niece is gay and she looks like a boy now in every way. She was like this ever since puberty. I love her to death, but oh, how she struggles in life. I've no doubt her life would be easier, living as a boy.

This podcast is with John Larsen a former member. So beware that it's not necessarily faith promoting from that standpoint. A couple of swear words ($h!#), and a mention of the "M" word. But I feel this is so important to listen to if you're someone who just doesn't get why someone would "mutilate" their bodies like this. I can't imagine living in a body that doesn't jive with my mind and soul. I hope that those that are on the outside looking in will have compassion for Jack, and so many out there.

Also, he is very close to his very LDS family and they are wonderful and accepting of him, despite having done what he has done. I'm in the middle of listening to this podcast. Hopefully there isn't anything offensive in it. I'm at the point that he is describing his surgery and what was needed. I have to quit listening for now, my son walked in the door, I guess there's always an off button if some on here aren't able to sit through the whole podcast, for whatever reasons. I'll listen later.

I'm limited on my usage of the MD&D board so therefore trying to pick and choose what topics I should post on. I felt this one is hands down the best to post if only to show empathy for the transgendered people out there.

(Daniel2, I just read your comment below, thanks for the explanation, it really was just me, I should have read over the OP alot better than I did!)

[Daniel2]

Daniel2, I never said anything about Josh having anything to do with transgenderism, or whatever you said. I just happen to have run across this podcast today and thought I'd post it under this thread since it went along with it nicely.

Tacenda,

I know you didn't say your link had anything to do with transgenderism, and my comment was not specifically directed at you, nor was it meant to either rebuke or rebut the link or comments you posted. Despite the thread title, since the bulk of this thread has dealt with gender dysphoria/transsexuality, the intent of my additonal comments was simply to point out in general terms to anyone reading the thread that "homosexuality" (as in the case of the video link you posted about Mr. Weed) and "transsexuality" (which was the sublect of the bulk of the comments in the thread) are not the same.

My intent in doing so generally is because there have been occasions in discussions with my LDS frends and family, or talks from LDS leaders, that seem to use the term "gender confusion" in a non-specific fashion that could be interpreted to refer to homosexuality, and/or transgenderism, and/or both. Since the term "gender confusion" doesn't seem to precise in it's language and there seems to sometimes be an overlap in understanding on these two issues, I thought I would offer that clarification for the sake of anyone reading--not as any sort of attack on you. My apologies if it came across as that.

Thanks for your great comments. I agree with you that it's always great to have compassion for others.

Daniel2

[Daniel2]

Yeah if you read the text of the thread its about transgender, but if you read the title it has that all encompassing acronym, which it is my understanding that some of the old timers among the gays are beginning to dislike because it lumps them in with transgenders and transvestites, etc. Just can't please everyone, I guess.

I hope my last post clarified that I wasn't "displeased" with Tacenda.

I am curious as to where you got your understanding that "some of the old timers among the gays are beginning to dislike" the acronym LGBT "because it lumps them in with transgenders and transvestites, etc.". Can you please share how you came to that understanding?

As far as I'm personally concerned as a 40-year-old gay man, the acronym doesn't bother me. I don't mind acknowledging and attempting to educate myself and others about the differences between homosexuality, bisexuality, and transsexuality. I also certainly understand and support the use of both the "B" or "T" in the "LGBT" acronym, as well as including and supporting the equal civil rights and social respect for transexuals (and for transvestitism---the latter of which is a distinct phenomenon that is separate and apart from homosexuality, transsexuality, bisexuality, or heterosexuality). "LGBT" is an acronym that acknowledges the commonality that each of those classes share, in that we are all minorities that differ from the sexual majority of heterosexuals in some way--but there is no shame or derision in understanding the differences.

My view,

Daniel2

[Daniel2]

I think, since the thread is specifically about transgenders peoples and not about homosexuality, that Daniel2 might have been confused about why you were interjecting a new subject and just wanted to make sure others weren't confused as well.

Thumbs up on this post, Bluebell (even if I wasn't confused, I appreciate you understanding it wasn't my intention to attack Tacenda).

Daniel2

[Stone holm]

I hope my last post clarified that I wasn't "displeased" with Tacenda.

I am curious as to where you got your understanding that "some of the old timers among the gays are beginning to dislike" the acronym LGBT "because it lumps them in with transgenders and transvestites, etc.". Can you please share how you came to that understanding?

As far as I'm personally concerned as a 40-year-old gay man, the acronym doesn't bother me. I don't mind acknowledging and attempting to educate myself and others about the differences between homosexuality, bisexuality, and transsexuality. I also certainly understand and support the use of both the "B" or "T" in the "LGBT" acronym, as well as including and supporting the equal civil rights and social respect for transexuals (and for transvestitism---the latter of which is a distinct phenomenon that is separate and apart from homosexuality, transsexuality, bisexuality, or heterosexuality). "LGBT" is an acronym that acknowledges the commonality that each of those classes share, in that we are all minorities that differ from the sexual majority of heterosexuals in some way--but there is no shame or derision in understanding the differences.

My view,

Daniel2

Certainly, from my gay older brother who is really my only contact with the gay community. He is also the source of my belief that sex change operations rarely work out well. He is a firm believer that bull dykes should remain such and not try to become males. And that gay men should not be talked into becoming women. I tend to listen to him because he is a psychologist and basically has adopted AA as his religion which seems to be not uncommon. So he encounters a lot of people who are truly dysfunctional. I have mellowed in my perspective over the years from being a fairly viciously anti-gay Mormon who would have fought gay marriage to the death and fired every gay or lesbian teacher who got outed, to a Mormon who believes we as a Church overstepped our bounds in trying to force our beliefs regarding marriage upon all American, and who now acknowledges that the gay community is the premier urban pioneer group in our country responsible for the improvement of many urban and non-urban environments. I still have lingering doubts that SSA is genetic, but try to be open minded about it. I don't think we should discriminate against any of the LGBT in our secular laws. I feel that it is going to be a real challenge for an SSA person to be active in the Church and have sympathy for them. With respect to transgender, I realize that some children are born hermaphroditic and the parents have to make a choice and sometimes get that wrong. As for the notion that a female spirit sometimes gets trapped in a male body, or vice versa, well sorry, guess I haven't progressed that far because I don't buy it.

[california boy]

I want to thank Tacenda for posting the Mormon Stories Podcast. While I was familiar with Josh Weed, I hadn't heard this interview before. I found him to be sincere and honest in trying to explain how he feels and what he is going through. I found myself agreeing with him about almost everything. It seems like he has found a way of getting through this world in a way that gives him peace. I only applaud him and wish him success. Do I think he should be held up as a poster child for all Mormons? No. I don't think the path he has chosen is the one most gay Mormons will choose. But he is the poster child for those that want to take that path. Good for him.

Just because I am gay does not automatically make me identify with those that are lesbian, transexual or bi. I really have no idea what their struggles are like any more than I know what it is like to be heterosexual. I can guess at it, and think what it might be like, but that only gives me some idea based on my own experiences. I am very comfortable with standing with the entire LBGT community however, even though I am very different from the rest in the acronym.

I watched a move called "Normal" a couple of years ago. It is about the struggles of a transgender man. What a tough thing to go through. I honestly thanked God that I was only gay. It makes my struggles with family and the church seem trivial. I have no idea how someone who has to deal with gender issues manages to make it through the process. It is really heart-wrenching. I honestly do not think it is something that anyone would choose to do as some kind of lifestyle choice. I applaud the church for moving towards greater inclusion of all God's children. I hope that direction continues.

[Stone holm]

I want to thank Tacenda for posting the Mormon Stories Podcast. While I was familiar with Josh Weed, I hadn't heard this interview before. I found him to be sincere and honest in trying to explain how he feels and what he is going through. I found myself agreeing with him about almost everything. It seems like he has found a way of getting through this world in a way that gives him peace. I only applaud him and wish him success. Do I think he should be held up as a poster child for all Mormons? No. I don't think the path he has chosen is the one most gay Mormons will choose. But he is the poster child for those that want to take that path. Good for him.

Just because I am gay does not automatically make me identify with those that are lesbian, transexual or bi. I really have no idea what their struggles are like any more than I know what it is like to be heterosexual. I can guess at it, and think what it might be like, but that only gives me some idea based on my own experiences. I am very comfortable with standing with the entire LBGT community however, even though I am very different from the rest in the acronym.

I watched a move called "Normal" a couple of years ago. It is about the struggles of a transgender man. What a tough thing to go through. I honestly thanked God that I was only gay. It makes my struggles with family and the church seem trivial. I have no idea how someone who has to deal with gender issues manages to make it through the process. It is really heart-wrenching. I honestly do not think it is something that anyone would choose to do as some kind of lifestyle choice. I applaud the church for moving towards greater inclusion of all God's children. I hope that direction continues.

Can't disagree with the sentiments expressed.

[Tacenda]

I want to thank Tacenda for posting the Mormon Stories Podcast. While I was familiar with Josh Weed, I hadn't heard this interview before. I found him to be sincere and honest in trying to explain how he feels and what he is going through. I found myself agreeing with him about almost everything. It seems like he has found a way of getting through this world in a way that gives him peace. I only applaud him and wish him success. Do I think he should be held up as a poster child for all Mormons? No. I don't think the path he has chosen is the one most gay Mormons will choose. But he is the poster child for those that want to take that path. Good for him.

Just because I am gay does not automatically make me identify with those that are lesbian, transexual or bi. I really have no idea what their struggles are like any more than I know what it is like to be heterosexual. I can guess at it, and think what it might be like, but that only gives me some idea based on my own experiences. I am very comfortable with standing with the entire LBGT community however, even though I am very different from the rest in the acronym.

I watched a move called "Normal" a couple of years ago. It is about the struggles of a transgender man. What a tough thing to go through. I honestly thanked God that I was only gay. It makes my struggles with family and the church seem trivial. I have no idea how someone who has to deal with gender issues manages to make it through the process. It is really heart-wrenching. I honestly do not think it is something that anyone would choose to do as some kind of lifestyle choice. I applaud the church for moving towards greater inclusion of all God's children. I hope that direction continues.

Your welcome california boy...I probably shouldn't have put it here on this thread but wasn't paying close enough attention and also unable to start topics anymore, I'm on "limited" use right now. I'm definitely in a "time out" or "standing in a corner" as Stone Holm mentioned. I feel embarrassed that I had to do just that in 8th grade once! I must be more rebellious than I thought I was.

Aren't we all so different?!? I think the Lord wants it to be that way and I don't think he makes mistakes! He loves all colors (see below) most definitely! I saw this posted on FB!

http://www.salon.com...ptist_compound/

[Stone holm]

Your welcome california boy...I probably shouldn't have put it here on this thread but wasn't paying close enough attention and also unable to start topics anymore, I'm on "limited" use right now. I'm definitely in a "time out" or "standing in a corner" as Stone Holm mentioned. I feel embarrassed that I had to do just that in 8th grade once! I must be more rebellious than I thought I was.

Aren't we all so different?!? I think the Lord wants it to be that way and I don't think he makes mistakes! He loves all colors (see below) most definitely! I saw this posted on FB!

http://www.salon.com...ptist_compound/

Oh, I thought standing in the corner was just part of the school tradition, kind of like detention it was where all the fun and interesting people were.

[mtomm]

Oh, I thought standing in the corner was just part of the school tradition, kind of like detention it was where all the fun and interesting people were.

No, we'd been moved out into the hall.

[Vanguard]

A local television station ran coverage of a protest by the "Mormons building bridges" group on the Utah state capitol grounds yesterday. Here is the link: http://www.abc4.com/...Lr2ysF-XWg.cspx

As I watched, I found myself conflicted, because while I agree with the idea that all of us are God's children, and we all have free agency, here was a mom (you have to watch the video to see this) talking about her "three sons". No, you have two sons and a daughter who has decided to live as a male. If you are a Sunday School teacher, as you profess to be, you should have read the Proclamation on the Family, which makes it clear that gender is an eternal characteristic.

I don't know if the daughter has or is planning to have a sex-change operation, but I do know that to do so is an excommunicable offense against the church, and that those who have had such a procedure are not candidates for baptism. If my child was going to make a change that would disqualify them forever from eternal life, I would hope I would love them enough to make the consequences of such an action crystal clear. Doesn't mean I don't love them, but acceptance of people does not mean acceptance of abominable sin.

Am I being uncharitable, or is there a line here that needs defending?

I'm not sure what you're conflicted about? What is the rationale for denying the passage of a bill that would allow for fair and equal access to housing and employment? At first blush it seems discriminatory to me. From the article it's not clear why the bill did not pass. As for the mother's comment about her "three sons" regards to what should be law, your larger point seems irrelevant.

[Stone holm]

I'm not sure what you're conflicted about? What is the rationale for denying the passage of a bill that would allow for fair and equal access to housing and employment? At first blush it seems discriminatory to me. From the article it's not clear why the bill did not pass. As for the mother's comment about her "three sons" regards to what should be law, your larger point seems irrelevant.

I don't know much about Utah politics, but it seems odd -- why would be conflicted about the bill, is what the Newscaster said about the Church backing a similarly worded City Ordinance elsewhere wrong or something? I didn't see anything about the son getting a sex change -- and as long as the son doesn't violate the law of chastity we aren't suppose to persecute lgbt.

[Vanguard]

I don't know much about Utah politics, but it seems odd -- why would be conflicted about the bill, is what the Newscaster said about the Church backing a similarly worded City Ordinance elsewhere wrong or something? I didn't see anything about the son getting a sex change -- and as long as the son doesn't violate the law of chastity we aren't suppose to persecute lgbt.

I think I agree with you though even if he did violate the law of chastity he should still have equal access to housing and such. Such violations of our own moral code are irrelevant to the legal considerations.

[Stone holm]

I think I agree with you though even if he did violate the law of chastity he should still have equal access to housing and such. Such violations of our own moral code are irrelevant to the legal considerations.

Right I agree about the housing code, I just didn't understand some of the reactionary comments. BTW why did it fail.

[Tacenda]

http://mormonstories...fb_source=pubv1

Here are the last installments of the interviews with Josh and Lolly Weed. There are also two gay men sharing their viewpoints in the last video. Sorry if this is off topic. I don't have the capacity to post OP's.

[BCSpace]

If my child was going to make a change that would disqualify them forever from eternal life, I would hope I would love them enough to make the consequences of such an action crystal clear. Doesn't mean I don't love them, but acceptance of people does not mean acceptance of abominable sin.

Am I being uncharitable, or is there a line here that needs defending?

Not at all. You're simply illustrating this person's unbelief in the doctrine.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

A local television station ran coverage of a protest by the "Mormons building bridges" group on the Utah state capitol grounds yesterday. Here is the link: http://www.abc4.com/...Lr2ysF-XWg.cspx

As I watched, I found myself conflicted, because while I agree with the idea that all of us are God's children, and we all have free agency, here was a mom (you have to watch the video to see this) talking about her "three sons". No, you have two sons and a daughter who has decided to live as a male. If you are a Sunday School teacher, as you profess to be, you should have read the Proclamation on the Family, which makes it clear that gender is an eternal characteristic.

I don't know if the daughter has or is planning to have a sex-change operation, but I do know that to do so is an excommunicable offense against the church, and that those who have had such a procedure are not candidates for baptism. If my child was going to make a change that would disqualify them forever from eternal life, I would hope I would love them enough to make the consequences of such an action crystal clear. Doesn't mean I don't love them, but acceptance of people does not mean acceptance of abominable sin.

Am I being uncharitable, or is there a line here that needs defending?

I believe that someone can be baptized if they had a sex-change, but can never hold the Priesthood.

[Buzzard]

I believe that someone can be baptized if they had a sex-change, but can never hold the Priesthood.

Transsexuals can be baptized only with special permission from the First Presidency. You are right in that they cannot hold the priesthood or a temple reccomend.

[Tacenda]

http://www.vh1.com/video/im-married-to-a/full-episodes/gay-mormon-hiv-woman/1708062/playlist.jhtml

Here's a full VH1 episode with Josh Weed and Laurel Shea Weed, in case anyone might like to watch. Pretty good stuff, I hope they make it and have a long happily ever after marriage!