Jump to content

Celebration Of Marriage Slc Ut March 26


GingerRed

Recommended Posts

My non Mormon friends are up in arms about this event being held here in Utah. They found out from Facebook from a gay advocate webpage/blog that spouted their usual venom calling this rally another 'we Mormons hate gays' crap.

http://cherilyneagar...ation-marriage/

Here is the other link thats against this:

http://www.towleroad...ah-capitol.html

How do I counter act those accusations? How do I stand up for myself and my church without looking anti- gay to them?

Thoughts??

Red

Link to comment

The Osmonds aren't you, you are you, if you're non mormon friends don't understand that, then they are doing exactly as they say the Osmonds and others do. They aren't looking at the individual, but lumping everyone together. Say as in how a gay couple might raise a child. There are great gay parents and great heterosexual parents and there are bad too, on both sides! I watched an episode of "My Three Sons" on PBS. I can't believe how old I feel I'm getting, anyway, I enjoyed it! It had Uncle Charlie and Fred McMurray (forgot his character's name) anyway they were raising these boys since very small according to the storyline. So two men, and they were doing an incredible job. Fred's character was a widower. So it happens, two men can raise children and the world won't end. A mother and father is ideal, but so to is another situation because it involves the INDIVIDUAL! There can be some pretty sad situations with a male and female in charge, they're not untouchable!

Link to comment

Don't worry about the angry homosexuals who want to play the victim or martyr. I think the rally is fine. I would attend with friends.

Thank you Val!! My friend did invite me to go. BUT..if it DID get out of hand with anything negative or attacking, I would leave.

Red

Link to comment

My non Mormon friends are up in arms about this event being held here in Utah. They found out from Facebook from a gay advocate webpage/blog that spouted their usual venom calling this rally another 'we Mormons hate gays' crap.

http://cherilyneagar...ation-marriage/

Here is the other link thats against this:

http://www.towleroad...ah-capitol.html

How do I counter act those accusations? How do I stand up for myself and my church without looking anti- gay to them?

Thoughts??

Red

Two comments come to mind: First, it's definitely possible to be against same-sex marriage without being "hateful." Second: I don't think it's possible to be against same-sex marriage without "looking anti-gay."

Link to comment

My non Mormon friends are up in arms about this event being held here in Utah. They found out from Facebook from a gay advocate webpage/blog that spouted their usual venom calling this rally another 'we Mormons hate gays' crap.

http://cherilyneagar...ation-marriage/

Here is the other link thats against this:

http://www.towleroad...ah-capitol.html

How do I counter act those accusations? How do I stand up for myself and my church without looking anti- gay to them?

Thoughts??

Red

All you can do is explain how you feel. If they are really your friends, they owe it it you to listen.

The main issue with gay marriage, IMO, involve parenting. To say that gender does not matter and that two dads or two moms is just as good, denies all differences between men and women. All reason says that males and females ARE quite different, and both bring unique qualities into a family that are important. Of course gay parents can successfully raise children! Yet in each situation, at least one parent is missing. NO man can substitute for a mother, and NO woman can substitute for a dad. We need to put children's needs FIRST, and every child needs their mom and dad.

Link to comment

My non Mormon friends are up in arms about this event being held here in Utah. They found out from Facebook from a gay advocate webpage/blog that spouted their usual venom calling this rally another 'we Mormons hate gays' crap.

Red

There was a time with disagreeing with others did not mean we hate them...that day sadly has past. I have a gay child whom I talk with 3 or 4 times weeks and see her every Sunday. Anytime I ask her to come to Church with me, she does so when she is always warmly received...all know she is gay, but they love her and she loves them. I know a single Mormon who hates gays. There is no death I would not suffer for her, none of my other children makes me laugh more. She is my blood and I love her beyond measure. Anytime groups accuse Mormons wholesale my heart is broken. I can't help but love her, nor anyone who knows her...my poem to her ended...

No matter what thy singing,

Thy music can't be wrong.

For laughter is thy lyric,

And beautiful is thy song.

It is entitled "Alicia's Song.

Link to comment

Well, you will sort of have to ignore them I guess. I have a hard time ignoring what people say too... but you have to sort of just let the accusations flow past, and not let your mind dwell on them. You'll won't feel as well if you dwell on them too much.

Link to comment

All you can do is explain how you feel. If they are really your friends, they owe it it you to listen.

The main issue with gay marriage, IMO, involve parenting. To say that gender does not matter and that two dads or two moms is just as good, denies all differences between men and women. All reason says that males and females ARE quite different, and both bring unique qualities into a family that are important. Of course gay parents can successfully raise children! Yet in each situation, at least one parent is missing. NO man can substitute for a mother, and NO woman can substitute for a dad. We need to put children's needs FIRST, and every child needs their mom and dad.

From my perspective, no one is saying, "gender does not matter,” and I think that is an oversimplification to the point of serving little purpose to this topic.

Also, it's a logical fallacy that acknowledging that "two fathers (or two mothers) can do 'just as good' a job (at raising healthy kids)" is the same thing as "denying all differences between men and women."

It’s completely possible to state that children raised by same-sex couples are just as healthy as children raised by opposite-sex couples, while simultaneously acknowledging that there are obviously differences between men and women.

It’s also completely possible to state that children raised by interracial couples are just as healthy as children raised by same-race couples, while simultaneously acknowledging that there are differences between blacks and whites.

The point that I would make in both examples is that, as far as the State is concerned, while there are clearly differences between same-race children, and interracial children, it’s not the State’s role to dictate that same-race couples should be parents, while interracial couples shouldn’t be. The differences, real as they may be, should be irrelevant, when it comes to the issue of freedom and equal representation.

EVERY parent “brings unique qualities” to HIS or HER own family—regardless of the parent’s gender. And EVERY parent probably falls short on the ‘Perfect Parent Scale,’ in some way—regardless of the parent’s gender. The same could be said of the parent’s race, religion, ability to nurture, teach, coach, educate, etc. etc. etc. However, no parenting trait is universal for all parents of any given gender (or any other trait). Some fathers are more nurturing than some mothers. Some mothers are more educationally-oriented than some fathers. Some straight parents are more artistic than some gay parents. Some gay parents are more sports-oriented than some straight parents. The list could go on and on. Children, as individuals, only receive the benefit of their OWN parent/s—not the ‘trend’ of what type of parents ‘generally’ do better in any given trait.

Focusing only on the positively-perceived “unique qualities” of dual-gendered parents unfairly ignores the positively-perceived “unique qualities” that same-sex parents bring to their children.

While the notion that “NO man can substitute for a mother, and NO woman can substitute for a dad” sounds good in theory, in practical application to life, it’s nonsensical. Of COURSE each parent is entirely unique, and “NO one can substitute for ANYONE else,” in that sense. But in many other ways, ANY parent will have stronger points, and weaker points, than ANY OTHER parent. An orphaned child, for example, may never find a “substitute” for his or her parents—but in being adopted, will have two new parents that are entirely unique, in their own ways, with strengths and weaknesses that are entirely unique and different than the child’s biological parents. Who can say whether that specific child would have been better off, either way? There’s no way to tell. There’s SO many factors that contribute to a child’s well-being that it is foolish to focus solely on one characteristic of the parents, as if that one characteristic is THE sole determining factor as to the advantages that such a child receives (or failed to receive).

My view,

Daniel2

Link to comment

I have to disagree, unless you are dealing with people who are determined to think the worst.

Let me put it this way:

Let’s say I believe that the practice of Mormonism is sinful and wrong.

However, despite ‘knowing’ that Mormonism is sinful, I adamantly affirm my love and acceptance of my LDS brothers and sisters, and do all I can to charitably serve them, treat them kindly, avoid saying negative things about them, and urge others to treat them with compassion.

Further, I believe Mormonism itself is so wrong that I decide to proactively lobby and fund a series of laws and Constitutional Amendments banning any legal recognition of Mormon marriages, because I believe that legal recognition of Mormon marriages would be the state promoting a sinful, godless, “Mormon lifestyle.” Further, I claim that children raised by Mormon couples are disadvantaged from those raised by normal couples, because kids raised by Mormons automatically believe in Mormonism, which means they'll go to Hell.

Would you expect anyone to take me seriously if I insist to everyone that I am somehow not "anti-Mormon"?

Aren’t my actions to prohibit legal recognition of Mormon marriages obvious proof that I am, actually, "anti-Mormon"?

What would you say to me if I asked, “How do I stand up for myself and my church without looking anti-Mormon to them?”

When someone suggests that I actually am anti-Mormon, and I dismissed them by saying, "Oh, they're just determined to think the worst" about me, would you believe that I therefore wasn't somehow "anti-Mormon

Link to comment

Hi Daniel2

I was hoping you would post on here because I was interested in your take. Though you are very passionate in your feelings for your lifestyle....you've always been decent and respectful in your responses. :)

Though I too, believe all children should have both a mother and a father, I would rather see an orphaned child have SOME kind of parents then none at all. I believe you are a good dad as I've seen nothing but the love you confess for them, and it seems like they love you dearly just as much.

I want to see for myself what they say, so I don't have to hear untruths or anyone twisting the words they say.. I want to see somebody speak about the church's recent willingness to reach out to the LGBT community, and that everyone is worthy of God 's love regardless.

I also happen to be friends with some Osmond family members, and it hurts me to see them being raked over the coals and judged before one word is even spoken out of their mouths! Makes me angry!

And I can bet they will be gay attendees so they too can see for themselves what is said.

Should be an interesting evening......

Red

Link to comment

From my perspective, no one is saying, "gender does not matter,” and I think that is an oversimplification to the point of serving little purpose to this topic.

Also, it's a logical fallacy that acknowledging that "two fathers (or two mothers) can do 'just as good' a job (at raising healthy kids)" is the same thing as "denying all differences between men and women."

It’s completely possible to state that children raised by same-sex couples are just as healthy as children raised by opposite-sex couples, while simultaneously acknowledging that there are obviously differences between men and women.

It’s also completely possible to state that children raised by interracial couples are just as healthy as children raised by same-race couples, while simultaneously acknowledging that there are differences between blacks and whites.

The point that I would make in both examples is that, as far as the State is concerned, while there are clearly differences between same-race children, and interracial children, it’s not the State’s role to dictate that same-race couples should be parents, while interracial couples shouldn’t be. The differences, real as they may be, should be irrelevant, when it comes to the issue of freedom and equal representation.

EVERY parent “brings unique qualities” to HIS or HER own family—regardless of the parent’s gender. And EVERY parent probably falls short on the ‘Perfect Parent Scale,’ in some way—regardless of the parent’s gender. The same could be said of the parent’s race, religion, ability to nurture, teach, coach, educate, etc. etc. etc. However, no parenting trait is universal for all parents of any given gender (or any other trait). Some fathers are more nurturing than some mothers. Some mothers are more educationally-oriented than some fathers. Some straight parents are more artistic than some gay parents. Some gay parents are more sports-oriented than some straight parents. The list could go on and on. Children, as individuals, only receive the benefit of their OWN parent/s—not the ‘trend’ of what type of parents ‘generally’ do better in any given trait.

Focusing only on the positively-perceived “unique qualities” of dual-gendered parents unfairly ignores the positively-perceived “unique qualities” that same-sex parents bring to their children.

While the notion that “NO man can substitute for a mother, and NO woman can substitute for a dad” sounds good in theory, in practical application to life, it’s nonsensical. Of COURSE each parent is entirely unique, and “NO one can substitute for ANYONE else,” in that sense. But in many other ways, ANY parent will have stronger points, and weaker points, than ANY OTHER parent. An orphaned child, for example, may never find a “substitute” for his or her parents—but in being adopted, will have two new parents that are entirely unique, in their own ways, with strengths and weaknesses that are entirely unique and different than the child’s biological parents. Who can say whether that specific child would have been better off, either way? There’s no way to tell. There’s SO many factors that contribute to a child’s well-being that it is foolish to focus solely on one characteristic of the parents, as if that one characteristic is THE sole determining factor as to the advantages that such a child receives (or failed to receive).

My view,

Daniel2

I'm afraid I can't agree. There is no comparison between the different races, skin colors, cultures, ethnicities ... and the difference between males and females. The contrast between men and women is recognized in every culture and group, and especially in the eyes of God. Every parent who has raised children, can tell you this. They are wired differently and it is evident very early on. This is why I'm saying that a man cannot be a mother, and a woman cannot be a father. A person cannot be what they don't have the capacity of being. And a child needs both because their parents are their roots. Boys and girls need to have the influence of both, to learn at home, how the two interact and get along, and to learn how to love someone different than one's self. This is not simply cultural, this is innate. Of course there are exceptions as in those individuals who seem to blur the differences, as there are in everything. But we must never toss out what's best for the vast majority, to accommodate the desires of the few.

It is never fair in a discussion like this, to compare loving, functional gay parents, and dysfunctional heterosexual parents. We must either compare the best of both, or the worst of both.

In a discussion among LDS, where we recognize the reality of the pre-earth, and post-earth lives, we must acknowledge that one's gender is eternal. Race, skin color, or culture, are only relevant, by some, for a small fraction of our existence. Our gender is basic to who we are. It is part of our eternal identity. And each gender has qualities that the other gender cannot offer in parenting. I'm not talking about duties, or roles, but something much deeper.

I know, as we raised our kids, there were times when I, as the mother, was needed, and times when one of our kids needed only their dad. I alone, could not teach our daughter, for example, how a man must love and treat his wife, lessons for her to learn for when she chose her husband. I, as a woman, could not teach our children, through example, the concept of a loving father, something that helped them to better understand the concept of a loving heavenly father.

It's a balance and a pattern that has existed since the beginning. Male and female, joining together to create children, then raising them together in a committed, married home. That is optimum for children, and we as the adults, have a moral responsibility to do all we can, to make that happen. Children deserve the best we can give them.

Link to comment

Let me put it this way:

Let’s say I believe that the practice of Mormonism is sinful and wrong.

However, despite ‘knowing’ that Mormonism is sinful, I adamantly affirm my love and acceptance of my LDS brothers and sisters, and do all I can to charitably serve them, treat them kindly, avoid saying negative things about them, and urge others to treat them with compassion.

Further, I believe Mormonism itself is so wrong that I decide to proactively lobby and fund a series of laws and Constitutional Amendments banning any legal recognition of Mormon marriages, because I believe that legal recognition of Mormon marriages would be the state promoting a sinful, godless, “Mormon lifestyle.” Further, I claim that children raised by Mormon couples are disadvantaged from those raised by normal couples, because kids raised by Mormons automatically believe in Mormonism, which means they'll go to Hell.

Would you expect anyone to take me seriously if I insist to everyone that I am somehow not "anti-Mormon"?

Aren’t my actions to prohibit legal recognition of Mormon marriages obvious proof that I am, actually, "anti-Mormon"?

What would you say to me if I asked, “How do I stand up for myself and my church without looking anti-Mormon to them?”

When someone suggests that I actually am anti-Mormon, and I dismissed them by saying, "Oh, they're just determined to think the worst" about me, would you believe that I therefore wasn't somehow "anti-Mormon

I appreciate your post, but the point was, can you be against gay marriage w/o appearing anti-gay. I believe you can, to the right person. There will always be people who, no matter what, will think you are bigoted. But there are reasonable people who will see it differently. There are actually gay people who do not support gay marriage. Can anyone call them bigoted?

There are reasonable arguments against gay marriage, while at the same time expressing love, empathy, and support, for those who are willing to listen. However, the chances of being able to communicate this successfully online, are probably slim.

Link to comment

My non Mormon friends are up in arms about this event being held here in Utah. They found out from Facebook from a gay advocate webpage/blog that spouted their usual venom calling this rally another 'we Mormons hate gays' crap.

http://cherilyneagar...ation-marriage/

Here is the other link thats against this:

http://www.towleroad...ah-capitol.html

How do I counter act those accusations? How do I stand up for myself and my church without looking anti- gay to them?

Thoughts??

Red

Just ask them if they believe in the 1st amendment to the Constitution.

Link to comment

Let me put it this way:

Let’s say I believe that the practice of Mormonism is sinful and wrong.

However, despite ‘knowing’ that Mormonism is sinful, I adamantly affirm my love and acceptance of my LDS brothers and sisters, and do all I can to charitably serve them, treat them kindly, avoid saying negative things about them, and urge others to treat them with compassion.

Further, I believe Mormonism itself is so wrong that I decide to proactively lobby and fund a series of laws and Constitutional Amendments banning any legal recognition of Mormon marriages, because I believe that legal recognition of Mormon marriages would be the state promoting a sinful, godless, “Mormon lifestyle.” Further, I claim that children raised by Mormon couples are disadvantaged from those raised by normal couples, because kids raised by Mormons automatically believe in Mormonism, which means they'll go to Hell.

Would you expect anyone to take me seriously if I insist to everyone that I am somehow not "anti-Mormon"?

Aren’t my actions to prohibit legal recognition of Mormon marriages obvious proof that I am, actually, "anti-Mormon"?

What would you say to me if I asked, “How do I stand up for myself and my church without looking anti-Mormon to them?”

When someone suggests that I actually am anti-Mormon, and I dismissed them by saying, "Oh, they're just determined to think the worst" about me, would you believe that I therefore wasn't somehow "anti-Mormon

Respectfully I disagree with you on this but I would never try to stifle your first amendment rights.

Link to comment

All you can do is explain how you feel. If they are really your friends, they owe it it you to listen.

The main issue with gay marriage, IMO, involve parenting. To say that gender does not matter and that two dads or two moms is just as good, denies all differences between men and women. All reason says that males and females ARE quite different, and both bring unique qualities into a family that are important. Of course gay parents can successfully raise children! Yet in each situation, at least one parent is missing. NO man can substitute for a mother, and NO woman can substitute for a dad. We need to put children's needs FIRST, and every child needs their mom and dad.

I can never figure out how people who hold this belief tie it into marriage. Whether gays are allowed to marry or not has nothing to do with whether they will raise children or not. That issue is about whether we are going to allow chldren to be adopted only if there is a husband and wife adopting the children. It only has to do with whether it is better for the children that have been adopted by gay couples to live in a home where the two men raising them are allowed to marry.

I would love to know how you tie raising children with a father and mother present relates to stopping children that have been adopted by two gays from being married.

Link to comment

I can never figure out how people who hold this belief tie it into marriage. Whether gays are allowed to marry or not has nothing to do with whether they will raise children or not. That issue is about whether we are going to allow chldren to be adopted only if there is a husband and wife adopting the children. It only has to do with whether it is better for the children that have been adopted by gay couples to live in a home where the two men raising them are allowed to marry.

I would love to know how you tie raising children with a father and mother present relates to stopping children that have been adopted by two gays from being married.

A very fair question. It seems logical to me that legalized gay marriage leads to its increase. Isn't it true that children raised by gay parents are more likely to experiment in homosexuality? To be honest, I don't recall where I read this, but I could probably find it again. Anyway, as gay marriage is legalized, as it will be, it becomes accepted and normal and more children will be raised in such households. I am not saying that these children will be abused or deprived of love. But in every case, w/out exception, they will be deprived of one of their parents. And not only will they not have one of their bio- parents, they will not have either a father or a mother. Of those two, which one is expendable?

I believe that adoption is a wonderful answer to an unplanned situation. I wish that unwed pregnancies, when the mother is unable to marry the father, would lead to adopting the baby to a two-parent, mom and dad home. The evidence is obvious that single parenting takes a huge toll on the children. And it's not fair to equate two gay parents to single, fatherless homes. So in the case of adoption, and gay couples, what do we have? Possibly one is the bio-parent, and one is not. Or nether are bio-parents. I feel that it is grossly unfair to any child, to preplan, prior to conception, its adoption, so that a couple can experience raising that child together. Because that would be purposely denying the child of one of its bio-parents. Children have basic, fundamental, God-given rights, to be raised by the parents who conceived them when at all possible. And we as the adults, have the moral responsibility to do our best to make this happen.

And I DO apologize for this much-too-wordy response.

Link to comment

I can see by your answer that you base your belief simply on prejudicial ideas to support your belief which has nothing to do with reality. I would ask you to reconsider your stance based on facts. Let's take a look at your answer.

A very fair question. It seems logical to me that legalized gay marriage leads to its increase. Isn't it true that children raised by gay parents are more likely to experiment in homosexuality? To be honest, I don't recall where I read this, but I could probably find it again.

You seem to think that if someone is around gay people,then somehow they will "catch" being gay. CFR where you learned that children raised by gay parents are more likely to experiment in homosexuality.

Anyway, as gay marriage is legalized, as it will be, it becomes accepted and normal and more children will be raised in such households. I am not saying that these children will be abused or deprived of love. But in every case, w/out exception, they will be deprived of one of their parents. And not only will they not have one of their bio- parents, they will not have either a father or a mother. Of those two, which one is expendable?

If gay marriage is legalized, then what will become more common? Homosexuality? Gays raising children? Do you think gays are not raising children because they can't get married? CFR what you base that idea on.

I believe that adoption is a wonderful answer to an unplanned situation. I wish that unwed pregnancies, when the mother is unable to marry the father, would lead to adopting the baby to a two-parent, mom and dad home. The evidence is obvious that single parenting takes a huge toll on the children. And it's not fair to equate two gay parents to single, fatherless homes.

If you are saying that it is better for two gay parents to raise a child rather than a single parent, why would you not want those two gay parents to be married? Again, you are not presenting any reason why gay parents of adopted children should not be allowed to marry. You have to give some reason why adopted children in gay homes are better off if the gay parents are not allowed to marry.

So in the case of adoption, and gay couples, what do we have? Possibly one is the bio-parent, and one is not. Or nether are bio-parents. I feel that it is grossly unfair to any child, to preplan, prior to conception, its adoption, so that a couple can experience raising that child together. Because that would be purposely denying the child of one of its bio-parents. Children have basic, fundamental, God-given rights, to be raised by the parents who conceived them when at all possible. And we as the adults, have the moral responsibility to do our best to make this happen.

You are arguing against gay couples being allowed to adopt. You haven't explained why it is better to not allow marriage for gay couples who have adopted. If you want to argue that gay couples should not be allowed to adopt, that is another question we can talk about. Just give me ONE reason why it is better for gay couples that have adopted to raise THOSE children outside of marriage.

And I DO apologize for this much-too-wordy response.

Your answer was not too wordy, it just lacked any answer at all to the question why it is better for gay couples who have children to not be allowed to marry.

Link to comment

http://mormonstories...age-fatherhood/

This is a new podcast and features Brett Bradshaw and his partner Jeff, along with their daughter Madeline. I don't know if this will change anyone's mind with gay's adopting children or not, but thought I'd share it. Last year I posted the podcast below that featured Brett's father, Dr. William Bradshaw who is a retired biology professor at BYU. It's a great interview to listen to beforehand.

http://mormonstories...and-compassion/

Or it may just seal the deal for those against gay marriage, etc. Not sure. I know that my mind changed somewhat in favor of gay marriage after listening to Dr. William Bradshaw's words.

Link to comment

Two comments come to mind: First, it's definitely possible to be against same-sex marriage without being "hateful." Second: I don't think it's possible to be against same-sex marriage without "looking anti-gay."

I disagree with the last part. I am anti gay marriage. But if people want to go be "gay" go ahead. It's a free country and it is non of my business.

But you did say "looking" which is a subjective term. So I guess you are correct.

Link to comment

My non Mormon friends are up in arms about this event being held here in Utah. They found out from Facebook from a gay advocate webpage/blog that spouted their usual venom calling this rally another 'we Mormons hate gays' crap.

http://cherilyneagar...ation-marriage/

Here is the other link thats against this:

http://www.towleroad...ah-capitol.html

How do I counter act those accusations? How do I stand up for myself and my church without looking anti- gay to them?

Thoughts??

Red

From the entertainment line up, it kinda looks more like a Ren Fair about marriage.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...