Celebration Of Marriage Slc Ut March 26

[thesometimesaint]

We tried number three during Johnson's war on poverty vit was a bit if a disaster.

Actually the War on Poverty was a roaring success. We decreased poverty by 50% in this country. Unfortunately we have gone from a War on Poverty to a War on the Poor.

Ps. Anyone remember the black welfare queens driving a big black Cadillac line?

[Brenda]

Brenda, it is not a matter of bad communication, it is a matter of a flawed position. Look, there is nothing that I would rather see then all bio parents committing in marriage to have children that they care for and nurture throughout their lives. But that is not what happens in life. Let's take the whole gay marriage off the table for a moment. Do you feel the government is the big brother who forces people to stay togeether for the sake of the children. Does government sterilize drug users to prevent them from bringing unwanted damaged children whose bodies are addicted the moment they are born into this world. Does government provide an agent when teenagers get together to prevent teen pregnancy? When parents want to divorce, does the government say sorry you can never divorce and you must remain in the home and raise your children for the rest of your lives Do we pass laws to encourage all of these measures for the sake of the children? Should we? Would it be in the best interest of the children? You seem to be stating that the government should play a role in preserving the ideal environment that you paint for chldren. So just what role do you see the government playing in solving these problems. So for the sake of discussion, let's take the whole gay card off the table. Now since your position seems to be that the government should encourage the ideal family, just what measures should the government take to address your concerns. Like I said, try giving us solutions without playing the gay card and let's see where we get. Because I personally would love to here some governmental solutions to the real problems with straight marriage.

I completely agree that marriage and procreation has been seriously abused by heterosexuals. Absolutely. So what is the answer? More government? No. We cannot legislate morality. But we, as a society, can encourage and teach it. And this must come from the people, and in the case of gay marriage, the people have spoken in most states.

Do you see how morality, and especially religion, has become something to be mocked and silenced? Sex outside of marriage used to be socially unacceptable, and now it's expected. In the past you did NOT want anyone to even THINK you were sexually active outside of marriage because of the shame it would bring. That was a good motivation to avoid it. Trust me, I'm old enough to remember. And it worked! Now, instead of teaching against it, schools and other govt. institutions hand out condoms. People WILL have sex, they say, it cannot be helped, so here's the free birth control. BUT many DIDN'T and DON'T live that way. It IS controllable by individuals who choose to do so and are given a reason to do so. We are not animals who must succumb to our base desires. We are children of God, and we must reach for a higher standard. Sadly that message does not get heard. Our culture no longer promotes the ideal, and has sunk a lower standard. And people no longer have ideals to live up to, nor the motivation to do so.

And who pays the biggest price for this? Innocent children. Single parent homes, fatherlessness, divorce, and no societal messages of hope and that there can be something better out there. Hence, we have despair, leading to ruined lives and crime. It's a pernicious and destructive cycle we have slipped into. So what does this have to do with gay marriage?

It's tampering with children's lives. It's tampering with their basic human right to have their own mother and father. This is not a fix to our problems. More government control? Again, no. Let our message of hope and a higher standard be heard and then let the people vote. Step up and speak out against how we've been reduced to the level of animals, with the promotion of sex everywhere you look, and that people should be allowed to seek out and live whatever sexuality they desire, regardless of who gets hurt by it.

I believe what I'm saying is possible because I've seen it happen. Morality can be taught. It can be promoted in our media, advertising, and everyday lives. God set forth standards for a reason, and the preservation of a society as a whole, is part of that. People must be free, but they also must be taught who they are, and what their responsibility and their potential is. And that teaching must happen primarily in the home, with a mother and father who came together in marriage and stayed together to raise the children they created. This keeps their children's identity and roots to their past, intact, and there is no sense of abandonment or void. That is how it is meant to be, and that is the ideal we must continue to fight for. It is what's best for children.

We cannot legislate it, but we can teach it.

[bluebell]

Actually the War on Poverty was a roaring success. We decreased poverty by 50% in this country. Unfortunately we have gone from a War on Poverty to a War on the Poor.

It depends on who you ask.

[MorningStar]

At the same time we're being told we should let children's gay parents get married instead of shack up, we're being told by others that marriage is just a piece of paper and doesn't mean anything. Children don't get to choose who their parents are, but I believe all of them deserve a mother and a father who love each other. I don't support gay couples, single people, or unmarried heterosexual couples adopting children. Although there are good intentions, I think the focus needs to be on what is best for the child.

[thesometimesaint]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Poverty

[Daniel2]

Dup post

[Daniel2]

At the same time we're being told we should let children's gay parents get married instead of shack up, we're being told by others that marriage is just a piece of paper and doesn't mean anything. Children don't get to choose who their parents are, but I believe all of them deserve a mother and a father who love each other. I don't support gay couples, single people, or unmarried heterosexual couples adopting children. Although there are good intentions, I think the focus needs to be on what is best for the child.

In many cases, adoption by same-sex parents HAS been found to be "in the best interests of the children." Making a blanket statement that you don't support same-sex adoptions ignores those children's interests when said children are found to be far better of bring raised by a same-sex couple, rather than being unadopted l in unstable foster care environments.

Some examples (the videos in the first two links are exceptional):

http://living.msn.com/family-parenting/the-family-room-blog-post?post=e6101508-94af-4e55-a5b4-e3ee8115e7f6

http://www.zachwahls.com/?page_id=273

And from an amicus brief filed in the Prop 8 case:

“How can they tell me that my family doesn’t count? That the relationship between my two dads that I have not only learned from and cherished, but also reaped the benefits of, isn’t acknowledged on the federal level? That the love they share isn’t deserving of the same protection and laws that a man and a woman receive?” – Ella Robinson

“My moms have been together for a long time, through thick and thin, and they’ve made it through the good times and the bad times together, as a team. They have shown me and the world what a lasting, loving relationship can look like. And when I think of my own wedding someday, should I be lucky enough to find a girl I want to spend the rest of my life with, I can’t imagine two better role models to base a family around than my moms. “ – Brian Arsenault

“Not only have my Dads physically and financially supported me throughout my childhood, but they also have supported me emotionally, spiritually, and mentally as I have transitioned into adulthood. For over forty years, my dads have been living proof that true love does exist and that perseverance through adversity helps to define who we are. They have taught me to stay true to myself, to change for no one, and to be the best me that I can be.” – Sarah Gogin

http://www.colage.org/featured/amicus-brief-filed-in-doma-and-prop-8-cases-presents-voices-of-children/

I don't believe the testimony of any of these individuals raised by same-sex couples negates the value that those of us who were raised by opposite-sex couples see in our parents--it's not a "either/or" proposition, but rather an acknowledgement that parents of same-sex couples can also be as capable, nurturing, and strong as opposite-sex parents.

Just as one would be hard-pressed to explain to a child who knows and loves both her mom and dad which of her opposite-sex parents is expendable, so, too, one would be hard pressed to tell an individual being raised by a same-sex couple which of his same-sex parents are similarly expendable. As parents--as specific, unique individuals--we make the difference in our children's lives--NOT the "trends" based on gender, age, social class, income level, race, religious affiliation, IQ, or other factors.

Daniel2

[Brenda]

May I say again, I support ANY loving, stable person or couple adopting children who have no other options.

[Brenda]

Oh Daniel, I could say so much to you regarding your last post, but have so little time right now.

Of course, ANY two people can provide a loving & stable home. No one ever said otherwise. And a child raised by two men or two women will naturally express love and loyalty. But Ella's parents need to fight for the benefits they lack, and not the title of marriage. Brian never had his dad! And Sarah never knew her own mother! Does that not mean anything? There are countless wonderful people in the world whom would bless and enhance our lives if we could possibly include them all. But at the cost of losing our father or mother? That cost is too high.

I don't believe for one moment that Ella, Brian, or Sarah, never once felt a yearning to know the parent that they lost. They will never know what it might have been like to grow up with their missing parent who gave them life. Never.

[california boy]

I completely agree that marriage and procreation has been seriously abused by heterosexuals. Absolutely. So what is the answer? More government? No. We cannot legislate morality. But we, as a society, can encourage and teach it. And this must come from the people, and in the case of gay marriage, the people have spoken in most states.

Do you see how morality, and especially religion, has become something to be mocked and silenced? Sex outside of marriage used to be socially unacceptable, and now it's expected. In the past you did NOT want anyone to even THINK you were sexually active outside of marriage because of the shame it would bring. That was a good motivation to avoid it. Trust me, I'm old enough to remember. And it worked! Now, instead of teaching against it, schools and other govt. institutions hand out condoms. People WILL have sex, they say, it cannot be helped, so here's the free birth control. BUT many DIDN'T and DON'T live that way. It IS controllable by individuals who choose to do so and are given a reason to do so. We are not animals who must succumb to our base desires. We are children of God, and we must reach for a higher standard. Sadly that message does not get heard. Our culture no longer promotes the ideal, and has sunk a lower standard. And people no longer have ideals to live up to, nor the motivation to do so.

And who pays the biggest price for this? Innocent children. Single parent homes, fatherlessness, divorce, and no societal messages of hope and that there can be something better out there. Hence, we have despair, leading to ruined lives and crime. It's a pernicious and destructive cycle we have slipped into. So what does this have to do with gay marriage?

It's tampering with children's lives. It's tampering with their basic human right to have their own mother and father. This is not a fix to our problems. More government control? Again, no. Let our message of hope and a higher standard be heard and then let the people vote. Step up and speak out against how we've been reduced to the level of animals, with the promotion of sex everywhere you look, and that people should be allowed to seek out and live whatever sexuality they desire, regardless of who gets hurt by it.

I believe what I'm saying is possible because I've seen it happen. Morality can be taught. It can be promoted in our media, advertising, and everyday lives. God set forth standards for a reason, and the preservation of a society as a whole, is part of that. People must be free, but they also must be taught who they are, and what their responsibility and their potential is. And that teaching must happen primarily in the home, with a mother and father who came together in marriage and stayed together to raise the children they created. This keeps their children's identity and roots to their past, intact, and there is no sense of abandonment or void. That is how it is meant to be, and that is the ideal we must continue to fight for. It is what's best for children.

We cannot legislate it, but we can teach it.

Brenda, this is a really sincere post and well articulated. It outlines the true problems that American families face today. It also addressed the difficult issue of what to do about it. There are no magic bullets to solve the declining commitment to the institute of marriage. Statistically speaking, only 25% of Americans live in a nuclear family of a father, mother and children. I am not sure what the answer is to change this trend. I do however think it is both unfair and wrongly directed solution to encourage gay parents as well as childless gay couples to live outside the bonds of matrimony. In my opinion it is the absolutely wrong message religion should be sending the young people of today. I certainly see the effects of this policy in the gay community. While many are very spiritual, few connect with a religious sect.

Young people look at their gay friends as not being that different from them. The only difference is who they are attracted to. "Marriage is not necessary for your gay friends" devalues marriage for the entire younger generation as well. When they hear that message their whole life, what effect do you expect it to have on their outlook of marriage. Oddly enough, I think that gays telling the courts and the public that marriage is worth fighting for does more to instill the importance of this institution. I know you will not agree. It is hard to separate religious belief from the consequences of that belief. It is so much easier to not question the church and the direction it feels is right. But it might be a big part of the reason why the church has backed away from being politically involved in this issue to the extent they once were.

Will preventing gays from marrying do anything to address the issues you bring up? Absolutely not, and I think you know that. Perhaps it is the very nature of these problems not having an easy solution that has made gay couples the target of the religious right. Maybe it is one thing the religious right thinks they can stop and somehow that will change the direction society is headed. The truth is, gays have little or nothing to do with these problems. Telling gay couples to shack up in my opinion only exasperates the problem. It has been estimated that only 3-5% of the population is gay. When 75% of the population lives outside the bonds of this ideal family, who is religion kidding. Making a scape goat of gay couples and denying them the legal opportunity and what I consider the civil right to marry only makes religion look divisive and less credible. If you do not think that the younger people look at it this way, you are not paying attention to the polls that are showing an 80% support for gay marriage in this demographic. It means that because of the churches stand, it is forcing 80% of this generation to fight against religion. It pushes them further away from institutions instilling those moral values you so want to teach them. The church is not only loosing most of it's gay members, it is also loosing some of those young people tha support gay marriage. I just don't think that is a good thing.

[california boy]

Scalia’s gay adoption claim: Even wronger than I thought

Posted by Ezra Klein on March 29, 2013 at 8:48 am

On Wednesday, I wrote about Justice Antonin Scalia’s comment that “there’s considerable disagreement among sociologists as to what the consequences of raising a child in a single-sex family, whether that is harmful to the child or not.”

It turns out Scalia’s comment was wronger than I thought — and wrong in a way that Scalia, in particular, should have known.

Antonin Scalia thinks that the idea that gay couples might adopt children is an argument against gay marriage. (Jewel Sawad / Getty Images)

It relied, remember, on the idea that sociologists are, in some significant way, split on this question. That’s not what the American Sociological Association thinks. Here’s its official statement on the matter:

The claim that same-sex parents produce less positive child outcomes than opposite-sex parents—either because such families lack both a male and female parent or because both parents are not the biological parents of their children—contradicts abundant social science research. Decades of methodologically sound social science research, especially multiple nationally representative studies and the expert evidence introduced in the district courts below, confirm that positive child wellbeing is the product of stability in the relationship between the two parents, stability in the relationship between the parents and child, and greater parental socioeconomic resources. Whether a child is raised by same-sex or opposite-sex parents has no bearing on a child’s wellbeing.

The clear and consistent consensus in the social science profession is that across a wide range of indicators, children fare just as well when they are raised by same-sex parents when compared to children raised by opposite-sex parents.

Pretty definitive. And here’s the punchline: That paragraph isn’t buried in a press release on its blog or in an editorial from its trade magazine. It’s from the amicus curiae briefthat the ASA filed in the very case Scalia was commenting on.

In other words, the official organization representing American sociologists went out of their way to provide the Supreme Court with their “consensus” opinion on the effect of same-sex parents on children. And yet, when struggling for a “concrete” harm that could come from gay marriage, Scalia went with “considerable disagreement among sociologists.” So we’ve gone from a weak claim — “considerable disagreement” over harm is not the same thing as actual harm — to an explicitly wrong claim. Scalia offered no details or evidence of this considerable disagreement among sociologists, and it’s hard to believe he’s a better judge of the profession than the ASA, whose brief he notably declined to mention.

Gay marriage’s opponents really have nothing to go on these days.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

So we're to tolerate intolerance?

Has anyone suggested this...when did a difference of opinion become intolerance? Or am I misreading you? I disagree with many things I consider sinful, does this make me sinful?

[Brenda]

Brenda, this is a really sincere post and well articulated. It outlines the true problems that American families face today. It also addressed the difficult issue of what to do about it. There are no magic bullets to solve the declining commitment to the institute of marriage. Statistically speaking, only 25% of Americans live in a nuclear family of a father, mother and children. I am not sure what the answer is to change this trend. I do however think it is both unfair and wrongly directed solution to encourage gay parents as well as childless gay couples to live outside the bonds of matrimony. In my opinion it is the absolutely wrong message religion should be sending the young people of today. I certainly see the effects of this policy in the gay community. While many are very spiritual, few connect with a religious sect.

Young people look at their gay friends as not being that different from them. The only difference is who they are attracted to. "Marriage is not necessary for your gay friends" devalues marriage for the entire younger generation as well. When they hear that message their whole life, what effect do you expect it to have on their outlook of marriage. Oddly enough, I think that gays telling the courts and the public that marriage is worth fighting for does more to instill the importance of this institution. I know you will not agree. It is hard to separate religious belief from the consequences of that belief. It is so much easier to not question the church and the direction it feels is right. But it might be a big part of the reason why the church has backed away from being politically involved in this issue to the extent they once were.

Will preventing gays from marrying do anything to address the issues you bring up? Absolutely not, and I think you know that. Perhaps it is the very nature of these problems not having an easy solution that has made gay couples the target of the religious right. Maybe it is one thing the religious right thinks they can stop and somehow that will change the direction society is headed. The truth is, gays have little or nothing to do with these problems. Telling gay couples to shack up in my opinion only exasperates the problem. It has been estimated that only 3-5% of the population is gay. When 75% of the population lives outside the bonds of this ideal family, who is religion kidding. Making a scape goat of gay couples and denying them the legal opportunity and what I consider the civil right to marry only makes religion look divisive and less credible. If you do not think that the younger people look at it this way, you are not paying attention to the polls that are showing an 80% support for gay marriage in this demographic. It means that because of the churches stand, it is forcing 80% of this generation to fight against religion. It pushes them further away from institutions instilling those moral values you so want to teach them. The church is not only loosing most of it's gay members, it is also loosing some of those young people tha support gay marriage. I just don't think that is a good thing.

CB, I appreciate this discussion. It has been respectful, in spite of our different opinions. Thank you.

I just don't see that religion has made gays into a target. Religion has had its standards for generations. Christianity, generally, must abide by the Bible, which clearly forbids homosexuality. It is the gay community that wants to change standards that have been in place ever since marriage has existed. So some might say that churches have been the targets, rather than the other way around. I guess it's a matter of perspective.

LDS doctrine follows the teachings of the Bible. The Lord gave us the power to procreate, but set strict limits around it. Misuse of that power can result in sobering consequences, because it is dealing with people's lives, and the Lord does not take that lightly. But beyond the lives of children, we are concerned about the lives of those with same sex attraction. They too, matter. We in the LDS Church want the best for them. We truly want them to be happy. But happiness never comes from violating the Lord's commandments. Not true, long-term happiness. Real happiness is eternal, and that is what we hope for everyone.

Homosexual behavior is sinful, and can jeopardize a person's eternal life, Just as any sex outside of marriage is sinful. You can give a child all the candy he wants, to make him happy today. But what about tomorrow, or in 20 years, when his teeth are rotted, and his health is bad, because of that which made him happy for a time? Is that loving the child? Is that wanting the best for him? No. We want that child to be healthy and strong as he becomes an adult, able to achieve greater happiness later on. That, IMO, is really loving someone. And sometimes real love can look/feel like tough love, because it involves rules, and delayed gratification.

We, as LDS, could say --- Go ahead and live as you want. Who cares about the next life? We could re-write our handbooks, and change the "rules" by allowing SS marriage in our membership and it might make us more popular .... but unless God directs it, it will do no good. It will only condone people's path to destruction. That's not love. It's careless disregard for someone's eternal welfare.

Now if you are not LDS, it doesn't matter to you what we believe, and I understand that. But I'm just trying to help you see it from our point of view. We are trying to help you long-term, and not discriminate or hurt you. So we teach what we believe, to whomever will listen, and hold firm to our standards. We are our "brother's keeper" and have been called by Christ to care for his sheep.

So yes, if you are gay, that probably means a mortal life of lonely celibacy. I get that. And it's awful. And I'm so, so sorry. Many people aren't able to marry for various reasons. Many women are never asked. I know a lot of people who are living their lives alone, and have managed to find meaning and fulfillment in other ways. This life is, as you agreed, very short, compared to eternity. And eventually, everyone who does their best to faithfully live God's commandments, will be blessed with everything ... and I do mean everything. That is our doctrine and that is our promise. There is hope for everyone and in the end, it will be worth the wait.

If we condone gay marriage, to stabilize those homes where children are being raised, it condemns the couple by risking their eternal welfare, and teaches the children that violation of God's laws is acceptable. It is far better that the children had been allowed to stay with their natural parents in the first place. That is the ideal for which we must strive. Legalizing gay marriage encourages homosexual behavior. It is bad for the couple, and it is bad for children ... long term. I don't have an easy fix for these situations. As I said, I wish they had never happened in the first place. There just is no easy answer.

[california boy]

I have also enjoyed our exchange of ideas. I appreciate your thoughts and insight. I am just going to comment on a few of the things you said.

CB, I appreciate this discussion. It has been respectful, in spite of our different opinions. Thank you.

I just don't see that religion has made gays into a target

By target, I met more of a scape goat to blame all of the things that are wrong with marriage today. If churches put as much effort fighting divorce, teen pregnancy, single parents as they do fighting gay marriage, I would probably not have that feeling. Yeah they preach against those other things, but they don't try and legislate the government to control those actions like they do gay marriage. Just my thought. You might disagree.

LDS doctrine follows the teachings of the Bible. The Lord gave us the power to procreate, but set strict limits around it. Misuse of that power can result in sobering consequences, because it is dealing with people's lives, and the Lord does not take that lightly. But beyond the lives of children, we are concerned about the lives of those with same sex attraction. They too, matter. We in the LDS Church want the best for them. We truly want them to be happy. But happiness never comes from violating the Lord's commandments. Not true, long-term happiness. Real happiness is eternal, and that is what we hope for everyone.

Homosexual behavior is sinful, and can jeopardize a person's eternal life, Just as any sex outside of marriage is sinful. You can give a child all the candy he wants, to make him happy today. But what about tomorrow, or in 20 years, when his teeth are rotted, and his health is bad, because of that which made him happy for a time? Is that loving the child? Is that wanting the best for him? No. We want that child to be healthy and strong as he becomes an adult, able to achieve greater happiness later on. That, IMO, is really loving someone. And sometimes real love can look/feel like tough love, because it involves rules, and delayed gratification.

We, as LDS, could say --- Go ahead and live as you want. Who cares about the next life? We could re-write our handbooks, and change the "rules" by allowing SS marriage in our membership and it might make us more popular .... but unless God directs it, it will do no good. It will only condone people's path to destruction. That's not love. It's careless disregard for someone's eternal welfare.

Now if you are not LDS, it doesn't matter to you what we believe, and I understand that. But I'm just trying to help you see it from our point of view. We are trying to help you long-term, and not discriminate or hurt you. So we teach what we believe, to whomever will listen, and hold firm to our standards. We are our "brother's keeper" and have been called by Christ to care for his sheep.

So yes, if you are gay, that probably means a mortal life of lonely celibacy. I get that. And it's awful. And I'm so, so sorry. Many people aren't able to marry for various reasons. Many women are never asked. I know a lot of people who are living their lives alone, and have managed to find meaning and fulfillment in other ways. This life is, as you agreed, very short, compared to eternity. And eventually, everyone who does their best to faithfully live God's commandments, will be blessed with everything ... and I do mean everything. That is our doctrine and that is our promise. There is hope for everyone and in the end, it will be worth the wait.

I completely understand Mormon doctrine since I was active in the church for 40 years, serving a mission, in a bishopric, on high counsel, teaching seminary, young mens president etc as well as being married and having kids. I really tried to go the "pretend you are straight route". But it is also a lonely life where you never trust anyones love and feel like you are living a lie. In the end, it just all felt dishonest and wrong. When my last child entered college and was no longer living at home, I came out. I have been away from the church for about 10 years. I have to say I have never personally been happier. I often thought of the scripture in the BofM "wickedness never was happiness" yet I have found a peace and happiness in my soul that I never had when I was in the church. I have found a wonderful guy that is just amazing to share my life with and he blesses me every day.

I am sure you are thinking about what is in store for me when I die. But the truth is, I have absolutely no interest in some magic change that will make me straight and be with a woman for eternity. If you are straight, that promise does sound like heaven. If you are gay, it sounds more like hell. Why would I possibly want to do that. God will decide what my fate is, and I rely on Him to do what ever He wants to do. If He thinks I am evil for choosing to share my life with a man, then I will take the stripes. And that brings me more peace than any thought of the plan of salvation that is outlined for His straight children.

If we condone gay marriage, to stabilize those homes where children are being raised, it condemns the couple by risking their eternal welfare, and teaches the children that violation of God's laws is acceptable. It is far better that the children had been allowed to stay with their natural parents in the first place. That is the ideal for which we must strive. Legalizing gay marriage encourages homosexual behavior. It is bad for the couple, and it is bad for children ... long term. I don't have an easy fix for these situations. As I said, I wish they had never happened in the first place. There just is no easy answer.

Any child that you can keep with their natural parents is just fine with me. I would encourage the same ideal. But as you know, that is not who gay couples are adopting.

Whether gay marriage is legal or not has nothing to do with encouraging homosexuality. Do you think that there are guys that are saying, "if gay marriage is legal, I will be gay, but as long as gay marriage is illegal, I will stay straight. Or I will be celibate unless gay marriage is legal. Don't you think this is a bit of a straw-man argument?

What do you want a gay man to do if he is unwilling to live the life the Mormon church wants him to live. It is a reasonable question .It still comes back to the question. "If the gay person chooses to not be celibate and live a life completely alone, do you want gay couples to shack up or do you want gay couples to be in stable marriage commitments especially when children are involved, or does it matter?

And I have one more question. If a gay couple that is not married have children, hears and accepts the gospel, should they break up their family, become celibate and live a life alone? What happens to the children? What does the church want to have happen? Should they join the church? If not, what happens to them in eternity? I have to say, if you are not straight, the plan of salvation gets way more complicated.

[california boy]

Sometimes it is easier to put a face on the families you are discussing. Do you think this family deserves the support marriage offers? Do these chidren deserve their parents to be married rather than just shacking up? Would this family benifit from joining the church? And what would happen to this family if they did join the church?

[thesometimesaint]

They are welcome to sit with me on the front row of the chapel anytime they want. What they do in the privacy of their own home is between them and their God.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

They are welcome to sit with me on the front row of the chapel anytime they want. What they do in the privacy of their own home is between them and their God.

As it is with all sins, but some need to be shared with a Bishop, unless this has become to un-PC.

[thesometimesaint]

As it is with all sins, but some need to be shared with a Bishop, unless this has become to un-PC.

I'm not their Bishop. We are to invite all to repent and come unto Christ. It is not up to me to add to anyone's burdens.

[GingerRed]

Well ! This topic is quite popular! I 've never had one of my posts get this much response before!

After this event was over and I was able to give a report to my friends on another forum, the ones who came down on me for even wanting to attend this, have relented and apologized for jumping on me. I tried to give them as much of an unbiased opinion as I could by simply stating the facts of who said or did what.

Over all, for the most part the protesters were civil. They were only rude about 3 times for disrupting. I think some people were quite nervous, after seeing the protesters come in silently, forming a circle around the seated audience on three levels, with their banners, signs and flags. Some were wearing somewhat scary looking makeup , that I don't think some of the parents appreciated as there were small children there who it might have been a little spooked. Me, after living in San Francisco for 5 years, it wasn't anything I haven't seen before. Even so, it felt a little intimidating.

There was no 'hate speech' or anything gay bashing from any of the speakers...just some strong reiteration of traditional families and children and how they felt that was best. The strongest talk came from the Catholic priest.....not anyone LDS! Alan Osmond didn't give a talk..he only introduced the speakers and performers. I saw his son Nathan Osmond, who performed, go around the room shaking some of the protesters hands and they would chat for a minute. That was nice.

There was one brief , unified moment....as Nathan sang, God Bless The USA, and wanted everyone to sing along....the WHOLE room joined in, singing together, with the protesters waving their arms, signs and flags in time to the music....it was kinda cool actually. ....at least I thought so! We were united in at least that ONE thing...we were ALL Americans.....and we were all standing together supporting whichever side...as Americans.

Just so you know...although I don't support SSM....I DO support other civil rights for GLBT community. ( housing, jobs, hospital visitation, etc)

I don't mind gays adopting children, as I'd rather see a child have good, gay couple parents, than no parents at all.

I abhor violence, bashing, name-calling etc on EITHER side!

And I take the stand the church takes....that SSA is NOT a sin, but ACTING on it is. Gays may claim they are born that way...which of course is still debatable....HOWEVER...they CHOOSE to ACT on those feelings and attractions...just I like I do as heterosexual...I could choose to be promiscuous if I wanted to....but I choose to be celibate. So can they. But I don't push my beliefs on others. I don't go around vocally condemning anyone. I have gay friends...they know I'm Mormon...I respect them and they respect me. To each his own, God is the judge, not me.

Red

[Daniel2]

They are welcome to sit with me on the front row of the chapel anytime they want. What they do in the privacy of their own home is between them and their God.

This is one of a long history of many thoughful, welcoming posts that make sometimesaint my favorite post-er.

Thanks for exemplifying charity!

Daniel2

[Brenda]

I have also enjoyed our exchange of ideas. I appreciate your thoughts and insight. I am just going to comment on a few of the things you said.

By target, I met more of a scape goat to blame all of the things that are wrong with marriage today. If churches put as much effort fighting divorce, teen pregnancy, single parents as they do fighting gay marriage, I would probably not have that feeling. Yeah they preach against those other things, but they don't try and legislate the government to control those actions like they do gay marriage. Just my thought. You might disagree.

Has there been any legislation on any of these other issues? If there was, the Church might encourage its members to get involved.

I completely understand Mormon doctrine since I was active in the church for 40 years, serving a mission, in a bishopric, on high counsel, teaching seminary, young mens president etc as well as being married and having kids. I really tried to go the "pretend you are straight route". But it is also a lonely life where you never trust anyones love and feel like you are living a lie. In the end, it just all felt dishonest and wrong. When my last child entered college and was no longer living at home, I came out. I have been away from the church for about 10 years. I have to say I have never personally been happier. I often thought of the scripture in the BofM "wickedness never was happiness" yet I have found a peace and happiness in my soul that I never had when I was in the church. I have found a wonderful guy that is just amazing to share my life with and he blesses me every day.

I am sure you are thinking about what is in store for me when I die. But the truth is, I have absolutely no interest in some magic change that will make me straight and be with a woman for eternity. If you are straight, that promise does sound like heaven. If you are gay, it sounds more like hell. Why would I possibly want to do that. God will decide what my fate is, and I rely on Him to do what ever He wants to do. If He thinks I am evil for choosing to share my life with a man, then I will take the stripes. And that brings me more peace than any thought of the plan of salvation that is outlined for His straight children.

Was your life with your wife and children like hell? If so, I hope they never know you feel that way. I don't know what's ahead for you, nor for myself for that matter. I too, am far from perfect. I know that we are both loved, and that our Father will do all he can for us.

I feel deeply that if I choose to bring a child into this world, I place myself under heavy responsibility. My child's needs must come before my own. My children deserve all that I can possibly do for their welfare. Not in excessive material goods, but for their long-term happiness. I am under solemn responsibility to teach by word and example until my dying day, whatever they need to learn for their eternal success. If I have to put all my own wants and needs aside to make this happen, then so be it. How could I live with myself if I do anything less? Look at Christ's example. He gave his whole life for us. He lived and died for us. It was the ultimate expression of selfless love.

My children deserve and need both of their parents. They need their parents to stay together, to make their marriage successful. It is possible to do. My children deserve and need to have the best shot at eternal happiness. What better system is there, than in this church? Just look at this world we live in. There is so much crap out there. People are clinging to one shifting set of ideas after another. Truth is no longer eternal in this society, but has become relative and changing, depending on convenience or whims. This church offers safety, structure, and support like no other, and protection from so many dangers and pitfalls. I know .... and I mean I really know, that being LDS has saved me from so much grief and has blessed me with more good in my life, than I can express.

Your example, by your choices, communicates to your children that the Church is not valid. You, as their father, have a powerful influence on them. They love you. Is that which you are teaching them, for their own good? Does life out of the church, give them the best shot at true happiness? Does it give them the best shot at success with their own marriage and family? You grew up in the Church. You must admit, it has a lot to offer. If you don't agree, then you were not raised in the same church as I was.

Any child that you can keep with their natural parents is just fine with me. I would encourage the same ideal. But as you know, that is not who gay couples are adopting.

Whether gay marriage is legal or not has nothing to do with encouraging homosexuality. Do you think that there are guys that are saying, "if gay marriage is legal, I will be gay, but as long as gay marriage is illegal, I will stay straight. Or I will be celibate unless gay marriage is legal. Don't you think this is a bit of a straw-man argument?

Of course not. No one chooses their sexual orientation. But if homosexual behavior is seen as acceptable, then people with that attraction will act on it. There are other options, but why seek them if the behavior is okay?

What do you want a gay man to do if he is unwilling to live the life the Mormon church wants him to live. It is a reasonable question .It still comes back to the question. "If the gay person chooses to not be celibate and live a life completely alone, do you want gay couples to shack up or do you want gay couples to be in stable marriage commitments especially when children are involved, or does it matter?

I think I've already answered this.

And I have one more question. If a gay couple that is not married have children, hears and accepts the gospel, should they break up their family, become celibate and live a life alone? What happens to the children? What does the church want to have happen? Should they join the church? If not, what happens to them in eternity? I have to say, if you are not straight, the plan of salvation gets way more complicated.

I have no idea. When you violate commandments and create a problem, I can't tell you how to fix it. Gay couples have children who have had to sacrifice a parent! You cannot get around this! All generations before us would have been appalled at this! Yet it's now becoming a norm! Mothers and father are becoming expendable! It's insane! This is exactly why the Lord gave us strict boundaries, so that these things don't happen in the first place. These are HIS beloved children we're dealing with. He sent them to us, and along with them came that sacred responsibility I spoke of above.

Ever since the beginning of time, people have had to sacrifice and live with hardships. And many of those hardships are much worse than what you're talking about. A single, celibate life would be hard, but MANY people do it. People also live with disease, handicaps, poverty, widowhood, depression, homelessness, oppression, and on and on. We all have our struggles. I assume you had a wife with whom you had your children, and you chose to leave your marriage. Many, many would have gladly traded their troubles, for what you had.

[Brenda]

Sometimes it is easier to put a face on the families you are discussing. Do you think this family deserves the support marriage offers? Do these chidren deserve their parents to be married rather than just shacking up? Would this family benifit from joining the church? And what would happen to this family if they did join the church?

Do you REALLY want those children to have what's best? Let them be raised by their own married father and mother!

Be honest. Couples had to split or divorce, then find new partners to create this family. Parents are shuffled and rearranged. Some come and some go. Where was the concern for the children's welfare, emotional security, and feelings, what all that was happening?

[california boy]

Do you REALLY want those children to have what's best? Let them be raised by their own married father and mother!

Be honest. Couples had to split or divorce, then find new partners to create this family. Parents are shuffled and rearranged. Some come and some go. Where was the concern for the children's welfare, emotional security, and feelings, what all that was happening?

I doubt very much that gay couples are ripping the children out of the loving arms of heterosexual couples to adopt.So yes I REALLY waht what is best for those children. A gay married couple is the second best option for children. Do you disagree? When it is not possible for a child to have a mother and father raise them, what do you feel is the best option for that child??

[california boy]

Has there been any legislation on any of these other issues? If there was, the Church might encourage its members to get involved.

Church members played an active role in getting Prop 8 on the ballot. They have not made the same kind of effort on all the other issues. So yeah, If churches put as much effort fighting divorce, teen pregnancy, single parents as they do fighting gay marriage, I would probably not have that feeling that the church was targeting gays.

Was your life with your wife and children like hell? If so, I hope they never know you feel that way. I don't know what's ahead for you, nor for myself for that matter. I too, am far from perfect. I know that we are both loved, and that our Father will do all he can for us.

I feel deeply that if I choose to bring a child into this world, I place myself under heavy responsibility. My child's needs must come before my own. My children deserve all that I can possibly do for their welfare. Not in excessive material goods, but for their long-term happiness. I am under solemn responsibility to teach by word and example until my dying day, whatever they need to learn for their eternal success. If I have to put all my own wants and needs aside to make this happen, then so be it. How could I live with myself if I do anything less? Look at Christ's example. He gave his whole life for us. He lived and died for us. It was the ultimate expression of selfless love.

My children deserve and need both of their parents. They need their parents to stay together, to make their marriage successful. It is possible to do. My children deserve and need to have the best shot at eternal happiness. What better system is there, than in this church? Just look at this world we live in. There is so much crap out there. People are clinging to one shifting set of ideas after another. Truth is no longer eternal in this society, but has become relative and changing, depending on convenience or whims. This church offers safety, structure, and support like no other, and protection from so many dangers and pitfalls. I know .... and I mean I really know, that being LDS has saved me from so much grief and has blessed me with more good in my life, than I can express.

You do realize that I stayed in the marriage and did not discuss my situation with my family until after all of my children were moved out of the house. I made a commitment to take care and raise my children. While I will always be their father, they are no longer living under my roof. They are now adults and make their own decisions. I love having children. I am still very close to my children. That is certainly the upside to having been married. That is why I stayed in the marriage until my children had moved out of the house. In hindsight, I probably should have not gotten married. But when I got off my mission, it is what the church at the time told me to do. They promised me that if I got married, then I would loose this attraction to men. Somehow I would learn to be straight. I believe them. That ended up being untrue. The choice I made to get married was based on that deception. A lot has happened in the church since the time I got married. The church now counsels that marriage is not therapy and discourages people from thinking that marriage will some how "fix" being gay.

Your example, by your choices, communicates to your children that the Church is not valid. You, as their father, have a powerful influence on them. They love you. Is that which you are teaching them, for their own good? Does life out of the church, give them the best shot at true happiness? Does it give them the best shot at success with their own marriage and family? You grew up in the Church. You must admit, it has a lot to offer. If you don't agree, then you were not raised in the same church as I was.

I completely agree. I think the church does have a lot to offer anyone, and I encourage my children to be involved in it. I am sure I would still be involved in the church if I was not gay. But I am gay, and the church does not have a place for me that is not filled with loneliness and isolation from going through life without someone I love. While the church has a lot to offer if you are straight, my life is so much more happy and fulfilled since I left. That does not mean that I don't love and support the church. It only means that despite what so many members want to espouse, the church is no place for a gay person. That is just the reality. "It is not good for man to be alone."

Of course not. No one chooses their sexual orientation. But if homosexual behavior is seen as acceptable, then people with that attraction will act on it. There are other options, but why seek them if the behavior is okay?

Are you seeing a whole bunch of homosexuals choosing to be celibate because gay marriage is not legal? Just what changes do you see happening in the gay community if "homosexual behavior is seen as acceptable"??

I think I've already answered this.

I am not sure I saw your answer. So I will ask you again. If the gay person chooses to not be celibate and live a life completely alone, do you want gay couples to shack up or do you want gay couples to be in stable marriage commitments especially when children are involved, or does it matter?

I have no idea. When you violate commandments and create a problem, I can't tell you how to fix it. Gay couples have children who have had to sacrifice a parent! You cannot get around this! All generations before us would have been appalled at this! Yet it's now becoming a norm! Mothers and father are becoming expendable! It's insane! This is exactly why the Lord gave us strict boundaries, so that these things don't happen in the first place. These are HIS beloved children we're dealing with. He sent them to us, and along with them came that sacred responsibility I spoke of above.

Brenda, the situation I presented was about a gay couple that married, adopted and are raising their family at a time they did not believe or maybe even know about the teachings of the church. Does the church not have a path for straight people who have broken the commandments before baptism? Or is it just gay couples that have a child that the church does not have a path for.

Ever since the beginning of time, people have had to sacrifice and live with hardships. And many of those hardships are much worse than what you're talking about. A single, celibate life would be hard, but MANY people do it. People also live with disease, handicaps, poverty, widowhood, depression, homelessness, oppression, and on and on. We all have our struggles. I assume you had a wife with whom you had your children, and you chose to leave your marriage. Many, many would have gladly traded their troubles, for what you had.

Sorry, but I don't look at being gay as some kind of affliction. If the church had not told me that I should marry, I probably would not have.

[blackstrap]

CB, consider what your life would have been had you not married. Marriage taught you a lot about love, forgiveness, tolerance, etc. which you may not have learned in another situation. Had you been participating in the homosexual lifestyle in the 80s and 90s you might have been exposed to some serious if not deadly consequences. These threads tend to focus on the gay' monogamous couples who wish to adopt as if they were the vast majority. Past and current evidence of bars and bathhouses speaks to this inaccuracy .