Has The Pope Hit The Bottom Of The Pool?

[Kenngo1969]

You seem to think we are having a debate. From my very pathological point of view, I don't actually care is everyone agrees with me.

OK.  Sorry.  I thought this was a discussion Board.  My bad.

[EllenMaksoud]

OK.  Sorry.  I thought this was a discussion Board.  My bad.

Please, I am at times not very coordinated or graceful when dealing with males. So, if you are wanting to discuss something, but if I mistakenly feel it is a debate, I get defensive. Being Mormon and being with people who are helpful and not generally dangerous has helped me a lot.

 

By the way, would you mind telling me what you do? You look like a Judge to me. And, that is not bad. Of course you could be a plumber or a cop or a truck driver.

Edited March 6, 2014 by EllenMaksoud

[Kenngo1969]

... I think it is important to learn genetic and other forms of predispositions as that can help tremendously in not only being more compassionate of someone's struggle (there is little that angers me so much as a dismissive "she just needs to use a little willpower), but just knowing the reasons why can help an individual gain more control and it can also go far in find better solutions to gaining control.

I agree with that ... provided someone wants to actually wage the struggle rather than simply throwing his or her hands in the air and saying, "God made me this way, therefore, He must also accept, unconditionally, any behavior that results (or that I believe results) from His having made me this way."

[Kenngo1969]

Please, I am at tiBy the way, would you mind telling me what you do? You look like a Judge to me. And, that is not bad. Of course you could be a plumber or a cop or a truck driver.

Heh.  Long-term unemployed.  It's OK.  My rich Uncle Barry sends me a check every month ...  Of course, it's Other People's Money , since it comes from the Government, but hey, why quibble?  Why should anybody want or need a job when if I were to work full-time, the check I get would work out to $5.05 an hour ... ?  Why complain?  That rate was slightly below minimum wage ...  in 1997!  (And of course, it's not like I can work or anything ... )

 

I got it made!

Edited March 6, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[EllenMaksoud]

Heh.  Long-term unemployed.  It's OK.  My rich Uncle Barry sends me a check every month ...  (Of course, it's Other People's Money , since it comes from the Government, but hey, why quibble?  Why should anybody want or need a job when if I were to work full-time, the check I get would work out to $5.05 an hour ... ?  Why complain?  That rate was slightly below minimum wage ...  in 1997!

 

I got it made!

So, what did you do before? I was an Electrician for 32 years but fell down a manhole. Like they say, it is not the fall that hurts but the stop. Now I write Science Fiction and blog all day long.

 

Funny, some people think I was a Navy Seal. LOL. 

Edited March 6, 2014 by EllenMaksoud

[EllenMaksoud]

 

 

I am sorry, I don't mean to pry, but are you saying that the church is holding you back because you are intersex, or because of an actual sin?  You claim not to have any SSA (whatever that means for intersex people) and think that intercourse is "icky", so I am left scratching my head what the problem is. 

 

If it is a sin that is keeping you out of the temple, you don't need to divulge the sin, but if it is simply the fact that you are intersex, I would like to know about that. 

 

I had a meeting with the Bishop tonight and told him to withdraw my application for a Temple Recommend. It is just too much stress to wait this out, and I think the stress from this caused a flare in my Fibro Mialgia. I feel that I can do the will of Heavenly Father without one and should he see a need for one, then he can change hearts. The Temple would do nothing to increase my faith.

[Kenngo1969]

So, what did you do before? I was an Electrician for 32 years but fell down a manhole. Like they say, it is not the fall that hurts but the stop. Now I write Science Fiction and blog all day long.

 

Funny, some people think I was a Navy Seal. LOL. 

Heh.  I've had a bunch of dead-end jobs.  (Sorry to hear you fell down a manhole.  That must've hurt! )

[Tacenda]

Heh. I've had a bunch of dead-end jobs. (Sorry to hear you fell down a manhole. That must've hurt! )

Much like the Pope hitting the bottom of the pool!

[CV75]

Do you think we abuse our stewardship of our sexual powers when we have sex and artificially prevent procreation to take place? If not, then how is our stewardship of our sexual powers any different between an opposite sex couple that artifically prevents having any children and a same sex couple having sex without having children?

 

Would celibacy and living alone for the rest of one's life be required of all straight people that never intend to have children?

 

Or am I reading everything you are saying wrong.  I just can't seem to fit your statements together with what is expected of a homosexual without simply denying the same expectations of being able to share a life with someone they love simply because they are gay.

I think birth control and celibacy can be areas where abuse of our stewardship can occur, but not always; and that intentions can be contrary to or congruent with God’s will. I think this hold true regardless of sexual orientation.

I’ve been reading about the tabernacle in the wilderness lately as part of the Sunday School class this year. There are a lot of miniscule details in its structure, the items used to build and use it, how things are done, the interrelationships and interdependencies between sacrifices, offerings and performances, etc. Where the Law of Moses was a schoolteacher, I suppose such details helped the congregation appreciate all the things that God is involved with, and conclude that simple faith is a much more practical approach to understanding Him and His will.

In the same way, we can study in great detail the interrelationships and interdependencies between procreation, power, stewardship, sexuality, attraction, behavior, mortal probationary conditions, pre-mortal conditions, spirits, souls, accountability, choice, eternal gender character, commandments, covenants, doctrines, etc. My conclusion is that we all share the same expectations with regards to stewardship over our powers of procreation regardless of sexuality (or any of the other factors I listed—each one unto itself carries a relatively miniscule influence in the whole purpose of our being).

I think there are many appropriate ways to share a life with someone we love regardless of sexuality. I believe we each have the same proper boundaries and conditions within which we can operate according to our various circumstances.

[saemo]

So a sort of non church marriage? Hmmmm, what for?

The Catholic Church does not recognize SSM as a valid marriage. A civil union provides a means to legal recognition without calling that recognition marriage. SSM activists is the US have rejected this approach.

[california boy]

I think birth control and celibacy can be areas where abuse of our stewardship can occur, but not always; and that intentions can be contrary to or congruent with God’s will. I think this hold true regardless of sexual orientation.

I’ve been reading about the tabernacle in the wilderness lately as part of the Sunday School class this year. There are a lot of miniscule details in its structure, the items used to build and use it, how things are done, the interrelationships and interdependencies between sacrifices, offerings and performances, etc. Where the Law of Moses was a schoolteacher, I suppose such details helped the congregation appreciate all the things that God is involved with, and conclude that simple faith is a much more practical approach to understanding Him and His will.

In the same way, we can study in great detail the interrelationships and interdependencies between procreation, power, stewardship, sexuality, attraction, behavior, mortal probationary conditions, pre-mortal conditions, spirits, souls, accountability, choice, eternal gender character, commandments, covenants, doctrines, etc. My conclusion is that we all share the same expectations with regards to stewardship over our powers of procreation regardless of sexuality (or any of the other factors I listed—each one unto itself carries a relatively miniscule influence in the whole purpose of our being).

I think there are many appropriate ways to share a life with someone we love regardless of sexuality. I believe we each have the same proper boundaries and conditions within which we can operate according to our various circumstances.

I have no problem with your personal belief.  I just like consistency.  If you feel gays should be celibate because to have sex would be an abuse of the procreative process, then you also have to believe:

 

Everyone should be celibate unless they want more children.

If you are a couple that can no longer have children, you should be celibate

Birth control should not be allowed

Masturbation would be prohibited.

 

The problem with this campaign of yours is that it effects straight people.  The beauty of requiring celibacy only if you are gay is that all those straight people can feel self righteous since it is a sin that can never effect them.  You have a much harder sell.  I wonder if you can get any other straight person on this board to support your position.

[CV75]

I have no problem with your personal belief.  I just like consistency.  If you feel gays should be celibate because to have sex would be an abuse of the procreative process, then you also have to believe:

 

Everyone should be celibate unless they want more children.

If you are a couple that can no longer have children, you should be celibate

Birth control should not be allowed

Masturbation would be prohibited.

 

The problem with this campaign of yours is that it effects straight people.  The beauty of requiring celibacy only if you are gay is that all those straight people can feel self righteous since it is a sin that can never effect them.  You have a much harder sell.  I wonder if you can get any other straight person on this board to support your position.

Campaign? LOL…

Black-and-white isn’t consistency, but here’s the consistency in what I was actually saying:

Everyone should* be celibate until they are married.

If you are a couple that can no longer (or never could) have children, you should* marry and/or stay married.

Birth control should* not be abused.

Masturbation already is prohibited (rather, counseled against).

* I’m accommodating your word, not mine…

It seems you really don’t understand my position. It is about everyone. Those who keep the commandments needn't be self-righteous against those who don't--what's that all about?

[Damien the Leper]

So, being an alcoholic is OK ... as long as one is functional?

Still not dealing with the same principle.

[Gray]

Homosexual behavior is a sin simply because it is an abuse of the stewardship we have over our God-given procreative powers. The stewardship is that we reserve sexual relations for marriage between a man and a woman, so anything else, however celebratory, is an abuse.

 

Homosexual attraction is not always homosexual behavior, and homosexual attraction is not part of one's eternal identity as evidenced by there being  no sexual powers to steward by the marriage covenant in the pre-existence.

 

I don't see how, as there is no procreation involved. An abuse of procreative power would be having a child and then neglecting him or her.

[Gray]

I believe that sin is sin is sin. One doesn't foster a wholesome environment by dumping acid and heavy metal into the soil and water. How can anyone expect to nourish a wholesome society if one promotes and sanctions behavior that is nonproductive? I can put my arm around the "gay" guy and point him towards the light. I can also shake the "gay" guy and tell him that he is headed towards disaster. I cannot condone the "gay" guy's actions no matter how harsh it might seem to people --- who simply do not see the broader picture and how it will ultimately influence society and further weaken both marriage and a correct view of God's saving grace. 

 

God wants us to be joyous in this life, that doesn't mean one is always happy in this life. But I can say that many people today are not happy or joyous no matter what they get, because their lives are empty and without purpose ------ yet filled with everything they ever wanted.

 

Gay people who try to live by the church's standards are typically miserable, not joyous. That's why the church's current policy cannot be right.

[thesometimesaint]

There is one issue. It is one that I will just live with. When I first started with the Sisters in March 2011, I was assured that the Atonement would see that all sin is forgiven. In 2014, it seems that some of the benefits of the Atonement will have to wait until the next life. Hmmm, someone changed the story.  I am sure that Heavenly Father will deal with this in his good time. Perhaps they believe that holding me back will stem the flow of other undesireables wanting admittance.

 

Interestingly, gay/ lesbian activist organizations say the incidence of homosexuality is around 10%, but of course they are the ones to benefit most by such numbers. I think that part of it is that some people just want to be promiscuous and will use anything to make that alright in their own minds.

 

The Atonement does cover ALL sins, Jesus the Christ paid the full price for everyone for all time. Being a baptized faithful member to the end of your mortality are the only requirements for ALL of the blessings. Of course we all have to exit mortality to receive most of the blessings. But be assured that no blessings in the next life will be denied you to which you would have been entitled to because of something you had no control over. Saints and sinners are held to the same standard. What we've done with what we knew.

 

The reality is that it is between 1-3%, however if it were just two people or 2 billion that neither justifies the sin nor our mistreatment of the sinner. God is fully capable of dealing with any of the consequences.

[Kenngo1969]

Gay people who try to live by the church's standards are typically miserable, not joyous. That's why the church's current policy cannot be right.

Like anyone else, they're usually as miserable or as joyous as they decide to be.  (And yes, I know more than I would care to about brain chemistry, neurotransmitters, psychiatric diagnoses, and related subjects ...)  Like anyone else, they must make an affirmative choice to be defined by what they have rather than by what they lack.  Either they can realize that this life is simply the second act in a three-act play and that this life often isn't fair (and they can choose joy, unfairness and whatever they lack notwithstanding) or they can chose to live "in the moment" (because, after all, who really knows anything about eternity anyway, right? ) and, perhaps, to sin ... just like the rest of us must choose.

[Kenngo1969]

Still not dealing with the same principle.

OK.  I guess I'm too idiosyncratic and inconsistent for your taste, Val!  (Welcome to the human race! )

[Kenngo1969]

The problem with this campaign of yours is that it effects straight people.  The beauty of requiring celibacy only if you are gay is that all those straight people can feel self righteous since it is a sin that can never effect them.  You have a much harder sell.  I wonder if you can get any other straight person on this board to support your position.

Baloney!  (I can't believe I'm actually engaging you on this topic, since you flamed me with absolute impunity the last time I did so ... What do you have on the Mods?  Are you shaking them down?  Extorting them?  Do you have pictures of them in compromising situations or something?!) The standard is no sex outside of marriage, and marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God.  It doesn't matter if you're gay or straight: the standard is no sex outside of marriage, period.  And if one never gets married, one never has sexual relations, period (even if straight).

[Gray]

Like anyone else, they're usually as miserable or as joyous as they decide to be.  (And yes, I know more than I would care to about brain chemistry, neurotransmitters, psychiatric diagnoses, and related subjects ...)  Like anyone else, they must make an affirmative choice to be defined by what they have rather than by what they lack.  Either they can realize that this life is simply the second act in a three-act play and that this life often isn't fair (and they can choose joy, unfairness and whatever they lack notwithstanding) or they can chose to live "in the moment" (because, after all, who really knows anything about eternity anyway, right? ) and, perhaps, to sin ... just like the rest of us must choose.

 

For many of them, choosing to be happy means choosing to live outside of current church policy. There is a long wake of suicides and attempted suicides that attests to the wrong-headedness of current church policy.

[pogi]

I had a meeting with the Bishop tonight and told him to withdraw my application for a Temple Recommend. It is just too much stress to wait this out, and I think the stress from this caused a flare in my Fibro Mialgia. I feel that I can do the will of Heavenly Father without one and should he see a need for one, then he can change hearts. The Temple would do nothing to increase my faith.

 

Thanks for sharing your story.  Your faith is inspiring!  

[CV75]

I don't see how, as there is no procreation involved. An abuse of procreative power would be having a child and then neglecting him or her.

There are so may ways to abuse the procreative powers, you just identifierd one. The one getting the attention of this thread is using it in religiously unauthorized ways, which happens when the couple is not married.

I see the Pope’s statement (about same sex unions, not marriage) as advancing the Catholic view for social justice (access to healthcare and necessities of life that many depend on their governments to provide).

I see the procreative powers as God-given and a spiritual stewardship as well as a physical stewardship. Our stewardship plays out in (and both affects and is affected by) innumerable factors of the human experience including genetics, chemistry, psychology, culture, morality, choice and accountability, etc. I believe this interplay between the powers, their stewardship and the mortal human factors is where we see the innumerable varieties and strengths of sexual attraction.

I see the God-given parameters (the covenant of marriage) not being about sexual attraction but about the God-given powers and stewardship. I see sexual attraction as part of the mortal experience. In the pre-existence, we had no power to procreate, so the attraction between male and female spirits was limited to their basic and fundamental eternal gender identity.

In other words, our procreative powers are God-given, and that the varied expressions of sexual attraction we find in mortality are not.

In addition, the many interacting factors impacting sexual attraction in mortality are far more complicated than the eternal gender characteristics that contribute to relationships between spirits in the pre-mortal life. Without procreative power and physical mortal conditions, the attraction between male and female spirits is governed only spiritually (e.g. the law of opposition).

I’ll add that I believe our gender characteristics are God-given in the sense that they are essential aspects of our eternal identity. But even these, in mortality, can be as impacted by the same factors that impact sexual attraction resulting in many kinds and strengths of sexual attraction possible in mortality—yet the stewardship over our procreative powers remains constant.

I’ve been reading about the tabernacle in the wilderness lately as part of the Sunday School class this year. There are a lot of miniscule details in its structure, the items used to build and use it, how things are done, the interrelationships and interdependencies between sacrifices, offerings and performances, etc. Where the Law of Moses was a schoolteacher, I suppose such details helped the congregation appreciate all the things that God is involved with, and conclude that simple faith is a much more practical approach to understanding Him and His will.

In the same way, we can study in great detail the interrelationships and interdependencies between procreation, power, stewardship, sexuality, attraction, behavior, mortal probationary conditions, pre-mortal conditions, spirits, souls, accountability, choice, eternal gender character, commandments, covenants, doctrines, etc. My conclusion is that we all share the same expectations with regards to stewardship over our powers of procreation regardless of sexuality (or any of the other factors I listed—each one unto itself carries a relatively miniscule influence in the whole purpose of our being).

[CV75]

Gay people who try to live by the church's standards are typically miserable, not joyous. That's why the church's current policy cannot be right.

I think you need to speak for yourself here. It's like saying "Anyyone of any sexuality who tries to live by the church's standards is typically miserable, not joyous. That's why the church's current policy cannot be right."

[california boy]

Campaign? LOL…

Black-and-white isn’t consistency, but here’s the consistency in what I was actually saying:

Everyone should* be celibate until they are married.

If you are a couple that can no longer (or never could) have children, you should* marry and/or stay married.

Birth control should* not be abused.

Masturbation already is prohibited (rather, counseled against).

* I’m accommodating your word, not mine…

It seems you really don’t understand my position. It is about everyone. Those who keep the commandments needn't be self-righteous against those who don't--what's that all about?

 

You are right.  I thougt you were saying something new about responsibility stewardship and sexuality.  Evidently you were not.  So now I am just confused with why you posted anything about this.  The post you just posted is much more clear if that was your point.

 

I don't think that anyone on this board is stating that sex outside of marriage goes against the law of chastity.  

Edited March 6, 2014 by california boy

[CV75]

For many of them, choosing to be happy means choosing to live outside of current church policy. There is a long wake of suicides and attempted suicides that attests to the wrong-headedness of current church policy.

Your observation has far, far more complex dynamics than the Church's policy.