Towards A Better Understanding Of Same Sex Attraction And Sin

[rockpond]

How many gay mormons push their agenda on the church?

 

I don't know.  And, you still haven't answered the CFR.

 

Why do you think they came out against same sex marriage?

 

Prejudice.  Fear.

 

Why did they make the site www.mormonsandgays.org?

 

My opinion:  an attempt to work toward a better understanding of each other.  And to encourage more compassion and empathy.  Maybe you could spend some more time there.

 

Also, since you're relatively new here I'll let you know something ... you are likely going to get this thread shut down with your behavior here.

[Daniel2]

How many gay mormons push their agenda on the church?

Answering a CFR is posting proof of your assertion, not reposing the question back to the thread. You made that claim. Please provide the requested evidence, or retract the claim.

Why do you think they came out against same sex marriage?

I'd think most gay Mormons are for gay marriage...

Why did they make the site www.mormonsandgays.org?

The LDS church made that website in response to much of its own members' anti-gay insensitivity and over-zealousness, much of which can be seen in this thread. Edited September 15, 2014 by Daniel2

[Brian 2.0]

How many gay mormons push their agenda on the church? Why do you think they came out against same sex marriage? Why did they make the site www.mormonsandgays.org?

 

So if gay mormons push their agenda on the church there should be we should be opposed to all gay rights in general?

 

There's a group of women pushing their agenda on the church currently... should we be opposed to all women's rights in general?

[rockpond]

How many gay mormons push their agenda on the church? Why do you think they came out against same sex marriage? Why did they make the site www.mormonsandgays.org?

 

I'm not aware of the gay rights movement successfully imposing its will on the church.  The Church, however, definitely imposed its will on the gay population of California (before the judicial system shut it down).

[california boy]

I have known great people in my own community who did many wonderful things but yet cheated on their spouses, raped or molested children, etc.

So does the state deny them marriage? 

[california boy]

Studies of same sex couples compared with homosexual couples show that gay couples are more promiscuous and have way more sex partners over the years.

Wait WHAT STUDY.  Quote the study that says that.

[california boy]

Yes. I am suggesting that minimizing illegitimate births and encouraging legitimate births continues to be a significant state interest, and a primary interest behind marital and family laws, regardless of the form of government, even today. Outside of bearing and raising kids, the government has little or no substantial interest in marital/family laws. The government/people derive no more value from childless married couples as they do from platonic friends, and thus there is little or no incentive for them to encourage childless marriages as it would be to encourage marriage between platonic friends. To not know this is to be woefully ignorant.

 

But, again, this is tangential to the topic of the thread.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

You do realize that YOUR idea of what the state laws on marriage has been ruled against over 20 times by both district and federal courts.   I predict within the year the Supreme Court will also rule against YOUR idea of government interests.  How about you?  Do you really think that suddenly the Supreme Court will reject every single federal judge and embrace your very individual view of what government interest is?

[Daniel2]

Studies of same sex couples compared with homosexual couples show that gay couples are more promiscuous and have way more sex partners over the years.

1. The above doesn't make sense.

2. Assuming you can clarify what sense you meant, how do you feel it's relevant?

[stemelbow]

Wait WHAT STUDY.  Quote the study that says that.

you know, comparing/onctrasting same sex couple to homosexual couples you find that gay couple have more sexual partners than them all. If ya didn't know that then you probably should be posting in this thread. This thread is for those who know something about same sex attraction and sin.

[Rodeo]

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02

You can't trust them because they have an agenda, but you can trust this (website X) website because it goes along with what I already believe.

 

Already know where this is going to go. 0 attempts to actually look at the facts.

[Rodeo]

I'm not aware of any law that allows for child molestation.

 

It's starting to sound like you are opposed to religious freedom.  Perhaps you could take a moment to read the 11th Article of Faith and D&C 134.

Theres way more at stake in marriage than just morality. Let us speak about children. Children have aright to be raised in a traditional family with both a mother and father. Kudos to Russia for their new anti-gay adoption laws! Studies have been done that prove children raised in homosexual relationships fare worse in society and in mental health than children raised in traditional families.

You can keep thinking that being gay is acceptable in society as a lifestyle but the truth is it is unhealthy, immoral and unnatural. If we impose legislation that is immoral at what point do we make things like rape and molestation lawful? Perhaps we can even pass laws for 30 year old men to groom children and marry them when they are 12.

The whole point with law is that it is based upon morales and those morales come from none other than God himself which light of Christ teaches us how to act and behave in society. There used to be laws against sodomy/ homosexual behavior but we have become so morally corrupt these days with our laws that now it is lawful to do all sorts of wicked and immoral things. SSM is a gross immoralityand if you can't see that then the light of Christ is far from bright anymore.

[Rodeo]

You can't trust them because they have an agenda, but you can trust this (website X) website because it goes along with what I already believe.

 

Already know where this is going to go. 0 attempts to actually look at the facts.

Do you think FRC's stats are swayed to their likening or are they pretty close to the truth? We know that similar studies by pro-gay researchers show the same trends.

[Brian 2.0]

The whole point with law is that it is based upon morales and those morales come from none other than God himself which light of Christ teaches us how to act and behave in society. 

 

First off, we don't live a theocracy so God is not the go-to for what is legal and illegal... in this country at least.

 

But granting you that... which God are we to look at to see His morals to base our laws upon?  The LDS version of God?  The Muslim version of God?  The Scientologists version of God?  You see how difficult what you are saying is?

[Daniel2]

1. The above doesn't make sense.

2. Assuming you can clarify what sense you meant, how do you feel it's relevant?

Rodeo, can you please clarify/summarize what statistic/s you are trying to assert, and clarify what relevance you feel they have to the discussion?

I think you're saying that, on average, single, partnered, or married gay men are statistically more likely to have more sexual partners than married straight couples do, or than single, partnered, or married lesbians do.

Is that what you're saying? Or is it something else?

Edited September 15, 2014 by Daniel2

[Brian 2.0]

Do you think FRC's stats are swayed to their likening or are they pretty close to the truth? We know that similar studies by pro-gay researchers show the same trends.

 

So I keep trying to get through this "study" you linked to.  It's so laughable sometime I almost think it came out of The Onion.  Look at this:

 

This is so flawed it not even funny.  It's comparing "homosexual males" to "MARRIED Males/Females"

 

 

This is apples to oranges.   A joke.

 

Here's how the study needs to be done to even mean anything.  

 

UNMARRIED POPULATION (all respondent are unmarried and in a current relationship):

- Heterosexual Males

- Heterosexual Females

- Homosexual Males

- Homosexual Females

 

MARRIED POPULATION (all respondents are legally married):

- Males in Opposite Sex Marriage

- Females in Opposite Sex Marriage

- Males in SSM

- Females in SSM

 

Anyone who has a half a brain in creating a study can see that the study you linked to was insanely biased towards a particular outcome.  Why didn't they use the approach I outlined above?  It wouldn't have been hard.  It would have been more accurate.

Edited September 15, 2014 by Brian 2.0

[california boy]

Rodeo, I do have a serious question to ask you since you seem to be the most concerned with gays being less monogamous than straight men.  And I assume you realize that the majority of gay men do not share your religious views.  So here is the question/

 

What reasons would you give a gay man to convince him he should be monogamous?

[Brian 2.0]

And as a counter to the "study" you linked to Rodeo (sorry, I just have to put it in quotes because of its content) 

 

This link will give you reference to SIX STUDIES which counter your claims:

 

http://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/gender-society/same-sex-marriage-children-well-being-research-roundup

 

And so just so you don't think I'm pulling the studies from the "Make the World Gay and Destroy Families Committee" or something... here's the academic institutions that make up these studies:

 

- Stanford University

- UCLA

- UCSF

- Florida State University

- Michigan State University

- University of Virginia

- University of Amsterdam

- Tufts University

- Boston Medical Center

- New York State Psychiatric Institute

- The Committee of Psychosocial Aspect of Child and Family Health

 

Here's the most recent study on this issue I could find.  From the University of Melbourne in Australia.  Linked from NBC News, also can be seen reported on by The Washington Post and dozens of other well respected news organizations.

 

"Children of Same Sex Parent are healthier: Study"

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/kids-health/children-same-sex-parents-are-healthier-study-n149901

[rockpond]

Theres way more at stake in marriage than just morality. Let us speak about children. Children have aright to be raised in a traditional family with both a mother and father. Kudos to Russia for their new anti-gay adoption laws! Studies have been done that prove children raised in homosexual relationships fare worse in society and in mental health than children raised in traditional families.

You can keep thinking that being gay is acceptable in society as a lifestyle but the truth is it is unhealthy, immoral and unnatural. If we impose legislation that is immoral at what point do we make things like rape and molestation lawful? Perhaps we can even pass laws for 30 year old men to groom children and marry them when they are 12.

The whole point with law is that it is based upon morales and those morales come from none other than God himself which light of Christ teaches us how to act and behave in society. There used to be laws against sodomy/ homosexual behavior but we have become so morally corrupt these days with our laws that now it is lawful to do all sorts of wicked and immoral things. SSM is a gross immoralityand if you can't see that then the light of Christ is far from bright anymore.

It would appear that you started the thread under false pretenses. You don't seem to want to understand homosexuality, you seem to feel that you have it all figured out.

And, you do seem to be bashing gays in every way you can come up with.

CFR on the studies that about children raised by gay parents.

Aside from that, if you are going to continue this dross, I won't be responding.

[Daniel2]

Why didn't they use the approach I outlined above? It wouldn't have been hard. It would have been more accurate.

My guess is a combination of factors:

1. The study was conducted prior to same-sex marriage being widely legal,

2. The FRC doesn't ideologically believe that "married" same-sex couples can actually exist, and to study married same-sex couples would be to legitimize their existence,

3. The FRC prefers to keep it vague, because the vagueness supports their ideology, and

4. The FRC would be concerned that your scientifically-controlled group study would probably show that civil marriage increases monogamy among partnerships from all three sexual orientations, albeit at differing ratios.

Edited September 15, 2014 by Daniel2

[Daniel2]

Rodeo, I do have a serious question to ask you since you seem to be the most concerned with gays being less monogamous than straight men. And I assume you realize that the majority of gay men do not share your religious views. So here is the question/

What reasons would you give a gay man to convince him he should be monogamous?

I think there are both religious and secular reasons to promote monogamy.

I would assert that gay men should strive for monogamy because overall, I believe monogamous, same-orientation married couples are more likely to be healthier physically, emotionally, and spiritually, stay together longer, and are probably happier and wealthier.

In short, I think monogamy in a same-orientation marriage probably shows increased levels of better... just about everything positive.

I have also read some of Dan Savages' thoughts on his "monogamish" marital relationship, and I think he makes a good case that each couple should decide for themselves what boundaries works best.

In short, I believe it's beneficial to encourage most people towards that direction, but respect the rights of those who chose otherwise.

Edited September 16, 2014 by Daniel2

[Rain]

Just because something is taught in conference doesn't mean it is "Official Doctrine" or that God specifically condones it.

 

And homosexuality doesn't appear to have been mentioned in General Conference since 1999.

 

 

That's misleading.  The word may have not been used, but "same gender", "same sex" and "sexual" have been. I haven't checked for others.  Most are not so clear cut as when "homosexual" was used.

[wenglund]

I think the commandment is just to get married.  "Heterosexual" isn't actually used in scripture.

 

I think the reason we haven't heard about God's will specifically for homosexuals is likely the same reason that it took us until 1978 to allow black members to receive saving ordinances in this life.

 

The restoration isn't over.

 

I think you are straining and being intentionally obtuse in order to hold onto your tenuous position. While the scriptures may not use the word "homosexual," they and the wealth of counsel from Church leaders are replete with references to husbands and wives, man and women, and other male/female cognates, in relation to commandments to marry and against divorce and sexual sins such as adultery and fornication.  Yes, The scriptures are very clear and specific about heterosexuals marrying. 

 

Furthermore, it isn't, nor has it ever been a sin and immoral to be black and not hold the priesthood; whereas by your own words, sex and sexual relations between people of the same gender is sinful and immoral outside the bounds of marriage--which marriage were not legally possible between people of the same sex. So the comparison is absurd as well as offensive. 

 

If you were honest with yourself, and not beholding to pop culture, you wouldn't need to strain credulity and toss out absurd comparisons, but could easily and reasonably answer my question by rightly saying that the reason that God has NEVER, in the thousands of years of recorded history, commanded homosexuals to marry each other, period, let alone to avoid sexual sin and immorality, and this is because not only aren't they intended to get married to each other (it would profane the sacred), but marriage wouldn't make the sin and immorality of homosexual behaviors any less sinful and immoral. This seems so obvious as to go without saying, but some people will kick against the pricks 

 

As Paul warned: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but after their own lusts shall heap unto themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth [while boldly proclaiming to seek the truth], and shall be turned unto fable," (2Tim 4:3-4) "This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves....Without natural affection...lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God. Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof....For this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with divers lusts, Ever learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth." (2 Tim 3:1-7)

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[rockpond]

I think you are straining and being intentionally obtuse in order to hold onto your tenuous position. While the scriptures may not use the word "homosexual," they and the wealth of counsel from Church leaders are replete with references to husbands and wives, man and women, and other male/female cognates, in relation to commandments to marry and against divorce and sexual sins such as adultery and fornication.  Yes, The scriptures are very clear and specific about heterosexuals marrying. 

 

Furthermore, it isn't, nor has it ever been a sin and immoral to be black and not hold the priesthood; whereas by your own words, sex and sexual relations between people of the same gender is sinful and immoral outside the bounds of marriage--which marriage were not legally possible between people of the same sex. So the comparison is absurd as well as offensive. 

 

If you were honest with yourself, and not beholding to pop culture, you wouldn't need to strain credulity and toss out absurd comparisons, but could easily and reasonably answer my question by rightly saying that the reason that God has NEVER, in the thousands of years of recorded history, commanded homosexuals to marry each other, period, let alone to avoid sexual sin and immorality, and this is because not only aren't they intended to get married to each other (it would profane the sacred), but marriage wouldn't make the sin and immorality of homosexual behaviors any less sinful and immoral. This seems so obvious as to go without saying, but some people will kick against the pricks 

 

As Paul warned: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but after their own lusts shall heap unto themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth [while boldly proclaiming to seek the truth], and shall be turned unto fable," (2Tim 4:3-4) "This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves....Without natural affection...lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God. Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof....For this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with divers lusts, Ever learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth." (2 Tim 3:1-7)

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

It's all good, Brother Englund. I know where and to whom to turn for sound doctrine. I'm quite comfortable in my beliefs and my relationship with God and the church.

[wenglund]

So I keep trying to get through this "study" you linked to.  It's so laughable sometime I almost think it came out of The Onion.  Look at this:

 

This is so flawed it not even funny.  It's comparing "homosexual males" to "MARRIED Males/Females"

 

 

This is apples to oranges.   A joke.

 

Here's how the study needs to be done to even mean anything.  

 

UNMARRIED POPULATION (all respondent are unmarried and in a current relationship):

- Heterosexual Males

- Heterosexual Females

- Homosexual Males

- Homosexual Females

 

MARRIED POPULATION (all respondents are legally married):

- Males in Opposite Sex Marriage

- Females in Opposite Sex Marriage

- Males in SSM

- Females in SSM

 

Anyone who has a half a brain in creating a study can see that the study you linked to was insanely biased towards a particular outcome.  Why didn't they use the approach I outlined above?  It wouldn't have been hard.  It would have been more accurate.

 

What you suggest may be correct if one wishes to compare fidelity rates under specific relationship conditions (such as married vs unmarried); but the breakout isn't necessary in terms of committed relationships in general. 

 

Do you seriously doubt that gay men are far more promiscuous and lack fidelity in their relationships than heterosexuals? If so, here is what I posted on my blog:

 

"Homosexuals...are taught by example and belief that marital relationships are transitory and mostly sexual in nature. Sexual relationships are primarily for pleasure rather than procreation. And they are taught that monogamy in a marriage is not the norm [and] should be discouraged if one wants a good 'marital' relationship.[20] Bradley P. Hayton, 'To Marry or Not: The Legalization of Marriage and Adoption of Homosexual Couples," (Newport Beach: The Pacific Policy Institute, 1993--as reportedHERE)  "Even in those homosexual relationships in which the partners consider themselves to be in a committed relationship, the meaning of ‘committed’ typically means something radically different than in heterosexual marriage.” (See HERE and HERE) A national survey discovered that even "committed" homosexual relationships display a fundamental incapacity for the faithfulness and commitment that is axiomatic to the institution of marriage. (Parade, August 7, 1994, pp. 4–6.) Another study found that two-thirds of same-sex spouses (40% female, 60% male) did not believe marriage needed always to be monogamous. In fact, nearly half of male same-sex spouses (47%) had an explicit agreement that allowed for non-monogamy. (See HERE andHERE) Yet another study showed: "that 47 per cent of gay couples had 'sex agreements' that specifically allowed sexual activity with others. An additional 8 per cent of couples were split: one person favored sex outside the relationship and the other expected monogamy. Only 45 per cent described their relationships as monogamous. Proponents of 'marriage equality' sing their refrain over and over: 'Our relationships are just the same as yours.' Not even close. While just 7 per cent of Americans believe that adultery (sexual infidelity by married, heterosexual partners) is morally acceptable, Dr Hoff’s report emphasizes that nearly 50 per cent of gays in committed relationships specifically affirm sexual infidelity. Other research shows shockingly higher rates (75-95 per cent) of non-monogamy in long-term gay relationships." (SeeHERE) (See also HERE and HERE and HERE)  As such, legalizing same-sex marriage didn't diminish infidelity and social problems common to unmarried homosexuals, but may have even encourage it by giving homosexual infidelity the legitimizing label of "marriage." (See also HERE and HERE and HERE) 

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited September 16, 2014 by wenglund