Towards A Better Understanding Of Same Sex Attraction And Sin

[Bob Crockett]

Sorry but it has not been well proven. Can you point to a study that shows single gay men have more sexual partners than single straight men? Can you point to a study that shows unmarried gay couples living together have more sexual partners than unmarried straight couples living together?

Making a statement like this does not satisify a CFR. The reason we have CFR's on this board is to back up what a person says is true. YOU HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO DO THAT. Withdraw the claim does not mean repeat the claim.

[Bob Crockett]

It seems undisputed. Kinsey noted it in his studies. Go to any prominent Christian website on the subject and they point to one study or another.

LDS teachings don't focus on this. It is an irrelevancy. For you and me it is seriously sinful conduct until told otherwise.

[thesometimesaint]

I don't understand your comment.  Who are these "world wide" people that you refer to that don't live in the United States?

 

The AIDS epidemic is world wide, and infects more heterosexuals than homosexuals.

[Rodeo]

And do you think that if a gay person read what you've written here on this thread that you would then be in a position to help persuade them to come unto Christ?

And again, who is sidestepping or ignoring the issue? I don't know what your point is with your continued references to that. Are you suggesting that we need to do more evil speaking of homosexuals like you've shown us here? Is that the better path?

How do you think we should approach it? How is it called evil speaking to call good "good" and evil "evil"?

[thesometimesaint]

How do you think we should approach it? How is it called evil speaking to call good "good" and evil "evil"?

 

I'm fine with the Church keeping it sinful. I'm not fine with making/keeping it criminal.

Edited September 14, 2014 by thesometimesaint

[Hestia]

Do not give links to offensive sites.

[Storm Rider]

Sorry but it has not been well proven.  Can you point to a study that shows single gay men have more sexual partners than single straight men?  Can you point to a study that shows unmarried gay couples living together have more sexual partners than unmarried straight couples living together?

 

Making a statement like this does not satisify a CFR.  The reason we have CFR's on this board is to back up what a person says is true.  YOU HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO DO THAT.  Withdraw the claim does not mean repeat the claim.

 

Hmm, I just googled it and I don't know a single man that comes anywhere close to the typical gay man's prolific numbers of gay "experiences".  I have heard of a one or two athletes that begin to reach these numbers, but those are the rare exception.  

 

California, are you really ignorant of these studies or are you just being coy?  Here are a number of articles that all refer to a number of studies:  the first one, here is the second one,  The vast majority of syphilis cases come from this same subset of our population according to the CDC.  

 

There seem to be a number of other studies that look at the average time period of a gay relationship.  One to three years is the largest group with 31% of gay couples; however, 29% are together for four to seven years.  

 

It seems fair to approach this topic realistically and without trying to distort the numbers; being aware of the studies leads to a more knowledgeable, realistic discussion.  Straight couples are not perfect and no one is attempting to portray them as such, but gay couples and straight couples are not the same.  Their relationships are different and, according to the studies listed above, they are more promiscuous and of shorter duration.  Will that change in the future?  Maybe, but it will not change unless the community itself begins to talk about its own shortcomings.  On the other hand, it may not change for the simple reason it does not value monogamy in the same way other couples value it.  

[california boy]

Hmm, I just googled it and I don't know a single man that comes anywhere close to the typical gay man's prolific numbers of gay "experiences".  I have heard of a one or two athletes that begin to reach these numbers, but those are the rare exception.  

 

California, are you really ignorant of these studies or are you just being coy?  Here are a number of articles that all refer to a number of studies:  the first one, here is the second one,  The vast majority of syphilis cases come from this same subset of our population according to the CDC.  

 

There seem to be a number of other studies that look at the average time period of a gay relationship.  One to three years is the largest group with 31% of gay couples; however, 29% are together for four to seven years.  

 

It seems fair to approach this topic realistically and without trying to distort the numbers; being aware of the studies leads to a more knowledgeable, realistic discussion.  Straight couples are not perfect and no one is attempting to portray them as such, but gay couples and straight couples are not the same.  Their relationships are different and, according to the studies listed above, they are more promiscuous and of shorter duration.  Will that change in the future?  Maybe, but it will not change unless the community itself begins to talk about its own shortcomings.  On the other hand, it may not change for the simple reason it does not value monogamy in the same way other couples value it.  

 

I am not claiming that gay men are not promiscuous.  And I don't think that you would claim that single straight men are not promiscuous.  The question I have and NO ONE has been able to show any solid study, is how do these two groups compare?  Are gay single men more promiscuous than straight men?  If so, by what percentage? 10% more? 20% more?  Are unmarried gay couples more promiscuous than unmarried straight couples?  How long are their relationships?  

 

We certainly know that married straight couples tend to be more monogamous than unmarried straight couples.  How about gay married couples?  Do they tend to be more monogamous that unmarried gay couples?

 

We have seen plenty of links to antigay sites on this subject, (such as the one you posted to Joseph Nicolosi, the founder and former president of NARTH.  A man who has made his livelihood preying on gays that desperately want to be straight even though several states have passed laws against reparative therapy for those under 18)  But what are the real numbers?  This seems to be a big deal to some of you like Rodeo and you, but you have YET to actually do a real side by side comparison.  It seems to me that if you and Rodeo are willing to rant about homosexual promiscuity, you should at least know the facts. It seems like you don't.  Until you can tell us how to gay single men compare with straight single men then you really have noting to go on and on and on about do you. Either provide the comparisons by a credible peer study, not what some antigay minister has to say or quit the rant.  Does that seem fair? 

[Tacenda]

I am not claiming that gay men are not promiscuous.  And I don't think that you would claim that single straight men are not promiscuous.  The question I have and NO ONE has been able to show any solid study, is how do these two groups compare?  Are gay single men more promiscuous than straight men?  If so, by what percentage? 10% more? 20% more?  Are unmarried gay couples more promiscuous than unmarried straight couples?  How long are their relationships?  

 

We certainly know that married straight couples tend to be more monogamous than unmarried straight couples.  How about gay married couples?  Do they tend to be more monogamous that unmarried gay couples?

 

We have seen plenty of links to antigay sites on this subject, (such as the one you posted to Joseph Nicolosi, the founder and former president of NARTH.  A man who has made his livelihood preying on gays that desperately want to be straight even though several states have passed laws against reparative therapy for those under 18)  But what are the real numbers?  This seems to be a big deal to some of you like Rodeo and you, but you have YET to actually do a real side by side comparison.  It seems to me that if you and Rodeo are willing to rant about homosexual promiscuity, you should at least know the facts. It seems like you don't.  Until you can tell us how to gay single men compare with straight single men then you really have noting to go on and on and on about do you. Either provide the comparisons by a credible peer study, not what some antigay minister has to say or quit the rant.  Does that seem fair? 

One only need look at all the heterosexual porn out there compared to gay porn.  Pretty well signifies that there can be a moral problem on both sides!

[omni]

Why would you think it would? I have not read any evidence that monogamy is a common state of being for those who practice the gay lifestyle. Conversely, I know many men who have only ever had a single sexual relationship and that is with their wife. Does that even exist among the gay population? I am not being facetious, but when one reads studies about the gay lifestyle it seems like multiple partners is just part of the life. Is this accurate or is it an exaggeration.

Of course it does, one of the primary purposes of marriage is to create long-term monogamous relationships. Why would it not do the same thing for gay relationships?

We'd probably see similar results if a law was passed stating heterosexuals born on even numbered days could no longer marry and have children.

The fact is that marriage and children have kept countless heterosexual relationships together that would have otherwise ended.

[wenglund]

Not going into complete details here, but my stepson, who is gay, just lost his partner to suicide after 7 years.  Irrelevant I am sure is the fact that he was LDS (my stepson is not).  But that being said, we cannot know ...really know..what it would be like to have someone say you are evil, bad..because you love.  I know the world isn't fair..but we should try.

 

Shortly after returning from my mission I attended a singles ward in which one of the young men hung himself to death because a certain girl in the Ward refused to go out with him.

 

This troubled me both on behalf of the young man who took his life as well as the young girl who was singled out as the cause of the suicide, as well as family members and friends that were left to deal with the young mans senseless death.

 

Consequently, I was motivated to search deeper into the causes of suicide--which I learned has much to do with the warped mindset of suicidal people, and little if anything to do with public stigmas against bad BEHAVIORS. (See HERE)

 

In short, instances of suicide ought to give us cause to correct the deleterious thinking and behavior of people with suicidal tendencies, and it ought not be cause for cultures to call bad behaviors good. Yet, the opposite seems to be the case with contemporary pop culture. 

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited September 14, 2014 by wenglund

[wenglund]

Of course it does, one of the primary purposes of marriage is to create long-term monogamous relationships. Why would it not do the same thing for gay relationships?

 

That is a good question. The answer rest heavily with the divergent cultures of the two sexual orientations, with the prevailing difference consisting in their general ability or inability respectively to have kids. (See HERE)

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited September 14, 2014 by wenglund

[wenglund]

I am not claiming that gay men are not promiscuous.  And I don't think that you would claim that single straight men are not promiscuous.  The question I have and NO ONE has been able to show any solid study, is how do these two groups compare?  Are gay single men more promiscuous than straight men?  If so, by what percentage? 10% more? 20% more?  Are unmarried gay couples more promiscuous than unmarried straight couples?  How long are their relationships?  

 

We certainly know that married straight couples tend to be more monogamous than unmarried straight couples.  How about gay married couples?  Do they tend to be more monogamous that unmarried gay couples?

 

We have seen plenty of links to antigay sites on this subject, (such as the one you posted to Joseph Nicolosi, the founder and former president of NARTH.  A man who has made his livelihood preying on gays that desperately want to be straight even though several states have passed laws against reparative therapy for those under 18)  But what are the real numbers?  This seems to be a big deal to some of you like Rodeo and you, but you have YET to actually do a real side by side comparison.  It seems to me that if you and Rodeo are willing to rant about homosexual promiscuity, you should at least know the facts. It seems like you don't.  Until you can tell us how to gay single men compare with straight single men then you really have noting to go on and on and on about do you. Either provide the comparisons by a credible peer study, not what some antigay minister has to say or quit the rant.  Does that seem fair? 

 

A little common sense will go a long way in answering all your questions. If it is correctly understood that women tend to be less promiscuous than men (primarily because they are capable of getting pregnant), then it would stand to reason that if women are involved in relationships then the rate of promiscuity will be less than where only men are involved in relationships. In other words, because of the presence of women in heterosexual relationships, one would expect the level of promiscuity to be lower among heterosexual men than it would be among gay males where women aren't involved. This isn't rocket science.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

I'm still not convinced that consensual homosexual activity is a sin. What is the reasoning behind it?

 

Here is clear evidence of how significantly pop culture has failed our youth in matters of morality--in large part because pop culture views sex as predominately or almost exclusively as a means of self or mutual gratification rather than as a means of procreation.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited September 14, 2014 by wenglund

[california boy]

That is a good question. The answer rest heavily with the divergent cultures of the two sexual orientations, with the prevailing difference consisting in the general ability or inability to have kids. (See HERE)

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

 

And once again, NO studies that actually compare gay married couples with gay couples only living together.  Wade do you really think quoting yourself is going to be some kind of expert on gay relations has any credibility?

 

Is this thread about "Towards A Better Understanding of Same Sex Attraction and Sin" or not? Is it too much to ask for a peer reviewed study comparing gay married couples with gay couples not in a marriage?  Do you have a study comparing single gay men with single straight men in a peer reviewed study?  Let's see what the actual correlation is.  Is that too much to ask?  If it is, then these repeated diatribes (especially where you reference yourself) are pointless. Is all your here, here, here and here links show is that gay men are promiscuous.  Are you trying to make the claim that straight single men are not promiscuous?   It just comes off as gay bashing and is not a sincere effort to better understand anything. 

[california boy]

A little common sense will go a long way in answering all your questions. If it is correctly understood that women tend to be less promiscuous than men (primarily because they are capable of getting pregnant), then it would stand to reason that if women are involved in relationships then the rate of promiscuity will be less than where only men are involved in relationships. In other words, because of the presence of women in heterosexual relationships, one would expect the level of promiscuity to be lower among heterosexual men than it would be among gay males where women aren't involved. This isn't rocket science.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

 

This isn't rocket science.  In fact it is not science at all.  You have made the claim, now show me the studies or quit repeating yourself.  

[wenglund]

And once again, NO studies that actually compare gay married couples with gay couples only living together.  Wade do you really think quoting yourself is going to be some kind of expert on gay relations has any credibility?

 

While the link in my previous post (to which you are here responding) was to my blog, the blog article, itself, links to a number of articles and studies that are clearly not mine. You are free to summarily dismiss them all purely on the basis that they reflect poorly on your chosen lifestyle, just as other readers are free to take them into reasonable consideration. To each their own.

 

 

 

Is this thread about "Towards A Better Understanding of Same Sex Attraction and Sin" or not? Is it too much to ask for a peer reviewed study comparing gay married couples with gay couples not in a marriage?  Do you have a study comparing single gay men with single straight men in a peer reviewed study?  Let's see what the actual correlation is.  Is that too much to ask?  If it is, then these repeated diatribes (especially where you reference yourself) are pointless. Is all your here, here, here and here links show is that gay men are promiscuous.  Are you trying to make the claim that straight single men are not promiscuous?   It just comes off as gay bashing and is not a sincere effort to better understand anything.

 

I addressed this in post number 213 above.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited September 14, 2014 by wenglund

[Tacenda]

Shortly after returning from my mission I attended a singles ward in which one of the young men hung himself to death because a certain girl in the Ward refused to go out with him.

 

This troubled me both on behalf of the young man who took his life as well as the young girl who was singled out as the cause of the suicide, as well as family members and friends that were left to deal with the young mans senseless death.

 

Consequently, I was motivated to search deeper into the causes of suicide--which I learned has much to do with the warped mindset of suicidal people, and little if anything to do with public stigmas against bad BEHAVIORS. (See HERE)

 

In short, instances of suicide ought to give us cause to correct the deleterious thinking and behavior of people with suicidal tendencies, and it ought not be cause for cultures to call bad behaviors good. Yet, the opposite seems to be the case with contemporary pop culture. 

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Bullsnit!  There are countless suicides having to do with SSA and feeling like an abomination to society.  Don't lesson the reason for some of these suicide victims who explicitly felt like they shouldn't exist, for the way society treated them or spoke about them, case in point this board.  Not all are like you say, and you seem to have found another way to put SSA into the sinners category.   

[rockpond]

How do you think we should approach it?

I'd suggest trying more empathy and compassion and less of the attacks that I've seen from you here.

[wenglund]

This isn't rocket science.  In fact it is not science at all.  You have made the claim, now show me the studies or quit repeating yourself.  

 

I suspect that for the vast majority of us, common sense, particularly in regards to the seemingly obvious, does not necessitate the added expenditures (some times considerable) of scientific verification, though it may exist amply (explicitly and implicitly) in the articles and studies linked to on my blog and elsewhere. 

 

However, for those, such as yourself, who seem at odds with common sense and the seemingly obvious, you may require scientific verification, but even that may not suffice depending upon which scientists are doing the studies or who is or isn't publishing the studies. For you, all that counts is what confirms your bias.

 

So, there is little or no point to your vacuous and unwarrantable challenge to what I said. You will only accept what underscores what you already believe, and my blog does the opposite.

 

For other readers, though, the credible documentation on my blog should suffice.

 

Again, to each their own.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited September 14, 2014 by wenglund

[rockpond]

rockpond said:

"True. But since married homosexuals aren't breaking the law of chastity (per the temple definition) it's not really a conflicting statement for me. I recognize others believe differently.

At what point do homosexual acts become "sin"? Holding hands? Dating? Slow dancing together? Kissing? Or just the sex act?"

--------------

If you combine the temple definition with the definition on the front mobile page of gaysandmormons.org (because they both talk about the law of chastity) they are breaking the law of chastity:

-----------

"God has given us commandments that support family and individual happiness. One of these is the Law of Chastity — individuals should have no sexual relations except in marriage, which Latter-day Saints define as between a man and a woman."

----------

As far as when it starts it is not as clear. The first page also says, "The experience of same-sex attraction is a complex reality for many people. The attraction itself is not a sin, but acting on it is. "

So I'm thinking any time you act on SSA? For some that could be hand holding or a kiss? For others even a love note?

Is there any scriptural support for declaring that hand holding or love note writing between homosexual persons is breaking the law of chastity?

[Rodeo]

I am not claiming that gay men are not promiscuous.  

But the front put up is that you want the same thing as monogamous heterosexual marriages have.

[wenglund]

Bullsnit!  There are countless suicides having to do with SSA and feeling like an abomination to society.  Don't lesson the reason for some of these suicide victims who explicitly felt like they shouldn't exist, for the way society treated them or spoke about them, case in point this board.  Not all are like you say, and you seem to have found another way to put SSA into the sinners category.   

 

I made no mention of SSA in my post. In fact, I didn't even explicitly mention homosexual BEHAVIORS. I was speaking generally about the causes of suicide, and cautioning generically against the manipulative use of suicides in dysfunctionally justifying bad BEHAVIORS. Please go back a read my post, and this time for comprehension.

 

Now, there is the possibility that homosexual suicides may be the exception to the general rule, or it may also be possible that you have been duped by the manipulative use of homosexual suicides to justifying bad SSA BEHAVIORS. I am open if you are to putting both to the test, though on another thread where it isn't tangential to the topic. Let me know.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[california boy]

But the front put up is that you want the same thing as monogamous heterosexual marriages have.

 

Actually it is irrelevant to the legalization of gay marriage.  We don't issue marriage licenses in this country by giving temple interviews.  The courts have made it perfectly clear that gay marriage is a civil right under the 14th amendment and has NOtHING to do with how the Mormon church or any other church views their relationships.  

 

Now if your agenda is to start issuing marriage licenses based on worthiness, then there are going to be a lot of straight couples that won't be getting married any time soon either.

[california boy]

I suspect that for the vast majority of us, common sense, particularly in regards to the seemingly obvious, does not necessitate the added expenditures (some times considerable) of scientific verification, though it may exist amply (explicitly and implicitly) in the articles and studies linked to on my blog and elsewhere. 

 

However, for those, such as yourself, who seem at odds with common sense and the seemingly obvious, you may require scientific verification, but even that may not suffice depending upon which scientists are doing the studies or who is or isn't publishing the studies. For you, all that counts is what confirms your bias.

 

So, there is little or no point to your vacuous and unwarrantable challenge to what I said. You will only accept what underscores what you already believe, and my blog does the opposite.

 

For other readers, though, the credible documentation on my blog should suffice.

 

Again, to each their own.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

 

Wade, over the years we have heard you go on and on about how unworthy gay couples are of marriage.  Now Rodeo has taken on your little crusade.   I want to take the self serving opinion out of both sides and see what the facts are.  It is not me making these often repeated claims of how badly all gay men behave, so therefore they should not be allowed to be invited into our holy sacred god-given rite of marriage.  And it is not me defending the promiscuity of gay men OR straight men.  I just want to know how gay men compare with those that you feel should be invited into your own personal definition of marriage.  After all, how many posts have you done on this issue.  Yet not ONE peer reviewed study to support your claim?  Maybe it is time to back down on your crusade or find something to support it.  How can that not be fair?