Eternal Same-Gender Procreation

[Daniel2]

Based mostly on the 1995 Proclamation on the Family, Mormonism currently teaches that gender is eternal and an important aspect of our individual identities, both now, as well as in the pre- and post- mortal realms. The Proclamation is rather vague as to what post-mortal gender roles will be.

It is obvious that current LDS leadership promote the idea that LDS doctrine will never change to embrace same-sex relationships. However, there is often much discussion among those of us that are younger, speculating on the possibility that that could change sometime in the future. The thinking seems to be that previous generations held similar beliefs about other doctrinal aspects that at the time, seemed unchangeable, but that revelation altered the church's stance in later years.

There definitely seems to be a generational divide among church members on the issue of the possibility that the church may, at some future date, under a different prophet and quorum of apostles, reveal that God may allow for eternal same-gender relationships.

I realize that there is an ongoing objection to this line of thinking by more traditional/conservative members who are emphatic that the current leadership cannot be wrong. Their criticism at those who are open to the idea of same-sex relationships usually centers around faithfulness in sustaining current church leaders, and accepting their sermons as unchangeable scripture. This idea is certainly worth ongoing exploration, but I'd like to focus this thread on a different aspect of the discussion.

Specifically, I'd like to focus on one facet of this discussion:

Those traditional, conservative Latter-day Saints frequently raise the objection that same-sex relationships would refute the entire purpose of the Plan of Salvation because, they claim, same-sex relationships could never be procreative. The thinking is that because the entire purpose of the Plan of Salvation is to experience a fulfillment of joy in having posterity, and because gays and lesbians cannot (and presumably will not ever be able to) procreate, that such couplings are contrary to God's design for divine family relationships.

As I have personally explored this aspect of this topic over the years, I see two solutions...

First: I think there's certainly the possibility that God could recognize and allow for eternal marital relationships that do not produce children. This school of thought suggests that in Heavenly Father's kingdom, there would be innumerable roles, jobs, functions, positions... (whatever you want to call them). Not all of God's children will receive exaltation in the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom--in fact, two thirds of those that receive Celestial Glory will not be procreative... Given how little is revealed in LDS cannon about Celestial roles, it seems at least possible (if not yet entirely plausible for those more conservative Latter-day Saints) that Heavenly Father could allow for same-sex relationships to fulfill other, non-procreative roles in the celestial kingdom (i.e. care-giving roles such as child caring, child rearing, husbandry of celestial flora and fauna, celestial art, music, dance, or whatever other roles may exist in Celestial creation). Given that not all of God's children have the same gifts, desires, talents, and personalities, and that this life is a time to prove and test and grow and learn to become our best selves in preparation for a degree of divine glory, it makes sense that our identities won't be universally the same in the afterlife.

So... that's the first explanation that came to my mind, as I've mulled this over the last decade or so.

The second solution is really what I'd like to suggest as the topic of this thread: as our medical technology evolves, it's becoming clear that here on earth, parents sharing the same gender will soon be able to conceive children, and this will no longer be a barrier to their ability to procreate. This is a topic I've mentioned before, in the past, by pointing to scientific studies showing same-sex parenting in mice. I've suggested that science will soon be able to allow same-sex couples to procreate. Today, it appears we are certainly on the verge of that happening:

Babies with no mother: Scientists say they can make human egg from skin of two men in new hope for infertile couples.

But breakthrough sparks new fears over 'designer' children

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2964586/Scientists-say-make-human-egg-skin-two-men.html

By Ben Spencer for the Daily Mail

01:21 23 Feb 2015, updated 01:22 23 Feb 2015

Babies with two fathers or two mothers could soon become a realityEgg and sperm cells can be made using skin from two same sex adultsScientists say technique could be used to create baby two years from nowBreakthrough could help infertile or gay couples to have childrenBut concerns have been raised about prospect of 'designer babies'

Babies with two fathers or two mothers could become a reality after a breakthrough by researchers at Cambridge.

They have shown that it is possible to make human egg and sperm cells using skin from two adults of the same sex.

The development could help men and women who have become infertile through disease or gay couples to have children.

But critics voiced concern, arguing that the breakthrough brings closer the prospect of 'designer babies', in which the looks, character and health attributes of children would be selected by parents.

The scientists from Cambridge University and the Weizmann Institute in Israel used skin from five adults to artificially create 'germ' cells, or stem cells, which make sperm and eggs in the body.

The academics say the cells could also be used as a 'repair kit' to heal tissue in any part of the body.

Jacob Hanna, the specialist leading the project's Israeli arm, said the technique could be used to create a baby just two years from now.

However, he conceded that ethical implications needed to be considered carefully. 'I am not in favour of creating engineered humans ... but I am very confident it will work and will be very relevant to anyone who has lost their fertility through disease.'

He added: 'It has already caused interest from gay groups because of the possibility of making egg and sperm cells from parents of the same sex.' The scientists' findings, published in the journal Cell, show that a gene called SOX17 is critical in the process of reprogramming human cells.

Professor Azim Surani, of Cambridge University, told The Sunday Times: 'We have succeeded in the first and most important step of this process, which is to show we can make these very early human stem cells in a dish.

'We have also discovered that one of the things that happens in these germ cells is that epigenetic mutations, the cell mistakes that occur with age, are wiped out. That means the cell is regenerated and reset, so while the rest of the cells in the body have aged and contain genetic mistakes, these ones don't.

'We can't say no mutations are passed on, but mostly it doesn't happen.' The use of manufactured sperm and egg cells would require a change in the law.

Allan Pacey, an infertility expert and professor at Sheffield University, said he was excited by the idea of the technology being used to make sperm for the thousands of men who have been left infertile after childhood cancer.

But David King, director of Human Genetics Alert, a secular organisation critical of the progress in fertility science, said he was concerned that scientists might view the development as a 'convenient route' to creating genetically engineered babies.

It comes as the House of Lords is this week set to approve the use of mitochondrial transfer or 'three-parent baby' technology.

It is designed to prevent devastating diseases caused by faults in mitochondria, which power cells, by swapping them with healthy ones from an egg donor. This will mean children are born with DNA from two women and a man.

Of course, it's very evident that there will be many questions and discussions on the ethics of such medical assistance (or tampering, depending on one's view). Arguments will be made, such as, "Just because we can do something, it doesn't mean it's right to do so." And as a father myself, I think those are valid points to consider. I am not yet convinced or comfortable with designer children. I don't believe it's wise for mortals to play in that sandbox, given that actual children are at stake, and because we are mortal and have limited knowledge, we wouldn't--we couldn't--know the effect of such medical interference until producing a child which may or may not be negatively affected. So, IMO, the ethical questions/concerns are definitely valid. But even those ethical questions are not what I wish to discuss, in this thread.

Having said all of the above, with the acknowledgement and full awareness of all of the above-mentioned theological and ethical arguments against medically-assisted same-sex procreation, I'm finally arriving at the focus of my thread, which is simply this:

SINCE LDS scripture thus far has revealed virtually nothing about how spirit bodies are created, and

IF, here and now in our mortal state, we, as limited humans, are already capable of pro-creating life from the seeds of two same-sex parents, and

IF, from an eternal perspective, God is truly both omniscient and omnipotent, and

IF, from an eternal perspective, with God, all things are possible,

THEN it seems to me that the argument that "same-sex parents cannot and could not ever procreate" is no longer a valid reason for thinking that same-sex parents will never be a celestial reality, or at the very least, isn't as concrete as it once was.

Edited February 24, 2015 by Daniel2

[JLHPROF]

I don't believe any method other than natural procreation will be a viable option in the eternities.

The method by which we procreate here is, in my opinion, in the image, type, or representative of how procreation works in the eternities.

 

We can speculate, and I agree that we don't have definitive revelation, but there is a difference between applying spiritual principles to the physical examples we see here, and assuming mortal methods translate upward in some kind of science fiction way.

 

No, the only reproduction of the species, be it spiritual or physical, will be heterosexual in nature and similar to natural procreation here.

At least, that's my opinion.

[DJBrown]

First of all, the only context in which we find any statements about exaltation or eternal life and celestial marriage are those which speak of "eternal increase."  That eternal increase is inherent in eternal families and marriages.  There is nothing that comes close to suggesting that there will be any other type of marriage in the eternities but those that have "eternal increase."

 

No two individuals of the same gender have ever created children.  To suggest such a union and creation may actually be a part of God's plan honestly just sounds like misguided and worldly wishing.  I admit that there is much that we do not understand.  But God has been extremely consistent throughout our knowable history in condemning homosexual relationships as wicked and unacceptable.  Modern prophets have consistently told us that homosexuality is contrary to the plan of God.  

 

To suggest that what mankind has always been told by God was wicked may actually be good and acceptable is to turn everything we know and believe about God on its head.  We might as well just suggest that Lucifer may actually be good and Heavenly Father evil.  

 

Elder Bednar came to our stake several years ago as an apostle and spoke on many important topics.  One of the things he repeated many times was the fact that we human beings and members of the church love to think that anything is possible, including the possibility that various things we are told are wrong may actually be good.  He repeated over and over, "not everything is possible."  Your thoughts above reminded me of his talk.  

 

I am sorry if this sounds judgmental or intolerant.  But how can a people who have been given so much turn our minds and hearts to things like this that are so clearly and completely against what the prophets and scriptures have declared for as long as we have had prophets and scriptures.

 

The preface to the Doctrine and Covenants includes this passage:  "For they have strayed from mine ordinances, and have broken mine everlasting covenant; They seek not the Lord to establish his righteousness, but every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol, which waxeth old and shall perish in Babylon, even Babylon the great, which shall fall."  Doctrine and Covenants 1: 15-16.

 

I fear that many of us are imagining a God that fits our view of what should be right instead of changing our perspectives to fit with what God reveals about Himself.

[Rob Osborn]

Immorality to be valid...

Lucifer wanted the same thing, he was thrown out.

[teddyaware]

Forgive me if this sounds insensitive, but I'm being completely honest when I say the very first impression that crossed my mind when reading the op is that a serious pursuit of same sex procreation sounds like the kind of thing that could be the straw (in this case a rather substantial tree limb) that would brake the proverbial camel's back and usher in the Second Coming. 

[Traela]

The notion of "same-sex procreation", whether here or in the eternities, is sexism masquerading as diversity and freedom. It puts forth the idea that one sex is unnecessary. I don't understand how any Mormon who understands and treasures the existence of a Mother in Heaven can entertain such a notion.

[DJBrown]

Forgive me if this sounds insensitive, but I'm being completely honest when I say the very first impression that crossed my mind when reading the op is that a serious pursuit of same sex procreation sounds like the kind of thing that could be the straw (in this case a rather substantial tree limb) that would brake the proverbial camel's back and usher in the Second Coming. 

 

It is absolutely the Tower of Babel mentality, in my opinion.

[Duncan]

I dunno, if God the Father can somehow impregnate Mary then somehow someway weird things can happen, he didn't have a problem with what we would call incest. Now , is same sex child making possible? who knows, I don't think the spirit would enter a fetus of that kind. They tried cloning sheep and that worked out for awhile until the thing died

Edited February 24, 2015 by Duncan

[Storm Rider]

Hello Daniel,

 

I think I can understand the genesis of this line of thinking. I also think each human seeks for answers and poses what if questions whose answers provide a higher degree of comfort and belonging.  Few things in this life are more complex, more overwhelming for God's people than providing answers to our brothers and sisters with same sex attraction. 

 

We have been given a gospel of exaltation that does not specifically address what happens to our gay family members.  On one side many of us believe and support the idea that we each are how God created us in this mortal life. How will each of us "fit in" in the eternal realms? 

 

We don't have answers to so many things and it is my personal belief that we will not know most things until we reach the other side.  The Gospel has given us what is necessary for each of us to identify the path back to our Father in Heaven.  We can each read the scriptures and listen and observe those that know Christ and teach us through word and deed how to emulate him.  That is our focus.

 

I think some questions can cause a great deal of pain while we are in constant pursuit of the unanswerable.  Sometimes questions are just unending rabbit holes where we get lost and lose our purpose and forget about our true desires.  However, for those that truly seek holiness I believe the mysteries can unfold for them through the guidance of the Holy Spirit.  There is a difference in focus and expenditure of effort in these two ways of being.

 

Know this, you are recognized as a son of God and he knows your trials and desires.  He has a plan for you and it is a plan which you will completely embrace and bring eternal joy by entering into a oneness with him.  That is exaltation.  Trying to explain daily activities and accomplishments in exaltation by any mortal person is pointless because we don't have the mind, the words, or the understanding to conceive of such things.

 

We must put our focus on becoming more like Christ and let him take care of the complexities of eternity.

[rockpond]

Daniel --

You know I believe that Heavenly Father has a place for his homosexual children (as loving couples) in the eternities.

But I think you are incorrect in the approach you took in your OP.

It seems to me, based on our theology and the temple experience, that exaltation doesn't involve creating physical bodies (presumably through procreative male-female intercourse) but creating spirits to inhabit physical bodies that are created from one original "Adam".

Male-female couples here on earth do not create spirits. Similarly, there's no evidence of Heavenly Mother and Father creating bodies through the means that we create them here. See the distinction?

We don't know how spirits are made. I suspect it is a priesthood ordinance involving the organizing of intelligences. But that is speculative.

In any case, that's why I do not see gay couples being a problem within the framework of the plan of salvation.

Edited February 24, 2015 by rockpond

[Ahab]

I'll put it to you this way: Even if 2 people of the same sex could somehow produce a child of their own, it would be a damned shame for that child not to have both a man and a woman as his/her immediate parents. I know somewhere up his or her family tree there would be both a father and a mother, but it's best for all children to have immediate parents that are each either a man or a woman than both to be the same sex. And if you can't understand why then you have a lot to learn about the virtues and characteristics of both men and women.

[rodheadlee]

Daniel --

Male-female couples here on earth do not create spirits. Similarly, there's no evidence of Heavenly Mother and Father creating bodies through the means that we create them here. See the distinction?

We don't know how spirits are made. I suspect it is a priesthood ordinance involving the organizing of intelligences. But that is speculative.

In any case, that's why I do not see gay couples being a problem within the framework of the plan of salvation.

27 So God created man in his own ^aimage, in the image of God created he him; male and ^bfemale created he them.

[carbon dioxide]

If we are going to entertain the idea of eternal same sex couples, why stop there.  Perhaps eternal inter species relationships will also exist. 

[MorningStar]

What a repulsive idea!  Homosexual couples should not be considered to be in the same boat as infertile heterosexual couples. What a slap in the face to them.   Also, you can't play "gotcha" with God. "Hey, now that we've figured out how to engineer children in a lab, you have to recognize homosexual couples as legitimate!"  Come on! 

[Ahab]

If we are going to entertain the idea of eternal same sex couples, why stop there. Perhaps eternal inter species relationships will also exist.

Have you seen many of the characters in Star Wars? Some people like that idea.

[carbon dioxide]

There definitely seems to be a generational divide among church members on the issue of the possibility that the church may, at some future date, under a different prophet and quorum of apostles, reveal that God may allow for eternal same-gender relationships.

 

I hope to be long dead and buried before that would happen.  I would rather have my children become atheists than accept that.

[rockpond]

I hope to be long dead and buried before that would happen. I would rather have my children become atheists than accept that.

Hmmm... Atheism vs believing in continuing revelation.

[sunstoned]

From reading the scriptures it is not clear to me how offspring will be produced in the here after.  When looking at the billions of spirits who have come to just this one planet, the numbers of spirit children the God has are staggering.  To me, these numbers preclude the physical method of procreation.  

[rockpond]

27 So God created man in his own^aimage, in the image of God created he him; male and ^bfemale created he them.

Exactly.

[Tacenda]

I'll put it to you this way: Even if 2 people of the same sex could somehow produce a child of their own, it would be a damned shame for that child not to have both a man and a woman as his/her immediate parents. I know somewhere up his or her family tree there would be both a father and a mother, but it's best for all children to have immediate parents that are each either a man or a woman than both to be the same sex. And if you can't understand why then you have a lot to learn about the virtues and characteristics of both men and women.

It doesn't appear to me as if God even raises them, or Mother Goddess. The earthly parents seem do the only raising. And if they're the same sex, then I'd hope they would find ways for their adopted child or child to be around different sexes, a good amount of time. Be it a good friend or relative.

I do see where you're coming from somewhat. I wonder if the child would be cheated of getting both sexes in a set. But you can counter that with a regular married couple fighting all the time, absent all the time with work and a person that is single because of divorce or being widowed.

There are all kinds of families out there, and what matters is the love, compassion...well you name it, that is given.

[Ferdinand55]

Hmmm... Atheism vs believing in continuing revelation.

It's not that simple, Rockpond.

 

What if the General Authorities came out tomorrow, and stated that it was now O.K. to drink alcohol, or view pornography, or something like that.

 

I might be tempted to conclude that God no longer directs his prophets today, because I find such habits appalling. I would seriously consider leaving the church, wouldn't you?

 

Perhaps this is what carbon dioxide was getting at.

[Ahab]

It doesn't appear to me as if God even raises them, or Mother Goddess. The earthly parents seem do the only raising.

You may not remember but you have been taught that you lived and were raised by your parents, a Father and Mother in heaven, before you came here.

And if they're the same sex, then I'd hope they would find ways for their adopted child or child to be around different sexes, a good amount of time. Be it a good friend or relative.

I do see where you're coming from somewhat. I wonder if the child would be cheated of getting both sexes in a set. But you can counter that with a regular married couple fighting all the time, absent all the time with work and a person that is single because of divorce or being widowed.

There are all kinds of families out there, and what matters is the love, compassion...well you name it, that is given.

Then I'll put it this way. All other things being equal, it would be best for a child to be raised by a man parent and a woman parent than have both parents be the same sex. Man and woman, living and loving together.

[HappyJackWagon]

It's not that simple, Rockpond.

What if the General Authorities came out tomorrow, and stated that it was now O.K. to drink alcohol, or view pornography, or something like that.

I might be tempted to conclude that God no longer directs his prophets today, because I find such habits appalling. I would seriously consider leaving the church, wouldn't you?

Perhaps this is what carbon dioxide was getting at.

[Kenngo1969]

HappyJackWagon,

 

Re: #23

 

Quoted for truth?

[HappyJackWagon]

Wow.how closed minded. If the church repealed the policy against alcohol, you'd leave? Read the 1st couple of verses of section 89 and tell me this is an eternal commandment. This is a great illustration of Daniels original point. Does this church really believe in continuing revelation or do we just claim it when convenient?

IF you believe in continuing revelation then there must at least be a possibility for change, no matter how remote you think that chance may be. But absolutely refusing continuing revelation because it doesn't match your current understanding is quite ironic.

Great OP, Daniel. It was very thoughtful and it's too bad there's so much hubris about eternal truth, despite acknowledgement that there is so much we don't know, that it becomes unlikely that a real conversation on this topic can be had.

If people know eternal truth as currently taught in the church we have little need of a prophet. Personally, I accept the possibility that virtually anything can change beyond our current, incomplete, limited understanding.