What Is Destroying America? The Importance Of Traditional Marriage.

[CV75]

I don't reject the concept of Exaltation, I only reject the current teachings on it for gay members.

But the teachings on it are for all members, “black and white… and both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female…” The teachings are not parsed into different doctrines depending on any delineation one might use to differentiate ourselves from others. Only God differentiates in the Judgement, and does so along very diffrerent lines than mortals do.

[california boy]

But the teachings on it are for all members, “black and white… and both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female…” The teachings are not parsed into different doctrines depending on any delineation one might use to differentiate ourselves from others. Only God differentiates in the Judgement, and does so along very diffrerent lines than mortals do.

 

I was referring more to current Mormon belief that gay couples can not exist after this life.  That it is "God's will" that it is better to be celibate than single.  And that sex within marriage is a sin.  I personally don't find any of those doctrines consistent with the scriptures.

 

Hence the concept of exaltation, eternal marriage to your spouse you have here on earth, and having a family eternally sealed to you for eternity is not available to someone who is gay.  

[CV75]

I was referring more to current Mormon belief that gay couples can not exist after this life.  That it is "God's will" that it is better to be celibate than single.  And that sex within marriage is a sin.  I personally don't find any of those doctrines consistent with the scriptures.

 

Hence the concept of exaltation, eternal marriage to your spouse you have here on earth, and having a family eternally sealed to you for eternity is not available to someone who is gay.  

But it is available to someone who is gay.

 

To put a finer point on it, exaltation is not available to anyone unwilling to eventually transcend his human nature to abide the eternal marriage covenant as it is structured. This is a challenge everyone has, no matter what barrier(s) they face or how they label the barrier(s).

 

Such barriers are something we “have” and “face”, not something we “are.” See https://www.lds.org/ensign/2015/04/it-isnt-a-sin-to-be-weak?lang=eng I’m not saying that sexuality by its nature is a weakness, but in those cases where we find that the adversary tempts us sorely, it still isn’t who we are nor does it define us. On the other hand, the covenants do define us as we choose to or are willing to define ourselves in the Lord's terms (Mosiah 26:20-24).

 

Government, whether in heaven or on earth, calls for people to transcend whatever it is that keeps them from sustaining that government.

[california boy]

But it is available to someone who is gay.

 

To put a finer point on it, exaltation is not available to anyone unwilling to eventually transcend his human nature to abide the eternal marriage covenant as it is structured. This is a challenge everyone has, no matter what barrier(s) they face or how they label the barrier(s).

 

Such barriers are something we “have” and “face”, not something we “are.” See https://www.lds.org/ensign/2015/04/it-isnt-a-sin-to-be-weak?lang=eng I’m not saying that sexuality by its nature is a weakness, but in those cases where we find that the adversary tempts us sorely, it still isn’t who we are nor does it define us. On the other hand, the covenants do define us as we choose to or are willing to define ourselves in the Lord's terms (Mosiah 26:20-24).

 

Government, whether in heaven or on earth, calls for people to transcend whatever it is that keeps them from sustaining that government.

I am really unclear what you are saying.  I don't think that being gay is totally sexual.  There is much more that attracts me to a man that just the possibility of having sex.  In fact I would say that is pretty far down the list for a long term relationship for both gay people and straight people.

 

And I am assuming that you are not promising eternal companionship with the person I love here on earth.  While that is the promise for straight members of the church, there is no such promise for gay members.  I don't think straight members are expecting some neutered relationship with whoever they happen to be matched up with in the next life.  But like I said, I am not sure what you are suggesting.

[CV75]

I am really unclear what you are saying.  I don't think that being gay is totally sexual.  There is much more that attracts me to a man that just the possibility of having sex.  In fact I would say that is pretty far down the list for a long term relationship for both gay people and straight people.

 

And I am assuming that you are not promising eternal companionship with the person I love here on earth.  While that is the promise for straight members of the church, there is no such promise for gay members.  I don't think straight members are expecting some neutered relationship with whoever they happen to be matched up with in the next life.  But like I said, I am not sure what you are suggesting.

Let's substitute “sexuality” with the terms you use, “being gay or straight.”

 

Anyone willing to put the Lord first and above every other human relationship and every other thing can enjoy the full blessings of the marriage covenant as designed by the Lord. No matter who or who else we love (“black and white/old and young/bond and free/male and female…”), putting Him and His ways first is required of everyone who would be exalted. We are truly all the same in that regard.

 

Anyone who is exalted can enjoy eternal companionship with like persons, whether they are spouses or not. The nature and expression of that eternal companionship of course is consistent with eternal covenant and law. In addition, I am confident that exalted people can continue some kind of companionship with those in other kingdoms with whom such relationships can be maintained according to the higher law.

 

As far as governments go, there is no reason not to reflect those in heaven with those on earth as much as is humanly possible.

 

But it is available to someone who is gay.

 

To put a finer point on it, exaltation is not available to anyone unwilling to eventually transcend his human nature to abide the eternal marriage covenant as it is structured. This is a challenge everyone has, no matter what barrier(s) they face or how they label the barrier(s).

 

Such barriers are something we “have” and “face”, not something we “are.” See https://www.lds.org/ensign/2015/04/it-isnt-a-sin-to-be-weak?lang=eng I’m not saying that "being straight or gay" by nature is a weakness, but in those cases where we find that the adversary tempts us sorely, it still isn’t who we are nor does it define us. On the other hand, the covenants do define us as we choose to or are willing to define ourselves in the Lord's terms (Mosiah 26:20-24).

 

Government, whether in heaven or on earth, calls for people to transcend whatever it is that keeps them from sustaining that government.

[thesometimesaint]

Let's substitute “sexuality” with the terms you use, “being gay or straight.”

 

Anyone willing to put the Lord first and above every other human relationship and every other thing can enjoy the full blessings of the marriage covenant as designed by the Lord. No matter who or who else we love (“black and white/old and young/bond and free/male and female…”), putting Him and His ways first is required of everyone who would be exalted. We are truly all the same in that regard.

 

Anyone who is exalted can enjoy eternal companionship with like persons, whether they are spouses or not. The nature and expression of that eternal companionship of course is consistent with eternal covenant and law. In addition, I am confident that exalted people can continue some kind of companionship with those in other kingdoms with whom such relationships can be maintained according to the higher law.

 

As far as governments go, there is no reason not to reflect those in heaven with those on earth as much as is humanly possible.

 

I want my religion to be strictly sectarian and my government to be strictly secular.

[CV75]

I want my religion to be strictly sectarian and my government to be strictly secular.

By definition they generally are, and ideally they compliment each other. Marriage and family is a good example of where they can:

 

“A family built on the marriage of a man and woman supplies the best setting for God’s plan to thrive—the setting for the birth of children, who come in purity and innocence from God, and the environment for the learning and preparation they will need for a successful mortal life and eternal life in the world to come. A critical mass of families built on such marriages is vital for societies to survive and flourish. That is why communities and nations generally have encouraged and protected marriage and the family as privileged institutions. It has never been just about the love and happiness of adults.”

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/why-marriage-why-family?lang=eng

[thesometimesaint]

By definition they generally are, and ideally they compliment each other. Marriage and family is a good example of where they can:

 

“A family built on the marriage of a man and woman supplies the best setting for God’s plan to thrive—the setting for the birth of children, who come in purity and innocence from God, and the environment for the learning and preparation they will need for a successful mortal life and eternal life in the world to come. A critical mass of families built on such marriages is vital for societies to survive and flourish. That is why communities and nations generally have encouraged and protected marriage and the family as privileged institutions. It has never been just about the love and happiness of adults.”

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/why-marriage-why-family?lang=eng

 

For better or worse any claim to religion as the basis for government or governmental policy is contradictory of a secular state.

[Gray]

By definition they generally are, and ideally they compliment each other. Marriage and family is a good example of where they can:

 

“A family built on the marriage of a man and woman supplies the best setting for God’s plan to thrive—the setting for the birth of children, who come in purity and innocence from God, and the environment for the learning and preparation they will need for a successful mortal life and eternal life in the world to come. A critical mass of families built on such marriages is vital for societies to survive and flourish. That is why communities and nations generally have encouraged and protected marriage and the family as privileged institutions. It has never been just about the love and happiness of adults.”

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/why-marriage-why-family?lang=eng

 

Unfortunately this again rests on the idea that gay marriage poses a threat to straight marriage. They are not in competition. 

[CV75]

For better or worse any claim to religion as the basis for government or governmental policy is contradictory of a secular state.

LDS scripture shows that religion, marriage and government are instituted of God, so any designation of which is "secular" and which is "sectarian," or how any could be either and both, is hardly useful in deciding what each institution is to accomplish and what each has to do with the other(s). I think they ideally complement each other. As long as people participate in any or all, that is certainly the most functional aim.

 

Unfortunately this again rests on the idea that gay marriage poses a threat to straight marriage. They are not in competition. 

I don't get that at all from reading this talk. "It" (the reason for [encouraging and protecting] traditional marriage and family) only rests on the idea that they make societies thrive and flourish, both on a religious and secular basis.

 

I think this thread is about government's role in encouraging and protecting traditional marriage and family, not about its role in imitations or substitutes.

[Jeanne]

This is so sad..the whole conversation here.  Important but sad.  Polygamy was at one time supposed to be mandatory for the CK..and then it has been said that ita is not a requirement.  If there is no gay marriages in the eternities then why should those here with SSA have the "problem" to overcome.  What kind of test is that?  I just don't God would want to deprive anyone of love..and familial love..my point being that Prophets really don't know what God wants.  The family proclamation is all they have and I don't believe God was even a part of that..mainly because in the process of revelation on the Proclamation of the Family, none of HIS daughters were sitting at the table.

[JLHPROF]

 If there is no gay marriages in the eternities then why should those here with SSA have the "problem" to overcome.  What kind of test is that?

 

The same as any other inappropriate inborn trait we need to overcome.  The list is long.  There is no reason SSA should get a pass and other negative traits shouldn't.

[Jeanne]

The same as any other inappropriate inborn trait we need to overcome.  The list is long.  There is no reason SSA should get a pass and other negative traits shouldn't.

Do you see the change?  Even you have now accepted that it is an inborn trait.  Not learned..but inborn.  Inappropriate or not, why would they be inborn to overcome to return to the Father who made them?

[Damien the Leper]

Kind of interesting that I brought up the articke in the link in the OP to discuss the role of family values in traditional families. Somehow, this thread is getting derailed into yet another gay marriage debate. I think its definitely an issue but not the point I was originally aiming for. In this post I am more interested in ways of keeping traditional families together. I think gay marriage and homosexuality is but just one symptom of the breakdown of the traditional family with parents divorcing, single parents, etc. That is why I think we need to refocus on strengthening the traditional family unit as the stabilizer of our country. A traditional family consists of the children and their biologic mother and father married and together.

I hope you don't kiss Ted Cruz with that mouth. His rhetoric is nonsense and should be rejected outright.

[Mormonmaniac]

I hope you don't kiss Ted Cruz with that mouth. His rhetoric is nonsense and should be rejected outright.

Please take your politics elsewhere. Thank you.

[Mormonmaniac]

This is so sad..the whole conversation here.  Important but sad.  Polygamy was at one time supposed to be mandatory for the CK..and then it has been said that ita is not a requirement.  If there is no gay marriages in the eternities then why should those here with SSA have the "problem" to overcome.  What kind of test is that?  I just don't God would want to deprive anyone of love..and familial love..my point being that Prophets really don't know what God wants.  The family proclamation is all they have and I don't believe God was even a part of that..mainly because in the process of revelation on the Proclamation of the Family, none of HIS daughters were sitting at the table.

The prophets do know what God wants. SSA is not entirely understood yet. We do know that we do have the choice to follow after what we are attracted to or not to follow after it. No one is forced into homosexuality just because they were born that way.

[Damien the Leper]

There you go again relying on the arm of flesh -- in this case uninspired scholars who lack the spirit of revelation and who in many cases don't even believe. The Book of Mormon makes it perfectly clear the Saviour knew His Second Coming would not occur until many centuries after His resurrection. 

 

Again, this exchange demonstrates the utter futility of believers and unbelievers attempting to have any kind of meaningful discourse. Such exchanges invariably devolve into sophomoric "my day can beat your dad" contests.

You continue to show that you're not a student of the scriptures. Not theologically and not academically. Your perversion is audacious.

A much more juvenile and irresponsible response would be "Nuh uh! Modern revelation!" That's the fastest way to dumb down any constructive dialogue.

[Mormonmaniac]

Do you see the change?  Even you have now accepted that it is an inborn trait.  Not learned..but inborn.  Inappropriate or not, why would they be inborn to overcome to return to the Father who made them?

The same case could be made for why the flesh is attracted to things like pornography. Its about overcoming the weaknesses of the flesh and learning to bridal passions according to Gods laws.

[Damien the Leper]

The breakdown of the husband and wife traditional relationship is one of the main factors in the rise of homosexuality and SSA. That traditional marriage breakdown is also the cause of a lot of other sinful sexual activity and drug abuse, crime, etc.That is my belief.

Now back this opinion up with solid and verifiable evidence. No hearsay. No outsider looking in.

[Mormonmaniac]

Now back this opinion up with solid and verifiable evidence. No hearsay. No outsider looking in.

Prophets have been telling us for thousands of years how to live. We have the scriptures, we have living prophets today. What evidence do you want?

[Senator]

That traditional marriage breakdown is also the cause of a lot of other sinful sexual activity and drug abuse, crime, etc.That is my belief.

 

I think if you removed "traditional" from 99% of your statements in this thread, your arguments would have merit.

 

As is, you have yet to address how a non-traditional marriage has worked to the benifit of society.

[Damien the Leper]

Prophets have been telling us for thousands of years how to live. We have the scriptures, we have living prophets today. What evidence do you want?

This is hearsay. Saying someone says so without verifiable evidence is worthless.

[Damien the Leper]

Please take your politics elsewhere. Thank you.

You brought politics first. Perhaps asking government to get involved in family wasn't a clear enough request.

But my statement still stands. The Rick Santorum's and the Ted Cruz's and the other totalitarian right who, like Satan, wish to legislate family and morality have got to go. Theocracy and theonomy are the enemies of God and creation.

[Mormonmaniac]

You brought politics first. Perhaps asking government to get involved in family wasn't a clear enough request.

But my statement still stands. The Rick Santorum's and the Ted Cruz's and the other totalitarian right who, like Satan, wish to legislate family and morality have got to go. Theocracy and theonomy are the enemies of God and creation.

I will ask one more time politely- Please take your politics elsewhere. Thank you.

[Mormonmaniac]

This is hearsay. Saying someone says so without verifiable evidence is worthless.

So, you think our living prophets are worthless?