Duncan Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 (edited) A gay couple who get a civil marriage is really no different in the eyes of God than a gay couple who lives together who is not married. If they are having sex, in both situations the sin is equal. God does not ask the government to define right and wrong or what is sin. The government can't force God to change His mind. well so far God hasn't said anything about gay marriages and being excommunicated for doing such, God must have some purpose he wants his gay children to do , can they do it in the church? Gay marriage has been legal in Canada here for years, when will God say something about it? like you can or can't get married and be a member in good standing? Are we waiting for the USSC to say something before God says something? Edited May 8, 2015 by Duncan 4
strappinglad Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 I need to make a list of all the behaviors that the scriptures say nothing about and compare it to a list of behaviors that society considers sins . 1. cutting another vehicle off in traffic. 2. double dipping in the chip dip. 3. leaving the toilet seat up. I'm sure there were others that were not on the ancients radar nor even conceived of at the time.
Calm Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 While they do not appear prior to this to be promoting any personal relationship to the Church, there are a number of articles publicizing their marriage. For example:http://www.wsusignpost.com/2014/02/11/wsu-gay-couple-gets-married-at-grammys/Perhaps this has something to do with it.
Boanerges Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 Correct me if I am wrong but the handbooks don't say anything about SSM, so I don't see why someone who gets married and has sex afterwards would be excommunicated. Do we want Gay members of the Church? What do you do with gay members in the Church? Do we proselytize in the gay community? are they not deserving of the Gospel just as much as anyone else?The Church has been telling straight people don't have sex until marriage and to gay folks don't have sex either or you'll be exed as well but if the straight couples can have sex after marriage why can't a gay couple? it's all the same until it hits the marriage wall, which is now legal in a lot of places, I don't see why a gay couple would be exed Since SSM is fairly new n the US (although some states have had it for a few years, most instituted it after 2010) I'm betting the next update of GH1 will address the issue more directly. It could very well be that the Brethren have not yet reached consensus on the issue.
HappyJackWagon Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 I'm wondering, are they excommunicating inactive members who enter into gay marriages? Because that would be odd - normally excommunications are reserved for active members of the church, or people who challenge the church publicly. Otherwise I'm sure there are millions of inactive straight members who might also be excommunicated or disfellowshipped, if we're tracking them down now and punishing them for their sins. EXACTLY! Seeking after inactive members to punish them is vindictive and does not accomplish the purposes for church discipline. This is true whether for gays as well as hetero's. This will be a huge problem for the church if they begin actively seeking after people for formal discipline like this. Perhaps its time for the church to update their definition of chastity to reflect current legal realities if they don't want to accept relations between married couples. The temple covenant is worded in such a way that a gay couple could make and keep that covenant within the bounds of their marriage. Again, if the church doesn't like it's own definition, they should change it. 2
ALarson Posted May 8, 2015 Author Posted May 8, 2015 EXACTLY!Seeking after inactive members to punish them is vindictive and does not accomplish the purposes for church discipline. This is true whether for gays as well as hetero's. This will be a huge problem for the church if they begin actively seeking after people for formal discipline like this.Perhaps its time for the church to update their definition of chastity to reflect current legal realities if they don't want to accept relations between married couples. The temple covenant is worded in such a way that a gay couple could make and keep that covenant within the bounds of their marriage. Again, if the church doesn't like it's own definition, they should change it.I agree with this and that's why I was confused when I read about this happening (and why I posted about it). I know of a few gay members who have married since it became legal and they have not been excommunicated. So, I was just puzzled as to why this one Bishop (and maybe others according to Dehlin) are contacting and excommunicating them. Unless they're causing some problems or vocally speaking out against the church, I see no reason to contact inactive members and hold a court on them. Is this commonly done to other inactives? Those who are living together and not married for example? Maybe there's more to the story than we know? I do know the church leaders have the right to do this, but I just wonder why they picked this guy? Here is a link if anyone would like to read his response to the Bishop:http://seanandtaylor.tumblr.com/post/117994017260/a-letter-to-the-church 1
Boanerges Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 I also know a couple inactive gay members "living in sin" (and known to be so by the bishop) who have not been disciplined. It's a good question. Generally speaking, in this area, at least, inactives are not disciplined for such things - either heterosexual or homosexual. I would disagree with the leadership were they to start seeking out and disciplining inactives. 3
thesometimesaint Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 Of course they should be excommunicated.But if SSM is legal it does make me wonder the extent of discipline on other legal actions that violate Church rules.Things like legal abortion for instance. I would imagine that would be disciplined too despite its legal status. You'll have to be more specific where abortion is concerned. Where rape; incest; life, or health of the mother; or fetal survivability; are at issue legal abortion is permissible.
ksfisher Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 (edited) well so far God hasn't said anything about gay marriages and being excommunicated for doing such, God must have some purpose he wants his gay children to do , can they do it in the church? Gay marriage has been legal in Canada here for years, when will God say something about it? like you can or can't get married and be a member in good standing? Are we waiting for the USSC to say something before God says something? I'm not sure how any member of the church could be unsure about the church's standing on this issue. The Lord's prophets have repeatedly taught that: 1) Marriage is only between a man and a woman. 2) Homosexual relations, in any form, are a sin. Has anyone ever been taught anything different in church? Are there any conference talks that would contradict the above? Edited May 8, 2015 by ksfisher 3
strappinglad Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 In the spirit of hyperbole where , after one gay couple was excommunicated by one bishop in one ward and suddenly the worldwide church has issued a fatwa against all inactives, might I suggest that the church establish a type of ' dead letter office' to hold the records of all those who have not darkened the door for , let's say , ten years. Those names could then be removed from the official membership rolls and critics would have one less complaint against the ' dishonesty' of church membership numbers announcements.
Duncan Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 I'm not sure how any member of the church could be unsure about the church's standing on this issue. The Lord's prophets have repeatedly taught that: 1) Marriage is only between a man and a woman. 2) Homosexual relations, in any form, are a sin. Has anyone ever been taught anything different in church? Are there any conference talks that would contradict the above? yeah, the purpose of this thread is to see why would a SSM couple would get excommunicated when there is no law saying that you'd be exed for doing so this case opens a can of spam for sure, certaintly now that it's public. Do you think the Church is for gay people? do we undermine the gospel message if it's for straight people and not all people? 2
Popular Post ksfisher Posted May 8, 2015 Popular Post Posted May 8, 2015 (edited) . Do you think the Church is for gay people? do we undermine the gospel message if it's for straight people and not all people? The church is for all people who have covenanted to become followers of Christ, and the church invites all to make that covenant through the waters of baptism. Part of being baptized is leaving behind our old life and being born again as a follower of Christ. We covenant to obey his commandments and serve him. If we hold onto parts of our old, sinful life, we effectively invalidate that covenant. Again, I'm not sure how any member of the church could be unsure about the church's teachings on marriage or homosexual relations. Edited May 8, 2015 by ksfisher 6
Duncan Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 (edited) The church is for all people who have covenanted to become followers of Christ, and the church invites all to make that covenant through the waters of baptism. Part of being baptized is leaving behind our old life and being born again as a follower of Christ. We covenant to obey his commandments and serve him. If we hold onto parts of our old, sinful life, we effectively invalidate that covenant. Again, I'm not sure how any member of the church could be unsure about the church's teachings on marriage or homosexual relations. I get the first part of your statement and fully agree with it. The second part is now that this case is out there I think the Church will have to clarify what is accepted or not. Sounds like this Bishop or Stake President is confused or whatever. They shouldn't have been excommunicated for violating a law in the Church that isn't a law, you can't be punished for something that you or anyone else doesn't know is wrong. Correct me if I am wrong but the CHI doesn't say anything about SSM. In the larger sense my heart goes out to members of the gay community in the Church, I just don't know why God would put them here and we act all surprised when they leave. They can't, apparently, have any kind of a relationship without get sacked or disciplined Edited May 8, 2015 by Duncan 4
ksfisher Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 Correct me if I am wrong but the CHI doesn't say anything about SSM. Has the church ever made any sort of statement defining homosexual relations as anything less than sinful? Has the church ever made any sort of statement condoning any type of marriage other than that between a man and a woman? 4
ALarson Posted May 8, 2015 Author Posted May 8, 2015 (edited) Has the church ever made any sort of statement defining homosexual relations as anything less than sinful? Has the church ever made any sort of statement condoning any type of marriage other than that between a man and a woman? Didn't the church recently state that members could support gay marriage? Maybe I'm mistaken? Edited May 8, 2015 by ALarson
bluebell Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 Didn't the church recently state that members could support gay marriage? Maybe I'm mistaken? Yes, the church did state that members could support SSM and not be disciplined. The church does still actively teach that SSM is a sin though.
ksfisher Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 Didn't the church recently state that members could support gay marriage? Maybe I'm mistaken? Which doesn't answer my questions: Has the church ever made any sort of statement defining homosexual relations as anything less than sinful? Has the church ever made any sort of statement condoning any type of marriage other than that between a man and a woman? 1
Duncan Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 Has the church ever made any sort of statement defining homosexual relations as anything less than sinful? Has the church ever made any sort of statement condoning any type of marriage other than that between a man and a woman? homosexual relations as in? sex? or I think someone pointed out that you may be excommunicated for homosexual relations but not necessarily you would be. Situations like child abuse, rape, incest and murder are automatic tickets out they have but they haven't said a word about homosexual marriage being excommunicatable. Why can't homosexuals in our church be celibate and get married and continue in the Church, because isn't the Church for all people?
rockpond Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 yeah, the purpose of this thread is to see why would a SSM couple would get excommunicated when there is no law saying that you'd be exed for doing so Homosexual relations are grounds for formal discipline per Handbook 1. I assume that the "law" being referenced is the law of chastity since our leaders have defined marriage as only between one man and one woman. To the second part of your post... this case opens a can of spam for sure, certaintly now that it's public. Do you think the Church is for gay people? do we undermine the gospel message if it's for straight people and not all people? We'll have to see what happens in this case... I believe that the young man has only been summoned to a DC but that the DC has not happened yet. Since he's been public about it, I assume he'll be public about the outcome. The Bishop has the discretion to enforce a probation, disfellowship, or excommunication. Is the Church for gay people? Not really. Some can make it work but we humans are, for the most part, wired to desire companionship. I believe that desire is instilled in us by our creator. When the ultimate aim of the gospel is put forward as eternal man-woman marriage, that makes it tough for gay people to stay. I honor & respect those who do choose to stay as well those who choose to leave. 2
thesometimesaint Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 Didn't the church recently state that members could support gay marriage? Maybe I'm mistaken? Yes, they did. But support doesn't mean engaging in. IE; We can fully support a nonmembers right to violate the Word of Wisdom. But for ourselves we hold to different standards.
rockpond Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 homosexual relations as in? sex? or I think someone pointed out that you may be excommunicated for homosexual relations but not necessarily you would be. Situations like child abuse, rape, incest and murder are automatic tickets out Yes, that was me earlier in the thread... Murder, rape, child abuse, and apostasy are the only "automatic tickets out" per Handbook 1. Homosexual relations is on the "maybe" list for formal discipline.
ALarson Posted May 8, 2015 Author Posted May 8, 2015 Yes, the church did state that members could support SSM and not be disciplined. The church does still actively teach that SSM is a sin though. Yes, I understand that. But can you imagine the church issuing a statement that members could openly support adultery or any other sin that a member can be excommunicated for? It just seems contradictory, but I know it's complicated too.
Storm Rider Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 homosexual relations as in? sex? or I think someone pointed out that you may be excommunicated for homosexual relations but not necessarily you would be. Situations like child abuse, rape, incest and murder are automatic tickets out they have but they haven't said a word about homosexual marriage being excommunicatable. Why can't homosexuals in our church be celibate and get married and continue in the Church, because isn't the Church for all people? Are you proposing that these two individuals were married, but were not sexual with one another?
ksfisher Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 because isn't the Church for all people? The church is for all who desire to be followers of Christ and covenant to obey his commandments. The church has stated that having same sex attraction is not a sin, but acting on those desires is. Acting on those desire is, as Rockpond pointed out, a violation of the law of chastity. If our desires are to break the law of chastity then making a covenant with Christ to be obedient to him may not be the best idea. God will not be mocked. 3
Duncan Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 Homosexual relations are grounds for formal discipline per Handbook 1. I assume that the "law" being referenced is the law of chastity since our leaders have defined marriage as only between one man and one woman. To the second part of your post... We'll have to see what happens in this case... I believe that the young man has only been summoned to a DC but that the DC has not happened yet. Since he's been public about it, I assume he'll be public about the outcome. The Bishop has the discretion to enforce a probation, disfellowship, or excommunication. Is the Church for gay people? Not really. Some can make it work but we humans are, for the most part, wired to desire companionship. I believe that desire is instilled in us by our creator. When the ultimate aim of the gospel is put forward as eternal man-woman marriage, that makes it tough for gay people to stay. I honor & respect those who do choose to stay as well those who choose to leave. that's the thing though, if you are gay and celibate and enter into a gay marriage, why is that wrong? if it isn't a sin to have sex with your straight spouse then why is it a sin to do it with your SS spouse?
Recommended Posts