rockpond Posted March 9, 2016 Posted March 9, 2016 1 hour ago, Rivers said: Any person having one or more sexual partners outside of marriage is fornicating. Gay or straight. This seems to be the message the Elder Holland wants to put forward. But it's not really the whole story. Is dancing with someone breaking the law of chastity? Dating? A kiss on the lips at the end of the date? All of the above are acceptable for straight couples but not for gay couples. 4
Rivers Posted March 9, 2016 Posted March 9, 2016 4 minutes ago, rockpond said: This seems to be the message the Elder Holland wants to put forward. But it's not really the whole story. Is dancing with someone breaking the law of chastity? Dating? A kiss on the lips at the end of the date? No. Those things are not breaking the law of chastity.
Analytics Posted March 9, 2016 Posted March 9, 2016 2 hours ago, Rivers said: No because the very act of entering into a sane-sex marriage is an act of apostasy. Two gay roommates not having sex might be a different story. So the issue isn't just chastity, right? 1
The Nehor Posted March 9, 2016 Posted March 9, 2016 6 hours ago, longview said: <teasing> <insult> Maybe I can explain that - - - The ones you are attracted to are in the upper tiers - - - While you are stuck in the lower tiers - - - </insult> </teasing> No, it is a fair guess. I have tried to see if that is the case. While I am not built in a way to make all women swoon I am way ahead physically of most of those in my same dating group in my area (30s, LDS, Unmarried). I think it is more a personality thing. I tend to attract women who want saving in some way (financially, spirtually, personally) and while I am friends with many such I do not fall in love with them.
canard78 Posted March 9, 2016 Posted March 9, 2016 18 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said: Holland also started the face 2 face off by quoting Jerry Maguire. It was just funny to hear an apostle quote a rated R movie. "Show me the money!!!" (I'm guessing not?) Maybe: "You had me at hello."
The Nehor Posted March 9, 2016 Posted March 9, 2016 3 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said: That's how it is with me too. The ones I like don't like me and the ones that do like me I have no interest in. It's different with non mormon girls though, ive had a lot of success dating attractive non members but I want a temple marriage and those non mormon girls can't give me that and they don't want to convert. Yeah, same here. It does not help that most of the time non-LDS women are more interesting and fun in my age group then the LDS women. 1
canard78 Posted March 9, 2016 Posted March 9, 2016 40 minutes ago, Rivers said: No. Those things are not breaking the law of chastity. But if two men or two women dated, kissed etc then they would be, right? They would at least be likely subject to formal discipline (depending on leadership roulette).
The Nehor Posted March 9, 2016 Posted March 9, 2016 48 minutes ago, rockpond said: This seems to be the message the Elder Holland wants to put forward. But it's not really the whole story. Is dancing with someone breaking the law of chastity? Dating? A kiss on the lips at the end of the date? All of the above are acceptable for straight couples but not for gay couples. Yep. There will not be any form of equality between the two types of relationships. Sorry. 3
canard78 Posted March 9, 2016 Posted March 9, 2016 18 hours ago, Duncan said: that's true but why don't gay people get to cleave as well? in the range of world problems homosexuality is even on the list? Thank you!!! No. It's such a shame that with all the church's resources that so much time and emotion is wasted on this topic. There are far greater causes and opportunities to serve those in need than stopping a gay couple being together. What do they, the church even lose? Even if the proclamation is truth? If a gay couple marry and in the eternities the church is really right that this marriage was for time only it'll be no different to all the other "time only" straight marriages that happen. Move on LDS prophets. Move on! 2
canard78 Posted March 9, 2016 Posted March 9, 2016 19 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said: Just watched Jeffrey Holland do the YSA face to face and the last question was about same sex attraction, and Elder Holland said he wishes people would talk less about the attraction and more about chastity. He kept repeating chastity is the issue as it is with heterosexual singles. It was a great session. Do you have a link? By the way, your title says "the issue is chastity not gender." Sexual orientation isn't gender either. I'd post a link to a very funny Australian stand up about how "manly" being gay is... but it's definitely not within board guidelines.
The Nehor Posted March 9, 2016 Posted March 9, 2016 10 minutes ago, canard78 said: Thank you!!! No. It's such a shame that with all the church's resources that so much time and emotion is wasted on this topic. There are far greater causes and opportunities to serve those in need than stopping a gay couple being together. What do they, the church even lose? Even if the proclamation is truth? If a gay couple marry and in the eternities the church is really right that this marriage was for time only it'll be no different to all the other "time only" straight marriages that happen. Move on LDS prophets. Move on! I expect they will move on as soon as the LDS membership move on. So far, as evidenced by this board, we have not. 2
VideoGameJunkie Posted March 9, 2016 Author Posted March 9, 2016 A direct quote from Holland last night was: "What we say is that we teach chastity for heterosexuals and for those with homosexual tendencies. We just go with what the Lord has said about chastity.”
Teancum Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 19 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said: Another thing Holland mentioned was that more women than men join the church, go to the temple, and more women are staying in the church than men. He must be preparing the Church for bringing back polygamy in this mortal life once is it legal.....
Teancum Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 10 hours ago, JLHPROF said: It has no purpose. It is an inborn weakness to be overcome like any other. The problem is we have made it one that is societally acceptable to embrace. Yes for good reason....
Teancum Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 9 hours ago, The Nehor said: Uhhhhh.....no. Uhhhh Yea....
Teancum Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 9 hours ago, JLHPROF said: I'd post it but we cannot post or link to temple content. It used to specify that those endowed only have relations with those given them by priesthood authority - which sheds new light on the Zina story in the other thread. When was she placed under that covenant? It really is great when you can make rules that fit and get you off doing something that would typically be viewed as a bad thing and even more so to be able to pin it on God told me so... well wow!
Teancum Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 8 6 hours ago, Rivers said: Chastity is not having sex outside of marriage. Marriage(in a gospel sense) is the union of man and woman. Its really that simple. What you should say is "Marriage according to the gospel I believe...." See not everyone thinks you have the true gospel.
JLHPROF Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 1 hour ago, Teancum said: Yes for good reason.... There is a very good reason why society has embraced homosexuality...the fulfillment of prophecy, the ripening in wickedness of the world, and the preparation for destruction. A very good reason. 1 hour ago, Teancum said: Quote I'd post it but we cannot post or link to temple content. It used to specify that those endowed only have relations with those given them by priesthood authority - which sheds new light on the Zina story in the other thread. When was she placed under that covenant? It really is great when you can make rules that fit and get you off doing something that would typically be viewed as a bad thing and even more so to be able to pin it on God told me so... well wow! Not sure what exactly in my post you are referring to here. I referenced that the law of Chastity was changed (around 1927) to make legal and lawful priority over priesthood authority and at the same time eliminate the option of polygamy.
Rivers Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 2 hours ago, Analytics said: So the issue isn't just chastity, right? Exactly.
Teancum Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 22 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: There is a very good reason why society has embraced homosexuality...the fulfillment of prophecy, the ripening in wickedness of the world, and the preparation for destruction. A very good reason. Not sure what exactly in my post you are referring to here. I referenced that the law of Chastity was changed (around 1927) to make legal and lawful priority over priesthood authority and at the same time eliminate the option of polygamy. I prophecy the destruction of planet earth is billions of years away. Now humans may become extinct before then for a variety of reasons. But God destroying humans because of homosexual marriage being accepted by society won't be among those reasons. my other comment was in reference to shedding more light on the Zina situation as well as the ever changing never changing God of Mormonism
Wanderer7 Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 3 hours ago, canard78 said: No. It's such a shame that with all the church's resources that so much time and emotion is wasted on this topic. There are far greater causes and opportunities to serve those in need than stopping a gay couple being together. What do they, the church even lose? Even if the proclamation is truth? If a gay couple marry and in the eternities the church is really right that this marriage was for time only it'll be no different to all the other "time only" straight marriages that happen. Move on LDS prophets. Move on! I agree that it's a shame that the church's time and emotions are wasted on this topic, and that there are many very important things to attend to. However, to claim that it's the prophets' fault seems backwads to me. Perhaps we fail to see the consequences of same sex marriage on the church and society at large. It may be that the Lord and His prophets and seers see far more than any of us. How do we know that the church doesn't lose a great deal by allowing same sex marriage? How many generations will it eternally impact? Yes, we should be spending our time doing more holy things, but as Jacob said, "Behold, if ye were holy I would speak unto you of holiness; but as ye are not holy, and ye look upon me as a teacher, it must needs be expedient that I teach you the consequences of sin" (2 Nephi 9:48). We as members of the church need to move on. We need to repent of our unwillingness to abide by the counsel of the Lord and His servants. Only then will the prophets also be able to move on. Until then, they must do their duty of teaching us the consequences of our sins. 1
JLHPROF Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 16 minutes ago, Teancum said: I prophecy the destruction of planet earth is billions of years away. Now humans may become extinct before then for a variety of reasons. But God destroying humans because of homosexual marriage being accepted by society won't be among those reasons. Believe as you will, I am still a Mormon Millennialist. It will happen sooner rather than later, despite the Packers of the world. Maybe 20 years, maybe 50 years (though I doubt it) but Christ IS returning, and soon based on scripture. Quote my other comment was in reference to shedding more light on the Zina situation as well as the ever changing never changing God of Mormonism Yes, how dare we shed more clarification on the misinterpretations of the "Zina situation" made by critics and questioning members. We wouldn't want to actually understand what happened would we?
Guest Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 22 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said: Just watched Jeffrey Holland do the YSA face to face and the last question was about same sex attraction, and Elder Holland said he wishes people would talk less about the attraction and more about chastity. He kept repeating chastity is the issue as it is with heterosexual singles. It was a great session. He is right, no matter our attraction, it is the choices we make that matter. There are many who, no matter what their feelings or attraction chose to live celibate lives. Catholic Priests and Nuns who chose to live against their nature, Monks who do the same, and Latter-day Saints who never find someone to marry choose chastity over violating the laws of God. Men are by nature attacked to every woman on the planet they seem beautiful, and live faithfully to their wives. In the military I was separated from my wife for long periods...I chose obiedence to God's will, while others did not. Self-Mastery means controlling one's self, which God has given us all the ability to do so. We send out young missionaries, male and female who decide, dite peer pressure and great temptation to live chase lives, so that they may serve a mission, and some longer to pursue higher education. Even our Saviour who had all the weaknesses of all men lived a perfect life. The Apostle Paul following a marriage gone wrong lived celebrate and even call for others to do the same...and many through Christian history have done so. Elder Holland was speaking truth, instead of being politically correct. On day, if anyone is to be given hope...it will only occure by telling the truth, instead of always trying to patronize and seek to make everyone feel good about themselves.
Teancum Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 5 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Believe as you will, I am still a Mormon Millennialist. It will happen sooner rather than later, despite the Packers of the world. Maybe 20 years, maybe 50 years (though I doubt it) but Christ IS returning, and soon based on scripture. Yes, how dare we shed more clarification on the misinterpretations of the "Zina situation" made by critics and questioning members. We wouldn't want to actually understand what happened would we? i have no problem with you beleiving in something that is wrong.
The Nehor Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 5 hours ago, Teancum said: Uhhhh Yea.... Nope, sorry.
Recommended Posts