stemelbow Posted June 7, 2016 Posted June 7, 2016 2 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said: I think a member can support legalization of SSM and be very much a worthy member of the Church in all respects. I think a member of the Church should probably not get a temple recommend for supporting, advocating for, and believing that SSM or homosexual sex is not a sin and should be accepted by the Kingdom of God as good. I think that is a clear and appropriate distinction. Thanks. That's an interesting distinction that I wonder if the Church would adopt. My last bishop and I talked about this a lot and he adamantly suggested there was nothing for me to worry about, in terms of discipline from the Church for my support for SSM and my belief that the Church will eventually support it too, thus not seeing it as a sin itself. He might end up wrong, sure, just as I might. But you got me curious, wondering where/if I belong.
Mystery Meat Posted June 7, 2016 Posted June 7, 2016 1 minute ago, stemelbow said: Thanks. That's an interesting distinction that I wonder if the Church would adopt. My last bishop and I talked about this a lot and he adamantly suggested there was nothing for me to worry about, in terms of discipline from the Church for my support for SSM and my belief that the Church will eventually support it too, thus not seeing it as a sin itself. He might end up wrong, sure, just as I might. But you got me curious, wondering where/if I belong. I think GA's have previous made comments to the effect that it is okay for members to support legalization efforts in the political realms. So I think at least as far as that goes, you are okay.
thesometimesaint Posted June 7, 2016 Posted June 7, 2016 I think you belong in the Church. Sins, even grievous sins, can be repented of. At least I hope so for my own sake, 2
rockpond Posted June 7, 2016 Posted June 7, 2016 1 hour ago, Mystery Meat said: I think a member can support legalization of SSM and be very much a worthy member of the Church in all respects. I think a member of the Church should probably not get a temple recommend for supporting, advocating for, and believing that SSM or homosexual sex is not a sin and should be accepted by the Kingdom of God as good. I think that is a clear and appropriate distinction. You can think that but that is not current church policy.
Mystery Meat Posted June 7, 2016 Posted June 7, 2016 (edited) 7 minutes ago, rockpond said: You can think that but that is not current church policy. I understand that, nor am I particularly concerned that it is not. If I were a Bishop, I would not insert my own feelings into the process, but would sustain and respect those who have actual authority to determine such things. Edited June 7, 2016 by Mystery Meat
TheSkepticChristian Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 22 hours ago, Mystery Meat said: I think a member can support legalization of SSM and be very much a worthy member of the Church in all respects. I think a member of the Church should probably not get a temple recommend for supporting, advocating for, and believing that SSM or homosexual sex is not a sin and should be accepted by the Kingdom of God as good. I think that is a clear and appropriate distinction. Good point! and that is why our church should not get involved in politics! General Authorities like to influence Utah lawmakers, I think that is very inappropriate! Their involvement on the "Yes on 8" campaign was also not appropriate. Our church leaders need to stay out of politics!
thesometimesaint Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 Since when did the politics gain control over the morality of a position? Again whatever your/or my politics of SSM the Church has always claimed such is a violation of the law of chastity for its members.
TheSkepticChristian Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 (edited) 22 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Since when did the politics gain control over the morality of a position? Again whatever your/or my politics of SSM the Church has always claimed such is a violation of the law of chastity for its members. I simply said our church leaders (General Authorities) should stay out of politics! Do you agree or disagree? Let's keep religion out of politics! SSM topics on the legalization of gay marriage shouldn't be allowed in this board. Global Warming is a far more important topic, it is scientific, and it is our religious duty to do something about it. Edited June 8, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian
thesometimesaint Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 Homosexual and non-church sanctioned sex is a moral issue for the Church. Same as alcohol consumption not that long ago.
TheSkepticChristian Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 (edited) 10 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Homosexual and non-church sanctioned sex is a moral issue for the Church Exactly! that is why our church leaders (General Authorities) should stay out of politics. and all the topics on the legalization of SSM shouldn't be allowed in this board. Edited June 8, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian
thesometimesaint Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 They inseparable. Look I've said many times that I don't care who or what someone has sex with. For all I care anyone can do it with a tree. But if they come to me in my professional capacity wanting to get married. We'll have a nice long talk about species boundaries and splinters.
Johnnie Cake Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 On 6/2/2016 at 0:35 PM, cinepro said: The Washington Post has an interesting article about changing attitudes towards sexuality in America, where they note the following: Obviously, we've all seen the trend for people being more accepting of homosexual behavior. But the Church still holds that homosexual behavior is sinful. As missionaries teach and prepare adults for baptism, is this issue something that should be clarified beforehand, even to the degree of making it a clear question for baptism? Should someone who feels that homosexual behavior is not a sin in any way (but doesn't participate in such behavior because they're not so inclined) be accepted for baptism, or is this an optional belief? Once again the church is on the wrong side of history...can it be only a matter of time before societal pressure is so great that they are once again forced to concede defeat and find a more tolerant solution from the corner they've painted themselves into? 2
Johnnie Cake Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 According to One of the newest members of the 12, a parent can publically support SSM, Their SSM married child's legal SS marriage and receive a temple recommend...but their grandchild will still be excluded.
JLHPROF Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 40 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said: Once again the church is on the wrong side of history...can it be only a matter of time before societal pressure is so great that they are once again forced to concede defeat and find a more tolerant solution from the corner they've painted themselves into? And then only a matter of time till Christ returns and ALL changes due to societal pressure that weren't from God are reversed. It is still God's church. He watches over and guides it. But men are fallible and mistakes are made. Sooner or later God will fix his Church to 100%. If the Church ever caves on SSM it will be a limited time derail because God will never cave on correct principle.
Johnnie Cake Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 (edited) 25 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: And then only a matter of time till Christ returns and ALL changes due to societal pressure that weren't from God are reversed. It is still God's church. He watches over and guides it. But men are fallible and mistakes are made. Sooner or later God will fix his Church to 100%. If the Church ever caves on SSM it will be a limited time derail because God will never cave on correct principle. If one accepts that God is real....then one must accept the reality that God made homosexuals. If homosexuals were made as they are, is it really part of God's plan that they should not be given the same exact rights, companionship and pleasures that you (I'm guessing here ) enjoy as a heterosexual? I can't believe in a God that discriminates and would deny equality for all of His Creations. Plus its pretty pompous to assume that YOU know the will of God and that men who claim that privilege actually know the will of God when they have been known to get it wrong on so many past occasions. Edited June 8, 2016 by Johnnie Cake 3
stemelbow Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 6 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: And then only a matter of time till Christ returns and ALL changes due to societal pressure that weren't from God are reversed. It is still God's church. He watches over and guides it. But men are fallible and mistakes are made. Sooner or later God will fix his Church to 100%. If the Church ever caves on SSM it will be a limited time derail because God will never cave on correct principle. In view of that, it's only a matter of time till Christ returns and all the things we stubbornly continue to do and teach, in spite of outside pressures trying to get us to give it up, which is wrong and has always been wrong will be cleared up. 1
JLHPROF Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 Just now, Johnnie Cake said: If one accepts that God is real....then one must accept the reality that God made homosexuals. No, God made man. Actions are the result of choices, and defects are the result of mortality and the fall. God didn't make flaws. The fall and mortal defect are temporary in nature.
JLHPROF Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 1 minute ago, stemelbow said: In view of that, it's only a matter of time till Christ returns and all the things we stubbornly continue to do and teach, in spite of outside pressures trying to get us to give it up, which is wrong and has always been wrong will be cleared up. This is true too. But I don't believe God uses corrupt societies to teach the Church to move in their direction.
stemelbow Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 4 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: This is true too. But I don't believe God uses corrupt societies to teach the Church to move in their direction. I do, after all the Church is not perfect itself. It is in that sense a corrupt society just the same.
thesometimesaint Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 3 minutes ago, stemelbow said: I do, after all the Church is not perfect itself. It is in that sense a corrupt society just the same. The Church is perfect. There is no other mechanism by which any can be saved. The people in it is another question.
stemelbow Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 9 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: The Church is perfect. There is no other mechanism by which any can be saved. The people in it is another question. The Church is the people. Everything that is the Church is because of it's people.
Daniel2 Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 (edited) 25 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: No, God made man. Actions are the result of choices, and defects are the result of mortality and the fall. God didn't make flaws. The fall and mortal defect are temporary in nature. The implied (or intentional?) message here seems to be that the romantic love shared between same-sex couples is a "flaw" that generates from some other source from God. Speaking strictly for myself, as a gay man who has no romantic attractions to women, the authenticity, inherent worth and worthiness, and the good fruit that's flowed from the love I intrinsically and effortlessly feel for my husband far surpasses the emotions I tried for 12 years to cultivate towards my now ex-wife. Intellectually, emotionally, and spiritually speaking, I cannot accept that my capacity to love my husband is inferior to the love I attempted to manufacture for my ex-wife, and reject that it is from anything less than the best and most divine aspects of my being--whatever the source. Edited June 8, 2016 by Daniel2
thesometimesaint Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 13 minutes ago, stemelbow said: The Church is the people. Everything that is the Church is because of it's people. Incorrect. The Church is the organization created by Christ to administer his earthly affairs. There is no other such organization. SEE https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians+4%3A11-16&version=KJV
california boy Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 1 hour ago, JLHPROF said: No, God made man. Actions are the result of choices, and defects are the result of mortality and the fall. God didn't make flaws. The fall and mortal defect are temporary in nature. I see. I am some kind of failed flaw. Nice to know. I didn't realize I was so defective. The cruelty of all of this is still being blessed with the ability to love another and desire companionship while on this earth.
thesometimesaint Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 8 minutes ago, california boy said: I see. I am some kind of failed flaw. Nice to know. I didn't realize I was so defective. The cruelty of all of this is still being blessed with the ability to love another and desire companionship while on this earth. That halo of yours must be getting really tight. 1
Recommended Posts