The Church speaks up on SSM again

[Guest]

11 hours ago, sunstoned said:

I don't see where the PoF has anything to do with baring some children from baptism and membership.  

Did I say or imply that? 

[Daniel2]

14 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Can you provide a reference for 

1. the suicide rate in Utah being triple that 2008.

2. Suicide being the leading cause of death among teenagers being suicide.

Unfortunately, I can, including sources that ALSO say that in addition to the above two statistics, Utah's teen suicide rate is more than double the national average...

Quote

 

Utah youth suicide now leading cause of death for Utah kids ages 11 to 17

By Heidi Hatch Tuesday, July 5th 2016

(KUTV) Utah suicide rates are skyrocketing and are now the leading cause of death for Utah youth. The youth suicide rate has tripled in Utah since 2007 -- jumping from three out of every 100,000 youth to 8.5, an alarming increase not seen anywhere else in the country.

http://kutv.com/news/local/utah-youth-suicide-now-leading-cause-of-death-for-utah-kids-ages-11-17

 

Quote

Low Oxygen Levels, Not Anti-LGBT Mormon Church, Blamed for Utah's Soaring Youth Suicide Rate

by John Wright
July 06, 2016 10:29 AM

 

State's Youth Suicide Rate Has Nearly Tripled Since 2007, But Health Officials Refuse to Acknowledge Impact of Anti-Gay Religious Teachings

http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/johnwright/utah_s_youth_suicide_rate_has_nearly_tripled_since_2007

 

Edited July 7, 2016 by Daniel2

[cinepro]

 

 

On 7/6/2016 at 11:09 AM, JLHPROF said:

 

Sorry, I should have said adoption agency services.
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865605313/LDS-Family-Services-shifts-from-adoption-agency-to-adoption-counseling.html

 

That will depend on what course lawsuits and legal changes take.

Just to be clear, that article you linked to says that the change in LDS Adoption services didn't have anything to do with Same-Sex parents:

Quote

Tuesday's announcement comes at a time when religious-based adoption agencies around the country are under pressure to facilitate adoptions for same-sex couples. LDS Family Services also has been the subject of lawsuits about fathers' rights in adoption cases.

"None of these issues drive this decision," McConkie said.

"This predates any of these court cases," said Sherilyn Stinson, field group manager for the Salt Lake Valley offices of LDS Family Services.

 

 

 

Unless you think David McConkie, the LDS Family Services " group manager for services for children," was lying.

Edited July 7, 2016 by cinepro

[Danzo]

11 minutes ago, Daniel2 said:

Unfortunately, I can...

 

 

Can you link to numbers and sources instead of news articles?

 

The reason I ask is that I cant seem to find any official sources to collaborate your assertions on this historical data the best on I could find is the following link

https://ibis.health.utah.gov/indicator/complete_profile/SuicDth.html

In it, the 2008 suicide rate for males is 25.1 for 2008 and 31.2 in 2014 (actually down from 32.9 in 2013) It is a rise, for sure, but not even double (24%, not 300%)

The rate for females 6.1 to 10.1 (a much higher jump, but no where close to triple)

If we are talking about youth specifically, the  report breaks down the suicide by age group for 2012 to 2014 but does not provide a historical comparison with 2008.

The numbers cited in your article are a rise from 3 to 8.7 per 100k but the report I link to gives numbers from 25.5 to 29.5 per 100K which are considerably different that whats quoted in the articles you linked to.

I suspect they are using a different denominator for their rates.  Using an incorrect denominator can really distort statistical comparisons.

 

 

 

[Danzo]

46 minutes ago, Daniel2 said:

Unfortunately, I can, including sources that ALSO say that in addition to the above two statistics, Utah's teen suicide rate is more than double the national average...

Your news sources are misleading and are  cherry picking their data.  

http://health.utah.gov/opha/publications/hsu/1502_Suicide.pdf

in it the graph shows that, indeed, from 2007 to 2013  the rates almost tripled, but 2005-2009 were stastically low years. If you changed the endpoints for the analysis to 2004, you will find that the rate has only slightly gone up.

My conclusion is that George W Bush being elected president depressed suicide rates while the passage of Obamacare increased the rates. 

But seriously, if you are genuinely concerned about Suicide rates among teens and other groups you should look at all of the numbers and not just those that confirm your particular agenda.  

According to the linked article, weekly religious attendance and family meals lower the risk, while watching tv and being bullied increase the risk

Also from http://www.health.utah.gov/vipp/teens/youth-suicide/

• 63% of suicide decedents having had contact with the juvenile courts.
• 54% of the decedents who had contact with juvenile court had a referral(s) for substance possession, use, or abuse and 32% had one felony referral.
• 23% had a special education evaluation, primarily for behavioral disorders.
• 35% had either a suspension or expulsion from school.

so it would seem that obeying the word of wisdom, as well as staying out of trouble (both things the churches Youth programs emphasize) are also helpful

 

[kllindley]

2 hours ago, Daniel2 said:

That being said, I actually respect and support Kllindley's ability and decision to enter into a mixed-orientation marriage, and as an adult, his therapist has every legal right to encourage him in that endeavor.

Maybe you do.  But not everyone.  Petitions are signed to prevent a 1 hour special about marriages like mine, because it might lead someone to think what I have done is possible.  The original bill in California also restricted adult therapy, so the desire is there to extend the restrictions to adults.  What if I had sought therapy when I was 17?  It's terrible for a therapist to tell a vulnerable teen that he can live a traditional lifestyle, but that same teen wouldn't be vulnerable to being told that the only way for him to be happy is to leave his oppressive religion and have sex with men?

And you can believe whatever you like about the claims in my original post.  The reality, unless you can support your characterization of them as inaccurate, is that freedom to practice religion is being infringed.  When a resource that would enable a young man to live his religion despite countervailing social norms is a target of legal restrictions, lawsuits, petitions to the FTC to silence dissenting opinions, that is a restriction of freedom.  

[JLHPROF]

38 minutes ago, cinepro said:

 

 

Just to be clear, that article you linked to says that the change in LDS Adoption services didn't have anything to do with Same-Sex parents:

 

Unless you think David McConkie, the LDS Family Services " group manager for services for children," was lying.

Not lying.  Avoiding a little and speaking judiciously.

If the Church ever stopped performing legal weddings and went with temple sealings only do you think they would openly blame SSM for the decision?
Or do you think they would couch it in more politically correct terms.  Something about separating the spiritual from the earthly or something like that...

[Daniel2]

40 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Can you link to numbers and sources instead of news articles?

 

The reason I ask is that I cant seem to find any official sources to collaborate your assertions on this historical data the best on I could find is the following link

https://ibis.health.utah.gov/indicator/complete_profile/SuicDth.html

In it, the 2008 suicide rate for males is 25.1 for 2008 and 31.2 in 2014 (actually down from 32.9 in 2013) It is a rise, for sure, but not even double (24%, not 300%)

The rate for females 6.1 to 10.1 (a much higher jump, but no where close to triple)

If we are talking about youth specifically, the  report breaks down the suicide by age group for 2012 to 2014 but does not provide a historical comparison with 2008.

The numbers cited in your article are a rise from 3 to 8.7 per 100k but the report I link to gives numbers from 25.5 to 29.5 per 100K which are considerably different that whats quoted in the articles you linked to.

I suspect they are using a different denominator for their rates.  Using an incorrect denominator can really distort statistical comparisons.

 

To be clear, those aren't "my assertions."  Those are direct quotes from several news sources, including The Associated Press, the Salt Lake Tribune, and KUTV, from "Utah health officials" based on "a state report released this month."

According to the Trib's report:

Quote

Utah officials unsure why youth suicide rate has nearly tripled since 2007

By MICHELLE L. PRICE

The Associated Press

First Published Jul 02 2016 12:30PM    •    Last Updated Jul 03 2016 11:56 am

---

---

Utah health officials are grappling with a rising youth suicide rate that's nearly tripled since 2007 and is now the leading cause of death among 10- to 17-year-olds in Utah.

A state report released this month shows Utah's youth suicide was 8.5 per 100,000 people in 2014, the most recent data available.

In 2007, the rate was 3.0 per 100,000.

Health officials, suicide prevention advocates and educators have been working to curb suicides, but officials don't know why Utah's child suicide rate is more than double the national rate and climbing.

State health officials haven't been able to find any clear causes of the state's growing rate, but the health department is working to launch an in-depth study, said Andrea Hood, a suicide prevention coordinator at the Utah Department of Health.

I haven't found the report itself, but if I do, I will post it.  If anyone else finds it, please feel free to post it again.

But bottom line, multiple mainstream news agencies are reporting the Associated Press's story concerning these statistics.  One would be hard pressed to deny them or presume that they are merely "my assertions."

Edited July 7, 2016 by Daniel2

[kllindley]

4 minutes ago, Danzo said:

But seriously, if you are genuinely concerned about Suicide rates among teens and other groups you should look at all of the numbers and not just those that confirm your particular agenda.  

You hit the nail on the head.  The numbers could just as easily be explained by the increasing affirmation of homosexual relationships and the systemic denial that other options exist - especially among the straight "ally" members.  Therefore, as young men with testimonies of the gospel continue to be told that the Church doesn't love them, that they have no chance of marrying a woman and having a happy family, is it any wonder that they become depressed and hopeless?  

[CV75]

2 hours ago, Jeanne said:

That is a long sentence just to say you really don't have any real good answers.

That one would say that is a long sentence highlights another unfortunate side of the problem...The "wink" replaces a long sentence, but does it really mean? I take it to mean that you know they are hateful, baseless accusations (cliche intended) and do not merit a response.

[Jeanne]

15 minutes ago, CV75 said:

That one would say that is a long sentence highlights another unfortunate side of the problem...The "wink" replaces a long sentence, but does it really mean? I take it to mean that you know they are hateful, baseless accusations (cliche intended) and do not merit a response.

Actually..take the wink as a slam if you want..to say that you won't answer because you can't..or don't want to..and I don't you to be mad at me.  How is that for honesty? He merits just as much for a response as you do!

[cinepro]

15 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Not lying.  Avoiding a little and speaking judiciously.

If the Church ever stopped performing legal weddings and went with temple sealings only do you think they would openly blame SSM for the decision?
Or do you think they would couch it in more politically correct terms.  Something about separating the spiritual from the earthly or something like that...

 

Sorry, but unless you can produce something better than a hypothetical, I'm going to trust the people who would know the best...

 

Catholic adoption agencies in multiple U.S. cities have closed their doors in the past year because they could not, according to the Catholic News Agency, in good conscience place children with same-sex couples.

LDS Family Services also would not place children with same-sex couples, but McConkie and Stinson said discussions about the changes announced Tuesday began long before those pressures mounted.

[Danzo]

23 minutes ago, Daniel2 said:

To be clear, those aren't "my assertions."  Those are direct quotes from several news sources, including The Associated Press, the Salt Lake Tribune, and KSL (the church's own TV channel), from "Utah health officials" based on "a state report released this month."

According to the Trib's report:

I haven't found the report itself, but if I do, I will post it.  If anyone else finds it, please feel free to post it again.

But bottom line, multiple mainstream news agencies are reporting the Associated Press's story concerning these statistics.  One would be hard pressed to deny them or presume that they are merely "my assertions."

If it's on the internet, it must be true. 

[JLHPROF]

8 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Sorry, but unless you can produce something better than a hypothetical, I'm going to trust the people who would know the best...

Quote

Catholic adoption agencies in multiple U.S. cities have closed their doors in the past year because they could not, according to the Catholic News Agency, in good conscience place children with same-sex couples.

LDS Family Services also would not place children with same-sex couples, but McConkie and Stinson said discussions about the changes announced Tuesday began long before those pressures mounted.

 

Is it really hypothetical when it says "LDS Family Services also would not place children with same-sex couples" and a change is announced that means they won't have to?

[california boy]

3 hours ago, CV75 said:

No, I don't answer those statements because they are meaningless polemics reflecting a biased lack of ability to dialog.

Got it.  I totally understand.  I don't blame you one bit.  I would have a hard time answering them myself.

[USU78]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

That one would say that is a long sentence highlights another unfortunate side of the problem...The "wink" replaces a long sentence, but does it really mean? I take it to mean that you know they are hateful, baseless accusations (cliche intended) and do not merit a response.

You failed to mention the mendacity implicit in the alleged questions.

[Jeanne]

Okay..if you all sense any anger in my recent posts..it is because I am..full and so tired of suicide.  Particularly in my family.  I have only mentioned this on PM's to two people on the board here.but maybe it is time to share.  For me ..for you..for this State..

Many of you know that I have talked about my foster sister.  A "Lamanite" from the early days who lived with my family while I was in Jr. and Sr. High School. She IS my SISTER!  Always.  When I moved back to Cache Valley from Tooele County almost two years ago, she was the hardest person to leave.  She helped me bury my own sister who was so close to both of us.

Two days ago, I received a call from my foster sister telling me her beautiful 19 year old grand daughter hung herself.  This is a 3rd suicide in my family.  Yes, she was LDS, but i do ot know the reasons for her depth of despair  All I know is there is a problem.  I would love to just blame the water in Utah..but I can't understand or compromise what is going on.  All I can do is relive and relive again a sad past that has ripple affects and reach out where I still have no answers.  My heart breaks again.for members of my own family and for the Indian nation she belongs to.  We need to find out a way to give hope.

[USU78]

Let's not forget this:  http://www.adherents.com/largecom/lds_LowSuicideRate.html

Quote

 

[T]he suicide rate among less active LDS church members aged 25 to 29 was seven times higher than among their active church peers. Nationally, the suicide rate among 20- to 34-year old males was 2.5 to 3 times higher than among active LDS church members of the same age. Suicide risk was also 3 to 6 times higher among nonmembers in comparison to active members of the LDS church.

In addition, the risk of suicide among males aged 15 to 19 was three times higher among the less active church members than among their active peers, but the rate among the active youth was comparable to the national suicide rate.

 

So what's the best answer, Jeanne?  What the Church has been teaching for decades, or what has been foisted upon the confused and mentally ill by self-seekers who seek to justify their own abysmally poor choices?

[thatjimguy]

On 7/6/2016 at 11:59 AM, JLHPROF said:

Not wanting my children to be taught incorrect teachings or to see SS relationships as normal and without sin is not discrimination.  It's my spiritual belief and I have every right to not want my family taught something I consider wrong.

No one is stopping you to teach your children your religion.

The only thing that happened is allowing others to worship they way they define marriage.

If you want the government to regulate a spiritual belief, be careful, be careful what you wish for. There are Christians out there wouldn't mind seeing a return of a certain extermination order against Mormons because they don't want their children taught something they consider wrong. (and good luck sending out Missionaries anymore either!)

[CV75]

1 hour ago, Jeanne said:

Actually..take the wink as a slam if you want..to say that you won't answer because you can't..or don't want to..and I don't you to be mad at me.  How is that for honesty? He merits just as much for a response as you do!

No, I do not take the wink as a slam, and am not at all mad at you, but as I said, I took it it mean that you know his statements are hateful, baseless accusations and do not merit a response. So I invite you to respond to the following statements, which others have chosen not to, or haven't been able to:

• Human connection is an intimate process; like connects with like (D&C 88:40). From the “space” link, “More than laws or legislatures, the affections of the heart are the glue that holds society together.”
• Considering the full interplay of all human attributes, as well as the human limitations of those attributes, the level of activity and space in which they perform is of necessity fairly small (couples, families, communities, etc.). We can only personally interact with so many people on a day-to-day, human-to-human basis. This is how and why exceptionally Christlike people get to be known; like Christ, benevolent human interaction comes first and foremost in their interactions with many people.
• The further out we branch our relationships (unless we are as Christ), the more virtual the relationships and by extension the community become, and the less fully human and meaningful they become. Some branching out is necessary for larger communities and nations to function, but when processes and systems become substitutes for human interaction, these more virtual and external forms of interaction and relationship become forces that impede the smaller individual, family and community conscience.
• The article is saying that certain broad, legalized practices impose their own brand of isolated (non-intimate) perspective onto the smaller human communities where freedom is actually lived and is most intimately expressed and protected, and thus impede these smaller communities’ ability to thrive. Thus the call for greater balance on a human level of practice (of "patience, collaboration and hard work"). Hence the support for the constitutional guarantee of special protection for religious freedom.
• Laws don't listen, people do. When people substitute laws and habits for listening and go on autopilot, human connection and interaction suffers. We see this happening in couples all the time, and is also the practical trade-off when communities grow larger and into states and nations,. This needs to be kept in check (and balance).  In smaller communities, human connection and interaction serve as the stronger "glue." Religion, the expression of human spirituality, is one of those bases or kinds of "glue" of connection. Thus a common understanding is often translated into law for the sake of governing larger networks of smaller communities, and in the case of a constitution as in the US (on a very large scale, hence its revolutionary nature), also protects the minority while protecting everyone's overall special interests of intimate human contentedness (in this case, religious freedom, whether they opt to practice or not). The article is calling for the majority to not substitute their humanity and connections (which includes an interest in protecting the minority) for laws, and to not focus on the system above the people and families, which in an age of unparalleled information is easy to do, given the constraints of human capacity to handle both information and "heart."
• The LDS Church doesn't need to be defended -- it isn't taking away any civil rights. The civil right for ssm is not being taken away; it is being evaluated, discussed and decided upon, jurisdiction by jurisdiction. It is a red herring, and unreasonable to say the LDS Church is trying to take or keep civil rights that have been granted from anyone when it is up for debate whether something such as ssm should become a civil right in jurisdictions where it isn't a right. IMany proponents of ssm on this thread are confusing legal discrimination, which the Church is not committing, with asserting her right to discuss and debate legislation as an expression of religious freedom that happens to run contrary to their "recognition and understanding" -- in other words, their own sense of discrimination -- of what they think is the right thing to do.
• The article and the "space" link advocate for a system that facilitates human connectedness in an expanding society, which human connectedness is the hallmark of spirituality and the highest aim of religion. This is why new rights and especially their related laws must take take the protection of religious freedom into account. Those who are excessively focused on law as the means to protect themselves tend to degrade human connectedness and the need to protect the religious freedom that promotes it.
• One thing to reconsider in all this: both articles are on Australian media, and the overall communication may be less confusing to Australians.
• Religious freedoms, on the other hand, which have been constitutionally protected and granted in the USA for example for 200+ years, are being challenged and taken away, in some cases through the extreme and unbalanced imposition of newly defined rights, simply because they facilitate opposition to the granting of such rights in the public square. This approach is misguidedly vengeful, spiteful, and hypocritically destructive to the highest principles of human connectedness, which are spiritual and are expressed through freedom, not rights.
• No one can be forced to appreciate LDS beliefs, and the passage of law by an LDS-influenced jurisdiction/community isn't intended to do that. According to the "space" link, laws can be an outgrowth of human connecteness, but in any case cannot substitute human connectedness. The structure of the laws can impede religious freedom, and people do try to marginalize the role of religion in formulating people's views and voice as to what constitutes appropriate legislation. Religious expression goes far beyond believing whatever ones wants to.

43 minutes ago, california boy said:

• Got it.  I totally understand.  I don't blame you one bit.  I would have a hard time answering them myself.

I am seeing that you agree that your list of statements were meaningless polemics reflecting a biased lack of ability to dialog / they were hateful, baseless* accusations unworthy of a response.

*(meaning not based in facts but just manipulated, twisted facts)

32 minutes ago, USU78 said:

You failed to mention the mendacity implicit in the alleged questions.

*what USU78 said!

[Jeanne]

30 minutes ago, USU78 said:

Let's not forget this:  http://www.adherents.com/largecom/lds_LowSuicideRate.html

So what's the best answer, Jeanne?  What the Church has been teaching for decades, or what has been foisted upon the confused and mentally ill by self-seekers who seek to justify their own abysmally poor choices?

I can't today anyway..find any best answers.

[ERMD]

2 hours ago, kllindley said:

  Therefore, as young men with testimonies of the gospel continue to be told that the Church doesn't love them...

The only ones telling them this are those who stand in opposition to the Church.

[USU78]

3 hours ago, Jeanne said:

I can't today anyway..find any best answers.

Fair enough. I've lost a childhood friend and a nephew to manic depression and one of my best friends to AIDS, the last during the bad old hedonistic disco days. Is he dead today without embracement  of disco-inspired risky bisexuality? Unlikely. 

[smac97]

15 hours ago, kllindley said:

You hit the nail on the head.  The numbers could just as easily be explained by the increasing affirmation of homosexual relationships and the systemic denial that other options exist - especially among the straight "ally" members.  Therefore, as young men with testimonies of the gospel continue to be told that the Church doesn't love them, that they have no chance of marrying a woman and having a happy family, is it any wonder that they become depressed and hopeless?  

I wonder if you are perhaps being overly kind here.  The message from the Anti-Mormon segment of the Gay Rights Lobby to LDS youth with same-sex attraction is not merely that "the{ir} Church doesn't love them," but that their Church hates and despises them.  This message is, I think, calculated with malice to cause alienation and estrangement between these youth and their religious faith.

I can't imagine what this must be like.  Let me walk you through my thought processes on this point:

• A) If I were an impressionable teenager, and
• B) if I had a strong familial and social attachment to the LDS Church, and
• C) if I personally had a spiritually-informed testimony of the Restored Gospel, and
• D) if I felt attracted to those of the same sex, and
• E) if I were in the midst of struggling to reconcile my testimony and my desire to live the Gospel with innate sexual feelings which - if acted upon - would lead me away from the Restored Gospel, and
• F) if under these conditions I was bombarded with a relentless series of stories and memes and declarations from other people in society that my church hates me and is filled with bigotry and hatred toward me, and that I have no hope whatsoever of living among them, and that my only option is to reject the Church and its teachings utterly and to join others in engaging in conduct which I have spent years struggling to control . . . then
• G) depression and hopelessness would not only be unsurprising, such feelings would be expected.

But can we expect any introspection from the folks who have spent years demonizing the LDS Church?  Will they ever stop to consider the possibility that they are causing harm to LDS teenagers by using deliberate and calculated means to vilify those teens' religious community, and to estrange those teens from that community?  My sense is that no, I don't think they will.

I have previously written about my concern about and disgust with the exploitation of suicides as a rhetorical weapon against the LDS Church.  My sense is that discussions about teen suicides and Mormonism are just another attempt to adroitly persuade the Saints to disregard the counsel from the Brethren, and to follow what the world is saying about issues pertaining to same-sex attraction.  It can be summarized as a five-step plan which I have outlined previously (see link):

• First, you start with a topic that *nobody* could find objectionable.  Caring for the welfare of children fits the bill.  
• Second, make broad, unquantifiable, emotion-based accusations about the topic to induce guilt in the target audience.  For example, quite recently Neon Trees' singer Tyler Glenn publicly accused the leaders of the LDS Church that "there is blood of your members of your hands."  Yep, that works.  
• Third, introduce an innocuous-sounding suggestion that we do *something* (nice and vague) to resolve the problem.  Here, the author accuses "every one of us" of "culpability" for teen suicides unless we do *something* ("all we can") about them.  For example, Tyler Glenn, after resorting to actual blood libel rhetoric against his former faith, demands that the Church "make a space for your gay members," and that we tell LDS youth with SSA that "they are OK and they’re made in the image of God and they’re not flawed."  Check this one off.  Who could possibly argue such things?
• Fourth, at some point switch the nebulous, vague, innocuous-sounding suggestion that we do "something" ("all we can") with something more specific. This "something more specific" will pretty much always include taking a position which will in some material respects oppose or otherwise be hostile to the LDS Church, its doctrines and/or leaders.  For example, Kimberly Anderson, of Mama Dragons fame, recently publicly declared that the words from leaders of the LDS Church expressing love and affection for teens with SSA are "hollow" and merely "{p}latitudes" and "lip-service" and are "meaningless."  Her proposal that we do "something" is, unsurprisingly, both "more specific" and requires the "taking {of} a position which will in some material respects oppose or otherwise be hostile to the LDS Church, its doctrines and/or leaders."  Here's her proposal (emphases added):

Quote

Platitudes, lip-service and meaningless testimony sharing by the highest levels of LDS Church leadership must stop. Announcing a hollow love for all yet condemning these beautiful children to a life of hopelessness and pain must end now. Both are done in the same breath. Renouncing all past teachings that do not align with current medical and mental health standards and practices needs to happen immediately. Resources that have not been devoted to the queer community must be released. Materials to reach out and extend a hand of love and inclusion must be created.

We have seen honorable and real outreach to other communities that are marginalized here in Utah and around the world. It is time to look inwardly honestly and without fear. The corporation that has created an environment where individuals seek the comfort of death over the sting of life needs to change. Attitudes of love and acceptance must replace bigotry, hate and a false persecution complex. Hearts of parents, congregations and leaders need be touched. Attitudes must be changed and lives must be saved.

Anything less is an admission of guilt.

• Fifth, once you have established item four above, you are at liberty to set yourself up as a moral voice alternate and superior to that of the Brethren.  Because if you don't agree with the proposal in Step Four, or if you *dare* to support the Church in its teachings about same-sex attraction, then the foregoing steps establish, as axiomatic truth, that you hate children and want them to commit suicide.  See Kimberly Anderson's horrid screed as "Exhibit A."

Nice, eh?  The above five-step plan was formulated well before the most recent round of the "Hey, Mormons! Either change your doctrines or we'll blame you for teen suicides!" phenomenon.  It is happening over and over.  It is exploitation of the first order and of the most repugnant sort.  Carol Lynn Person and Affirmation were doing it back in 2008.  Rockpond was doing it back in 2013.  The Mama Dragons were doing it last year and earlier this year.  And now we are seeing it play out again in this thread (with bows taken by Mama Dragons, Tyler Glenn, and Kimberly Anderson).  Each time, the above five-step plan has been followed rather carefully.

In all candor, these tactics make me seriously question the good faith of those who use them.  I question their good faith because it is one thing to express remorse and angst about suicide, and more particularly about teen suicide, and even more particularly about gay LDS teen suicide.  But it is quite another to exploit such horrific tragedies by using them as a brickbat with which to attack the LDS Church.  Such usage reeks of ill intent.  The deaths of LDS teens are not, I think, being discussed because of the innate and inestimable worth each child of God has, but because these suicides can be be used as social/political weapons against the LDS Church.  And such exploitation is what keeps happening, over and over and over again (see above).

I also question their good faith because data suggests that membership in and adherence to the tenets of the LDS Church are a good thing for LDS youth, including LDS youth with same-sex attraction.  Here are some data points on this:

• According to a study in the Netherlands where homosexuality has been accepted and mainstreamed for years, homosexual behavior significantly increases the likelihood of psychiatric, mental and emotional disorders, negating the mindset that society's lack of tolerance of homosexual behavior and lifestyle produces these psychoses. Youth are four times more likely to suffer major depression, almost three times as likely to suffer generalized anxiety disorder, nearly four times as likely to experience conduct disorder, four times as likely to commit suicide, five times as likely to have nicotine dependence, six times as likely to suffer multiple disorders, and more than six times as likely to have attempted suicide. (Study of 5,998 Dutch adults) Theo G.M. Sandforte et al., "Same-Sex Sexual Behavior and Psychiatric Disorders: Findings from the Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence," Archives of General Psychiatry 58, 10 (2001): 85-91.
• Researchers found "an elevated suicide risk for homosexuals" even in tolerant Denmark. Ping Qin, Esben Agerbo, and Preben Bo Mortensen, "Suicide Risk in Relation to Socioeconomic, Demographic, Psychiatric, and Familial Factors: A National Register-Based Study of All Suicides in Denmark, 1981-1997." American Journal of Psychiatry 160 (2003): 765-772.
• According to the American Journal of Epidemiology, active Latter-day Saints are seven times less likely to commit suicide:

Quote

Young Mormon men living in Utah who closely adhere to the dictates of their faith are less likely to commit suicide than their peers who are less active in the church, study findings show.

The Mormon Church is known formally as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS).

For more than 10 years, 15- to 34-year-old males in Utah have had suicide rates markedly higher than those seen nationally. In fact, in the early to mid-1990s, suicide was the number one cause of death among 25- to 44-year-old men in the state and the second-leading cause of death among men aged 15 to 24.

"These results provide evidence that a low level of religious commitment is a potential risk factor for suicide," Dr. Sterling C. Hilton of Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah, and his colleagues write in the March 1st issue of the American Journal of Epidemiology.

Hmm. The Latter-day Saints who are at increased risk for suicide, then, are those who do not live according to the teachings of the LDS Church.  Put another way, the teachings of the LDS Church decrease the risk of suicide. This kinds contradicts the whole "We gotta let homosexuals ditch the Law of Chastity, else they'll kill themselves" narrative being propagated by the five-step plan described above.  

But even assuming, to some extent, that there may be a link between teen suicides in LDS society and social opprobrium against homosexual conduct in LDS society, why are the folks crowing about teen suicides seemingly doing all they can to ratchet up that tension?  

If folks are so concerned about homosexuals committing suicide, why aren't they encouraging them to to maintain high levels of religious observance (which includes, you know, abstinence from homosexual behavior)?

And why are they instead trying to persuade/cajole the LDS Church into altering its teachings about homosexuality when living in accordance with those teachings appears to lower the risk of suicide?  

These are sincere questions.

Sadly, my sense is that the answer to them is pretty much along the lines of this: There are people who hate the LDS Church so much, that they will use any rhetoric, any means, any handy brickbat to attack the LDS Church.  

Even if this means crassly exploiting the suicides of children, they will do it.  

Even if this means encouraging LDS youth to abandon precepts and a community, adherence to and participation in which have a demonstrably positive effect in their lives, they will do it.  

Even if this means materially contributing to the stress and anxiety felt by vulnerable, at-risk teens by telling them that the religion they have grown up in and love, that their leaders and mentors and friends and family, all hate them, they will do it.  

For the record, as a Latter-day Saints (or to be more precise, because I am a Latter-day Saint), I am appalled and saddened that anyone would kill themselves for any reason. I think it is tragic that Latter-day Saints with same-sex orientation have been (and, to some lesser extent, sometimes still are) treated poorly because of that orientation.  I have no doubt that same-sex attraction can be a tremendous struggle.  And I think the Church (both the leaders and laity) have improved significantly, but that we as individuals can and must to better to make teens feel loved and safe (no matter what the enemies of the Church say to the contrary).

The Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ offers clarity in areas of moral ambiguity, particularly where the World is saying one thing and the Scriptures and Prophets another. Some of us have chosen to listen to and accept the precepts of the World on this point, precepts which patently contradict the Restored Gospel.

I can accept divergent views on many things, but not all things. The Scriptures warn against calling evil good, and good evil. Against putting darkness for light, and light for darkness. Against putting bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter.  We are living in a point in time in which, in the World, homosexual behavior is characterized as "good" and "light" and "sweet," and opposition to it based on adherence to scriptural and personal revelation as "evil" and "dark" and "bitter." I cannot agree with these characterizations.

Homosexual conduct is fundamentally at odds with the precepts of the Restored Gospel. It is expressly prohibited by both ancient and modern prophets, the conduits of the Restored Gospel. It contravenes the fundamental tenets of the Plan of Salvation, most particularly concerning the eschatological destination of God's children. It doesn't make sense biologically. Or physiologically. All of these things are, as far as I can tell, empirically true. Subjectively, I also reject popular contemporary calls for endorsing/embracing homosexual behavior because such efforts are repugnant on their face (see comments above about exploiting suicides as a guilt-tripping tactic), and because such efforts are, in my opinion, incompatible with guidance from both the Light of Christ and the Holy Spirit.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited July 8, 2016 by smac97

[Scott Lloyd]

7 hours ago, Daniel2 said:

To be clear, those aren't "my assertions."  Those are direct quotes from several news sources, including The Associated Press, the Salt Lake Tribune, and KUTV, from "Utah health officials" based on "a state report released this month."

According to the Trib's report:

I haven't found the report itself, but if I do, I will post it.  If anyone else finds it, please feel free to post it again.

But bottom line, multiple mainstream news agencies are reporting the Associated Press's story concerning these statistics.  One would be hard pressed to deny them or presume that they are merely "my assertions."

"Multiple, mainstream news sources" are not necessarily an indicator of truth. Ever hear of pack journalism? It works like this: One report comes out. Then others try to play catch-up by reporting the same thing without taking the time or trouble to evaluate it or fact check. 

Happens all the time. It comes from the concept of following the pack. 

Edited July 8, 2016 by Scott Lloyd