Apparently new policy is no longer

[SteveO]

10 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Why do you feel that your cousin cannot get married?

I've never asked.  Are you saying he should be able to be sexually attracted to adults?

Are homosexual attractions as easily overcome?  

Edited September 9, 2016 by SteveO

[rockpond]

1 minute ago, SteveO said:

I've never asked.  Are you saying he should be able to be sexually attracted to adults?

I'll have to plead ignorance on pedophelia.

Is he without any attraction to adults?

[CV75]

12 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

What will happen in the next life? The church has no answer so we must come up with our own. So my answer is that loving relationships will endure this life.

All forms of love will certainly continue, for as long as they can without the cementing power of priesthood sealing. Without that grace, sadly, even the power of love will become stagnant. So only certain forms and applications of love (those which can pass the Lord’s approbation) will endure. I believe there are many subjects and object of love that can so endure, but a marital relationship is not one of them. The Church has answered that in scripture (D&C 132).

[SteveO]

5 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I'll have to plead ignorance on pedophelia.

Is he without any attraction to adults?

...I thought that was a given?  I guess I can't give a definitive answer now that there seems to be doubt on it.  

Ive never sat down and discussed it with him.  There are a select few in the family that know.  But he lives by himself and I guess I always assumed that was the reason why.

But you are right, there are men attracted to children who are married with families...however, there are examples of gay men doing the same

 

Edited September 9, 2016 by SteveO

[ALarson]

12 minutes ago, SteveO said:

I've never asked.  Are you saying he should be able to be sexually attracted to adults?

Are homosexual attractions as easily overcome?  

A pedophile hurts children and is committing a crime (if acting on their attractions).  That's very different from someone who is gay and who is in a loving relationship with another consenting adult.  

I don't know whether most pedophiles are also sexually attracted to adults.  But if your cousin's only choices are to commit a crime and hurt a child or live alone, then he's doing the right thing in his life, IMO.

.

Edited September 9, 2016 by ALarson

[SteveO]

1 minute ago, ALarson said:

A pedophile hurts children and is committing a crime (if acting on their attractions).  That's very different from someone who is gay and who is in a loving relationship with another consenting adult.  

No.  The very definition of a pedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children.  I understand that acting on it is of a completely different sort of thing than a consenting homosexual relationship.

[SteveO]

Look, I don't want to go down this rabbit hole.  My point was that you guys gave the answers I expected you to give.  Homosexuals seem to be a protected class whose grievances seem to be given more legitimate than everyone else's.

My cousin is just expected to get over it and be happy.  But not gays.  They seem to be the only ones stonewalled in that endeavor...and I just don't think it's true.

Edited September 9, 2016 by SteveO

[HappyJackWagon]

5 minutes ago, SteveO said:

No.  The very definition of a pedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children.  I understand that acting on it is of a completely different sort of thing than a consenting homosexual relationship.

OK- I totally missed the part about pedophi1ia. Sorry. I must have been confusing stories. My bad. Please consider my previous comments in context of my misunderstanding. I apologize.

 

[cinepro]

50 minutes ago, SteveO said:

Yep...I notice people still are skirting around my point I brought up concerning people like my cousin. It's a genuine sexual attraction.  It can't be cured.  It can't be prayed away.  It can't be removed via therapy.  The only ways to approach it is to act on it...or control it through self mastery.

Maybe for now...

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/04/swedish-trial-examine-drug-men-pedophilic-impulses

The drug that the team will test is called Firmagon, also known as Degarelix in its injectable form. It belongs to a class called Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists, meaning that the drug competes with the body's natural GnRH and binds to its receptors in the brain, which ultimately blocks the production of testosterone in the testes. Currently, the drug—a form of "chemical castration"—is approved only to treat prostate cancer.

Other types of medicines are already prescribed—and sometimes mandated by law—to treat sexual offenders, including other drugs that change testosterone levels and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, a class of antidepressants. But some of these drugs are only effective after several months, and their use is “based on very weak evidence,” Niklas Långström, a psychiatric epidemiologist at KI, said at the press conference.

And a big hearty "thank you" for getting me to search for this on my work computer!

Edited September 9, 2016 by cinepro

[SteveO]

3 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

OK- I totally missed the part about pedophi1ia. Sorry. I must have been confusing stories. My bad. Please consider my previous comments in context of my misunderstanding. I apologize.

 

That would explain it 

[ALarson]

9 minutes ago, SteveO said:

Look, I don't want to go down this rabbit hole.  My point was that you guys gave the answers I expected you to give.  Homosexuals seem to be a protected class whose grievances seem to be given more legitimate than everyone else's.

My cousin is just expected to get over it and be happy.  But not gays.  They seem to be the only ones stonewalled in that endeavor...and I just don't think it's true.

You don't seem to be able to see the difference between a pedophile who hurts a child, breaks the law & commits a crime and a loving relationship between two consenting adults who are gay. Why do you continue to compare the two?

(And by the way, I feel bad for your cousin.  But, he's made the right choice to live alone if that is the only alternative he feels he has.)

. 

Edited September 9, 2016 by ALarson

[rockpond]

18 minutes ago, SteveO said:

...I thought that was a given?  I guess I can't give a definitive answer now that there seems to be doubt on it.  

Ive never sat down and discussed it with him.  There are a select few in the family that know.  But he lives by himself and I guess I always assumed that was the reason why.

But you are right, there are men attracted to children who are married with families...however, there are examples of gay men doing the same

 

I don't know either but I thought that someone who was a pedophile was also still attracted to a gender.  And could have a successful relationship with an adult by learning to suppress/deny the desire to be with a child.

But I wouldn't want to press someone into a marriage if they felt that they couldn't make such a relationship successful.  That advice was given by church leaders to gay men for a long time and had disastrous results.  Yes there are some who live happy lives but the reported success rate of mixed orientation marriages is tragically low.

In a follow up post you wrote:  "My point was that you guys gave the answers I expected you to give.  Homosexuals seem to be a protected class whose grievances seem to be given more legitimacy than everyone else.  My cousin is just expected to get over it and be happy.  But not gays.  They seem to be the only ones stonewalled in that endeavor...and I just don't think it's true."

That's a horribly unfair portrayal of our responses.  I'm not saying that homosexuals are a protected class.  I'm not giving them more legitimacy.  I would say to my gay friend and your cousin alike that I encourage them to find a consensual, fulfilling, committed relationship and look for happiness.  I don't believe God wants any of us to be alone.

[kllindley]

2 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Thanks for sharing the quote. Let's break it down a little.

So this statement is a personal opinion, which is fine, but hardly a church doctrine.

 Further, from the official response from the FP and Q12 to those with Same-Sex attraction "God Loveth His Children":

Quote

As we follow Heavenly Father’s plan, our bodies, feelings, and desires will be perfected in the next life so that every one of God’s children may find joy in a family consisting of a husband, a wife, and children.

Not belief or opinion.  Prophets, seers, and revelators stating a proposition as truth.  People are of course free to reject their authority or deny the truthfulness of the propostition they declare.  

In a 2007 PBS special, Elder Holland said about same-sex attraction:

Quote

I do know that this will not be a post-mortal condition. It will not be a post-mortal difficulty

 

Edited September 9, 2016 by kllindley
Edited to add another source

[JLHPROF]

7 minutes ago, ALarson said:

You don't seem to be able to see the difference between a pedophile who hurts a child, breaks the law & commits a crime and a loving relationship between two consenting adults who are gay. Why do you continue to compare the two?

Everyone can see the difference.  Nobody doesn't understand the difference between consenting adults and harming a child.

The comparison continues and will continue because the only arguments made in favor of homosexuality can all be applied to ANY form of sexual attraction and so they don't provide any reason to accept SSM.
 

[kllindley]

6 minutes ago, ALarson said:

You don't seem to be able to see the difference between a pedophile who hurts a child, breaks the law & commits a crime and a loving relationship between two consenting adults who are gay. Why do you continue to compare the two?

You don't seem to be able to see the difference between attraction and action.  That would explain a lot of your confusion about gays.

[kllindley]

3 hours ago, ALarson said:

Steve, I think a big part of your issue here is that it would help your understanding if you'd stop thinking of a person who is gay as being the same as someone who has "severe physical handicaps" or someone who is autistic.

I agree that a big part of the issue is this way of thinking about a person who is gay prevents understanding your perspective on the issue.  Whether or not thinking of sexual orientation as at least in some ways analogous to other situations is inaccurate is a matter that is still debatable.

[kllindley]

16 hours ago, rockpond said:

It's not just a run of the mill disagreement.  Like disagreeing over political affiliation.

Imagine if someone said to you:  "I love you but I don't think you should be allowed to be married to your spouse.  You are afflicted with a condition that makes you unnaturally love your husband.  I believe that God condemns your marriage, that you should be excommunicated from the church, that your children shouldn't attend, and that your relationship should be disavowed."

If someone said those things to you (and all those sentiments have been typed on this thread) would there be any way you could simultaneously feel love from them?

I want to understand our position, because I am reading a lot of times where you say that your views are being misrepresented.  Take your quote above.  How would you modify that quote to honestly reflect your feelings toward the following people:

A 40 year old man in Central Africa engaged to a 13 year old girl.

A woman in Bagledesh married to man already married to two other women.   

Do you love those people even when their actions and relationships are not only legal but culturally acceptable?

 

[ALarson]

21 minutes ago, kllindley said:

You don't seem to be able to see the difference between attraction and action.  That would explain a lot of your confusion about gays.

Where have I shown any confusion about gays?  Of course I know the difference between attraction and action.  I have no issue with either when pertaining to a relationship between 2 consenting, gay adults and most especially when they choose to enter into a committed marital relationship.  However, if a pedophile acts on their attraction to a child, that child is hurt and abused.  And, a crime has also been committed where the perpetrator should serve time in prison if convicted.  

If you can't see the difference here, then it's you who are confused.

.

 

Edited September 9, 2016 by ALarson

[JLHPROF]

4 minutes ago, ALarson said:

 And, a crime has also been committed where the perpetrator should serve time in prison if convicted.  

If you can't see the difference here, then it's you who are confused.

Homosexuality was likewise considered a crime until a few years back.
Who knows what crimes society will come to accept in the future.

[SteveO]

11 minutes ago, rockpond said:

 

That's a horribly unfair portrayal of our responses.  I'm not saying that homosexuals are a protected class.  I'm not giving them more legitimacy.  I would say to my gay friend and your cousin alike that I encourage them to find a consensual, fulfilling, committed relationship and look for happiness.  I don't believe God wants any of us to be alone.

You're right it was.  Apologies. I was responding to HappyJack whose response was incredulous to me because he was suggesting marriage for my cousin--something I know isn't considered ideal for many gays in the church.  But it appears he was a little out of the loop when he wrote it, so I'm less confused now. 

[kllindley]

Just now, ALarson said:

Where have I shown any confusion about gays?  Of course I know the difference between attraction and action.  I have no issue with either when pertaining to a relationship between 2 consenting, gay adults and most especially when they choose to enter into a committed marital relationship.  However, if a pedophile acts on their attraction to a child, that child is hurt and abused.  And, a crime has been committed.

 

I agree that sexual relations with children is abusive and criminal (and should be!).  However, that was not always the general view of societies at large and in fact is not considered such in much of the world today.  Was/is it still wrong then/there?  On what authority?   

Within the worldview of the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ, acting on same-sex attractions is spiritually hurtful and abusive, and a sin has been committed.  People are free to reject this worldview, on whatever authority they choose.  But that rejection doesn't automatically invalidate the worldview.  

[rockpond]

9 minutes ago, kllindley said:

I want to understand our position, because I am reading a lot of times where you say that your views are being misrepresented.  Take your quote above.  How would you modify that quote to honestly reflect your feelings toward the following people:

A 40 year old man in Central Africa engaged to a 13 year old girl.

A woman in Bagledesh married to man already married to two other women.   

Do you love those people even when their actions and relationships are not only legal but culturally acceptable?

 

If you read my quote carefully, you'll note that I was referring to the person's ability to feel love from someone who rejected much of the person's identity and life.  I'm not questioning the love people are claiming to have towards certain individuals be they gay or whatever.  I think that is an important distinction that your response seems to have missed (since you asked if I could love those people... rather than asking if they could feel my love even after I expressed my rejection of them).

While I love everyone as a child of God I would disdain the actions of a 40 year old many marrying a 13 year old girl.  If I expressed that to him I doubt he would really feel/believe the love I was expressing to him.

As for the woman in Bangledesh, since I am not opposed to polygamy, I don't really have any concerns there.

 

[ALarson]

5 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Homosexuality was likewise considered a crime until a few years back.

Not the same as hurting and abusing a child.  Not the same at all. 

[ALarson]

5 minutes ago, kllindley said:

I agree that sexual relations with children is abusive and criminal (and should be!).  However, that was not always the general view of societies at large and in fact is not considered such in much of the world today.  

Yes, gratefully, things are changing at least in our country and rightly so.  

[SteveO]

40 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Everyone can see the difference.  Nobody doesn't understand the difference between consenting adults and harming a child.

The comparison continues and will continue because the only arguments made in favor of homosexuality can all be applied to ANY form of sexual attraction and so they don't provide any reason to accept SSM.
 

Thank you, I was going to respond because I want it absolutely clear that I understand the difference, nor am I trying to draw a comparison between the two.