Church takes public position on the transgender law

[Duncan]

Just now, Bernard Gui said:

My issues with Scouting are privacy....tents, latrines, showers, swimming, etc. It's asking a lot of boys and young men to ignore the obvious in pursuit of some egalitarian agenda. I agree with your take on privacy rights.

so a trangendered youth aren't supposed to shower, go to the bathroom, swim all because you feel uncomfortable? do you normally think about youth doing those things? I don't and obviously I am not accusing you of anything untoward or anything. What are they supposed to do? not go camping? I think the larger issue is God loves everyone except his children of LGBTQ status, I think that message has been sent loud and clear so why would any youth want to have anything to do with the Church or any of its programs?

[Duncan]

Just now, Bernard Gui said:

Those would probably be rare, but certainly possible. I would have issues with being in a locker room with my daughter or wife and a person pretending to be or even believing he was a woman. I would have issues even if I weren't in the room. Would I have to be there for their protection?

if you were then others might feel umcomfortable, I have never heard of a transgendered person attacking anyone in a washroom, I am open to the possibility though. I guess though would you send your little kid into a change room by themselves? I wouldn't

[Duncan]

Just so we're clear there is a difference between transvestite and transgendered.

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Duncan said:

so a trangendered youth aren't supposed to shower, go to the bathroom, swim all because you feel uncomfortable? do you normally think about youth doing those things? I don't and obviously I am not accusing you of anything untoward or anything. What are they supposed to do? not go camping? I think the larger issue is God loves everyone except his children of LGBTQ status, I think that message has been sent loud and clear so why would any youth want to have anything to do with the Church or any of its programs?

Such an overreaction.
God loving someone is not the same as allowing them to do whatever they feel good about.
And no, I do not want a transgendered 12 year old "girl" sharing showers and bathrooms or a tent with my daughter.  I don't want a transgendered 12 year old "boy" sharing showers and bathrooms or a tent with my son.

Not because of any hatred or lack of love.  Because it's just not appropriate.

[Duncan]

Just now, JLHPROF said:

Such an overreaction.
God loving someone is not the same as allowing them to do whatever they feel good about.
And no, I do not want a transgendered 12 year old "girl" sharing showers and bathrooms or a tent with my daughter.  I don't want a transgendered 12 year old "boy" sharing showers and bathrooms or a tent with my son.

Not because of any hatred or lack of love.  Because it's just not appropriate.

what are they supposed to do, hold it in? not shower? these are basic life skills that no church should deny someone, even prisons allow people to shower. What if your daughter was transgendered? what then?

[Ouagadougou]

On 17.02.2017 at 3:08 PM, Tacenda said:

The church needs to take stances on other items of far more importance IMO.

I agree 100%.  Out of all the problems in the world, the church is focused on the use of public restrooms?  Churches need to stay out of political issues, IMO.  Further, I find it ironic how some churches want to claim a tax exempt status -- yet at the same time -- engage in various political issues.  With regard to the LDS church, I find it deplorable that leaders still try to define gender roles and what the family unit should look like -- when Brigham Young himself had over 50 wives.   

It's ok for early leaders to marry teenage girls and have numerous wives, but transgender people can't use a certain restroom?   Lorenzo Snow can mary a 15-year-old at age 57...but how dare transgenders use a certain restroom for the gender they identify with?  

IMO, the church has no business telling the world what the family unit should look like and what gender roles people should or shouldn't fulfill, especially if you look at early church history.  

Where in the scripture does it say we should worry about little things like who uses what restroom? 😀

 

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865673693/Utah-LDS-Church-join-friend-of-court-briefs-in-transgender-bathroom-case.html

 

Edited February 19, 2017 by Ouagadougou

[Duncan]

Just now, JLHPROF said:

Such an overreaction.
God loving someone is not the same as allowing them to do whatever they feel good about.
And no, I do not want a transgendered 12 year old "girl" sharing showers and bathrooms or a tent with my daughter.  I don't want a transgendered 12 year old "boy" sharing showers and bathrooms or a tent with my son.

Not because of any hatred or lack of love.  Because it's just not appropriate.

God created or organized the various sexualities so given that how would a non heterosexual person be in the Church in your perspective?

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

It almost has the feel of the days blacks couldn't use white only restrooms, when we look at the possibility of ward buildings being forced to let transgender people use the restroom.

Do you have evidence that white women didn't want to share bathrooms with black women because they thought the black woman might attack them?  Serious question.  I don't have a clue.

My feeling is with blacks there was a disdain of interacting with what was seen as lower class as well as an irrational and inappropriate fear of contamination (fear of disease, uncleanliness...as if black skin was inherently dirty...though it was perfectly okay to have them as cleaners and cooks...but that is one of the reasons why irrational fears are called irrational, I guess).  Nothing I have read hints at fear of violence from black women, though there was plenty of fear of black men; but I have not studied the subject as deep as I could so I may have missed something.

With the transgender issue, I have seen two issues it boils down to...not wanting to have to discuss transgenderism with young children until they get older because they see the issue as complicated and confusing for that age (this is a concern for all public multiuser bathrooms) and second, fear of straight male predators that will use the law as an excuse to enter women's restrooms to attack them (haven't see anything about men worrying about women attacking them, but some expression of awkwardness).  A distant third concern in the places I have gone to see the discussion (may be expressed more or less elsewhere) is a fear of transgender themselves and a view they will more likely be predators than women in general).

"What I think the church is afraid of is not being allowed to stop a transgender from being baptised or going to the temple. Just like when the church wanted to stop gay marriage. They don't want to be forced into letting SSM happen in temples, IMO."

I doubt that is much more than a minor concern.  Much more likely is a concern of being required to hire transgenders in church related jobs or to allow them to attend church schools, equality areas that are currently being debated for a lot of categories: unmarried sexually active, nonWoW partakers, married homosexuals, nonchurch members in some jobs (as in church members may be given preference even above WoW issues).

Edited February 19, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

3 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

  I have a right to use a restroom designated for men and not have females use it.  My wife has the right to use a restroom designated for women and not have men use it.  As long as we are not forced to participate, I have no problem with transgender people dressing, acting, and doing what they want in their personal lives.

A public restroom provided by the government is not some inherent right, I believe...except maybe for employees.  A private restroom provided by a company has the right to label it how they want it to be used, imo.  You don't have to use it if a customer. If an employee, you can choose to work elsewhere if any policy offends you.

Way too much is being claimed as a "right" in my view these days.

Edited February 19, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

2 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

No.  Just in regards to scouting.  By letting girls into scouting, at least it does not allow any confusion on the issue that boys and girls are still boys and girls and the transgender can't shift from one to the other.  I am still for restrooms and lockers being based on biological terms.  Not only am I against it but if a transgender does come in the bathroom with me, I will make an issue of it.  I will not be a silent participant in this.  I have rights too.

Possibly public restrooms provided by the government, but only if the law says so.  Not in someone else's privately owned restroom.  Your own property, sure.

[california boy]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

A public restroom provided by the government is not some inherent right, I believe...except maybe for employees.  A private restroom provided by a company has the right to label it how they want it to be used, imo.  You don't have to use it if a customer. If an employee, you can choose to work elsewhere if any policy offends you.

Way too much is being claimed as a "right" in my view these days.

I agree with you completely.  If Target wants to allow transgenders into their bathrooms, you, as a customer, have choices.  You can refuse to shop at Target.  You can wait until the transgender person leaves.  Or you can use one of the stalls that gives most people all the privacy they need. 

Same with government bathrooms.  You aren't forced to use them.  If you freak out over transgenders being in a restroom, then go before you leave home.  Or wait until the transgender person leaves.  Or use a stall.  

Some people have such a feeling of entitlement and feel the world should revolve around their own personal beliefs.  We live in a diverse world.  Get over it.  

[bsjkki]

14 minutes ago, california boy said:

I agree with you completely.  If Target wants to allow transgenders into their bathrooms, you, as a customer, have choices.  You can refuse to shop at Target.  You can wait until the transgender person leaves.  Or you can use one of the stalls that gives most people all the privacy they need. 

Same with government bathrooms.  You aren't forced to use them.  If you freak out over transgenders being in a restroom, then go before you leave home.  Or wait until the transgender person leaves.  Or use a stall.  

Some people have such a feeling of entitlement and feel the world should revolve around their own personal beliefs.  We live in a diverse world.  Get over it.  

My issue is not with bathrooms--most wouldn't know if someone were transgender or not if they are actually transgender and conform outwardly to their chosen genders outward appearance. It's the locker rooms. I don't want to see male junk in the locker room and I don't want my little girls to see male junk either. I don't think girls should have to change clothes in front of biological males at school either. If you have a penis, please use a private changing area. 

[MormonVideoGame]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

If an employee, you can choose to work elsewhere if any policy offends you.

In the real world it is not easy for many to find a job, 76% of Americans live paycheck-to-paycheck
http://money.cnn.com/2013/06/24/pf/emergency-savings/

It is way worst in poor countries, life is not black and white, it's all just chance and genetics. 

Edited February 19, 2017 by MormonVideoGame

[carbon dioxide]

4 hours ago, Duncan said:

so a trangendered youth aren't supposed to shower, go to the bathroom, swim all because you feel uncomfortable? do you normally think about youth doing those things? I don't and obviously I am not accusing you of anything untoward or anything. What are they supposed to do? not go camping? I think the larger issue is God loves everyone except his children of LGBTQ status, I think that message has been sent loud and clear so why would any youth want to have anything to do with the Church or any of its programs?

Of course they can shower, go to the bathroom, and swim.  Nobody has every suggested otherwise.  Its where they go to the bathroom and shower.  Not that can or can not.

[carbon dioxide]

3 hours ago, Ouagadougou said:

I agree 100%.  Out of all the problems in the world, the church is focused on the use of public restrooms?  Churches need to stay out of political issues, IMO.  Further, I find it ironic how some churches want to claim a tax exempt status -- yet at the same time -- engage in various political issues.  With regard to the LDS church, I find it deplorable that leaders still try to define gender roles and what the family unit should look like -- when Brigham Young himself had over 50 wives.   

It's ok for early leaders to marry teenage girls and have numerous wives, but transgender people can't use a certain restroom?   Lorenzo Snow can mary a 15-year-old at age 57...but how dare transgenders use a certain restroom for the gender they identify with?  

IMO, the church has no business telling the world what the family unit should look like and what gender roles people should or shouldn't fulfill, especially if you look at early church history.  

Where in the scripture does it say we should worry about little things like who uses what restroom? 😀

 

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865673693/Utah-LDS-Church-join-friend-of-court-briefs-in-transgender-bathroom-case.html

 

1.  Churches can take moral and even political stances and be tax exempt.  They just can't endorse and candidate or party.  Trump might even try to get rid of that part too.

2.  Gender is an important issue.  Gender is an eternal principle.  Those who are born males will be resurrected as males.  Those born females will be resurrected as females. 

3.  Nothing wrong with early LDS leaders marrying teen brides. It was not illegal in those days.  There is no eternal law that gives an age of when a person can marry.  Hate to tell you but this age 18 thing did not come from God.  Its a fairly recent concept in western societies.  If you lived in those days you probably would not mind as well. You mind because you were brought up in a different time.

4.  The Church does have a business to declare to the world eternal principles.  People are free to reject it but God is not changing with the calendar. 

5.  Are there more important things than the transgender issue?  YES.  Should the Church spend much time on it.  NO. Just because there are more important things does not mean one can't hold a position on the subject.  There are many issues of right and wrong, truth verses error and they vary in degrees of importance.    1+1=2.  If there are people out there saying 1+2=3 that is not a huge problem especially if it involves a tiny part of the population but its not incorrect to make a statement that even though there are people that say 1+1=3 that the truth is 1+1=2 regardless if it hurts people or regardless of what century or decade on lives in.

Edited February 19, 2017 by carbon dioxide

[Calm]

1 hour ago, MormonVideoGame said:

In the real world it is not easy for many to find a job?..

I didn't say it was easy, one has to choose if the offense is worth it.  There are usually a lot of things one has to put up with in jobs.  Worrying about  transgenders in the restrooms given the percentage in population is probably low. 

My point is simply it isn't an inalienable right to say who and who can't use a bathroom you are using.

Edited February 19, 2017 by Calm

[carbon dioxide]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

I agree with you completely.  If Target wants to allow transgenders into their bathrooms, you, as a customer, have choices.  You can refuse to shop at Target.  You can wait until the transgender person leaves.  Or you can use one of the stalls that gives most people all the privacy they need. 

Same with government bathrooms.  You aren't forced to use them.  If you freak out over transgenders being in a restroom, then go before you leave home.  Or wait until the transgender person leaves.  Or use a stall.  

Some people have such a feeling of entitlement and feel the world should revolve around their own personal beliefs.  We live in a diverse world.  Get over it.  

Another option is to confront the person.  No physical violence but one can correct them on biology.  Perhaps the big solution is just make all bathrooms available for everyone.  No more bathrooms for men and women. 

Edited February 19, 2017 by carbon dioxide

[Kenngo1969]

5 hours ago, MormonVideoGame said:

How? Is it a sin for a man to use the women's restroom? Is it a sin for a gay man to use the men's restroom? 

 

I already discussed, at length and in detail, the reasons underlying the concern of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its leaders regarding this issue. You're absolutely free to ignore that lengthy, detailed, discussion, but don't simply repeat the same question as though I never engaged in that discussion.

Quote

No one is going to force you to allow gays to use your restroom or the restrooms of your church building. Law makers always make exceptions for religious organizations that are acting as religious organizations. Laws won't affect a church project or practice when "its purpose is the inculcation of religious beliefs ".  

I admire your sanguineness that the devout, their faiths, and associated institutions need not worry about any of the prospects I discussed in my foregoing post.  I hope you're right.  For reasons I have already explained, however, I do not share your optimism, and I find your bare ipse dixit that things will work out ... unconvincing ... to say the least.

[california boy]

56 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

My issue is not with bathrooms--most wouldn't know if someone were transgender or not if they are actually transgender and conform outwardly to their chosen genders outward appearance. It's the locker rooms. I don't want to see male junk in the locker room and I don't want my little girls to see male junk either. I don't think girls should have to change clothes in front of biological males at school either. If you have a penis, please use a private changing area. 

Can you name a place in the entire country where this is actually happening?  Just one?  Or is this just mass hysteria over nothing

[Duncan]

Just now, carbon dioxide said:

Of course they can shower, go to the bathroom, and swim.  Nobody has every suggested otherwise.  Its where they go to the bathroom and shower.  Not that can or can not.

then they can go elsewhere, so what's the issue? 

[california boy]

13 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

1.  Churches can take moral and even political stances and be tax exempt.  They just can't endorse and candidate or party.  Trump might even try to get rid of that part too.

I agree.  Is it part of the three fold mission of the church to monitor bathrooms looking for transgender people?

 

13 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

2.  Gender is an important issue.  Gender is an eternal principle.  Those who are born males will be resurrected as males.  Those born females will be resurrected as females. 

So what happens to those that are born with both sexes?  Got an answer for that?

 

13 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

3.  Nothing wrong with early LDS leaders marrying teen brides. It was not illegal in those days.  There is no eternal law that gives an age of when a person can marry.  Hate to tell you but this age 18 thing did not come from God.  Its a fairly recent concept in western societies.  If you lived in those days you probably would not mind as well. You mind because you were brought up in a different time.

Do you think it is a moral issue when 57year old men who is already married, marries someone 4 decades younger than them?  Is telling them it is God's will that they marry them a moral idea?  Do you think 15 year old girls want to marry someone 57 year old?  While people did used to get married at a younger age, how common was it for someone 57 to marry a 15 year old?  Are you really going to defend that kind of behavior even during that time period?  If as you claim, it was common, show some data.  Until you do, it is just creepy and in my opinion immoral for a religious leader that is 57 years old take advantage of a 15 year old girl's beliefs.

 

13 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

4.  The Church does have a business to declare to the world eternal principles.  People are free to reject it but God is not changing with the calendar. 

I agree.  

 

13 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

5.  Are there more important things than the transgender issue?  YES.  Should the Church spend much time on it.  NO. Just because there are more important things does not mean one can't hold a position on the subject.  There are many issues of right and wrong, truth verses error and they vary in degrees of importance.    1+1=2.  If there are people out there saying 1+2=3 that is not a huge problem especially if it involves a tiny part of the population but its not incorrect to make a statement that even though there are people that say 1+1=3 that the truth is 1+1=2 regardless if it hurts people or regardless of what century or decade on lives in.

The church has a fixation on this kind of stuff.  We certainly have learned that over the past decade.  Why anyone who is gay or transgender would have anything to do with the church is beyond me.  I have no idea why you are making erroneous math calculations.  Maybe the church should go after children born hermaphrodites.  That seems like something they would love to spend time and money on.  After all, you can't possibly be both male and female.  It's God's will.  Until the church can answer that question, then they are not in any position to understand transgenders imo.

[sjdawg]

7 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

One does not have to be anyphobic in order to be uncomfortable sharing a stall. 

I don't generally share a stall with anyone.   

[Tacenda]

On 2/17/2017 at 4:08 PM, MormonVideoGame said:

Double standard 

This needs to be bumped up, and it should have a lot of upvotes, IMO. Thanks for sharing!

[Calm]

1 hour ago, carbon dioxide said:

Another option is to confront the person.  No physical violence but one can correct them on biology. 

Do you think it would be appropriate for a transgender person to come up to you in a bathroom and give you a lesson in biology?

[thesometimesaint]

9 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

No.  But you should probably inform the Bishop if you are transgendered.

Why, and how would I be able to prove it?