Gay Clergy- UMC Church Division

[bluebell]

43 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

That can change provided more information.  I'm open to the possibility so much so on this point I think change will come and relatively soon.  

Its happened before it'll happen again.  We're still building in the direction of truth.  We don't own the market, nor can we pretend our belief is complete.  Peace to you bluebell

It's our current theology but you're right, it could change.

[stemelbow]

8 minutes ago, bluebell said:

It's our current theology but you're right, it could change.

Thanks.  That was my only point here.  Don't know why I felt so obliged to butt in on you guys, but thanks. 

[Darren10]

11 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I disagree. Gay people are expected to follow the law of chastity +. Hetero people can date, kiss, cuddle, etc. yet those things are unacceptable for gay people in the church.

What is the path in eternity for a gay person who has made and kept all covenants and never entered any kind of SS relationship? What does that look like? What is that person's plan of happiness? Where is the theology on that?

The last I checked, heterosexuals need to follow the law of chastity as well. Yes, they may kiss, cuddle, date, etc. but so can homosexuals in the exact same manner of heterosexuals. These standards are NOT "unacceptable for gay people", they are unacceptable as "gay behavior" in the Church but that prohibition is equally applied to heterosexuals. There is no "gay standard" in the Church.

"What is the path in eternity for a gay person who has made and kept all covenants and never entered any kind of SS relationship? "

The exact same as any heterosexual who has kept his or her covenants and never entered into a SS relation. Why is that confusing?

Beyond personal sentiment, why are you seeking a gay standard in the Church? You are intentionally dividing gays against non gays in the Church. Why do you feel contempt for one standard for everyone? 

[stemelbow]

8 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

The last I checked, heterosexuals need to follow the law of chastity as well. Yes, they may kiss, cuddle, date, etc. but so can homosexuals in the exact same manner of heterosexuals. These standards are NOT "unacceptable for gay people", they are unacceptable as "gay behavior" in the Church but that prohibition is equally applied to heterosexuals. There is no "gay standard" in the Church.

 Really not much more to say to that. 

8 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

"What is the path in eternity for a gay person who has made and kept all covenants and never entered any kind of SS relationship? "

The exact same as any heterosexual who has kept his or her covenants and never entered into a SS relation. Why is that confusing?

Are you saying their attraction to those of the same sex is a mortal condition?  Are you sure of that?  That it's not an eternal element of who they are?  Are you sure of that? 

8 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

Beyond personal sentiment, why are you seeking a gay standard in the Church? You are intentionally dividing gays against non gays in the Church. Why do you feel contempt for one standard for everyone? 

God works on and with the individual. 

[Darren10]

34 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

 Really not much more to say to that. 

Are you saying their attraction to those of the same sex is a mortal condition?  Are you sure of that?  That it's not an eternal element of who they are?  Are you sure of that? 

God works on and with the individual. 

"Are you saying their attraction to those of the same sex is a mortal condition?  Are you sure of that?  That it's not an eternal element of who they are?  Are you sure of that? " - I am absolutely sure of that unless you can demonstrate how same sex attraction fits within the eternities.

"God works on and with the individual. " - Absolutely! And we all have the same standard to live by, no?

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

"Are you saying their attraction to those of the same sex is a mortal condition?  Are you sure of that?  That it's not an eternal element of who they are?  Are you sure of that? " - I am absolutely sure of that unless you can demonstrate how same sex attraction fits within the eternities.

Use your imagination.  IT can fit just fine.  It's not that hard to figure that out. 

Quote

"God works on and with the individual. " - Absolutely! And we all have the same standard to live by, no?

no.  Some are LDS and some are not.  Some have lived on remote islands scouring for food only to starve to death and some have been killed by their neighbors due to every disagreement imaginable.  The billions who live and have lived have lived such varied lives, it feels silly to think we all have one standard--that's the whole point of living by the degree of light we have. 

Edited May 2, 2017 by stemelbow

[RevTestament]

39 minutes ago, california boy said:

So just how does your God expect someone who is gay to learn natural affection for a woman?  Because if you don't have a path that a gay person can follow to learn this natural affection, then your whole argument goes down the tubes. 

i do not pretend to be an expert in the sex of the brain. I think that is complicated thing. I can really only speak from my personal experience so in that sense I cannot speak for someone who feels they are gay. There are some simple societies which seem to have no gay relationships. There are also some simple cannibalistic societies which seem to incorporate homosexual rites into their passage of becoming a male hunter. My personal belief is the less we are exposed to it, the less likely our brain is to become wired to it. I do not believe people are born gay, and I know that will be a controversial statement, but I believe studies with identical twins tends to bear that out. As a male I have been attracted to certain other males. although I didn't feel that attraction in a sexual way - but I can't really say I feel that attraction towards women either. Nothing seems to physically happen with me until I start kissing, etc. Then I may start thinking about that person, and start to have physical desires. It's not like I have seen a woman and immediately want to jump in bed with her or begin to ideate about that. For me its just being around women some. Playing with girls as a boy. Making friends. Talking to girls. I know there are gay men that have "girl friends" so I certainly don't have all the answers here on how that process of becoming/being gay happens, but certainly having natural friendships with girls at a young age I think has a large part to do with the sexual maturation process. Not getting exposed to pornography at a young age I believe is also important. It can definitely warp the mind. I believe our society has far too much preoccupation with sex, and far too much talk about it which children are getting exposed to down to a constant stream of sexualized ads. I believe seeing natural, healthy relationships between one's parents is also very important, and for some reason dysfunctional parental relationships seem to have negative impacts on the maturation of their children. So there is no "path" I can lay out for gay men to help them learn heterosexual attraction. I believe most of that path has happened by the time they are going into puberty. See the rest of my answer below.

13 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I disagree. Gay people are expected to follow the law of chastity +. Hetero people can date, kiss, cuddle, etc. yet those things are unacceptable for gay people in the church.

What is the path in eternity for a gay person who has made and kept all covenants and never entered any kind of SS relationship? What does that look like? What is that person's plan of happiness? Where is the theology on that?

The path for a gay person in the Church is admittedly not easy, but there are heterosexuals who impose celibacy on themselves until getting married or simply never marrying. I got married at 32 with no intercourse before that time. My wife had some ovarian cysts before we got married and the doctor repeatedly asked about her relations, and when my present wife repeatedly told him she was not having sex he repeatedly did not believe it over the course of several visits. Nevertheless, he finally did a test and found some cysts, which were causing her pain. But anyway that experience just goes to show how infrequent celibacy is in our society. The path for a SSA person in the Church is not easy, but it is not one for destination hell either. While a SSA person may not get sealed in this life, that does not mean they cannot advance in the gospel or cannot inherit things of the kingdom. Maybe not worrying about the destination so much, and just determining to make oneself a good Christian person would be the best approach. After all our Lord did recognize that some make themselves eunuchs for the sake of the Word. For instance I don't believe John the Baptist ever got married. I personally have a belief that priesthood marriage may be more about marrying people to the gospel than opposite sexes together. Could the physical just be a token of the spiritual?

Isaiah 62:5

5 ¶ For as a young man marrieth a virgin, so shall thy sons marry thee: and as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God ^arejoice over thee.

 

[HappyJackWagon]

56 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

1-The last I checked, heterosexuals need to follow the law of chastity as well. Yes, they may kiss, cuddle, date, etc. but so can homosexuals in the exact same manner of heterosexuals. These standards are NOT "unacceptable for gay people", they are unacceptable as "gay behavior" in the Church but that prohibition is equally applied to heterosexuals. There is no "gay standard" in the Church.

"What is the path in eternity for a gay person who has made and kept all covenants and never entered any kind of SS relationship? "

2- The exact same as any heterosexual who has kept his or her covenants and never entered into a SS relation. Why is that confusing?

3-Beyond personal sentiment, why are you seeking a gay standard in the Church? You are intentionally dividing gays against non gays in the Church. Why do you feel contempt for one standard for everyone? 

1- This just isn't true. Gay people are told they should not act on their SSA which means they could not kiss, cuddle, hold hands etc. none of which is included in the hetero law of chastity. Hetero people can do those things and be have temple recommends, hold callings, and exercise priesthood. I don't believe an openly gay man would be allowed to bring his partner to church, show affection as described, and still be permitted to participate fully. Are you disputing this? Are you claiming that the same standard exists for gays as hetero in expressing their sxuality in even chaste ways?

2- If it is so clear, would you please explain it to me. How does that gay person progress through eternity and God's plan of happiness as a gay person who must always be alone? Seriously, I'd love to hear how this is the same as for straight people.

3- This is laughable. I'm not dividing anyone. The division is there and it's been instigated by top leadership. I don't feel "contempt" but rather sadness and dissatisfaction with a "one standard for everyone" approach that does not include everyone. The church does not have a positive message for gays and their pursuit of happiness in the church or eternity.

[Darren10]

59 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Use your imagination.  IT can fit just fine.  It's not that hard to figure that out. 

no.  Some are LDS and some are not.  Some have lived on remote islands scouring for food only to starve to death and some have been killed by their neighbors due to every disagreement imaginable.  The billions who live and have lived have lived such varied lives, it feels silly to think we all have one standard--that's the whole point of living by the degree of light we have. 

"Use your imagination.  IT can fit just fine.  It's not that hard to figure that out. " - Gay gods in the eternities? Hmmm, let me imagine......ummmmmmmm, NO! Can't see it. And if something cannot reach exaltation it is damnable.

"no.  Some are LDS and some are not." - So?

"Some have lived on remote islands scouring for food only to starve to death and some have been killed by their neighbors due to every disagreement imaginable." - So?

"The billions who live and have lived have lived such varied lives" - So?

Aren't the vast majority of these cases the result of NOT living as we should? As for external elements such as living "on remote islands scouring for food", aren't we to be charitable and give where and when we can? Obviously no services can be rendered upon those on "remote islands" as the "scour for food", but we do our best.

By living the same standards I was not talking about conditions in life but what is morally expected of us all. To that the Church has one standard for everyone. God has one standard or all. There is not "gay standard" to live by. If so, where is it?

Edited May 2, 2017 by Darren10

[Darren10]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

1- This just isn't true. Gay people are told they should not act on their SSA which means they could not kiss, cuddle, hold hands etc. none of which is included in the hetero law of chastity. Hetero people can do those things and be have temple recommends, hold callings, and exercise priesthood. I don't believe an openly gay man would be allowed to bring his partner to church, show affection as described, and still be permitted to participate fully. Are you disputing this? Are you claiming that the same standard exists for gays as hetero in expressing their sxuality in even chaste ways?

2- If it is so clear, would you please explain it to me. How does that gay person progress through eternity and God's plan of happiness as a gay person who must always be alone? Seriously, I'd love to hear how this is the same as for straight people.

3- This is laughable. I'm not dividing anyone. The division is there and it's been instigated by top leadership. I don't feel "contempt" but rather sadness and dissatisfaction with a "one standard for everyone" approach that does not include everyone. The church does not have a positive message for gays and their pursuit of happiness in the church or eternity.

"This just isn't true. Gay people are told they should not act on their SSA which means they could not kiss, cuddle, hold hands etc. none of which is included in the hetero law of chastity." - What are you talking about? Are you saying that if a gay male kisses and cuddles an holds hands with a female he'll be in trouble with the Church? That's against Church standards? Huh? What they cannot do is kiss, cuddle, hold hands with those of their same gender, and neither can heterosexuals. What you're advocating for is an acceptance of the Church upon same sex relations and you cite living revelation as an example of how that could come about. While hypothetically it could; but there is an awful lot of history, traditions and doctrines that need explaining in order for that to happen. In fact, I cannot foresee such a revelation to happen without explicitly nullifying so much doctrine and tradition currently governing sexual behavior.

"If it is so clear, would you please explain it to me. How does that gay person progress through eternity and God's plan of happiness as a gay person who must always be alone? Seriously, I'd love to hear how this is the same as for straight people." - That's my point: he can't *as a gay person* but a gay person must abide *by the exact same standards* as a non-gay person to pass through the eternities. You seem to be stretching for "a gay way" to exaltation. How is that possible? And if so, then would not that create a secondary way towards exaltation? How do two males pro-create spirit children in the eternities? How would two females do so? I am not talking mechanics for nobody knows the exact processor "procedures" for an exalted God to create spirit children but all the understanding of pro-creation and creating life among God's children is sexual relations between man and woman. Knowing we have a Heavenly Mother, doesn't that pretty much deny a "gay pathway" to exaltation? Yet you seem to say that there must needs be such a path. How do you see better than past and living prophets? How in the cosmos did you get into a position to declare redemption through the Atonement for gay couples in gay relations without them relinquishing such relations?

"I'm not dividing anyone." - Oh, yes you are. You are creating an alternative path to exaltation. A path which has been explicitly condemned since forever. By creating an alternative path or leading people to an alternative path you are naturally dividing people. You feel contempt for top leaders for dividing the people when in reality they teach unity, sir. They teach that everyone has to live by the same standards; not create new standards for "new people" or for a "newly acceptable social standard" of people.

"The church does not have a positive message for gays and their pursuit of happiness in the church or eternity." - Live by your covenants and all the promises of the eternities are yours. That's not positive? Now you want to create an alternative positive. You're saying to those in homosexual lifestyles, "don't worry about repenting, for God will forgive you as he will forgive anyone else."

Question: if a heterosexual engages in homosexual activity would that be a sin of which would be needed to repent?

Edited to ad: "That's my point: he can't *as a gay person* but a gay person must abide *by the exact same standards* as a non-gay person to pass through the eternities." - Likewise, this also means that a non-gay person must live by the exact same standards as a gay person to pass through the eternities. That is perfect equality. By saying "this group can do their thing and that group can do theirs", you are naturally dividing people.

Edited May 2, 2017 by Darren10

[california boy]

1 hour ago, RevTestament said:

i do not pretend to be an expert in the sex of the brain. I think that is complicated thing. I can really only speak from my personal experience so in that sense I cannot speak for someone who feels they are gay. There are some simple societies which seem to have no gay relationships. There are also some simple cannibalistic societies which seem to incorporate homosexual rites into their passage of becoming a male hunter. My personal belief is the less we are exposed to it, the less likely our brain is to become wired to it. I do not believe people are born gay, and I know that will be a controversial statement, but I believe studies with identical twins tends to bear that out. As a male I have been attracted to certain other males. although I didn't feel that attraction in a sexual way - but I can't really say I feel that attraction towards women either. Nothing seems to physically happen with me until I start kissing, etc. Then I may start thinking about that person, and start to have physical desires. It's not like I have seen a woman and immediately want to jump in bed with her or begin to ideate about that. For me its just being around women some. Playing with girls as a boy. Making friends. Talking to girls. I know there are gay men that have "girl friends" so I certainly don't have all the answers here on how that process of becoming/being gay happens, but certainly having natural friendships with girls at a young age I think has a large part to do with the sexual maturation process. Not getting exposed to pornography at a young age I believe is also important. It can definitely warp the mind. I believe our society has far too much preoccupation with sex, and far too much talk about it which children are getting exposed to down to a constant stream of sexualized ads. I believe seeing natural, healthy relationships between one's parents is also very important, and for some reason dysfunctional parental relationships seem to have negative impacts on the maturation of their children. So there is no "path" I can lay out for gay men to help them learn heterosexual attraction. I believe most of that path has happened by the time they are going into puberty. See the rest of my answer below.

The path for a gay person in the Church is admittedly not easy, but there are heterosexuals who impose celibacy on themselves until getting married or simply never marrying. I got married at 32 with no intercourse before that time. My wife had some ovarian cysts before we got married and the doctor repeatedly asked about her relations, and when my present wife repeatedly told him she was not having sex he repeatedly did not believe it over the course of several visits. Nevertheless, he finally did a test and found some cysts, which were causing her pain. But anyway that experience just goes to show how infrequent celibacy is in our society. The path for a SSA person in the Church is not easy, but it is not one for destination hell either. While a SSA person may not get sealed in this life, that does not mean they cannot advance in the gospel or cannot inherit things of the kingdom. Maybe not worrying about the destination so much, and just determining to make oneself a good Christian person would be the best approach. After all our Lord did recognize that some make themselves eunuchs for the sake of the Word. For instance I don't believe John the Baptist ever got married. I personally have a belief that priesthood marriage may be more about marrying people to the gospel than opposite sexes together. Could the physical just be a token of the spiritual?

Isaiah 62:5

5 ¶ For as a young man marrieth a virgin, so shall thy sons marry thee: and as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God ^arejoice over thee.

 

Quite honestly, there are so many misconceptions in what you think about gay people, it is apparent to me that you have decided to try and fit in what it must be like to be gay through your own eyes and certainly without much engagement with someone who is actually gay.  Your response is more like a cross your fingers, wish list of what it must be like to be gay.  

I would be more than happy to discuss this with you, but first you have to want to know something about this issue from someone who is actually gay and want to listen to gain some understanding.  I can certainly tell from what you wrote, that has not yet happened in your life.  

In any event, you haven't really explained your path to making a gay person straight.  Did you give up on that?  Or do they just have to wish hard enough to be straight?

 

Edited May 2, 2017 by california boy

[bluebell]

26 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

"This just isn't true. Gay people are told they should not act on their SSA which means they could not kiss, cuddle, hold hands etc. none of which is included in the hetero law of chastity." - What are you talking about? Are you saying that if a gay male kisses and cuddles an holds hands with a female he'll be in trouble with the Church? That's against Church standards? Huh? What they cannot do is kiss, cuddle, hold hands with those of their same gender, and neither can heterosexuals. What you're advocating for is an acceptance of the Church upon same sex relations and you cite living revelation as an example of how that could come about. While hypothetically it could; but there is an awful lot of history, traditions and doctrines that need explaining in order for that to happen. In fact, I cannot foresee such a revelation to happen without explicitly nullifying so much doctrine and tradition currently governing sexual behavior.

"If it is so clear, would you please explain it to me. How does that gay person progress through eternity and God's plan of happiness as a gay person who must always be alone? Seriously, I'd love to hear how this is the same as for straight people." - That's my point: he can't *as a gay person* but a gay person must abide *by the exact same standards* as a non-gay person to pass through the eternities. You seem to be stretching for "a gay way" to exaltation. How is that possible? And if so, then would not that create a secondary way towards exaltation? How do two males pro-create spirit children in the eternities? How would two females do so? I am not talking mechanics for nobody knows the exact processor "procedures" for an exalted God to create spirit children but all the understanding of pro-creation and creating life among God's children is sexual relations between man and woman. Knowing we have a Heavenly Mother, doesn't that pretty much deny a "gay pathway" to exaltation? Yet you seem to say that there must needs be such a path. How do you see better than past and living prophets? How in the cosmos did you get into a position to declare redemption through the Atonement for gay couples in gay relations without them relinquishing such relations?

"I'm not dividing anyone." - Oh, yes you are. You are creating an alternative path to exaltation. A path which has been explicitly condemned since forever. By creating an alternative path or leading people to an alternative path you are naturally dividing people. You feel contempt for top leaders for dividing the people when in reality they teach unity, sir. They teach that everyone has to live by the same standards; not create new standards for "new people" or for a "newly acceptable social standard" of people.

"The church does not have a positive message for gays and their pursuit of happiness in the church or eternity." - Live by your covenants and all the promises of the eternities are yours. That's not positive? Now you want to create an alternative positive. You're saying to those in homosexual lifestyles, "don't worry about repenting, for God will forgive you as he will forgive anyone else."

Question: if a heterosexual engages in homosexual activity would that be a sin of which would be needed to repent?

Edited to ad: "That's my point: he can't *as a gay person* but a gay person must abide *by the exact same standards* as a non-gay person to pass through the eternities." - Likewise, this also means that a non-gay person must live by the exact same standards as a gay person to pass through the eternities. That is perfect equality. By saying "this group can do their thing and that group can do theirs", you are naturally dividing people.

A heterosexual member of the church can kiss and cuddle with a person they are sexually attracted to and still be in good standing in the church.  A homosexual member cannot.  

That is where the different standards comes into play.

[california boy]

25 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

"This just isn't true. Gay people are told they should not act on their SSA which means they could not kiss, cuddle, hold hands etc. none of which is included in the hetero law of chastity." - What are you talking about. Are you saying that if a gay male kisses and cuddles an holds hands with a female he'll be in trouble with the Church?

This is all i had to read to know you have no idea what it even means to be gay.  Do you really think a gay man should use women just for kissing, cuddling and holding hands like some kind of stuff animal?  

[Darren10]

4 minutes ago, bluebell said:

A heterosexual member of the church can kiss and cuddle with a person they are sexually attracted to and still be in good standing in the church.  A homosexual member cannot.  

That is where the different standards comes into play.

"A heterosexual member of the church can kiss and cuddle with a person they are sexually attracted to and still be in good standing in the church.  A homosexual member cannot. " - That is100% correct.

"That is where the different standards comes into play." - I do not recall the standard being "to the person you are sexually attracted to" by the Church but in moral conduct. Gay relations directly contradict the doctrines to exaltation, do they not? Does not the Church admonish, teach, support, guide, and direct its members towards exaltation?  Thus, there is no difference in behavioral standards, correct?

If, by any chance the Church taught people to achieve something less than exaltation, then, yes, there would be lots of room for homosexual relations within the Church.

[Darren10]

14 minutes ago, california boy said:

This is all i had to read to know you have no idea what it even means to be gay.  Do you really think a gay man should use women just for kissing, cuddling and holding hands like some kind of stuff animal?  

"This is all i had to read to know you have no idea what it even means to be gay." - Being gay *means* being sexually attracted to others of the same gender, no? Did you mean "what it's like to be gay"?

"Do you really think a gay man should use women just for kissing, cuddling and holding hands like some kind of stuff animal?" - No. Do you? In fact, I think a gay man should "use" a woman to love, support, protect, and have a family with. Don't you?

"...and have a family with" - (through marriage of course but we'll leave that out so you can answer the "don't you" question in the context of how a gay man should "use" a woman).

Edited May 2, 2017 by Darren10

[rockpond]

2 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

"That is where the different standards comes into play." - I do not recall the standard being "to the person you are sexually attracted to" by the Church but in moral conduct.

Romantic kissing and cuddling with someone you are not sexually attracted to constitutes using that person and I would consider that immoral.

[california boy]

31 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

Question: if a heterosexual engages in homosexual activity would that be a sin of which would be needed to repent?

I know you are not going to understand this.  As you probably know, I married because church leaders promised that if I just marry a woman, then I would eventually not be gay.  It was the church's path to "how to make a gay person straight."  As you probably also know, that program was such a disaster, they have since discontinued that idea.

But this is what I wanted to tell you.  Every time I engaged in heterosexual activity while I was married, it felt wrong and immoral.  I knew it was something I should not be doing.  It is probably a similar feeling that you would have if you had if you had homosexual activity.  Sometimes you don't need to be told by a church leader what is morally wrong.

[Darren10]

Californiaboy;

The context of this dialogue is in light of "passing through the eternities, not just the social aspects of being gay.

[Darren10]

4 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Romantic kissing and cuddling with someone you are not sexually attracted to constitutes using that person and I would consider that immoral.

Then don't do it.

[california boy]

6 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

"This is all i had to read to know you have no idea what it even means to be gay." - Being gay *means* being sexually attracted to others of the same gender, no? Did you mean "what it's like to be gay"?

"Do you really think a gay man should use women just for kissing, cuddling and holding hands like some kind of stuff animal?" - No. Do you? in fact, I think a gay man should use a woman to love, support, protect, and have a family with. Don't you?

lol.  Honestly Darren, is this something you are so blinded by, that you simply refuse to understand a gay person has no attraction to a woman?  How would a gay man use a woman to love, support, protect and have a family with?  

I already went down this rabbit hole.  Ask my wife if she thinks this is a good path for someone who is gay to follow.

[Darren10]

2 minutes ago, california boy said:

I know you are not going to understand this.  As you probably know, I married because church leaders promised that if I just marry a woman, then I would eventually not be gay.  It was the church's path to "how to make a gay person straight."  As you probably also know, that program was such a disaster, they have since discontinued that idea.

But this is what I wanted to tell you.  Every time I engaged in heterosexual activity while I was married, it felt wrong and immoral.  I knew it was something I should not be doing.  It is probably a similar feeling that you would have if you had if you had homosexual activity.  Sometimes you don't need to be told by a church leader what is morally wrong.

"I know you are not going to understand this." - Thanks for the condescension. The division continues!!!

"As you probably also know..." - Ah, a little hope for me and my ignorance. unity takes a small step forward!  

" Sometimes you don't need to be told by a church leader what is morally wrong." - Unless it is morally wrong.

How does being an active homosexual help you gain exaltation? (I know you are not a Mormon but that is the gist of this dialogue, not merely what a person "feels" but how a homosexual relation help people progress to "become God" in the LDS meaning of that term.

[rockpond]

8 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

Then don't do it.

Obviously.  We're explaining why there is a different standard.

[HappyJackWagon]

28 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

"This just isn't true. Gay people are told they should not act on their SSA which means they could not kiss, cuddle, hold hands etc. none of which is included in the hetero law of chastity." - What are you talking about? Are you saying that if a gay male kisses and cuddles an holds hands with a female he'll be in trouble with the Church? That's against Church standards? Huh? What they cannot do is kiss, cuddle, hold hands with those of their same gender, and neither can heterosexuals.

What this means is that a gay person cannot express love to someone they are attracted to and could love in an intimate way. Heteros are allowed to do this, gays are not. So that standard is NOT exactly the same. What if you were told you could never kiss, cuddle, hold hands, put your arm around, love, dedicate your life to someone you love? Would that sound like a happy life to you? What if you were told you would have an eternity of loneliness where you could not have any of those things? Would that be something you would aspire to? Hetero people have a plan for happiness for them to follow. Gay people do not. They are told to be alone or seek intimacy with a person to whom they have little to no attraction for. I'm struggling with your obtuse refusal to recognize this difference.

What you're advocating for is an acceptance of the Church upon same sex relations and you cite living revelation as an example of how that could come about. While hypothetically it could; but there is an awful lot of history, traditions and doctrines that need explaining in order for that to happen. In fact, I cannot foresee such a revelation to happen without explicitly nullifying so much doctrine and tradition currently governing sexual behavior.

Is holding hands, kissing, cuddling etc breaking the law of chastity? If there is a difference when answering for a hetero person and a gay person, then the law is not applied equally.

"If it is so clear, would you please explain it to me. How does that gay person progress through eternity and God's plan of happiness as a gay person who must always be alone? Seriously, I'd love to hear how this is the same as for straight people." - That's my point: he can't *as a gay person* but a gay person must abide *by the exact same standards* as a non-gay person to pass through the eternities.

So a gay person must change to no longer be gay. Is that your answer? Does the gay person have an eternity of pretending to be something they're not? Sounds fantastic. Who wouldn't want that? I hope that somehow you can recognize that it is not the "exact same standards" when hetero people can behave in ways gay people cannot as it relates to their identity and attraction.

You seem to be stretching for "a gay way" to exaltation. How is that possible? And if so, then would not that create a secondary way towards exaltation? How do two males pro-create spirit children in the eternities?

I don't know how spirit children are created/organized? And neither do you. (at least not through LDS teachings)

How would two females do so?

I don't know how spirit children are created/organized? And neither do you. (at least not through LDS teachings)

I am not talking mechanics for nobody knows the exact processor "procedures" for an exalted God to create spirit children but all the understanding of pro-creation and creating life among God's children is sexual relations between man and woman. Knowing we have a Heavenly Mother, doesn't that pretty much deny a "gay pathway" to exaltation?

Just because I have a wife, and I'm happy in my marriage and my family doesn't mean that is the only way to be. My family situation doesn't necessitate every other person doing exactly as I have done. I'm glad you at least admit to not knowing how spirit children are created, yet that is one of your main points against SSM. "How do two males (or women) procreate spirit children in the eternities?" How can you use that as an argument when you don't know yourself?

Yet you seem to say that there must needs be such a path. How do you see better than past and living prophets? How in the cosmos did you get into a position to declare redemption through the Atonement for gay couples in gay relations without them relinquishing such relations?

Good question. Maybe they are stuck in the culture and time in which they were raised and can't consider any thing differently. Maybe they haven't asked and are relying on what they consider to be "common sense" of their time and culture. Maybe it's hard for them to give up past prejudices that they came by honestly like most other people of their generation. I wish they could see it more clearly. For me, I am not declaring anything on behalf of the church but rather pointing out a gaping hole in the plan of salvation. I'm pointing out the weakness of the doctrine in this area. I'm suggesting that a more complete theology would help gay people not to be alienated by the church because I feel that alienation is contrary to the will of God. I follow the counsel given in the last conference to trust and act on the spirit when it is given and the spirit has told me the treatment of gays in the church is not godly.

"I'm not dividing anyone." - Oh, yes you are. You are creating an alternative path to exaltation. A path which has been explicitly condemned since forever. By creating an alternative path or leading people to an alternative path you are naturally dividing people. You feel contempt for top leaders for dividing the people when in reality they teach unity, sir. They teach that everyone has to live by the same standards; not create new standards for "new people" or for a "newly acceptable social standard" of people.

You give me far too much credit. I have "created" nothing. I am asking questions and pointing out gaps in the plan that a more fully developed theology might consider.

"The church does not have a positive message for gays and their pursuit of happiness in the church or eternity." - Live by your covenants and all the promises of the eternities are yours. That's not positive? Now you want to create an alternative positive. You're saying to those in homosexual lifestyles, "don't worry about repenting, for God will forgive you as he will forgive anyone else."

I'm suggesting that "live by your covenants and all the promises of the eternities are yours" rings very hollow for a gay person who is destined for eternal loneliness in the church paradigm.

Question: if a heterosexual engages in homosexual activity would that be a sin of which would be needed to repent?

Why would a hetero person wish to engage in a gay relationship? I suspect it's the same answer as "why would a gay person wish to engage in a hetero relationship?" In each case, that relationship would be against their natural attraction and would less likely to be sustainable.

Edited to ad: "That's my point: he can't *as a gay person* but a gay person must abide *by the exact same standards* as a non-gay person to pass through the eternities." - Likewise, this also means that a non-gay person must live by the exact same standards as a gay person to pass through the eternities. That is perfect equality. By saying "this group can do their thing and that group can do theirs", you are naturally dividing people.

It's hard to respond to something like this but I will try  within the text.

Also, a bit of friendly advice. You said in a previous post...

Quote

Gay gods in the eternities? Hmmm, let me imagine......ummmmmmmm, NO! Can't see it. And if something cannot reach exaltation it is damnable.

No need to yell. Your exclamation is bordering on homophobia.  Your disgust at the possibility is duly noted.

[Darren10]

2 minutes ago, california boy said:

lol.  Honestly Darren, is this something you are so blinded by, that you simply refuse to understand a gay person has no attraction to a woman?  How would a gay man use a woman to love, support, protect and have a family with?  

I already went down this rabbit hole.  Ask my wife if she thinks this is a good path for someone who is gay to follow.

"is this something you are so blinded by" - Thanks. more division! HappyJack is winning!  

"that you simply refuse to understand a gay person has no attraction to a woman?" - Oh, I fully realize that. When did I ever say anything to the contrary. Again, this dialogue is about how a homosexual relation helps you "pass through the eternities". I say it will eternally you. What's your take and why?

"How would a gay man use a woman to love, support, protect and have a family with?" - I do it, why can't a gay man? Why do you underestimate gay people. Besides, I was not saying that they *should do it* or *have to do it*, only live a good moral life outside of homosexual activity and the eternities are theirs just as much as any heterosexual who does*the exact same thing*. That's eternal equality is it not?

" Ask my wife if she thinks this is a good path for someone who is gay to follow." - That's not what this thread is about unless she's a prophet and can speak authoritatively as to how this will help you "pass through the eternities" and to exaltation.

[stemelbow]

Watching Darren10 talk about what it's like to be gay to a gay person reminds me of Ahab telling women here what it's like to be women.  It's comical, painful, and sad at the same time.  Please, Darren, stop, for the sake of all that is sane.