Gay Beehive Delivers Prepared Speech in F&T Meeting - Ends as Expected

[carbon dioxide]

4 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Two choices - change the doctrine or lose members/potential members who cannot accept the doctrine.
Really, what other choice is there?

And while the momentum isn't moving as fast as some would like to claim, I think we can all see where it is heading.
It seems we have many among us who would like to see the Church become a non-denominational all inclusive group dedicated only to praising Christ in every meeting.

And if they change the doctrine, they lose far more members who know that such a change would be accepting wickedness.   There may be a number of members who don't understand the gospel and think that its better to look upon sin with a great degree of allowance but most do not that I personally know. 

[carbon dioxide]

4 hours ago, rockpond said:

Well, it looks like we're getting to where most of these threads go and now we're discussing the rightness/wrongness of homosexuality.  I don't really need that in my life so I'll bow out now.  But I'll say this...

Savannah and her testimony are a symbol of several facts:

1. There are LGBT youth in the church.
2. LGBT youth in the church are unlikely to stay "in the closet" regarding their LGBT-ness.
3. LGBT youth have testimonies of the gospel and the Savior that are just as strong/real as their non-LGBT counterparts.
4. Today's youth will be the leaders of the church in the 2020's and 2030's.
5. The first four facts above make current Church policy challenging to sustain.

Yes on points 1-3.  Point number 4 is also true but the vast majority of them are not LBGT.  If we accept the same ratio in the church of LBGT as outside the church according to the CDC, only 1 in 20 members would fall in that group.  So 19 out of 20 church leaders would not be LBGT.   Thus point 5 is not valid.  The Church can sustain itself even if every LBGT was to leave.  We have seen a number of examples in other churches that have accepted LBGT issues and it has lead to a very strong division.  It would be even worse in the LDS Church.  If the Church was to every go beyond what it does now and accept gay relationships, we could see a split in the church like during the times after Joseph Smth died but I think it would be a much stronger division.  I know what side I am going with. 

Edited June 16, 2017 by carbon dioxide

[Calm]

 

31 minutes ago, birdgirl said:

I think if she was heterosexual (as far as anyone knew) and a 12 year old said she didn't know if God spoke to her but she felt loved and accepted by Him church leaders would tell her that was how her Heavenly Father communicated via the Holy Ghost. 

Quite possibly.  If that was all they said, I think they would be wrong though.

But she didn't say she didn't know if God talked to her from the report, she said she didn't know if God talks to people at all.  I think there is a significant difference.  She is saying not that she has not received a personal witness about whatever, but that she is not certain anyone can.  It questions the possibility that the First Vision and all revelations since then are anything but frauds or wishful thinking.

It is possible that she meant the first, but said the second.  Given the fact she went over it with her parents extensively, I am prone to believe she understood the implication.

Edited June 16, 2017 by Calm

[The Nehor]

8 hours ago, cinepro said:

1. I believe that if God is there, he knows I am perfect, just the way I am.

I am going to go a bit against the grain and say this, absent everything else in the testimony, is the most egregious false doctrine. God and/or Christ did not spend a lot of time talking about how everyone is perfect just the way they are. That sentiment is only holy canon in terrible after-school specials.

[Garden Girl]

2 hours ago, cacheman said:

Hi Garden Girl,

I agree with your call for respect and compassion for everyone despite differences.  However, as a fellow plant lover I feel compelled to correct your statement.  There are in fact many plant species that propagate asexually.  It is not uncommon or obscure.  Dandelions are a common example

cacheman

Hello cacheman...  Well then, that explains my backyard...

GG

 

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

True, gays that marry can raise up children also. 

Tacenda... yes, they can and do adopt children, or obtain children to raise by using some other method such as artificial insemination.  But two women, or two men, cannot physically create life.  But through means such as adoption, gay married couples are able to experience the joys of raising children as a family.

GG

[USU78]

Just gotta say it: the parents' choices here do not pass the smell test

[Hamba Tuhan]

58 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

Nobody is perfect.

Exactly. Implicit in the great Atonement that is the centrepoint of all Christian belief and practice is the crystal-clear message that not one of us is perfect 'just the way we are'. To deny this point is, in essence, to deny the Christ.

Edited June 16, 2017 by Hamba Tuhan

[clarkgoble]

42 minutes ago, Gray said:

Why so cynical? Do you take the same attitude when GAs bear testimony on camera, no doubt with rehearsal before hand?

I assume the apostles doing so have a preconceived message they are trying to communicate that goes beyond their testimony. It might be a message I agree with but it is clearly all preplanned and intended to have an effect.

[Calm]

8 hours ago, Gillebre said:

As someone who themselves is in the position of being attracted to their own gender, I know how this feels. I think it's important to have clear expectations and a sound understanding of what these feelings mean in relation to basic Gospel teachings and guidance from living Prophets. Entering into a same-sex marriage is an act of apostasy, a complete rejection of standards of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Those who decide to marry another of their own gender are always free to attend services and participate as much as they can, but they do not have the privilege of being members of the Church and receiving the blessings of that membership.

The truth is that most often this feels like an impossible decision to make. How do you choose between feelings that come to you as natural and fundamental as companionship, love, and the core teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ and the Gospel of Jesus Christ? It's a choice that everyone must make in one form or another. It's a choice I must make everyday, and the answer, in my experience so far, is this: Can I put everything else aside and simply hold onto every experience I've had that has taught me to trust my Savior? These are terrible burdens to bear, and there are other kinds of problems that other people must face having nothing to do with attractions. I can choose to lay down what I want, to put it aside, for the sake of my trust in Jesus Christ. He's my mentor and closest Friend, and I've learned to trust my spiritual instincts and intuition. This young woman will make the choice for her own life, and those who love her will have to make it also. No one should be treated or valued less because of how they feel or the way they choose to pursue their own happiness, but the Lord's standards are more clear than they've ever been: don't expect to stay a member of His Church, and receive the blessings thereof, if you choose to completely leave it's teachings behind by marrying someone of your own gender. 

We need an increase of compassion as the Savior had on every sinner He ministered to. We need peace in our hearts to live without a spirit of condemnation in these days where diversity of how one chooses to live is perhaps greater than ever before.

For me, just as an onlooker and not knowing what else might have been going on in the background, I wish that she had been allowed to finish and that you were then able to follow her as the needed compassion and doctrinal correction and most important of all example of how one can walk in faith within the current structure of the Church, but life doesn't work the way we would like to script it usually.

[Rain]

1 hour ago, Ouagadougou said:

But it would be ok with you if a parent stood behind a child as young as 5 and whispered every word into this child's ear to then repeat to the entire congregation as a  personal "testimony?"  

What gave you that idea?  (real question.  Not rhetorical).

No, that wouldn't be ok with me.  I even held my children back on giving their testimonies till I felt they actually had a testimony and were not repeating what everyone else said. 

Edited June 16, 2017 by Rain

[clarkgoble]

45 minutes ago, Calm said:

For me, just as an onlooker and not knowing what else might have been going on in the background, I wish that she had been allowed to finish and that you were then able to follow her as the needed compassion and doctrinal correction and most important of all example of how one can walk in faith within the current structure of the Church, but life doesn't work the way we would like to script it usually.

Yes. While I'm a bit skeptical of how things shook out - especially the very unusual filming - the ideal situation was what you describe. It was an odd situation all around. The Bishop, who apparently was friends with the family and familiar with things, was gone. The Stake President happened to be there and was presiding. Lots of people not of the ward were apparently there - why isn't clear. (Baby blessing perhaps?) It's very unusual no matter what one thinks. I'd say the Stake President, from my very limited information, probably didn't act ideally. But indisputably the family in question didn't either. (Seriously - the solution is to make a viral video attacking the church and go on a gay podcast?)

[Darren10]

10 hours ago, cinepro said:

 

Another interesting chapter in Church history (or culture?) for the internet age:

 

 

 

 

1) Filming in sacrament is not allowed / discouraged.

2) Reading a prepared testimony is discouraged.

3) This was clearly a propaganda ploy, most likely from the child's parents to us the pulpit of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to actively promote being lesbian and gay in general as good.

4) The propagators used an untouchable spokesperson, that being a 12 year old girl, in order to promote what is officially sinful behavior according to LDS doctrine and standards. That is, being gay is not a sin, living a homosexual lifestyle is. The 12 year old girl clearly promoted the latter.

5) She is not a "mistake". Mistakes will be on her end, and most likely her parent's end, not our Heavenly Parent's end.

6) Absolutely her Heavenly Parents love her, and beyond humanly measurable. That's precisely why they (citing them here in order to keep in harmony with her testimony) have established in order to live with them for all eternity. When one cannot, by choice, live certain standards, living with them and as them is in jeopardy.

7) I love this 12 year old girl. She seems sweet.

8 ) I firmly stand against what she is using the LDS church's facilities and resources to promote that which is against LDS doctrines and standards.

9) I firmly hold her parents accountable if they had anything to do with encouraging and enabling this 12 year old girl to make the speech she did.

10) The presiding priesthood holder intervened soon after I was asking myself, when he would intervene and stop the speech. Good for him.

11) I got a lot of dialogue to catch up with.

Edited June 16, 2017 by Darren10

[Darren10]

9 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

What false doctrine was taught? Can you provide an example or two?

What false doctrines were corrected by the leader who stood up after telling this girl to sit down? There were no corrections? I assume there would have been if some false doctrine had been taught.

I find this video heartbreaking. This is a brave girl who couldn't finish speaking because the leaders were too threatened by what she was saying or perhaps feared what she might say.

I'm still trying to process this. Heartbreaking.

Example 1: She, and, by proxy, every other gay person, may live a life with a gay partner and get, by implication, full approval of her Heavenly Parents.

(Are they gay...can they be gay and exalted according to LDS doctrine?)

Example 2: She implies that her / our Heavenly Parents made her as gay in order to be gay and live a gay lifestyle with a gay partner, including "having a family" with that partner.

Which of these are in accordance to LDS doctrine?

The leader should have corrected the doctrine explicitly and did not do so I agree. After testifying that we are all unique, he should have set forth what the LDS Church 's standards and beliefs are regarding temple marriage and living a gay lifestyle.

"I find this video heartbreaking."

You find lots of things heatbreaking and it seems that gives you authority to denounce things. She sohlud not have been allowed to finish. if anything she should have been given less time up on the pulpit.

"This is a brave girl..."

You see, an 'untouchable". Who wants to attack a "brave girl" who is young and thus a "brave [little] girl". People feel yucky to attack a "brave little girl" and thus she was most likely chosen, most likely by her parents, to be used as a token symbol to promote gay lifestyle as an eternal positive despite the LDS Church's clear position on the opposite.

" because the leaders were too threatened by what she was saying or perhaps feared what she might say"

So, it's the leaders who are bad. You disdain LDS church leaders regularly so why not now? you are consistent.

"I'm still trying to process this. Heartbreaking."

I think my bunny slippers are crying right now. I should step away for a bit as well.

 

[Darren10]

10 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Did God create her?

If God did not make her that way did God make a mistake?

Does he not love her?

What is wrong with her statements?

I answered these already before reading your post so I'll summarize:

Yes.

He didn't. all mistakes will be hers and whomever put her up to this stunt. most likely it was her parents.

Yes.

Being gay is not a sin, living an active gay lifestyle with a gay partner is.

[Darren10]

10 hours ago, cinepro said:

The bolded lines in the summary above are probably the part that would be considered "false doctrine."

22-24; 26 are not wrong at all in and of themselves. in the context which she is promoting these eternal truths is where doctrinal corruption sets in.

#27 Is a direct no-no as that directly reinforces her promotion of living a gay lifestyle with a gay partner.

[Darren10]

10 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

It's a forum for sharing beliefs & hopes (which this girl did) but only if those hopes and beliefs pass the censorship test.

I'd say that it is a forum to share hopes and dreams according to LDS standards and doctrines. If I get yup and bear my testimony that I hope to one day be a millionaire and close it with just that, there really is no faith promotion there. If I go up and say I feel God accepts me being a homosexual and to one day marry a gay man (whom I am attracted to) and raise a family with, that is contrary to LDS standards and beliefs. I have a right to feel that way and to share it, but I do not have a right to share that n a church which officially believes against it.

I also think that fast and testimony meeting has become so routine that "brave little girls" could go up and actively promote gay a lifestyle and it'll touch many LDS members hearts...or break them, whichever comes first.

[MormonVideoGame]

34 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

4) The propagators used an untouchable spokesperson, that being a 12 year old girl, in order to promote what is officially sinful behavior according to LDS doctrine and standards. That is, being gay is not a sin, living a homosexual lifestyle is. The 12 year old girl clearly promoted the latter.

in your opinion. FYI the American Psychological Association reports, " Some report difficulty coping with intense guilt over the failure to live a virtuous life and inability to stop committing unforgivable sins, as defined by their religion."  

http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/therapeutic-response.pdf

For married heterosexuals the law of chastity is easier. Not saying it is easy, but it is easier.  Please stop judging. 

34 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

5) She is not a "mistake". Mistakes will be on her end, and most likely her parent's end, not our Heavenly Parent's end.

So what do they do? Remain celibate for the rest of their lives? or marry someone they don't feel romantically attracted to?

If there is an afterlife what is the worst that can happen to them? Just the telestial kindgom which is better than life on earth today. 

If there is no afterlife what is the worst that can happen to them? Not enjoying this life.  

34 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

8 ) I firmly stand against what she is using the LDS church's facilities and resources to promote that which is against LDS doctrines and standards.

If LDS members want her to listen to them, why not also listen to her? 

Edited June 16, 2017 by MormonVideoGame

[Darren10]

10 hours ago, cinepro said:

The interesting thing about this is that in order for the Church to maintain its policies (and doctrines) against homosexuality, the people who experience same-sex attraction had to keep their mouths shut.  It was easy to believe that those who experience same-sex attraction should remain celibate and not have the option to get legally married or enjoy long-term relationships or raise children when there was no voice in support of those options.

But when someone you know (and respect and/or love) becomes a voice for these issues, you have to make a choice.  Now everyone in that ward that previously felt those who experience same-sex attraction should not have the legal right to get married (and still don't have the moral right) have to choose between that belief and little Savannah.  Many people might support the Church on these issues given that choice, but I don't think everyone will.  Minds and hearts will start to change, and the problem will not go away. 

Interesting times ahead.

"and little Savannah"

Who...oh, the untouchable?

Are you speaking as a member in general or are divulging the mind and heart of the LDS Church leaders?

 

[Guest]

No one would ever want to hurt or harm the spirit of someone so young. It is important to note, that even though members are given the opportunity to speak from the pulpit or to classes, members are not free to say what they wish. Especially to speak to or about doctrines that are contrary to established doctrines. Members of given great freedoms, so there are 1,000's of topics, and even more scriptures to teach "correct principles, that they (members) may govern themselves". (to paraphrase the Prophet Joseph). This poor child was trying to mix, what she felt like and hoped, into doctrines concerning Temple Marriage, and actions that are not compatible with one another. 

As it relates to being gay, many who came out to the Church whom I have known for decades, and many friends who are gay outside the Church...make it clear to me that Chasity before marriage is just foolish and wishful thinking. One of my closest friends (served with him in Bishopric, so very close) who was later excommunicated told me that, gay person cannot know who he or she wants to spend his or her life with, without sexual conduct, and contact. Of course that is the same argument of behavior many straight couples have engaged in; in and out of the Church. But those in the Church can repent, and after long delays and having confessed their sin my at so point be able to marry in the Temple. This young girl must have warned her parents (if not one would have stepped in) so that this beautiful young lady did not continue to preach/teach false doctrine from the pulpit. This for the sake of members and investigators. 

On the topic off God making everyone the way he wants, here is the truth. God created this world for man, made all things animal, vegetable and fouls of the air for our use. He also gave us a world to inhabit, with all else we need. He does not and cannot make persons one way or the other, he cannot break his own laws to compell us to act a certain way, and other act differently. With few exceptions, we are all the product of genetics, so if our genetic code causes issues in the brain and we feel like hurting others, we either master ourselves despite what we feel, or be jailed. Every man who comes to this earth with so few exceptions, that all men are attacked to more than one woman, even married we all struggle constantly to keep our eyes from wondering. Women, are not as bad, but still find the,selves being pulled to attractive men, especially when one or more jobs keeps the other away from home. What of those for one reason or another never marry, those committed to the Gospel, chose to live chaste lives. 

It it is true., we cannot chose how we feel, how we think, nor the conditions of our lives. What we can do is choose, no matter how hard the trial, the Grace of God is able to give us able sadly her talk did not speak of choices and sacrifice, but about how sh was gong to forge ahead and then break them. 

 

[Thinking]

9 hours ago, Rain said:

It is a set up. THAT is what is heartbreaking - why would someone put a child in this position?.

It's interesting that you are calling her a child and suggesting that it wasn't her decision to do this. Remember that the Church allows children much younger than her to make serious covenants with God through the ordinance of baptism.

[Darren10]

9 hours ago, rockpond said:

This is just a harbinger of what is coming as a result of the Church's current position on homosexuality.  We can't tell people that it is okay to be gay but not okay to talk about it.

This girl was bearing her testimony of her divine nature and her belief in the plan of loving Heavenly Parents.  The stake presidency member was wrong to ask her to sit down.

More of these types of testimonies will likely come.

More like housecleaning.

[MormonVideoGame]

5 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

 Of course that is the same argument of behavior many straight couples have engaged in; in and out of the Church.

but like I told Darren10

8 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said:

 FYI the American Psychological Association reports, " Some report difficulty coping with intense guilt over the failure to live a virtuous life and inability to stop committing unforgivable sins, as defined by their religion."  

http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/therapeutic-response.pdf

 

For married heterosexuals the law of chastity is easier. Not saying it is easy, but it is easier.  So what do gays do? Remain celibate for the rest of their lives? or marry someone they don't feel romantically attracted to? 

 

If there is an afterlife what is the worst that can happen to them? Just the telestial kindgom which is better than life on earth today. 

If there is no afterlife what is the worst that can happen to them? Not enjoying this life.  

What do you think? 

Edited June 16, 2017 by MormonVideoGame

[Darren10]

9 hours ago, rockpond said:

Seems like an accurate description of what this Beehive was doing.

"I feel that my Heavenly Parents made me the way I am. All my parts are perfect. My eyes, hands, feet, and being white. I do not think they want me to be alone with someone I am superior to. I know I should only marry a white person as the white race is superior to non white races."

That would be OK with you? Would you say the Holy Ghost let me know "this is true"?

Please...

[Thinking]

4 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said:

For married heterosexuals the law of chastity is easier. Not saying it is easy, but it is easier.  Please stop judging.

Yep.

I can't imagine what it would be like to be told that I could only marry another man even though I have an intense attraction toward women.

[Darren10]

9 hours ago, MorningStar said:

It's not appropriate to get up in sacrament meeting with a script to push an agenda that goes against the church.  The purpose of F&T meeting is to testify of Jesus Christ.  Who's recording it?  Her parents?  

Agreed and, yeah, I would say a parent.