Recent Survey (via Jana Reiss)

[JLHPROF]

I know, I know, another SSM thread.  Because they always go so well and I never complain about the proliferation of them. 

But perhaps we can focus on WHY the Church membership views are changing instead of whether we think this is right/wrong or good/bad.
http://religionnews.com/2017/06/27/mormons-are-changing-their-tune-on-same-sex-marriage/

According to this survey about 1/3 of Mormons now favor SSM and barely more than half oppose it.  Now, the survey may have some issues (most do) but the change from last year is the indicator of interest assuming the survey was handled the same way both times.  We as members appear to be changing our views.

So without opening the debate about SSM itself, perhaps we can discuss the following:
1. WHY are members views changing so rapidly?
2. HOW do members reconcile the doctrinal disparity with Church teachings?
3. The Church is often accused of being afraid of nothing.  Is THIS what the Church really has to fear from the SSM movement?

 

 

[Glenn101]

Is a sample size of 700 statistically significant?

 

[JLHPROF]

Just now, Glenn101 said:

Is a sample size of 700 statistically significant?

 

Good question.
Polls are generally a statistically small portion of a group.  And the smaller the sampling, the more room for error.

But assuming the poll was conducted in the same manner as much as possible year over year, something caused a change in result.

[hope_for_things]

48 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

So without opening the debate about SSM itself, perhaps we can discuss the following:
1. WHY are members views changing so rapidly?
2. HOW do members reconcile the doctrinal disparity with Church teachings?
3. The Church is often accused of being afraid of nothing.  Is THIS what the Church really has to fear from the SSM movement?

1. I think people are getting more acclimated to these ideas and finding that the slippery slope arguments are not coming true as the doomsayers predicted they would.  Life goes on, and the LGBT are not ruining society.  

2. I've heard some discussions at church about people being willing to attend the marriage of a family member or friend for a same sex wedding where in the past they wouldn't have.  The language to justify this is that they feel personally called to love and they leave the judgments up to God.  For me, this is a good baby step in the right direction.  

3. Not sure I understand this question, but I'll try.  I think the church only fears openly acknowledging that culture influences doctrine.  The mythos taught in church is that all doctrines are eternal and unchanging and directly from God.  But the reality is that doctrines change and will continue to change, because people are the administrators of the doctrine, not deity, and people will continue to interpret the divine will incorrectly and then later find reasons to reinterpret things.  To me this is the principle of modern revelation, but for some reason the church culture afraid of embracing one of its core tenants.  Its a paradox.  

Edited June 27, 2017 by hope_for_things

[Maestrophil]

Would venture that the public shift in general has leaned toward a mainstreaming of Homosexuality, that has to effect the membership.  Especially when, IMO, much of the dialog (not all) from people who support SSM is often hostile and makes villains of those who would have opinions counter to SSM. No one wants to look like a backwards rube, right?

For me personally as an LDS, I tend to support SSM in a legal sense because I lean more libertarian.  I don't believe that legislating morals works very well.  My preference would be for the government not to define marriage at all, but leave that to be a personal/spiritual choice and union.  

 

So it would be a tricky question to answer for me - do I support SSM.  Legally, sure, morally, not so much.

[cinepro]

Here are the bullet points from the survey:
 

Quote

1. Mormons still oppose same-sex marriage, but...even though 55% of Mormons still oppose same-sex marriage, that opposition is rapidly eroding: PRRI’s 2015 data about Mormons had 66% opposing it and 26% in favor.

2. Younger Mormons are quite a bit more supportive.

3. Most Mormons now reject the idea that small business owners can refuse service to members of the LGBT community.

All I can say is what I say every time this subject comes up: the shift on this, even in the Church, appears to be both massive and quick. 

But the LDS position has deep roots in scripture and doctrine that goes far beyond the "anchor" for the Priesthood Ban. 

If neither of those factors change, then Mormonism in 100 years could be in serious, serious trouble.  Could it end up being a relatively small (< .5 million active members?) religious group with massive real estate holdings supporting them, with endless talk of "wheat" and "chaff" on Sundays? 

Since I don't think the first factor is going to change, it's up to the Church leaders to figure out how they're going to accommodate this issue in order to not lose future generations.  This could be more difficult than polygamy and the Priesthood Ban.  I don't envy the leaders that will have to deal with this.

 

 

[stemelbow]

That change in numbers in 1 year is pretty intriguing, particularly since the Church in Nov 2015 came out with a policy opposing SSM and Actively gay members (as if to further draw a line for members to follow).  It could speak volumes.  most members who aren't active, in my estimation are either supportive of SSM or not opposed to it.  Those that are active, as we call ourselves, by and large most (as in nearly 100% from what I can tell)  will not support SSM.    So in my ward we have about 40% activity.  Most in the ward don't attend Church basically at all.  But I"d wager of those who do attend, nearly all oppose SSM.  Most who don't attend, probably do support SSM.  With that said, most Mormons who are young (18-26, as the survey lsits them) are not active, but probably still affiliate in some measure.  As time goes on, as the Church continues to struggle to keep members involved, I think these numbers will continue to favor the for SSM.  It will have to be, at some point, that the Church changes it's tune on this issue (and others of course).  It's been done it before, it'll do it again.  On this, I'm guessing, in not many years hence, the Church will do an about face on this issue.  56 years should wind up the scene, of course it'll probably be closer to 20-25 years (and of course, hopefully sooner).  in some ways it feels like we're in the early 50s, in terms of how the Church treated race back then.  From the early 50s to the late 70s (25ish years) before it got it's act together on that.  This may turn out to be about the same. 

[USU78]

A tribute to the power of propaganda.

[RevTestament]

57 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I know, I know, another SSM thread.  Because they always go so well and I never complain about the proliferation of them. 

But perhaps we can focus on WHY the Church membership views are changing instead of whether we think this is right/wrong or good/bad.
http://religionnews.com/2017/06/27/mormons-are-changing-their-tune-on-same-sex-marriage/

According to this survey about 1/3 of Mormons now favor SSM and barely more than half oppose it.  Now, the survey may have some issues (most do) but the change from last year is the indicator of interest assuming the survey was handled the same way both times.  We as members appear to be changing our views.

So without opening the debate about SSM itself, perhaps we can discuss the following:
1. WHY are members views changing so rapidly?
2. HOW do members reconcile the doctrinal disparity with Church teachings?
3. The Church is often accused of being afraid of nothing.  Is THIS what the Church really has to fear from the SSM movement?

My personal guess is the data could be geographically skewed somewhat. If not, that is a really big change. In matters of sexual sin the Church has its hands full with pornography apparently running amok.

[Mystery Meat]

Does the survey differentiate between secular vs. religious policy? I am inclined for its legalization politically/secularly, but am adamantly opposed morally/religiously. I am a youngish person and most people my age who are active LDS feel the same. No issues with legalization. Deep reservations with it being embraced doctrinally.

[cinepro]

13 minutes ago, USU78 said:

A tribute to the power of propaganda.

While the "how" and "why" questions would be a different study, it is amazing to have lived through such a dramatic shift on the issue.  If you had told me this was going to happen back in 1996 or even 2006, I would have thought you were crazy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/06/26/how-unbelievably-quickly-public-opinion-changed-on-gay-marriage-in-6-charts/

Edited June 27, 2017 by cinepro

[mnn727]

Like the WoW, its only against OUR Covenants, not against people not under the Covenant, Its not a sin for a non-Mormon to drink or smoke, only if we do it.

Likewise SSM. I wonder what the survey would have came up with if it asked a realistic question something like 'should gays be allowed to be married/sealed in the Temple?' - that would be comparing apples to apples.Anything else is apples to oranges.

[hope_for_things]

4 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

My personal guess is the data could be geographically skewed somewhat. If not, that is a really big change. In matters of sexual sin the Church has its hands full with pornography apparently running amok.

The point being that many members no longer consider SSM to be a sexual sin.  I do wonder about the pornography trend as well, I'm guessing the trend would be similar with respect to how members view the sinful nature of it.  

[JLHPROF]

Oh well.

Matthew 24:37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

The scriptures are full of prophecies about the wickedness of the world at the return of the Savior.  Perhaps these changes are just what was always going to happen.
Is this change, even among general membership, the path we were always destined to follow?  I think it probably is.  The real question is just how far the Lord will allow us to go.

 

[JLHPROF]

1 minute ago, mnn727 said:

Like the WoW, its only against OUR Covenants, not against people not under the Covenant, Its not a sin for a non-Mormon to drink or smoke, only if we do it.

Likewise SSM. I wonder what the survey would have came up with if it asked a realistic question something like 'should gays be allowed to be married/sealed in the Temple?' - that would be comparing apples to apples.Anything else is apples to oranges.

I completely disagree with this.

[stemelbow]

11 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

Does the survey differentiate between secular vs. religious policy? I am inclined for its legalization politically/secularly, but am adamantly opposed morally/religiously. I am a youngish person and most people my age who are active LDS feel the same. No issues with legalization. Deep reservations with it being embraced doctrinally.

It's hard to oppose it legally when its already been settled to be legal, I guess. 

But you raise an interesting thought that I failed to consider.  Thanks.  Is the question posed in this survey to account for moral religious vs, legal?  Perhaps this change has far more to do with accepting the law of the land then not. 

[Maestrophil]

8 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

The point being that many members no longer consider SSM to be a sexual sin.  I do wonder about the pornography trend as well, I'm guessing the trend would be similar with respect to how members view the sinful nature of it.  

I don't know that that is true.  As I mentioned, I support a legal union of SS couples, but do consider ti a sin.  Saying you support the union, doe snot immediately imply acceptance of the sexuality.  I support non-married people in relationships, but I still view their sexuality as 'sinful' by definition.  That said, I am not their judge, and don't look down on them for it.  It just is what it is to me, just like my sins are sins regardless of who approves or not.

[Maestrophil]

13 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

Does the survey differentiate between secular vs. religious policy? I am inclined for its legalization politically/secularly, but am adamantly opposed morally/religiously. I am a youngish person and most people my age who are active LDS feel the same. No issues with legalization. Deep reservations with it being embraced doctrinally.

Exactly...  yet I am bordering on becoming an 'oldish' person!  :-)

 

[stemelbow]

25 minutes ago, USU78 said:

A tribute to the power of propaganda.

Wrong thread.  But yes, the Church is "A tribute to the power of propaganda."

I dont' mind such off-topic comments.  Not at all.  Some do, though, so watch out.  The mods may be coming. 

[pogi]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

According to this survey about 1/3 of Mormons now favor SSM and barely more than half oppose it.  Now, the survey may have some issues (most do) but the change from last year is the indicator of interest assuming the survey was handled the same way both times.  We as members appear to be changing our views.

So without opening the debate about SSM itself, perhaps we can discuss the following:
1. WHY are members views changing so rapidly?
2. HOW do members reconcile the doctrinal disparity with Church teachings?

What is meant by "favor SSM"? 

I think that if the question was clarified to distinguish between favoring 1) the legality of SSM, vs. favoring 2) the morality of SSM, I think we would see that these numbers are only showing an increased support for the legality of SSM.  I think that answers your #2 question.  It is not hard to separate your political leanings from your religious ones.  For example, I am strongly opposed to prohibition - that is a doctrinal disparity with Church teachings. 

[hope_for_things]

6 minutes ago, Maestrophil said:

I don't know that that is true.  As I mentioned, I support a legal union of SS couples, but do consider ti a sin.  Saying you support the union, doe snot immediately imply acceptance of the sexuality.  I support non-married people in relationships, but I still view their sexuality as 'sinful' by definition.  That said, I am not their judge, and don't look down on them for it.  It just is what it is to me, just like my sins are sins regardless of who approves or not.

To be completely scientific we would need a poll that addresses this question specifically.  My guess is that the trend of opinions are changing on both the legality and the sinful nature from my observations.  

[cinepro]

25 minutes ago, mnn727 said:

Like the WoW, its only against OUR Covenants, not against people not under the Covenant, Its not a sin for a non-Mormon to drink or smoke, only if we do it.

Likewise SSM. I wonder what the survey would have came up with if it asked a realistic question something like 'should gays be allowed to be married/sealed in the Temple?' - that would be comparing apples to apples.Anything else is apples to oranges.

I don't think that analogy holds up.  The teachings (policies? doctrines?) forbidding same-sex marriage are rooted in the ideas of an eternal and never-changing gender and sexual morality that forbids homosexuality in all times and places. 

As has been analogized countless times before, it is closer to adultery on the sin scale than eating herbs out of season, and I don't know any LDS that would think adultery was okay as long as you weren't Mormon.

[stemelbow]

9 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

To be completely scientific we would need a poll that addresses this question specifically.  My guess is that the trend of opinions are changing on both the legality and the sinful nature from my observations.  

I think that's true. But I'd really wonder whether those who are for SSM both spiritually and legally are active Mormons or not too.  I mean I think the big change here is among those Mormons who likely didn't attend anyway, or were iffy and maybe are iffy about their attendance.  That may be generalizing a bit because of course there will be exceptions.  I think we forget when things like this come up that many Mormons aren't active but still consider themselves MOrmon--and often they aren't active for a reason. 

[rpn]

When I look at lds church doctrine, I think there was every reason to reject and argue against civil ssm because it is not how God sets up families, and every child should have the right to be born into a family with a man and a woman as parents.   But now that it IS the LAW of the land, and so long as people of faith can still preach the way God intends it to be, can perform marriage only the way they believe God approves of,  and so long as governments do not place children into homes with single parents or same sex parents unless there are no other choices appropriate for the kiddo, then I have to wonder if God would be okay with those who are going to be intimate with partners do it with a marriage?   I tend to think that if He cannot get His children to follow His commandments, at least He would like them to live in ways that help themselves be good people and any children they are raising have stability.   And if there are no opposite sex parents to raise children, He'd probably accept ss parents to help those children.

Of course this will not stop activists who want everyone to see homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle, including an equal choice in having and raising children.   They will continue to call those who want to believe and preach and live God's way bigots, and insist that governments who are placing children give equal rights to same sex parents on behalf of kiddos who have no choice and may not even know what they are missing out on (even when they are okay with it because they have solid relationships with those selected already that would surely be better than some other family situations that could be out there).

So I think the change could just be a recognition that our country has chosen not to follow God in its civil laws, and so why should members still protest that civilly?  To what end?  

My thinking is that if there are mortals who have determined they won't or shouldn't have to follow the commandments, then civil marriage might be a really good thing for them.   And if there are children who would not otherwise be adopted into two parent homes, then why would ssm home be automatically any worse than a single parent home for them? 

The biggest drawback is that ssm couples cannot form an eternal family, and therefore those in them are in for suffering they could avoid.  But if you asked LGBTQ+ friends or acquaintenances if that is a good reason for them not to go forward, many will tell you they just don't believe that they won't have everything opposite sex marriages and families get and God won't split up love (even that that idea is just about bigotry itself).   Others don't believe in an afterlife at all. 

[pogi]

40 minutes ago, cinepro said:

I don't think that analogy holds up.  The teachings (policies? doctrines?) forbidding same-sex marriage are rooted in the ideas of an eternal and never-changing gender and sexual morality that forbids homosexuality in all times and places. 

As has been analogized countless times before, it is closer to adultery on the sin scale than eating herbs out of season, and I don't know any LDS that would think adultery was okay as long as you weren't Mormon.

I don't know if I entirely agree.  I am an example of a Mormon who doesn't believe that homosexuality and gay marriage is a sin in all cases.  It is impossible for us to judge what light each individual has received.  For example, a born Unitarian Universalits, Buddhist, Reformed Jewish, or secularists would not necessarily be under condemnation for practicing homosexuality.  One cannot sin in ignorance of light.  It is impossible for us to judge at what point a person becomes accountable.