california boy Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 From the Huffington Post today. Just a perspective from an LGBTQ view of how the church policies have directly effected them. Young LGBTQ Mormons Reflect On the Dire Consequences of Church's Anti-Gay Stance 1
Popular Post Storm Rider Posted October 24, 2017 Popular Post Posted October 24, 2017 12 minutes ago, california boy said: From the Huffington Post today. Just a perspective from an LGBTQ view of how the church policies have directly effected them. Young LGBTQ Mormons Reflect On the Dire Consequences of Church's Anti-Gay Stance I wonder why this hit piece was so poorly constructed and sought to distort, create out of whole cloth, accusations that have no basis in fact. It would be nice to see figures on strictly gay youth who have committed suicide rather than basing it on Utah's total youth suicide rate, then making a story up that it is totally due to the Church's stance on gay marriage....which has been around since Adam and Eve. If you are going to create a piece for humans to listen to then, please, make every effort to make it honest rather than a propaganda piece. I find it offensive, emotionally manipulative, and dishonest when I see this caliber of agenda-marketing posing as something truthful. Nazis could have learned form this type of propaganda. Do we burn the LDS Church down now or should we wait until Halloween night? 6
Jeanne Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 14 minutes ago, california boy said: From the Huffington Post today. Just a perspective from an LGBTQ view of how the church policies have directly effected them. Young LGBTQ Mormos Reflect On the Dire Consequences of Church's Anti-Gay Stance I am crying...I listen to things like this..and I still cannot comprehend the emotion and the spiritual life being sucked out this way. THIS way. Leaving the church was not easy for me...but to actually be set apart as group..is just astounding and hurtful to see.
Popular Post Calm Posted October 24, 2017 Popular Post Posted October 24, 2017 Why one needs to be careful making assumptions about suicide rates and the Church: https://www.fairmormon.org/blog/2017/10/11/gay-youth-suicides-utah "If it’s true that Mormonism is driving youth suicides in Utah, then we should see a similar suicide rate among youth in other states dominated by religions that are similarly opposed to gay identity, gay lifestyle, and gay marriage. But we don’t: The suicide rates for ages 10 to 24 in Georgia (9.18, #33), South Carolina (9.91, #29), West Virginia (8.88, #37), Alabama (9.56, #32), and all other Southern states as well, are all lower than Utah’s rate. Religious acceptance of homosexuality is at least as low in those states as it is in Utah; why the dramatic difference in youth suicide? And the reverse must also be true: States with broad acceptance of gay identity, gay lifestyle, and gay marriage must have lower rates of teenage/young adult suicides than Utah; right? Then why does fairly liberal Colorado (16.69, #5) rank just barely ahead of Utah? And why does South Dakota (25.22, #2) differ so much from North Dakota (7.81, #42), when the two states have nearly identical cultures? And why has Utah seen teen/young adult suicides increase by 66% between 2001 and 2015, but Oregon (+78%) and Washington state (+68%), where gays are supposedly warmly embraced, have had higher rates of increase in youth suicide in the same time period? And, most telling of all, why has the national suicide rate for teens/young adults gone from 6.95 in 2001 to 9.15 in 2015 (an increase of 32%), when acceptance of the gay identity, gay lifestyle, and gay marriage have increased dramatically throughout the United States during the same period? Wouldn’t we expect to see a decrease in the nationwide suicide rate of youths, including gay youths?" 7
california boy Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 25 minutes ago, Storm Rider said: I wonder why this hit piece was so poorly constructed and sought to distort, create out of whole cloth, accusations that have no basis in fact. It would be nice to see figures on strictly gay youth who have committed suicide rather than basing it on Utah's total youth suicide rate, then making a story up that it is totally due to the Church's stance on gay marriage....which has been around since Adam and Eve. If you are going to create a piece for humans to listen to then, please, make every effort to make it honest rather than a propaganda piece. I find it offensive, emotionally manipulative, and dishonest when I see this caliber of agenda-marketing posing as something truthful. Nazis could have learned form this type of propaganda. Do we burn the LDS Church down now or should we wait until Halloween night? I think the video was pretty clear that they have no direct evidence that the church's actions towards gays has caused the jump, but certainly some share that opinion. And people are sharing how they personally have been affected by church policies. You can't dismiss those feelings can you? 2
california boy Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 25 minutes ago, Calm said: Why one needs to be careful making assumptions about suicide rates and the Church: https://www.fairmormon.org/blog/2017/10/11/gay-youth-suicides-utah "If it’s true that Mormonism is driving youth suicides in Utah, then we should see a similar suicide rate among youth in other states dominated by religions that are similarly opposed to gay identity, gay lifestyle, and gay marriage. But we don’t: The suicide rates for ages 10 to 24 in Georgia (9.18, #33), South Carolina (9.91, #29), West Virginia (8.88, #37), Alabama (9.56, #32), and all other Southern states as well, are all lower than Utah’s rate. Religious acceptance of homosexuality is at least as low in those states as it is in Utah; why the dramatic difference in youth suicide? And the reverse must also be true: States with broad acceptance of gay identity, gay lifestyle, and gay marriage must have lower rates of teenage/young adult suicides than Utah; right? Then why does fairly liberal Colorado (16.69, #5) rank just barely ahead of Utah? And why does South Dakota (25.22, #2) differ so much from North Dakota (7.81, #42), when the two states have nearly identical cultures? And why has Utah seen teen/young adult suicides increase by 66% between 2001 and 2015, but Oregon (+78%) and Washington state (+68%), where gays are supposedly warmly embraced, have had higher rates of increase in youth suicide in the same time period? And, most telling of all, why has the national suicide rate for teens/young adults gone from 6.95 in 2001 to 9.15 in 2015 (an increase of 32%), when acceptance of the gay identity, gay lifestyle, and gay marriage have increased dramatically throughout the United States during the same period? Wouldn’t we expect to see a decrease in the nationwide suicide rate of youths, including gay youths?" I don't disagree with you. I think it is more difficult to figure out the increase suicide rates than just church policies. But what I do know is that church policies have really effected the gay community and their relationship with the church. Tyler Glenn perhaps being the most visable and vocal about how it effected him. 2
Popular Post Calm Posted October 24, 2017 Popular Post Posted October 24, 2017 3 minutes ago, california boy said: I don't disagree with you. I think it is more difficult to figure out the increase suicide rates than just church policies. But what I do know is that church policies have really effected the gay community and their relationship with the church. Tyler Glenn perhaps being the most visable and vocal about how it effected him. I wonder how much of the effect has been caused by people telling them they should be affected. 6
kiwi57 Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 20 minutes ago, california boy said: I think the video was pretty clear that they have no direct evidence that the church's actions towards gays has caused the jump, but certainly some share that opinion. And people are sharing how they personally have been affected by church policies. You can't dismiss those feelings can you? That's right. We mustn't dismiss "feelings," even (or especially) when they are being weaponised by anti-Mormon propagandists. 1
rockpond Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 16 minutes ago, kiwi57 said: That's right. We mustn't dismiss "feelings," even (or especially) when they are being weaponised by anti-Mormon propagandists. Our entire epistemology is based on feelings. If you want to only dismiss the feelings that disagree with your POV, that’s fine. But own it. 2
Hamba Tuhan Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 7 minutes ago, rockpond said: Our entire epistemology is based on feelings. I'm assuming that's an exclusive 'we'? 1
rockpond Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 8 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said: I'm assuming that's an exclusive 'we'? We = LDS Our “knowledge” or testimony is based on feelings that we identify as the Spirit. 2
Hamba Tuhan Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 19 minutes ago, rockpond said: We = LDS Our “knowledge” or testimony is based on feelings that we identify as the Spirit. That's not how it works for me. My testimony is based on what I've personally witnessed/seen/heard/etc., no different to the kind of testimony I've given in a courtroom. I have no certainty that any particular impression is from God until I've acted upon it, often repeatedly. 2
rockpond Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 3 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said: That's not how it works for me. My testimony is based on what I've personally witnessed/seen/heard/etc., no different to the kind of testimony I've given in a courtroom. I have no certainty that any particular impression is from God until I've acted upon it, often repeatedly. Similarly, what we hear from our LGBT brothers and sisters in the church goes beyond just feelings... it is a result of what they have experienced and witnessed while being both gay and Mormon. 2
Scott Lloyd Posted October 24, 2017 Author Posted October 24, 2017 3 hours ago, rockpond said: Yes, it should have been easy enough for a prophet or apostle to have made such a statement prior to 20 years ago. And yet they didn’t. Interesting isn’t it. Now, consider why. The problem I’ve highlighted is that once you pull the statements out of their fill context they become open to reinterpretation. And that’s what I’ve seen done here time and time again. I won’t play that ridiculous game. As for the claims I’ve made, please refer back to what I said and not what you and Kiwi have changed my claim to be. The reason you don’t find them 20 years ago is for precisely the reason kiwi has intimated. That homosexual back then was shorthand for homosexual behavior, not just feelings. 2
Scott Lloyd Posted October 24, 2017 Author Posted October 24, 2017 1 hour ago, california boy said: I don't disagree with you. I think it is more difficult to figure out the increase suicide rates than just church policies. But what I do know is that church policies have really effected the gay community and their relationship with the church. Tyler Glenn perhaps being the most visable and vocal about how it effected him. I can only stand so much. “Affect” is the verb you should be using here. “Effect,” in most instances, is a noun. 1
california boy Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 1 hour ago, Calm said: I wonder how much of the effect has been caused by people telling them they should be affected. Oh I think the hurt is pretty real, even for many members. That part is pretty apparent. 1
california boy Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: I can only stand so much. “Affect” is the verb you should be using here. “Effect,” in most instances, is a noun. lol. Yeah I always get those to mixed up. Sorry
california boy Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 1 hour ago, kiwi57 said: That's right. We mustn't dismiss "feelings," even (or especially) when they are being weaponised by anti-Mormon propagandists. Sorry. Not going to take the bait.
Scott Lloyd Posted October 24, 2017 Author Posted October 24, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Calm said: I wonder how much of the effect has been caused by people telling them they should be affected. In this post, Calm has used both the verb “affect” and the noun “effect” properly. Let it serve as a model. Edited October 24, 2017 by Scott Lloyd 1
sunstoned Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 17 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said: That's not how it works for me. My testimony is based on what I've personally witnessed/seen/heard/etc., no different to the kind of testimony I've given in a courtroom. I have no certainty that any particular impression is from God until I've acted upon it, often repeatedly. Without meaning to offend, I would submit to you that your testimony is feelings. Just like my testimony of how great this county is, or my testimony of how much I love my wife. These things are very special to me and they come with strong emotions, but they are still just feelings. I have friends who are committed to their church (not LDS) and have expressed this to me is the form of what we would call a testimony. It is important to them, and their feelings are real and valid. But when all is said and done, they are just feelings. 3
Hamba Tuhan Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 8 minutes ago, sunstoned said: Without meaning to offend, I would submit to you that your testimony is feelings. No offence taken, but you're absolutely wrong about me.
kiwi57 Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 1 hour ago, rockpond said: Our entire epistemology is based on feelings. If you want to only dismiss the feelings that disagree with your POV, that’s fine. But own it. Your entire epistemology may indeed be based on feelings, which would explain why you can claim with a straight face that something somewhere has revealed to you that the Church's moral standards are wrong. But ours are not. 1
Calm Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: In this post, Calm has used both the verb “affect” and the noun “effect” properly. Let it serve as a model. Lol, I had to go back and doublecheck. I tend to be highly aware of the difference because "affect" is a noun in psychology, which I had to get used to using back in my university days. Edited October 24, 2017 by Calm
rockpond Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 49 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: The reason you don’t find them 20 years ago is for precisely the reason kiwi has intimated. That homosexual back then was shorthand for homosexual behavior, not just feelings. That’s a convenient interpretation of what they taught. It fits well with their current positions on homosexuality which are, of course, significantly different than what they were decades ago (as demonstrated by the papers I cited).
rockpond Posted October 24, 2017 Posted October 24, 2017 25 minutes ago, kiwi57 said: Your entire epistemology may indeed be based on feelings, which would explain why you can claim with a straight face that something somewhere has revealed to you that the Church's moral standards are wrong. But ours are not. Whoa. Please don’t misrepresent what I’ve said. I did not claim that the Church’s moral standards are wrong To the epistemology question. Isn’t it LDS doctrine that a testimony is gained through the Spirit? What is your testimony based upon?
Recommended Posts