Utah Ward Invites LGBT Speakers for 2nd and 3rd Hour

[Danzo]

54 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/12/07/genes-linked-homosexuality-discovered-scientists/

also from your article you linked to 

"

Prof Robin Lovell-Badge, Group Leader at The Francis Crick Institute,said: “The topic of this paper is important if we are to learn more about the influence of genes on aspects of our behaviour, but this is one that is notoriously difficult to study.

“Even if a gene variant does show some correlation with sexual orientation, this does not mean that the gene is in any way responsible for being gay – it just means it has some association with a trait that is more likely to found in the relatively few people involved as subjects in the study.

 

“This could be better social awareness or being brave enough to acknowledge that they are in a minority.”

Gil McVean, Professor of Statistical Genetics at the University of Oxford, also added: “Sexuality is likely influenced by many different factors, including environment, experience and, likely, some aspects of innate biological variation.

“I can see no major implications of this work or how it could be useful in the future.  

“The genetic effects are far too weak to be of any predictive or diagnostic value.  All biology – including the origins of sexuality – is interesting at some level, but I see no direct applications of such research.”"

Edited February 3, 2018 by Danzo

[Danzo]

39 minutes ago, pogi said:

This meeting was not about placing blame, or pointing the finger in shame.  I didn't see any of that.  The parents of the child who committed suicide spoke at this meeting...no one was blaming them for falling short. Instead, they received support. This meeting was about mourning with those who mourn.  It is about increasing awareness of a very serious and worsening situation.  It is about lending an open ear and listening to those who hurt. 

There is plenty of good evidence that suggests that family/community dynamics do play a significant role.  This is not about condemnation or judgement however.  We cant say for sure what environmental trigger might have exacerbated the situation for any given individual.  It is probably a multitude of factors.  No one person is to blame.  Family dynamics may or may not have played a role in any given case.  It is not for us to judge any individual.  However, understanding that environment does play a role, places the burden on the community to work towards a solution to this problem - to take some ownership of it. Again there is a difference between shame and guilt.  Guilt and ownership inspires change, reconciliation, and healing.  Without it, you are simply ignoring the hole in the pipe and moping up the wet floor.    

This gets into the whole debate of preventive healthcare vs. curative healthcare (As a public health nurse, you don't want to open that can of worms with me )  You seem to favor curative measures by becoming better at recognizing symptoms and initiating early interventions.  I agree, that is important.  However, from my perspective, if an individual is to the point of showing suicidal symptoms, then we are already too late!  I believe that we can do more good by investing in prevention over cure.  Fix the leak!   I favor preventive measures, without leaving the other undone.  If we invested as much money and effort into prevention as we do curative measures, our healthcare system would be so much better!

 

I have nothing against better families and nicer communities, Prevention is always better than a cure, but we cannot solve these problems without understanding them. 

I have a brother that suffers from Schizoaffective disorder he was just diagnosed a few years ago. For about 25 years, we tried being nicer to him, we all blamed ourselves, asking what we were doing wrong with him, why was he abusing drugs, why was he not very successful socially.  None of use even knew what schizoaffective disorders were. Only when he was diagnosed (after nearly committing suicide) we we able to see and address the problem. He is now doing better than he ever was, he holds a job, has quit drinking and smoking on his own.  But before then, all the "Be nice", "Its your fault for not understanding him" "let him do his own thing" "Stop judging him" and other things we tried, just didn't work.  They probably would not have ever worked. None of use even knew what schizoaffective disorders were.  Only when we understood his real problem were we able to help.

If you want to solve a problem, you have to see it clearly first.

[captiancupcake]

3 hours ago, smac97 said:

The first link below is, for me, the most enlightening.

The second link below is generally fine.  

As for the third link my initial impression is . . . oh, it's bad.  "Mormon shaming" and "airing the family's dirty laundry" stuff throughout.  Off-putting.  Manipulative in the extreme.  Plainly inappropriate for Sunday services.  In fact, it seems almost entirely shot through with remarks that throw the author's mother under the bus.  It seems markedly unhealthy for the daughter to have made these remarks about her mother in church.  And now "the bishop's wife" is publishing those remarks to the entire world, which I frankly find to be appalling (unless the bishop's wife got the mother's permission - which I imagine didn't happen).  Exodus 20:12 takes a major beating, IMO.

Moreover, it is an overt apologetic for same-sex marriage ("When I married Aimee, I felt like I was choosing to live my truth. 100% Jordan. For me, I had to do it. It felt right.").  Advocacy and justification for excommunicable conduct.  Presented to the Saints in the Lord's house and during Sunday services.  And authorized by the bishop (and, apparently, the stake presidency).  And now the bishop's wife is publishing such advocacy and justification to the entire world. 

This, for me, is deeply troubling.  I want to listen to LGBT folks.  But . . . not like this.  If someone wanted to find a way to get people like me to resist further discussion (because at present, I am giving serious and ongoing consideration how to go about such things), they would very likely present this third link as "Exhibit A."

https://www.facebook.com/susie.augenstein/posts/10215207188870961

https://www.facebook.com/susie.augenstein/posts/10215212018831707

https://www.facebook.com/susie.augenstein/posts/10215208165215369

Thanks,

-Smac

Other context:

"The church has caused me a lot of pain, but I don’t hate it. And I don’t hate the people in it. Many of my closest friends and family members are extremely active, and it really isn’t a problem for me. Because I was raised in the church, my life and my values are very similar to my active friends’ and family members. I dream of having a family with my wife. I value authenticity, service, love, and compassion--all things that I was taught were important and Christlike in this faith." (emphasis added)

Nothing is offered of what the Church 'did' to cause the pain, so I guess we are just to assume what the Church did and it must have done bad things.

"One summer while I was at BYU, I went by myself to Italy for an internship. I was terrified. I barely spoke the language and didn’t know anyone going, but I did have this -- I knew there was a ward down the street from where I was going to be living where. And I knew that all I had to do was get there. I knew that if I could just get there that they would make sure that I felt safe, seen, embraced, and loved. And that is exactly what happened. They gave me that community and that sense of belonging that I had at home, and it made me feel so good. I miss that."

Great message and one that other sources could have been used to convey.

Until my wife and I found Encircle, we didn’t really have that same community--and we both missed it. We are currently building a home together in American Fork and we frequently discuss how nervous we are that our neighbors will be uninterested in being our friends or that they will be judgmental towards us. Having this large community of people that you know care about you and your well being and want to know about your life--it gives human beings a sense of belonging--one that Aimee and I both dearly miss. It’s one that I long for within the church and within my own family. (emphasis added)

No indication that they made an effort to meet their neighbors. One must wonder if the speaker wants the audience to believe that the neighbors were Mormons and therefore would "be uninterested in being our friends or that they will be judgmental toward" them. This apparent "judgment" was self-inflicted.

When I go home to visit my mom and her side of the family, my wife is unwelcome. I go home without the single most important person in my life. I go home knowing that not one person in my family will ask how I am doing. Or how my wife is doing. I go home knowing that who I am as human being, is someone that my mom thinks is gross, sinful, and wrong. If I want to see my mom and my little sister on Christmas day, I am forced to choose between seeing them and abandoning my own wife, or not being with my family at all. What kind of choice is that?

First bold. It comes across as selfish. I see it as selfish because the daughter conveys that she does not allow the mother to have her own opinions and the mother is not permitted to adhere to her religious beliefs. As for "sinful, and wrong" that is the Doctrine. Is the message love the sinner hate the sin or love the sinner and the sin?

As to the second bold. "What kind of choice is that". Is that an rhetorical question  or is the statement intended to shame Mormons?

"When I married Aimee, I felt like I was choosing to live my truth. 100% Jordan. For me, I had to do it. It felt right. I couldn’t lie about that. I knew what that would mean though. I felt like I had to choose between making my mom proud and feeling her love by being someone I wasn’t and potentially being miserable and suicidal forever, or potentially losing my mom forever and marrying the love of my life. Please don’t make your LGBTQ brothers and sisters choose. It leads to unbearable heartbreak. Unnecessary heartbreak."

 Again, what is the message? Love the sinner and not the sin or love both?

[Hamba Tuhan]

7 hours ago, Tacenda said:

We are not to interfere with His creations.

That's right. As is taught clearly in the scriptures, all of us are OK just the way we are, no interference needed:

Quote

And he also testified unto the people that all mankind should be saved at the last day, and that they need not fear nor tremble, but that they might lift up their heads and rejoice; for the Lord had created all men, and had also redeemed all men; and, in the end, all men should have eternal life.

 

Edited February 3, 2018 by Hamba Tuhan

[Hamba Tuhan]

Duplicate.
 

Edited February 3, 2018 by Hamba Tuhan

[JulieM]

24 minutes ago, captiancupcake said:

Other context:

"The church has caused me a lot of pain, but I don’t hate it. And I don’t hate the people in it. Many of my closest friends and family members are extremely active, and it really isn’t a problem for me. Because I was raised in the church, my life and my values are very similar to my active friends’ and family members. I dream of having a family with my wife. I value authenticity, service, love, and compassion--all things that I was taught were important and Christlike in this faith." (emphasis added)

Nothing is offered of what the Church 'did' to cause the pain, so I guess we are just to assume what the Church did and it must have done bad things.

"One summer while I was at BYU, I went by myself to Italy for an internship. I was terrified. I barely spoke the language and didn’t know anyone going, but I did have this -- I knew there was a ward down the street from where I was going to be living where. And I knew that all I had to do was get there. I knew that if I could just get there that they would make sure that I felt safe, seen, embraced, and loved. And that is exactly what happened. They gave me that community and that sense of belonging that I had at home, and it made me feel so good. I miss that."

Great message and one that other sources could have been used to convey.

Until my wife and I found Encircle, we didn’t really have that same community--and we both missed it. We are currently building a home together in American Fork and we frequently discuss how nervous we are that our neighbors will be uninterested in being our friends or that they will be judgmental towards us. Having this large community of people that you know care about you and your well being and want to know about your life--it gives human beings a sense of belonging--one that Aimee and I both dearly miss. It’s one that I long for within the church and within my own family. (emphasis added)

No indication that they made an effort to meet their neighbors. One must wonder if the speaker wants the audience to believe that the neighbors were Mormons and therefore would "be uninterested in being our friends or that they will be judgmental toward" them. This apparent "judgment" was self-inflicted.

When I go home to visit my mom and her side of the family, my wife is unwelcome. I go home without the single most important person in my life. I go home knowing that not one person in my family will ask how I am doing. Or how my wife is doing. I go home knowing that who I am as human being, is someone that my mom thinks is gross, sinful, and wrong. If I want to see my mom and my little sister on Christmas day, I am forced to choose between seeing them and abandoning my own wife, or not being with my family at all. What kind of choice is that?

First bold. It comes across as selfish. I see it as selfish because the daughter conveys that she does not allow the mother to have her own opinions and the mother is not permitted to adhere to her religious beliefs. As for "sinful, and wrong" that is the Doctrine. Is the message love the sinner hate the sin or love the sinner and the sin?

As to the second bold. "What kind of choice is that". Is that an rhetorical question  or is the statement intended to shame Mormons?

"When I married Aimee, I felt like I was choosing to live my truth. 100% Jordan. For me, I had to do it. It felt right. I couldn’t lie about that. I knew what that would mean though. I felt like I had to choose between making my mom proud and feeling her love by being someone I wasn’t and potentially being miserable and suicidal forever, or potentially losing my mom forever and marrying the love of my life. Please don’t make your LGBTQ brothers and sisters choose. It leads to unbearable heartbreak. Unnecessary heartbreak."

 Again, what is the message? Love the sinner and not the sin or love both?

Are you going to do the same with the first 2 talks linked to?   Post quotes and comments?  Or did you join just to discuss this one talk?

[JulieM]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

My post was in response to what Smac posted. I would not have needed to read the whole talk to have read the quotation in Smac's post and to have confined my response to that quoted portion. Which is what I did.

 

Ok.  Are you planning on reading the actual talks that have been posted or are you going to just rely on others to read them for you and then base your opinions on their’s?

[provoman]

The mother and daughter talks are posted on the bishop's facebook page.