A Coming Out Party in Provo

[Bernard Gui]

An interesting event at BYU commencement....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/04/29/i-am-proud-be-gay-son-god-mormon-valedictorian-comes-out-graduation-speech/?utm_term=.448ed02b2eb8

Quote

The issue is especially fraught at Brigham Young, which enrolls more than 30,000 undergraduates in Provo, Utah. The school enforces an honor code that requires chastity and forbids “not only sexual relations between members of the same sex, but all forms of physical intimacy that give expression to homosexual feelings.” Dress and grooming standards proscribe beards and form-fitting clothing. Students live in sex-segregated housing.

The times they are a changin'.........

Edited April 30, 2019 by Bernard Gui

[Calm]

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/71809-byu-graduation-speech/

[california boy]

Perhaps the most signiicant part of this speech is the resounding cheers and applause that came from his announcement on his orientation.  That says a lot about the new generration of members of the Church.  Right now, the Church seems to be kicking the can down the road.  Will that last forever?  Probably depends on how you view this issue.  

[CV75]

6 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

An interesting event at BYU commencement....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/04/29/i-am-proud-be-gay-son-god-mormon-valedictorian-comes-out-graduation-speech/?utm_term=.448ed02b2eb8

The times they are a changin'.........

In Zion, I suspect there will be no need for people to identify by, or congratulate, societal labels while at the same time transcending them.

[JulieM]

6 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

An interesting event at BYU commencement....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/04/29/i-am-proud-be-gay-son-god-mormon-valedictorian-comes-out-graduation-speech/?utm_term=.448ed02b2eb8

The times they are a changin'.........

Yes they are and I think it’s wonderful.  I loved hearing about this.  It’s what I’m seeing with the youth I serve in my ward.  They embrace their gay friends and family members.   They’re also happy for them to find relationships and partners and support SSM (at least almost all that I’ve heard discuss it).  That’s the future and more and more members feel this way too now from what I’ve seen.

[ALarson]

7 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

An interesting event at BYU commencement....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/04/29/i-am-proud-be-gay-son-god-mormon-valedictorian-comes-out-graduation-speech/?utm_term=.448ed02b2eb8

The times they are a changin'.........

I read this story when it was first posted here and rejoiced.  What a wonderful experience for this young man and also for those in attendance.

You're right about times changing.  Compare this to what took place with the gays on campus when Dallin H. Oaks was the president.  That should never happen again....change can be good or in this case excellent.

Quote

Under Oaks, a system of surveillance and searches of dorms of problem students, including suspected homosexuals, was implemented.[33] This included electronic recording devices which BYU Security Chief Robert Kelshaw confirmed in 1975 had been planted on students to gather information. In reference to the widespread campaign to find homosexuals among BYU students, Oaks stated, "Two influences we wish to exclude from the BYU community are active homosexuals and drug users, and these subjects are therefore among those with which our security force is concerned."[34]

Four years later BYU's newspaper reported Oaks asking BYU security to be "especially watchful" for any student homosexual infractions.[35]:126[36] Stake outs by BYU security looking for license plates of BYU students at gay bars in Salt Lake City[37][38] and fake contact advertisements were placed in a gay Salt Lake City newspaper to ensnare gay students[39][37] resulting in the arrest of former BYU student David Chipman.[35]:126[40][41] However, the director of public relations for the university stated that Oaks ordered BYU security to stop surveilling gay bars and to cease posting entrapment advertisements.[37]....

From 1971 to 1980 BYU's president Dallin Oaks[35]:32 had Gerald J. Dye over the University Standards Office[86] (renamed the Honor Code Office in 1991). Dye stated that during that decade part of the "set process" for homosexual BYU students referred to his office for "less serious" offenses was to require that they undergo some form of therapy to remain at BYU, and that in special cases this included "electroshock and vomiting aversion therapies."[43]:155

In an independent BYU newspaper article two men describe their experience with the BYU Aversion therapy program during the early 1970s.[87]:162 After confessing to homosexual feelings they were referred to the BYU Counseling Center where the electroshock aversion therapy took place using pornographic pictures of males and females. Jon, one of the individuals, implied that the treatment was completely ineffective.[88] The experiences match most reports which state that shock therapy was ineffective in changing sexual orientation.[89]

From 1975 to 1976 Max Ford McBride, a student at BYU, conducted electroshock aversion therapy on 17 men (with 14 completing the treatment) using a male arousal measuring device placed around the penis and electrodes on the bicep. He published a dissertation on the use of electrical aversive techniques to treat ego-dystonic homosexuality.[90] The thesis documents the use of "Electrical Aversion Therapy" on 14 homosexual men using a "phallometric" apparatus, "barely tolerable" shocks, and "nude male visual-cue stimuli."[91][92] Although it is not publicly published whether all top LDS Church leaders were aware of the electroshock aversion therapy program,[93] it is known that apostles Spencer Kimball, Mark Peterson, and now apostle Dallin Oaks were,[2]:379 and leaders involved in LDS Social Services thought the therapy was effective.[94][42]:164–165

 

This entire history is interesting to read:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigham_Young_University_LGBT_history

Edited April 30, 2019 by ALarson

[JulieM]

18 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I read this story when it was first posted here and rejoiced.  What a wonderful experience for this young man and also for those in attendance.

You're right about times changing.  Compare this to what took place with the gays on campus when Dallin H. Oaks was the president.  That should never happen again....change can be good or in this case excellent.

This entire history is interesting to read:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigham_Young_University_LGBT_history

I’ve read that and it’s hard to believe this took place at BYU.  But it surely shows how times are changing (just as Bernard stated in the OP).  That was just 40 years ago so let’s hope there’s as much change (in the same direction of acceptance) over the next 40 years!

Edited April 30, 2019 by JulieM

[bluebell]

4 hours ago, california boy said:

Perhaps the most signiicant part of this speech is the resounding cheers and applause that came from his announcement on his orientation.  That says a lot about the new generration of members of the Church.  Right now, the Church seems to be kicking the can down the road.  Will that last forever?  Probably depends on how you view this issue.  

I thought the most significant part was that the school knew he was going to come out in his speech and encouraged him to do it.  That was more surprising to me (in a good way) than that the students supported him after the fact.

[Kenngo1969]

46 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Yes they are and I think it’s wonderful.  I loved hearing about this.  It’s what I’m seeing with the youth I serve in my ward.  They embrace their gay friends and family members.   They’re also happy for them to find relationships and partners and support SSM (at least almost all that I’ve heard discuss it).  That’s the future and more and more members feel this way too now from what I’ve seen.

OK.  Let's start governing the Church of Jesus Christ by popular vote, then.

[HappyJackWagon]

4 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I thought the most significant part was that the school knew he was going to come out in his speech and encouraged him to do it.  That was more surprising to me (in a good way) than that the students supported him after the fact.

Yep. All are good things.

 

Times are changing and this will continue to be an issue going forward in the church. Sorry, RedHen  

[ALarson]

53 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Yes they are and I think it’s wonderful.  I loved hearing about this.  It’s what I’m seeing with the youth I serve in my ward.  They embrace their gay friends and family members.   They’re also happy for them to find relationships and partners and support SSM (at least almost all that I’ve heard discuss it).  That’s the future and more and more members feel this way too now from what I’ve seen.

This is exactly what I'm seeing in my ward and stake.  It's definitely happening with the youth, but I'm seeing it with the adults as well.  I believe the leaders know this too and they are listening (which is why I believe the policy was reversed).

Edited April 30, 2019 by ALarson

[Kenngo1969]

I posted this on the other thread, and I think it bears repeating here:

I'm not necessarily critiquing or disagreeing with what this young man did.  More power to him, and I'm glad the audience reacted as it did: I would join in that reaction.  That said, I do think we need to get away from saying, "I'm an [x] son [or daughter] of God," whatever the [x] is.  If I am a Son or a Daughter of God, then I am a Son or a Daughter of God ... period.  That's the only thing that matters.  Once I come to the realization that I'm a Son of God, then the [x], whatever it is, ceases to matter.  If I continue to aver that "I'm an [x] Son of God," there is always the danger (however slight, and however unintended or unforeseen it may have been when I began using that phrase, that qualifier [x]) that, eventually, the "Son of God" will begin to matter less and less until it ceases to matter, and the [x] qualifier will begin to matter more and more until it becomes the only thing that matters.

[CV75]

3 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I posted this on the other thread, and I think it bears repeating here:

I'm not necessarily critiquing or disagreeing with what this young man did.  More power to him, and I'm glad the audience reacted as it did: I would join in that reaction.  That said, I do think we need to get away from saying, "I'm an [x] son [or daughter] of God," whatever the [x] is.  If I am a Son or a Daughter of God, then I am a Son or a Daughter of God ... period.  That's the only thing that matters.  Once I come to the realization that I'm a Son of God, then the [x], whatever it is, ceases to matter.  If I continue to aver that "I'm an [x] Son of God," there is always the danger (however slight, and however unintended or unforeseen it may have been when I began using that phrase, that qualifier [x]) that, eventually, the "Son of God" will begin to matter less and less until it ceases to matter, and the [x] qualifier will begin to matter more and more until it becomes the only thing that matters.

I'll repeat myself also: "In Zion, I suspect there will be no need for people to identify by, or congratulate, societal labels while at the same time transcending them."

I think the danger you point out obviously varies from individual to individual, and some of these dangers are often externally imposed as well. I go back to Elder Bednar's observation on this subject, "There are no homosexual members of the Church. We are not defined by sexual attraction. We are not defined by sexual behavior." https://www.lds.org/youth/activities/spiritual-strength/scriptures-and-prophets/face-to-face-with-elder-and-sister-bednar?lang=eng

 

[JLHPROF]

23 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

OK.  Let's start governing the Church of Jesus Christ by popular vote, then.

You've heard of common consent I take it.

The Church is a theodemocracy, not a direct theocracy.

Which is how we know it's temporal in design and will eventually be supplanted by theocracy.

[ALarson]

11 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I posted this on the other thread, and I think it bears repeating here:

I'm not necessarily critiquing or disagreeing with what this young man did.  More power to him, and I'm glad the audience reacted as it did: I would join in that reaction.  That said, I do think we need to get away from saying, "I'm an [x] son [or daughter] of God," whatever the [x] is.  If I am a Son or a Daughter of God, then I am a Son or a Daughter of God ... period.  That's the only thing that matters.  Once I come to the realization that I'm a Son of God, then the [x], whatever it is, ceases to matter.  If I continue to aver that "I'm an [x] Son of God," there is always the danger (however slight, and however unintended or unforeseen it may have been when I began using that phrase, that qualifier [x]) that, eventually, the "Son of God" will begin to matter less and less until it ceases to matter, and the [x] qualifier will begin to matter more and more until it becomes the only thing that matters.

When members are all treated equally, then I believe this will happen.   Until then, they will do as this young man did and receive applause.

[MustardSeed]

14 minutes ago, CV75 said:

I'll repeat myself also: "In Zion, I suspect there will be no need for people to identify by, or congratulate, societal labels while at the same time transcending them."

I think the danger you point out obviously varies from individual to individual, and some of these dangers are often externally imposed as well. I go back to Elder Bednar's observation on this subject, "There are no homosexual members of the Church. We are not defined by sexual attraction. We are not defined by sexual behavior." https://www.lds.org/youth/activities/spiritual-strength/scriptures-and-prophets/face-to-face-with-elder-and-sister-bednar?lang=eng

 

I think that is a worthy goal . 

When you identify as someone who has been maligned in the church, it’s important internally for a person to say to themselves “I am THIS and still I am a worthy child of God, just like the rest of you are. “. Once the maligning is non existent, the qualifier will be moot. 

As far as the church adjusting for popularity... perhaps it seems that way.  But perhaps like the Priesthood issue, God had to wait for the people to catch up. 

Its just sad so many had to get hurt along the way. 

[MustardSeed]

I’m curious what will be. 

Heres my take. 

I think across the board married homosexuality will not be punished at BYU or otherwise.  Homosexual relationships will have the same constraints and freedoms of heterosexual relationships.  I’m not expecting sealing for some time. 

I wonder how, in the future, housing will be arranged and managed In 10 years when homosexuality is now factored in . 

 

[Kenngo1969]

9 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I’m curious what will be. 

Heres my take. 

I think across the board married homosexuality will not be punished at BYU or otherwise.  Homosexual relationships will have the same constraints and freedoms of heterosexual relationships.  I’m not expecting sealing for some time. 

I wonder how, in the future, housing will be arranged and managed In 10 years when homosexuality is now factored in . 

 

So, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will change to suit your fashion, huh.  I suppose, if and when that does happen, that I'll have a decision to make.

[Kenngo1969]

39 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

You've heard of common consent I take it.

The Church is a theodemocracy, not a direct theocracy.

Which is how we know it's temporal in design and will eventually be supplanted by theocracy.

Common consent is not a popular vote.  

[MustardSeed]

3 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

So, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will change to suit your fashion, huh.  I suppose, if and when that does happen, that I'll have a decision to make.

Oh I don’t know jack. Not my fashion to be sure. I wish everyone were the way I saw the world when I was 9.  So much simpler then.  But it’s not and I’ve witnessed a lot of deep sorrow around me, extensively. My own change of heart occurred 15 years ago after I saw a documentary.  Rocked my world, and I went to my husband and told him “this issue will rip at the fibers of this church.  We need to decide if we are in or out.” We chose in, but chose to be sensitive to our homosexual brothers and sisters (and children?) . 

I really don’t know anything about anything.  I think understanding that limitation about myself makes all the changes we see bearable. 

[HappyJackWagon]

5 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Common consent is not a popular vote.  

Agreed. Votes aren't counted, though sometimes they are "noted"  

Sadly, Common Consent is (or at least it's treated like) a rubber stamp for what leadership proposes.

I think, among other things, that Common Consent was intended as a check and balance on leadership. IMO it was intended to give voice to the people in holding leaders accountable to their decisions. It should not be treated as a perfunctory rubber stamp, yet it is. Missed opportunity by the church.

[Bernard Gui]

8 hours ago, Calm said:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/71809-byu-graduation-speech/

Sorry. Missed that.

[MustardSeed]

9 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I'll have a decision to make.

Do you want to talk more about that? Sounds ominous. 

[USU78]

Time, place and context.  Some things are appropriate to discuss at certain times.  Others are appropriate in certain places.  And some are appropriate only in certain contexts.

Toddlers are capable of learning this.  Takes a while, but they get it, most of them, by the time they're four.

[Kenngo1969]

1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I posted this on the other thread, and I think it bears repeating here:

I'm not necessarily critiquing or disagreeing with what this young man did.  More power to him, and I'm glad the audience reacted as it did: I would join in that reaction.  That said, I do think we need to get away from saying, "I'm an [x] son [or daughter] of God," whatever the [x] is.  If I am a Son or a Daughter of God, then I am a Son or a Daughter of God ... period.  That's the only thing that matters.  Once I come to the realization that I'm a Son of God, then the [x], whatever it is, ceases to matter.  If I continue to aver that "I'm an [x] Son of God," there is always the danger (however slight, and however unintended or unforeseen it may have been when I began using that phrase, that qualifier [x]) that, eventually, the "Son of God" will begin to matter less and less until it ceases to matter, and the [x] qualifier will begin to matter more and more until it becomes the only thing that matters.

 

1 hour ago, ALarson said:

When members are all treated equally, then I believe this will happen.   Until then, they will do as this young man did and receive applause.

 

35 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I’m curious what will be. 

Heres my take. 

I think across the board married homosexuality will not be punished at BYU or otherwise.  Homosexual relationships will have the same constraints and freedoms of heterosexual relationships.  I’m not expecting sealing for some time. 

I wonder how, in the future, housing will be arranged and managed In 10 years when homosexuality is now factored in . 

 

 

25 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

So, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will change to suit your fashion, huh.  I suppose, if and when that does happen, that I'll have a decision to make.

 

14 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

Do you want to talk more about that? Sounds ominous. 

No.

Nice try.

Thanks for dangling the bait.  

Edited April 30, 2019 by Kenngo1969