A Coming Out Party in Provo

[mtomm]

This reminds of a time clock that"s ticking.  Is someone keeping track of that?

[MustardSeed]

24 minutes ago, CV75 said:

I don't think he was talking about sexuality so much as how he manages his sexuality within the covenants he has made, and balancing that with his changing social standing vis-a-vis changing societal attitudes about sexuality.

Yes.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

When was the last time you heard about a gay cake maker whose store was shut down? 

If that was the worse, I think many would be celebrating.

Quote

In recent years LGBT violence has been on the rise in the United States. In 2016, the killing of LGBT people hit a record high. The biggest act of violence occurred in Orlando when Omar Manteen attacked the Pulse nightclub in the city killing 49 and wounding 53 others. This was not only the biggest attack targeting LGBT people but one of the biggest mass shootings in the United States history. There was also 28 Americans who identified as LGBT and were killed in 2016 alone...

January 2, 2018 - Blaze Bernstein, an openly gay Jewish college student, was stabbed more than 20 times. Samuel Woodward, an avowed neo-Nazi and member of the group Atomwaffen Division, was charged with his murder.[228]

March 7, 2018 - Ta'Ron 'Rio' Carson, a gay man, was fatally shot as he left the Aura nightclub in Kansas City, Missouri.[229]

March 23, 2018 - Jared Jacobs was killed after a man drove a car at high speed into a gay couple. Another man was taken to an area hospital with injuries to his right leg and torso. Cordale Robinson, a 25-year-old man, was taken into custody after police arrived on the scene. Robinson has been charged with murder and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.[230]

March 28, 2018 - Amia Tyrae, a black transgender woman, was found dead in a motel room in Baton Rouge, Louisiana with multiple gunshot wounds. Nevaa White, a friend of Tyrae's, said that Tyrae had lived her life as an openly trans woman since 2009. White also said Tyrae was bullied and "didn't have an easy life.[231][dead link]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_violence_against_LGBT_people_in_the_United_States#Federal_hate_crime_statistics

Edited April 30, 2019 by Calm

[ALarson]

2 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

My point was that this young man was being validated all along the way from family, friends, professors, university administration, and yet with all of that validation he 1) still felt the need for more validation, 2) still felt insecure of telling others what is sexual preference was.

How do you know this was the case?  (Sincere question).  Is there somewhere that I can read more about his background?

(Thanks)

[carbon dioxide]

5 hours 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.

God did say that when he starts pouring his judgements out on the earth, he will start with his house.  Members should always be careful that their acceptance of anything runs counter to what the Lord accepts.   If one is on the wrong side of the Lord, we pretty much know who will win.  I will always remain a member regardless of what happens. Perhaps might go inactive for a bit to avoid the the house cleaning.

[MustardSeed]

3 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

God did say that when he starts pouring his judgements out on the earth, he will start with his house.  Members should always be careful that their acceptance of anything runs counter to what the Lord accepts.   If one is on the wrong side of the Lord, we pretty much know who will win.  I will always remain a member regardless of what happens. Perhaps might go inactive for a bit to avoid the the house cleaning.

Indeed, God may be a clever writer , introducing the twist at the end.  Stay the course.  

[CA Steve]

14 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

God did say that when he starts pouring his judgements out on the earth, he will start with his house.  Members should always be careful that their acceptance of anything runs counter to what the Lord accepts.   If one is on the wrong side of the Lord, we pretty much know who will win.  I will always remain a member regardless of what happens. Perhaps might go inactive for a bit to avoid the the house cleaning.

I like what Armand Mauss has to say in his 'Mormon Scholars Testify" about certainty of belief.

Quote

Having entered recently the ninth decade of my mortal existence, I have settled on relatively few intellectual and spiritual positions on which I am prepared to testify with some degree of certainty. During my lifetime, I have come to be much more impressed with what I don’t know for sure—or wonder if even I can know—than with what now seems definite to me. Much of what I can’t claim to know is routinely included in the testimonies of other Latter-day Saints, whose conventional lists of what seems true and certain to them leaves me baffled at their apparent spiritual attainments. Yet I have learned that I have no right to gainsay the individual spiritual experiences of others, as I hope they will not gainsay mine, different (and fewer) though mine might be. Later I will set forth those relatively few matters to which I wish to testify, but first I shall review some of the life experiences that have contributed to my testimony.

[Snip for brevity but the entire testimony is worth reading.]

I said at the beginning of this essay that my quest has led me to a relatively few matters about which I feel I can testify on the basis of my own study, experience, meditation, and prayer. Perhaps it is time now to conclude by setting these forth:

First, I testify that there is a personal God, for it seems to me that I have felt Him (or His emissaries) remonstrating with me at times and attempting (if not always succeeding) to direct me away from my own vain, carnal, and foolish inclinations. I see Him as anthropomorphic, since alternative conceptions (such as some kind of Cosmic Force) seem to reduce God to a non-person, not so different from other natural forces like gravity. To me, that is akin to atheism. I have encountered a variety of doctrines about Deity, both within the LDS Church and without, including doctrines about Divine Parents, male and female. I have no certainty or other basis for testifying about any of those other doctrines, though I am open to further understanding. At this stage, I testify only to the existence and power of Deity in my own life.

Second, I testify to the divinity and power of the mission and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ. The Atonement is the most sublime and elevating means for human redemption and ultimate perfection that I have encountered in any religious or philosophical system. I do not understand how the Atonement actually operates in the divine, cosmic economy, but I do know that it is efficacious for me only to the extent that I strive to live in a constant state of repentance; and that’s all I need to know. Mystical or sophisticated theological explanations about the Atonement really add nothing to that basic understanding.

Third, I testify to the authenticity of the calling and mission of Joseph Smith as a prophet of God. I revere him for what he sacrificed and accomplished in pursuit of that calling, despite what seem to me a great many human flaws and errors in his life. He remains a paradox to me in many ways. Knowing, as I do, how the official accounts of his visions and revelations were produced, I cannot testify to any particulars in those accounts. I am convinced, however, that he had periodic encounters with Deity, and that these provided the basis for his recorded revelations. His contributions to the religious and spiritual fulfillment of millions of people will guarantee a revered place for him in the history of humankind. The Book of Mormon is a unique tour de force in the history of religion. I know the official account of how it was produced, but I don’t understand it, and I have no explanation of my own apart from the Prophet’s own account. I find the alternative explanations, proffered by non-believers, harder to believe than the angel stories, so I’ll go with those for now. Such a revered academic intellectual as Harold Bloom attributes Joseph’s accomplishments, including the Book of Mormon, to “genius.” To me, that’s as close as a secular explanation can come to “divine origin,” to which I would testify.

Fourth, I testify that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was established by divine intervention in human affairs. This was not the only such divine intervention, but I do not understand these interventions as routine, or even frequent. My understanding of God’s usual modus operandi is that He initiates events and institutions in human history by revelation and authorizes key human agents to carry them forward. From then on, these institutions typically become increasingly human, the more so to the extent that these agents rely upon human wisdom as opposed to divine inspiration. Those two sources of wisdom are not, of course, mutually exclusive. Ideally they go together. For example, modern general authorities have periodically hired professional consulting firms for advice, or have consulted professional scholars inside and outside the Church, either explicitly or at least by reading their published work. I myself served as such a consultant to the LDS Research Information Division in the 1970s and 1980s, and to the Presiding Bishopric in the 1960s, even before there was a RID. Yet, after all such consultations, it remains the ultimate responsibility of the priesthood leaders themselves to seek divine guidance in whatever uses they make of such human products.

 

Armand L. Mauss in Mormon Scholars Testify.

 

[The Nehor]

50 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

God did say that when he starts pouring his judgements out on the earth, he will start with his house.  Members should always be careful that their acceptance of anything runs counter to what the Lord accepts.   If one is on the wrong side of the Lord, we pretty much know who will win.  I will always remain a member regardless of what happens. Perhaps might go inactive for a bit to avoid the the house cleaning.

[Nacho2dope]

So honest question, how does everyone reconcile this with the teaching of the Church. I see how excited everyone gets with orientation is mentioned as long as it’s not heterosexual. Just wondering how everyone is doing this. 

[MustardSeed]

4 minutes ago, Nacho2dope said:

So honest question, how does everyone reconcile this with the teaching of the Church. I see how excited everyone gets with orientation is mentioned as long as it’s not heterosexual. Just wondering how everyone is doing this. 

The church is presently teaching that homosexuality isn’t a sin.  

 

[Calm]

1 minute ago, MustardSeed said:

The church is presently teaching that homosexuality isn’t a sin.  

 

Better to be specific to avoid confusion...the Church is teaching attraction itself is not a sin.  Behaviour, acting on that attraction, still qualifies as immoral behaviour.

Quote

The Church distinguishes between same-sex attraction and homosexual behavior. People who experience same-sex attraction or identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual can make and keep covenants with God and fully and worthily participate in the Church. Identifying as gay, lesbian, or bisexual or experiencing same-sex attraction is not a sin and does not prohibit one from participating in the Church, holding callings, or attending the temple.

https://www.lds.org/topics/same-sex-attraction?lang=eng

[MustardSeed]

25 minutes ago, Calm said:

Better to be specific to avoid confusion...the Church is teaching attraction itself is not a sin.  Behaviour, acting on that attraction, still qualifies as immoral behaviour.

https://www.lds.org/topics/same-sex-attraction?lang=eng

FTFM , I forget not everyone is up to speed. 

[Storm Rider]

2 hours ago, ALarson said:

How do you know this was the case?  (Sincere question).  Is there somewhere that I can read more about his background?

(Thanks)

Yeah, just read the story in the first link. It reports what he said about his coming out gay to his parents and friends, where he received support from professors and staff and the dean's office approval of his talk two weeks prior to giving it. 

[Storm Rider]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

If that was the worse, I think many would be celebrating.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_violence_against_LGBT_people_in_the_United_States#Federal_hate_crime_statistics

Yeah, not getting overly excited about this when we all can point to a great number of worse disasters killing all kinds of people for a wide range of reasons. It would have more meaning IF individuals who went to a gay club were the only ones targeted. They are not and never have been. 

[california boy]

5 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

My dear friend, I think this medium is often too ineffective to really communicate well on these types of serious topics. I am not questioning the significance of an individual at BYU, a valedictorian, standing up and tell the graduation audience that he is gay. I think it is significant on many levels. 

My point was that this young man was being validated all along the way from family, friends, professors, university administration, and yet with all of that validation he 1) still felt the need for more validation, 2) still felt insecure of telling others what is sexual preference was.

 

You haven'r even listened to the speech he gave have you.  The link to the speech is posted in the News form.  This is not a speech about coming out.  It is a speech acknowledging all those who struggled and sacrificed to be able to stand and graduate.  He acknowledges everyone who has struggled including married couples.  It is a talk about struggles and finding a path back to God through the atonement.  In subsequent interviews, he stated that the reason he included his struggles at BYU was to give encouragement to others that don't have a platform and to assure ALL who struggle that they are loved by God.  

Your judge, jury and conviction of the motivation for his talk is way off base.  It isn't about. his own insecurities or need for validation any more then when Church leaders relate their struggles that they have had to deal with in hopes of inspiring others to push forward and rely on the atonement.

Quote

The Gay Agenda has this massive bullhorn and has had for the last almost 20 years. Does a lot of society still reject homosexuality? Yes. Does the majority of world religions still reject homosexuality? Yes Does the majority of the world accept another individual's right to have whatever sexual preference they choose? Yes....well almost, societies still hold some things to be sexually unacceptable choices. 

 

 

Honestly I have no idea where you have formed some of your opinions.  Gay people in general could't care less what religion or the far right thinks about them being gay.  I have lots of gay friends.  None of them are wringing their hands hoping that some church will alow them to attend. What they care about is being treated equal and having the same rights as every other American.  Out of all the posters that hope someday the church will accept gay marriage, I am one of the few that really doesn't care.  Their bullhorn as you put it is to fight those that trys to deny them those civil rights.  Of course they are going to yell loud and clear.  It is wrong.

Quote

In this world, people are rejected for a host of things, countless numbers of things. Having a sexual preference outside the norm is just one of them. The dealing with the "secret" is a personal challenge; I don't think it is a challenge at all for society.

Yet if you had just taken the time to just listen to what he said rather than just judge, you would have heard him acknowledge numerous things that people struggle over, not just being gay.

Quote

You're gay, okay, join the crowd that has been in every television show, every movie, every song, it is a non-stop assault on the senses of humanity. When was the last time you heard about a gay cake maker whose store was shut down? You are right - it doesn't happen. Something to think about.

 

Yeah I totally get that you think those that are gay should be invisible and not exist in your world.  And they should quit being so loud about demanding those basic American civil rights guaranteed them in the constitution but denied them because some think they don't have a right to those rights.

Do you have any idea how many television shows, how many movies, how many songs I have been assaulted by pushing heterosexual relationships?  

Quote

I think you are correct that when an individual says, "I would like to thank my wife or husband for..." We don't think twice about it. However, when someone says, "I am homosexual and I have a spouse and he loves me completely and I thank him for supporting me on this journey in a straight world..." Yeah, doesn't really fly for a lot of people.

 

If you would have bothered to listen to his speech, he acknowledges both the struggles of married life and raising a child while attending BYU.

Quote

I am not sure I have ever heard a valedictorian thank their spouse before. I know I have never heard a valedictorian feel the need to tell me their sexual preference. I don't think this is a gay or straight issue, it is just the need in today's society to freely talk about all things sexual at any time. There is no sense of decency, no boundaries for when things are appropriate. 

 

Do you know how many times I have heard a General Authority and other church leaders thank their spouse for their support and the importance that person is in their lives while giving a talk?.  In doing so, they too are referring to their sexual preference.  Has that ever bothered you?  Saying you are gay is not sexual, any more than thanking a spouse is sexual.  Geez you have issues with those that are gay and have the audacity to be visible. In your world, only straight people should exist.

Edited April 30, 2019 by california boy

[carbon dioxide]

1 hour ago, Nacho2dope said:

So honest question, how does everyone reconcile this with the teaching of the Church. I see how excited everyone gets with orientation is mentioned as long as it’s not heterosexual. Just wondering how everyone is doing this. 

All sin is based on an action or (inaction in sin of omission).  So all orientation regardless of all the potential flavors out there is neutral.   It is when one acts on that orientation that determines whether the action is sinful or not.  So I don't care if people are oriented towards the opposite sex, the same sex, to sex robots, or anything else out there.  They can be a good member in the Church if they play in bounds and not out of bounds.

[member10_1]

22 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

Yeah, not getting overly excited about this when we all can point to a great number of worse disasters killing all kinds of people for a wide range of reasons. It would have more meaning IF individuals who went to a gay club were the only ones targeted. They are not and never have been. 

What the...

Ha...next time someone brings up the extermination order, Haun’s Mill, or Joseph’s martyrdom at Church I’m going to steal your reasoning...

”Yeah, not getting overly excited about Haun’s Mill or Carthage when we all can point to a great number of worse disasters killing all kinds of people for a wide range of reasons. It would have more meaning IF Joseph and Mormons were the only ones targeted. They are not and never have been.”

I’m sure everyone will be overwhelmed by my compassion.

[Kenngo1969]

3 hours ago, mtomm said:

This reminds of a time clock that"s ticking.  Is someone keeping track of that?

So, someone says, "I'm gay," nobody who's a Latter-day Saint clamors for burning him at the stake, and, somehow, that's supposed to portend the eventual acceptance of gay marriage in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?  (Should Latter-day Saints, instead, have called for burning him at the stake?)

[ALarson]

11 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

So, someone says, "I'm gay," nobody who's a Latter-day Saint clamors for burning him at the stake, and, somehow, that's supposed to portend the eventual acceptance of gay marriage in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?  (Should Latter-day Saints, instead, have called for burning him at the stake?)

As I posted here:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/71814-a-coming-out-party-in-provo/?do=findComment&comment=1209902894

It's a far cry from what took place just 40 years ago at BYU.  It's the progress that many are celebrating (along with the courage of this young man and the acceptance he received).  We're moving in the right direction and many believe the acceptance of gay marriage by the church leaders is on that path.  You don't need to agree and I respect that.....but it's why many are encouraged and pleased to hear about this.

Edited April 30, 2019 by ALarson

[ALarson]

3 hours ago, mtomm said:

This reminds of a time clock that"s ticking.  Is someone keeping track of that?

Oh boy.

(This made me laugh...thanks)

[Storm Rider]

34 minutes ago, member10_1 said:

What the...

Ha...next time someone brings up the extermination order, Haun’s Mill, or Joseph’s martyrdom at Church I’m going to steal your reasoning...

”Yeah, not getting overly excited about Haun’s Mill or Carthage when we all can point to a great number of worse disasters killing all kinds of people for a wide range of reasons. It would have more meaning IF Joseph and Mormons were the only ones targeted. They are not and never have been.”

I’m sure everyone will be overwhelmed by my compassion.

Stupid is as stupid does. Do you think a government issuing an extermination order on a group is any more significant than what has become a run of mill mass killing of groups - name the group - paper editors in France, high school students, Christians, Muslims, Jews, tourists, pedestrians, civil rights protestors, and gays. Are you proposing that killing gay individuals and their straight friends is somehow more significant? Why? What is the exact difference that you seem to think is so much more important than all the others?

[Storm Rider]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

You haven'r even listened to the speech he gave have you.  The link to the speech is posted in the News form.  This is not a speech about coming out.  It is a speech acknowledging all those who struggled and sacrificed to be able to stand and graduate.  He acknowledges everyone who has struggled including married couples.  It is a talk about struggles and finding a path back to God through the atonement.  In subsequent interviews, he stated that the reason he included his struggles at BYU was to give encouragement to others that don't have a platform and to assure ALL who struggle that they are loved by God.  

Your judge, jury and conviction of the motivation for his talk is way off base.  It isn't about. his own insecurities or need for validation any more then when Church leaders relate their struggles that they have had to deal with in hopes of inspiring others to push forward and rely on the atonement.

Honestly I have no idea where you have formed some of your opinions.  Gay people in general could't care less what religion or the far right thinks about them being gay.  I have lots of gay friends.  None of them are wringing their hands hoping that some church will alow them to attend. What they care about is being treated equal and having the same rights as every other American.  Out of all the posters that hope someday the church will accept gay marriage, I am one of the few that really doesn't care.  Their bullhorn as you put it is to fight those that trys to deny them those civil rights.  Of course they are going to yell loud and clear.  It is wrong.

Yet if you had just taken the time to just listen to what he said rather than just judge, you would have heard him acknowledge numerous things that people struggle over, not just being gay.

Yeah I totally get that you think those that are gay should be invisible and not exist in your world.  And they should quit being so loud about demanding those basic American civil rights guaranteed them in the constitution but denied them because some think they don't have a right to those rights.

Do you have any idea how many television shows, how many movies, how many songs I have been assaulted by pushing heterosexual relationships?  

If you would have bothered to listen to his speech, he acknowledges both the struggles of married life and raising a child while attending BYU.

Do you know how many times I have heard a General Authority and other church leaders thank their spouse for their support and the importance that person is in their lives while giving a talk?.  In doing so, they too are referring to their sexual preference.  Has that ever bothered you?  Saying you are gay is not sexual, any more than thanking a spouse is sexual.  Geez you have issues with those that are gay and have the audacity to be visible. In your world, only straight people should exist.

Did you read the article I specifically cited that I was responding to? NO. Quit creating the strawman. I did not listen to his speech, not what I was addressing. 

The rest just does not apply. Sorry. 

No, not even buying it. You are desperately reaching. A man stands up and says, "I would like to thank my spouse" - if you don't know him personally, you don't know who his spouse is. For me, if Buttigieg had just stood up and said my spouse has been great, I would not have known his spouse was a man or woman, but that is not what he did. FIrst, he has to tell my his sexual preference, then he has to tell me he is married, then he has to tell me his spouse is a man. Get over it; live your friggin life and get on with it. 

Edited May 1, 2019 by Storm Rider

[JLHPROF]

9 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Common consent is not a popular vote.  

Actually if you check your history books it can be at times.

[member10_1]

23 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

Stupid is as stupid does. Do you think a government issuing an extermination order on a group is any more significant than what has become a run of mill mass killing of groups - name the group - paper editors in France, high school students, Christians, Muslims, Jews, tourists, pedestrians, civil rights protestors, and gays. Are you proposing that killing gay individuals and their straight friends is somehow more significant? Why? What is the exact difference that you seem to think is so much more important than all the others?

Dang, I totally forgot that when I comment on the suffering of one group it elevates their suffering above that of every other group...I’m soooo sorry. What groups do you identify with? I’ll include those groups in a special disclaimer for any post I make about suffering to make sure you don’t feel like someone else is more special than you. 

[MustardSeed]

37 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

Get over it; live your friggin life and get on with it. 

Has anyone ever accused you of being a nurturer?