Robert F. Smith Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 11 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said: The absolute oddness is compounded when we consider that fixed, gendered sexual identity -- including, importantly, so-called 'heterosexuality'* -- has a known and relatively recent genealogy. Why would we assume that exaltation will consist of late 19th-century social constructs that temporarily gained ascendance in certain Western and Western-influenced cultures in the early 21st century? ----- * On this point, nearly all of us are in equal need of the curative power of the Atonement: 'And he that looketh upon a woman to lust after her shall deny the faith, and shall not have the Spirit; and if he repents not he shall be cast out'. Not really certain what you are saying here, despite a couple of careful rereadings. However, my question would be whether God is a social constructionist, in addition to being merciful and gracious? Are we even going to get an E for effort?
Ahab Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 9 minutes ago, The Nehor said: Yeah, congratulations on posting parts of the word which taken in isolation can be used to broaden the word but when dealing with words built on other words the definition is often more narrow. Now we can look at the definition of what we are actually discussing: ho·mo·sex·u·al·i·ty /ˌhōməˌsekSHəˈwalədē/ noun the quality or characteristic of being sexually attracted solely to people of one's own sex. Oh, and please do not resort to your tired schtick where you now claim that you have a private definition of the word that does not match common usage. We have been down that road a few times and it is tedious and boring. When clarifying an issue it helps to try to look at it from all directions as much as possible, rather than limiting the scope of the issue. I think the problem with being "attracted solely to people of one's own sex" is that the other sex is not seen as being sexually attractive, even though there are many others who will testify that it is! Limitations like that can be overcome, though, and I think all of us will be able to see how each sex is sexually attractive the more we come to see each sex as our Father in heaven sees us.
USU78 Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 2 minutes ago, CV75 said: The straw-men are in your responses to me here Posted 3 hours ago and here Posted 3 hours ago (edited), which touched on whether being gay is a sin or disease. They detract from the point I was making (here Posted 2 hours ago ), which you seemed to counter by saying that being gay might affect your testimony and following Christ compared to whatever orientation you might be. I'm not sure why being gay would separate you out from knowing what is good, right and true but that is something you were suggesting, not me. Perhaps you can explain why being gay would have that kind of impact on your faith, and describe how you might be healed from that through the Atonement of Christ. I'm reminded of an exchange up at the ewe when a female presenter at Sunstone claimed that a male Christ could not be a savior for females because He could not possibly understand women's issues, and that a female Christa was necessary before women could feel full participants in Christianity. The male responder/commentator said, after she was done, "Just what part of omniscient don't you understand?" Brought the house down. Good old Blake. 2
The Nehor Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 3 minutes ago, USU78 said: How are you defining "it?" If one defines "it" as merely the inclination/drive/temptation, whatever its origins, we have plenty of from-the-pulpit-in-Conference declarations, as well as online variations on the theme, that "it" is not sin in and of itself. Thus, your 2nd sentence above appears to be out of line with what the Church's actual position is, regardless how you see G-d's involvement in that position. If "it" is acting upon the inclination, then the Church's position is clear: it's a sin that must be repented of like any other. Is it cruel? I myself don't think so. I can think of far worse things to be gifted with in life, at birth or otherwise. Here we get into the nature of evil and the problem of pain. Is it cruel that I was born with serious scoliosis and a lifetime of pain? Is it cruel that I was born with a malformation of the pyloric sphincter muscle that led to post natal stenosis, requiring life-threatening surgery to prevent loss of life at a couple of weeks old? Is it cruel that my parents moved me from my natal state to Brigham City, where the local folk never accepted us outlanders, leaving me lonely and unhappy? Or are these merely incidents of earth life, neither good nor bad, that I must accommodate myself to? Arguably G-d caused each of those three things. Arguably He merely permitted them, knowing that my spirit put into my body at my birth at a particular place and time would assist me to become the best version of me that I am capable of fashioning. I'm not particularly impressed with the whole "poor me" schtick. Everybody's got a lot of dreck to deal with. I don't want yours. You definitely don't want mine. Yes, all that is cruel and they are definitely bad and not good. I do not buy things that cause suffering being morally neutral. Yeah, we deal with them but they are still evil, even if enduring that evil can be turned to good through growth. We could all give a litany of personal afflictions. I would ask though if any of these afflictions cut you off from any of the ordinances of exaltation.
The Nehor Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 2 minutes ago, Ahab said: When clarifying an issue it helps to try to look at it from all directions as much as possible, rather than limiting the scope of the issue. By that you mean making up new definitions and correcting those who use the real ones. Then throw in your standard creepy and offputting way of hinting that you are bisexual and everyone will be like you one day. As I said we have been down this road before. 3
USU78 Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 1 minute ago, The Nehor said: Yes, all that is cruel and they are definitely bad and not good. I do not buy things that cause suffering being morally neutral. Yeah, we deal with them but they are still evil, even if enduring that evil can be turned to good through growth. Hard to be a Book of Mormon believer and hold that position. Care to explain how you reconcile that? Quote We could all give a litany of personal afflictions. I would ask though if any of these afflictions cut you off from any of the ordinances of exaltation. Any one of them by itself or the bunch together could cut me off from the ordinances of exaltation if I chose to permit them to. My bundle of horribles. My choice how I deal with them. The first people like us we encounter in scripture have dumped upon them mutually irreconcilable choices, no clear indication of which is the better choice, and deadly serious consequences attached to each, which they understood only slightly. That's "cruel" by your very odd definition, yet it is in the nature of our species and our situation on this here planet to have to make awful choices on limited or no information with possible consequences we rarely can see clearly. Is the world cruel? You could say so, but you'd ignore the wildly beautiful parts of life if you focused on only that. So what makes the homosexual so special that he gets to check out of this central problem of earthly existence?
CV75 Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 7 minutes ago, The Nehor said: Yes, all that is cruel and they are definitely bad and not good. I do not buy things that cause suffering being morally neutral. Yeah, we deal with them but they are still evil, even if enduring that evil can be turned to good through growth. We could all give a litany of personal afflictions. I would ask though if any of these afflictions cut you off from any of the ordinances of exaltation. Technically, none of them do (or would) in the long run. During mortal life, many are kept from them for one reason or another (including attitudes of hopelessness), and every generation may adopt an insurmountable exception and cause of hopelessness into its ethos, but none of them really are.
Ahab Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 4 minutes ago, The Nehor said: By that you mean making up new definitions and correcting those who use the real ones. Then throw in your standard creepy and offputting way of hinting that you are bisexual and everyone will be like you one day. As I said we have been down this road before. You libel me, sir. And I do not make up definitions. I simply use the ones that exist for words and the components of words in an attempt to clarify what those words mean. Nevertheless, the fact remains that there are men who say women are sexually attractive and women who say men are sexually attractive, as well, along with some of each sex who say that only their own sex is sexually attractive. So what say you to all that? I say we should either take them each at their own word or conclude that each is a liar and there is no sex which is sexually attractive. I once was blind, partially, but now I see more and am willing to share what I see.
The Nehor Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 1 minute ago, USU78 said: Hard to be a Book of Mormon believer and hold that position. Care to explain how you reconcile that? Any one of them by itself or the bunch together could cut me off from the ordinances of exaltation if I chose to permit them to. My bundle of horribles. My choice how I deal with them. The first people like us we encounter in scripture have dumped upon them mutually irreconcilable choices, no clear indication of which is the better choice, and deadly serious consequences attached to each, which they understood only slightly. That's "cruel" by your very odd definition, yet it is in the nature of our species and our situation on this here planet to have to make awful choices on limited or no information with possible consequences we rarely can see clearly. Is the world cruel? You could say so, but you'd ignore the wildly beautiful parts of life if you focused on only that. So what makes the homosexual so special that he gets to check out of this central problem of earthly existence? I know of nothing in the Book of Mormon that suggests pain is not an evil. What do I need to reconcile? How would you suggest a homosexual be sealed for eternity to someone of the opposite gender? Deception? Hope it will just work out? Who is saying they get to check out? I am saying it is hard and there looks to be no escape. The scriptures offer no solution. The requirements in the Doctrine and Covenants for exaltation seem to offer no honorable options. I have gay friends in the church I have encouraged to stay celibate and hope for some help later but I do not blame them when they fail to stick to that course. There is emotion attached. It is called empathy and I am not very good at it but interpreting everyone who struggles with Herculean trials should not elicit the characterization of “poor me” whining. As to Adam and Eve my interpretation of that story is radical and probably heretical and I do not believe it was an irreconcilable situation. There was a choice but I do not believe in the conditions and reasons LDS folklore often build around it. In it Adam and Eve made a great and terrible choice to rescue us and the two of them are greater then we give them them credit for. I suspect John Taylor was wrong in putting Joseph Smith as second only to the Savior in bringing exaltation to humanity. I would put Joseph at fourth.
The Nehor Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 10 minutes ago, CV75 said: Technically, none of them do (or would) in the long run. During mortal life, many are kept from them for one reason or another (including attitudes of hopelessness), and every generation may adopt an insurmountable exception and cause of hopelessness into its ethos, but none of them really are. It is not insurmountable and there are no exceptions outside of small children and those not accountable for their actions. I just do not know how to comfort and strengthen those that walk this road and it seems neither do they.
The Nehor Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 3 minutes ago, Ahab said: You libel me, sir. And I do not make up definitions. I simply use the ones that exist for words and the components of words in an attempt to clarify what those words mean. Nevertheless, the fact remains that there are men who say women are sexually attractive and women who say men are sexually attractive, as well, along with some of each sex who say that only their own sex is sexually attractive. So what say you to all that? I say we should either take them each at their own word or conclude that each is a liar and there is no sex which is sexually attractive. I once was blind, partially, but now I see more and am willing to share what I see. I take them at their word and still creepy.
Ahab Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 1 minute ago, The Nehor said: I take them at their word and still creepy. According to the way you define creepy, perhaps. So do we both now agree that both men and women are sexually attractive, even though you may still find that fact creepy? It is kinda weird, but then again, I wouldn't want it any other way and it's fascinates me the more I think about it. Each sex is sexually attractive, collectively, even though not everybody, individually, agrees with that fact.
MustardSeed Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 3 minutes ago, Ahab said: According to the way you define creepy, perhaps. So do we both now agree that both men and women are sexually attractive, even though you may still find that fact creepy? It is kinda weird, but then again, I wouldn't want it any other way and it's fascinates me the more I think about it. Each sex is sexually attractive, collectively, even though not everybody, individually, agrees with that fact. FWIW I don’t think it’s creepy to find both sexes attractive. I think women are far more attractive than men. Full stop, as the kids say. To actually “be” attracted is something different imo. Not that that is creepy to me but whatever. 1
Ahab Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 1 minute ago, MustardSeed said: FWIW I don’t think it’s creepy to find both sexes attractive. I think women are far more attractive than men. Full stop, as the kids say. To actually “be” attracted is something different imo. Not that that is creepy to me but whatever.. In my experience I have found that to "be" attracted to someone of any sex all it takes is enough thought/focus/concentration/attention on what it is that makes that person sexually attractive. Given the fact that each person is, of course, to at least one person. And my advice on that is to not think too much about things that you should not be thinking too much about!
USU78 Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 (edited) 22 minutes ago, The Nehor said: I know of nothing in the Book of Mormon that suggests pain is not an evil. What do I need to reconcile? Sure you do: Quote Mosiah 3:19 For the anatural bman is an cenemy to God, and has been from the dfall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he eyields to the enticings of the fHoly Spirit, and gputteth off the hnatural man and becometh a isaint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a jchild, ksubmissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father. Quote How would you suggest a homosexual be sealed for eternity to someone of the opposite gender? Deception? Hope it will just work out? See id. Quote Who is saying they get to check out? I am saying it is hard and there looks to be no escape. The scriptures offer no solution. The requirements in the Doctrine and Covenants for exaltation seem to offer no honorable options. I have gay friends in the church I have encouraged to stay celibate and hope for some help later but I do not blame them when they fail to stick to that course. There is emotion attached. It is called empathy and I am not very good at it but interpreting everyone who struggles with Herculean trials should not elicit the characterization of “poor me” whining. If your say their lot is so cruel that they cannot be held to the same moral standards as the rest of us, including the central problems of taking on faith that good will ensue if we make right choices, even if we cannot see the advantage of good here, then you excuse them and, like any good and useful codependent, enable bad behavior. Quote As to Adam and Eve my interpretation of that story is radical and probably heretical and I do not believe it was an irreconcilable situation. There was a choice but I do not believe in the conditions and reasons LDS folklore often build around it. In it Adam and Eve made a great and terrible choice to rescue us and the two of them are greater then we give them them credit for. I suspect John Taylor was wrong in putting Joseph Smith as second only to the Savior in bringing exaltation to humanity. I would put Joseph at fourth. It doesn't matter a d@mn whether there were an Adam and an Eve at a particular point in time in a particular place. The power of the myth is in its descriptive accuracy and power, and how it teaches us what life is really like and what is expected of us. BTW: I put Eve second, Joseph third, and Adam fourth. She's the one who took the plunge on incomplete information, with disinformation being slopped around, muddying what might otherwise have been clear, and without knowing for sure that, with the stakes so dire and dreadful, she wasn't screwing things up for billions. Adam, on the other hand, said, "Okay." Edited August 6, 2019 by USU78 1
MustardSeed Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 2 minutes ago, Ahab said: In my experience I have found that to "be" attracted to someone of any sex all it takes is enough thought/focus/concentration/attention on what it is that makes that person sexually attractive. Given the fact that each person is, of course, to at least one person. And my advice on that is to not think too much about things that you should not be thinking too much about! Don’t worry. Women tend to be annoying enough to counteract any attractiveness, IMO of course 😂
ALarson Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 (edited) 45 minutes ago, USU78 said: So what makes the homosexual so special that he gets to check out of this central problem of earthly existence? Who is asking for that to take place? Just don't lump a person who is gay in with saying that being gay is the same as someone who suffers with a disease or birth defect (ie: "Is it cruel that I was born with serious scoliosis and a lifetime of pain? Is it cruel that I was born with a malformation of the pyloric sphincter muscle that led to post natal stenosis, requiring life-threatening surgery to prevent loss of life at a couple of weeks old?"). All of what you list regarding the sufferings of physical (or even mental) illnesses and birth defects also affect those who are gay. No one is asking to "check out" or be allowed to never suffer with any of those just because they are gay. Edited August 6, 2019 by ALarson
ALarson Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ahab said: Elder Haden didn't say gay people will become straight. Use his own words. He was conveying or at least trying to convey the idea that people's attraction for each other will be "normal" after they die, and I take normal to mean that both sexes will see each other the way they saw each other while they/we lived in the Celestial kingdom with our Father in heaven before we were born here on this planet. Men who see only their own sex as attractive, for example, will also see the opposite sex as attractive, and vice versa. Each of us is, but some people simply can't see that for some reason or another. But then we will see as we are seen and know others as we know and learn better how to know our own selves. I understand that's what you believe. But you're stating all this as if it's a known fact. You're doing a whole lot of speculating here..... And your usage of normal (in scare quotes) is a big part of the problem. Those who are gay are normal and feel normal affection for others. Edited August 6, 2019 by ALarson
USU78 Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 5 minutes ago, ALarson said: Who is asking for that to take place? Just don't lump a person who is gay in with saying that being gay is the same as someone who suffers with a disease or birth defect (ie: "Is it cruel that I was born with serious scoliosis and a lifetime of pain? Is it cruel that I was born with a malformation of the pyloric sphincter muscle that led to post natal stenosis, requiring life-threatening surgery to prevent loss of life at a couple of weeks old?"). All of what you list regarding the sufferings of physical (or even mental) illnesses and birth defects also affect those who are gay. No one is asking to "check out" or be allowed to never suffer with any of those just because they are gay. See my response to The Nehor, above.
ALarson Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 (edited) 2 minutes ago, USU78 said: See my response to The Nehor, above. Which one? Can you link to it? (Thanks) ETA: Nevermind....I see it. And, my answer still stands. No one who is gay is asking to get out of all the sufferings in this life that others suffer with. Specifically what suffering are you referring to that you believe those who are gay are asking to escape from in this life? Edited August 6, 2019 by ALarson
USU78 Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 Just now, ALarson said: Which one? Can you link to it? (Thanks) Don't know how. Check up around 5 posts +/-.
The Nehor Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 1 minute ago, USU78 said: Sure you do: See id. If your say their lot is so cruel that they cannot be held to the same moral standards as the rest of us, including the central problems of taking on faith that good will ensue if we make right choices, even if we cannot see the advantage of good here, then you excuse them and, like any good and useful codependent, enable bad behavior. It doesn't matter a d@mn whether there were an Adam and an Eve at a particular point in time in a particular place. The power of the myth is in its descriptive accuracy and power, and how it teaches us what life is really like and what is expected of us. BTW: I put Eve second, Joseph third, and Adam fourth. She's the one who took the plunge on incomplete information, with disinformation being slopped around, muddying what might otherwise have been clear, and without knowing for sure that, with the stakes so dire and dreadful, she wasn't screwing things up for billions. I did not suggest that they cannot be held to the same moral standards. I just empathize that some of those standards are harder because some drives have no permitted outlet and that one covenant and ordinance is unlikely to be attainable. I am also not surprised if they give up on the whole thing but I am not surprised when people leave over other things as well. I do not enable. I just do not condemn. I do believe the final judgment will factor in degree of difficulty. If that is enabling so be it. Life is cruel. I actually admire your stoic take on afflictions and the evils of this world. I wish I could copy it but I do not seem to have that capability. I have to deal with pain in different ways. I would argue it does matter whether they existed. As a myth it works as man choosing to fall against God’s will and a redemption happening but with Latter-day Saint insights as to God wanting it to happen it becomes less clear. If the plan from the beginning was the Fall had to happen why all this rigamarole in the Garden? Why not start in a fallen world? We all agreed before the world started to be there. Why did our first parents have to kick that off when everyone agreed? Why did God forbid something He wanted to happen? Why not lay out the two options and forbid nothing? Why was Satan stupid enough to kick the thing off when he was in the initial council? Why let him into the Garden at all? So much seems off. Sorry, I will end this tangent.
The Nehor Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 4 minutes ago, ALarson said: And, my answer still stands. No one who is gay is asking to get out of all the sufferings in this life that others suffer with. I am not gay but I have asked for this. I am in good company. The Savior would have opted out if there was another way.
The Nehor Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 21 minutes ago, Ahab said: In my experience I have found that to "be" attracted to someone of any sex all it takes is enough thought/focus/concentration/attention on what it is that makes that person sexually attractive. Given the fact that each person is, of course, to at least one person. And my advice on that is to not think too much about things that you should not be thinking too much about! Please do not undress me physically, mentally or emotionally with your thoughts, focus, concentration, or attention. Thanks in advance.
CV75 Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 40 minutes ago, The Nehor said: It is not insurmountable and there are no exceptions outside of small children and those not accountable for their actions. I just do not know how to comfort and strengthen those that walk this road and it seems neither do they. I think how to do that becomes very personal and individualized, but walking with another is certainly a good start.
Recommended Posts