What do you believe is the current narrative for most LGTBQ members of the Church?

[california boy]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

How do you describe the Church's approach to LGTBQ members?

I can understand the importance of a couple being committed to each other, but the most essential component of the relationship is the couple's individual and united commitment to and covenant with God.

I can say this.  The Church does NOTHING to encourage gay couples to be in a committed relationship.  In fact the Church until just recently the Church did everything it could to prevent those monogamous relationships by, excommunicating gay couples that entered into such an relationship. That is THE harshest punishment the Church could use to prevent committed relationships.  It is total hypocrisy to now vilify gay couples that are not in a monogamous relationship.

[The Nehor]

On 11/11/2021 at 5:13 PM, rodheadlee said:

I'm still trying to figure out why I need to know anyone's sexual orientation. TMI!

I mentioned my necrophilia once in passing. It was a long time ago. I’m sorry okay.

Let it go!

[thatjimguy]

In the idea of being in line with the church (tolerance, acceptance and the like being a different lens), I really don't see much difference between being gay as opposed to being single, as I am.

Both of us cannot engage in pre marital sex. 

I could also, simply "find someone" that I am not "in love" with, but "learn to love" for the sake of having children and building a church. (I believe it was Elder Holland that gave that advice). As you can imagine, my dedication to that idea isn't strong.

Can you be happy in the church without sex or even companionship? Yes, but it's a difficult road. Very difficult. With a lot of failure along the way as you could imagine.

You are right, there isn't a lot of success stories in the church about this. But I don't think it's logical to think there ever will be. Most guys in my position would have lifted their hands and say "I'm out!" and just hit a strip club or whatever. (and I can't judge them and quite honestly, can't blame them either. I am two bad days away from that route myself at times). 

I think stating how tough that road actually is and acknowledging most people, in their same position, will not be able to achieve it, would go a long way.

[Olmec Donald]

10 hours ago, MrShorty said:

We're not used to the principle of common consent being used in this way -- to suggest bottom up revelation -- but I think the implication is there.

Reminds me of the story of Balaam's @$$, a clear case of bottom-up revelation.  (And no, that wasn't a bad pun:  "@$$" in this context means "donkey".)  But my point is, there is precedent for bottom-up revelation.

 

Edited November 13, 2021 by Olmec Donald

[Calm]

2 hours ago, CV75 said:

I think I used the wrong word then, but I meant having the highest priority. I'll change that -- thank you!

I can understand the importance of a couple being committed to each other, but the most essential component of the relationship is the couple's individual and united commitment to and covenant with God.

 

 

Think prevailing winds…prevailing idea…more than just current, but not just primary.

I think the word you mean is paramount.

[Peacefully]

3 hours ago, kimpearson said:

If the Church's approach to LGTBQ members is the approach sanctioned by God, why does it cause such suffering in the form of mental illness, self harm, self hatred and in far too many cases suicidal ideation by those who try for years to follow the Church's approach.  I am basing those results on the 3 or 4 thousand personal stories I have listened too.  These are individuals who kept the law of chastity, read their scriptures, prayed (in most cases almost constantly for a period of time), attended the temple regularly, attended seminary, served as class and quorum presidents, went on missions.  None of these actions helped.  Their mental condition became worse and worse until they left the Church to save their own lives.  Explain to me why a loving savior who was willing to sacrifice His life would offer a path that leads to such results.  Tell me of any other path of obedience to God's commandments that causes those who are faithful in their obedience such pain and suffering.  The scriptures seem clear.  By the fruits you shall no if something is right.  How can we argue that wickedness is never brings happiness but imply the righteousness for some will always cause unbearable pain and suffering.

Please don't assume I saying the Church should say homosexual sex is okay in any instance.  I personally believe the gender of your sexual partner doesn't matter.  What matters is the commitment to that partner.  The righteous proper use of sex is between two individual that have made promises to each other that are intended to last forever/life depending on your understanding.  We see the good fruits of such commitments that are truly honored around us in numbers to great to deny.  This includes committed gay couples.  We see the bad fruits of those who don't honor such commitments or have sex outside of such commitments in numbers to great to deny.   Now as to the question of whether you can become exactly like God (i.e. highest degree in the Celestial Kingdom) in a same gender relationship, I have no idea.  I have no problem with not performing celestial marriages in the temple for eternity for same gender couples until we get further revelation.  I have no problem with the Church officially refusing to perform same gender marriages in its churches because it isn't known if they can lead to the celestial kingdom.  Why can't we accept that unknown but allow homosexual committed relationships evidenced by legal marriages under the law of the land full membership in the Church with the exception of temple marriage.  Why can't we treat homosexual sex outside of such committed relationships the same as we treat heterosexual sex outside of committed relationships.  Why can't that be the definition of the law of chastity?  What would be the bad fruit that would hurt peoples lives and make them unhappy of such a policy?  What would cause people to draw away from God by such a policy?

I do believe people should be allowed to transition their gender.  If not being allowed to transition creates the same mental illness, self harm and in far to many cases suicidal ideation, how can that be the approach sanctioned by a loving Heavenly Father.  I have yet to meet a transgender member of the Church that didn't for at least some period of time try to follow current Church guidance but had to stop before it ruined their lives.  If the Church believes the priesthood can only be held by men, then a transgender female member can give up the priesthood and a transgender male can be ordained to the priesthood.

Am I demanding these changes, no.  I am saying the current approach does not bear any evidence of being approved by God as guided by prophets and scripture as to what is evidence of God's approach.  So let's try a different approach.  I have offered some that allow certain current doctrines to remain fully in place while simply treating God's children in way that would bring much relief from current suffering.

I am an active member of the church and I agree with most of what you have said, but I would go a step further. Since there has been no revelation on same-sex marriage, why not allow them to be sealed and let God take care of the details in the next life? 

[Canadiandude]

43 minutes ago, Peacefully said:

I am an active member of the church and I agree with most of what you have said, but I would go a step further. Since there has been no revelation on same-sex marriage, why not allow them to be sealed and let God take care of the details in the next life? 

There hasn’t?

I’ve heard contradictory things re: revelation on the matter.

From the info I’ve read, the creation of The FamProc makes me wonder, yet official church cannon doesn’t always come through these official, institutionalized processes either. 

[Canadiandude]

11 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I don’t know about that. The Lord, in November 2015 revealed that the more committed the homosexual couple, the worse sin it is. The revelation indicated that serious transgressions include “homosexual relations (especially sexual cohabitation)” [emphasis mine]. It also stated that a disciplinary council was mandatory for apostasy if a homosexual relationship was solemnized with the sacrament of marriage. So under this revealed hierarchy, promiscuous relationships < cohabitation << marriage on the sin seriousness scale. 

Heck, I was excommunicated for merely having a boyfriend and not repenting.

In hindsight, and upon reading the policy at the time better, I have so many questions.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Think prevailing winds…prevailing idea…more than just current, but not just primary.

I think the word you mean is paramount.

Yes, that covers it -- thanks again!

[Peacefully]

33 minutes ago, Canadiandude said:

There hasn’t?

I’ve heard contradictory things re: revelation on the matter.

From the info I’ve read, the creation of The FamProc makes me wonder, yet official church cannon doesn’t always come through these official, institutionalized processes either. 

I agree there have been some contradictions, but I think it is because we believe all has not yet been revealed that there is room for this issue to evolve. I don’t know where it will end up in my lifetime, but I’m hopeful. 

Edited November 13, 2021 by Peacefully

[Canadiandude]

12 minutes ago, Peacefully said:

I agree there have been some contradictions, but I think it is because we believe all has not yet been revealed that there is room for this issue to evolve. I don’t know where it will end up in my lifetime, but I’m hopeful. 

Yeah, the term ‘Continuing Revelation, and all that jazz. 
 

I respectfully think there are alternative explanations for why organizations change but that’s me.

[kimpearson]

3 hours ago, thatjimguy said:

In the idea of being in line with the church (tolerance, acceptance and the like being a different lens), I really don't see much difference between being gay as opposed to being single, as I am.

Both of us cannot engage in pre marital sex. 

I could also, simply "find someone" that I am not "in love" with, but "learn to love" for the sake of having children and building a church. (I believe it was Elder Holland that gave that advice). As you can imagine, my dedication to that idea isn't strong.

Can you be happy in the church without sex or even companionship? Yes, but it's a difficult road. Very difficult. With a lot of failure along the way as you could imagine.

You are right, there isn't a lot of success stories in the church about this. But I don't think it's logical to think there ever will be. Most guys in my position would have lifted their hands and say "I'm out!" and just hit a strip club or whatever. (and I can't judge them and quite honestly, can't blame them either. I am two bad days away from that route myself at times). 

I think stating how tough that road actually is and acknowledging most people, in their same position, will not be able to achieve it, would go a long way.

Tell me how many heterosexual sis-gender single members of the Church you know who slowly have lost their mental health to the point of suicide living the gospel to their best ability.  What does a heterosexual sis-gender single member dream of for the life after this one if they don't marry?   They get the desire of their heart, marriage.  What does a homosexual or transgender member of the Church get to dream about for the next life?  A relationship or body that makes them ill to even think about.  What if a single member meets someone and falls in love?  They can get married for time and eternity.   Does a heterosexual sis-gender single member face challenges?  Yes.  Is their life hard in a family oriented church?  Yes.  Maybe the fruits we see in single members lives indicate that we could do much better as a church in including them in the gospel path.  But I completely fail to see how the challenges a heterosexual sis-gender single member faces are equal/the same as LGTBQ members other than both shouldn't have sex under current guidelines.

[Canadiandude]

And then there’s that real sense of assimilation horror when one contemplates the god fixing you postmortally so as to ensure you’re properly str8.

and ‘perfected’.

Edited November 13, 2021 by Canadiandude

[thatjimguy]

 

Quote

Tell me how many heterosexual sis-gender single members of the Church you know who slowly have lost their mental health to the point of suicide living the gospel to their best ability. 

What makes you think you have a monopoly on mental health issues and suicide? Ever hear of perfectionism in the church? You are not alone bud. 

 

Quote

What does a heterosexual sis-gender single member dream of for the life after this one if they don't marry?   They get the desire of their heart, marriage.  What does a homosexual or transgender member of the Church get to dream about for the next life?  A relationship or body that makes them ill to even think about.

The idea of finding someone "in the next life" is as much science fiction for both heterosexuals as it would be homosexuals to deal with, isn't it? 

 

Quote

What if a single member meets someone and falls in love?  They can get married for time and eternity.  

and if not...we are still in the same boat. I am rather positive you could step in to say "at least you have hope!" But, are you sure about that? I haven't dated in years...years. Does that sound like hope?

 

Quote

Is their life hard in a family oriented church?  Yes. Maybe the fruits we see in single members lives indicate that we could do much better as a church in including them in the gospel path.  

It is if you dwell on it. (and I know that is a hard advice to swallow, I remember eye-rolling to it years ago myself) I found that being happy for them is better than being sorry for myself.

I have a fulfilling calling as a single man. Actually, I have had a few. I magnify it. Since I help others, how hard is it not to feel better about one's own situation?

Being same-sex attracted does not disqualify you from church callings. But diving in full-on would (again, same boat as me).
 

Quote

But I completely fail to see how the challenges a heterosexual sis-gender single member faces are equal/the same as LGTBQ members other than both shouldn't have sex under current guidelines.

I think it is close enough to have empathy, understanding, and solutions.

How many people are even in the church compared to the world? How many of them are all that dedicated? How many of them are getting the Celestial Kingdom (and in my opinion, the Celestial Kingdom is a similitude for the American Dream, spouse, kids, house, maybe a dog.)

I couldn't judge or blame you for jumping ship if you wanted to live your life in love with someone. How many of Temple Recommend holders would give up their spouse if asked? With all those perfect pictures of families and all, I doubt most would answer that call either. 

But in heaven, everything's going to be all right. We certainly cannot understand how right now. But, it's heaven right? So if you believe there is a heaven, logic dictates that everything will be fine. 

We just gotta get through this muck first.

 

 

 

 

[Canadiandude]

19 minutes ago, thatjimguy said:

I think it is close enough to have empathy, understanding, and solutions.

No love like ‘stop commandeering the podium’ love- which is soon followed by the solution of better raising more metaphysical muskets.

And that’s to not speak of past campaigns like Prop 8.

[thatjimguy]

30 minutes ago, Canadiandude said:

No love like ‘stop commandeering the podium’ love- which is soon followed by the solution of better raising more metaphysical muskets.

And that’s to not speak of past campaigns like Prop 8.

none of which has anything to do with my reply

 

Edited November 13, 2021 by thatjimguy

[Gillebre]

On 11/11/2021 at 4:32 PM, kimpearson said:

It's interesting to me how most of you took a simple question and made it much more complex with a need for in depth analysis.  Many of you went off on tangents while pretended that my question was unclear.  I will simplify the question.  How are LGTBQ members ( as in born in covenant baptized at 8 or converted later in life) doing in the Church.  I present two narratives.  The one presented by publications of the Church of accepting wards where LGTBQ members find an accepting space and are at peace progressing in the gospel.  The other based on my personal experience of the vast majority of LGTBQ members who struggle with the Church and can't find a way to make it work.

I will be honest and express that my impression is many of you know all most all LGTBQ members are suffering and struggling with the church.  It appears many of you are uncomfortable with admitting that fact by itself.  You spent a lot of time making an effort to explain why that suffering and struggle is OK.   Some of you seem to love to cherry pick only those studies or scriptures that you can argue justify your position when there are just as many other scriptures and studies that contradict your conclusions.  That fascinates me because it confirms my general impression that most active members of the Church are very uncomfortable about what is happening to LGTBQ members and many of their families.  Such members will go to incredible lengths to explain why that situation is OK.  I believe the Brethren are frustrated with the issue because for the most part they truly believe that if LGTBQ members would just follow their current counsel they will find peace.  That is why the Church publishes the stories it does.  There is just one little problem.  Its not happening.  Just like the Brethren 50 years ago said it was a choice.  Just like the Brethren said 30 years ago, you can change with the proper treatment.  Just like the brethren said 20 years ago, go on a mission and get married and you will change.

This mind set of traditional believing members fascinates me on other issues besides the LGTBQ issue.   Why is that such members have such a hard time admitting that a current approach isn't working or conversely just admitting that they see certain people as destined by God's will to suffer and His covenant path members have no requirement under those covenants to try to help overcome the suffering of such children of God.  I am grateful that there are many other active members of the Church who do see these issues and are trying to do something to address that suffering.  The human mind and mentality is just fascinating to see in action.  Its no wonder some of us including myself might need millennium after this life to become like our Father in Heaven. 

I can speak to this topic as a male member of the Church of Jesus Christ who has been deeply attracted to other males throughout my life. My experience will be unique and different, but what I've learned through hard experience does, I think, paint the best solution.

My experience tells me that if the LGBT person has not internalized their covenants on a deeply personal, even intimate level, and learned for themselves how the Savior can save them individually, then I fear they will perpetually be blown around and torn between two opposing worldviews.

I am secure where I stand because I've fought long and hard with the natural man to stabilize my orbit around the Son through the covenants I've made with Him. This is the fruit that every single LGBT Saint can have for themselves if they want it badly enough. They can actually have personal peace throughout their lives no matter where their journey takes them.

Nothing of this mortal world can give us the lasting desire to be valiant and endure to the end except it be the undeniable witness and assurance that if He truly does command us to live a chaste life then He will make a way for us to be successful. That success can only be found in a covenant partnership with Him.

I love that the Brethren are seeking further light about these challenging questions and trials of faith. Some say that the celibate lifestyle is unfair or unreasonable to expect, and an irrational impossibility, but I testify as He lives that what He asks us to do is in fact possible because He asked it, and I have seen the principles prove themselves.

LGBT Saints have an especial and urgent need to draw near to the Savior so that the Holy Ghost can both teach and testify to them of His will for them, and this in truth and not according to their own will for what the world and their innate feelings drive them towards.

As LGBT Saints place their desires on the altar of sacrifice and make the same type of offering as Abraham I can witness that He will answer their faith and trust with pure revelation and inspiration for their lives. He can quiet their fears and lay to rest their uncertainty about the future because they are willing to trust His goodness and in the power of His redemption.

The answers they really need are these in no particular order:

1. Is this truly His Church and are these His authorized servants?

2. Does He expect them to both live and embrace the Law of Chastity?

3. Are they willing to live by His words as the Spirit confirms them even as those words contradict the world's popular wisdom?

4. Are they willing to yoke themselves to Him every day by living inside their covenants?

It's all really about coming to know and trust Jesus Christ. If they will do this and strive to repent then the darkness of confusion will be dispersed by the light they've invited into their lives by making time for, and actively remembering Him everyday. 

Bottom line: LGBT Saints can know how the Lord wants them to live, and they will be blessed beyond measure for their diligence in seeking His will over their own. No earthly companionship, romance, or sexual fulfillment can hold a candle to the Savior of the world. All other things fall away when He becomes everything to them.

Edited November 13, 2021 by Gillebre

[CV75]

On 11/12/2021 at 10:08 AM, MrShorty said:

I admit that I am not sure if this comment will further the discussion you want to have, but I find this interesting. I agree that many in the Church are uncomfortable with any suggestion that maybe some people's path to salvation and exaltation does not go through the Church. We have a sense of exclusivity and exceptionalism that leads to want to believe that everyone's path must go through the Church.

As I [mis-]understand the principle of common consent, it seems to me that the observation that a "vast majority" of those who actually experience same sex attraction or gender dysphoria "can't" make the Church work for them strongly suggests that something is in error in our teachings and practices and policies related to LGBT+ issues. I have seen others (like Jon Bennet and Bryce Cook) express similar sentiments. We're not used to the principle of common consent being used in this way -- to suggest bottom up revelation -- but I think the implication is there.

I don't know if that is helpful for the direction you want the discussion to go, but those were a couple of thoughts that came to mind in response.

Please explain the error in our teachings, practices and policies of common consent, and how this results in a vast majority of the saints you mention not finding the Church useful for them.

[Meadowchik]

11 hours ago, Gillebre said:

I can speak to this topic as a male member of the Church of Jesus Christ who has been deeply attracted to other males throughout my life. My experience will be unique and different, but what I've learned through hard experience does, I think, paint the best solution.

My experience tells me that if the LGBT person has not internalized their covenants on a deeply personal, even intimate level, and learned for themselves how the Savior can save them individually, then I fear they will perpetually be blown around and torn between two opposing worldviews.

I am secure where I stand because I've fought long and hard with the natural man to stabilize my orbit around the Son through the covenants I've made with Him. This is the fruit that every single LGBT Saint can have for themselves if they want it badly enough. They can actually have personal peace throughout their lives no matter where their journey takes them.

Nothing of this mortal world can give us the lasting desire to be valiant and endure to the end except it be the undeniable witness and assurance that if He truly does command us to live a chaste life then He will make a way for us to be successful. That success can only be found in a covenant partnership with Him.

I love that the Brethren are seeking further light about these challenging questions and trials of faith. Some say that the celibate lifestyle is unfair or unreasonable to expect, and an irrational impossibility, but I testify as He lives that what He asks us to do is in fact possible because He asked it, and I have seen the principles prove themselves.

LGBT Saints have an especial and urgent need to draw near to the Savior so that the Holy Ghost can both teach and testify to them of His will for them, and this in truth and not according to their own will for what the world and their innate feelings drive them towards.

As LGBT Saints place their desires on the altar of sacrifice and make the same type of offering as Abraham I can witness that He will answer their faith and trust with pure revelation and inspiration for their lives. He can quiet their fears and lay to rest their uncertainty about the future because they are willing to trust His goodness and in the power of His redemption.

The answers they really need are these in no particular order:

1. Is this truly His Church and are these His authorized servants?

2. Does He expect them to both live and embrace the Law of Chastity?

3. Are they willing to live by His words as the Spirit confirms them even as those words contradict the world's popular wisdom?

4. Are they willing to yoke themselves to Him every day by living inside their covenants?

It's all really about coming to know and trust Jesus Christ. If they will do this and strive to repent then the darkness of confusion will be dispersed by the light they've invited into their lives by making time for, and actively remembering Him everyday. 

Bottom line: LGBT Saints can know how the Lord wants them to live, and they will be blessed beyond measure for their diligence in seeking His will over their own. No earthly companionship, romance, or sexual fulfillment can hold a candle to the Savior of the world. All other things fall away when He becomes everything to them.

I think you can speak from your own experience, and I thank you for that. However, there is a hazard in extending your experience as a generalisation to other LGBT Saints. Others have different experiences, often vastly different and diametrically opposed to yours.

[Gillebre]

1 hour ago, Meadowchik said:

I think you can speak from your own experience, and I thank you for that. However, there is a hazard in extending your experience as a generalisation to other LGBT Saints. Others have different experiences, often vastly different and diametrically opposed to yours.

I appreciate the significance of your statement about vastly different experiences from mine...even diametrically so. I won't begrudge anyone for making the best choice they could in their circumstances, but I know there is a better way forward.

I can only offer my experience as living evidence that by putting the Lord first and gaining a determination to let God prevail then anyone can, in time, obtain similar outcomes subject to God's timing and what is expedient for them, and this precisely because God doesn't charge or vary from that which He has said. That is the reason why I'm willing to make a generalization of my experience because the principles are outgrowths of eternal truths, and they apply equally to all of His children.

I invite my fellow brothers and sisters in the Church to chime in on this...do you feel I'm in error to make this generalization as I've explained it?

D&C 130:20-21:

20 There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated—

21 And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated.

As all blessings He sends us are tied to laws in Heaven it is upon us to learn what laws govern the blessings we need so we can act accordingly.

I hope that in sharing my experience someone might then gain a glimpse of what laws in Heaven govern the very blessings needed most by LGBT Saints, and I'm so grateful we have a Prophet teaching these things to us every General Conference.

With great empathy for the pain and confusion that bind so many beloved children of God, like the chains that bound me for many years, I gently insist that they must obtain anew a fresh perspective about themselves, the Lord, and the purpose of His Church. I say this because until I saw things His way there was so much confusion and paranoia as I only had the wisdom and perspective of man to rely on.

What I hope to accomplish by sharing my experience is in helping others see that it is not impossible to reconcile faith and sexuality, and I maintain that as long as the Lord is their first priority then anyone can eventually receive the same blessings as I have shared. This isn't an outcome limited to certain people, but on the application of universal truth out of the scriptures.

Popular wisdom may insist that what helped one person find stability and peace isn't automatically applicable to someone else because their circumstances, trials, and history will vary widely, but that viewpoint is confronted by the infinite Atonement of Jesus Christ.

I don't believe The Plan of Salvation as taught today is in need of revision  because it already accommodates LGBT Saints. They are lovingly offered  every covenant that they are willing to receive which He knows they need to find peace and stability throughout this mortal life.

Of course it be wonderful to know more about why the Lord allowed these things to be, but scripture gives us one answer already: "We will prove them herewith." It only seems unfair if you don't consider faithfully making and keeping Gospel covenants to be the solution we've always needed and previously ignored. The answer we need is to know Him and trust Him, and until we can do that I think we'll be endlessly frustrated at His Church.

Edited November 13, 2021 by Gillebre

[Canadiandude]

14 hours ago, thatjimguy said:

none of which has anything to do with my reply

 

Are you are so sure?

My post was purposeful and relevant.

If it’s no sin to come out and identify as lgbtq+, how can Elder Holland’s attack on Matt Easton for ‘commandeering the podium’ be construed as ‘kindness’?

How beneficial to 2slgbtq+ BYU students and non-students was Elder Holland’s advocacy of more people taking up metaphorical ‘muskets’ in defence of the church’s doctrine re: traditional families?

Its perfectly fine to speak of love and solutions but so far they both seem severely lacking in definition and efficacy.

I’m not trying to be a troll here but you speak of empathy- I implore you to try imagining yourself being the target of these metaphorical muskets, prop 8, and accusations of ‘commandeering podiums’ on account of your sexuality being controversial.

Then do and say that which is of benefit of those that actually are.

[thatjimguy]

If it’s no sin to come out and identify as lgbtq+, how can Elder Holland’s attack on Matt Easton for ‘commandeering the podium’ be construed as ‘kindness’?

 

An "attack" on him personally? No, it certainly wasn't that. That was a criticism of those who approved the speech because it risks the graduating ceremony to turn into a political show for any number of subjects. If you see that as an attack, it is because you want to see it as such. 

 

 

How beneficial to 2slgbtq+ BYU students and non-students was Elder Holland’s advocacy of more people taking up metaphorical ‘muskets’ in defense of the church’s doctrine re: traditional families?

Because that statement wasn't for them. The traditional family has been degraded for the last decade very hard and the young, and our society, are going to suffer from it. You don't think the traditional family has been looked down upon?

[Meadowchik]

1 hour ago, Gillebre said:

I appreciate the significance of your statement about vastly different experiences from mine...even diametrically so. I won't begrudge anyone for making the best choice they could in their circumstances, but I know there is a better way forward.

I can only offer my experience as living evidence that by putting the Lord first and gaining a determination to let God prevail then anyone can, in time, obtain similar outcomes subject to God's timing and what is expedient for them, and this precisely because God doesn't charge or vary from that which He has said. That is the reason why I'm willing to make a generalization of my experience because the principles are outgrowths of eternal truths, and they apply equally to all of His children.

I invite my fellow brothers and sisters in the Church to chime in on this...do you feel I'm in error to make this generalization as I've explained it?

D&C 130:20-21:

20 There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated—

21 And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated.

As all blessings He sends us are tied to laws in Heaven it is upon us to learn what laws govern the blessings we need so we can act accordingly.

I hope that in sharing my experience someone might then gain a glimpse of what laws in Heaven govern the very blessings needed most by LGBT Saints, and I'm so grateful we have a Prophet teaching these things to us every General Conference.

With great empathy for the pain and confusion that bind so many beloved children of God, like the chains that bound me for many years, I gently insist that they must obtain anew a fresh perspective about themselves, the Lord, and the purpose of His Church. I say this because until I saw things His way there was so much confusion and paranoia as I only had the wisdom and perspective of man to rely on.

What I hope to accomplish by sharing my experience is in helping others see that it is not impossible to reconcile faith and sexuality, and I maintain that as long as the Lord is their first priority then anyone can eventually receive the same blessings as I have shared. This isn't an outcome limited to certain people, but on the application of universal truth out of the scriptures.

Popular wisdom may insist that what helped one person find stability and peace isn't automatically applicable to someone else because their circumstances, trials, and history will vary widely, but that viewpoint is confronted by the infinite Atonement of Jesus Christ.

I don't believe The Plan of Salvation as taught today is in need of revision  because it already accommodates LGBT Saints. They are lovingly offered  every covenant that they are willing to receive which He knows they need to find peace and stability throughout this mortal life.

Of course it be wonderful to know more about why the Lord allowed these things to be, but scripture gives us one answer already: "We will prove them herewith." It only seems unfair if you don't consider faithfully making and keeping Gospel covenants to be the solution we've always needed and previously ignored. The answer we need is to know Him and trust Him, and until we can do that I think we'll be endlessly frustrated at His Church.

To speak such generalities is to risk someone's well-being. I think it is presumptuous to assert that faith and their LGBT sexuality needs reconciling.

It's a terribly high-hazard way to try to manage other peoples' lives.

[Gillebre]

1 hour ago, Meadowchik said:

To speak such generalities is to risk someone's well-being. I think it is presumptuous to assert that faith and their LGBT sexuality needs reconciling.

It's a terribly high-hazard way to try to manage other peoples' lives.

To me it's only a risk if the underlying premise, the Atonement of Jesus Christ, were not a reality. All of us will, by virtue of our being imperfect, fashion our own false gods and idols to whom we give more devotion and attention than the Lord Jesus Christ. The need for reconciliation to God extends to every aspect of human life where we don't put Him before all other considerations.

We'll have to agree to disagree generally, but I do think that all we say and teach must be tailored to the needs and conditions of the person. I wouldn't lead out with all of this as-is unless they were serious about trying to pursue their own reconciliation, and even then it must be done according to the Holy Spirit's direction.

[Canadiandude]

2 hours ago, thatjimguy said:

An "attack" on him personally? No, it certainly wasn't that. That was a criticism of those who approved the speech because it risks the graduating ceremony to turn into a political show for any number of subjects. If you see that as an attack, it is because you want to see it as such. 

If that were true, and it wasn’t about Easton, then he could have easily communicated so to the respective staff and administrators in a private meeting- without using loaded words such ‘commandeering’.

He could have stated that it ‘wasn’t Easton’s fault’ or that he didn’t hold him responsible to ensure that nobody aimed such muskets at the valedictorian.

~
 

Why is my sexual orientation political but yours isn’t?

Who decides who’s too political for public??

How often do BYU student speakers at commencement suggest they are straight?

Funnily enough without any apostolic accusations of their commandeering the podium, nor dissatisfaction that it occurred in the first place.

https://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2021/08/27/how-often-do-byu-student-speakers-at-commencement-suggest-theyre-straight/