Concrete guidance on gay dating while remaining a member in good standing?

[Calm]

6 hours ago, kimpearson said:

  So I am not surprised by you or others who want to argue with totally irrelevant details to somehow justify their views

I get the feeling there are several you are communicating with you are making assumptions about their views and why they are arguing what you view as totally irrelevant details that aren’t that accurate.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

21 minutes ago, kimpearson said:

That's fine.  I did explain that what I was sharing was based on the parents in the groups I am part of.  I am curious, what is you and your queer child's stories.  I would love to hear them.  I keep hoping for a story that shows both the family and the queer child having a good outcome and staying active in the Church that includes a queer child older than 40.  I have heard hundreds where everyone thought everything was great until the child grew into their 30's or 40's and then everything came apart.  I will admit that I have lost hope in ever hearing such a story personally from someone who lived it.  Many have told me they know of such stories but they will never offer names or the opportunity to personally talk to those involved.

I can’t help you there.  First off she is in her early 30’s nor has she participated in church since mid teens for a variety of reasons, not just belief.  My daughter is agnostic in regards to things of the spirit.  She has significant health issues and is well aware that chemical imbalances can affect her perception of the world, so she currently sees no reason to assume that what we identify as the spirit or the spiritual realm exist…except for the fact she sees how we are affected by acting on our beliefs, in other words she reserves making a decision because of the respect and understanding she has of her family members and what they believe is their interaction with the spirit.  Given what she knows of us, she sees it as possible, but since she does not interpret any of her experiences as spiritual she does not have her own witness.  And as far as her immediate and most of her extended family, we don’t feel a need to insist she believe in something she hasn’t experienced.  As far as her social life, outside of family it has to be online at this point.  Hopefully, some day it will be more.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Calm

[kimpearson]

1 hour ago, SkyRock said:

No, you have a repeated failure to understand.  If these parents are questioning the church, do they really believe in it?  Or are they cultural Mormons who never developed a true testimony?

And "No such hope"?  Oh,  ye of little faith, captured by the current culture.    Lots of parents have had their children reject the gospel for generations.  It isn't new.   Some return, others don't. 

Any person can decide to put the will of God before their own.  Some people can, some refuse to do it.  Additionally, some parents tried to keep their children from every having pain and having to struggle.  Overcoming the natural man and our weaknesses is the key to growth and we all have weakness.  Preventing our children from having challenges and telling them they don't need to grow and develop means they never progress.  

If one or more of my children leave the church, I will do like Alma and pray for them.   I will be sad, but it will not challenge my testimony.  I have had far greater challenges to my testimony and greater reasons to leave the Church than something like this.  Through my trials, I have grown through my pain and suffering as I have conformed my will to God's.  Everyone can do the same.

 

If I understand you correctly then you are saying that parents of queer children who struggle with the Church's position and are in pain have no basis for that and should just suck it up and get over it?

It also seems you are saying because you have gotten through the pain and suffering that everyone else must do the same if they are really faithful.  Is that correct?

[Hamba Tuhan]

46 minutes ago, Calm said:

I was just me.  I liked what I liked and saw no reason why I had to categorize it in my head as a girl thing or a boy thing.

This!

[kimpearson]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

I can’t help you there.  First off she is in her early 30’s nor has she participated in church since mid teens for a variety of reasons, not just belief.  My daughter is agnostic in regards to things of the spirit.  She has significant health issues and is well aware that chemical imbalances can affect her perception of the world, so she currently sees no reason to assume that what we identify as the spirit or the spiritual realm exist…except for the fact she sees how we are affected by acting on our beliefs, in other words she reserves making a decision because of the respect and understanding she has of her family members and what they believe is their interaction with the spirit.  Given what she knows of us, she sees it as possible, but since she does not interpret any of her experiences as spiritual she does not have her own witness.  And as far as her immediate and most of her extended family, we don’t feel a need to insist she believe in something she hasn’t experienced.  As far as her social life, outside of family it has to be online at this point.  Hopefully, some day it will be more.

If I may be so bold, what are your personal feelings about her eternal future, the Church's current teachings and how you would view a future relationship that resulted in a same sex marriage?  No need to share if you don't want to but like I said, listening to stories and feelings is my thing.

[Kenngo1969]

3 hours ago, kimpearson said:

Still learning about the expectation of this group.  I made a bad assumption that those who would discuss this topic would be very aware of statistics on LGTBQ+ individuals. ...

 

Way to go!  Certainly, that's an important step toward good-faith dialogue: Impugn the intelligence, perception, awareness, et cetera, of your interlocutors!  Well, this is going to go very well!  But, never mind me!  Carry on!

[kimpearson]

1 minute ago, Kenngo1969 said:

 

Way to go!  Certainly, that's an important step toward good-faith dialogue: Impugn the intelligence, perception, awareness, et cetera, of your interlocutors!  Well, this is going to go very well!  But, never mind me!  Carry on!

I would be curious about why you felt the need to post this comment.  Are you willing to share your feelings?

[Calm]

43 minutes ago, kimpearson said:

If I may be so bold, what are your personal feelings about her eternal future, the Church's current teachings and how you would view a future relationship that resulted in a same sex marriage?  No need to share if you don't want to but like I said, listening to stories and feelings is my thing.

Back when her health first tanked when she was 12, I was in desperation.  I knew what could help her but also knew it would be hell getting her to live like that because of many of the same issues I got in my genetic inheritance (it is top rate annoying knowing what can help me feel better and not be able to do it because I don’t have energy, can’t stand up straight, can’t put weight on my feet, can’t get in a car, etc).  I was bracing myself to do it “to” her (it would definitely not have been  “with” her for several years) even if it meant more days of her screaming she wanted to die (she had a significant needle phobia, perfect for a diabetic and there were many other things on the list of “health” that she hated).  I was praying a lot for the strength and self discipline and health I would need to give her that normal life I wanted her to still have.  I got a “no” answer.  It was her life her road, her choices to be made about what was important to her and she was going to be just fine when she got to the end of it.  So my daughter hasnt graduated from 7th grade or above yet even though I am obsessed with education.  I never said a word about her weight in front of her, but pulled aside the doctor and asked if there was an issue if she put any on due to insulin issues and since they always said “not a problem” I made sure when the subject came up with my extended family, the subject was dismissed as irrelevant (it is a health issue with us rather than looks, but it amounts to the same thing in the end, using the wrong measure for health screws up body image…every person in my extended family can probably testify to that).  We never insisted she say the prayer at dinner time or read scriptures or attend church, just offered the opportunity.  I admit I was shocked and in pain when she told me she didn’t believe because I knew how much my faith makes my bad days endurable for me.  

Her path so far is nothing like I would have chosen for her, but I haven’t worried about it except at weak moments (which aren’t that often except for the suffering part, I still have a hard time seeing her sick even if I should be used to it by now) since God told me he knew her, knew what she needed better than I did and they would work it out.

I have no clue how I would react to a future ssm given I don’t believe we are that good at predicting our future behaviour in new situations as humans are so complicated and what is important now isn’t always important in even an hour later…I can just say based on my past reactions, if that is what she sincerely wanted to do, it appears that I would likely back her on it just as I tease her now about her attractions when we joke with each other and have backed her on her other decisions.  She has a right to feel safe and free in her own home and I can help do that for her.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Calm

[kimpearson]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

Back when her health first tanked when she was 12, I was in desperation.  I knew what could help her but also knew it would be hell getting her to live like that because of many of the same issues I got in my genetic inheritance (it is top rate annoying knowing what can help me feel better and not be able to do it because I don’t have energy, can’t stand up straight, can’t put weight on my feet, can’t get in a car, etc).  I was bracing myself to do it even if it meant more days of her screaming she wanted to die (she had a significant needle phobia, perfect for a diabetic).  I was praying a lot of the strength and self discipline and health I would need to give her that normal life I wanted her to still have.  I got a “no” answer.  It was her life her road, her choices to be made about what was important to her and she was going to be just fine when she got to the end of it.  So my daughter hasnt graduated from 7th grade or above yet even though I am obsessed with education.  I never said a word about her weight in front of her, but pulled aside the doctor and asked if there was an issue if she put any on due to insulin issues and since they always said “not a problem” I made sure when the subject came up with my extended family, the subject was dismissed as irrelevant (it is a health issue with us rather than looks, but it amounts to the same thing in the end, using the wrong measure for health screws up body image…every person in my extended family can probably testify to that).  We never insisted she say the prayer at dinner time or read scriptures or attend church, just offered the opportunity.  I admit I was shocked and in pain when she told me she didn’t believe because I knew how much my faith makes my bad days endurable for me.  

Her path so far is nothing like I would have chosen for her, but I haven’t worried about it except at weak moments (which aren’t that often except for the suffering part, I still have a hard time seeing her sick even if I should be used to it by now) since God told me he knew her, knew what she needed better than I did and they would work it out.

I have no clue how I would react to a future ssm given I don’t believe we are that good at predicting our future behaviour in new situations as humans are so complicated and what is important now isn’t always important in even an hour later…I can just say based on my past reactions, if that is what she sincerely wanted to do, it appears that I would likely back her on it just as I tease her now about her attractions when we joke with each other and have backed her on her other decisions.

Thank you.  I love hearing personal stories of how people deal with life.  In my experience, what works for one might not work for another but the proof is in the outcome of how well our individual approaches bring a life of peace, joy, growth and love.

[SkyRock]

42 minutes ago, kimpearson said:

If I understand you correctly then you are saying that parents of queer children who struggle with the Church's position and are in pain have no basis for that and should just suck it up and get over it?

It also seems you are saying because you have gotten through the pain and suffering that everyone else must do the same if they are really faithful.  Is that correct?

No. You still don't understand.  Everyone has pain in this life.   Some try to avoid it.  Some try to drown it in sin or entertainment.  Others grow through it, especially with the Grace of the Atonement.  It isn't getting over it, but it is dealing with it instead of wanting everyone else to change so you don't need to deal with your trials.

Joy comes from becoming a disciple of Christ through overcoming the natural man.  The Great Plan of Happiness isn't the Great Plan of Avoiding Struggle.   That was Satan's Plan, if you remember. 

My father was pained by my brother identifying as gay.   It has been a trial for him for 40 years.   He also has other trials, including the pain of losing his own father as a young man (a pain now of over 70 years), declining health in old age, financial setbacks, failed marriage, a dead spouse, insecurities,  etc.  That my brother has grown so much over the last 5 years fills my father with great joy. 

Dealing with struggles builds resilience.  Opposition provides us with growth opportunities.  

We will all fall short of the mark and we all have unique struggles.   It is almost impossible to grow without trials.  God is most concerned with our eternal destination.  

It is pretty narcissistic to believe that this trial is unique or so much more difficult than so many other struggles in life. 

[kimpearson]

5 minutes ago, SkyRock said:

No. You still don't understand.  Everyone has pain in this life.   Some try to avoid it.  Some try to drown it in sin or entertainment.  Others grow through it, especially with the Grace of the Atonement.  It isn't getting over it, but it is dealing with it instead of wanting everyone else to change so you don't need to deal with your trials.

Joy comes from becoming a disciple of Christ through overcoming the natural man.  The Great Plan of Happiness isn't the Great Plan of Avoiding Struggle.   That was Satan's Plan, if you remember. 

My father was pained by my brother identifying as gay.   It has been a trial for him for 40 years.   He also has other trials, including the pain of losing his own father as a young man (a pain now of over 70 years), declining health in old age, financial setbacks, failed marriage, a dead spouse, insecurities,  etc.  That my brother has grown so much over the last 5 years fills my father with great joy. 

Dealing with struggles builds resilience.  Opposition provides us with growth opportunities.  

We will all fall short of the mark and we all have unique struggles.   It is almost impossible to grow without trials.  God is most concerned with our eternal destination.  

It is pretty narcissistic to believe that this trial is unique or so much more difficult than so many other struggles in life. 

Interesting take on life.  I am sure you won't be surprised that I don't agree with many of your conclusions.  As much as pain is part of life, I believe the pain caused by teachings and beliefs is often an indicator of the falseness of those beliefs and teachings.  I find little of comfort or understanding in you beliefs that places all trials and struggles into the same class.  Death, sickness, natural disasters have to be endured because they just exist in the world we live in.  Pain caused by how people treat other people should have every effort made to alleviate that pain and correct the cause.   The growth comes from effectively healing the pain and working so that the actions are corrected.  That is repentance.  The purpose of the gospel of Jesus Christ is to help us become like Him and never inflict intentional pain on another.  To only bless the lives of others with understanding, compassion, forgiveness and greatest of all love.  I find your comments reflecting a harsh God who just views our pain as necessary.  Yes we had to be put in a situation where choices could inflect pain but such choices are not championed by God as desired of the child who makes such a choice.  I view a God that suffers with me.  That doesn't just say get tough and get over it.  I believe in a God that understands how badly His children can hurt one another, even those that view themselves as righteous.  The learning is not simply enduring the pain.  The learning is fully accepting was caused the pain and doing what can be done to heal and correct the action that caused the pain.

The Church's current teachings related to our queer bothers and sisters in only bringing pain and hurt.  No one, and I know this is a sweeping statement but it is just how I feel, no one is inspired or filled with love and a closeness to God by these teachings.  No one's pain is being lessened or taken away by these teachings.  Then compare that to the relief from pain and sorrow that occurs in person after person who comes out and stops being ashamed of who they are.  Look at the lives of those who start queer dating, transitioning and entering into same sex marriages.  They find joy and purpose to life.  They become mentally healthy.  Many testify of coming closer to God.  God hasn't told me what the exact answer is but I have felt enough pain to know that the current situation is not the will of God.

[The Nehor]

6 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

So you were running around at recess calling other kids 'heterosexuals'???

No, my verbal repertoire just included a lot of homophobic insults. They were prevalent amongst my friends. Even the names of some of our games were overtly homophobic.

[CV75]

9 hours ago, kimpearson said:

Interesting take on life.  I am sure you won't be surprised that I don't agree with many of your conclusions.  As much as pain is part of life, I believe the pain caused by teachings and beliefs is often an indicator of the falseness of those beliefs and teachings.  I find little of comfort or understanding in you beliefs that places all trials and struggles into the same class.  Death, sickness, natural disasters have to be endured because they just exist in the world we live in.  Pain caused by how people treat other people should have every effort made to alleviate that pain and correct the cause.   The growth comes from effectively healing the pain and working so that the actions are corrected.  That is repentance.  The purpose of the gospel of Jesus Christ is to help us become like Him and never inflict intentional pain on another.  To only bless the lives of others with understanding, compassion, forgiveness and greatest of all love.  I find your comments reflecting a harsh God who just views our pain as necessary.  Yes we had to be put in a situation where choices could inflect pain but such choices are not championed by God as desired of the child who makes such a choice.  I view a God that suffers with me.  That doesn't just say get tough and get over it.  I believe in a God that understands how badly His children can hurt one another, even those that view themselves as righteous.  The learning is not simply enduring the pain.  The learning is fully accepting was caused the pain and doing what can be done to heal and correct the action that caused the pain.

The Church's current teachings related to our queer bothers and sisters in only bringing pain and hurt.  No one, and I know this is a sweeping statement but it is just how I feel, no one is inspired or filled with love and a closeness to God by these teachings.  No one's pain is being lessened or taken away by these teachings.  Then compare that to the relief from pain and sorrow that occurs in person after person who comes out and stops being ashamed of who they are.  Look at the lives of those who start queer dating, transitioning and entering into same sex marriages.  They find joy and purpose to life.  They become mentally healthy.  Many testify of coming closer to God.  God hasn't told me what the exact answer is but I have felt enough pain to know that the current situation is not the will of God.

Are you saying that a dating-only lifestyle is a sufficient romantic strategy to maintain emotional, mental and spiritual health (let's say for Church members keeping their covenants) for the long-term / a lifetime?

[Chum]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

Are you saying that a dating-only lifestyle is a sufficient romantic strategy to maintain emotional, mental and spiritual health (let's say for Church members keeping their covenants) for the long-term / a lifetime?

This is like the entire thread in one sentence.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

In a world where saying “I am proud to be a gay son of God” is worthy of a public rebuke from an apostle of God,*

in a world where another apostle of God is embarrassed to be seen eating in public with his gay son on a date,

I’m not sure why any Latter-day Saint would have any hope that guidance from church headquarters on gay dating would be anything other than a resounding “Don’t!”

Quote

Just as we’re pulling into the driveway Elder Gong spoke up,

“Please don’t post that photo anywhere.”

Unsure what he was referring to, I asked for clarification.

“Please don’t post the photo from dinner.We wouldn’t want people to get the wrong idea.”

My giddiness turned bitter. I pushed back, anger flaring in my chest.

“What’s the wrong idea? That you had dinner with your son?”

“Please don’t post the photo. We wouldn’t want people to get the wrong idea.”

Elder Gong will be polite and cordial, but if there’s even a chance that his actions could have public ramifications… It’s better that he and a potential future son-in-law never co-exist in the public eye. For anyone looking for someone to pin your hopes on that the Church will change, it’s not him.

 

https://medium.com/@thatonegaygong/state-of-the-matt-2021-6e0d278e8d01
 

*referring to Elder Hollands rebuke of Matt Easton. 

Edited January 12, 2022 by SeekingUnderstanding

[HappyJackWagon]

13 hours ago, SkyRock said:

No, you have a repeated failure to understand.  If these parents are questioning the church, do they really believe in it?  Or are they cultural Mormons who never developed a true testimony?

And "No such hope"?  Oh,  ye of little faith, captured by the current culture.    Lots of parents have had their children reject the gospel for generations.  It isn't new.   Some return, others don't. 

Any person can decide to put the will of God before their own.  Some people can, some refuse to do it.  Additionally, some parents tried to keep their children from every having pain and having to struggle.  Overcoming the natural man and our weaknesses is the key to growth and we all have weakness.  Preventing our children from having challenges and telling them they don't need to grow and develop means they never progress.  

If one or more of my children leave the church, I will do like Alma and pray for them.   I will be sad, but it will not challenge my testimony.  I have had far greater challenges to my testimony and greater reasons to leave the Church than something like this.  Through my trials, I have grown through my pain and suffering as I have conformed my will to God's.  Everyone can do the same.

 

This is a lazy trope. It's easier to believe that people never had a testimony, were lazy or just wanted to sin as opposed to a person deciding after considerable study and prayer that the church is either Not True or Harmful to their family members.

[bluebell]

15 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

In a world where saying “I am proud to be a gay son of God” is worthy of a public rebuke from an apostle of God,

in a world where another apostle of God is embarrassed to be seen eating in public with his gay son on a date,

I’m not sure why any Latter-day Saint would have any hope that guidance from church headquarters on gay dating would be anything other than a resounding “Don’t!”

 

https://medium.com/@thatonegaygong/state-of-the-matt-2021-6e0d278e8d01

Can we get references for those two statements?

I'm assuming that the first is from Elder Holland, and my answer to that assumption is that I don't interpret that event in the way that you have stated it at all, and that the public rebuke was about the venue for the declaration, not the declaration itself (but my assumption on what you are referring to might be wrong so the reference would be helpful).

I'm assuming the second statement comes from something that an apostle (I think it was Elder Oaks?) said decades ago, and my answer to that assumption is that I don't know that we can assume, or that it is fair to assume, that Elder Oaks feels the same way now as he did then, anymore that it's fair to assume that everything you (or I) said decades ago is still true for us today.  (But again, my assumption on where that reference is coming from could also be wrong).

[Calm]

8 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Can we get references for those two statements?

I'm assuming that the first is from Elder Holland, and my answer to that assumption is that I don't interpret that event in the way that you have stated it at all, and that the public rebuke was about the venue for the declaration, not the declaration itself (but my assumption on what you are referring to might be wrong so the reference would be helpful).

I'm assuming the second statement comes from something that an apostle (I think it was Elder Oaks?) said decades ago, and my answer to that assumption is that I don't know that we can assume, or that it is fair to assume, that Elder Oaks feels the same way now as he did then, anymore that it's fair to assume that everything you (or I) said decades ago is still true for us today.  (But again, my assumption on where that reference is coming from could also be wrong).

The quote and link is last in the post, .I believe.

[MrShorty]

@Bluebell: The second statement is coming from an essay published yesterday (11 Jan 2022) by Matt Gong about an incident during the last couple of years dining with his parents. I'm not sure how much of Elder Gong's reticence to have the picture publicly published is merely about "embarrassment" and how much is a deeper discomfort with Church members and others trying to understand what it means for an apostle in the LDS Church to have dinner with his queer son and son's date. Whether mere embarrassment or something deeper, @SeekingUnderstanding's point still stands -- the Church does not want to even wrestle with the question of same-sex (or other LGBT expressions of) dating.

[bluebell]

8 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

@Bluebell: The second statement is coming from an essay published yesterday (11 Jan 2022) by Matt Gong about an incident during the last couple of years dining with his parents. I'm not sure how much of Elder Gong's reticence to have the picture publicly published is merely about "embarrassment" and how much is a deeper discomfort with Church members and others trying to understand what it means for an apostle in the LDS Church to have dinner with his queer son and son's date. Whether mere embarrassment or something deeper, @SeekingUnderstanding's point still stands -- the Church does not want to even wrestle with the question of same-sex (or other LGBT expressions of) dating.

I guess I read his point differently, but you could be reading it more correctly than I am. 

I thought SU was saying that the church would not ever want to wrestle with the question of same-sex dating.  Clearly they haven't wanted to wrestle with it yet, because they haven't (at least not where we can see), but I'm coming at this thread on what might be possible in the future.  That could be why my perspective and SU's perspective are different.

[SkyRock]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

This is a lazy trope. It's easier to believe that people never had a testimony, were lazy or just wanted to sin as opposed to a person deciding after considerable study and prayer that the church is either Not True or Harmful to their family members.

No, it is not. Most people who leave the church slip out the side door because of various sins and the lack of their own conversion.  My best friend growing up never read scriptures, never prayed much, never cared about becoming and converted, and left the church at 18 as the sex and drinking took over. 

I work for a cultural Mormon.  In many conversations with him, it is clear he never was converted even though he grew up in the church, served a mission, went to BYU, and served in a bishopric.  After he had an affair and was excommunicated and started drinking, he suddenly started having questions about the church.  He is still a BYU fan, so there is that,  I guess. 

There are some that leave the church after pondering and such, but they are very few.  And those that do leave that way often lack humility and are full of pride.

Believing "the Church is Harmful to family members" is the opposite of obedience and humility.  It is the pride of putting our will and thoughts above God's will.   

[SeekingUnderstanding]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

Can we get references for those two statements?

I'm assuming that the first is from Elder Holland, and my answer to that assumption is that I don't interpret that event in the way that you have stated it at all, and that the public rebuke was about the venue for the declaration, not the declaration itself (but my assumption on what you are referring to might be wrong so the reference would be helpful).

Sorry! As I too often do what is clear to me is obviously not clear to others. Yes. It is a reference to elder Holland and I will edit my post to make that clear. Given that I have never seen an apostle publicly rebuke someone for saying they are proud to be a daughter (instead of child) of God, never seen a rebuke for someone mentioning their spouse in a speech (implying sexuality), and can’t imagine someone being rebuked for saying they were a proud, Black, Latino, introverted etc etc child of God, I’m just not going to see it your way. 

 

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

I'm assuming the second statement comes from something that an apostle (I think it was Elder Oaks?) said decades ago, and my answer to that assumption is that I don't know that we can assume, or that it is fair to assume, that Elder Oaks feels the same way now as he did then, anymore that it's fair to assume that everything you (or I) said decades ago is still true for us today.  (But again, my assumption on where that reference is coming from could also be wrong).

As MrShorty pointed out this reference was in the post (though it could have been clearer). Oaks has never retracted, it’s still “in print” on the website, and I see no daylight between his position and the one taken by Holland and apparently Elder Gong. 
 

 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

I guess I read his point differently, but you could be reading it more correctly than I am. 

I thought SU was saying that the church would not ever want to wrestle with the question of same-sex dating.  Clearly they haven't wanted to wrestle with it yet, because they haven't (at least not where we can see), but I'm coming at this thread on what might be possible in the future.  That could be why my perspective and SU's perspective are different.

I think per Holland’s address they feel they *have wrestled with it and gone as far as they can possibly go. And rainbow flags, pride parades and public affirmations of being proud and gay are too far. And per Elder Gong’s son, he appears to be in near lockstep with Oaks’s “Don’t expect us to take you out and introduce you to our friends, or to deal with you in a public situation that would imply our approval of your “partnership.””

[rongo]

9 minutes ago, SkyRock said:

No, it is not. Most people who leave the church slip out the side door because of various sins and the lack of their own conversion.  My best friend growing up never read scriptures, never prayed much, never cared about becoming and converted, and left the church at 18 as the sex and drinking took over. 

I work for a cultural Mormon.  In many conversations with him, it is clear he never was converted even though he grew up in the church, served a mission, went to BYU, and served in a bishopric.  After he had an affair and was excommunicated and started drinking, he suddenly started having questions about the church.  He is still a BYU fan, so there is that,  I guess. 

There are some that leave the church after pondering and such, but they are very few.  And those that do leave that way often lack humility and are full of pride.

I don't think your anecdotal sample size says much. I think we all know people whose roots were never deep to begin with, but we also know people who had deep roots and lots of experience who have left the Church. 

It's important not to paint with a broad brush. Some of the closest people to me who are considering leaving (I alluded to my wife's best friend's daughter in another friend a while ago) are "elite" in every sense of the word. Including having paid the price for testimony. 

[california boy]

4 hours ago, CV75 said:

Are you saying that a dating-only lifestyle is a sufficient romantic strategy to maintain emotional, mental and spiritual health (let's say for Church members keeping their covenants) for the long-term / a lifetime?

I would say it is a LOT better than telling someone they can not have any intimate contact with anyone their entire life just because they are gay.  Lots of people live in sexless messages, yet they still find those relationships to be their most important and wouldn't give them up for anything.  Why can't a gay person at least have the option of that kind of relationship?  When did holding hands, kissing and hugs become a sin?????