New Church Policy?

[ttribe]

8 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Exactly what is happening - same sex pairing becomes more and more acceptable.

"Same sex pairing" is not the same thing as being gay (although there would be overlap on the Venn diagram). When Duncan says that this will not make someone 'more gay' or 'miraculously turn gay' he is absolutely correct.

[rongo]

Just now, JLHPROF said:

Exactly what is happening - same sex pairing becomes more and more acceptable.

I agree that dancing is pretty harmless.  I don't agree that displaying acceptance of same sex couples is harmless.

Dancing isn't sex.  Romantic attraction is often a big part of youth dances.

We really need to stop pretending that homosexual sex isn't serious sin.  And anything that encourages acceptance is wrong too.

Yes. The copycat nature, impressionability, normalization and even celebration of it, and social contagion aspects of the gay-identifying epidemic among youth and among LDS youth is something that leaders should be in front of. In my experience, many of these confused youth revert back to their "default setting" once their experimentation and fad wears off. Girls dressing like boys, conspicuously growing leg hair, and identifying. Boys making a big do-do over their new identification (one of these was actually at a stake dance. He's now temple-married --- at the time, a lot of the kids said it was all for attention, and it was). 

I think refusing to do what we can as leaders and parents to discourage gay dating behavior is malpractice. Even when youth figure things out and the fad passes, they went through unnecessary law of chastity violations in their experiment. I think we should do what we can to teach, foster, and encourage correct principles. To me (and many others) letting boys dance as a gay dancing display crosses that line in a way that platonic friend dancing among girls doesn't. It's the same concern and rationale as the gay dating behavior at BYU. 

[ttribe]

1 minute ago, rongo said:

Yes. The copycat nature, impressionability, normalization and even celebration of it, and social contagion aspects of the gay-identifying epidemic among youth and among LDS youth is something that leaders should be in front of. In my experience, many of these confused youth revert back to their "default setting" once their experimentation and fad wears off. Girls dressing like boys, conspicuously growing leg hair, and identifying. Boys making a big do-do over their new identification (one of these was actually at a stake dance. He's now temple-married --- at the time, a lot of the kids said it was all for attention, and it was). 

I think refusing to do what we can as leaders and parents to discourage gay dating behavior is malpractice. Even when youth figure things out and the fad passes, they went through unnecessary law of chastity violations in their experiment. I think we should do what we can to teach, foster, and encourage correct principles. To me (and many others) letting boys dance as a gay dancing display crosses that line in a way that platonic friend dancing among girls doesn't. It's the same concern and rationale as the gay dating behavior at BYU. 

Oh my...words fail me on this one...

[JLHPROF]

1 minute ago, ttribe said:

"Same sex pairing" is not the same thing as being gay (although there would be overlap on the Venn diagram). When Duncan says that this will not make someone 'more gay' or 'miraculously turn gay' he is absolutely correct.

Yes, he was.  The danger has never been turning someone gay.  It's been about making gay relationships so acceptable in the Church that accepting everything except the sexual relations is the next step.

Then there remains only one step left.  If all today's youth grow up accepting same sex couples in the Church that final step becomes unavoidable.

[rongo]

25 minutes ago, Calm said:

And ban inappropriate behaviour like hands on butts or whatever just as is done with opposite sex dancing.

Absolutely. I think this is pretty well policed. In my experience, kids are pretty well behaved at dances, and a lot of non-member youth come with friends. It's actually a "good time had by all" for everyone. My old stake (we just moved) did a lot of line or group dancing that all kids liked doing as a big group, which is good for the wallflowers and shy kids. Boys did a pretty good job of sharing the wealth and seeking out girls who don't get asked all the time for slow dances. Inappropriate dress or behavior was extremely rare. 

[Calm]

1 minute ago, rongo said:

Inappropriate dress or behavior was extremely rare. 

Then why not assume this will be the same if there is no ban on same sex dancing?

[HappyJackWagon]

16 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Exactly what is happening - same sex pairing becomes more and more acceptable.

I agree that dancing is pretty harmless.  I don't agree that displaying acceptance of same sex couples is harmless.

Dancing isn't sex.  Romantic attraction is often a big part of youth dances.

We really need to stop pretending that homosexual sex isn't serious sin.  And anything that encourages acceptance is wrong too.

I think the church should create a definitive hierarchy of sin so we really know which ones we should be most upset about so we can judge appropriately.

 

Murder- yeah that's really bad

lying- as long as its political no prob

dancing- as long as no same-gender hands or bodies touch is OK..ish

swearing- It's all good. No worries

Divorce- no prob

viewing p0rn-  One of the worst

premarital sx- Bad, but just get married for repentance to kick in

same gender marriage- the worst because it's Satan's tool

Saying "Mormon"- bad because it's also Satan's tool

Bigotry- OK as long as its deserved

Bullying- very bad unless it's deserved and must be done to avoid the appearance of evil

 

Can we all agree that EVERYONE sins? Signaling our righteousness because our sins aren't really the "bad" ones is garbage behavior and doesn't say much positive for the theology. 

Can we all agree that EVERYONE at church is currently a sinner?

So lets' stop claiming that other peoples sins are worse than our own. The concept of proving our "worthiness" to others is destructive because it allows judgement to permeate the culture and even mandates the judgements of men to be pronounced on others.Why does worthiness have anything to do with religion? Serious question. In most Christian religions worthiness is a concept used to describe God and our ability to trust in him. NOT other people, who, we should all be able to agree, are all unworthy.

[HappyJackWagon]

8 minutes ago, rongo said:

Yes. The copycat nature, impressionability, normalization and even celebration of it, and social contagion aspects of the gay-identifying epidemic among youth and among LDS youth is something that leaders should be in front of. In my experience, many of these confused youth revert back to their "default setting" once their experimentation and fad wears off. Girls dressing like boys, conspicuously growing leg hair, and identifying. Boys making a big do-do over their new identification (one of these was actually at a stake dance. He's now temple-married --- at the time, a lot of the kids said it was all for attention, and it was). 

I think refusing to do what we can as leaders and parents to discourage gay dating behavior is malpractice. Even when youth figure things out and the fad passes, they went through unnecessary law of chastity violations in their experiment. I think we should do what we can to teach, foster, and encourage correct principles. To me (and many others) letting boys dance as a gay dancing display crosses that line in a way that platonic friend dancing among girls doesn't. It's the same concern and rationale as the gay dating behavior at BYU. 

You still act like non-sxual behavior among same gendered individuals is somehow breaking the law of chastity. Which version is that?

[JLHPROF]

Just now, HappyJackWagon said:

I think the church should create a definitive hierarchy of sin so we really know which ones we should be most upset about so we can judge appropriately.

 

Murder- yeah that's really bad

lying- as long as its political no prob

dancing- as long as no same-gender hands or bodies touch is OK..ish

swearing- It's all good. No worries

Divorce- no prob

viewing p0rn-  One of the worst

premarital sx- Bad, but just get married for repentance to kick in

same gender marriage- the worst because it's Satan's tool

Saying "Mormon"- bad because it's also Satan's tool

Bigotry- OK as long as its deserved

Bullying- very bad unless it's deserved and must be done to avoid the appearance of evil

 

Can we all agree that EVERYONE sins? Signaling our righteousness because our sins aren't really the "bad" ones is garbage behavior and doesn't say much positive for the theology. 

Can we all agree that EVERYONE at church is currently a sinner?

So lets' stop claiming that other peoples sins are worse than our own. The concept of proving our "worthiness" to others is destructive because it allows judgement to permeate the culture and even mandates the judgements of men to be pronounced on others.Why does worthiness have anything to do with religion? Serious question. In most Christian religions worthiness is a concept used to describe God and our ability to trust in him. NOT other people, who, we should all be able to agree, are all unworthy.

Yes, everyone is a sinner.

Sexual sins and chastity breaking are some of the most serious.

I don't see that's up for debate in our religion, only in our society.

[HappyJackWagon]

1 minute ago, JLHPROF said:

Yes, everyone is a sinner.

Sexual sins and chastity breaking are some of the most serious.

I don't see that's up for debate in our religion, only in our society.

Can you describe the benefits of judging other people's worthiness?

[rongo]

Just now, Calm said:

Then why not assume this will be the same if there is no ban on same sex dancing?

I agree with @JLHPROF. It isn't that there will be groping, petting, etc. with boys dancing. It's the continued normalization and social endorsement of it that youth are bombarded with. I think the Church and Church-sponsored activities and entities should continue to maintain boundaries. What used to be the analogy of a widening chasm between the world's trajectory and the Church's. This is one of the ground zeroes of this that **could** go either way, depending on whether the Church accommodates or remains where it is. 

[JLHPROF]

1 minute ago, HappyJackWagon said:

You still act like non-sxual behavior among same gendered individuals is somehow breaking the law of chastity. Which version is that?

Because people still refuse to acknowledge the effects of acceptance and tolerance on standards, something that's been well established.

[ttribe]

2 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Yes, everyone is a sinner.

Sexual sins and chastity breaking are some of the most serious.

I don't see that's up for debate in our religion, only in our society.

But, the questions that never seems to be asked are - Why is this so serious in the LDS belief system? Why does the Book of Mormon elevate alleged sexual sin to be just below murder?

[Calm]

7 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Yes, he was.  The danger has never been turning someone gay.  It's been about making gay relationships so acceptable in the Church that accepting everything except the sexual relations is the next step.

Then there remains only one step left.  If all today's youth grow up accepting same sex couples in the Church that final step becomes unavoidable.

You can tell the difference usually between opposite sex friend couples vs opposite sex romantic couples.  Why not apply the same ability to judge to same sex, especially since my guess is it is already done with girls?  Why ban all male pairing, but not female pairing?  It is not as if same sex sexual coupling is any rarer among girls than guys.

[ttribe]

Just now, Calm said:

You can tell the difference usually between opposite sex friend couples vs opposite sex romantic couples.  Why not apply the same ability to judge to same sex, especially since my guess is it is already done with girls?  Why ban all male pairing, but not female pairing?  It is not as if same sex sexual coupling is any rarer among girls than guys.

Because it offends their (JLHProf and rongo) masculinity and makes them uncomfortable. That's the real answer, any way.

[rongo]

3 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

You still act like non-sxual behavior among same gendered individuals is somehow breaking the law of chastity. Which version is that?

cf. Elder Paul Johnson's rationale against gay-dating behavior at BYU, and apply it to counsel to Church youth. Same-sex hand-holding, kissing, etc. aren't per se violations of the law of chastity, but they do not lead towards where they need to be, and in fact lead away (whether temporarily or permanently, depending on agency). Boys dancing together in an LDS stake dance setting is blatantly flouting the social norms --- a bold, conscious step, either to test the waters/reaction, or even bolder, to proclaim and project. It's not the same level of "serious" as sex, but it's still something that should be prohibited at a stake dance setting, in my view. 

[JLHPROF]

4 minutes ago, ttribe said:

But, the questions that never seems to be asked are - Why is this so serious in the LDS belief system? Why does the Book of Mormon elevate alleged sexual sin to be just below murder?

Because both mess with the gift of life.

[ttribe]

1 minute ago, rongo said:

cf. Elder Paul Johnson's rationale against gay-dating behavior at BYU, and apply it to counsel to Church youth. Same-sex hand-holding, kissing, etc. aren't per se violations of the law of chastity, but they do not lead towards where they need to be, and in fact lead away (whether temporarily or permanently, depending on agency). Boys dancing together in an LDS stake dance setting is blatantly flouting the social norms --- a bold, conscious step, either to test the waters/reaction, or even bolder, to proclaim and project. It's not the same level of "serious" as sex, but it's still something that should be prohibited at a stake dance setting, in my view. 

It was also once against social norms to wear shorts, and yet here we are and society hasn't been destroyed.

[ttribe]

Just now, JLHPROF said:

Because both mess with the gift of life.

Seriously? That's your answer? I suspect you know that a human can engage in sexual activity and it have no effect, whatsoever, on the so-called 'gift of life.'

[Calm]

16 minutes ago, rongo said:

To me (and many others) letting boys dance as a gay dancing display crosses that line in a way that platonic friend dancing among girls doesn't.

And the occasional set of boys that want to dance as a platonic dancing display is ignored like the occasional lesbian dancing display for girls is ignored by a global ban on slow dancing for boys, but not girls because why?

I can see it now, two boys dancing slow with two girls doing the same because they were a part of a girl boy friend group who thought it would be fun to start dancing at once and for a lark paired off with a couple of same sex partners.  Along comes the chaperones and they break up the boys, but not the girls…I can think of several inappropriate messages that could send.

[JLHPROF]

5 minutes ago, Calm said:

You can tell the difference usually between opposite sex friend couples vs opposite sex romantic couples.  Why not apply the same ability to judge to same sex, especially since my guess is it is already done with girls?  Why ban all male pairing, but not female pairing?  It is not as if same sex sexual coupling is any rarer among girls than guys.

Fair point.

I agree.  Just as I think our young men should dress just as modestly at the beach as our young women.

[rongo]

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

Why not apply the same ability to judge to same sex, especially since my guess is it is already done with girls?  Why ban all male pairing, but not female pairing? 

Boys dancing together in an LDS stake dance setting is blatantly flouting the social norms --- a bold, conscious step, either to test the waters/reaction, or even bolder, to proclaim and project. It's completely different from platonic, friend dancing among girls. 

5 minutes ago, Calm said:

It is not as if same sex sexual coupling is any rarer among girls than guys.

Actually, in the explosion over the last ten years, it's much more common among girls than among boys. Our very open and obvious gay community at school (which includes many Church members --- and they are trying to be open and obvious about it) is almost exclusively girls (there are some boys). At other schools I have been at, this social phenomenon is overwhelmingly girls. 

[HappyJackWagon]

5 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Because people still refuse to acknowledge the effects of acceptance and tolerance on standards, something that's been well established.

So judge people so they know what is really bad? 

And what happens if they don't get that message? They accept people who commit sins and inadvertently keep the 2nd great commandment? Or perhaps they sin themselves. OK. So then what?

They either repent or continue to sin. If they continue to sin perhaps they repent later. If they don't repent later perhaps they repent in the next life and continue progression eternally? So then what? The unworthiest of sinners take a little extra time at the dawn of eternity to be found worthy of God.

The idea that God needs us to pass earthly judgement so that people are already worthy when they come to him is impossible. We will all die sinners. We can choose to believe that our sins are less abhorrent to God than others but regardless post-life repentance will be necessary so it seems like the only benefit of judging people now is a possible head-start in eternity.

On the other hand, we judge people now, pretending to understand God's will and judgement, and turn people away from Jesus, thus delaying their eternal progression whilst simultaneously failing to follow the 2nd great commandment.

[HappyJackWagon]

6 minutes ago, rongo said:

cf. Elder Paul Johnson's rationale against gay-dating behavior at BYU, and apply it to counsel to Church youth. Same-sex hand-holding, kissing, etc. aren't per se violations of the law of chastity, but they do not lead towards where they need to be, and in fact lead away (whether temporarily or permanently, depending on agency). Boys dancing together in an LDS stake dance setting is blatantly flouting the social norms --- a bold, conscious step, either to test the waters/reaction, or even bolder, to proclaim and project. It's not the same level of "serious" as sex, but it's still something that should be prohibited at a stake dance setting, in my view. 

I suppose that depends on whether or not you believe God created gay people just as he created hetero people. Are we to fulfill the measure of our creation? Are we to have loving relationships and families? Or is that only for hetero people? No need to answer.

But please, stop pretending that handholding and dancing is breaking the law of chastity.

[JLHPROF]

7 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

So judge people so they know what is really bad? 

And what happens if they don't get that message? They accept people who commit sins and inadvertently keep the 2nd great commandment? Or perhaps they sin themselves. OK. So then what?

They either repent or continue to sin. If they continue to sin perhaps they repent later. If they don't repent later perhaps they repent in the next life and continue progression eternally? So then what? The unworthiest of sinners take a little extra time at the dawn of eternity to be found worthy of God.

The idea that God needs us to pass earthly judgement so that people are already worthy when they come to him is impossible. We will all die sinners. We can choose to believe that our sins are less abhorrent to God than others but regardless post-life repentance will be necessary so it seems like the only benefit of judging people now is a possible head-start in eternity.

On the other hand, we judge people now, pretending to understand God's will and judgement, and turn people away from Jesus, thus delaying their eternal progression whilst simultaneously failing to follow the 2nd great commandment.

Your argument isn't asking us to accept the sinner.  You see that right?