It’s got to be a tough situation. Sexual urges whether heterosexual or homosexual is such a strong controlling thing. When our children break the commandments with sexual sins, we hope, pray and help them to come back. I’m reminded concerning Alma and Corianton. Alma gave the prescription to help our sexually astray children back to the Lord. The single greatest commandment was to Love the Lord with all our heart, mind and strength. That’s so that we can overcome all our sinful thoughts and doings. To do this, we must keep the commandments first. Be the example. Then, teach the commandments to our wayward children as Alma did to Corianton. Then, through love and acceptance, bring them back unto the Lord. Teach them the way. Not all children will be a Corianton. But, we cannot lower the Lord’s standards. We don’t have that right.
Wow Grass Hopper, wow, wow, wow!!!
I have some recommended reading for you.
Please read on this blogging site, by Busman, his defination of three different kinds of Mormons.
While I think none of us fit totally in any one of the catagories, I do think that all of us come closer to fitting in one of
those catagories than the other two choices.
I think you come closer to fitting into the first catagory, which all others like you, could be very, very, proud. I think that you represent the majority on this web site. I love this web site and I welcome difference of opinion and love to discuss those differences when it can be done intelligently and without putting down differences of opinions. I love the open thought process where we might learn from each other. I dislike closure that dead ends conversation.
I think that I come closer to fitting into the third catagory which is the place that I and others that think the way I do, feel much more comfortable. I think that while the third group is a minority on this site, it does have the same end goals as those in the other catagories have, but perhaps we march to a different drummer and find it easier to keep in step in our own 3rd group, where we like to question, explore different approaches and belief that changing times warrants looking into different approaches to solutions…
I am not sure if there is a glitch in our reply system or if I am being blocked from responding to you openly. I am hoping that it is just a glitch that can be corrected.
Ron… nobody needs to “look” for it because it is easy to see. Your examples are like claiming that it should be okay for you to poke, push and antagonize yet expect nobody to respond in-kind. That makes no sense at all.
The reason your “communication” gets worse is because your comments are inflammatory and critical, on top of the fact that for the most part they just aren’t accurate or reflective of reality. Once you can say something that has basis in fact or is real, then it will be easier to have a discussion. Even when somebody tries to offer some perspective, you simply don’t see it.
Ron, It’s doctrine when it comes to homosexual behavior. Old Testament, New Testament, our Prophets today teach that it is sinful to enter into homosexual relationships. It’s not policy. How we deal with those who sin these great sins of sexual lust is policy. That has changed from OT times to NT times and to our present day.
With that said, all people who sin can be forgiven if we repent and turn away from our sins. So, yes, I’m not going to be the final judge for gays and lesbians. I’m not going to know if they have fully repented. The Lord and our Heavenly Father will know that. My business is to teach the commandments. Watch over the Church and it’s members that I’m assigned to or can help with. I know it’s none of my business to decide what is sin and what is not. That’s in the scriptures and given to us by our Prophets and Apostles.
What makes you think that? Honestly, I think that most of the posters here are pretty open minded about things. Mind you, open minded does not mean agreeing with or accepting actions that contradict the commandments. Treating others with a lack of love and compassion is breaking the commandments, but so is same sex marriage and regardless of what our political leaders think, it is still wrong.
Your opinions and thoughts seem to be in disagreement with that.
Great post Ron. Been there done that. I remember all of the issues at BYU in the 1960’s over the Priesthood. Most of the haters didn’t even understand what the responsibility of the Priesthood was or is. I think it is interesting to see the racial diversity of Brasil during this 2016 Olympics. They seem like a happy people who face the advisory
every day. Actually I am glad that we got to see Rio in the 2016 Olympics. It shows a vibrant very diverse society which has accepted the restored Gospel and faces challenges from the advisory every day. .
Great post Glenn. The complexity of our world is as obvious as the diversity as the racial breakdown of Rio deJanario… Different strokes for different folks.
The lovey dovey stuff is nice and can be good in the right context and setting. But, I must remind those who have made covenants in the Temple. Are we defending the kingdom of God (Church) when we defend evil and evil doers?
What I don’t see from some in here is the concept of “love the sinner but hate the sin.”
It’s nice to see Obama hasn’t destroyed race relations in sports.
You seem to think their is more than one entrance to the Celestial Kingdom and multiple roads to the entrance. Going against God’s commandments and his chosen oracles is not a path that leads to Eternal Life.
You remember the ERA battle in the late 70’s. The truth about that amendment was to get to where we are now with respect to LGBT issues. It was never anything to do with equal rights for women as NOW said. And, the Brethren knew this and tried to teach us now.
The road to Eternal Life is righteousness. That means to also keep his commandments. And, every week we partake of the sacraments saying we will and we do keep the commandments. One of those commandments is not to enter into homosexual behavior and relation acts. That differs from the policy of not having blacks receive the priesthood. A policy is not a commandment.
This is a complex issue to me and I would like to thank all of you who have posted here. I find many points of view from most all of you that I agree with and others I’m not sure of and others I digress from. I know if i home taught a gay couple I would love them as I would anyone else-doesn’t mean I would completely understand them as I don’t even understand some of the things my own kids do. It is comforting I do not have to judge them or their behavior and I can leave that to a God that is much smarter than I am. I have to be solely concerned about the choices I make and the ripples I make in this world that affect the course of history. I will not be critical of any post on this subject. I have encountered gay people in the military and civilian life. My only concern for them in the military was the same as everyone else-that I could trust them to do their job. In civilian life they are like everyone else-trying to find happiness. Ultimately, whether you approve or not they are a part of this world and we all need to come to terms with that. I have left this board for a while because while the great percentage of you were just expressing view points, which can be fun and educational there were a few that were just trying to cause contention, which any of you in the church should know is a by product of Satan. So Ron, Jim, Glenn, Roy, Chris and the rest of you-thanks for your input-I find enlightenment in your statements worth spending time pondering over. I don’t believe any of you are a hundred percent accurate, but I believe you all have points worthy of merit.
Grasshopper,
I totally agree that a policy is not a commandment. This is where, for me, the water gets mirckey.
My whole life up until 1955, ( DOB 12/11/35) I believed with all my heart that the story about the war in heaven,
JESUS PLAN VS. SATEN’S PLAN, was gospel. I really believed that the blacks were cursed with
a black skin because they were the fense sitters.
When I returned home from my tour of duty from the Army in 1955, A GA told us that that was never Gospel. It was just what many people generally believed and passed on and many, nation wide, believed it was gospel but it really was not.
When asked at the Stake conference, what the real reason was, it was told to us that it was probably because Cane
killed Able.
At the next conference, we were told that it was neither because of the War in Heaven nor
was it because Cane killed Able. We were told at that time, that it was just one of the mysteries that
we do not have an answer for but all things would be known in the hereafter.
Every since that time, I have been very, careful, (and perhaps too careful as my carefulness does offend
many people that have not had that experience of which I speak), to find out if some of the controversal
issues that we get involved in are indeed, doctrine or policy?
If it is undisputes doctrine, I stand off. If there is a gray area, or if it is policy, I try to influence a change in that policy, (not going against the Church, but instead, trying to defend the Church) against un-necessary pain, such as the pain we are not going through with the SGBT community, which now turns out to be a greater pain that the scandal during the
Gary Crowton era. Be clear, that my statements are not intended to go against the Church. Instead, it is trying to avoid
conflict if it is a matter of changing policy, (not doctrine). Sometimes, as I said above, what we believe to be doctrine today, may be found to be policy in another time.
Nerver do I mean and offense to you or anyone else,
Grasshopper, I can appreciate what you said. We all do the best we can to learn, understand, and teach gospel principles. You brought up policy so I assume you were referring to one of my earlier posts. This whole thread discussion began with the issue of BYU’s honor code with respect to same-sex attraction. I wondered if it was legal for the HC to allow heterosexual couples to show
affection on campus (hold hands, etc.) but not allow our gay students to do the same without being disciplined or dismissed? I made the point that it is Church doctrine to “obey, honor, and sustain the law.” There are laws that protect gays from discrimination. Shouldn’t the HC be crafted such that it doesn’t violate state and federal anti-discrimination laws? Unless a law has a direct
conflict with our first amendment rights of religious freedom, aren’t we obliged to obey? LDS members can get a temple recommend if they live the commandments including the Law of Chastity (no sexual relations including heavy petting outside of a heterosexual marriage). Can LDS members with same-sex attraction get a temple recommend? Yes, as long as they are living the Law of Chastity. What if they have a friend they show affection to by holding hands, etc. but nothing more? Are they breaking the Law of Chastity? Would you issue a temple recommend? Would you allow them to attend BYU? My point is that we can do more to comply with anti-discrimination laws without compromising our standards of worthiness based on the Law of Chastity. The HC is policy and can be changed and updated when needed.
Regarding Romans 1, if you are going to take Paul’s council literally then the following sins in addition to homosexuality are worthy of death: “Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful…” There are probably a few sins on Paul’s list that we all struggle with from time to time.
Please don’t misunderstand my post. I’m not advocating the gay lifestyle. I just recognize that society has changed drastically in the last few years. In some ways, many heterosexuals long for the good ole days when our gay population stayed securely hidden in the closet and we didn’t have to deal with these issues. We are in a new era and how we respond to these issues may be
just as important for our eternal progression as those on the other side of the issue. What I am advocating is that we continue to be open and sensitive to others in our culture that have more than their fair share to deal with. When we find a policy change is needed to comply with state and federal laws and it can alleviate someone else’s burden while not compromising our faith then we
should pursue it. Regarding those families that are concerned over how the Plan of Salvation applies to their gay children, in his April conference address, Elder Renlund said “I can emphatically state that because of the Atonement of Jesus Christ, ultimately, in the eternal scheme of things, there will be no unfairness. All that is unfair about life can be made right.”
We believe that Christ personally suffered for our sins and pain. He is the only one who knows
what these LDS kids and their families have to go through and it is only just that He is the one who gets to extend the hand of mercy to you, me, and those dealing with same-sex attraction.
Thank you TexCoug.
None of my comments are intended to be against the Church or the Church doctrine. In the past, many very, very important issues that a significant number of people believed to be docrine, nation wide, turned out to not be doctrine. It turned out to not be policy. Instead, it turned out to be nation wide opinion that the Church later told us that it was never Church sanctioned doctrine. It leaves one to question more now until we are told by the GA that this is indeed doctrine and not just policy and not just opinion.
My over all feeling and desire is, (Can’t we just all get along?) Can’t we judge not, lest we be judged and leave all the judging to God? It seems like our actions, right or wrong, is being interpreted by the LGBT community as being judged by us when they feel that the only person that has a right to judge them for being LGBT is God.
No Jim,
If indeed you see yourself in the third group, than you and I are more alike than we are different, We both want what is best for the Church, the University, and The Cougar Football team. One of the main difference we have with the common goal which each of us share, is one of us, know for absolute certainty that our our stand against LGBT community not being able to marry is because we say, that our doctrine says that marriage should be defined as being between one man and one woman.
The other one of us, wants us to be absolutely certain that this is Church Sanctioned doctrine and not just policy and not just something that we believe to be true.
In the past, it was taught as doctrine in Sunday School classes, in Sacrament meetings and elsewhere about the War in Heavy that turned out to not be doctrine, not to be Church sanctioned policy, but instead, it was someone’s opinion that went nation wide as gospel but turned out after decades, to only be opinion.
We use to believe in (regardless of the reasons, which yes, I am aware of as my father in law, a bishop was a son of a polygamist family), that it was okay for one man to have more than one wife.
This is no way an attack on the Church or the University or on our football team. One of us just wants to believe what he believes to definitely be doctrine. The other of us whants this time, to be sure that it is Church sanctioned doctrine. I would like to hear a GA tell us that this is definitely doctrine.
Scott,
Thank you for your polite and intelligent reply. I appreciate you and your reply.
You sound like you may be a Bishop or perhaps a higher position. My father in law was a bishop and started the East Los Angeles Ward and 13 years later, at the end of his 13 year term as bishop, started the East Los Angeles Stake. He was Bishop Paul E. Richard.
My son in law, married to my oldest daughter was Bishop of the Moreno Valley Ward, He is Bishop Bob Herrick in Moreno Valley, Ca. He is a graduate of the Ruben Clark Law School at BYU and was before retirement, the City Attorney for Moreno Valley for approximately 30 year.
I have had other relatives in Bishoprics, the one most know in Utah was Ward C. Gordon.
I have been in the Elders Quorum Presidency. I have been in Stake Superintendency , I have been a Church Cub Scout leader, a Sunday School teacher and a home teacher.
I was drafted out of BYU in school year 1953-54 at the end of the Korean War. When I got home from the army, I had a wife and a child and 3 years later I had four children and no, I missed going on a mission but all of my children went on missions. All attended at least some time at BYU. My two sons graduated from BYU. One of my daughters graduated in Washington and is an RN as is her oldest daughter. All have children that attended BYU. I am about the most loyal BYU and BYU Cougar fan that you can find anywhere.
What I have to say, is never intended to be against the Church or the Church doctrine. My indent is to TRY to be sure, not from here-say, that indeed, any issue that is extremely controversial, is indeed doctrine and not opinion.
( I go back to the War in Heaven Issue that in my first 20 years of life, I believed with all of my heart, because i learned it in Sunday School and in Sacrament meetings and other places that this was doctrine, only to find out decades later, that it was never Church doctrine, nor was it ever Church policy, but only peoples opinion that taught it nation wide as gospel.
We say now that it is doctrine that marriage should be between one man and one woman, yet when my father in law was born to a polygamist family, it was doctrine, he thought and his family thought, that it was okay for one man to have more than one wife.
I just want us to be sure that we are not suffering or causing others to suffer, because of policy, or for what someone believes that has spread world wide, where people believe we are talking doctrine when we are not anymore sure that we were about the other issues above.
I would like a statement from a GA that our current stand vs the LGBT is indeed doctrine and not just policy and not just opinion.
I still believe "Judge not, lest ye be judged and leave all judging to God. That is also doctrine. I would love a world where we can all just get along.
Thanks again for your courtesy and with your reply, which I respect.
Well spoken-although I would never want to be grouped or type classed-I am on a mission to learn as much as I can in a short amount of time. All of the points you make are reasonable in your own mind, though some take offense because they may feel you are saying something you really aren’t . I believe we need to keep seeking understanding, because frankly there is a lot of opinion out there that is completely erroneous and damaging to others. Keep up the good work!
Sr_Burton,
Congratulations on your mission. Where are you serving? One of my boys served in Monterey Mexico while the other served in Ohio.
I have members of the family that served in Argentina, Uruguay, South Africa, Canada and other state missions. (later in life), I was drafted while at BYU 1953/54 school year and when I returned home I had a wife and a child and four years later, I had 4 children, and I was never able to go on a mission. I miss not having that experience.
I am what I am. I was never a cookie cutter individual. From the first 20 years of my life, I probably was, but from 1955 to present, I have learned to question everything controversial as I have stated in more than one post above. You may see that as bad, or damaging. I was personally damaged by the said above changes make in 1955. I now must question until I hear an GA say that our stand on controversial issues are indeed doctrine and not just opinion or policy. I would like very much to read an article from a GA stating was is doctrine in the LGBT issue.
No I was not born to be a doubting Thomas. I was made to be one from the War In Heaven Change in 1955.
fish,
The Church has doctrine. There are things which even the majority believes to be doctrine, which later is found out to be only opinion and not even Church policy.
Before you or someone else is hurt, by what you believed to be doctrine, only decades late to find out that it was not doctrine at all, nor was it Church policy, but only someone’s opinion that was taught nation wide as doctrine, which it was not. Only than, does a person begin to question things that are presented as doctrine
We had a policy in the 40’s and 50’s, (Not doctrine, but policy), that if you were Latino, you had to take buses or if you were fortuante enough, you drove a car, to a Mexican Branch instead of coming to our Caucasian Branch a couple blocks away. One of my neighbors., a latino, that lived about 6 blocks from our Ward was told that he had to go to the Mexican Branch about 17 miles away. When asked why, he was told that he needed to hear the gospel in his native tongue. When he replied, that his native tongue was English and that he did not speak or understand Spanish, he was than told that he had to go to the Mexican Branch so that he could be with people of his own culture. When he replied that he was born in the United States and the American Culture was his culture and that he had nothing to do with the Mexican culture, he was told, “Sorry, this is policy”
My point is, we need to make sure what we are calling doctrine, policy or opinion. Over the years, I have witnessed
difference of opinion over what is doctrine, policy and opinion ()War in Heaven/Mexian Branches/1978/and now, I want to make sure that the LGBT issue is stated by a GA and not just opinion on this or any other board,
Finally fish, in your support, ( I think support, maybe not, but intend it to be support), There has been many studies, which I don’t think the Church supports, (not sure, but maybe), that says that 10% of our total population, world wide is born Gay or Lesbian. Some to different degrees from others. We are not talking about environmentally gay or lesbian,
but genetically gay or lesbian.
I still believe that we are all God’s Children and that he had a hand in our creation. I am not one to criticize the Lord’s work. There is much that I do not understand and I know that. I also know that there is many on this board that truly believes they understand perfectly everything. With my lack of understanding, I choose to judge not, lest I be judged, and for me, I will leave the judging to God. As for the rest of you, those without sin, (any sin//10 commandment sin), let he/she without sin, cast the first stone. Isn’t that doctrine?
Sorry Ron-miscommunication -not currently serving a mission-meant my mission in life-I too was drafted while going to BYU in 1969. Never bothered with a student deferment-never regretted a day spent serving my country -though I wondered how anyone could possibly talk to me like that:) it’s all good Ron-keep going Brother Ron- even Grasshopper makes sense occasionally 