why thank you.
I’ve never heard of the ERA being a front for the lbg movement before…I’ll see if I can find anything to back up that opinion…unless you care to provide.
I don’t know what it was like in the spirit world…apparently you know more than the scripture but many people do…Moses and Paul as infallible interpreters of the spirit of god? especially given we have no autograph from either one of them to know what they wrote that hasn’t been handed down through both well meaning and evil designing men…Haven’t a clue.
Sorry if my humility bothers you…but you’re surety, of the evilness of the lgb community and of the job “they”'ve done on me, still doesn’t answer the question I posed to you when you brought up the Proclamation on the Family…“if the two gender meaning in mind at the time of the Proclamation turns out to be the eternal meaning…I’m uncertain how that informs the question of how to deal with the current political hot buttons that do recognize more than the traditional two… which is why I queried how you connect the Proclamation to question of LGBT, the honor code, and BYU admittance to the B12.”
Ron,
I remember in law school one of my professors who quoted the 10% stat you use. When asked to provide a source, for it, the only sources he could provide were all talking heads who looked like they were quoting each other.
The best summary I’ve found of the scientific studies from around the world is Wikipedia and the numbers just don’t seem to add up to that high a percent…
Ron, I’ve enjoyed your posts as well. I am sure we’d be good friends if we lived in the same ward. With BYU holding closed practices, there hasn’t been much in the way of football to post about so I’m glad everyone took a moment or two to share perspectives on an important social issue. The most important thing I feel we can do is to open our hearts and minds and remember that the worth of a soul is great in the sight of God. I think those who deal with this issue need our love and support and respect instead of our scorn.
Yes, that’s why the Church was against it. They said the genders would be blurred. They saw the mess we are now in and knew it would have happened much sooner. Look it up.
So, now, because Moses and Paul clearly state that God views homosexual acts as vile and wicked, they are no longer the mouthpiece for God and the scriptures are evil.
The Proclamation is clear that marriage is only between a man and a woman. That means in the Celestial Kingdom, the same is true.
As far as the preexistence, unlike physical bodies that can become sick and die, spirit bodies are eternal and perfect. No mistakes.
And I agreewith you I am truly clueless. Please enlighten me as to what you see me projecting.
What I’ve asked mr grasshopper now for the third time is to explain something I don’t understand. How it is that the proclamation on the family is supposed to apply to the question of the BYU HC and the big12.
First he spouted citations at me as if they are explanations, and I don’t get it.
Then he backs off a bit and stated “I’d like to stress the importance of gender in the preexistence.” I still don’t understand. Assuming that, as the proclamation states, “Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.” which I take to be a reasonably accurate statement of reality or it wouldn’t have been issued, how is the statement supposed to inform the honor code? or BYU’s admittance to the B12. I assume the answer must be something like:
because of the Proclamation on the Family, x exists.
because of the reality of the lgbtq community, y exists.
because of the reality that equal protection of the law exists…as currently construed by the SCOTUS, z exists
therefor BYU should do something or other…
I think I understand the antecedents mr grasshopper is proposing, but I don’t understand what seems to me is the missing consequent or the implicate part of his assertions.
I certainly don’t understand the jump to the conclusion.
I’ve also asked you for a source of the 10%…, because I’ve heard the claim for a number of years and I’ve periodically looked for a substantiation of that well known number. It appears to be one of those numbers like the 50% marriage failure rate, or the million lives that Truman saved by dropping atomic bombs on Japan, that has entered into our knowledge with little if any substantive source and the sources that do exist have been substantially debunked…but we still all “know” the numbers.
I have not stated an opinion, I find the questions the existence of the lgbtq and others engender interesting.
For what it’s worth, one of my closest friends, former roommate actually, has left the church and came out of the closet. I feel sad for his path. Sadder that he has chosen to attack the church of which I know he had a testimony of: we served as temple workers together while at BYU. He stayed active and served regularly in the temple sharing some amazing spiritual experiences with me, until the Prop 8 vote happened. Decades of service, testimony building experiences, and then like too many he took offense…and left. As near as I can tell only after leaving did he decide that the law of chastity oath he took would be violated.
As to the general societal arguments over gay marriage and other rights, I generally see neither party actually taking the other arguments seriously. Both sides mostly shoring up their own proponents with repetitions of stale arguments that failed to persuade the other side. But that clearly the arguments of the gay marriage rights persuaded more of the undecided than their opponents. This left us with the current predicament facing BYU, and society or at least the political classes, of how to handle the strongly held presumptions that both freedom of religion matters and that the newly won rights of the lbgtq community also matter.
The church’s positions, as I understand them, in the Utah legislature was one of the better solutions, so I wouldn’t be surprised to see a better solution provided for BYU and its honor code as well.
FWIW, much of this thread has been about the personal rather than the communal response. I like many others here think that on a personal level a liberal serving of the basics of Christian kindness will go a long way. But as with so many Christian questions. taking the gospel response from an individual level to the community or government level creates complexities that engender differing views of the correct solutions which themselves differ based on time and circumstance.
Moses and Paul were the mouthpieces of God. I didn’t think there was a question regarding that, not in my mind anyway, and from your statements I assumed you would agree.
I did not say the scriptures were evil.
What I said is that we don’t know what Moses and Paul said regarding this specific subject, because the Bible as we have it has passed through so many hands many of which had their own agendas which fact we know because of what the Bible itself says, what the Book of Mormon says about the Bible, as well as what the Prophet Joseph and many other modern prophets have said regarding the Bible.
The Book of Mormon, the D&C, and the Pearl of Great Price do not have questions regarding editors and their insertions or deletions over time. It may be worth pausing to consider that the scriptures you refer to are in the one portion of our scriptures that has passed through the hands of editors with something other than godly intent…
The proclamation on the family clearly states that “We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God”
That marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God, does not say that same sex marriage is or is not ordained of God. At the time it was proclaimed though it was certainly meant to imply what you claim it asserts. That it does not assert that is also simply prima facie. I think that the men who wrote it were lead by God and if God had wanted to make the positive assertion that you imply was made, that the Lord would have inspired them to make that assertion. Assuming they said what the Lord wanted them to say, which I take as fact, The Lord didn’t, they didn’t, the Proclamation on the Family doesn’t say what you want it to say regarding gay marriage.
I was not asserting that spirit bodies in any way were mistakes. What I was positing, clearly I may well be wrong, is that given that at least some same sex attraction seems to be genetically based and given the statement from the proclamation on the family that “Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.” then it is possible that like in the mortal existence in the premortal existence maybe there was something other than just the male and female genders that the Proclamation on the Family talks about.
The only way to keep things straight on this issue is to make a clear distinction between sexual temptation and acting on those temptations. Moses and Paul are condemning sexual acts. The Church’s position is that faithful members who may have same-sex attraction but do not act on those temptations are worthy members of good standing in the Church. This is not violating the doctrine Moses and Paul taught. The BYU honor code is consistent with distinguishing between same-sex attraction and same-sex acts. BYU students who have same-sex attraction are gay but as long as they don’t participate in same-sex acts, they are in good standing with the university. We have reached a time where the Church needs to decide where to draw the line on what is considered “acting” on sexual temptation. BYU lets heterosexual couples hold hands and display public affection. They want to encourage students to date and marry. This is where BYU is trying to navigate through the sticky situation with Anti-discrimination laws that have changed in recent years. According to our worthiness standards, heterosexual couples can court and show affection. It doesn’t violate the Law of Chastity unless it goes too far (sex, petting, etc.). So if that isn’t violating the Law of Chastity, what legal basis do you have for dismissing gay BYU students that hold hands on campus or show affection. That is where things get sticky. Are gay students who show affection on BYU campus violating the Law of Chastity? Are they still worthy of a temple recommend? Then why would they be dismissed from BYU? That could be considered illegal discrimination against gays. The other quandry is that our doctrine states that “we believe in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.” So if BYU complies with the law and allows gay students to show affection on campus, what will be the reaction of the LDS population? Would LDS members consider that as caving to political pressure? It is a difficult decision that they face. I personally would be in favor of BYU complying with anti-discrimination laws rather than digging their heels in on this issue only to have legal action taken and to be forced to comply down the road. But, I can see the other side of the issue too. I guess this is why President Worthin gets paid the big bucks.
Here is some additional statements on the position of the Church on same-sex attraction:
The Church’s approach to this issue stands apart from society in many ways. And that’s alright. Reasonable people can and do differ. From a public relations perspective it would be easier for the Church to simply accept homosexual behavior. That we cannot do, for God’s law is not ours to change. There is no change in the Church’s position of what is morally right. But what is changing — and what needs to change — is to help Church members respond sensitively and thoughtfully when they encounter same-sex attraction in their own families, among other Church members, or elsewhere.
Where the Church stands:
The experience of same-sex attraction is a complex reality for many people. The attraction itself is not a sin, but acting on it is. Even though individuals do not choose to have such attractions, they do choose how to respond to them. With love and understanding, the Church reaches out to all God’s children, including our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters.
How should we as members respond?
We can all come together to foster a climate of goodwill and a determination to understand the workings of God in each individual life. Latter-day Saints take the Christian charge to “love one another” seriously. Though we all fall short, each of us can reinvest in kindness and gentle persuasion. http://www.mormonsandgays.org/
People out or within the church will respond in different ways no matter what the prophet or general authorities say. You know what you are supposed to do-live after the manner of Christ -love God and then love everyone else-show compassion and kindness to all and keep the commandments. A classic example, leaving the gay issue aside for now, is the refugees coming into our domain. A sore spot for many a church member or nonmember alike. Yet President Uchdorf nearly breaks into tears asking us for compassion for these people. I’m sure that it didn’t sit well for many members-but I don’t remember being offered a choice to pick and choose who we treat with kindness and compassion.
I think you misunderstand the concept of what it means that the Bible is correct as for its translated correctly. That doesn’t mean all of it is incorrect and therefore not doctrine. Joseph Smith corrected only a small portion and the Book of Mormon does a tiny bit. What Joseph Smith did not correct was the scriptures in both OT and NT concerning homosexual acts being sins. And, the First Presidency said his translation was complete. Moses, Paul and others specifically state homosexual acts are vile sins. I’m sorry if that includes you or a family member.
President Oaks did a thesis on this subject and science has concluded its not biological. It has a 50% possibility at the most of being genetic. Regardless of that, Elder Oaks, as well as others, state it wouldn’t matter if it was a physical genetic issue. It’s still prohibited. It’s still a sin.
As far as your outer space comment about our spirits being flawed and gay, homosexual behavior whether genetics or not has nothing to do with the spirit body.
Our Spirit body and mind has the responsibility to learn to control our body’s brains, parts and passions. Any sexual behavior outside marriage between a man and a woman is a sin. That’s what the Proclamation teaches. Apostles and Prophets have taught this over and over. There is no missing understanding like you suggest. There is no reason to add to the Proclamation that specifically gay marriage is a sin. It’s inferred by the way it was written being 100% specific that marriage is between ONLY a man and a woman. None of your wiggles is appropriate.
Look how Germany is being trashed and destroyed by the refugee problem. It doesn’t mean people don’t have compassion because they want immigration to be controlled properly. We simply want to see it done in a way we don’t put citizens and legal aliens lives in jeopardy. How will Uchtdorf feel when ISIS start bombing our churches and temples in America? Vetting immigrants has always been done in America
I think what could also help is gays and lesbians try to understand why God doesn’t approve of homosexual behavior. It would help if they were compassionate to those who believe in God and understand it’s our responsibility to not only be compassionate but to teach right from wrong.
A simpler explanation is that we have destroyed and trashed ourselves. It started almost half a century ago when we started preaching over population and the responsibility of limiting our families while others just kept on with the procreation process. The demographics in the US and Western Europe have changed significantly in the last 50 years.
Every good thing that has happened in my life I attribute to the Church and efforts to follow Heavenly Father. It has never been my intention to come across as secular or critical of the Church doctrines. I really do feel we can be compassionate and reach out to BYU gays and lift their burdens without compromising our positions.
One thing to remember is that BYU is not a public school. This means that it can set standards in accordance with the Church stance on homosexual acts. I would not want to see the Church nor BYU cave in because then what is next? Progressivism doesn’t stop. It continues on destroying more and more of what is good.
You asked what is the limit to which gays can show affection and cross the line into sin. I think that goes to what they are thinking and feeling at the time. If they hold hands because they are in love, the next step will to go further towards a sexual relationship. My feeling is that there is a Utard schools 40 minutes north they can transfer to. Why does an entire school have to change because of a few hundred students, if that many?
It’s got to be tough for gays to see their Church teach and push for celestial marriage and they can’t do it while on earth. Can they marry someone of the opposite sex? Of course. In the not so far past, marriage wasn’t so much about emotions and love as it was about necessity and procreation. There was arranged marriages and they survived. I know a couple of couples that one is gay but happily married because they love the Lord with all their hearts and strive to do what’s right and help build the kingdom of God on the earth.
Grasshopper,
We could put a ban on all flights into BYU that come from USA communities that have know LGBT in those sanctuary communities. We could build a wall around BYU and make the LGBT community pay for it. It is better for LGBT members to go to the Utah Utes than to have the full student body at
BYU dwindle in disbelief. We should go into each different state that has LGBT issues on their ballot and do all that we can to assure that those states fail to give equal opportunity to the LGBT community.
We should complain about all P5 conferences that keep us out because of our religious and political activities. We should demand equal opportunity to get into those P5 conferences.
Or,
We should leave all judging to God, lest we be judged.
Aro,
You present an excellent example in my earlier quote from the Bible, “As ye sew, so shall ye reap”
Also, I believe that you are adding much fire to the subject when you suggest that the B word,
bestiality, be added to the LGBT reference. Perhaps you should look the word up. If you truly understand the meaning, I do not believe you to be the type of person as to be so insulting to a whole community, ( Perhaps 10% approximately of the entire world wide community).
Nice statement fish. Nice intent.
It is my guess, that the LGBT community at BYU would rather have you (not) reach out to them, but instead, treat them like you would any other student coming tot BYU to get a good education while judging not, and leaving all judgement to God.