- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
[Moderator note: splitting this conversation off from the original thread located here: http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=3646 Hi Meoclaw,
I admire how you love others and show empathy & compassion for the struggles others face regarding homosexual preferences.
I also love others as such – with family & friends who have struggled with homosexuality. Two friends of mine even died of AIDS.
I feel passionate about truth – which is partly why I’m on this forum. I realize many cognitive distortions in the church, yet I also see some true value.
“Know the truth and it shall set you free.” Truth will carve itself, so a fearless search for truth will present more truth, even if it’s unpopular.
It may not be popular to express, but the truth is: we are not born with sexual desires. Our brains are only 25% developed at birth, so we can better adapt to environmental influences. Obviously any conscious action, including homosexual actions are choices. Emotions are in motion & are what they are, but are preceded by thoughts which can be chosen. Emotions can affect physiology. Habitual thought patterns are less consciously chosen & more difficult to change.
Evidence shows that homosexuality is more linked to environmental influences than to biology…
Science Does not Support the Claim That Homosexuality Is Genetic
http://www.cwfa.org/images/content/bornorbred.pdf Homosexual Researchers Debunk ‘Born Gay’ Urban Legend
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/724179/posts The APA changed the definition of homosexuality not because of scientific studies, but because of political harrassment from gay lobbyists.
http://www.freewebs.com/theborngayhoax/theapa.htm I believe in calling it what it is, otherwise we find ourselves looking for the wrong kind of responses in our attempt to love. We each have different beliefs, different perspectives on Stay LDS. It is good – if we all thought alike – we wouldn’t learn much. One aspect that I appreciate about the LDS church is their stand for legal marriage between a man & a woman. I also believe in freedom of speech & have had my speech limited too many times by same-sex marriage supporters. I hope we can each be free to express our own perspectives in respectful ways.
Featherina wrote:Evidence shows that homosexuality is more linked to environmental influences than to biology…
I would agree that SOME evidence suggests this. I find that I have certain traits as a youngest sibling and others that I apprear to have learned from my parent’s ways of doing things. Both of these are non-biological influences. It is important to remember that choice in what we think/feel is hard – choice in how we think is even more limited. If this discussion is to continue much further perhaps a new thread would need to be started.
{moderator hat on} Based on our experience, this tends to be a hot button topic with a lot of strong opinions. PLEASE keep our site mission in mind: topics are supposed to lead towards finding solutions or resolution to issues that help people maintain some type of positive connection to Mormonism.
We try to give each other the freedom to view things in ways that work for them. This is one of those topics where people have an opinion, and there are diverse sources out there for and against it (especially within authoritative church sources).
In particular, please remember the following two items in our rules of etiquette:
Quote:Please feel free to disagree with anyone. Nobody here has all the answers. We can all benefit from being challenged. This is not a debate club though. There is no winning or losing. Please try to stay supportive and positive with those who might not believe the same way.
Quote:Please do not start discussions that lead to a debate with the results of finding the one correct answer to a problem. Topics like this will probably be moderated.
{moderator hat off}I hate to say this but biologically, I don’t believe homosexuality serves a useful function. Then again, neither do condoms if we’re thinking in such literal terms. I think it has come about accidentally, at least in purely biological terms.
Featherina wrote:the truth is: we are not born with sexual desires.
Agreed… but at the same time, we are not born with ANY desires. Yet we are born with a set of pre-loaded programs that start running at a future time. A newborn has no sense of self preservation, for example, yet it is part of human nature, not something that is developed by environment. I can assure you that heterosexual men don’t have sexual desires when they are young, but can’t avoid them when they get older. These boys are indifferent about girls when they are young, begin to sense group affiliation and competition around the time they start school, find girls abhorrent sometime around the middle of grade-school and avoid interaction, and then suddenly, unexpectedly, and without regard to prior convictions, become obsessed with girls beginning around middle-school… and it never lets up. They may not have been “born with” these desires, but they are foreordained to it.
My own belief now, is that a large percentage of SSA individuals were pre-loaded with this trait before they were ever aware of their environment, just like heterosexual individuals were pre-loaded with their more common trait.
I suspect that there is a second set; some percentage of SSA people that are the product of their environment, just like all of us have some major traits that are due to our upbringing. I don’t think of that as a “choice” however. For example, I’m somewhat of a perfectionist when it comes to work. I thought everyone was like that until I began working with other people and realized that many just don’t care and just want to do the minimum required. I have that sense based on the environment that I grew up in, and these concepts were passed on to me beginning at a time before I can remember. I wouldn’t call that a choice. I can’t avoid it. It’s part of who I am.
I think in a sense, this is why many of us stay LDS. I was born into the church, but I wasn’t aware of the church when I was a newborn. Then church was part of my life experience, and I knew nothing else. Then as I got older, I became aware there were others that weren’t in the church, and began a natural group affiliation. Later, I saw the church as the only thing REAL in life and tried to get others to join it… etc… etc… etc… now, it’s not something I can simply walk away from and pretend it never existed. I still feel (unrighteous) pride about the dedication and commitment that have raised the church to international prominence. I defend the church and it’s freedom to be. I encourage my children to be a part of it. I have a religious orientation that I can’t avoid.
SamBee wrote:I hate to say this but biologically, I don’t believe homosexuality serves a useful function. Then again, neither do condoms if we’re thinking in such literal terms.
I think it has come about accidentally, at least in purely biological terms.
From a biological reproductive point of view, it would seem homosexuality serves no function.
We know by research & child development, that sexuality is learned more than inborn. There has never been a gay gene found. Even in cases where someone is born with an inherited tendency, doctors tell us that environment influences the gene’s expression or lack of expression.
This is not in any way saying that people, of whatever preference, have no function. Each person has unique ways of seeing things & unique ways of contributing. Sexual preference does not make up one’s complete identity as a human being. Still, homosexual acts themselves seem to involve more liabilities than assets to society:
The US CDC reports disproportionately high statstics of AIDS & STDs contracted and spread among those engaging in homosexual practices.
Children need a mother and father to not only thrive, imitate in healthy ways & get along best with both sexes, but also to even exist. Those supporting same-sex marriage are denying children the right to the scientifically natural union that created children. They deny the necessity of mothers and fathers, as if just moms or just dads are enough, when children need both mothers & fathers.
I have experienced and been aware of cases of others’ rights being infinged upon in the cause for “gay rights.” Children are being indoctrinated in public schools where same-sex marriage has been legalized. Freedom of speech has been limited, as well as some have even been fired or otherwise harmed simply for stating support for marriage between a man and a woman.
One of the teachings I admire of the LDS church is their stand on supporting marriage as it has been defined for centuries: between a man and a woman.
“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 and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.”On Own Now wrote:Yes, however environmental influences overpower much of such programs, otherwise we wouldn’t be able to adapt to the environment as we have. A newborn has no sense of self preservation, for example, yet it is part of human nature, not something that is developed by environment.
Actually, babies can immediately after birth, sense where the mother’s milk is & inch his/her way up, when placed on the mother’s abdomin.In the church, there is the teaching that we each have a conscience – knowing what is healthy & what is not – aka the light of Christ.
Isn’t the semantics interesting: con=with, science… con-science, conscience.
Science seems to back this up, which I find fascinating. In a petri dish, the nucleus (which is like the brain of the cell) was taken out of a cell, yet the cell still moved toward nourishment and away from toxin.
Godfried Leibniz explained that the essence of everything are simple substances called monads – indestructable & based on perception. He explained them to be most influenced by immediate enviroment, while also being somewhat of a mirror of all…
“Now this interconnection, relationship, or this adaptation of all things to each particular one, and of each one to all the rest, brings it about that every simple substance has relations which express all the others and that it is consequently a perpetual living mirror of the universe.”To me, it gives a deeper meaning behind, the idea of free agency and the idea that we are each a “child of God.”
Quote:I can assure you that heterosexual men don’t have sexual desires when they are young, but can’t avoid them when they get older. These boys are indifferent about girls when they are young, begin to sense group affiliation and competition around the time they start school, find girls abhorrent sometime around the middle of grade-school and avoid interaction, and then suddenly, unexpectedly, and without regard to prior convictions, become obsessed with girls beginning around middle-school… and it never lets up. They may not have been “born with” these desires, but they are foreordained to it.
As you noted, it’s common for boys to go through a phase of not liking girls, & at this point, some (esp. in public schools where same-sex marriage has been legalized) have attempted to sway boys toward homosexuality, in the disguise of “homosexual tollerance” or “anti-bullying.”Normalizing & even encouraging children to explore homosexuality obviously causes more to experiment with homosexuality.
“The Legal Liability Associated with Homosexuality Education in Schools… This report is part of an integrated strategy to inform and educate parents, students and school officials across the nation of its contents and of their respective rights and duties. It has documented the concern that the health of students in many schools across the country may have been compromised and their First Amendment rights may have been denied.”
Quote:For example, I’m somewhat of a perfectionist when it comes to work. I thought everyone was like that until I began working with other people and realized that many just don’t care and just want to do the minimum required. I have that sense based on the environment that I grew up in, and these concepts were passed on to me beginning at a time before I can remember. I wouldn’t call that a choice. I can’t avoid it. It’s part of who I am.
If it serves you well, then it is functional. If it doesn’t, then you would look into changing it & because you have ability to change thoughts and actions, you can. You are not without free agency. One thing that has allowed us to evolve as a human race, is the fact that we can choose how to react to our environment & develop more in relation to environmental cues than we are limited to inborn nature, or even learned behavior. In this way, human beings are truly unique from all other more instinctive creatures.Quote:I have a religious orientation that I can’t avoid.
It may seem that, & believing that would no-doubt influence your actions. However, the fact is that many do change their religious orientation.Since I realized some of the beliefs I had learned from church doctrine or customs were dysfunctional, I have changed my beliefs and actions. Some have called me “apostate” but I believe in following truth/God above any other group’s dictated belief package. Gratefully, I have the ability to think for myself, to question popular opinion, and as it is at least now, I still have religious freedom.
Speaking as a moderator, there are two separate topics in this thread, and it’s going to be very hard to talk about either of them dispassionately and with a focus on staying LDS. We are not a site geared toward debate and convincing others that we are right and they are wrong. it simply isn’t part of our mission. As Brian said, we will try to keep to that mission with this thread. I don’t believe that all people who end up in homosexual relationships are hard-wired for that. I understand enough about the research on human sexuality and know too many homosexuals who had traumatic experiences that influenced greatly their choices and/or actions to believe it’s predestined at birth. Boys who are sexually abused in their childhood by a male are more likely to be abusers of other boys when they are adults; women who are abused by men are more likely to turn to other women for comfort, support and sexual fulfillment; etc. I understand those “environmental” forces and their effects on sexuality. However, I also know WAY too many people who lived completely normal lives without any trauma, “indoctrination” (which I really don’t like using in a conversation like this, since it’s a standard charge that means, in practical terms, “teaching something to children that I don’t believe”) or other supportive environmental influences. I’ve known too many people who have known only sexual attraction to those of the same sex from the days of their earliest awareness of sexual attraction – who have tried to change that aspect of themselves without any success whatsoever. For them, like for me, trying to change their sexual attraction from one sex to another is useless; it simply can’t be done.
Thus, I believe the following statements in the Church’s latest pamphlet about same-sex attraction, even as I don’t accept some other statements in it:
Quote:Many questions, however, including some related to same-gender attractions, must await a future answer, even in the next life.
Quote:However, the perfect plan of our Father in Heaven makes provision for individuals who seek to keep His commandments but who, through no fault of their own, do not have an eternal marriage in mortal life
.
Quote:Same-gender attractions include deep emotional, social, and physical feelings.
It also is interesting that the pamphlet does not use the word “repent” once when dealing with homosexual attraction. Rather, it talks about such attraction often lasting throughout one’s entire life and speaks of “self-mastery” – not “change”. It is phrased in terms of transgression, not sin – and that phrasing is explicit. It is obvious that the Church no longer views homosexual attraction itself as sin, which translates into the belief that homosexual attraction is not a conscious choice in many cases.
All other issues aside, I believe that foundational understanding is key. Yes, there are environmental forces at work in many cases, but there are genetic forces at work in many others. I have come to this understanding partly through the research, but a more important part of my understanding was gained by talking openly and deeply with those about whom we are talking – and the ultimate realization came from multiple people who asked me, point-blank, if I could change my own sexual orientation if I tried hard enough – if I “only had more faith”. I couldn’t, and the very assertion that I should evokes a powerful oppositional reaction within me. In that sense, I “get it” – and I understand why many people hear someone say that they weren’t “born that way” and feel like such statements are a direct attack on them and their honesty and sincerity. It is very much like saying, “That’s not true. You are lying – or deceived.” They aren’t lying, and they aren’t deceived. They simply are being honest about what they feel.
So, for me, the “solution” to this type of discussion is to recognize the truth of the Church’s first statement I excerpted and posted above:
Quote:Many questions, however, including some related to same-gender attractions, must await a future answer, even in the next life.
I believe that, and I apply it to lots of other topics, as well.
I’m fine with doing my best to understand what I can in this life while admitting openly that many questions must await future answers.Featherina, it is obvious you have strong opinions about this topic. Be careful, please, that you don’t imply things like those who see things differently than you do are less evolved. Also, try to avoid using absolutist terms about a topic where “the research” is all over the map and where, as I quoted in my last comment, even the LDS Church acknowledges that some answers might have to wait until the next life. There are generalizations we can make confidently about segments of any group, but universal, absolute conclusions about everyone within any group nearly always are stereotypical and not applicable to everyone within that group. We (Mormons together and we as a subset within Mormonism), of all people, should understand the damage that such sweeping statements can cause.
Orson said the following in a different thread:
Quote:You know what they say about religion and politics. Some discussions will never be productive, the best thing we can do is be polite and just let the topics go.
I hope we can have a productive conversation about this topic focused on how we can understand it in a way that will help people stay LDS, but, if we can’t, we might have to “be polite and just the topic go”.
Ray, I hope we can have a productive conversation about this too.
I understand that we each have unique perspectives regarding this and many other topics.
Considering the unique backgrounds of each of us, it is understandable that we won’t all see things the same way, but it can be a good thing.
Freedom of speech is important to me, not just for my own purpose, but for others as well.
You quoted the general authority out of context. They were speaking to single members who never had the chance to get married & were not discussing homosexuality at all when they said,
“However, the perfect plan of our Father in Heaven makes provision for individuals who seek to keep His commandments but who, through no fault of their own, do not have an eternal marriage in mortal life.”The general authority have stated several times that any sexual act outside of legal marriage is sin & have discussed repentance in regard to this.
Although, GA has taught those who have same-sex attraction but do not act on it are not sinning, they have still clearly expressed their support of marriage as only between a man and a woman and about concerns regarding the homosexual movement…
“… it is clear that any sexual relationship other than that between a legally wedded heterosexual husband and wife is sinful. The divine mandate of marriage between man and woman puts in perspective why homosexual acts are offensive to God. They repudiate the gift and the Giver of eternal life.”– Victor L. Brown “There is a falsehood that some are born with an attraction to their own kind, with nothing they can do about it. They are just ‘that way’ and can only yield to those desires. That is a malicious and destructive lie. While it is a convincing idea to some, it is of the devil. No one is locked into that kind of life. From our premoral life we were directed into a physical body. There is no mismatching of bodies and spirits. Boys are to become men –masculine, manly men –ultimately to become husbands and fathers. No one is predestined to a perverted use of these powers.”-Boyd K. Packer “Applying the First Presidency’s distinction to the question of same-sex relationships, we should distinguish between (1) homosexual (or lesbian) ‘thoughts and feelings’ (which should be resisted and redirected), and (2) ‘homosexual behavior’ (which is a serious sin).“We should note that the words homosexual, lesbian, and Gay are adjectives to describe particular thoughts, feelings or behaviors. We should refrain from using these words as nouns to identify particular conditions or specific persons. Our religious doctrine dictates this usage. It is wrong to use these words to denote a condition, because this implies that a person is consigned by birth to a circumstance in which he or she has no choice in respect to the critically important matter of sexual behavior.
“Feelings are another matter. Some kinds of feelings seem to be inborn. Others are traceable to mortal experiences. Still other feelings seem to be acquired from a complex interaction of ‘nature and nurture.’ All of us have some feelings we did not choose, but the gospel of Jesus Christ teaches us that we still have the power to resist and reform our feelings (as needed) and to assure that they do not lead us to entertain inappropriate thoughts or to engage in sinful behavior.
“Different persons have different physical characteristics and different susceptibilities to the various physical and emotional pressures we may encounter in our childhood and adult environments. We did not choose these personal susceptibilities either, but we do choose and will be accountable for the attitudes, priorities, behavior, and ‘lifestyle’ we engraft upon them.
“Essential to our doctrinal position on these matters is the difference between our freedom and our agency. Our freedom can be limited by various conditions of mortality, but god’s gift of agency cannot be limited by outside forces, because it is the basis for our accountability to him. The contrast between freedom and agency can be illustrated in the context of a hypothetical progression from feelings to thoughts to behavior to addiction. This progression can be seen on a variety of matters, such as gambling and the use of tobacco and alcohol.”
– Dallin H. Oaks Moreover, although I agree with the church’s stand on marriage between a man & a woman, I base my conclusion on science more than church doctrine.
Old-Timer wrote:All other issues aside, I believe that foundational understanding is key. Yes, there are environmental forces at work in many cases, but there are genetic forces at work in many others. I have come to this understanding partly through the research, but a more important part of my understanding was gained by talking openly and deeply with those about whom we are talking – and the ultimate realization came from multiple people who asked me, point-blank, if I could change my own sexual orientation if I tried hard enough – if I “only had more faith”. I couldn’t, and the very assertion that I should evokes a powerful oppositional reaction within me. In that sense, I “get it” – and I understand why many people hear someone say that they weren’t “born that way” and feel like such statements are a direct attack on them and their honesty and sincerity. It is very much like saying, “That’s not true. You are lying – or deceived.” They aren’t lying, and they aren’t deceived. They simply are being honest about what they feel.
I also believe that foundational understanding is key. We are more influenced by environment than inborn factors.Research, as well as basic human physiology explains this. I see denying axiomatic truth as unhelpful & similar to denying that an anorexic’s aversion to food cannot be helped.
I believe those who say they feel attraction to the same sex. I don’t think they are lying. When we think, emotions are often the result of thoughts, then those emotions affect our physiology in very real ways. IE Parents, not just mothers, but fathers too have shown to change hormonally after becoming parents.
What I believe is not true is the idea that somebody is born with any sexual fettish. It simply is false, in light of basic science.
The constitution never stated anything about society being legally required to honor someone based on homosexual preference.
I see the gospel as good news… when we make the effort to “know the truth” – we will become more free.
I see God as love & truth & light… & the way to love others is not necessarily denying uncomfortable truths.
/ Back to speaking as a moderatorThis thread is very close to being shut down, for two reasons:
1) It is being framed as an argument about who is right and who is wrong, with no latitude whatsoever to allow others to understand this topic in different ways. One position is being stated as “axiomatic truth”, which casts all other positions as being in opposition to axiomatic truth. That is inconsistent with our mission, especially when there is such a wide diversity of opinion about a topic, as is the case with this one.
2) Bluntly put, I now have been called a liar (not in a public comment) and been accused of quoting the words of LDS leaders out of context – when neither of those chargs are true and they are totally inconsistent with our mission. I would be saying the same thing as a moderator no matter the target of the charges, including if they were leveled against Featherina.
We are not going to let this thread turn into an argument, and we certainly aren’t going to let it turn into personal insults and accusations. We will try to keep it active, but the conversation has to abide by the rules of this site if it is to continue.
Alright, before this thread gets locked I’ll go ahead and throw out my opinion. My take on this is that there is a significant amount of variety and randomness involved with life in general and same sex attraction is just one of countless examples of this. It’s almost like asking why some leopards have spots while others are black. There are animals that exhibit homosexual behavior as well. Obviously people that are attracted to others with the same sex exist, they have always existed as far as we know and they will most likely continue to exist long after all of us are gone so I’m not sure that looking at this as if it should not ever happen is going to help anything regardless of exactly why this is the case. I just had a thought and want to make a suggestion: It appears right now that Featherina and I are playing the part of dueling piccolos in this particular orchestral piece, to reference Elder Wirthlin. I will “let it drop” for the rest of the day and ask that Featherina do so also. That way, the rest of the instruments in our orchestra will be able to play their own instruments in this thread without concern about being drowned out by either of us. The two of us can return to the conversation starting tomorrow and join in the music at that point, if appropriate.
Featherina, let’s consider the rest of this day as our “whole rest” in this particular performance and let others talk about this topic for a while. I’d much rather do that than see the piece stopped completely.
I think Elder Andersen’s talk could show a subtle, but important shift in the Brethren’s views on the origin of SSA. He said, Quote:Another friend served an outstanding mission, followed by rigorous academic training. He hoped to have a family. His trial of faith: feelings of same-sex attraction. He wrote me recently: “I am promised in my patriarchal blessing that I will have my own family someday. Whether that will occur in this life or the next, I do not know. But what I do know is that I don’t want to do anything that will jeopardize the blessings God has promised both me and my future posterity. … Living [the law of chastity] is a challenge, but did we not come to earth to confront challenges and to show God our love and respect for Him by keeping His commandments? I am blessed with good health, the gospel, a loving family, and loyal friends. I am grateful for my many blessings.”
I noticed a few things:
1) He doesn’t condemn his friend, but praises his missionary service.
2) He couches his struggle as a trial, not a sin or a personal choice.
3) He points out that his friend is blessed with the gospel, he’s not cast off.
4) His friend is also blessed with a loving family, he wasn’t shunned to encourage him to repent.
I hope that this shift finds its way to local congregations so we can treat all of our brothers and sisters like Christ would.
And yes, Elder Andersen’s talk was one of the few I got to listen to…
I agree that this thread up to date has been about as divisive as any political debate and I would not fault the moderators for locking it. In an attempt to be non-confrontational I have the following to consider:
Featherina,
It sounds like you are coming from a perspective where people should generally change their actions, habits, and even ways of being until they become optimal. This then becomes a discussion about what is “optimal” because those that are not behaving at optimal levels should attempt to change until they become optimal. That sounds good as far as it goes.
I’m just not sure that this represents reality for all of humanity.
I would especially be careful because it seems like you are describing your own heterosexuality and your orientation towards continually seeking after truth as an ideal or an optimal state that should be emulated. Those sound like personal traits. Some people are not bothered by seeking after “truth” and prefer to take things on “faith/spiritual truths.” Some of them may think that their faith orientation is the ideal/optimal and perhaps the most important determinant for how things will play out for them in the eternities.
Featherina wrote:Some have called me “apostate” but I believe in following truth/God above any other group’s dictated belief package.
Sometimes people with differing opinions as to what is ideal use labels and other tactics to dismiss those that are different than them. It sounds like you have rejected these peoples attempt to dictate what is the optimal pattern for your life. I would just be careful that you don’t do exactly the same thing and attempt to dictate to others what the optimal pattern for their lives should be.
- The topic ‘Origins of Same Sex Attraction, Legal Marriage’ is closed to new replies.