- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Here’s an article written by Linda and Richard Eyre about marriage. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865633013/What-defenders-of-traditional-marriage-may-be-forgetting.html ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865633013/What-defenders-of-traditional-marriage-may-be-forgetting.html I’m wondering what the message is. I think they’re saying the fight for “traditional marriage” is what many of us think it is – a thinly disguised fight against SSM. Their point seems to be that of it really is about traditional marriage we’re fighting the wrong battle. I particularly like the concluding paragraph:
Quote:But whatever our personal position, each of us should ask the question of what we should be most concerned about — the emergence of same-sex marriage or the disappearance of traditional marriage.
Thoughts?
I would agree. I have really struggled with wanting to post on facebook something like:
Quote:My church has encouraged us to support marriage. I would like to do that. A first step could be to look at what is fighting against marriage. From my perspective it seems the biggest issues tearing at families are poverty, abuse within families, sexual issues, and others. I want to say I support measures for working on improving those issues.
I might as well come out as somewhat disaffected member though.
I agree with you LH. I am having an email discussion with my missionary son about gay marriage. He knows I support civil gay marriage and why. He also knows I support any church’s right to perform or not to perform such marriages. In my explanations I have pointed out what the Eyres point out in this article – the church spends tons of time resources fighting against gay marriage (under the veil of fighting for “traditional” marriage) but the far bigger threat that we see (and have seen for decades) is cohabitation. If cohabitation is not an affront to traditional marriage, I don’t know what is. While I do recognize that the church does hold a position on cohabitation and it is against the law of chastity, I also recognize the church holds a position on same sex marriage and that homosexual relations are against the law of chastity (church’s view, not mine). But how does the church approach these two similar affronts (in their view)? When was the last time you heard a GA speak specifically about cohabitation? What is the ratio of talks opposed to cohabitation to talks opposing gay marriage? What about other social things the church opposes, like smoking or drinking? Do we have campaigns against those things for people outside the church? (I do recognize that the church did support prohibition and we all know how that turned out.) I know I’m ranting and venting here and appreciate the indulgence.
I wonder why they campaign againstanything in the world. Why not invite people to live according to correct principles, and let others govern themselves.
Quote:“Preachers err by trying to talk people into belief; better they reveal the radiance of their own discovery.”
-Joseph CampbellI say…stop trying to convince people what marriage is or is not. Just show how happy living the gospel is. People who are seeking will come to that message. Those who are already happy otherwise are just fine. Just like the WOW…trying to quote medical research on the benefits of alcohol abstinence is not the point of the Word of Wisdom.
They should not fight with financial advisors about the benefits of donating to charity (tithing) vs investing 10% of earnings in the stock market. They shouldn’t fight doctors on abstaining from a glass of wine. They shouldn’t fight groups who want to enter into same sex marriage.
Teach the path of enlightenment, and let the goodness speak for itself. (and sometimes…accept that light and knowledge comes from the world without having to go through a prophet every time).
I am with Heber on this one. Haven’t we learned from 185 years of experience that campaigning against things doesn’t work? How often have we overturned our doctrine because eventually we looked really weird? Or how often has life gone on and we haven’t been hurt at all – cohabitation being a great example. What about people who get married by Justice of the Peace or Pastor Bob – we don’t rail against those.
If there are injustices that need campaigning – I am starting with human trafficking. Christ did have some words to say about people who harm children – millstones I believe were mentioned.
But if we aren’t going to send money to burned churches in the South, or stop young kids from being sex slaves – I think we should do Hebers plan – Love, light, mercy, healing. Kind of Uchtdorf/Okazaki thing. Try it for a decade, preach it loud and long, arrange our church service around it then measure the results.
I hope the Eyres message unlocks some staunchly conservative minds. Thanks for posting it DJ.
I do like the thought of no campaign against things, but rather FOR what is positive. By and large the LDS church does not tear down other churches (at least since BRM stopped calling the Catholic Church the “great and abominable church”). I always heard in church, “We don’t preach AGAINST other churches, we preach FOR Mormonism.” DarkJedi wrote:(I do recognize that the church did support prohibition and we all know how that turned out.)
I know I’m ranting and venting here and appreciate the indulgence.
I have to laugh the other day when I heard something about where the LDS leadership asked that member not vote to repeal prohibition. Instead the brought it over the finish line
Quote:February 1933 Utah became the thirty-sixth and deciding state to approve the Twenty-first Amendment abolishing prohibition through repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment.
Maybe if this site sold indulgences we wouldn’t need a fundraiser request every year
DarkJedi wrote:… the church spends tons of time resources fighting against gay marriage (under the veil of fighting for “traditional” marriage) but the far bigger threat that we see (and have seen for decades) is cohabitation. If cohabitation is not an affront to traditional marriage, I don’t know what is. While I do recognize that the church does hold a position on cohabitation and it is against the law of chastity, I also recognize the church holds a position on same sex marriage and that homosexual relations are against the law of chastity (church’s view, not mine). But how does the church approach these two similar affronts (in their view)?
When was the last time you heard a GA speak specifically about cohabitation?What is the ratio of talks opposed to cohabitation to talks opposing gay marriage? What about other social things the church opposes, like smoking or drinking? Do we have campaigns against those things for people outside the church? (I do recognize that the church did support prohibition and we all know how that turned out.) It would be really interesting to know what is consciously or unconsciously going on in their (and our) heads. We still won’t baptize cohabitating non-member couples, but that’s a stance that’s taken on the small stage on the ward level. We still won’t marry sexually active/and certainly not cohabitating members in the temple. That’s drawing the line without talking about it. But why don’t we say it, use the actual words?
Quote:It would be really interesting to know what is consciously or unconsciously going on in their (and our) heads. We still won’t baptize cohabitating non-member couples, but that’s a stance that’s taken on the small stage on the ward level. We still won’t marry sexually active/and certainly not cohabitating members in the temple. That’s drawing the line without talking about it. But why don’t we say it, use the actual words?
I wonder if things wouldn’t be better if we did just that: drew the line but didn’t talk about it. What if the standards were set but not promulgated? What if there was no Proclamation for the Family? Why do we need Proclamations? It seems to me that the Church would do better to stay out of the public eye as much as possible or do its work (be it political or charitable) quietly behind the scenes. There is something vaguely “evangelical” about our current approach. Not every interaction we have (be it as a Church or an individual) has to be a “missionary moment” or “an opportunity to stand for something.” The late L. Tom Perry’s story about drinking milk at a party is amusing (find it here:
https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1988/04/in-the-world?lang=eng Currently, in the eyes of the world, Mormons are those odd people who practiced (or practice) polygamy but still oppose gay marriage. I’m just not sure if the right message is being sent.
Okay. Back to your regularly scheduled program….
It is good to see this published in the Deseret News. I truly believe more members feel this way, generally, than most people realize.
From By Common Consent: “The Best Defense is . . . . a Middle-Market Newspaper Article from 2004” about marriage in Scandinavia and how badlywe “read” the information coming out of complicated situations in countries not our own. Really interesting.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.