- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Almost thirty years ago a dear friend married her BYU classmate. She now finds out that he’s a well-known in their area community of closeted gay men. She has sudden insight into his rigid and controlling behavior, and horrible guilt for exposing her kids to it all these years. They’re divorcing and the kids are running away fast from the church. I’m worried about the new marriage of a gay boy I taught in seminary ten years ago.
I worry about the couples getting ready for temple weddings this weekend. Some of them could be on my friend’s path. But, hey, it’s just a small minority. We can handle a few more men in secret turmoil, devastated wives and damaged kids.
The church telling bishops to not push gay people into mixed-orientation marriages
is not enough. Because this man didn’t go to his bishop. He saw what was in store for him – and what he would neverhave – as a gay LDS man and took the plunge into a life of denial. I’m sorry to hear this Ann. I am sorry for families who have suffered this kind of deceit, yet I also feel for the men or women who have felt they had to do this. I’m assuming the boy you are referencing as having taught in seminary is in a straight marriage? I wish this were a less common occurrence, but this seems to be the Plan A. It most definitely doesn’t lead to happiness. The fact is, the church hasn’t figured out how to deal with same sex attraction. They do not accept it, that is for sure, Turinabar (don’t mind my spelling), who posted here trying to grapple with the issue, is a case in point regarding the frustration and lack of answers the church provides on this issue. And the church seems to have no compunction about dividing families if it means keeping their policies in place. I am sure they would rather these side effects never occurred, but they must know their policies (one year waiting period, no allowance for people with same sex attraction, family heritage repudiation policy now for children of Same Sex marriages) has these side effects. And they have no solution to solve the problem. In fact, the recent repudiation policy only strengthens my case about the inadequacy of their ability to deal with the SS attraction issue in a way that is positive for everyone. Actually the Nov. 5 policy originally doubled-down on these beleaguered families. Who had gay parents? The kids whose gay parent finally came out of the closet and landed in a gay marriage with joint custody. Lots of gay people entered these marriages as a way to cure their homosexuality, either at the encouragement of an ignorant but well meaning bishop or because the idea just made sense given our theology. This puts additional pressure on these exes, too. If the gay parent gets custody, then the kids can’t be baptized until age 18 and only on condition of disavowing their custodial parent’s marriage. What kind of choices are these? It’s unconscionable. It is beyond the pale. Let me play devil’s advocate Hawk, and ask a question (ironic since the question is one that a TBM would likely ask, yet I am playing devil’s advocate!). The scriptures say that Christ indicated that he came to turn son against father, daughter against mother etcetera — indicating that he was OK with religion splitting families. Does this scripture justify the repudiation policy and all the other family division fallout we run into in the LDS church?
If not, then what does this scripture mean?
Quote:SD wrote:
“The scriptures say that Christ indicated that he came to turn son against father, daughter against mother etcetera — indicating that he was OK with religion splitting families. Does this scripture justify the repudiation policy and all the other family division fallout we run into in the LDS church?”
I find it fascinating that this scripture concept gets pulled out when someone wants to join the LDS church against their family’s wishes.
Once we are members, we are counseled to pray and counsel within our family units and to make sure that our families remain united and steadfast in every way. Any sort of split within the family is considered very grave with eternal consequences.
The modern twist is that the children of gay married couples are not allowed to be confused by baptism until they turn 18 .. Then the opening quote applies. They are expected to split from their families in order to show their love for God. But .. we are also taught that we show our love for God by doing kindness in His name.
This thought process makes me think: which actions show love and affiliation for God. Which actions show love and affiliation for the church. How can I make those two things congruent in one life? Is it possible?
Quote:The scriptures say that Christ indicated that he came to turn son against father, daughter against mother etcetera — indicating that he was OK with religion splitting families. Does this scripture justify the repudiation policy and all the other family division fallout we run into in the LDS church?
All the splits described in this scripture are generational, did you notice? I think that’s telling. The gospel divides people by generation, maybe because it’s interpreted differently at different stages of life.
DarkJedi wrote:I’m sorry to hear this Ann. I am sorry for families who have suffered this kind of deceit, yet I also feel for the men or women who have felt they had to do this. I’m assuming the boy you are referencing as having taught in seminary is in a straight marriage?
Yes, my seminary student married a woman. He’s a great kid and I do feel for him, too, and for my friend’s husband. Because putting aside for a moment where things ended up, I think it started with innocent desperation on this part.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.