- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I’m learning to avoid these CES firesides but I haven’t learned yet – but this may well have been the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. Elder Ballard did the CES fireside last night. It was on TV at our house but I wasn’t closely watching. I did get the gist of things and did pay attention to some parts before I told myself “I can’t listen to this anymore.” Pretty standard fare for one of these things, he talked about electronic media, pornography, and marriage – except marriage was really a talk about SSA. He quoted from the Proclamation on the Family several times. Just what our singles want and need to hear about, because the GAs never talk about these subjects. 
:problem: Anyway, he emphatically reiterated the church’s position on SSA saying that same sex attraction was not a choice and is not itself a sin, but acting on it is. Here’s my question. I didn’t choose to be heterosexual, either, why is it not a sin for me to act upon that attraction? I realize it is a sin to “act” outside marriage, but a repentable one. The problem is the church is giving these people a catch 22 – you can’t have sex outside marriage but you can’t marry those who you are attracted to and love. These people are our brothers and sisters who the church leadership professes to love.
Over the years I’ve come a long way on this subject in realizing SSA is not a choice. This hurts me more and more each time I hear it as I consider the feelings of those who I know who are in this situation that they did not choose. I am becoming very frustrated by it – if past performance by the church is any indicator of when a change might come, it won’t happen in my lifetime or the lifetime of most of those now vexed by this horrible policy or doctrine or whatever it is. It is very, very sad.
The beginning of his talk was somewhat of a rebuke to those who consider the GAs to live in a bubble and those who think they’re too old – it was really a self justification on his part. I don’t care that he does all of the things he said he does – he does live in a bubble and age doesn’t make you wise all by itself.
Sorry if this is a rant, I know we have discussed this subject quite a bit – but I had to get it out, it kept me awake last night.
It’s funny how the active topics on the forums tend to compliment each other. Here’s a quote from the article posted in the staying LDS in the 1950s thread: Quote:For most of those living in Utah and adjacent states the Negro question is academic; they hardly ever see Negroes, much less live in the same community with them. In any case, they would find comfortable agreement with the white supremacy idea because of latent historical prejudices which they share with so many other white people. However, my knowledge of the deep humanitarianism of the Mormon people leads me to think that if the question could be openly discussed they would line up on the side of justice.
Which describes this bubble to which you refer. I know there are a several GAs that are related to and actively reach out to people with SSA but I think most of them do not. I think human nature would often have us fear the unknown but as more GAs get to know people with SSA then they’ll start to see them as normal, everyday people.
Age can place you in a bubble. Sometimes older people continue to identify with the way things were at the expense of the way things are… and once you’re older it’s not like you are going out of your way to relate to things outside your bubble. Doesn’t nearly everyone have a story to tell about some of the things their grandparents would say when they visited them.
😮 Maybe that was just me.I get their perspective though, I shared if for a long time. Their concern is how do they/we/society discern between eroding values and “progress” in being tolerant and accepting.
I’m confused, DJ. You said Elder Ballard said being attracted to the same sex is NOT a sin, but then you said you are tired of hearing that it IS a sin. I’m not sure I follow that part of the post.
I agree with you completely, especially your frustration about a double standard, but it sounds like you are upset about something that wasn’t said in the fireside and isn’t taught by the top leadership anymore. Why did that bother you as a result of the fireside?
Oh, and just to say it, I would have turned off the fireside at least as early as you did, if I had watched it at all.
Sorry if I am confusing anyone – I understand me perfectly, I don’t know why anyone else shouldn’t! 
I don’t mind that the church says SSA is not a sin – I wish they’d say it more. The problem I have is with the double standard – if you don’t have SSA you’re actually expected to have sex, although within the limits of marriage. If you do have SSA you’re expected NOT to have sex and marriage is not an option (in current practice, policy, and/or doctrine in the church). That’s what bugs me. None of us choose our sexuality, why do we have to choose to have or not to have sex based on something over which we have no choice?
You’re right, Ray, I should have found something else to do. I was working on the computer (near the TV), I half listened to his rationalization of why he should say whatever he wanted, and then heard his subject. I should have just found something else to do then and come back the computer later. I was OK with the technology thing, and yeah, we probably shouldn’t text during the actual sacrament. Fortunately this wasn’t said by THE prophet so it’s less likely to be as highly revered as scripture. And I got the porn thing – like the other hundred times I’ve heard it. When I realized the marriage portion was really about SSA I should have gotten up. It wasn’t just the subject, part of it was presentation – finger pointing from the pulpit and all, very much like Elder Holland a month ago in the Saturday morning session.
And thanks for pointing out the similarities, Nibbler. It is not lost on me – will it be 120 years for the church to come around to SSM? I’d be happy if they only recognized it as legal and removed the sexual sin annotation from it, they don’t need to condone or participate in any other way. I don’t see it happening soon.
Oh, and doesn’t anyone think the single adults in the church might benefit from a discussion about the race and the priesthood statement, or a discussion and explanation of the differences in the accounts of the first vision, or a burning testimony of God’s infinite love for them specifically? Why do these always seem about the same topics? (I know they’re actually not, just the ones I seem to hear.)
I don’t know if you’ve seen this, but it is how I have framed the most basic aspect of the double standard we currently employ regarding homosexuality. It goes beyond just forbidding marriage and sex and would be SO easy to eliminated without sacrificing any doctrinal aspect at all: “
Homosexuality and the Most Basic Double Standard” ( http://thingsofmysoul.blogspot.com/2011/11/homosexuality-and-most-basic-double.html No, I hadn’t seen that Ray, thanks for the link. Very well put, and I agree. Thanks for the “health warning.” The Jan 2013 CES fireside from Elder Uchtdorf seems a very long time ago. It troubles me that they are making such an aggressive stand on this single issue. I get that the church only want a married man and woman to have sex (even though they don’t have particularly strong scriptural support against gay marriage).
I just wish they would stop trying to make it such a deep line in the sand. The stronger the line the clearer the side I seem to be on.
By the way… did he really say SSA is not a choice? Is the text on LDS.org yet? I guess it takes a few days. At the moment that statement is not on the LDS website (only linked to it). If that’s happening then I look forward to adding it to our quotes library (even if I have to ignore the rest of the talk).
I really don’t know the big picture, but my daughter is living her little-picture life and things aren’t adding up. A school friend she admires told her last week that she is gay. My daughter told her that she’ll always love her, and that she has her support and respect. Bottom line to me was, “___________is a good person.” Last night she came home from a stake youth fireside. The last 45 min.- hour were spent on a “dismal” presentation from our good and loving stake president about how acting on SSA was wrong, SSM is wrong, and the kids should be vocal in defending one man/one woman marriage. She had loved the preceding speakers and was happy that I’d made her go, but she said, “The Spirit left the room” when this topic opened, and all she could think was that she was glad she hadn’t invited any non-members.
I can’t see the future. Prophets say they can. But my daughter’s over at school as I type, coming and going with gay classmates she can’t bring herself to judge.
mackay11 wrote:
By the way… did he really say SSA is not a choice? Is the text on LDS.org yet? I guess it takes a few days. At the moment that statement is not on the LDS website (only linked to it). If that’s happening then I look forward to adding it to our quotes library (even if I have to ignore the rest of the talk).(P.S. – You’re a machine!
:thumbup: Thanks for maintaining thoughtfulquotes.)mackay11, read DJ’s follow-up response to my similar question. Bottom line:
NO, Elder Ballard didn’t say SSA is not a choice. He said it IS a choice.
Ann said: Quote:Last night she came home from a stake youth fireside. The last 45 min.- hour were spent on a “dismal” presentation from our good and loving stake president about how acting on SSA was wrong, SSM is wrong, and the kids should be vocal in defending one man/one woman marriage. She had loved the preceding speakers and was happy that I’d made her go, but she said, “The Spirit left the room” when this topic opened, and all she could think was that she was glad she hadn’t invited any non-members.
One of my children is gay, and currently inactive. Only one of my children is semi-active at this point, but has a very good friend who is also gay.
I just wonder if they realize how many young people are leaving those firesides feeling deflated, depressed, alone, unhappy or worse. Those who are gay and who feel they really have no future in the church where they can be truly happy, those with family members who are gay and who feel like they don’t want to support an organization that would limit those both inside and out of the church just because of their orientation, and those with good friends who are gay and who are told that they should not only not support SSM, but should speak out against it.
I keep trying to find a way to stay and be happy at church, and lately I’ve been doing much better, but talks like this just set me back again. IMHO the church is going to lose some of their best and brightest most loving and kind people by talking this subject into the ground. Those loving people who are gay, and others who show compassion and love towards others and who don’t feel good about the stand the church is taking. I understand what Ann’s daughter was saying when she said “the spirit left the room.” I have felt that also when this topic is broached. The love just leaves.
😥 On a better note, I just read this article from No More Strangers, which shows how a negative church experience actually turned out to be a very positive one. Ann wrote:I really don’t know the big picture, but my daughter is living her little-picture life and things aren’t adding up. A school friend she admires told her last week that she is gay. My daughter told her that she’ll always love her, and that she has her support and respect. Bottom line to me was, “___________is a good person.”
Last night she came home from a stake youth fireside. The last 45 min.- hour were spent on a “dismal” presentation from our good and loving stake president about how acting on SSA was wrong, SSM is wrong, and the kids should be vocal in defending one man/one woman marriage. She had loved the preceding speakers and was happy that I’d made her go, but she said, “The Spirit left the room” when this topic opened, and all she could think was that she was glad she hadn’t invited any non-members.
I can’t see the future. Prophets say they can. But my daughter’s over at school as I type, coming and going with gay classmates she can’t bring herself to judge.
Your daughter sounds awesome and is a credit to you. That’s my hope for the future. If people like that can stay and be tomorrow’s leaders then the church might eventually change.
Old-Timer wrote:mackay11, read DJ’s follow-up response to my similar question.
Bottom line:
NO, Elder Ballard didn’t say SSA is not a choice. He said it IS a choice.
I’ve reread DJ’s second post and didn’t notice the clarification.
Is Elder Ballard saying the attraction or acting on it is a choice?
If he’s saying that being attracted to the same sex is a choice (that people choose to be gay) then they seriously need to make their mind up!
mormonsandgays.org (an official website) says people don’t choose to be gay. Elder Ballard says they do?
OK, to clear things up, I went back and watched that part again and actually transcribed it. Here is what Elder Ballard said: Quote:Let us be clear tonight. The Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day Saints believes that 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 choose how to respond to them.
Here’s the link:
https://www.lds.org/broadcasts/watch/ces-devotionals/2014/05?lang=eng ” class=”bbcode_url”> https://www.lds.org/broadcasts/watch/ces-devotionals/2014/05?lang=eng (It doesn’t appear to be downloadable. As you may know, sometimes transcripts are “scrubbed” so you might want to listen before it’s edited.)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.