- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I would agree with you, nibbler, that God gives more revelation when people are ready to receive it. It just pisses me off like it does others when God commands or seems to command people to do or not do certain and then he turns around allows exceptions. Unfortunately, the church as a whole hardly talks about those exceptions. I guess the leadership is probably convinced too many members will get too confused and start rationalizing murdering, stealing, raping, and much more dangerous things. When I was a missionary I remember teaching people that the ideas of men are limited. Boy I would find out later in life that so much of what is supposed to be true doctrine is mixed with the ideas of men. If we belong to Christ’s actual church, then he will have to make some corrections with his church when he comes during his reign. I guess I can live with that. On Own Now wrote:Ilovechrist77 wrote:I don’t see the church accepting gay marriages anytime at all. Too many leaders and members are too much against it because of the teaching eternal families need to created by male and female sexual intercourse through marriage.
I agree with you, if we say “anytime soon”… but “anytime at all” is too far-reaching. The Church will eventually accept it. There will be same-sex couples in our wards, and serving in callings. Gay sealings will be performed in our temples. The only question is when these steps will take place. Major steps toward acceptance have already taken place. Openly gay men can hold the priesthood and attend the temple, as long as they remain celibate. Can you imagine this a generation ago? The next step will be 1) to welcome Same-gender couples into are wards, but without significant callings, priesthood, or temple. We are on the doorstep of that, if not already there in a handful of places. The next step will be 2) callings, the step after that 3) priesthood, the step after that 4) temple attendance, the final step will be 5) temple sealings. During my years left on earth, we will get part way there. How far along the scale it will fall is unknown, but I hope for #5 and expect #2. But beyond the horizon of our lives, the Church will eventually get there.I almost never say “never”, but I definitely never say “certainly”.
Good point, unknown, so let me amend my thoughts and say that I believe that those things will happen. There’s no telling for sure. I think that as nibbler pointed out, what is heresy to one generation is normal to the next. Old-Timer wrote:What Sam said.
The biggest threat to marriage today is heterosexuals, not homosexuals – and it isn’t close.
Equality aside – I do find it ironic that homosexuals want to do something that heterosexuals are abandoning in droves.
We can see the following (non-homosexual) tendencies as a threat to marriage and reproduction:
* Encouragement of promiscuity in media, and the attendant rise in STDs which can sterilize people.
* The increasing cost of weddings.
* Sex turned into a leisure pursuit.
* Overuse of contraception.
* The rising age of marriage, People may look younger than they did, but 24 yr olds are still more geared to it than 34 yr olds.
* Toxins in the environment, food additives.
* Unmarried pregnancy with absent fathers.
* Business culture.
* Legal interference and governmentalization of marriage. This causes cohabitation as much as anything else.
* Narcotics, smoking, alcohol abuse and prescription drugs can all effect reproduction/marriage in different ways.
* Abuse of people.
* Death by war or violence.
* Friends with benefits, f buddies, swinging… forms of heterosexuality that offer neither reproduction nor emotional connection nor long term balance.
* Eating disorders, self-harm.
I was thinking the same thing, Sambee, although I hadn’t ever thought of some of those things as detrimental to marriage. I’ll have to give those some thought. My son and his girlfriend have lived together for about 3 years and have no plans to ever get married. They just don’t see the need. I’ve tried to explain why I fee l marriage is important, setting aside any religious reasons, but he still doesn’t see the point. I think he’s very typical for his age group (mid-twenties.) My younger son who’s been living with his girlfriend for about a year says he does want to get married someday. That kind of surprised me.
The biggest surprise though is a gay relative who says he doesn’t see what all the fuss is about gay marriage. He doesn’t see the need for anyone to marry, like my hetero son. He was with one partner for about 40 years until his partner passed away last year. They had a civil union and he says having a marriage license wouldn’t have made the least amount of difference to their relationship. He lives in NY and they only had civil union to get joint benefits.
I still think heterosexual marriage is vital to a stable society. It’s estimated that less than 10% (on average) of any given population is homosexual, so whether they marry or not, it’s still important for the other 90+% to form a stable foundational family base. I agree with Sambee that this is getting increasingly more difficult to accomplish.
I’m not too worried about when or if the church will accept SSM. I’m way to old to be around when or if it happens.
😆 BTW, my active, practicing LDS kids see no problem with SSM.Bear in mind that I’m not saying contraception is a bad thing altogether just that if people use it all the time – no children to look after old me and you! Women will get the priesthood (officially) before SSM.
Quote:My son and his girlfriend have lived together for about 3 years and have no plans to ever get married. They just don’t see the need. I’ve tried to explain why I fee l marriage is important, setting aside any religious reasons, but he still doesn’t see the point. I think he’s very typical for his age group (mid-twenties.) My younger son who’s been living with his girlfriend for about a year says he does want to get married someday. That kind of surprised me.
Yes very common. I think some of these are common law marriages, if they last for years, but they’re not marriage as the church sees it. Men don’t want to be entrapped into a system which will hurt them financially and in other ways.
Quote:The biggest surprise though is a gay relative who says he doesn’t see what all the fuss is about gay marriage. He doesn’t see the need for anyone to marry, like my hetero son. He was with one partner for about 40 years until his partner passed away last year. They had a civil union and he says having a marriage license wouldn’t have made the least amount of difference to their relationship. He lives in NY and they only had civil union to get joint benefits.
I have a gay friend who says much the same thing. He’s not cohabiting, but he does wonder what the point is.
Gays have been able to get married for years, it’s just a matter of how official it is. Civil union is a kind of marriage.
The master stroke would have been to open civil unions up to heterosexuals, but no one’s thought of that yet.
I’ll add one more thing as a threat to marriage. The increasing isolation of people.
If a child is raised by TV it finds it harder to relate to other people including potential mates.
I definitely don’t blame the gays for destroying marriage.The only way that they might do that is by marrying people of the opposite sex and playing away. writer63 wrote:BTW, my active, practicing LDS kids see no problem with SSM.
Exactly. This is why it will become increasingly difficult for the Church to “hold the line”. I personally want SSM to be the law of the land and the Church. In my parent’s generation, I would be in a small minority. In my generation, I’m in a minority in the Church, but about 50-50 outside the Church. In my kids generation, I would be on the minority side, but with a significant percentage standing with me in the Church and in the majority outside of it.The numbers will continue to grow, and I suspect there will come a time when the issue will be a detriment to the Church if it doesn’t adapt. I would not stay in the Church today if the priesthood/temple ban were still in effect, and I believe that a majority of Church members in my generation and younger generations would not be able to support the Church if that policy remained… and it’s only been 36 years since the ban was the law of the Church (1978).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.