"Homesexuals CAN Change..," A giant step backwards for the

[Anonymous]

What about our spirits? What about SSA with regards to that? If gender was assigned before we got here, what about sexual feelings and righteous preferences? And if my understanding is correct and I am more than my biology, then doesn’t that mean I have some capcity to change? if not my biology, then my thinking? And doesn’t Christ help us heal biology sometimes? And when He doesn’t, isn’t that the times where he increases our capacities and strengths or makes it so we can’t feel the weight of certain burdens? He says he makes a way for us to obey.

I don’t want to deny the science. I don’t know how I feel about Hafen yet. But I do struggle against the idea that things can’t change and that the only solution is the changing of church doctrine — something that for me would make the question of staying Lds completely mute.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

I am simply at a loss for finding proper clinical validation of methodologies employed by Evergreen International or taught at BYU.

I am not a scientist but could you explain what clinical validations are missing with regards to Evergreen? And when you say taught at BYU, do you mean taught to future therapists? I heard both good and bad stories of Evergreen’s effectiveness…..mostly they sound as effective as other less effective stuff out there. My brother went there and didn’t feel so great about it, but I think he only went once or twice. Could it be that these therapies are like other behavioral/emotional therapies? That they are good for some and not others. I found that working with our sexual addiction stuff. Some stuff just didn’t work for us, so we had to find what did work and even costum fit our therapy for our situation as there are limits to all this stuff.

Quote:

“First do not harm” is the basic foundation in Medical Science. There are also legal implications for promising cures when no scientifically valid studies are provided to back up the claim. Elder Hafen was a Dean of BYU School of Law, so he should know this.

Yes “do no harm” is the basic idea, but lets tell the truth. They do harm all the time….stuff they don’t always have to take responsibility for. And many of these drugs that were supposedly cleared as “safe” have caused lots of people damage. So, I think its a little unfair to hold Evergreen to a standard that nobody can meet. Not that it shouldn’t be evaluted for effectiveness and not that it shouldn’t stay as cutting edge as everything else. Just wanna keep some perspective here.

[Anonymous]

Poppyseed wrote:

…Christ…says he makes a way for us to obey.

I can appreciate these sentiments. So I guess it goes back one step to what really is to “obey?” My take on this is that yes, there have been many men that have said that acting on homosexual feelings is wrong. That it is a sin. I know it is written in scripture.

But so are many other rules that we choose not to give credence to today: at least as far as the Bible goes, we shouldn’t be eating pork or shrimp either! And when you defer to “modern revelation,” earlier LDS prophets taught many things that we don’t live today…so my logical, trying to be consistent mind, tells me that this very well could be one of those areas that with further light and knowledge, we are (eventually) going to see a change in what the commandment is.

To me it is clear that God made (or allowed) variations in biology…so I can’t imagine that He would consider His creation wicked and sinful. BUt like the other rules that have changed, it takes time and prayer to affect change that is consistent with love.

[Anonymous]

Poppyseed wrote:

Yes “do no harm” is the basic idea, but lets tell the truth. They do harm all the time….stuff they don’t always have to take responsibility for. And many of these drugs that were supposedly cleared as “safe” have caused lots of people damage. So, I think its a little unfair to hold Evergreen to a standard that nobody can meet. Not that it shouldn’t be evaluted for effectiveness and not that it shouldn’t stay as cutting edge as everything else. Just wanna keep some perspective here.

It is certainly true that we learn things in medicine that we did not suspect previously. That is the nature of science. But when peer-reviewed, extensively researched results show something to be wrong, the standard is changed and medicine corrects itself. That is what is happening today wrt homosexuality. The evidence is strong that it IS biological, not a choice for the majority of homosexuals. (I explained earlier how it is a spectrum, rather than black and white)…so the medical and psychology fields are coming out with the statements that it is NOT a disorder, but is a variation that should be accepted.

That is a HUGE positive statement for the 3-5% of humanity (homosexuals) that have been told they are broken somehow. I don’t know how often you read the obits…almost everyday you see one or more suicides that have been a direct result of the deep depression they felt from being told they were not okay.

And now Evergreen is going against the new science and continues to give false hope to many who are believers…but fail, so the tragedies will continue. Truly a shame.

😥

[Anonymous]

Poppyseed wrote:

What about our spirits? What about SSA with regards to that? If gender was assigned before we got here, what about sexual feelings and righteous preferences? And if my understanding is correct and I am more than my biology, then doesn’t that mean I have some capcity to change? if not my biology, then my thinking? And doesn’t Christ help us heal biology sometimes? And when He doesn’t, isn’t that the times where he increases our capacities and strengths or makes it so we can’t feel the weight of certain burdens? He says he makes a way for us to obey.

I don’t want to deny the science. I don’t know how I feel about Hafen yet. But I do struggle against the idea that things can’t change and that the only solution is the changing of church doctrine — something that for me would make the question of staying Lds completely mute.

Poppyseed, I understand your confusion. In my opinion, this apparent contradiction is just one more reason I don’t believe we have spirits, or if we do, they aren’t anything like we are taught by LDS theology. Hermaphrodite/intersexual people have been around for a long time. How does that fit in with the Proclamation of the Family? I know I’m exercising no faith and relying on science and evidence, but hermaphrodites and SSA have biological explanations that make some sense–when the soul/spirit comes into play, it muddles the picture.

If these intersexual bodies have souls, which sex are they? If brain chemistry is driving sexual attraction, then what role would a soul/spirit play, even for heterosexual people? LDS theology teaches that animals have spirits too; what about animals that have sex with other animals of the same gender? They obviously don’t have “accountability” so their behavior isn’t considered perverse. It seems like that is a good example of how SSA works–that’s it’s biologically driven, and at the end of the day, humans are highly evolved animals, so turning to the animal kingdom for evidence isn’t a bad idea.

If we accept the accumulating evidence that SSA is biological, then why should we expect gay people to refrain from sexual relationships? Why is it bad? The Church expects heterosexual people to wait until marriage to have sex, but they are denying gay people this form of commitment. Why? Why deny gay people the most stabilizing form of commitment society has come up with for relationships? People that are “born” gay can’t control their feelings, and they shouldn’t be expected to. The gay community is considered promiscuous, but until we grant them opportunities to legally marry/unite, then how can we expect that to change much? On that note, the promiscuity of the gay community has improved significantly in areas of our country and around the world where they are given the option of marriage. I’m not sure that the gay community is more promiscuous than the unmarried heterosexual segment of society, but imagine how much more promiscuous our society would be if heterosexuals weren’t allowed to legally commit to each other? Marriage creates a level of commitment that really isn’t achievable any other way, and it is the most symbolically powerful statement a couple can make about their love for each other. We should allow gay people the same opportunity.

[Anonymous]

What wordsleuth said!!!

I was about to post on intersex but he beat me to it. Plus he said it much better than I would have.

In my mind, that is the most damaging part of the Proclamation and Hafen’s talk. The insistence that gender is set, unchangeable, immutable similar to the concept of what God is. What if gender is biologically dubious? What of those who change their sex? What of those who are transgender? Or those who know that they’re a man but are living in a female body?

This may be a mythical construct but the idea/concept of “God” is actually very changeable depending on the individual. And that’s true for everyone whether orthodox or not.

Orthodox religion attempts to hammer that image into everyone’s mind so any one denomination is “on the same page” with regards to the nature of God. I think that’s why religions are so adamant about the nature of God being so important, eg. evangelicals insisting that Mormons are not saved because their version of “God” is not the “real” God.

Ironically, the idea of gender in the next life is pretty unique to Mormon theology, from the little that I know of other theologies. So, this is going to be an issue for the church long after other christian denominations have discovered a Christ-like way to deal with it.

[Anonymous]

Whatsoever things I see or hear, in my attendance on the sick or even apart there from, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself holding such things as sacred secrets.

– Hippocratic Oath, 4th Century, B.C.E.

I wish that all of our GA would take this oath. When in the course of a Priesthood Leader’s sacred duties, a young man or woman confesses “same sex attraction”, that information should be kept in the strictest of sacred confidences. There should never be an instance where that private, personal confusion of a troubled young men would end up in a public speech, promoted all over the world via the internet. We live in the “information age”. Elder Hafen’s speech will arrive in Europe at the speed of light. God forbid, that someone could identify the young man who was seen talking with Elder Hafen, yes the young, single, LDS returned missionary who was present at the Stake in Europe that Hafen recently visited – the one of two young men that Hafen requested to counsel with. Gee, I wonder who we are talking about???

[Anonymous]

Quote:

People that are “born” gay can’t control their feelings, and they shouldn’t be expected to.

Really? REALLY?? Gay people can’t control their feelings? And Gay people shouldn’t be expected to? ……. Except when we give them the right to marry. THEN they can control themselves til marriage. Is that what you are saying? Not that the merits of Gay marriage are the purpose of this thread……

I am sorry I have to respectfully disagree with this. I get that biology could be a fixed variable in ones life. But I don’t see it as the only variable and I don’t think the church does either.

I decided to go back and read the whole of Hafen’s remarks, not just the Tribunes cut. I also read a lot from Oaks and Wickman as they answered questions about this issue. Oaks seemed to understand that biology might be a determining factor. I just couldn’t find anything in the remarks that showed the church was back slidding in its views. In fact, I felt the opposite. I felt that the church was trying to give hope and trying to get people to break thru the lies of Satan even when they are woven into compelling science or the lies of self reproach. Maybe they don’t understand everything. I am not hearing the kind of stuff Bro. Brigham might say on the subject. The issue is about obedience. And that comes down to ones personal testimony I would think, just like every other commandment we wrestle with.

Here is the link to what I read……http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/public-issues/same-gender-attraction

Here is a little blurb….

ELDER OAKS: Yes, homosexual feelings are controllable. Perhaps there is an inclination or susceptibility to such feelings that is a reality for some and not a reality for others. But out of such susceptibilities come feelings, and feelings are controllable. If we cater to the feelings, they increase the power of the temptation. If we yield to the temptation, we have committed sinful behavior. That pattern is the same for a person that covets someone else’s property and has a strong temptation to steal. It’s the same for a person that develops a taste for alcohol. It’s the same for a person that is born with a ‘short fuse,’ as we would say of a susceptibility to anger. If they let that susceptibility remain uncontrolled, it becomes a feeling of anger, and a feeling of anger can yield to behavior that is sinful and illegal.

We’re not talking about a unique challenge here. We’re talking about a common condition of mortality. We don’t understand exactly the ‘why,’ or the extent to which there are inclinations or susceptibilities and so on. But what we do know is that feelings can be controlled and behavior can be controlled. The line of sin is between the feelings and the behavior. The line of prudence is between the susceptibility and the feelings. We need to lay hold on the feelings and try to control them to keep us from getting into a circumstance that leads to sinful behavior.

ELDER WICKMAN: One of the great sophistries of our age, I think, is that merely because one has an inclination to do something, that therefore acting in accordance with that inclination is inevitable. That’s contrary to our very nature as the Lord has revealed to us. We do have the power to control our behavior.

With regards to seeking treatment for SSA, they say this…..

ELDER WICKMAN: Well, it may be appropriate for that person to seek therapy. Certainly the Church doesn’t counsel against that kind of therapy. But from the standpoint of a parent counseling a person, or a Church leader counseling a person, or a person looking at his or her same-gender attraction from the standpoint of ‘What can I do about it here that’s in keeping with gospel teachings?’ the clinical side of it is not what matters most. What matters most is recognition that ‘I have my own will. I have my own agency. I have the power within myself to control what I do.’

Now, that’s not to say it’s not appropriate for somebody with that affliction to seek appropriate clinical help to examine whether in his or her case there’s something that can be done about it. This is an issue that those in psychiatry, in the psychology professions have debated. Case studies I believe have shown that in some cases there has been progress made in helping someone to change that orientation; in other cases not. From the Church’s standpoint, from our standpoint of concern for people, that’s not where we place our principal focus. It’s on these other matters.

ELDER OAKS: Amen to that. Let me just add one more thought. The Church rarely takes a position on which treatment techniques are appropriate, for medical doctors or for psychiatrists or psychologists and so on.

The second point is that there are abusive practices that have been used in connection with various mental attitudes or feelings. Over-medication in respect to depression is an example that comes to mind. The aversive therapies that have been used in connection with same-sex attraction have contained some serious abuses that have been recognized over time within the professions. While we have no position about what the medical doctors do (except in very, very rare cases — abortion would be such an example), we are conscious that there are abuses and we don’t accept responsibility for those abuses. Even though they are addressed at helping people we would like to see helped, we can’t endorse every kind of technique that’s been used.

Hafen says this…..

You are literally God’s spirit child. Having same-gender attraction is NOT in your DNA, but being a child of God clearly IS in your spiritual DNA—only one generation removed from Him whom we call Father in Heaven. As the family proclamation states, “Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.” As part of an eternal plan, our Father placed us in this world subject to death, sin, sorrow, and misery—ALL of which serve the eternal purpose of letting us taste the bitter that we may learn to prize the sweet.

If you are faithful, on resurrection morning—and maybe even before then—you will rise with normal attractions for the opposite sex. Some of you may wonder if that doctrine is too good to be true. But Elder Dallin H. Oaks has said it MUST be true, because “there is no fullness of joy in the next life without a family unit, including a husband and wife, and posterity.” And “men (and women) are that they might have joy.” [v]

What do you guys say about that last bit…..about waking up on ressurection morning?

[Anonymous]

I have to totally agree with Dalin Oaks. As a former Supreme Court Judge, Elder Oaks is exceptional. I find that he combines, the moral, ethical, legal, biological and spiritual elements into an eternal blend of truth. Oaks, omits accusations against the research community and admits errors when they have occurred. I am so very grateful for Elder Oaks – this is surely a man who is called of God. Perhaps one day, he may even be a Prophet.

Elder Hafen and I both adamantly reject the concept of “absolute biological determinism”. Suppose that I am genetically susceptible to obesity (I am). I decide to spend 30 minutes per day in the gym and I stop eating junk food – my weight falls within a healthy limit. This is the power of free agency, the power of choice, the power of mind over matter. Just as those that crave sweets don’t have to indulge, persons, with SSA don’t have to yield to temptation. There is a real joy in just passing up the donuts and chocolate and living a healthy life.

What I want so much for Elder Hafen to understand is that we are seeing patients with genetic conditions, Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, for example who will never experience opposite-sex attraction. They will never be able to have biological children. The only person who understands why they were born that way is God himself. We need to teach these individuals about self-acceptance and self-love.

We need to protect them from discrimination in civil and family law. Person’s, such as myself, who advocate on their behalf are not evil. These patients are not evil. California Proposition 8 could have easily included a provision that exempted certain intersex persons from having to meet the standard of “man” or “woman”. I think of Jesus Christ as the most just and merciful person in the Universe. I think of His grace as sufficient to justify all those who are, through no fault of their own, born with these conditions.

[Anonymous]

Five years ago I would have been so aligned with the Church’s stance on homosexuality. Now — not so much. In fact — not at all. I have been through the tumultuous journey of “praying and fasting for change.” I spent hours on the Evergreen website. My husband and I spent hours in the temple. We literally spent hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars in therapy for my son. Some have said, “Well, you obviously had faith, but he didn’t.” Those kinds of comments make me cry. Without going into personal detail, let me just attest to the fact that he fasted, prayed, and cried his heart out with similar faith and hope.

One of the most difficult things about this discouraging journey has been the advice, literature, and counsel we were given. It all sounded so spiritual and comforting, but it ended up being myth. I love the scriptures, but I do not go there when I have a cavity, a viral infection, or a broken arm. This is an area where we need to acknowledge the APA. Even their analyses and theories suggest we’ve still got a long way to go in understanding homosexuality. Nonetheless, their research is scientific research. We were told our son could change… if he just had faith. The APA discourages reparative therapy, suggesting it causes more harm than good. Unfortunately, we found out the hard way: the APA is right.

[Anonymous]

Ophelia wrote:

Five years ago I would have been so aligned with the Church’s stance on homosexuality. Now — not so much. In fact — not at all. I have been through the tumultuous journey of “praying and fasting for change.” I spent hours on the Evergreen website. My husband and I spent hours in the temple. We literally spent hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars in therapy for my son. Some have said, “Well, you obviously had faith, but he didn’t.” Those kinds of comments make me cry. Without going into personal detail, let me just attest to the fact that he fasted, prayed, and cried his heart out with similar faith and hope.

One of the most difficult things about this discouraging journey has been the advice, literature, and counsel we were given. It all sounded so spiritual and comforting, but it ended up being myth. I love the scriptures, but I do not go there when I have a cavity, a viral infection, or a broken arm. This is an area where we need to acknowledge the APA. Even their analyses and theories suggest we’ve still got a long way to go in understanding homosexuality. Nonetheless, their research is scientific research. We were told our son could change… if he just had faith. The APA discourages reparative therapy, suggesting it causes more harm than good. Unfortunately, we found out the hard way: the APA is right.

I am sorry for you and your sad experience. It sounds like to me that at least Oaks understands that perhaps some people can’t change in terms of complete transformtion and that rather the goal is harmony with the commandments of God. My heart just breaks reading this. I feel sad when I hear the “just have more faith” sentiment because I think it is misunderstood. Sometimes we can plead and plead but God simply doesn’t grant our request. I actually feel the same bitterness with my own situation, but I am learning that there are lots of kinds of healing or maybe ways the healing takes shape inside of a person. Perhaps its not all in a biological way. Maybe we need to change our focus from having faith to change, to having faith that Christ will help and heal the situation according to his will and perhaps then learn to deal with those outcomes. Perhaps the exercizing of faith is more powerful when it is open to possibilities rather than severely focused on one single outcome. Perhaps that is where Hafen goes wrong is grouping everyone into one single possible outcome….although I didn’t completely get that sense. This in my mind IS where the church needs to increase its efforts by helping people deal in effective ways when straight forward healing doesn’t come quickly or doesn’t come at all. Sometimes I wonder about Paul and what ever burr was under his saddle that the Lord didn’t remove. Was there some purpose in carrying the burden? Some necessary test of faithfulness? Some point in his late life when the burden was lifted because of faithfulness? Maybe we need to help people see more possibilities with how to deal and heal.

[Anonymous]

The following study was conducted by Researchers at the University of Utah. I happen to personally know many of the Researchers and I can attest that they are very spiritual, honest Latterday Saints. The difference between the University of Utah Researchers and the BYU Researchers is that they can be a bit more honest without the fear that their positions or jobs at the U of U will come to an end if they don’t produce they type of date that the Church wants to see. They can be more objective.

http://tcp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/32/5/651?ck=nck

[Anonymous]

Poppyseed wrote:

Perhaps the exercizing of faith is more powerful when it is open to possibilities rather than severely focused on one single outcome. Perhaps that is where Hafen goes wrong is grouping everyone into one single possible outcome….although I didn’t completely get that sense. This in my mind IS where the church needs to increase its efforts by helping people deal in effective ways when straight forward healing doesn’t come quickly or doesn’t come at all.

Absolutely beautiful insight, Poppy!

On your previous posts question about the resurrection:

I get the sentiment of hope. However, I don’t think it’s practical on one level and, in fact, I think it’s quite damaging on a couple others.

It’s impractical in that it sets up a system of hope and faith which focuses exclusively on future outcomes. Which leads to the damaging aspect: why suffer here now when there’s a beautiful life waiting on the other side? Whether this becomes a suicidal thought or not, the emotional damage is devastating. It truly makes mortal life pointless.

And that’s the biggest point I can make. And I’ve said it before in another context. I personally reject the notion/insinuation that the main purpose of this life is to suffer and endure to the end.

I know that anyone would say, “No, no, you totally misunderstood what I meant”. Really? You didn’t just say that my only hope for true happiness, joy and fulfillment as a human being is in the next life when I’m not a human being any more?? “Oh, well, you don’t get it, the next life will be wonderful, if you just obey and sacrifice everything in this life, the next will be eternal bliss”. Oh, and how will I know if it’s blissful or not, if I never had the chance to experience it in mortality??

Sorry for the stupid hypothetical, but I feel so deeply and strongly that this mortal life is MORE important than the after life. It is the only chance we get to experience this. We’ll be immortal for eternity, but mortal for a very short time. I think that concept screams of importance and significance. I absolutely abhor the way that mortality is de-emphasized at the expense of immortality.

I don’t know if I believe the literalness of this concept or not but “obey no matter what” was Satan’s plan to get everyone back to Father. Which, of course, devalued completely the mortal experience. In this same sense, I feel that any preoccupation with the next life is devaluing the mortal experience in the same way. And the more that it is emphasized/highlighted, the greater the devaluation of the mortal experience.

Not to sound over-kill but… Christ’s preoccupation was with the living; loving and sharing and blessing the mortal, without regard to their immortality or His own. (I know, the resurrection guaranteed immortality but that was already the plan 😳 )

[Anonymous]

Dear Swimordie,

Your thoughts are exactly mine. I truly believe that this earth life, no matter how short, whether we live one minute or one hundred years is vital for our eternal progression.

Yes a homosexual may rise during the first resurrection with the proper attractions, but if he has lived a totally celibate life, devoid of any meaningful relationships, devoid of any family of his own, how prepared will he be?

This is NOT the same thing as the single sister who never marries. She will go to dances, associate with men, meet people, fall in love, perhaps many times. She will have many opportunities to care for children in the church nursery and serve in the primary. I know many single sister who spend more time caring for children then some mothers do. This sister will rise in the resurrection with all the parenting skills they need. The same is not true for homosexuals. They are rarely allowed to work around children. They cannot be Scout Masters, for example. People associate homosexuality with homosexual-pedophiles and therefore tend to keep children “out-of’-reach”.

If we are to become like our Heavenly Father, shouldn’t we have some hands-on parenting experience, parenting real, mortal children? After we are resurrected, do we just suddenly have all of the wisdom and skills that those who raised children have?

[Anonymous]

Hi Swim. I understand the feelings you are illustrating, but they aren’t necessarily representative of the true condition of a person or the position of the church. I disagree that the purpose of life is only to suffer and white knuckle til the end and that this is the circumstance the church wants SSA people to resign themselves to. I get that it feels that way some days. Suffering blinds us like that sometimes. But this isn’t reality. Seeing life and problems this way is a choice to close ones eyes to the possibiliites of hope and Christ for that matter. Suffering is part of the deal with earth life, but it isn’t the whole deal! Earth life is a condition of opposites and contradictions and that is what makes it a perfect place to learn. And there is much to be gained from struggling with some affliction over time.

This is where I appreciate and agree with the comments of Oaks and Wickman and even Hafen. There are many who won’t enjoy tradition marriage and family life for many reasons. Oaks talks about his disabled daughter and her loss and sadness over her circumstances. Life isn’t fair. No one promised it would be. Our trials and afflictions are gifts if we don’t give into the lies Satan tells us about them. There is spiritual refinements and opportunities and blessings that come to a person only inside of extended burden carrying. And when a person obeys anyway, Christ meets that person will all sorts of healing and tender mercies. There is wisdom in letting children deal with problems over time and not saving them every time they ask…. and Father in heaven knows this. In my own situation, I have plead for relief. The blessing havn’t been granted. So..what are my choices? I could choose bitterness and poor me thinking. Been there done that. I could choose to stop having faith in Christ and his healing and leave the hollow church promises with a huff. Been there too. The trial of faith is so much more than asking and getting. There is much in the way of healing that happens inside our attitudes as we apply ourselves to submission and obedience and sometimes simply changing the way we look at things. I am not sure there is much spiritual healing to be found when one abandons the coming to Christ process thru indulgence.

And with regards to future outcomes, are we really saying that life isn’t about future outcomes?? I mean come on…. And ALL of us have conditions that won’t be fixed until after death. This doesn’t take away the importance or meaning of human life and it doesn’t mean we won’t be prepared. As if marriage and family is our only life teacher……

Marriage is no guarantee of happiness. And church isn’t the only place to meet and interact with children. My brother is gay. He can see my kids any time he wants. My kids love him and he is generous with them. Maybe the church isn’t completely getting the message that SSA feelings are not the same as indulgence. Oaks makes it clear in his remarks that worthiness should open all doors of service for people. Perhaps we have more work to do on that front as the people in the church expand their thinking too.

[Author]

Posts