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

[Anonymous]

I have thought about this for a long time, and completely agree with Ophelia that it is complex to think through and solve. So I’ve thought through how to reduce things to something I can grasp. Here’s my attempt at summarizing the Plan according to Heber:

1. The gospel teaches we must pass through life to become worthy of exaltation and the presence of God and all that He has.

2. We must repent of sins and rely on Christ for the hope to gain the experience needed. His commandments help us gain that experience through our choices.

3. The Spirit of God is able to help us on our journey.

4. The church can provide ways in receiving and intensifying the Spirit in a person’s daily life.

5. The people in the church can provide support, but will always be imperfect in how they interpret things, how they treat others, and what they say. It is both good and bad, provides healing and pain…it is a paradox.

6. The individual must decide how to find peace with God despite the mortal environment, and find joy in the experience.

It seems to be a clear story, and a good plan up through point #4, and then gets mucky and difficult when you get into points #5 and 6 (which to me describe “Enduring to the end”).

Homosexuality is interesting to me because it is an individual thing that people don’t understand,and so points #5 and 6 are unclear how to handle this subject, both for homosexuals (how they view and treat the church) and heterosexuals (how they view and treat others). I tend to agree with poppyseed that God’s plan as taught by the church to us is the family unit is the eternal unit and is narrowly defined as man and woman and children, and falls into point #2 above that it is given to us as a commandment we must choose not to practice homosexual or heterosexual sin. Further, Christ taught us that we also must avoid committing sin “within our hearts”, beyond just the act of committing sin. But with faith, Christ can change our hearts.

While I personally feel this way, I recognize I’m viewing that from the perspective of a heterosexual father of a mormon family with one wife and 4 young kids…so I cannot appreciate what others are dealing with to think my views are easily adopted by others. IT IS NOT EASY, IT IS NOT CLEAR. But it sits wrong with me that I hear people like Ophelia share:

Ophelia wrote:

The Church is not a healthy place for most gays. Some can deal with this issue; however, most have to seek refuge in a safer environment — a safer church. My son attends another church now, and I am so relieved and happy he has found peace elsewhere. It is simply too caustic to sit amongst “faithful” saints who have all the answers and all the judgments wrapped up in a neat little pretty package.

This greatly saddens me and disappoints me.

Perhaps this reflects my “unrealistic expectations” – but I have believed for so long the church is for everyone, that everyone can come through that door on the way to God, and more easily find God by doing so. The churh is for everyone…warts and all…you will become better by being in the church than not being in the church. Maybe it isn’t easy and safe, but it is right and true.

So, I continue to ponder the matter and am open to being wrong or that the church may change (not in the near future). So I think there is 2 ways I can resolve it in my mind:

Option1. The church isn’t for everyone. Sometimes we just realize it is good enough for the majority, but some individuals must be pioneers to find their own path through the mists of darkness, being taunted both by people in the large and spacious building AND by those holding on to the Iron Rod. But they can find another path to God and enjoy all the same blessings as the Iron Rodders. Sin for me may not be judged by God as sin for others, but the church will define what is sin for its members. And so the church and its teachings are not for everyone, but God takes care of it in the Eternities.

or..

Option2. Straight is the way, narrow is the gate…the church is the path for all, we just have to endure the current environment with faith it will one day be revealed why obedience to the commandments as taught by the church can be done by everyone, and everyone will be judged according to the same standard and by how they love everyone else. In this way, we should learn from past experiences like the Blacks and the Priesthood…that even if we can’t control or change our race or our sexual tendancies or our physical or mental capacities given to us in this life, and immediate circumstances are “unfair” because of it, we must have faith it will one day be taken care of and we will be judged on how we handled the experience. This means gays must endure just like blacks had to endure (although very different circumstances, still requires like endurance and faith), and others in the church must become better at loving and comforting those that stand in need of comfort.

I don’t like being part of a church where Ophelia’s son feels better elsewhere. But I guess the reason I’m still stuck in Fowler’s stage 4 is I continue to hold on to the belief that Option2 is still the answer. And I don’t know if that is realistic.

[Anonymous]

I have always believed that the only path that is right for me is to attack problems, not to attack people. When we choose to attack people, we can no longer problem solve.

One thing that medical science has shown us is that children born to mother’s with thyroid disease can suffer from health problems, including gender dysphorias (homosexuality). Yesterday, a young, fresh out of college BYU student scientist began working in our laboratory. We have ordered a book about pregnancy and thyroid hormone. We discussed the possibility of screening all pregnant women for thyroid disease. We discussed how Utah laboratories could potentially reach that testing capacity. We talked about the possible need to reformulate artificial thyroid hormone into a “time release” medication so that the developing fetus did not receive sudden increases in hormone followed by shortages. We decided to just work together to help resolve some of these issues. She was extremely knowledgeable and helpful. She was well-read and amazingly brilliant. I don’t want this young scientist to believe all the hype about “homosexuality is a choice”. I want her to come to work tomorrow and use that brilliant brain to start finding some of these answers.

Perhaps I ask too much. Perhaps I want too much. The Lord I know doesn’t just give us answers when we “take no thought but to ask him”. My biggest fear is that people like Elder Hafen firmly believe that they already have all the answers, so they have stopped asking questions. For so many, “the debate is over when the Prophet speaks”, I want the debate to begin when the Prophet speaks. He has brought attention to this issue. Now is the time to work on actively solving some of these problems.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

Option1. The church isn’t for everyone. Sometimes we just realize it is good enough for the majority, but some individuals must be pioneers to find their own path through the mists of darkness, being taunted both by people in the large and spacious building AND by those holding on to the Iron Rod. But they can find another path to God and enjoy all the same blessings as the Iron Rodders. Sin for me may not be judged by God as sin for others, but the church will define what is sin for its members. And so the church and its teachings are not for everyone, but God takes care of it in the Eternities.

or..

Option2. Straight is the way, narrow is the gate…the church is the path for all, we just have to endure the current environment with faith it will one day be revealed why obedience to the commandments as taught by the church can be done by everyone, and everyone will be judged according to the same standard and by how they love everyone else. In this way, we should learn from past experiences like the Blacks and the Priesthood…that even if we can’t control or change our race or our sexual tendancies or our physical or mental capacities given to us in this life, and immediate circumstances are “unfair” because of it, we must have faith it will one day be taken care of and we will be judged on how we handled the experience. This means gays must endure just like blacks had to endure (although very different circumstances, still requires like endurance and faith), and others in the church must become better at loving and comforting those that stand in need of comfort.

I’m leaning toward Option 1. Perhaps God loves his children so much that he creates many different religions/churches, so that everyone can find the path that personally speaks to them and be made a better person and return to God. I don’t necessarily think that even Christianity is the only path for everyone, let alone the LDS church.

[Anonymous]

MisterCurie wrote:

I’m leaning toward Option 1. Perhaps God loves his children so much that he creates many different religions/churches, so that everyone can find the path that personally speaks to them and be made a better person and return to God. I don’t necessarily think that even Christianity is the only path for everyone, let alone the LDS church.

Yes, I lean this way as well, but will add that “God” may not be a separate, perfected human, Kolob living entity at all. “He” may be within each of us; we may be the creators(s), individually and collectively of everything in our lives.

(sorry, I just finished “The Lost Symbol” and am feeling a bit more “Universalist” today… 😆 )

[Anonymous]

Rix wrote:

Yes, I lean this way as well, but will add that “God” may not be a separate, perfected human, Kolob living entity at all. “He” may be within each of us; we may be the creators(s), individually and collectively of everything in our lives.

agreed as well

[Anonymous]

[quote=”Poppyseed

… what changes do you feel the church needs to make so homosexuals don’t have to leave? Do the changes have to be doctinal or marrriages offered? From your experience and feelings, is there a middle ground in your thinking?[/quote]

Hi Poppyseed,

You really give good discussion to this thread. I have gone round and round in my head over the things said here and you make good arguments for the gospel and church. For years I couldn’t get past the ‘plumbing’ and how God made man and woman to be together. Also, I couldn’t get past the idea that one of the purposes of life was to multiply and replinsh the earth. Forever, we have heard about the importance of bringing spirit children down to earth to get a body and how a child needs a mother and a father. This all makes sense to me.

…but you brought some wonderful questions and I would like to respond to them. Everyday, I hear about how gay people are treated all over the world. It is horrible and happened in Nazi Germany as well. If the church spent half the money they do to fight gay marriage and show the world they fight homosexual abuse they would come across much more loving. I would like to see people with SSA in the church be able to come out with their struggles and in fast and testimony meeting and be surrounded with understanding and love. I would like to see talks given on the subject on how to love the homosexual better. I went to a Love Won Out Conference Omaha Nebraska church a couple of years ago where the minister asked the audience to specifically reach out and love their homsexual brothers and sisters. There was an experiment done once in the single wards at the U of Utah. The bishops were told for one month to say the word homosexual or homsexuality in sacrament meetings and how we care about them. After the one month over 65 people came out in the ward with this issue. If we cannot even say the word homosexual or gay in the wards, how can we love them.

I did not see the church fighting gay marriage in Denmark only in America. I think they ought to leave gay marriage and civil unions alone like they do in Denmark and focus more on the messes heterosexuals have done in their own lives with their own kids. Utah has a large illegal polygmany problem and yet they do nothing about that. Instead of spending millions on prop 8, they should spend it on things like Wallace said that can make a difference.

[Anonymous]

bridget_night wrote:

I went to a Love Won Out Conference Omaha Nebraska church a couple of years ago where the minister asked the audience to specifically reach out and love their homsexual brothers and sisters. There was an experiment done once in the single wards at the U of Utah. The bishops were told for one month to say the word homosexual or homsexuality in sacrament meetings and how we care about them. After the one month over 65 people came out in the ward with this issue. If we cannot even say the word homosexual or gay in the wards, how can we love them.

There is lots of stuff we can’t share with people. Depression, addiction, mental illness. Yet we live in a time when so many of these modern problems touch so many of us. I honestly wish we could come to the church with our problems. But It has been my sad experience that with some things you just can’t and with some people you just can’t. Perhaps we all know that too well with regards to our spiritual doubts.

Perhaps this experiment is a good one. Perhaps we need to address these things out in the open in better ways. With regards to my own stuff, I have often wished for the brethren to not only speak against porn addiction but to also address the people who are negatively affected and maybe give guidelines for how people need to be supported. I think sometimes people really do care but dont know what to say or do. Other times people try to care and it makes a person feel like they are a project or like people are too nosey. Sometimes people keep their first impression of a person too long and remember a persons sins long after God has forgotten them.

Its tough being in this church because sometimes you don’t have a private life as people and their problems are routinely discussed. I don’t know if I think that should stop. I just wish we knew how to love each other better. I wish I felt love and support from the church that was more than a singular gesture. There have been many lonely and painful days when all I needed was a friend just to stand by me. The good news is I have learned to be my own best friend. The bad news…..I really don’t trust church people.

[Anonymous]

Poppyseed wrote:

Its tough being in this church because sometimes you don’t have a private life as people and their problems are routinely discussed. I don’t know if I think that should stop. I just wish we knew how to love each other better. I wish I felt love and support from the church that was more than a singular gesture. There have been many lonely and painful days when all I needed was a friend just to stand by me. The good news is I have learned to be my own best friend. The bad news…..I really don’t trust church people.

Wow, powerful, real stuff here, PS! Thanks for this.

I think all of what you said here comes down to the way we are brought up in the culture (I don’t think it is officially taught, just tradition) to make moral judgments of others. We do it to them, so we feel — often correctly — that they are judging us too. If you think about it, we shy away from sharing our problems with others if we believe they are going to think badly of us (yes, the codependent in us). So we don’t, and we stuff it — never a good idea.

I live with a circle of friends now that are mostly non-mormons. They (generally) don’t do the moral judgment thing…and it shows. The culture allows open communication and expression of “problems,” since they know they won’t be judged. It is a very compassionate, supportive energy; no gossip, no back-stabbing. It’s great!

Unconditional love should be the culture of the church, and I think it is progressing towards that…none too soon!

[Anonymous]

Fwiw, there is an inherent conflict between unconditional LOVE and unconditional LAW. The first is possible; the second is not.

Yes, learning to love unconditionally is a critically important aspect of this discussion, but someone can love someone else unconditionally and still disapprove of their actions – as is evidenced by almost everyone here in this forum when you talk about things that others do that drive you nuts and make you want to leave the Church sometimes. Think about that – at length, if necessary.

The key isn’t becoming so open that you lose your own personal beliefs and internal standards – or even that the Church as an organization be totally accepting of all actions. The key, imo, is to understand fully the following:

Quote:

let them worship how, where or what they may

The LDS Church can’t be for all, but it CAN offer a theology that opens the same eternal reward for all – and it does that more so than ANY other theology within Christianity. Its members don’t always understand that, but its core theology gives eternal hope and grace to the hopeless and condemned in mortality – specifically because it is both open to radical change in mortal understanding and policy AND leaves all judgment, in the end, truly to a loving Father.

I would LOVE to see the Church be more accommodating to gay members, but I also LOVE that the 2nd and 11th Articles of Faith leave the possibility door open for them to be exalted even if they can’t be accommodated fully in the Church – now and perhaps ever.

[Anonymous]

Poppyseed wrote:

Perhaps this experiment is a good one. Perhaps we need to address these things out in the open in better ways. With regards to my own stuff, I have often wished for the brethren to not only speak against porn addiction but to also address the people who are negatively affected and maybe give guidelines for how people need to be supported.

I love this, poppy, and I know I’ve said this before, but I think church would be great if it was more like an AA mtg, people sharing and caring and supporting each other without judgment.

I also think that the church leaders tend to hyper focus on actions and the sinner, rather than underlying reasons and collateral damage. You hear very little about the plight of the porn addicts wife, for example, or the child of a prescription drug addict.

And, more related to this topic is something I’ve been thinking alot about lately. The plight of the spouses of gay married men and women. The church leaders focus so much on the gay “problem” and on “overcoming” the “disease” of SSA, and enduring to the end, but what about the spouse. It seems that the spouse is condemned to a relatively passionless marriage (I know, I know, aren’t we all 😳 ), wherein sexual fulfillment is all but impossible.

And, what kind of example is that to the kids. You can’t fake passionate love. The emotional bonds created in the intimate act are real and palpable. Yet, kids born of this kind of marriage are also being deprived an appropriate model for intimacy between a monogamous pair.

It feels like there’s a generation of men and women who suffer in absolute and utter silence and invisibility with a cross they don’t deserve. Sorry, I’ve slipped back a little. 😳

[Anonymous]

Old-Timer wrote:

Fwiw, there is an inherent conflict between unconditional LOVE and unconditional LAW. The first is possible; the second is not.

Yes, learning to love unconditionally is a critically important aspect of this discussion, but someone can love someone else unconditionally and still disapprove of their actions – as is evidenced by almost everyone here in this forum when you talk about things that others do that drive you nuts and make you want to leave the Church sometimes. Think about that – at length, if necessary.

The key isn’t becoming so open that you lose your own personal beliefs and internal standards – or even that the Church as an organization be totally accepting of all actions. The key, imo, is to understand fully the following:

Quote:

let them worship how, where or what they may

The LDS Church can’t be for all, but it CAN offer a theology that opens the same eternal reward for all – and it does that more so than ANY other theology within Christianity. Its members don’t always understand that, but its core theology gives eternal hope and grace to the hopeless and condemned in mortality – specifically because it is both open to radical change in mortal understanding and policy AND leaves all judgment, in the end, truly to a loving Father.

I would LOVE to see the Church be more accommodating to gay members, but I also LOVE that the 2nd and 11th Articles of Faith leave the possibility door open for them to be exalted even if they can’t be accommodated fully in the Church – now and perhaps ever.

Yes! Yes! Yes!

I believe that there are doctrinal changes the church literally can’t make and shouldn’t have to. But I do see the possibilities for growth in the middle ground. And I know that perhaps I don’t have the best experiential evidence to hope….but I still have the hope that these struggles will forge new capacities for helping people not only deal with pain but become reconcilled to Christ at the same time. And I don’t confine that hope to SSA only.

How I personally have longed for a place like Rix describes where judgment just isn’t part of the deal with friendship. Could you use another member to your group, Rix? How I have wished that I didn’t have to hide my struggles and that I had trusted friends I could lean on? Had my experience been different, I dont’ know if I would be battling with the church like I am now. But at the very same time, I do have a testimony of the gospel as it is taught. I do believe the gospel and the church are very different entities. It’s not a complete knowledge but it is something that I can’t in all good conscience deny even though my pain would have me walk away and never come back. I am learning thru my own recovery process that there is so much more wiggle room inside the gospel of JC than I had previously seen or known! I think that is a tremendous thing and I feel grateful that God has helped me understand a few perspectives that way. Perhaps this is where the church needs to open its focus of teaching. I hope the church can learn how to hold its firm position while extending its spectrum of outreach. I know God is able to do that. I think the church is trying and I honestly believe the church has so much love to offer people with SSA or a whole bunch of other stuff. Sometimes I think it stumbles because it has to defend itself. But the church is run by people…..people who are not completely like Christ yet. And part of the Christian deal is supporting all of us in our weakness and deficits. If the people in the church could just simply drop the judgy thing, wouldn’t that be a tremendous improvement all by itself? I also think another tremendous boon would be if we each could forgive the church and the people in it more, especially when we fail or lack some piece of Christlike love.

Swim. I agree with all your last comments. The wives! The children! And the husbands too. We stand invisable in the damage path and everyone is so darn focused on the tornado! We need more Jacobs in the church leadership. We really do.

But maybe those of us with these big crosses to bear need to adjust our thinking too. The church can’t be everything and perhaps it is unrealistic to think that a man in a suit will always say the right healing thing for every single person. And for those who aren’t familiar with these heart wrenching struggles, perhaps it is unfair to expect that they should have all the empathy that is needed. And maybe it is on us not to interpret every dictate from the pulpit as hurtful. I mean in the end, becoming offended because of anothers weakness is a choice. And it certainly isn’t the only choice.

We can figure this out. I believe!!!!!!!

[Anonymous]

I have faithfully and carefully read every comment in this thread. I have only spoken once, on page 8 as I told the story of my 2 brothers and eldest son. There seems to have been little progress in changing the individual opinions expressed (quite beautifully by the way), on both sides of this issue. I feel strengthened in the vast unconditional love expressed toward our gay children. I am sadden by some who feel change may never come, that gay and lesbian members may do well to seek spiritual refreshment elsewhere. I know though, there is truth in that position also. Thousands (maybe tens of thousands), have left the church after losing hope for any real change.

What bothers me with such a stance is the reality we should consider encouraging our same-gender attracted children to leave early, for their emotional and spiritual health. At what age then do we become involved, 12, 15, 19 (certainly before a mission I would think)? And to what degree do we allow well meaning ecclesiastical leaders to counsel our children? I have a lot of guilt, my friends. I long suspected (before my son came out), where his journey was headed (remember two gay brothers?). Yet I allowed my son to endure the hurt, pain, rejection, thoughts of suicide, because I wanted a son who served a mission, found the right girl, married in the temple, gave me some grandkids. I have apologized for my lack of strength in standing with him through his difficult years. He has accepted my apology.

I have seen change in my long life. When I was a teenager, it was taught homosexuality was next to murder, even openly from the pulpit. I have not heard such a damaging talk in a long while. I hope I never do again.

[Anonymous]

George wrote:

I have seen change in my long life. When I was a teenager, it was taught homosexuality was next to murder, even openly from the pulpit. I have not heard such a damaging talk in a long while. I hope I never do again.

Thank you George for your heartfelt comments. I think we can take solace that we ARE seeing change in the church; no, not fast enough, but it is happening. LDS members are certainly some of the most loving people I know, and really want to do the right thing. The youth of the church seem to understand this issue better than we older folks…so I have hope that as the church grows up, significant change will happen.

I met with a man in pain last night. He is married with children but hasn’t had a real conversation with his wife for four months. He has had a relationship with another man and feels deep guilt about it. As he has sought help from his bishop, he gets more guilt and, IMO, false hope. So many people in his life are being impacted by his situation. He wants help but is very confused about where to turn. My heart aches for him. He needs some hope that somewhere there is true acceptance and love in his life…but it seems hopeless.

These situations are not uncommon in the church. How many more obituaries do we need to read before we will do something? Pain affects change, but how much more pain will it take to learn the lesson?

😥 😳

[Anonymous]

I have never before, nor will I ever advocate that the LDS Church lower it’s standards with respect to marriage or the law of chastity.

What I am advocating is that the Church maintain her standards. My requests have always been the same. My requests do not change. I have asked that the Church protect all copyrighted materials as well as the name of the Church. The name of the Church contains the name of the Savior. Currently, in Utah, there are a few “Hate Groups” that actively and openly advocate harm (hate crimes) against homosexual persons. Right now, they use the name of the Church and Church copyrighted materials to say, “see, we are approved by the Church”, we are doing the Lord’s work in cleansing the earth, we are good. It is just good practice for the Church to protect her copyrighted materials and it is absolutely evil to use the name of the Lord to justify hate crimes.

My second request is that the Church not form any alliances with any group that is listed as a “terrorist organization” or “hate group”. We had this problem back in the 1977. There were three groups that openly and actively opposed the Equal Rights Amendments. One of the National Eagle Forum, the other two were the LDS Church and and Klu Klux Klan. When we are actively pursuing any legitimate civil cause, it is vitally important that we NOT form alliances with hate groups. We should make this rule stand with NO exceptions.

This is a copy and paste:

Document 8: John M. Crewdson, “Mormon Turnout Overwhelms Women’s Conference in Utah,” New York Times, 25 July 1977. Reprinted in National Women’s Conference Official Briefing Book: Houston, Texas, November 18 to 21, 1977 (Washington, D.C.: National Commission on the Observance of International Women’s Year, 1977), pp. 234-35.

Introduction

Women committed to change clashed with those against it, at the state and territory meetings held to elect delegates to the NWC. Opponents of the NWC agenda were typically affiliated with conservative and New-Right groups including Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum, Stop ERA, the John Birch Society, the Relief Society of the Mormon Church, and the Klu Klux Klan.

END OF COPY AND PASTE

Ok, I don’t like the “Reflief Society of the Mormon Church, being list right next to the Klu Klux Klan. You will notice that something as benign and well intentioned as hosting a territorial conference on women can bring various elements into the organization. Political alliances are formed, friendships are forged. The LDS Relief Society should stay strictly separate from all of these other groups. We should meet and send our own delegates to conferences and political meetings. That would mean that our current Relief Society President (or counselors) would ALWAYS be are delegate to represent us. We would NOT allow ourselves (as women) to be represented by any other person. We support and sustain our Relief Society President. She is called of God to speak for us collectively and to represent our interests. We simply must not allow some of these others groups (listed above) to use the name of the Church and speak for us. The Relief Society is one of the oldest and largest woman’s organizations on earth. We deserve to be represented politically, but I don’t want a radical, right-wing extremist group to speak for me. Much of the severe, anti-gay, material circulation is coming from these groups who are using the LDS Church as a front.

[Anonymous]

George wrote:

What bothers me with such a stance is the reality we should consider encouraging our same-gender attracted children to leave early, for their emotional and spiritual health. At what age then do we become involved, 12, 15, 19 (certainly before a mission I would think)?

Fascinating article in Sunday’s NYT Magazine about middle-schoolers dealing with SSA. This article will REALLY make you think, regardless your perspective on the topic:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/27/magazine/27out-t.html?_r=1&ref=magazine

[Author]

Posts