- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Roy, that wasn’t a rhetorical question was it. I have no idea what to think about what you have written there. If Millet speaks for mainstream LDS (and I know he is not the prophet or 12), then it does show the cultural idea that GAY is not normal, and not in accordance with God’s plan.
I have a personal friend who has gay children, and she is angry that the LDS faith believes that those who are gay are by their very nature impure and apt to pedophilia as well as other sexually deviant behaviors. The whole discussion happening now about the LDS faith pulling out of BSA, though not overt, has this as a hidden agenda IMHO.
I now know from some of my gay friends that “being fixed” by religious zealots is offensive to them. They are considered intrinsically deviant, and they must be fixed or they will not be celestial? And, in order to be clean, they must remain alone?…possibly forever UNLESS they are fixed?
I personally see the Millet answer as a step in the right direction. At least we are now talking about something (orientation) that is not chosen. I believe that this changes the conversation dramatically. Yet – how then can gay people fit into the eternal plan?
Elder Packer seems to conclude that a loving Father God would not make a person gay. Bro. Millet seems to conclude that faithful gay people will be made heterosexual in the resurrection (if not before).
I believe that different people will honestly come to different conclusions as they try to fit the pieces together.
Roy wrote:Elder Packer seems to conclude that a loving Father God would not make a person gay.
My gay friend has not a single memory of ever not being gay, even when he was a little boy. He struggles with Elder Packer’s position, because to him it means that he is gay because HE CHOSE to be gay.
Its certainly a challenge.
There was an excellent post on another Blog that asks a similar question “What Does the Church Want Non-LDS Gay People to Do?” (Note: I don’t know if I’m allowed to link to it, but it is the last blog to show up alphabetically in any list of Mormon blogs)
The Blog author gives several options:
1) Celibacy.
2) Mixed-orientation marriages.
3) Go back to an earlier time, when gay people had to remain closeted and homosexuality was much less socially acceptable
4) Live the “gay lifestyle.”
5) Enter into civil unions.
6) Gay marriage.
So the question is, what does the church expect from my non-LDS neighbor?
Sheldon wrote:There was an excellent post on another Blog that asks a similar question “What Does the Church Want Non-LDS Gay People to Do?”
(Note: I don’t know if I’m allowed to link to it, but it is the last blog to show up alphabetically in any list of Mormon blogs)
The Blog author gives several options:
1) Celibacy.
2) Mixed-orientation marriages.
3) Go back to an earlier time, when gay people had to remain closeted and homosexuality was much less socially acceptable
4) Live the “gay lifestyle.”
5) Enter into civil unions.
6) Gay marriage.
So the question is, what does the church expect from my non-LDS neighbor?
Sheldon, the general feeling I get from the “culture” around me is #1, #2, and #3. For a while, the church promoted #2 which VERY often ended in divorce–which was heartbreaking. It is because of that circumstance that I personally believe that love in marriage is not enough; there has to also be a certain amount of “compatibility”. And, having compatible sexual orientations probably is a BIG one.
The prevailing culture in the orthodox communities where I am is against #4, 5, 6. But, there are growing groups of LDS people who support #5.
What is expected or what is considered the ideal? Those are two very different questions, especially now that marriage is a legal option.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.