- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Sorry Ray it was a newbie mistake and I promise to behave better. I am impressed by the way at your dedication you must have been on after midnight. No more campaigns. Ophelia I apologize for finding a soap box in your thread and hoping onto it and sounding off a little too enthusiastically. One of the “benefits” of the doubting time, the “dark I think I might just walk away from the Church time even though I know it is true time”, for me was a profound reversal of my former attitude towards gays. Thinking back on it I am completely embarassed by my callous, “they are sinners don’t worry about them” kind of approach. As I think might be a pattern, though I am not certain, another of the “benefits” of doubt is a greater personal emphasis on Christ, His love pulled me out of despair and doubt and in the process I was clearly told I had to change my attitude to gays because He loves them and cares for them just as much as He cares for others.
So I think I am a better person because of the struggle and at the end of it all I hope that will be true for you and your son and all people caught up in such difficulty.
Bill, I appreciate your sincerity and admitting that you had a bad attitude once about gays. Most members do not understand this issue at all and I have had to do so much educating in my ward and stake. Too many people do think homosexuals choose these feelings and see them as pervets and wicked. If they could see the anquish these lds gay youth and adults go through when they discover these feelings, it would make them cry. So much suicide and self-loathing go on with our homosexual members and I have found them to be some of the most valiant and beautiful spirits. Who would choose such a challenge. I remember two lesbian young women in our ward who were trying to live the gospel. My visiting teachers home taught them and ask me to help them understand homosexuality. I showed them a wonderful video about that and it made such a difference in how they treated these young women then. The lesbian women wanted to go with these visiting teachers to Nauvoo to see the new temple, but the VT husbands would not allow it because they thought the lesbian women might hit on their wives. It really upset me.
One good bit of news is that because of the backlash from Prop 8, the church told our stake leaders to not get members involved with trying to stop gay marriage in Iowa, where I live. My son was so happy to here that the state he grew up in now allows gay marriage.
Bridget the news about both your Stake and Iowa’s decision is great. It really irks me that the Church has fought against gay marriage, forcing gays to not be able to properly marry means that you force them into the grey world of “relationships”. Marriage is healthy, marriage means that you stop and think about someone else all the time before you carry on with actions or decisions, marriage means that you have a safe place to be and from that safe place you can venture out to serve and help others. Gays getting married is emphatically NOT going to destroy the American family it is merely going to expand it, and gays will be just as faithful in their marriages as heterosexuals are (which is to say about half of them will eventually get divorced but that’s OK too), and those long term marriages will be every bit as loving, helpful and sustaining to their friends, family, and church (if we have enough charity to welcome them) as the heterosexual marriages are. (Climbing down from my soap box I walk off into the night).
Have you listened to any of John Dehlin’s interviews of gays that are available here on StayLDS? There are some very spiritual and powerful people in those interviews they might help both you and your son.
I would love to listen to those interviews. Where are they posted? You are right about gay marriage. I recently got back from Europe and met the Danish young man I wrote my book with ( see link ) http://www.authorhouse.com/BookStore/ItemDetail.aspx?bookid=12053 swimordie wrote:Poppyseed wrote:But they don’t want to be required to call evil “good” in order to be recognized as loving.
In the spirit of not letting statements go unchallenged since they will exist in perpetuity on the internet:
I can’t agree with the above statement. Are you insinuating that SSA or SSM is “evil”?
If heterosexuality is from God, than homosexuality is as well, since both are developed in the same way. I doubt anyone believes that “satan” tinkers with the biological, genetic, psychological in utero or infancy. Sure, evil people do evil things to infants, so this would come with exceptions.
The only reason that same-sex couples are “fornicating” is because they can’t legally get married. If they were allowed to formalize their relationship in the same way that opposite-sex couples can, they would be married and no longer “living in sin”. Society is perpetuating the “sin” by not allowing these relationships to be formalized in this way.
Wow. I didn’t see this response. Let me see what I can say here.
Yes. I see your point. But I am not quite sure you understood mine. I don’t know what is right politically or socially in terms of SSM. In America, the people vote and that is how we decide things. And even though the debate is emotional, the process is very American.
Your post is logical and I think for a lot of the public, this makes a load of sense and it is a compelling perspective. But, I don’t know though how one can support SSM
ANDthe proclamation on the family too. I mean it is either absolutely right OR absolutely wrong. And maybe that is one reason some have left the church and why this issue is so hard to reconcile. I also can’t necessarily agree that the ONLY reason people fornicate is because they can’t marry. My girlfriend (hetero) will prolly never marry and she doesn’t make this choice. She keeps her promises to not have sex until she is married. I also know SSA people who have decided NOT to act on the feelings simply because they have a desire to obey as well. This doesn’t solve many of the feelings or issues. But it does support that we can choose, even if the choice is a hard one. I suppose it is up to each of us to determine what God’s will is on this issue and then try to act in harmony with it. I think lots of LDS people feel as though that is what they are trying to do with regards to the vote. I am sorry the whole thing has been so divisive.
I feel that sometimes because some feel that SSM is wrong and that acting on SSA is sinful as well ( not that the state of being is sinful…please understand), that they are mislabeled as unloving. THAT was my point. I think a person can have a view that would be kind and compassionate AND uphold the proclamation on the family/law of chasity at the same time. That is all I meant.
Like I said on another thread, I truly don’t know what the answers are. I don’t know how the church can reconcile all of these issues and make everybody happy at the same time. They are hard and heart wrenching. I don’t know if either extreme on the issue is correct. I know why people feel as they do. I see compelling arguments on both sides and I try to search inside myself and the Spirit on this. I think we need God to advise. Or maybe he has already and this is something that will surely test all of us. I don’t know what to do with all the feelings in my heart. I hope you will forgive me for not having decided opinions as the rest of you seem to have. No knowing what to do or how to feel about all of it doesn’t make a person unloving either.
Poppyseed wrote:Like I said on another thread, I truly don’t know what the answers are. I don’t know how the church can reconcile all of these issues and make everybody happy at the same time. They are hard and heart wrenching. I don’t know if either extreme on the issue is correct. I know why people feel as they do. I see compelling arguments on both sides and I try to search inside myself and the Spirit on this. I think we need God to advise. Or maybe he has already and this is something that will surely test all of us. I don’t know what to do with all the feelings in my heart. I hope you will forgive me for not having decided opinions as the rest of you seem to have. No knowing what to do or how to feel about all of it doesn’t make a person unloving either.
I don’t want to speak for “swim,” but my 2 cents is that the issue is a major dilema! The church wants to do what is right…consistent with their understanding of God’s laws. Until recently, it all made sense. It WAS the position that “same-sex attraction” was wicked and wrong. But in the last decade, science has shown that it is biological — and it is hard to call what God gave us a “sin!”
So the way I would look at it is that like so many other teachings that have changed as we come to understand truth better, this is another that will. I don’t profess to know what that looks like, but to be consistent with the most important teaching of love, the church will need to evolve. So I see ALL teachings today as maleable…scripture, previous prophets’ words, etc. Remember, God didn’t personally “write or say” any of those — it was “man” claiming to speak for Him…and man is subject to error.
Just my opining….
Poppyseed wrote:But, I don’t know though how one can support SSM AND the proclamation on the family too. I mean it is either absolutely right OR absolutely wrong.
This is the dilemma that, I believe, Rix was referring to.
I’m not sure you can say it is absolutely right or absolutely wrong. I think it just needs to reflect the reality: there are loving monogamous homosexual couples raising families just the same as everyone else. Really, that’s all.
Poppyseed wrote:I also can’t necessarily agree that the ONLY reason people fornicate is because they can’t marry.
I didn’t say, or even insinuate, in my comment, your response in this quote. I meant just what I said: that the only “sin” that these monogamous homosexual couples are committing is fornication, due to the fact that we don’t allow them to legally marry.
Poppyseed wrote:I hope you will forgive me for not having decided opinions as the rest of you seem to have. No knowing what to do or how to feel about all of it doesn’t make a person unloving either.
My intention was not to make you feel bad or confused or guilty. I have no doubt that you are an extremely loving person, having felt that spirit in the posts you leave here. My reaction was to your comment that “felt” contradictory to me:
Poppyseed wrote:But they don’t want to be required to call evil “good” in order to be recognized as loving.
This “seems” like you are judging a person as “evil” while trying to love them. I reacted to it because this is the mantra that you hear at church all the time: “hate the sin, love the sinner”. My point being that WE, collectively, as a society, church, community are creating the “sin” by not allowing monogamous homosexual parents the opportunity to legally marry.
If we “hated the sin”, we could fix it by allowing them to marry. Then they wouldn’t be sinning and we could love them without a disclaimer.
Sorry for my heavy rhetoric, like you said, it’s a very emotional issue and I’m not immune.
😳 Quote:This “seems” like you are judging a person as “evil” while trying to love them. I reacted to it because this is the mantra that you hear at church all the time: “hate the sin, love the sinner”. My point being that WE, collectively, as a society, church, community are creating the “sin” by not allowing monogamous homosexual parents the opportunity to legally marry.
I know people feel judged. There is so much shame here. But what we ‘do’ isn’t necessarily who we are. And accepting someones behavior just because that is “who they are” isn’t always loving. I love lots of people, but I don’t necessarily love what they do. I am sure you are the same. That is just the truth. But with this issue it all gets turned around and the unfair judgment frankly flies both ways.
Quote:If we “hated the sin”, we could fix it by allowing them to marry. Then they wouldn’t be sinning and we could love them without a disclaimer.
Well, that is one solution.
Quote:Sorry for my heavy rhetoric, like you said, it’s a very emotional issue and I’m not immune.
This is absolutely ok. I appreciate that and I trust you weren’t going after me personally. I have respect for your views even if I can’t completely adopt them. This doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate them.
Perhaps we do need to dial it back a bit on the emotions meter. There has got to be a better way of disagreeing or discussing ideas/concerns than the stuff going on out there in politics land. I know we are all humans and we tend to take things personally. But perhaps doing so clouds an already cloudy issue. ( just general commentary…not necessarily this conversation.)
Poppyseed wrote:
Perhaps we do need to dial it back a bit on the emotions meter. There has got to be a better way of disagreeing or discussing ideas/concerns than the stuff going on out there in politics land. I know we are all humans and we tend to take things personally. But perhaps doing so clouds an already cloudy issue. ( just general commentary…not necessarily this conversation.)I suspect we sometimes get “emotional” when our “way” is challenged. Not by another person, but by allowing ourselves to be open to another possible way of thinking. When we’re emotionally invested in “our way being the true way,” and somebody challenges that, it is uncomfortable. But I also think that is how we learn and grow. So I think a little discomfort here may be good. For all of us!
Consider the possibility that homosexuality is okay. Every bit of it. Perhaps the rhetoric and bigotous judgments made by people about it is simply trying to avoid the possible reality that it is all okay — and that doesn’t jive with what we’ve been taught.
Just thinking out loud….
Rix wrote:Consider the possibility that homosexuality is okay. Every bit of it. Perhaps the rhetoric and bigotous judgments made by people about it is simply trying to avoid the possible reality that it is all okay — and that doesn’t jive with what we’ve been taught.
Good “out loud” thoughts, Rix.
It seems the only way to do it is to try to best decide what the future will hold, and then try to act one way or the other while always loving them in my heart. I don’t know how you determine when something is important enough to the future to cross the line requiring action.
I dunno. Just my “out loud” thoughts.
Thanks for the reasoned responses. I don’t pretend to have all the answers (okay, sometimes I do 😳 ), but I agree with poppy that the poo flies both ways. And I get what Heber is saying about the unpredictable future. It does make the process murky.And, it may seem obvious, but my libertarian leanings bleed into this issue as well, so I’m doubly emoted…
😳 😆 I guess, from my inner-most self, I’ve examined in my heart and mind what the future “could” be and determined that it is “good”. There are lots of places (Canada, Massachusetts, et al) where SSM is legal and the ramifications don’t seem scary.
I don’t want to repeat alot of the discussion from the previous SSM thread, just to say that there’s a pattern of acceptance that doesn’t include the dire predictions made by many, including the brethren.
As for “spiritual” consequences, I leave that up to the individual and their respective higher power.
Heber13 wrote:I think the problem becomes heavily debated when our belief in what future impact will have for all of society and that makes it harder to just allow others to do what they want and it is all ok. If what you want to do impacts me, than I do care about defending what I think.
Yes, that makes sense to me. So as it relates to homosexuality, what I see (and of course I may be wrong here) is that currently, LGBTs are treated very poorly. They are considered by many as broken, sinners, weak, wicked…all of which makes them depressed and often suicidal. They are not allowed to be married (in most states), so they have a disadvantage financially than the rest of us. If we consider their way of life “wrong,” and to be eradicated, then continuing this way is a good thing, because they just take their lives anyway….and since statistics show that the occurrence is about 5% (plus or minus 2%, depending on the study), they will never become a social/political force anyway.
On the other hand, if we accept that they are “okay,” and we allow them all the rights as the rest of us heteros, and we understand that they do not “recruit,” or “abuse” others any more than we heteros do, then we all just get along without the pain and confusion of “what should we do with them” that exists in most cultures today.
IOW, we just love them.
I like the latter. I think that is what God wants.
swimordie wrote:As for “spiritual” consequences, I leave that up to the individual and their respective higher power.
You beat me to it!
😆 Heber13 wrote:Rix wrote:Consider the possibility that homosexuality is okay. Every bit of it. Perhaps the rhetoric and bigotous judgments made by people about it is simply trying to avoid the possible reality that it is all okay — and that doesn’t jive with what we’ve been taught.
Good “out loud” thoughts, Rix.It seems the only way to do it is to try to best decide what the future will hold, and then try to act one way or the other while always loving them in my heart. I don’t know how you determine when something is important enough to the future to cross the line requiring action.
I dunno. Just my “out loud” thoughts.
Thanks for thinking outloud cause that was good!
Rix wrote:I like the latter. I think that is what God wants.
You said that well, Rix. I think what God wants is us to love each other and return to live with Him. I think He wants us to not look at people as “them vs us” but as “we are all one family and on the same ground”. But circumstances are different, so being on the same ground doesn’t mean we are all the same, just equal. I think there has to be that separation of loving them for who they are from how to handle the institutions or doctrines that seem to need to be changed to do that. Maybe the rules don’t need to change, just the way people think about each other.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.