Page 6 of 31 FirstFirst ... 234567891016 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 180 of 903

Thread: The path for homosexuals in LDS theology

  1. #151
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726
    Very interesting transcription of Elder Christofferson's KUTV interview here:

    http://www.sixteensmallstones.org/ld...-sex-marriage/

    One excerpt:

    [Just as the interview seems over and Elder Christofferson begins to stand up, a different voice from somewhere behind the camera and without a mic, interrupts to ask his own additional question.]

    Unidentified Man:

    “This has been a divisive issue, in all of society, but I think also within the church– that people are still trying to sort out exactly how they think and feel and how to act and they don’t like feeling like they’re in opposition to the church but they may in their heart feel like marriage equality is something that they have a personal conviction of. What would be your message to those individuals within the church, that are trying desperately to stay within the church, but feel like that because they’re so at odds with what is publicly stated that they no longer feel like might fit– your message to them? You know the church has done a lot with the I’m a Mormon campaign to emphasize the diversity of the backgrounds and perspectives within the church, but on this issue specifically I think people sometimes feel like it’s in or out.”

    Elder Christofferson:

    “Well it’s, it’s not an easy thing, and I believe we recognize that. Our hope is that overtime, as we stay together and worship together and search for inspiration together, that ways open up for people of all persuasions to come to feel but they’re comfortable here. While they don’t know the eventual outcome and what’s going to happen in the near term– I should say what’s going to happen in the near term, they know the end result can be happiness– a state of happiness, a state of fulfillment, something that God desires for all– and we firmly believe no one is predestined to a second class status and… have a… no one who is is faithful to the commandments and the principles that we teach even though that may involve some very significant sacrifice in the short term (even all of mortal life, if you can call that short term) is all worth it in the end because nothing is denied anyone who is faithful. We don’t see all how that comes together, but we have the faith that it does because we have a God who created us all, loves us all, and is gonna give everyone who tries and who is loyal to him everything that he has to give.”

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  2. #152
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post
    Very interesting transcription of Elder Christofferson's KUTV interview here:

    http://www.sixteensmallstones.org/ld...-sex-marriage/

    One excerpt:
    FWIW, I have heard second hand that several GA's have close gay relatives--maybe children--and that this Prop 8 issue, etc. was very, very hard on them. I think Elder Christofferson is one. They have been instrumental in moving this along.

  3. #153
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned View Post
    FWIW, I have heard second hand that several GA's have close gay relatives--maybe children--and that this Prop 8 issue, etc. was very, very hard on them. I think Elder Christofferson is one. They have been instrumental in moving this along.
    Elder Christofferson has a brother who is gay. Lives in CT and is pretty active in the ward there, from what I have heard.
    "Don't apologize; it's not your fault. It's my fault for overestimating your competence."

  4. #154
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned View Post
    FWIW, I have heard second hand that several GA's have close gay relatives--maybe children--and that this Prop 8 issue, etc. was very, very hard on them. I think Elder Christofferson is one. They have been instrumental in moving this along.
    Probably. I think anyone who even has gay friends struggles with the impact of the church's position. (I do.) Even so, here's what Elder C. said about that:

    Daniel Woodruff:
    “We’ve reported on your situation, you have a brother who is gay, and you’ve talked about how that has impacted your family. Has that, personally for you, has that family dynamic impacted at all how you’ve approached this issue– how you’ve approached publicly advocating, as an apostle, for SB296?”


    Elder Christofferson:
    “No. The the real genesis of, of the movement, if you will, behind these issues has been a matter of counseling together as we do in the church. We operate by councils: there’s the Quorum of the Twelve, which is a council, the First Presidency, is a council, and at the ward, the local levels, and the stake levels, we rely heavily on counseling together to determine which way to go and to, as a way of facilitating revelation and inspiration and receiving guidance that way. So it’s not one person says, you know, because of this experience that I’ve had in my life this is how we need to do it. But it’s this sharing of past experience, sharing of knowledge and background, but it’s after everything else a search for revelation– a search to know what the Lord’s will is and that’s what we try to follow.”

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  5. #155
    Quote Originally Posted by NorthwestUteFan View Post
    The riots were fueled by the common belief that the cops were racists who hated one segment of the population, which led to the unjustified shooting of an unarmed man.

    The facts do not bear that out, of course, but since when do mobs check all the facts before grabbing their pitchforks?

    I can see how the police chief could be taking preemptive action against the officer in an attempt to show the police Dept to be objective.
    Maybe he was referring to the fact he didn't detain them or cite them for public intoxication. Either way, this report hardly paints the picture of a guy targeting gay people.

  6. #156
    Quote Originally Posted by #1 Utefan View Post
    Maybe he was referring to the fact he didn't detain them or cite them for public intoxication. Either way, this report hardly paints the picture of a guy targeting gay people.
    I agree with you. But the Police Dept must be cognizant of public perception in situations like these.

    In Ferguson the officer who shot Michael Brown was cleared of all wrongdoing via the federal investigation (NOT just an internal review), but the department itself was shown to have significant problems with systemic racism.

    LA, the quote you posted sounds as though Elder Christofferson expects lgbt people or people who support marriage equality to sacrifice and fall in line with the church's way of thinking for a 'short time', and then all things will be made right.

    But then he defines 'short time' as meaning 'this life'. If you are lgbt then you are not allowed to have a comfortable sexual component to your life. You must choose the sexuality preferred by the church. It must be Male & Female, inside marriage only, and we will still oppose gay marriage at the legislative level.

    In other words this new openness and acceptance is merely a change in tone, and not a change of substance. And it still doesn't explicitly clarify whether church members can truly speak their minds on 'social media'. Will this filter down to the local leadership?

  7. #157
    Five-O Diehard Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    4,894

    The path for homosexuals in LDS theology

    Quote Originally Posted by #1 Utefan View Post
    Maybe he was referring to the fact he didn't detain them or cite them for public intoxication. Either way, this report hardly paints the picture of a guy targeting gay people.
    Or perhaps there is far more to the story than what the public knows.

  8. #158
    Quote Originally Posted by Diehard Ute View Post
    Or perhaps there is far more to the story than what the public knows.
    Such as...

  9. #159
    Quote Originally Posted by Diehard Ute View Post
    Or perhaps there is far more to the story than what the public knows.

    Please share. I don't pretend to know what happened behind the scenes of this incident or the gay parade motorcycle show but I do think the latter was handled poorly by SLCPD. Handle things internally, not in the media and public court of opinion.

    Chief Burbank still has some explaining regarding several aspects of that case. Who leaked the information, were they disciplined, and did he himself possibly use the incident as a means to score political points with his boss and a potential future run at public office? I just think he was far too public and outspoken over an incident that probably should have been handled quietly in house.

  10. #160
    Five-O Diehard Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    4,894

    The path for homosexuals in LDS theology

    Quote Originally Posted by #1 Utefan View Post
    Please share. I don't pretend to know what happened behind the scenes of this incident or the gay parade motorcycle show but I do think the latter was handled poorly by SLCPD. Handle things internally, not in the media and public court of opinion.

    Chief Burbank still has some explaining regarding several aspects of that case. Who leaked the information, were they disciplined, and did he himself possibly use the incident as a means to score political points with his boss and a potential future run at public office? I just think he was far too public and outspoken over an incident that probably should have been handled quietly in house.
    You do realize the officer resigned before any investigation was completed. He wasn't fired by the department.

    I'm not privy to any details, but do know most of the information people are relying on came in the 6 page letter the former officer released. Little information was released by the department.

    Reality is personnel issues such as these always have more than one version of events and rarely does anyone know the whole story.

    My point is you really can't make any judgement one way or the other when you're not part of what occurred, because you're working with only bits and pieces of information
    Last edited by Diehard Ute; 03-20-2015 at 08:07 PM.

  11. #161
    Quote Originally Posted by Diehard Ute View Post
    You do realize the officer resigned before any investigation was completed. He wasn't fired by the department.

    I'm not privy to any details, but do know most of the information people are relying on came in the 6 page letter the former officer released. Little information was released by the department.

    Reality is personnel issues such as these always have more than one version of events and rarely does anyone know the whole story.

    My point is you really can't make any judgement one way or the other when you're not part of what occurred, because you're working with only bits and pieces of information
    I'm curious as an officer what you think... And maybe you can't really say, but is it possible to fully protect someone while also objecting to what they do/believe/represent?

    I would guess that probably happens all the time, whether you come to the aid to a drug dealer with a medical problem or whatever else.

    If what that officer said was remotely true I guess I don't have a problem with what he wanted to do, my guess is it is more complex than that.

    I think officers should be required to do their job to protect etc, but things I consider to be more elective, like participating in a parade, an officer should be able to opt out without penalty. For example if an officer didn't want to ride formation in the Days of 47 parade because he objects to the LDS church I don't think he should have to. However if he is on shift and asked to provide security for the event then he should.

    Maybe I've simplified things but it seems like a pretty easy line to draw. And I also think someone is fully capable to carrying out their job while having personal objections to the people they serve.

  12. #162
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  13. #163
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726
    This seems to fit best here:

    Op-ed: Start a conversation with someone on the other side of LGBT debate

    http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/271450...m&st_refQuery=


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  14. #164
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726
    Interesting piece by Tom Christofferson, brother of Elder Todd Christofferson.

    A North and South Heart

    http://ldslights.org/a-north-and-south-heart/


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  15. #165
    [QUOTE=LA Ute;57195]Interesting piece by Tom Christofferson, brother of Elder Todd Christofferson.

    A North and South Heart

    http://ldslights.org/a-north-and-south-heart/

    That is a very interesting article and I would love to meet that man. He has made a choice to honor his God and his belief in that God over himself, his sexual orientation and his (I assumer former) partner. Tough choice to make. Tough line to toe.

  16. #166
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726
    [QUOTE=UTEopia;57202]
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post
    Interesting piece by Tom Christofferson, brother of Elder Todd Christofferson.

    A North and South Heart

    http://ldslights.org/a-north-and-south-heart/

    That is a very interesting article and I would love to meet that man. He has made a choice to honor his God and his belief in that God over himself, his sexual orientation and his (I assumer former) partner. Tough choice to make. Tough line to toe.
    I can't begin to empathize, so I simply stand in awe of him. I don't know that I could do what he's done.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  17. #167
    [QUOTE=LA Ute;57215]
    Quote Originally Posted by UTEopia View Post

    I can't begin to empathize, so I simply stand in awe of him. I don't know that I could do what he's done.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Agreed. That is a powerful article. He is certainly an extremely thoughtful person. Isn't he a sinner in the eyes of the church, or am I wrong? That takes a lot of courage to embrace it and it obviously touches him very very deeply. He has a huge heart.

  18. #168
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726

    The path for homosexuals in LDS theology

    [QUOTE=concerned;57218]
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post

    Agreed. That is a powerful article. He is certainly an extremely thoughtful person. Isn't he a sinner in the eyes of the church, or am I wrong? That takes a lot of courage to embrace it and it obviously touches him very very deeply. He has a huge heart.
    It appears that he's chosen the celibate path, at considerable personal cost. He's a rare man indeed.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  19. #169
    [QUOTE=LA Ute;57219]
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned View Post

    It appears that he's chosen the celibate path, at considerable personal cost. He's a rare man indeed.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    It is a different choice at 65-75 than it is at 20-30.

  20. #170
    I think the imprint of Tom's upbringing is very strong, and he obviously derives inner rewards for adhering to his church's beliefs and expectations. Good for him.

    I suspect over the centuries there have been innumerable Catholic priests and nuns who may have taken that route in life because their innate orientation could not have been more taboo, and I'm sure many were edified both by their sacrifice and the positive response they got for serving.

    (This sort of reminds me of the stories in my wife's family about what life was like when the Civil Rights movement was picking up steam. After Selma, many black communities in the South had similar "marches", my wife's little hometown was one of them. My father in law, the Baptist Pastor, wouldn't let any of his children participate in the marches. "We have to know our place! We have to know our place!" He wasn't motivated to push school integration, and eventually his kids went to integrated schools, 9 years after Brown vs Board of Education. The Pastor eventually became the first African American city councilman, with a resilient and forgiving personality, kind of like Jackie Robinson. "Dad was a safe choice", one of his sons told me.)

    Related to my original thesis about Homosexuals in LDS theology needing women to get the priesthood first, here's an article from the D-News that's interesting:

    http://www.deseretnews.com/article/8...t-any-age.html

    On the face of it, there's nothing earth shattering here. But even discussing the topic is a change in tone, I would argue, and the questions that arise, combined with working through a strong adherence to faith, start to lay the foundation for change. Obviously not quick enough for Kate Kelly, but nonetheless, women can now give prayers in church, etc.
    Last edited by Ma'ake; 08-02-2015 at 09:16 AM.

  21. #171
    Taking the spotlight off Mormonism for a minute, it's interesting to see how gay marriage is starting to impact Christianity, over all. The Episcopalians announced they'll allow gay marriage in their churches, I would guess Presbyterians will be "next", or soon. This will alter the marketplace of ideas within Christianity, in the next few years.

    A co-worker's sibling is a Pentecostal minister, in Virginia, and the topic has stirred interesting discussions within their family. Essentially, the minister admits that while the Bible appeared to be very clear about justifying slavery, that was a case of humans mis-interpreting what God's meaning was, but on this issue there is no such confusion.

    I found a website called "Homosexuals for Jesus" that claims that Jesus never directly condemned homosexuality, while noting the previous views on slavery and how nobody today views the Bible as justification for slavery.

    I think in the next decade there will be a lot of parsing of the Bible on the issue, and given the unprecedented connectedness we now have, there will be similar reflection within Mormon theology.

    It could be that "evolved" understandings of homosexuality, including the benefit to gays in having marriage as an option, will impact the women and the priesthood issue. (Kind of the cart before the horse, but if you have a cart, you'd better be looking to get a horse.)

  22. #172
    Quote Originally Posted by Ma'ake View Post
    Taking the spotlight off Mormonism for a minute, it's interesting to see how gay marriage is starting to impact Christianity, over all. The Episcopalians announced they'll allow gay marriage in their churches, I would guess Presbyterians will be "next", or soon. This will alter the marketplace of ideas within Christianity, in the next few years.

    A co-worker's sibling is a Pentecostal minister, in Virginia, and the topic has stirred interesting discussions within their family. Essentially, the minister admits that while the Bible appeared to be very clear about justifying slavery, that was a case of humans mis-interpreting what God's meaning was, but on this issue there is no such confusion.

    I found a website called "Homosexuals for Jesus" that claims that Jesus never directly condemned homosexuality, while noting the previous views on slavery and how nobody today views the Bible as justification for slavery.

    I think in the next decade there will be a lot of parsing of the Bible on the issue, and given the unprecedented connectedness we now have, there will be similar reflection within Mormon theology.

    It could be that "evolved" understandings of homosexuality, including the benefit to gays in having marriage as an option, will impact the women and the priesthood issue. (Kind of the cart before the horse, but if you have a cart, you'd better be looking to get a horse.)
    Wouldn't bet on it. The Mormon Church has been pretty clear about their definition of family and I don't see that changing anytime soon. Some religions may morph to accommodate the trends of the day but I just don't see that happening with the LDS Church anytime soon.
    Last edited by #1 Utefan; 08-02-2015 at 10:11 AM.

  23. #173
    Quote Originally Posted by #1 Utefan View Post
    Wouldn't bet on it. The Mormon Church has been pretty clear about their definition of family and I don't see that changing anytime soon. Some religions may morph to accommodate the trends of the day but I just don't see that happening with the LDS Church anytime soon.
    I agree the LDS church is not the most "progressive", but modern revelation makes it quite nimble, compared to the Catholic Church, who took 500 years to apologize about Galileo.

    A friend puts it well - the Mormons can make a 45 degree course change at any time, eg, 1978, the Manifesto ditching polygamy. (I remember after the 1978 revelation, there was still "counsel" that people should marry within their own race, probably mostly to reduce potential trouble spots for young couples. So, 1978 wasn't a full 180 degree turn, at least arguably. Brigham said blacks wouldn't have the priesthood until after the Millennium, so 1978 was definitely a shock.)

    The Catholics can only change course about 3 degrees at a time, because they don't have a prophet.

    Here's a possible pathway within Mormonism: One of the controversial aspects of Joseph Smith was Polyandry, but there are clear instances where JS was getting sealed to women - and even men - where there was no conjugal relationship involved. Same with Brigham.

    There are 2 families on my street that have had multiple kids come out of the closet. (Yes, the water has been tested! lol) One of the families just had one of their gay sons marry his "partner", but with a twist: the partner has a very young daughter, from a failed attempt at the regular kind of marriage. To their great credit, this family posted on Facebook a big family photo, including the new son-in-law, and his daughter.

    I don't think it would be a massive reversal to bring back the JS-era temple sealings, eg, in the case of step-kids. (Can step-kids be sealed to both their original parent, and to a step-parent? If not, why not? Are there different types of sealings? From the days of JS, obviously there were, but I'm definitely not an expert.)

    Anyway, yeah, I'm not betting money on any of this, but as understandings evolve, a path could emerge. Just the evolution in understanding about homosexuality itself - among good, faithful Mormons - has been pretty remarkable.

    (EDIT - Ironically, "Internet Speculation" probably has an inhibiting effect on changes, it seems to me.)
    Last edited by Ma'ake; 08-02-2015 at 12:51 PM.

  24. #174
    Quote Originally Posted by Ma'ake View Post
    I agree the LDS church is not the most "progressive", but modern revelation makes it quite nimble, compared to the Catholic Church, who took 500 years to apologize about Galileo.

    A friend puts it well - the Mormons can make a 45 degree course change at any time, eg, 1978, the Manifesto ditching polygamy. (I remember after the 1978 revelation, there was still "counsel" that people should marry within their own race, probably mostly to reduce potential trouble spots for young couples. So, 1978 wasn't a full 180 degree turn, at least arguably. Brigham said blacks wouldn't have the priesthood until after the Millennium, so 1978 was definitely a shock.)

    The Catholics can only change course about 3 degrees at a time, because they don't have a prophet.

    Here's a possible pathway within Mormonism: One of the controversial aspects of Joseph Smith was Polyandry, but there are clear instances where JS was getting sealed to women - and even men - where there was no conjugal relationship involved. Same with Brigham.

    There are 2 families on my street that have had multiple kids come out of the closet. (Yes, the water has been tested! lol) One of the families just had one of their gay sons marry his "partner", but with a twist: the partner has a very young daughter, from a failed attempt at the regular kind of marriage. To their great credit, this family posted on Facebook a big family photo, including the new son-in-law, and his daughter.

    I don't think it would be a massive reversal to bring back the JS-era temple sealings, eg, in the case of step-kids. (Can step-kids be sealed to both their original parent, and to a step-parent? If not, why not? Are there different types of sealings? From the days of JS, obviously there were, but I'm definitely not an expert.)

    Anyway, yeah, I'm not betting money on any of this, but as understandings evolve, a path could emerge. Just the evolution in understanding about homosexuality itself - among good, faithful Mormons - has been pretty remarkable.

    (EDIT - Ironically, "Internet Speculation" probably has an inhibiting effect on changes, it seems to me.)
    Not going to happen. Lost in this entire discussion is the fact that the traditional family which is central to LDS doctrine, is necessary to procreate and have children which are also a key component of LDS families and doctrine.

    I think the reason the LDS Church no longer has LDS Social Services performing adoptions is because they saw where the gay marriage issue was going and did not want the government and courts trying to force them to adopt to gay couples. Gay activists in other areas of the country had already forced other Catholic and religiously affiliated adoption agencies to close by taking away government not for profit status (pretty odd the government played along when a group like Planned Parenthood still has that designation despite their controversial history and recent barbaric allegations of selling aborted baby and fetus organs).

    I have never seen the gay marriage push as comparable to the Civil Rights movement, race, and blacks receiving the Priesthood. You are born with an ethnicity and while I do think some gays and lesbiens are born with that predisposition, many others choose the lifestyle based on their life experiences. I also think the type of discrimation that bore any resemblance to what African Americans endured was largely well behind us. I don't recall having ever seen person or gay couple asked to sit at the back of a bus, put in segregated schools, or beaten by police or government authority figures. I am sure some will disagree and/or flame away but that is my opinion.
    Last edited by #1 Utefan; 08-02-2015 at 03:42 PM.

  25. #175
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726
    This will soon be seen (and already is seen) as the latest, most authoritative statement of the church's views on same-sex marriage.

    Disciples and the Defense of Marriage


    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  26. #176
    The more probable outcome will be a more general acceptance but a 'it'll all get sorted out in heaven' sort of a thing. We see that often with things like my best friend's wife who died from leukemia 12 years ago. She has since remarried another guy, have kids together and will likely spend 60 years together vs their just over a year. Does she remain sealed to my friend?

    As far as women getting ordained to he priesthood that will take as big of a doctrinal shift as homosexuality. People say there isn't doctrinal precedent to deny women the priesthood, but temple ordinance pretty clearly indicate priesthood ordination is necessary for the salvation of men. The church would have to say either the priesthood isn't necessary for salvation, or redo all previous temple ordinances for women live or vicarious.

    I don't see either happening but I can picture a sort of one off acceptance of homosexuality before I can see female ordination in my lifetime. On this issue my guess is societal norms will shift faster than the church will.

  27. #177
    Quote Originally Posted by Rocker Ute View Post
    On this issue my guess is societal norms will shift faster than the church will.
    I think this is definitely true, but I also think the LDS church has the ability to adjust much more quickly than most religions, which I view as a virtue.

    Actually, I don't think present day assertions that things will "never change" will be viewed too negative if/when things *do* change, because there have been plenty of pronouncements in the past that were pretty strong that fell by the wayside.

    - On Polygamy: "It is God's law and everlasting - we will always follow God's law over man's law". (paraphrasing)

    - Brigham's statements on blacks getting the priesthood

    - (Others I don't care to look up or even cite, they're really not that important.)

    I want to re-iterate that I'm no oracle or purveyor of infinite truth, either. Just observing and connecting the dots the best I can. The amount of good that comes from Mormonism (and most other religions) outweighs the bad, in my view.

  28. #178
    Quote Originally Posted by Scratch View Post
    I may be splitting hairs here, but God creates everyone as a sinner, with inherent sin wired into them. I certainly know that's the case with me.
    That's not true in Mormon theology. I think that Mormons view people as intrinsically divine yet intrinsically corruptible. I actually like that take better than the original sin one. I think it's the reason why Mormons are so fixated on this issue, because it speaks to an intrinsic "defect" rather than corruption by "choosing" to sin.

    Otherwise I find it incredibly perplexing that so many people here are so fixated on something that really shouldn't have such priority in their minds. At least this is the only way it made sense to me other than assuming it's a reaction formation phenomenon.

    Isn't it time to move along? Calling this board a Utah sports forum is like calling Brokeback Mountain a ranching movie. You have to ignore a lot of gay sex to get there.
    Last edited by jrj84105; 08-02-2015 at 06:12 PM.

  29. #179
    Quote Originally Posted by sancho View Post
    Why couldn't it be necessary for men and optional for women?

    I too feel that changes on gay marriage / female ordination are unlikely. The changes Maake mentions required no major changes in doctrine. Polygamy was always going to be a temporary thing according to the Book or Mormon, and there was never an official doctrinal reason for blacks and the priesthood. There are, however, clear doctrinal explanations for the LDS position on gay sealings. I guess doctrine regarding women and the priesthood is a little less clear.

    On the other hand, I don't pretend to know the mind of God. It's certainly possible that I am wrong about these things. He does move in mysterious ways.
    'It would be the first 'optional for some' saving ordinance I'm aware of.

  30. #180
    Quote Originally Posted by jrj84105 View Post
    Isn't it time to move along? Calling this board a Utah sports forum is like calling Brokeback Mountain a ranching movie. You have to ignore a lot of gay sex to get there.
    That's funny. Well done. lol.

    I think the reason people care is because everyone knows somebody who's gay, and the pivot in understanding, from thinking they must have made some horrendously bad choices, to now recognizing that many didn't choose that predicament, to possibly thinking they may achieve full parity, is fascinating, and compelling.

    (For me, personally, I can relate, because of my marriage and my bi-racial kids, and my memories when I was kid wondering what exactly black people had done wrong to deserve being on God's bad side.)

    Now that we're in August, there are bigger fish to fry, for sure.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •