Page 28 of 28 FirstFirst ... 182425262728
Results 811 to 819 of 819

Thread: The path for homosexuals in LDS theology

  1. #811
    If you say you will not build a website of any sort for a particular gay person, then you are discriminating and at risk. But if you don't do porn of any kind for any client, and you would happily make a car repair or scrapbooking or travel website for the same gay client, then you are being consistent and not individually discriminatory.

    The curious thing about this case is the attorneys appear to head toward calling the baker's wedding cakes a figure of 'art', and thus an act of 'speech'. But then where do you draw the line at what is 'art'? Where in the process does it become art? There is a broad range of steps between dumping the flour into the mixing bowl, whipping the eggs, lining up the rounds, laying on a fondant, spooging the roses and ivy decorations from a frosting gun, and placing the two grooms on top.

    That point in time is important because the baker in the case will be required to do everything up to that point for all pairs of clients, whether or not they have an even number of penises (zero being an even number in this case...).

  2. #812
    Quote Originally Posted by Rocker Ute View Post
    Here is a serious question: my business that does marketing and websites has always had a policy that we donít do certain types of sites, among them for illegal activities (of course), gambling, pornography and MLMs among others. Most of those things are based off my principles and religious beliefs. Presuming the Supreme Court sides with previous decisions against the baker would that mean I would be exposing myself to liability if someone wanted to build a gay porn site on my platform and I didnít allow it?

    Or am I protected because I donít allow any of that kind of activity?

    And no Iím not being facetious, Iím honestly curious (and no I donít expect it to happen).

    In the same, if the baker says, ďAs a gay person you are welcome in my shop and Iíll serve you for everything but that event...Ē is he not doing essentially the same thing as me?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I love that MLMs get lumped in with porn, gambling, and illegal activities. I couldn't agree more!

  3. #813
    Quote Originally Posted by UtahsMrSports View Post
    I love that MLMs get lumped in with porn, gambling, and illegal activities. I couldn't agree more!
    Well interestingly the way my platform works has some functionality for real estate brokerages that allows individual agents to have their own websites yet the core content and control is retained by the brokerage. That is a functionality that is really nice for MLMs because you could potentially do the same thing for the downline. I've been approached many times by budding MLMs who wanted to do that and I've politely declined stating that I didn't believe our business models were a good match for each other. I wouldn't be able to look myself in the mirror knowing I had supported that garbage.

  4. #814
    Quote Originally Posted by Rocker Ute View Post
    Here is a serious question: my business that does marketing and websites has always had a policy that we donít do certain types of sites, among them for illegal activities (of course), gambling, pornography and MLMs among others. Most of those things are based off my principles and religious beliefs. Presuming the Supreme Court sides with previous decisions against the baker would that mean I would be exposing myself to liability if someone wanted to build a gay porn site on my platform and I didnít allow it?

    Or am I protected because I donít allow any of that kind of activity?

    And no Iím not being facetious, Iím honestly curious (and no I donít expect it to happen).

    In the same, if the baker says, ďAs a gay person you are welcome in my shop and Iíll serve you for everything but that event...Ē is he not doing essentially the same thing as me?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    i would think you are okay because none of the activities you described are practiced solely by people of a protected class, i.e., race, nationality, religion, gender, sexual orientation. In the Baker case, the Baker would provide products to a gay person, other than a wedding cake based on his belief on marriage. This makes this case very difficult to decide and will allow the court to reach a very narrow ruling. I like the artistic expression argument because in this case the Baker does provide products for gay people, other than wedding cakes. The court could rule in favor of the Baker without creating a basis for someone to deny services to all gay people.

  5. #815
    Handsome Boy Graduate mpfunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah
    Posts
    1,493
    Nelson as president selects Oaks as first counselor.

    Can I collect my swish now that there is no place in the LDS church of LDS theology for LGBTQ individuals?
    So I said to David Eckstein, "You promised me, Eckstein, that if I followed you, you would walk with me always. But I noticed that during the most trying periods of my life, there have only been one set of prints in the sand. Why, when I have needed you most, have you not been there for me?" David Eckstein replied, "Because my little legs had gotten tired, and you were carrying me." And I looked down and saw that I was still carrying David Eckstein.
    --fjm.com

  6. #816
    Quote Originally Posted by mpfunk View Post
    Nelson as president selects Oaks as first counselor.

    Can I collect my swish now that there is no place in the LDS church of LDS theology for LGBTQ individuals?
    I don't understand how this changes LDS theology related to LGBTQ individuals.

  7. #817
    When asked how the First Presidency plans to approach LGBTQ issues, President Nelson replied that God loves His children and wants them to have joy.

    ďWe know that there are challenges with the commandments of God; challenges to be worthy [and] to enter His holy presence when weíre through with this mortal experience.

    ďWeíre trying to help people find happiness and joy in this life and prepare for great possibilities in the world ahead.Ē

    Because of Godís love, He has given His children commandments, added President Oaks. There is the love of the Lord ó and the law of the Lord.

    ďHe has given us a plan to achieve the highest blessings He has for His children. As leaders of the Church, we have the responsibility to teach love and also teach the commandments of God and the highest destination that He has prescribed for His children, all of which is embodied in the plan of salvation.Ē


    https://www.deseretnews.com/article/...erenceNew.html


    "It'd be nice to please everyone but I thought it would be more interesting to have a point of view." -- Oscar Levant

  8. #818
    Here's a pothole for many Mormons, from the new prophet: https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2018...n-millennials/

    And below is a response in the forums, from somebody named "JustChris1976". (I think this is why some Mormons felt like Uchdorf got the shaft in the recent transition).

    What a joke! I'm sick an tired of being respectful, when old men, who haven't even tried to understand, condemn others.MISTER Nelson, I did not choose to be exclusively attracted to males. It was always just this way. Before I had even reached your "age of accountability" I was aware of the way I felt about other boys my age.As I got older, I tried, and tried, and cried as I begged, in prayer, for God to "fix me." I served an honorable two-year mission, hoping that God would turn my head for my sacrifice.After I got home, I still felt exactly the same as ever about my sexuality. It was then that I realized that I'd had my answer all along:There's nothing wrong with me. I'm not in need of redemption. I'm a moral, kind person who works hard to love others, especially my partner of TEN YEARS.Let's make a deal - You stay out of my bedroom, and I'll stay out of your silly, man-made church.

  9. #819
    Quote Originally Posted by Ma'ake View Post
    Here's a pothole for many Mormons, from the new prophet: https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2018...n-millennials/

    And below is a response in the forums, from somebody named "JustChris1976". (I think this is why some Mormons felt like Uchdorf got the shaft in the recent transition).

    What a joke! I'm sick an tired of being respectful, when old men, who haven't even tried to understand, condemn others.MISTER Nelson, I did not choose to be exclusively attracted to males. It was always just this way. Before I had even reached your "age of accountability" I was aware of the way I felt about other boys my age.As I got older, I tried, and tried, and cried as I begged, in prayer, for God to "fix me." I served an honorable two-year mission, hoping that God would turn my head for my sacrifice.After I got home, I still felt exactly the same as ever about my sexuality. It was then that I realized that I'd had my answer all along:There's nothing wrong with me. I'm not in need of redemption. I'm a moral, kind person who works hard to love others, especially my partner of TEN YEARS.Let's make a deal - You stay out of my bedroom, and I'll stay out of your silly, man-made church.
    My son gives some advice to his LGBTQ friends who get upset over what Mormon leaders say. Stop reading and listening to it. The poster ends his statement with "you stay out of my bedroom and I'll stay our of your silly, man-made church." It is obvious the poster refuses to do so.

    As for the statement that made him upset. The LDS Church is not going to change its doctrine when it comes to marriage or same gender, sexual relationships anymore than it is going to change its doctrine on adultery or pre-marital sex. I don't expect the LDS Church to tell me that it is okay if I want to go out and commit adultery because I happen to love someone who is not my spouse. Why do people continue to expect the LDS Church to say that it is okay to engage in same gender, sexual relationships?

Posting Permissions

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