The path for homosexuals in LDS theology

[sancho]

For example, let's take gay marriage. As an enlightened and rational society we might say, "If two people love each other, who are we to stand in the way, let them get married." And then we'd all celebrate. But then a rational person might step up and say, "Wait a minute, this is relatively new and truthfully we don't know either way whether this might have a long term effect on children who for millennia have been patented by a male and a female. Further study is required before we make a decision as a society..." and so we might then still be without this right... Not a perfect example but hopefully you get my (only) point.

I think what you described would be a society based on science, not reason.

For a system based only on reason, we would first have to establish agreed upon axioms. That's where the dream would begin and end.

[SeattleUte]

You might be the only person here who has read the givenses?

I read it under protest. There's a backstory. I swore off reading books on Mormonism, pro or con, a long time ago.

[Rocker Ute]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

I read it under protest. There's a backstory. I swore off reading books on Mormonism, pro or con, a long time ago.

I have a hunch that you are not in the Givens' intended audience.

[tooblue]

I have a hunch that you are not in the Givens' intended audience.

A one trick pony's gotta do what he's gotta do to maintain his story arc:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...rytelling.html

[Scorcho]

whencookiesscream-tumbler-3.jpg

[Rocker Ute]

I've always heard there are only two story lines:

"Boy leaves town" and "Someone new comes to town".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ma'ake]

Cougar Nation is smartin' right now, with the LGBT letter trying to dissuade the Big-12 from inviting them. Anger, defiance, dismay.

The orthodox BYU/LDS thinking is something along the lines of "if the world wants us to change to fit the current thought-stream, we should stay proudly independent". Understandable.

I see something else going on. The longtime Ute fan in me had to see how Cougarboard was reacting, and there was plenty of the predictable responses. But I saw another, albeit less prevalent thought expressed, which was basically:

Fan 1 - "Tom Holmoe is right, we never discriminate against anyone. Why can't they be more tolerant of our religious views?"

Fan 2 - "Actually, we do discriminate. Dating couples on BYU's campus can hold hands, kiss, etc. Gays can't".

If it was one of us Ute fans who pointed this out to them, it would be just another rivalry dig. Because this conversation was occurring between Y fans, education was occurring, in real time, ala "I never really thought it of that way, and I'm not going to admit that on a message board for the school that represents my church, but I see your point".

Will BYU change their honor code before the season starts? Of course not. Does this collective pain point facilitate and perhaps accelerate evolution in understanding? I think so.

[NorthwestUteFan]

Here is a relevant Twitter exchange between Riley 'Abs' Nelson, and a close friend mine:





To his credit, Riley retracted his tweet and apologized.

[tooblue]

Here is a relevant Twitter exchange between Riley 'Abs' Nelson, and a close friend mine:





To his credit, Riley retracted his tweet and apologized.

There's no defence for Nelson's tweet. It's beyond idiotic. Unfortunately, the included response to his tweet is equally ineffective in making a sincere, valid point. Primarily, due to hyperbole of the text, but also, inanely, due to summary insinuation that: "Mormons had it coming because they too (allegedly) made threats?" Does the person who wrote that response understand what he is advocating? Does any person or group, per this situation truly have it coming?

What is a tragedy, which has largely gone unnoticed, is the nature of the letter sent to the Big12 presidents. It is a not so thinly veiled threat, calculated in its intent to harm and punish. For groups, supposedly so desperate for dialogue and understanding that's unfortunate. But such is politics. (just imagine if a different track was taken—perhaps more remarkable things could've been achieved, greater than the state of Utah evolving LGBT rights protection laws etc.) It's a missed opportunity.

To be clear, my post here is not a defence of BYU, the honour code etc. Personally, I do not think BYU is getting an invite to the Big12, and it has nothing to do with the letter. It's much larger than that, and to be blunt it is bigotry of a type that will keep BYU out. And please don't insult by pretending it is anything more than that. No, I do not have a persecution complex. No, I am not a pessimist, nor am I dismayed. It just is what it is.

Of course, lastly, what is equally disgusting is the barely contained sense of glee with which a few on this board are discussing this. It's disappointing. But again, it's my own fault for thinking I would come here and find anything different. Now that's sad. Oh, well. Go Cougars! And I hope the Utes do well this year also (except on September 10).

[NorthwestUteFan]

Forgive my glee. I get excited when goodness and love triumphs over evil.


(P.S. Nice job. This is your best Poe troll yet)

[sancho]

and to be blunt it is bigotry of a type that will keep BYU out.

Of course, lastly, what is equally disgusting is the barely contained sense of glee with which a few on this board are discussing this. It's disappointing.

I agree with you. The bigotry of geography is the worst kind. The bigotry of wanting teams that have been successful is a close second.

Your second paragraph makes me wish I had shown a little more glee. The disappointment and disgust of an internet troll is usually a positive sign. I guess I'm saving my glee for the final verdict. I hope you still have a little disgust left for me by then.

[tooblue]

I agree with you. The bigotry of geography is the worst kind. The bigotry of wanting teams that have been successful is a close second.

Your second paragraph makes me wish I had shown a little more glee. The disappointment and disgust of an internet troll is usually a positive sign. I guess I'm saving my glee for the final verdict. I hope you still have a little disgust left for me by then.

A troll. LOL ... Dehumanizing and demonizing me will not bring you peace of mind for your schadenfreude. And for me, I'm not sure it's misfortune we're looking at here. That's why I'm not dismayed.

[tooblue]

Forgive my glee. I get excited when goodness and love triumphs over evil.


(P.S. Nice job. This is your best Poe troll yet)

When I post in the thread about BYU I can be accused of trolling. That's what sports fans of opposing teams do, hopefully always in good fun. Here, I'm not trolling.

[sancho]

Forgive my glee. I get excited when goodness and love triumphs over evil.


(P.S. Nice job. This is your best Poe troll yet)

Poe?

I assume you're taking about Utah football when you say goodness and love. If you are taking politics, you are way off. There's never been any love in politics.

[tooblue]

I know, I’m supposedly trolling. But maybe, in context to this particular thread, we should talk about this for a minute. Consider the following ‘what if’ for a moment; what if the LGBT groups had written a different type of letter. For example: “Hey, Big12. We see you are considering adding BYU to your league. It’s obvious we disagree greatly with the policies of an LDS church sponsored private school—specifically, their honor code and the potential hypocrisy in its enforcement on LGBT individuals who attend the school, or who could be on campus for a sporting event. Considering the LDS church's past willingness to come to the table to talk about these issues (see: landmark LGBT state of Utah legislation), this could be a great opportunity to start a sincere dialogue about BYU's policies. This could be the best way to possibly affect significant change that is to the best benefit of LGBT students and student athletes, starting with the newest member of the Big12. We would very much like to be a part of the dialogue, which could not only bring about change on BYU’s campus, but have far reaching effects on many other campuses across the country.”

Instead the groups advocated for the presidents to shun BYU. Because obviously, that works so well.

[sancho]

Instead the groups advocated for the presidents to shun BYU. Because obviously, that works so well.

When have you ever seen a political group attempt dialogue and compromise when they believe they are in position for total victory?

Like you said, it's better if BYU doesn't get in, so maybe they did you a favor.

[LA Ute]

When have you ever seen a political group attempt dialogue and compromise when they believe they are in position for total victory?

Yep. I see where the LGBT groups are coming from, my own thinking having evolved on these issues, but trying to punish people and groups over matters of conscience is wrong, IMO.

[UTEopia]

Yep. I see where the LGBT groups are coming from, my own thinking having evolved on these issues, but trying to punish people and groups over matters of conscience is wrong, IMO.

To many people the most important issue of conscience is that all people, regardless of orientation, be treated equally, so when an organization or institution punishes them by excluding them, they strike back. I've recently been reading a biography on Lincoln and it is interesting to read about all of the discord between the abolitionists and secessionists. Not only did they disagree in the political debates, but the disagreement often led members of the community to tar and feather, destroy property and kill members of the opposition. The matters of conscience ultimately led one group to attempt to leave the union and then to the most deadly war in US history.

[Rocker Ute]

To many people the most important issue of conscience is that all people, regardless of orientation, be treated equally, so when an organization or institution punishes them by excluding them, they strike back. I've recently been reading a biography on Lincoln and it is interesting to read about all of the discord between the abolitionists and secessionists. Not only did they disagree in the political debates, but the disagreement often led members of the community to tar and feather, destroy property and kill members of the opposition. The matters of conscience ultimately led one group to attempt to leave the union and then to the most deadly war in US history.

So aren't you kind of making LAs point that people are taking matters of conscience beyond that and trying to do each other harm? No matter though.

This can go in circles and circles and just results in escalations. I can't help but think about the only time the LDS church and the LGBT community made any sort of progress was when they say down together and began talking. Tooblue's hope that that the LGBT community should have taken a higher ground approach is naive, but now couldn't the church step up and say to them, "We've heard your concerns and we want to sit down together and talk..."

Seems to me an opportunity is being missed in a big way, and it isn't by the LGBT community, particularly when we are claiming to be disciples of Christ.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tooblue]

So aren't you kind of making LAs point that people are taking matters of conscience beyond that and trying to do each other harm? No matter though.

This can go in circles and circles and just results in escalations. I can't help but think about the only time the LDS church and the LGBT community made any sort of progress was when they say down together and began talking. Tooblue's hope that that the LGBT community should have taken a higher ground approach is naive, but now couldn't the church step up and say to them, "We've heard your concerns and we want to sit down together and talk..."

Seems to me an opportunity is being missed in a big way, and it isn't by the LGBT community, particularly when we are claiming to be disciples of Christ.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s not naivety. My position is informed by actual experience dealing with similar issues under different circumstances. There are more effective ways of tackling this issue. The LGBT groups in question, dropped the ball. And I have absolute faith the Church may do precisely what you suggest they could, because that is what they have done in the past (see: state of Utah landmark LGBT legislation). That’s why I am not dismayed.

So long as we are talking about naivety, I want to explain my point of view more thoroughly through a couple of interesting anecdotes. I’m an artist and designer. For many years I have worked closely with, taught, mentored and been mentored by numerous other artists and designers. Many of whom are gay, struggling with or exploring their sexuality, in addition to questioning and changing their gender identity. Interestingly, as a teacher I am—generally speaking and as happens frequently—the person many such students turn to for advice and understanding. Now that’s partly due to the fact I have administrative duties in addition to teaching duties. But it’s also due to the fact I am honest, direct and sincere.

In one instance I had a student named Pat. Yes, that was his actual name. During his graduating portfolio assessment, with a panel of professors—the culmination of three years of work—he fainted due to anxiety. Later, he came to me and explained: “I just can’t do this. I’m dealing with so much. I would be so much more comfortable presenting my work as a woman.” (note: he is 6'4")

“Please, present as a woman then. Be true to yourself. We genuinely care about you as a person, and we simply want to evaluate your work to confirm you are ready to compete in a competitive job market,” was my response. Given a second chance, Pat, as a competent artist and designer gave a great presentation, without fainting. Pat is now gainfully employed.

I have been blessed to teach and work with another student, who when first enrolled was Melissa. By the end of the first year, Melissa became Jason. By the beginning of the next year Jason became Melissa again. Two years later, Melissa was once again enrolled in one of my courses and unbeknownst to me was now ‘permanently’ Jason. I had not seen him in several months. At first he was angry with me because, I mistakenly called him Melissa. Without hesitation, I explained his anger was unacceptable and he should apologize: last time I spoke with him he was Melissa, not Jason, and he had given me no indication that he was now, again, Jason. He is still formally listed, legally, on the student roster as Melissa.

Later that day, Jason came to me with a dilemma: “Your one of the few people I trust. You are honest with me … which bathroom do you think I should be using—I don’t want to cause trouble, but I am confused.” I replied, “physically, Jason, you look like a woman. You best continue to use the woman’s bathroom.” And so he did.

This brings me to my last point, which could be considered in light of the recent controversies surrounding Target’s non gender specific store bathrooms and recent legislation in North Carolina. That incident I had with Jason wasn’t isolated. It has been and will continue to be an issue with a number of students. It had the potential to blow up on our campus. Myself and along with another administrator, in pressing the issue, wanted to avoid such a conflict. I actually live in a very conservative community, relatively speaking. There was a lot of conflict among senior admin and facilities managers. Our solution presented to them was simple. The logic goes like this: We have Men’s, Woman’s, Physically Challenged, and Faculty bathrooms. Why can’t we also have Transgender bathrooms? It’s worthwhile to consider. Senior admin and facilities looked at one another, and the very next summer it was done. We now have a variety of bathrooms, mostly in our area of the campus, students of all stripes can choose from.

Imagine, if Target, and legislators in North Carolina had acted similarly? Sometimes, conflict is good and necessary, especially in a democracy. Sometimes it is just due to stupidity. The LGBT groups acted stupidly.

[Moose]

Is it possible that pressures currently felt by BYU athletics to conform on homosexuality issues may be a catalyst to a change in doctrine? This question I think is better answered by those who are old enough to remember events in the 70's.

Is it possible that pressure felt by BYU from athletics and scheduling had a role in preparing church leaders for revelation in regards to race in 1978? I honestly don't know, I was born in the late 70's and have no recollection. Maybe it's impossible to know for sure, but for those who remember this era, were BYU athletics starting to suffer due these pressures? Were members feeling like they were being persecuted against because of their beliefs, or were they growing impatient with the church leadership for not catching up to most other Christian religions?

I had an argument with a girl who stated that she thought college sports were a big waste of time and money and that all sports provided were physical exercise for the participants, nothing else. She could accomplish the same by following an aerobics video from home. Needless to say, I disagreed. I pointed out that many of our best leaders in business and politics were college athletes and the skills they developed in athletics were a big part of what they accomplished. I never thought about possible influences on religion from athletics, but it seems possible.

[Moose]

Our solution presented to them was simple. The logic goes like this: We have Men’s, Woman’s, Physically Challenged, and Faculty bathrooms. Why can’t we also have Transgender bathrooms? It’s worthwhile to consider. Senior admin and facilities looked at one another, and the very next summer it was done. We now have a variety of bathrooms, mostly in our area of the campus, students of all stripes can choose from.

Imagine, if Target, and legislators in North Carolina had acted similarly? Sometimes, conflict is good and necessary, especially in a democracy. Sometimes it is just due to stupidity. The LGBT groups acted stupidly.

Have you ever installed a bathroom where there is not already plumbing in place to do so? It's a big deal, costs a lot of money, and takes a lot of work. If I had a small business, installing a third bathroom for transgender would be absolutely out of the question. I guess if you know there are always going to be several transgender people using the bathroom, okay. What needs to happen is no bathroom should be specified as male or female. Require stalls at every toilet for privacy. Done. The only contact between people in bathrooms should be at the sink, and conversations between men, women, transgender..anyone, at the sink, should not be a problem.

Back to the topic at hand, I'm not sure there was time for the LGBT groups to offer up a calm discussion about the honor code issues. They're under the impression that that the BIG XII is making a decision swiftly. It would have been nice had the BIG XII released a decision date, and LGBT and BYU could have hashed out differences. Maybe this will happen by 2024 when BYU will have its next shot at gaining conference admission.

[Rocker Ute]

It’s not naivety. My position is informed by actual experience dealing with similar issues under different circumstances. There are more effective ways of tackling this issue. The LGBT groups in question, dropped the ball. And I have absolute faith the Church may do precisely what you suggest they could, because that is what they have done in the past (see: state of Utah landmark LGBT legislation). .

I'm not saying you are naive about the issues I am saying it is naive to expect a group that is hurt by something to act calmly and diplomatically as you've described. That should be the role of the offender in my opinion.

For example, if I back into someone's car and they come out angry at me I shouldn't be surprised, nor should I demand that they approach me with a humble desire to reconcile. It would be nice, but shouldn't be expected. Instead it should be my role to attempt to make things right. Even more so for our shared faith. It doesn't mean they need to resolve all issues... on some they may not be able to.

So I find it strange that you require that of them. But the church can and should do something. Unlike you I am not sure they will, particularly for a matter as silly as football conferences. I don't think BYU sports matter to the brethren as much as BYU fans want to believe. I would however hope that they seek reconciliation because they should, not for admittance to an athletic conference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sancho]

There are more effective ways of tackling this issue. The LGBT groups in question, dropped the ball.

Effective meaning what? The letter writers got publicity, which they wanted. They will get even more publicity for their cause if BYU is not added to the big 12. Or, they may cause BYU to re-word some of the honor code. In either of those outcomes, their approach will have been very effective.

[tooblue]

Have you ever installed a bathroom where there is not already plumbing in place to do so? It's a big deal, costs a lot of money, and takes a lot of work. If I had a small business, installing a third bathroom for transgender would be absolutely out of the question. I guess if you know there are always going to be several transgender people using the bathroom, okay. What needs to happen is no bathroom should be specified as male or female. Require stalls at every toilet for privacy. Done. The only contact between people in bathrooms should be at the sink, and conversations between men, women, transgender..anyone, at the sink, should not be a problem.

Back to the topic at hand, I'm not sure there was time for the LGBT groups to offer up a calm discussion about the honor code issues. They're under the impression that that the BIG XII is making a decision swiftly. It would have been nice had the BIG XII released a decision date, and LGBT and BYU could have hashed out differences. Maybe this will happen by 2024 when BYU will have its next shot at gaining conference admission.

It wasn't cost effective, even for a large institution, to create the primary Transgender bathroom in my area (about 20 feet from my office). There was just too much infrastructure to account for new plumbing. The only thing facilities management could do was rebuild an existing bathroom designated for individuals with physical challenges. At first several LGBT individuals balked at the shared purpose of the facility. A couple of them actually stated they were offended to be compared to and lumped in with persons with disabilities.

They were encouraged to think more carefully about their position: were they saying they are superior to, and deserve special consideration beyond what persons with physical challenges deserve? Considering every existing male and female bathroom on campus, by law, already has stalls designed for wheel chair access. After really thinking about it for a while, there were no more complaints, and there hasn't been further conflict (for several years now).

But that's the type of tone deafness I'm talking about—it's appalling. What are these LGBT groups really looking for? What's more, by law (as far as I know) all small businesses if they offer a bathroom to customers that bathroom must be accessible. In fact, in many places there already are family bathrooms in addition to male and female bathrooms. There are always cost effective solutions to every situation.

As a person with irritable bowl, I use a lot of public bathrooms. I've spent a lot of time in Europe. In many places you have to pay to use a toilet, which is both a good and bad thing. But the thing I like about Europe, is the stalls are often completely enclosed floor to ceiling, which makes so much more sense than the way stalls are built in North America. Unfortunately, I've thought about this a lot. There's always a good, cost effective solution to consider.

------ this probably belongs in the football forum -------

Also, one caveat on BYU to the Big12. Just because I don't think they will get an invite doesn't mean they won't. If BYU isn't invited, it's a clear sign Oklahoma and Texas will bolt sooner rather than later, and then the Big12 will fold without a good landing spot for the rest of its teams. Which is what I think is going to happen. The best way to ensure continued profitable viability of the conference is to start by adding BYU. Diluting the conference with lessor teams leads to ruin. That is what the PAC12 is discovering (I'm not trolling).

The nature of GOR is changing much more rapidly than is anticipated. Especially, with the onslaught of digital networks. ESPN shows all the signs of a dying empire. FOX is ill-equipped to fill the void because they are too invested in the old network models. Facebook, Google, Apple and Netflix are getting in on the distribution of live sporting events. They have resources the networks can only dream of. How many more NFL games this year will be broadcast via Twitter? I have't watched a single Olympic event this year on network tv. HBO is sitting pretty all on it's own. Netflix original content is proliferating at a remarkable rate.

How screwed are you in the new landscape if all you have to sell in the evolving digital market is the Utah football brand? Your own conference can't sell that; why isn't the PAC12 network on Direct TV yet? This issue isn't going to wait for 2024. I've been on these message boards a long time. Way back when, on some other forum I suggested Apple had changed the world with the release of the iPhone etc. I was summarily mocked and laughed at. Go ahead mock me now.

[Moose]

As a person with irritable bowl, I use a lot of public bathrooms.

You irritable bowel people are what I worry about when I go to a public restroom. Worry about my kids being exposed to that too. Disgusting.

[tooblue]

I'm not saying you are naive about the issues I am saying it is naive to expect a group that is hurt by something to act calmly and diplomatically as you've described. That should be the role of the offender in my opinion.

For example, if I back into someone's car and they come out angry at me I shouldn't be surprised, nor should I demand that they approach me with a humble desire to reconcile. It would be nice, but shouldn't be expected. Instead it should be my role to attempt to make things right. Even more so for our shared faith. It doesn't mean they need to resolve all issues... on some they may not be able to.

So I find it strange that you require that of them. But the church can and should do something. Unlike you I am not sure they will, particularly for a matter as silly as football conferences. I don't think BYU sports matter to the brethren as much as BYU fans want to believe. I would however hope that they seek reconciliation because they should, not for admittance to an athletic conference.

Effective meaning what? The letter writers got publicity, which they wanted. They will get even more publicity for their cause if BYU is not added to the big 12. Or, they may cause BYU to re-word some of the honor code. In either of those outcomes, their approach will have been very effective.

The story has already been flushed through the news cycle. If may resurface again if BYU isn't invited, but not likely, at least not in a positive way or as anything more than a footnote. Consider how great similar actions taken were in taking down Chick-fi-a. Actually, they had no effect at all.

The only thing the actions will be effective at, is the continued polarization of two separate factions. When in fact the LGBT group could've started a much more meaningful dialogue now. Yes, that's what I expect of them—to learn from their past actions. Because, that is supposedly what they want. Unless of course it's not. Which makes one wonder, what do they really want? I actually don't think they know, hence their stupidity.

BYU may change some wording, but that's far less likely if they are not invited into the conference. Precisely, because I agree with Rocker that the brethren don't care all that much about BYU sports—not to the extent the LGBT groups are likely banking on, or fans could ever hope. I could be wrong. Wouldn't be the first time. That's just the way I see it.

[tooblue]

You irritable bowel people are what I worry about when I go to a public restroom. Worry about my kids being exposed to that too. Disgusting.

Are you kidding me? We are 1billion times cleaner than your average idiot, precisely because we spend a lot of time on the toilet. I carry disinfectant and cleaning supplies with me everywhere I go because of the morons who can't be bothered to lift a seat to pee, despite the presence of urinals. And there is nothing worse than those who wipe their crap everywhere like it's play doe or paint. When I'm done in a stall, it's cleaned because I had to use it.

[sancho]

Also, one caveat on BYU to the Big12. Just because I don't think they will get an invite doesn't mean they won't. If BYU isn't invited, it's a clear sign Oklahoma and Texas will bolt sooner rather than later, and then the Big12 will fold without a good landing spot for the rest of its teams. Which is what I think is going to happen. The best way to ensure continued profitable viability of the conference is to start by adding BYU. Diluting the conference with lessor teams leads to ruin. That is what the PAC12 is discovering (I'm not trolling).

This paragraph makes no sense. The fates of UT and OU are not tied to BYU in any way.

Diluting the conference with lessor teams is something the big 12 has already apparently decided to do. BYU is on that list of lessor teams.