"We feel that there are some places where there is a difference between what
the church has said and what it is doing. We want to be able to talk about
that."In the LDS Church, there is God and God's prophet.
The two can't control the actions of the membership of the church and
critics of the church (most often being former members) often like to disagree
with how God or His prophet is "running the show". Some want the LDS
Church to change its core doctrine (which can't happen). Others want the
LDS Church to more swiftly punish members who 'misbehave'. I have
heard calls for excommunicating leaders and members over the smallest of general
complaints before.In my experience, I have witnessed many persons
misbehave very seriously, make false and inappropriate accusations of others,
and react with hatred to statements of loving concern- statements that while
including no inappropriate or ill-willed remarks, were accused of such. I have
seen people willingly choose to be offended where no offensive act existed- then
blame the church in hatred.---There is equally a
difference in what is often accused, and what the church/members is doing.
@voice of reasonwhat you say is true as far as it goes but I also know
that sometimes the church and or one of its members actually is offensive and/or
does act poorly. My experience with you in particular is that you are very quick
to lay down very offensive comments then turn around and even more quickly take
spring street,I'm not perfect and I often admit it. I often
apologize if I over-step in my comments and I've learned to do it less over
time. I think we all share in that, otherwise no one would ever argue. I
don't appreciate your criticism of me at all. The most offensive of my
comments are still only ever reactionary to others who are criticizing the LDS
Church unjustly. Note that it is still in defense.It isn't
right to judge others. Perhaps I have offended in my remarks, but it
wouldn't have ever happened had people not been inappropriately attacking
the LDS Church to begin with.I'm not claiming I'm always
right and I apologize every last time I truly believe I've said something
inappropriate. But I don't take offense to other opinions. I take offense
when people don't think I have a right to express my own opinions as freely
as they can their own.I'm truly sorry if I've offended
you, but my actions say nothing about the truthfulness or appropriateness of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Period.
The Church won't change its doctrine and Evergreen won't change
it's agenda. I don't know where we go from there. The Church will
always be kind and loving, but it won't condone the behavior or agenda of
these pro-gay groups. I don't know what else can be said.
I know there's a lot of concern from the LGBT community about so-called
"ex-gay" organizations, and from what I've heard about Evergreen,
they certainly sound like an "ex-gay" organization. From what I
understand about church doctrine, having gay feelings is not a sin, only acting
on those feelings, but the whole mission of Evergreen from what I understand is
to supposedly change those gay feelings. On the other hand, the only other LGBT
organization that's connected with Mormonism is Affirmation, who sounds
like their objective is to get the church to change doctrine. So it sounds like
there's really no "middle ground" organization that demands neither
a change in doctrine nor any sort of "reparative[sp?] therapy."
Cats: it's changed many times before.
The issue comes down to the popular statement: Love the sinner, but hate the
sin. The church has room for improvement in teaching members how to do this.
It requires a certain firmness to your own faith to be open and accepting of
others who think and act differently than you.I have friends and
colleagues that are Homosexual (I don't use the word "gay" as that
means "happy") and we get along just fine. In my experience, many are
more loving and less judgmental than I am and have a different set of strengths
and weaknesses. Who has the greater sin? I'm glad I'm not the judge
because I'm far from perfect. And it doesnt matter who has the greater sin
anyways - we all need saving grace.I'm still learning how to
love everyone for who they are and accept them as a whole person- good and bad.
I believe that's what the Savior would do.
@Voice of reasonNo one has ever tried to silence you and I have never once
seen you apologize for anything. You are anything but a victim.
elarue,"So it sounds like there's really no "middle
ground" organization"That is because there is really no such
thing as a "middle ground" regarding what is moral. The question of
morality is irreconcilable, as plainly evidenced by asking someone to compromise
with a murderer. The dichotomy is inherent to what the meaning of
"moral" or "right" is.The only plausible compromise
is choice, by choosing to agree on certain common principles- two people can
compromise in sacrificing their own beliefs for the sake of peace.The fundamental problem is that liberals aren't arguing for compromise or
democracy but a "right" to state recognition- a "right" to what
we as a whole own. They take our votes away in favor of their literal dictating
of their morality, disregarding all other opinions. The LDS membership
isn't infringing freedom, just not recognizing gay marriage choices as
moral while allowing choice. This is a peaceful position. The LDS Church has
even promoted equal treatment, just not equal moral recognition.If
anything, just as many owe apologies to the LDS Church leadership for libel,
hatred, and violence. Sure, members have made mistakes- but the LDS Church has
given no offense.
@huggyface"Love the sinner, but hate the sin."And that
is a troublesome position to handle right since it often appears to come across
as hate. Consider that a lot of evangelicals who call the LDS church a cult
probably would say that they don't hate mormons... they hate mormonism and
consider that lifestyle choice to be endangering the standing in heaven of
mormons. Now LDS members can react to that in a variety of ways, similarly,
LGBTs would response to similar statements about hating homosexuality and not
homosexuals in a variety of ways.
@a voice of reason"The fundamental problem is that liberals
aren't arguing for compromise "I don't see
conservatives offering compromise. Utah pre-emptively banned civil unions too,
as well as many other states.
@a voice of reason The LDS church goes beyond not recognizing it is
moral and actively work to prevent gay marriage which is a civil not religious
contract and do so through campaigns of miss information and surrogate such as
yourself. Aggressively oppressing others rights is anything but peaceful.
@voice of reason you are not required to appreciate my criticism of
you thats fine but I think it is more then fair. I to have yet to ever see you
apologies for any of the very offensive things you say on these threads. As far
as the LDS church is concerned their efforts to actively work to keep some
citizens for being full members of society despite no evidence that allowing
them to do so will cause any harm. The LDS church has also proven time and again
they are not approve spreading miss information about such members of our
society. Active suppression of others through the use of the force of law is not
spring street,I apologized in my last comment and again, I apologize
now. I did include that I feel I am typically heated in response to arguments
instead of my being on the offense. It has happened and I admit that, but I do
feel you are dramatizing your account of my commentary.Furthermore,
I have apologized several times on here and I will say yet again that my
comments are forever available on this site to stand as evidence of it.The next time there is an article where I comment, you have my full permission
to quote and recount all of the most offensive things I've ever put on
here. I will more than willingly apologize for them and in sincerity. I have
never claimed to be perfectly right or innocent- only that my imperfections (and
others) say nothing about the LDS Church and that those criticizing my opinions,
other's opinions, or the LDS Church's opinions are not exempt from the
same judgement and have wrongfully been offensive all the same.I'm not sorry for what I believe, what I know, and what I hold as
reasonable. For my mistakes/imperfections I absolutely apologize.
Not to pile on, but when did "Voice of Reason" become responsible for
defending the Church? They have a PR department that can handle that just fine.
As a faithful member, you've been asked to share your testimony of the
Gospel and the Church, not to accuse others of spreading libel, etc. or
suggesting the Church could and should take legal action against others. It is
not desired by the Church that you declare yourself a quasi-spokesman/woman to
defend the Church against attacks, and certainly not to place people in groups
and then attempt to defame them as you did with the term "liberals."
There are those who by the definition of liberal are in the leadership of the
Church, not to mention throughout the membership worldwide. With that in mind,
you might consider how to more appropriately phrase your comments if you wish to
continue to claim your strong representation to the Church. Absent that, a
disclaimer stating that you don't represent my views, would be
appreciated.The Church should meet with groups like this. It
fosters constructive dialogue and encourages respect among those of differing
opinions. Something more on this board could emulate.
@voice of reason "The next time there is an article where I
comment, you have my full permission to quote and recount all of the most
offensive things I've ever put on here. I will more than willingly
apologize for them and in sincerity."How about you start with
your 12:17 comments where you attempt to draw parallels between being gay and
being a murder. Do you really think murder is a fair comparison? could you see
why that maybe offensive?
Church officials are meeting with the 'SoulForce' group? I wonder if
they ever meet with the rank and file members to see how WE feel about the
Church's increasing tolerance for homosexual lifestyles.
voice of reason: "[Liberals] take our votes away in favor of their literal
dictating of their morality, disregarding all other opinions. The LDS membership
isn't infringing freedom, just not recognizing gay marriage choices as
moral while allowing choice."There are several Christian
denominations that have no problem with gay marriage and do perform same-sex
marriages where legal. The LDS Church's active promotion (directly or
through its membership) of California's Prop 8 and other similar political
efforts to keep gay marriage illegal seems very much to me to be a
"dictating of their morality, disregarding all other opinions" and an
infringement on freedom. Those other denominations are being prevented by law
from being able to freely exercise their religious beliefs. Is this any less a
"war on religion" than the insurance contraceptive mandate?As to the news item itself, I see this as a positive step on the part of the
church, but it has been a very long time coming and is a very small step.
Still, coupled with the non-opposition to LGBT antidiscrimination ordinances,
there are signs of hope. Supertankers don't turn on a dime.
@the walker maybe they are not interested in what you think.
George: The comparision the Voice of Reason uses between Homosexuality and
murder is quite justified. Next to murder, sexual sin is the most grievious.
This destroys societies, families and etc. So yes his comparision is quite note
@bill in nebraska after many many years of this debate both in the public
forum and the court of law not one person has been able to present one valid
shred of evidence to support your claim that gays and gay marriage have or will
do any of the thing you claim. does any of the things you claim meaning not
only is his comparison not note worthy but your claims only add to the pile of
false and erroneous claims by those that appose gay marriage and gay rights.
Bill, maybe I misunderstood, but it sounded like you just told the members of
the Seventy that what they do is meaningless. Might want to rethink that seeing
as they have a lot more to do with the daily running of the Church than the FOP
and Q12...something Boyd K. Packer has repeatedly said is one of the
accomplishments he's most proud of.
Voice of Reason, you sound reasonable to me. Keep up the good work.
Claudio: If that is what you read that was not my intent. However, it is quite
revealing when it stated that none of the Church Leadership was there. That
leadership is First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve. The Quorum of the
Seventy will act and do things that are given to them on a basis by the
Twelve.George, evidently you've never studied the History of
the World. Many of the decading empires through history have been destroyed
from within. Many because of their own morality. The Bible and the Book of
Mormon are quite clear on this. Just because some theologians and scientists
try to prove otherwise, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Sodom and
Gomorrah were destroyed because of their wickedness. This country as a whole is
still protected but as we go further down the road of immorality and the
decadence of the family, yes it is opening itself to the same destruction.
The Walker said: "I wonder if they ever meet with the rank and file members
to see how WE feel about the Church's increasing tolerance for homosexual
lifestyles."If you are a member of the Church, then you clearly
do not understand how the Church operates. It is the Church of JESUS CHRIST. He
stands at the head of it. He directs the Church (members), not the other way
@Bill in Nebraska;What you clearly don't understand that what
your church thinks about same-sex marriages only applies within your church.
You and your church have no business fighting against the civil
equality of same-sex couples outside your church. Your "Proclamation"
applies ONLY to Mormons. Nobody else needs to follow it. Nobody.We
are not obligated to follow your beliefs in the same way that you are not
obligated to follow ours, meaning that you don't need to have a same-sex
marriage if you don't want one. Likewise, you have absolutely no business
telling non-Mormons what they can and can not do outside the walls of your
Thanks, Ernest. Maybe those who say the church won't change its doctrine
only mean the issue o homosexuals, because the church doctrine has certainly
"changed" for other issues. And I'll bet one day it will change
for this issue also, but not until they are the "last church standing"
so to speak.
Bill in NE: You failed to respond to any of the substance of my original post.
Voice of Reason had claimed that the LDS were not "imfringing freedom"
and were "allowing choice" vis-a-vis gays. Ironically (or incredibly)
VOR maintained that liberals were the ones infringing freedom and limiting
choice. I pointed out that there are churches (mainline ones, at that) that
accept homosexuality and gay marriage as perfectly moral and that political
eforts by LDS were preventing those churches from acting freely within their
doctrine. The LDS church is perfectly within its rights to engage politically
on issues it finds important, but for supporters to say that it unequivocally
promoting religious freedom by doing so when it is curtailing the freedom of
other churches to act according to their faith is simply incorrect.
Bill in NE: "Next to murder, sexual sin is the most grievious..."Yet the game is rigged. When sin is defined as sex outside of marriage,
but the opportunity for marriage is denied to some, then those people never have
a chance to avoid sin. Anything they do is sin because they can never get the
special exemption that marriage provides.Ironically, by denying gays
the chance to marry, defenders of "virtue" only increase the social
pathologies like STD's and promiscuity that sexual behavior codes (like the
concept of sin) are intended to prevent. By stigmatizing homosexuality and
legally discouraging gays from forming stable, longterm, committed monogamous
relationships (i.e. marriage), you are guaranteeing that gays will sneak out to
the bars, bathhouses, and alleys, have multiple partners, or enter into sham
hetero marriages (which are bound to fail and are unfair to the spouses). If
you think homosexuality is wrong because of HIV,hepatitis, high suicide rates,
or the hidden subculture, then work to create social institutions that
incentivize monogamy-- in a word, support gay marriage. If you think
homosexuality is wrong because of Leviticus, then I hope you never eat bacon or
wear wool/cotton blends.
Lagomorph, we believe homosexual acts are wrong because God, Jehovah, Jesus
Christ said homosexual acts are wrong, a sin, an abomination. For those of us
who have testimonies of the reality of God and His teachings, that's the
end of the discussion. It was, once more, reiterated in The Family: A
Proclamation to the World.There is absolutely nothing than
anyone--gay or straight--can say that makes it okay.
Though not Mormon, I support the Mormons 100% in their right to speak out
against what is wrong.If they feel acting on gay feelings is wrong -
speak up, keep up the good work Mormons!
@voice of no reasonThe "church" has changed core doctrine on
many occasions. Word of Wisdom, Plural marriage, priesthood eligibility to name
a few, so it does happen.
Sneaky Jimmy, the Word of Wisdom was not "changed" it was introduced, as
was plural marriage. And plural marriage was suspended (not changed), it will be
re-instituted when the people are ready to live the higher law, as was the
Melchizedek priesthood. Priesthood eligibility was not changed by the
"church," it was opened to all worthy males by Jesus Christ.Homosexuality goes against the most fundamental part of the Plan of
Salvation--to raise up families, e.g., father, mother, and children, all which
may be led to exaltation.
@Cinefan;Please explain why those who don't believe as you do
must follow the dictates of your god? Please. I thought that the
Constitution granted ALL Citizens the right to worship as they would, not just
the Mormons or other "Christian" religions.You have the
right to follow your Proclamation. You. Nobody else has to, or is obligated in
any way by your "proclamation".
Without coming to the defense of voice of reason, which I seriously doubt they
need much help in that regard.I wish springstreet and claudio would re
read their own comments. claudio accuses someone for assuming the role of
defending the church, then in his next comment pretends to speak for the church
about it's policies for members' behavior.I see one here trying
to be civil and others trying to pick apart someone's words.Which
could be seen as looking for fault or finding offense.The fact that we
each have strong feelings on this subject in particular means that we
respectfully allow another to have an opinion and not expect them to agree with
@ClaudioNo one said the church should do anything different. But I
do agree with Voice that if anyone should be expecting the other side to change
or apologize... it shouldn't be gays expecting the church to consider
changing but the other way around. After the threats, terrorist acts against the
church, and yeah I'd even say libel (if you saw one of their
commercials)... then there is need for many to humble themselves and apologize.
The only thing anyone needs to ever do is repent and live right. I don't
see the church doing anything to hurt that, so no offense but what's your
@GeorgeBill in NE is right. Being that the two are sins they already
are parallel. They might have very different results and one of the consequences
is definitely more grievous, but if it is wrong it is wrong. I don't treat
gays like murderers. But I show gays respect. I even show murderers respect.
That's what it means to not judge people. The people not showing respect
need to look in a mirror, cause so far all I see is people saying offensive
things about a religion just for saying what it believes.I respect
your disagreement, and I mean you respect. I bet you're even a pretty swell
guy, but I don't think it's offensive just to take a gander at whether
something is acceptable and give your opinion about it. America is a diverse
country with different beliefs. Sometimes yours won't win out in the end.
Why is that such a problem for everyone? No one's rights are being taken
away. Life, liberty, property... gays are already free and the church isn't
trying to take that away. Its trying to encourage citizens to value what's
Cinefan: "For those of us who have testimonies of the reality of God and
His teachings, that's the end of the discussion."As
RanchHand asked, what of those who do not share your testimony (a testimony that
is held by a distinct minority in the US and the world)? Why is YOUR belief the
only one that matters? Why should Jews, Muslims, Roman Catholics, Protestants,
Pastafarians, agnostics, etc. be bound in civil law by the standards of the LDS
Family Proclamation?"Homosexuality goes against the most
fundamental part of the Plan of Salvation--to raise up families..."About 30% of gay households have children, either through previous straight
marriages, artificial insemination, surrogacy, or adoption-- all methods that
are routinely used by straight couples to isssue children. They are families.
Would you withhold salvation from these children by preventing them from having
married parents and a "real" family? That seems unspeakably cruel."...the Word of Wisdom was not "changed" it was
introduced..."Changed, suspended, introduced... All semantic
hair-splitting and sophistry. Supporters of Romney have bent over backwards to
distance his campaign (and his church) from polygamy. Are you saying
they're wrong and the evangelical critics are right?
@cinefanWow, interesting "Spin". The truth shall set you
free. Read about the various interpretations of the Word of Wisdom through
church history. It changed many times. Plural marriage was "suspended"?
Please read the BofM concerning marriage. Also, please explain how an African
American was eligible for the priesthood prior to 1978. Lastly, if homosexuality
goes against God's plan why does he allow children to be born with
attraction to the same sex? Please watch "Modern Family". The gay couple
seem to be doing a good job of raising up a family.
@Lagomorph"All semantic hair-splitting and sophistry."Here's a nice comparison. God commands man to "cut down this
tree". Man says "sorry God but I got lazy and forgot to do it. Plus that
Satan guy told me not to". God commands "Okay, now you must cut down
these two trees instead but only the cherry trees."It's
pretty simple. Man was the factor of change. God may require more or less of us,
may command one thing then revoke it in another breath. But God doesn't
change. You can call it sophistry, but then by your own way of thinking so is
everyone else. You don't think we could apply that analogy to anyone else?
It can apply to parenting and a million other examples.Just cause
you want to label other people as sophists, doesn't make it true. Fact is,
your own arguments are showing far more flaws than the religion you seem to
oppose so much.
Re: Sneaky Jimmy....why does he (God) allow children to be born with
attraction to the same sex?"That assertion opens the door to a
multitude of possible questions. Why does God allow people to be born with
sexual attraction to children? Why does god allow people to be born with the
desire to murder? Why does God allow people to be born with no malice or hatred
toward their fellow man at all? Why does God allow some people to be born with
exceptional intellence? Why does God allow people to be born with disabilities.
Ect. ect. ect. I'd say that there is a lot of stuff, good and bad, that
God allows. You can't judge peoples actions on just the fact that God
allowed it. It is the old standard principle of Free Agency at work.
Lagomorph, homosexual actions are a sin, period. Even if a homosexual couple
were to marry, it is still a sin, period.
@freedom-is-dangerso God has always been indecisive and tentative?
Speaking of sophists, was your comparison vignette meant to support your premise
that God doesn't change? I think we would all do well to be ready to accept
change and make sure it is positive.
@Sneaky Jimmy:"Lastly, if homosexuality goes against God's
plan why does he allow children to be born with attraction to the same sex?
Please watch "Modern Family". The gay couple seem to be doing a good job
of raising up a family."Really? Using a fictional TV show to
prove that gay couples do a great job of raisin a family? Hollywood has been
pushing the LGBT agenda for years. That has no bearing on what is truth. The simple truth is, people are not born with same-sex attraction, and
they can change it with help. Evergreen has every right to help those who do
not want to be gay. There are thousands and thousands who have overcome this.
That is the big truth the LGBT Community does not want everyone to
know. If you can change your sexual attraction, it is not something you can get
governmental discrimination protection for.
@FID;Your church is the one that needs to apologize.They're the ones interfering in, and materially damaging the lives of
GLBT American Citizens. It isn't us who is terrorizing Mormons, it's
the other way around. We're not the ones campaigning to revoke your
rights, you're campaigning to revoke our rights as Americans.Please, get your facts straight.@Kith;Bigotry is a
@RanchHand"We're not the ones campaigning to revoke your rights
... Please, get your facts straight."---------Let's
see. Photographers, fertility doctors, dating websites, hotel owners, etc have
all been sued or forced to change by the pro-gay agenda.Please get
your facts straight.
When will the uber-right realize that being gay is not a sin?It’s sexual relations outside of wedlock, regardless of sexual
orientation, that would constitute a religious sin.And being gay is
not against the law.Therefore, why all the anti-gay discrimination
laws?And as for neighbors….Give me a gay couple over a
Conservative, Republican, drug addict, married and divorced 4 times with no
Family and NO children [Rush Limbaugh, your hero] hypocrite any day….
@Utes Fan;No, you failed to address the facts. They're being
sued because they refuse to obey the law and not discriminate. If you CHOOSE to
go into business, you CHOOSE to abide by the laws regulating businesses and if
you don't you get sued. It's quite simple really. Using your
religion to justify discrimination when you go into business doesn't
justify failure to obey the law.For all of you using God's name
in vain and quoting what he wants/says/etc., please provide one single shred of
proof that your God is better than my God, and then perhaps, just perhaps,
I'll follow his dictates. Until then, I'm under no obligation to
follow your God in the least, so please, quit trying to force me to do so.
So basically the refutation of my comments are that because your religion says
it is a sin and equal to murder then it is a fact and people should accept it as
fact not be offended, further we should exchange the stories in the bible as
history rather then actual history and should blindly accept your beliefs and
accept it is harmful to society despite all quantified and qualified evidence to
the contrary and that gays do not have the right to marriage because you said
so. Sounds reasonable to me I don't know why I was arguing with you. oh
thats right its not rational.
@bill in Nebraska 8:36 pmSo because your religious beliefs support you we
should not find it insulting?@bill in Nebraska 8:36 pmSo
because you accept your religious beliefs as history george does not understand
history and need to learn history? he may not understand your religion but it
sound like he understands history and history does not support your claims.@freedom in danger “America is a diverse country with
different beliefs. Sometimes yours won't win out in the end. Why is that
such a problem for everyone?” If you could provide some actual
evidence of a social harm I would agree but all we hear is les and religious
dogma as justification. That is not winning out it is bullying into submission
by pure force of numbers. The reason we fight on for a rational response is
because for those that are being denied access to marriage this is not simply an
intellectual exercise or simply a battle of wills.
@Ranch,"They're being sued because they refuse to obey the
law and not discriminate"-----------Why is it no surprise that
so many people are opposed to gay marriage then???? Here is an example:A hotel owner in Utah cannot be sued for refusing to host a gay marriage
because gay marriage is illegal in Utah. That scenario won't happen. A
hotel owner in Vermont CAN and has been sued because... drumroll... gay marriage
is legal there! GET IT?It takes simple logic to conclude that the
legalization of gay marriage simply erodes the freedom of conscience as I have
just demonstrated. Not to mention that when many of these business owners
started their business, it wasn't required then by law to be forced to
allow gay marriage. I don't blame them for opposing gay marriage - their
business was there first.The legalization of gay marriage gradually
erodes the right to refuse to participate in gay functions as I just
demonstrated. We all need to survive and work and start businesses and gay
marriage forces us to accept it. Not to mention that the day will come when it
will be taught in schools, etc.
Just because someone is born with same-sex attraction doesn't mean they
have to act upon it. Our Heavenly Father has given us weaknesses so that we
will humble ourselves before him. Ranchhand: The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-Day Saints is the only true and living church of Jesus Christ in the
world. All the others are not his Church PERIOD.The Family,A
Proclamation to the World is not just for MORMONS. It is for the entire world
because our Father in Heaven is speaking through his prophets. Whether you
believe it or not doesn't matter. You will be held accountable for that.
The joy you speak of is for this life only, not for the world to come. To sit
there and judge me because I hold to the fact that Jesus Christ has spoken
through his prophets. The warning is clear and any government that goes against
that will be held accountable in due time by the Lord. Just because its been 5
years, 10 years doesn't matter. It is his time and his earth. We came
here with the claim that we would obey all his commandments.
@bill in Nebraska I have to wonder if you have the ability to understand
that your beliefs are not the same as observable reality and that just because
you believe something is true or history does not make it either one.
@redwingsthere is a mountain of evidence to support that gay parents are
more the competent. A simple google search for the APA, NASW, AMA, APS will
provide more research then you will ever want to read. "There are thousands
and thousands who have overcome this." really please provide one credible
study or research to support that claim. Again google any of the above
organizations and they have a mountain of research showing what evergreen is
doing is not only not effective but harmful. Know I will not sit here and claim
that there are not some people such as counter intelligence that genuinely feel
they have "overcome" being gay or may have chosen to remain celibate
which they have every right to do but the bottom line is what evergreen does is
go against all scientific evidence and facts and tries to repair people that are
I find this article disappointing in that it doesn't specifically state the
issues that soulforce claims to have with the LDS church. One of the reps
claimed the church said one thing and did another, or something to that effect.
Some reporter needed to call them on the carpet, to name specific instances
where this was the case, and exactly where soulforce's expectations lie. It
would certainly give the readers a better sense of the sort of organization
soulforce is, and whether it is a radicalized group, one that's ignorant of
LDS beliefs and practices, or whether it has legitimate concerns. Also a
reporter should have asked SPECIFICALLY its concerns with Evergreen
International, rather than just assuming that the two bodies can't coexist.
Anyhow I was hoping for more from the article. Thanks.
To LDS Liberal HMMMMMMMM.... A little "judgemental"
arn't we. Just between you conservatives and me, that is so
typical of liberals. They like to think of themselves as the open minded
tolerant, accepting ones, but that only applies to the ones on "their
Marriage these days is more of a civil union than a religious one. It was
started by God in the Bible, but today you can go to Vegas and drive thru and
get married and a Happy Meal to go. Or, you can have Elvis marry you at the
"Hitchen Post". Frankly, I don't care if 2,3,5,or 10 people want
to marry in todays irrerevent society. The real issue with the LDS Church will
be if the day ever comes that same sex couples want to be Sealed in the Temple.
Now that will be something to talk about.
The LDS church advocates marriages between a man and a woman that are regulated
by government. Only men and women who have obtained a government license can be
married. Only persons approved by government can perform marriages. The LDS
church recognizes marriages performed by persons approved by government,
regardless of whether the persons being married are members a church or
religion, as long as the persons are a man and a woman.What I
don't understand is why members of the LDS church favor governmental
regulation of marriage when they disagree with governmental regulation of other
aspects of their lives.I don't know the history of marriage
very well, but I suspect that governments began regulating marriages when the
governments began regulating religion. In the case of Christianity, this was
when the Roman government adopted Christianity as a state religion. It seems to
me it is time for government to stop regulating marriage and to focus on civil
rights through civil unions, and to let social groups, adopt what ever form of
marriage the groups want.
@m.g.scottTake away government regulation of marriage, and the LDS
church would be the only group responsible for determining who can have a Temple
marriage. With governmental regulation of marriage, governments have the final
say as to who can be sealed in a LDS Temple. As you said, that will be something
to talk about.As long as the LDS church and many LDS members cling
to government regulation of marriage, they risk having government decide that
couples of the same sex can be sealed in a LDS Temple. It seems to me that the
safest approach is to push for deregulation of marriage, thus letting the LDS
church have the final say who can be sealed in a Temple.
So what is next? Meeting with B4UACT, that group of mental health professionals
who want pedophilia to not be demonized because it is an uncontrolled behavior
they are born with and it isn't their fault?? Or that German couple who
wants incest to be legalized, because they (brother and sister) want to get
married?People scream rights, but where is the right to marriage in
the Constitution? 10 Amendment says it isn't even the Federal
government's business.... The LDS Church members are part of the tax paying
community. We ALL have a right to say what government tax dollars recognize,
including the definition of marriage. That is just basic democracy. Not having a
say in these basic issues is why that little tea party happened oh so long ago.
@Utes Fan;Ultimately, it is going to come down to Equality Under the
Law.You oppose treating other Americans equally to how you are
treated by the government. You oppose providing the safety to families you
don't approve of. That sir, is the very definition of bigotry. It really
doesn't matter if you don't like it. It really doesn't matter if
you find it "icky". It really doesn't matter that your religion
opposes it. What is important is Equal Treatment by our government
of all American Citizens.@Deseret News Moderators;You
claim to want "civil discourse" yet refuse to print comments that say
anything negative in the least about the LDS Church - but you will print very
uncivil comments from Bill in Nebraska claiming that all other churches are
false.Please discontinue the hypocrisy. Either print all comments
that may be "offensive" to LDS or print NO comments that other religions
may find offensive, like Bill's "Testimony".
@m.g.scott"The real issue with the LDS Church will be if the day ever
comes that same sex couples want to be Sealed in the Temple."I
find that most people who support same sex marriage, including myself, are
against the idea of forcing churches to marry same sex couples. @jskains"People scream rights, but where is the right to marriage in
the Constitution? "So, according to you, the legislature, if it
so desired, could pass a law banning LDS temple marriages tomorrow and
that'd be a-ok because there's no right to marriage?
@jskainsWell considering that both pedophile and incest both have
proven harms not really the same, but thanks for playing. As to not
being a specifically enumerated right, I would remind you once again that almost
everything we take for granite as a right in our society is not specifically
enumerated in the constitution unfortunately for your argument the courts have
found that denial of marriage to gay couples does violate their 14th amendment
rights to equal protection (which does fall under the role of the federal
government) based on the fact that there is no proven harm to allowing them
marriage, again the same amendment that protects your right to do many of the
things you take for granite as your right to do everyday. If there is no proven
harm then people have the right to decide for themselves if they wish to engage
in certain behaviors and it really is no ones business.
Breaking the laws of the land are a sin. Those of you who knowingly and
intentionally drive over the speed limit, only to slam on the brakes when you
see a police car (which I get a great chuckle out of, by the way) are sinning.
If you want to put some sort of hierarchy on sin, be my guest, but you are a
sinner. And I'd be willing to bet there is no repentence for that
particular sin, and you do it day in and day out. What I find amazing is that
people feel they need to do "God's" work. If God exists and is so
amazing, I'm quite certain God can manage on their own. How about focusing
on your own family; let others worry about theirs.
"Love the member, but hate the church."By changing the
words, it is easy to see how disrespectful that tired saying is.
@Sorry Charlie!There's even a bigger mountain of evidence that
two gay people can't have kids. Turns out it takes a daddy and a mommy to
have em. It only makes sense that a daddy and mommy are the right people for the
job... the only people for the job. As Bill said, "The Family,A Proclamation
to the World is not just for MORMONS. It is for the entire world because our
Father in Heaven is speaking through his prophets. Whether you believe it or not
doesn't matter. You will be held accountable for that." I agree with
him.@RanchSo for us to keep it civil you have to be
allowed to say negative and hateful things about other people and their beliefs.
Yup... that makes a whole truckload of sense.@TolstoyI
don't need evidence to cast a vote. It's amazing how that works.@RanchHandMormons are voting and repaid with threats,
terrorized with anthrax threats, and protested all for voting. If our votes
don't count, we're the second-class citizens who will have lost our
freedom to express our views (a real right)The truth can't be
@freedom in danger funny thing a lot of gay people actually do have kids,
seems it does not really take a mommy and daddy in a heterosexual relationship
anymore maybe you should shed that mountain of 18th century evidence you are
@FID;Prove that any of those things were from GLBT Americans. IMO,
they came from Mormon Leaders trying to divert attention from their Sinful Acts
against other American Citizens. My theory is every bit as valid as yours on
this matter.I didn't say that you can't say negative
things about others. I asked the Moderators to be consistent in their
moderating. Currently, they're allowing you Mormons to say negative things
about other churches (implicitly calling them false and therefore of the devil),
while refusing to print any negative, FACTUAL comments about the LDS Church.
The moderators are currently being hypocrites, asking for civility but only
requiring it of non-Mormon commentors.
@freedom in dangerwith regards to your april 27 9:17 pm post to
tolstoy, I suppose you are right you can base your vote on any flight of thought
you may have if you are not interest in taking your civic duties serious,
however, it does not mean that the law you voted for may not violate the
constitution which is what happened with prop 8.
jskains: "We ALL have a right to say what government tax dollars recognize,
including the definition of marriage. That is just basic democracy."----------------------AND that is why we do NOT live in a
democracy. We live in a constitutional republic. We are first govern by our
Constitution. Any law that we or our representatives pass MUST be found to
agree with our constitution.Prop 8 in CA was deemed
unconstitutional. To pass a law that treats other Americans as less worthy
citizens cannot pass per our 14th amendment.THAT is just basic
Religious freedom unless your religion and its beliefs upset a loud group.Free
speech unless what you have to say might offend a special interest group. The
LDS Church does not have to apologize for anything. I has its beliefs, just as
gays have their beliefs. I am tired of the whole gay agenda being shoved down
the throats of people who believe differently. In California, the whole marriage
thing was put to a vote but because the gay community didn't like the
democratic outcome we have to remain in this battle. I do not believe in hurting
others or bashing another person's beliefs. Why can't the gay
community accept the vote like everyone else. Seriously, this is getting real