Deseret News | Reader comments: Gay Mormons to church: Don't fight California court ruling

Reader comments
Gay Mormons to church: Don't fight California court ruling

Phoenix | 12:40 p.m. May 28, 2008

While I understand their concern and keeping in mind that the church has occasionally changed positions on some issues, I just don't think that this will be one of them. If the church sanctions gay marriages, it would unravel what the church teaches as the plan of salvation. This is a tough situation, though, and there are no easy answers. I just can't see it happening.

misleading headline | 12:46 p.m. May 28, 2008

The heading is quite misleading.
You can't be an active homosexual and a member of the church.

The article is really about an activist group that thinks it is for gay rights on behalf of gay Mormonï¿½s (an oxymoron).

Again... gay marriage isn't about rights, it is about the redefinition of marriage.
Next you'll be demanding that church's are forced to marry gays or else....

Look. You have indoctrinated the youth of this country in schools for years. Enough to where many of these indoctrinated youth are now at voting age and think it is normal to be gay. It isn't. But they think it is.

Marriage is defined as between a man and a woman.

You have usurped rights of cohabitation. This was won mostly by combining the voting with laws that included cohabitation of man and woman too. Many who shack up want their tax breaks as well and other so called rights.
But for them it is an option to me married, because they fit the definition.

You have made it the focus point, but again the DEFINITION of marriage precludes the perversion of homosexuality from being joined together.

Awesome | 1:01 p.m. May 28, 2008

Here is a group that represents those who are not following their own churches teachings begging that church to not get involved in something the morals that the church stands by. Seems kind of silly to me.

Comments continue below

Park City Resident | 1:05 p.m. May 28, 2008

I didn't know that you could be gay and still be Mormon.

I think that the Mormon Church should oppose and fight ALL forms of immoral perversion.

I am sorry... | 1:06 p.m. May 28, 2008

if anyone has been hurt by people's dealings. However, Heavenly Father instigated these rules long before the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was restored (see Old Testament).

I agree, people should be sensitive in their dealings with each other, gay or not.

I don't agree with saying God was wrong in establishing his commandments, though. None of us would be here if he hadn't.

Contention | 1:06 p.m. May 28, 2008

Doesn't the church believes in not stirring up contention? Explain, someone, please!

I see LDS people hating gay people because of this.

Help Them | 1:13 p.m. May 28, 2008

The LDS Church and it's members should reach out and show love for gay members, but the sanctioning of marriages comes from the Lord, not from men.

Tom | 1:35 p.m. May 28, 2008

I am an active member of the church, and not gay, and I still feel very strongly that the church should not get involved in the gay marraige debates. If we do, we need to stop saying that "The church is apolitical, and does not get involved in politics". To claim this is a lie if we are getting involved in court rulings about gay marriage. I love the leaders of our church, but not because of their political views, I choose to follow them for their spiritual teachings. Render unto Caesar...

Dutchman | 1:58 p.m. May 28, 2008

You can be gay and Mormon as long as you do not practice homosexual acts or advocate for gay causes. Read the "Proclamation on the Family" issued by the First Presidency and the Quorumn of the Twelve Apostles. It is pretty clear that the Church has already spoken on this issue.

Live and Let Live | 1:59 p.m. May 28, 2008

I'm not gay but I'm an active Latter-day Saint. While I do not expect or necessarily wish the Church to change its current stance on homosexuality; I personally, would be very disappointed if the Church actively promotes a CA constitutional amendment to overrule the court's decision. In my mind, we should focus on strengthening our own church community and worry less about enforcing our beliefs amongst the general public. With a finite amount of time and resources, I think we as a Church could be so much more effective pursuing other avenues of service.

show love | 2:00 p.m. May 28, 2008

The best way to show love for folks struggling with homosexuality is to stand firm on the teachings that ultimately are the only path to joy and fulfillment for all of us.

Lesbian's mother | 2:00 p.m. May 28, 2008

I'm the mother of a lesbian woman--and I'm an active member of the LDS Church. I love my daughter dearly, but I cannot agree that her lifestyle supports the Plan of Salvation. Not to mention the damage that it has done to her children--and to the children of at least one of her now ex-partners.
I pray that we can be kind and loving toward those friends and family members who deal with this issue. But I support the teaching of the LDS Church, as well as other tradational churches, and the Bible, on this issue. And I have faith that a loving Heavenly Father can and (someday) will sort this out--we may have to wait for the resurrection to see that, but then I am waiting for the resurrection for my handicapped son, too.

contention? | 2:16 p.m. May 28, 2008

I don't think so.

The Church believes in Standing for Something; and being a Beacon of Truth and Light in a base and wicked world.

Don't fear or hide from the Truth, embrace it and it will set you free.

Homosexuality is harmful.
Homosexual marriage is harmful to society.

Don't put the Light under a bushel.

Blah, blah, blah | 2:23 p.m. May 28, 2008

This is ridiculous. You can't be an active member of the LDS church and practice/live by the gay lifestyle. This is no different than the animal rights activists "urging" the LDS church leaders to change the Word of Wisdom. SILLY! It's a church, with set doctrines, not group of politicians out for popularity votes. I really don't understand why our leaders put out a statement about it in the first place, but whatever. Yes, we should reach out to those members struggling with this, but not change the church for them.

Jonathan | 2:23 p.m. May 28, 2008

I had a problem with the church's "apolitical" stance, but realized this isn't politics, this is about sin, and sinful behavior. While i think the church isn't proactive enough in some circles, I understand more that the LDS people should be more active in legislating against sin and sinful behavior. The sanctity of marriage and family is being systematically dismantled. Stand up and defend your faith and beliefs!

Also, the LDS church does not teach to hate gay people, it teaches to hate the sin, not the sinner.

Re: Live and Let Live | 2:34 p.m. May 28, 2008

Gay marriage is not a political, but moral issue.

It strikes at the very definition of marriage.

If the church doesn't speak out now, when will they speak out, when the government requires that the church must perform and accept gay marriages or lose their right to be considered a church?

Dan | 3:01 p.m. May 28, 2008

God made it quite clear he is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. He also made it clear in the Law of Moses that homosexuality was a capital offense. The CA Supreme Court violated the laws of the land by ruling politically correct instead of on the constitutionality of the law. They should be impeached for their blatent disregard of the laws made by the people.

re: Live and Let Live | 3:05 p.m. May 28, 2008

"we should focus on strengthening our own church community and worry less about enforcing our beliefs amongst the general public." WHAT??? We are literally in a battle and the sanctity of the family unit may be the biggest prize for either side. It is wholly appropriate that our energy should be spent leading others to correct laws that distort the purpose of life and fight against evil notions, like legalized gay marriage, that if allowed to grow will cheapen and even destroy families. We cannot bury our heads in our own comfy community when there is so much important work to be done.

MoJules | 3:14 p.m. May 28, 2008

Fact 1: Gays can be good standing Mormon's, but they must abide by the same standards as the rest of the members, no sexual relationship outside of marriage. The church has defined marriage as between a man and a woman.

Fact 2: It is not our place to council God, this church is led by a living Prophet, and we don't go to him with our vote of what is and isn't acceptable in the standards. We are all going to have issues, I had a boss who said he would go inactive if they ever put another temple in Utah, that was before the ones that are being built right now.

Fact 3: We have the LDS church, they have accepted the council of a living prophet, there is the FLDS church, they choose to live a different lifestyle, yet claim to be part of the church. Maybe there needs to be the GayLDS church, they can have their own prophet, like Jeff's and they can do what they want, yet profess to be Mormon's.

Fact 4: As for me in my house, we will serve the Lord, not our own wants and needs, sometimes hard to do.

Chance | 3:24 p.m. May 28, 2008

The church does not get involved in politics as far as election of authorities go, but the law is a totally different matter. The church is all about laws, spiritual and temporal and how they affect us as a Church, nation and as individuals. It has every right to stand up for righteoussness in any form. In fact, it has a doctrinal responsibility to do so. Especially in this case. How do you think the Elders of the Church will be called to assist in the saving of the Constitution when it is hanging by a thread? or should I say, as it is hanging?

Jim J in Cedar Rapids | 3:45 p.m. May 28, 2008

Politics vs Morality. In each instance I can think of in the past 15-20 years, the Church has come out publically on morality related issues. Abortion, homosexuality, marriage and the family are the main statements I've seen come out of SLC that could be construed politically.
That is consistent with teaching obedience to the laws of God as taught in the holy scriptures. I believe the church has a responsibility to be publically heard when it sees judges (activist or otherwise) make a decision that legislates (im)morality.
I would rather see our leaders speak out on these topics than be silent and allow the activist groups gain more ground on society than they already have.
We should love and help those who struggle with same-sex attraction whenever we can. But, we should not compromise our own standards and obedience to the commandments in the process.
My brother is gay and I love him with all my heart. I do not condone his life's choices, but they are between him, God, and the church leaders over him. His choice does not alter my love for him.

Nothing new | 3:49 p.m. May 28, 2008

As a gay ex-mormon, I think that Affirmation is merely charging at windmills. The LDS church isn't going to stop meddling in politics no matter what the cause.

There's nothing new in this story, just more of the same anti gay rhetoric.

I thought | 4:08 p.m. May 28, 2008

I thought that the church didn't meddle in politics outside of Utah, then I remembered all the money they sent to various states to help fund anti gay marriage campaigns.

Confused | 4:29 p.m. May 28, 2008

I just don't understand what the world has come to. Man with man, or woman with woman is not what marriage is all about. Frankly I hope this world comes to an end quick cause what is happening is very frighting. What happen to worshiping how one wants. If a church doesn't support what you want, then don't go to that church simple as that. Don't force views on others. Get your own life back together first before you worry about others. This nation is falling apart!! No doubt about it.

Poor quality headline | 4:46 p.m. May 28, 2008

When you come to a fork in the road, you can't travel both roads. Gay and Mormon...you can't practice both at the same time.

Battle against attrition | 5:14 p.m. May 28, 2008

There is a standard in property law called adverse possession but its principle creeps into so many aspects of law: If you do something bad, even heinous, and you do it long enough without anyone stopping you, then it becomes okay.

The church and hopefully its members are standing up for whats right and saying the California Court was wrong. Making the choice to be a homosexual should not give you rights above what I enjoy. Making a choice to be in class of people should not give you rights above anyone else. Gays are not a sex or a race that should deserve protection above that afforded to an average American, they have the same protections already. That should be enough.

Allowing others rights | 5:47 p.m. May 28, 2008

Articles of Faith #11: "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may". This seems to indicate that the LDS Church affords all others the right of religious freedom that the Church claims for itself. Assuming that other people may not beleive the doctrine that homosexuality is sinful and pursue worshipping God according to their conscience, doesn't the Church therefore believe in standing for their freedom to beleive such? It would seem the church would better spend its time fortifying its own membership against what it declares a sin, and teaching all who will listen that it is such rather than imposing its beliefs on others via the government.

As for Mormons being gay, my understanding is that all are sinners and all fall short of perfection. If perfection were a minimum standard for Mormonism, I suppose all who have posted that all gays aren't LDS are by default not Mormon based on their pre-judgement of those who are gay.

Prophet of God on the Earth. | 6:08 p.m. May 28, 2008

As a Latter Day Saint, I know that we do have a Prophet of God on the Earth today, and that he is not always going to be popular. The church does at times take stands on issues that affect the morality of all people. They have spoken out against gambling, they have of course spoken out about gay marriage, they have made statements on some issues that are crucial to ones spiritual strength. My goodness, what is conference all about, they talk about pornography, about music, about dress and so forth. But there is just one group that has been addressed that has to make this all about them and politics. Just as gays have the right to say what they want, and if you were to put this on a scale, they do most of the talking, church leaders of any religion have a right to make statements on moral issues. The church will not tell anyone who to vote for or not to vote for, but yes, they will encourage members to stand up against behaviors that destroy society. I remember, while living in St. George the wards protesting a porn store daily in Mesquite.

Brian | 6:11 p.m. May 28, 2008

For those of you who think this decision does not adversely affect heterosexual couples, bride and groom have now been deleted in favor of Party #1 and Party #2. Bride and groom is no longer authorized per the directions of the Office of Vital Records. Nope, we won't be affected by the decision. Get real folks!!
Our call is to love everyone, but again hate the sin, not the sinner, but sin is sin no matter what 4 judges say.

Why hate? | 6:18 p.m. May 28, 2008

I don't understand why religious people have so much hate towards a particular group of people, gay in this case? Did religion teach that hatred?

Some religious people say they don't hate gays but the practice of homosexulatity. I find that as meaningless as saying one doesn't hate mosquitos, but hate when they bite.

to "show love" at 2PM | 6:41 p.m. May 28, 2008

When you say that we should "stand firm on the teachings that ultimately are the only path to joy and fulfillment for all of us," please be careful. I have always been dismayed when gay church members have been told to try and live a straight lifestyle because that is the way to true happiness. Sometimes those men marry us unsuspecting women, father children, and then decide that they can't continue to live a lie (which, of course, they should not). It hurts us and our children. Please let them be who they are, and don't ask them to try to take on a lifestyle that isn't natural to them.

Gay Mormons | 7:29 p.m. May 28, 2008

People really have a hard time understanding this and I can't see why. It is very simple. You can be gay AND be a mormon. You can have gay feelings and desires, and attractions,and tendencies. As long as you do not break your covenants, you are a worthy member of the Church. You cannot be a practicing gay, who acts upon those tendencies, and be a mormon. There are are also many people out there with a whole raft of other issues, feelings,desires, tendencies--that are incompatable with being a worthy mormon. As long as those tendencies are not acted upon, same as for a gay person, they can be a worthy member of the Church. It is not our weakness that defines us--it is what we DO. It is not our inclinations or tendencies--it is what we DO.

Re: Re: Re: Live and Let Live | 7:42 p.m. May 28, 2008

If it's the Church's role to ensure the general public adheres to our strict standards, we should start thinking about how we can pass laws to criminalize:

ï¿½ Idol worship
ï¿½ Taking the Lord's name in vain
ï¿½ Breaking the Sabbath Day
ï¿½ Not honoring your father and mother
ï¿½ Bearing false witness
ï¿½ Coveting.
ï¿½ Smoking
ï¿½ Drinking
ï¿½ Pre-marital sex
ï¿½ Masturbation
ï¿½ Unwed cohabitation
ï¿½ Bearing children outside of wedlock

I know these sound extreme, but where does the Church draw the line? All of the above-listed items negatively impact families. Can the Church better spend its resources to promote peace and strengthen families in other ways?

Back at the park... | 8:14 p.m. May 28, 2008

And meanwhile, back at the park... closeted gay male mormons, who are living openly straight, married lives, and hooking up with dudes on the side at various parks, vigorously support the LDS Church opposing gay marriage in California.

Live and Let Live Get Real | 8:19 p.m. May 28, 2008

No doubt the church would start thinking about how to keep laws from being passed if any of your list was being pushed by any paticular people as lawful and mainstream similar to gay marriage. Your entire list is a list of harmful, hurtful acts that nearly all agree with are wrong even if we frequently see them. It is not our place to judge others even when we witness these acts. Gay marriage should be added to your list and gay activists should agree that this practice is wrong. From there the debate should end and all should ultimatley allow God to render judgement.

stant | 10:22 p.m. May 28, 2008

Hate gays? Nah. I try to love them like Jesus asked me love all God's children. (Why is it that whenever anyone, ESPECIALLY a conservative Christian like a Mormon, takes a stand against a homosexual lifestyle it is automatically characterized as hate or homophobia?) Nothing about me hates homosexual people in particular. Homosexual actions are another matter.

And to Live-and-Let-Live: as a matter of fact, most of those things *have been* on the books at one time or another. They were on the books because they each can have negative emotional, economic, and physical (not to mention, spiritual) consequences. But unfortunately the world has long since passed those issues by. They're hard to legislate; hard to enforce.

Homosexual marriage, on the other hand, is the formal state recognition of (what I consider) an immoral lifestyle--the imposition of the force of law in support of immoral behavior. This isn't just winking at something that's virtually impossible to enforce (like the sabbath, or even adultery). It is the protection of that behavior by the state.

Should the Church fight it? Duh. Do they have the right to fight it? It's a moral issue--yes.

To 6:41 pm | 10:31 p.m. May 28, 2008

The church's current counsel to people with homosexual tendencies is to
a) live the commandments of the church, including not advocating a gay lifestyle and the law of chastity - same as for everyone else;
b) live a good and normal life focusing on doing and being good, like everyone else; and
c) NOT get married to a person of the opposite sex while still dealing with attraction to the same sex.

Part (c) was a change some years ago after observing the problem you point out - marriages not working out when one spouse has homosexual tendencies.

But the critical thing is still to live all the commandments. Yes, this means that for a time these people will go without some blessings, such as a loving spouse and sexual intimacy. But the same is true of everyone else who doesn't find a spouse and yet keeps the law of chastity. The good news is that we all have the promise of the Lord's infinite power to fill in those gaps in the life to come.

The best word I've heard from the Church about this is in the Newsroom section of the Church site under same-gender-attraction.

Hate the sin? | 10:52 p.m. May 28, 2008

I've seen several comments on different posts about "hating the sin but not the sinner" which may be true so far as it goes. But I have a different perspective--I think the only sins I have a right to hate are my own! And that "hating the sin" should lead me to a sincere and deep attempt to overcome them with the help of the Savior. Other people's sins are not my place to hate.

Levi Garrett | 10:53 p.m. May 28, 2008

I consider myself a believing Mormon, served a mission, attend my meetings, etc. However, I have a chewing tobacco habit. Maybe I should start a support group called "Expectoration" and raise a fuss because I can't go to the temple. However, I realize that the church has taken a stand on this and that they won't be letting that fly any time soon. I just need to quit. The church will let me chew before they allow practicing homosexuals to be members in good standing. We all know that neither will happen. Any sexual activity not between a man and a woman is what they call a sexual perversion. A spade is a spade. Why would you expect a church to sanction a perversion of any kind? The funny thing is, I've never seen them close their doors on anybody, and I've never seen them 'force' gays to be straight. By the way, I think I'll go to Lagoon this weekend and try to get in without paying. Everyone else has to pay, but I shouldn't have to because I'm a minority in Utah who chews.

I DO NOT HATE GAYS!!! | 11:11 p.m. May 28, 2008

But I do hate that they think they are the exception to the rule, I had a relationship when I was single, the other person was single. I lost my membership in the LDS church for nine months, I did not have anger or resentment. I ask that gays who give in to their desires, like I did, be willing to accept whatever church discipline they are given. I have a very close gay friend, I was very proud of him for never breaking the law of chastity. This month has been five years since I got my temple blessings back, I learned that I could live without giving into all my wants and needs. I am so grateful for the things I learned and for learning to not put myself before my Father in Heaven. I love the sinner, but not the sin, and I don't like having that or any other sin flaunted in front of me, as a matter of fact, I hate any public display of affection, between gay or straight. Both of them gross me out, because that is personal and private. Any relationship that is based on the physical is very shallow.

Fountain Valley CA | 11:40 p.m. May 28, 2008

Gays can demand all they want, they'll never be treated as equals by most.

Kyle from AZ | 11:46 p.m. May 28, 2008

Once again I am here to educate people who don't do their homework. The church has never said it was "apolitical" or that it was never going to comment on policies in politics. Here is what the church says...they are nonpartisan and politically neutral UNLESS...did you all get that....Unless (now here is the quote from the church website so no one can mess it up....yes it is the "straight" quote....ready...the church "Reserves the right as an institution to address, in a nonpartisan way, issues that it believes have significant community or moral consequences or that directly affect the interests of the Church." Last time I checked homosexuality was a moral issue people.

Johnny | 1:09 p.m. May 29, 2008

Coming out as a gay man after 18 years of marriage to a wonderful woman was a horrible time for me. But it is almost ten years later, and she is happily remarried to a great guy...I no longer contemplate suicide because I was a hated minority. My kids have grown and are loving and happy for me, and my ex-wife and her husband...both very active members...have even played matchmaker for me. No one can understand what it is like to be gay and Mormon unless they have been there...I do not feel that I am "suffering" with anything, or that I will be "cured" when ressurected. I am happy, though, that I no longer attend Church and have to listen in person to many of the types of comments like I have read here.

Jon B. Holbrook | 3:01 p.m. May 30, 2008

I hope that the LDS Church becomes active in the fight to preserve traditional marriage in the State of California and does not allow itself to be intimidated by gay activists or political-correctness. The sanctity of marriage is at the root of The Plan of Salvation. It must be preserved if civilization is to survive. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints made its position very clear in The Proclamation of the Family. This is a fight worth engaging in. Homosexuality is a life-style choice and an affront to God. Homosexuals claim that they "were born this way". Homosexuals who believe this also deny the principle of moral agency. There is one standard in the Church and one standard only: Complete chastity before marriage and complete fidelity after marriage. Marriage is defined as between a man and a woman. This is the revealed word of God through His Prophets, both ancient and modern. If gay Mormons fight the Church on this issue, they will be excommunicated. If a gay Mormon lives a moral life, supports the Church and lives by its standards, he will be blessed. Thank-you

to Tom | 9:43 a.m. May 31, 2008

This discussion is all about social/moral issues. There is a huge difference between partisan politics and taking a stand on moral issues. The LDS faith clearly takes no stand on candidates or parties. The LDS Church clearly DOES/and should take a stand on immorality and harmful social practises in our world. Homosexual practise is clearly, undeniably sinful. It goes against nature and has only become accepted as our society has become corrupt and worldly. For anyone to believe the LDS Church will/and should allow persons in gay and lesbian unions to be accepted is foolish and clearly shows they are truly out of harmony and fellowship with the Church. Please, if you are living in sin then you are better off to find another denomination where your sinful lifestyle is accepted. If you think pressure will reverse what we are clearly taught in "The Proclamation on the Family" you have no real testimony of divine, prophetic guidance and of the LDS Church. A sinful life is always followed by absence of the Holy Spirit and, without repentance, being deceived by Satan. This is clear.

LDS Church changes | 10:02 a.m. May 31, 2008

Folks continue to point to certain "changes" in LDS doctrine and practises. Do you not believe Christ knows the end from the beginning? Do you not believe Christ commanded the practise of plural marriage? Do you not believe Christ knew how things would eventually play out politically for the Church vis-a-vis plural marriage? Do you not believe our Prophets to be guided on the subject of the Priesthood and when it would be extended to all worthy males? You obviously believe the LDS Church is just another denomination driven by the whims of public and social popularity and by political pressure. If you are not a member I do not expect you to understand any of this. If you are a member you should understand these concepts. Ultimately, you will choose to follow the Prophet or not follow the Prophet. Whether we are members or not, we all need to sincerely read and follow Moroni 10:4-5. That about sums it up, I need say no more.

PoliSci Doc | 12:01 p.m. June 4, 2008

This is simply ridiculous. The Church has never changed its official doctrines, and has only modified practices or policies to be in compliance with national and international laws. That does not mean that Mormons or their leaders stop believing revealed doctrines--they just adhere to the temporal constrains placed upon them.

Furthermore, the First Amendment guarantee's any and all religions the right to establish their own tenets, and freedom of association. The Federal government has no business regulating the operations of a private organization as strictly asserted by our founders. Despite the feds outlawing polygamy--which if actually challenged doesn't have any legal grounds to stand on, and the law would be ruled unconstitutional--it has no right to assert that churches can't moderate their memberships.

Anonymous | 4:26 p.m. June 9, 2008

I don't think some of you understand...it is ENTIRELY possible for two men to marry and NOT break a single commandment...not likely, but possible...stop stereotyping all gay people into one tiny little box

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.