Deseret News | Gay support group lists requests to LDS Church

Reader comments
Gay support group lists requests to LDS Church

Page:
< Previous
1
2

XMollyMo | 4:32 a.m. Aug. 13, 2008

The LDS church has been an ever evolving institution. It gave into government pressure to give up the practice of polygamy. It gave into social pressure to accept blacks into the church. It is not the same church that Joseph Smith founded. Brigham Young would not recognize his church today. I do not regret resigning from The LDS church but I also do not resent it. I believe that the Book of Mormon is the word of God. I still read it today. I believe it is true because I believe Joseph Smith first. I got that from my personal pipeline with the almighty. However I do not trust LDS church leadership. What I remember of my ward leadership was a group of lay people who were extremely overwhelmed and intimidated of challenges that they were mostly underqualified for. I cannot accept that an imperfect group of humanbeings could or would determine another persons membership. Whatever happened to the idea of not casting people out of synoguages because one does not know when they should repent? Affirmation why do you care what the instution wants. Just live the best life you can, Pray, and read the scriptures.

Paul in MD | 7:51 a.m. Aug. 13, 2008

To XMollyMo at 4:32 am 8/13

Please do a little more research into why those two practices changed (by the way, blacks were allowed in the church, they just couldn't hold the priesthood until 1978). Social and political pressure were not the reasons for those changes.

Regarding your mistrust of local leaders, I served for 5 years as a ward clerk. During that time, there were several Bishop's councils held. Several people were excommunicated. The process was instructive for me. The bishopric did not make those determinations lightly, and they certainly did not make them on their own. There was truly compassionate discussion of the people, issues and events involved, and a great deal of prayer. God made those decisions, not men.

Excommunication is not the same as casting people out of the synagogues. Excommunicated members are encouraged to continue attending church. I know two people personally who were excommunicated and after repenting were re-baptized. That would not have been possible had they been cast out.

It sounds like your ward leadership failed to avail themselves of help that is available from the stake and higher up.

Clarifficality | 8:08 a.m. Aug. 13, 2008

Please read this in the Spirit in which it is intended. Firstly, it is improper to say that Affirmation is a media-monger. The gay LDS community has obviously got themselves together enough to present themselves before the GA's of the LDS church to speak with them face to face. For that they deserve our respect. Secondly, I love that as Children of God we recognise that we are responcible for ourselves and our actions.
Thirdly, the root of the matter is, how far can we as a people take to resolving this issue without the help of the Lord? and when the Lord does offer his help how far will we go to support it?
We, the general LDS public, do not sit in a place of judgement to say,"This is the black and white of it."
Fourth, some people need more than absolutes to heal and to grow. We should feel love tward one another that we have accomplished a non-hostile environment in which to engage one another openly. Open enough even for the media to record and publish the proceedings of these issues.
I respect and support our GA's & the LDSGLBTG.

Comments continue below

Sarah | 9:24 a.m. Aug. 13, 2008

I'm not the same Sarah who posted on the other page, but here's what I wanted to say: there is a huge, huge difference between blacks not holding the priesthood and homosexuals being asked to live the law of chastity. Every last person who falls into either group were always allowed in the church.

Just like in ancient times, there used to be groups of people who could not hold the priesthood. That was NEVER supposed to be permanent. There was always the promise there that someday, that would be remedied. This is the first time in the histoy of the world (that we're aware of) when every single worthy male member of the church can hold the priesthood.

Acting on homosexual urges is a sin. Sins will always continue to be sins. Certain practices may come and go with the times, but things that were labeled as sins in ancient times are still labeled as sins today. The law of chastity always has, and always will, stand. I applaud those members of the church who commented here about their struggles to live God's laws. That takes very real courage, and I'm very impressed and inspired by them.

John | 10:41 a.m. Aug. 13, 2008

I'm always amazed at how judgmental these forums become. The only requests I saw is that a member of the Quorum consider speaking at one of their meetings, that more training be provided to assist bishops in counselling people facing same-sex attraction, and that a topic in an upcoming general conference address the concerns of the parents of these children.

While the first may not happen, the mere request is not so far-fetched as some find it to be. The other two requests seem extremely reasonable requests. Notice how it's not about recognizing their problem, but providing comfort and counsel to those who suffer from the problem. My daughter is only 1, but I would still find it reassuring to hear a GA remind me that many of her future choices are not my fault. That agency is vital to the plan.

Of course, what else should I expect from an online forum in UT? I live in California, but I recently heard my cousin in UT moved to Chicago because his fiancee got pregnant. The cynicism in UT is thick enough that it can be cut with a knife.

XMollyMoMo2PaulinMD | 2:54 p.m. Aug. 13, 2008

Dear Paul Please don't try and lose my view in translation. What I am meant was exactly that. Why does anyone have to take a second class seat in my former church? The lack of black priesthood inhibited a lot of people from joining the church. And at the time most members agreed with it. Although there were a lot of members who were afraid to say how they really felt. My family was there. They wept from joy when the black were allowed the priesthood. My former Bishop Dave Parker knew the Kimballs personally and he told me that Sister Kimball was afraid of the church members reaction to her husbands revelation however they bravely did what they believed was right anyway. I pray that someday they will accept everyone no matter who they love or how they express it. The only hope that I have is that those affirmation people do get their meeting with Church Leaders I am interested to see what the outcome will be. It is the First Presidency decision and it is time that this debate be over and not avoided anymore. And don't worry President Monson is way to smart to bully.

Town Heathan | 3:01 p.m. Aug. 13, 2008

To Michael & Tired

News flash...you already support a religion that has changed their doctrine to meet society's demands.

Polygamy
Blacks & the Priesthood

You can say what you want about it being a revalation from God and such, but the reality is Society forced both of those on your church.

As for understanding Gay people...the bulk of the LDS church is to close minded to ever consider that Gays are not a right or a wrong...they are a different.

Just like Mormons are not a right or a wrong to the rest of us...they are just different.

Diversity is what makes us grow. Failing to acknowledge or admit diversity makes us a bigot and the last time I looked...God didn't encourage bigotry....

cassie | 3:21 p.m. Aug. 13, 2008

God is in charge of this church, not you. If you are not willing to bend your will to meet Gods, then don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Change | 9:21 p.m. Aug. 13, 2008

Credible evidence shows that some gay people can change, especially through strong commitment and proper therapy. One of several types of therapies is reparative therapy which attempts to compensate for deficits and repair damage to a gay personï¿½s gender identity by those deficits. Other therapies would be more effective for gay people who were raised in good families without unusual problems

definition time | 10:55 p.m. Aug. 13, 2008

There is no such thing as a "Gay Mormon". There are Mormons who are gay, but that's it. If you are the EQ president, then you are hiding your sexuality. If you are attending the temple then you lied in your recommend interview. You are decieved if you believe you can be gay (to me that means active participation and acceptance of the behavoir) and be worthy to hold a church position or go to the temple. Activity in church does not mean worthiness (Matthew 7:21-22). The only room in the church for gay individuals is for those who are trying to purge those feeling and become a "new creature in Christ".

hmmmm | 2:11 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

I find it funny how much harder satan works against the LDS church (my religion). When ever the LDS church gets dragged into things, the whole world goes berzerk. Satan fights hardest against us because he knows that we follow god through the very wise prophet who god himself ordained worthy to be his mouth piece in these last days.

Paul in MD | 6:08 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

To XMollyMo @ 2:54 pm 8/13

I'm sorry, having to converse through 200 word snippets means there isn't much room to properly interpret more subtle meanings. I understand and agree with your point that the priesthood ban kept many people from joining the church.

I was new in the church and a teenager when the announcement was made in General Priesthood meeting in 1978 that the ban was lifted and all worthy men could hold the priesthood. Being young and new in the church I really didn't understand what that meant, and I don't remember whether I even knew there was a ban.

I do remember hearing about members leaving the church over the change. I thought that was really absurd. Even at that time, I understood that change like that came from God, not from political or social pressure. That's the whole point of having a prophet. Just as in Biblical times, the prophet is the mouthpiece of God on Earth.

You are also right that many don't live the gospel they preach. We all have weaknesses and failings, which we are here to overcome. Some weaknesses are just more visible than others.

Okay, everyone's in time-out | 7:21 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

You can "play nice" via words and keyboards, or you can go to your rooms.

Matt | 8:43 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

AFFIRMATION READ THIS!!! Moses was commanded to put homosexuals to death. What more needs to be said? The Lord has laid down the law and nobody has the right to change it.

Dear Matt | 9:11 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Moses was also commanded to stone disobedient children, true followers should never eat seafood, second marriages should never have any consumation in the marriage bed, the list goes on and on. Why do hypocritical so called disciples of Christ love to spout the law of Moses when it comes to homosexuality, but refuse to follow and live by all the other tenants of that law. Pure hypocrisy! Mormonism is not the true religion. It is a cult pure and simple. And these forums prove it! How arrogant it truly is to think you know the will of God and to place a man like Monson on a pedestal as a prophet. It's blasemphy!

May there be hope | 9:21 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

woah... was I the only one who read this and NOT think badly of these people. When I first heard about the meeting I figured "oh great a new demand to allow gay marriages in the temple." According to this article it wasn't anything like that. What they are asking for is more understanding so that they can be helped. Let's face it, if a gay man goes into the bishop to talk about his problem he realizes what he's feeling is wrong but he doesn't know what to do about it. What they are wanting is more help to face their trial, not people telling them they are damned to hell and turning away from them completely.

Paul in MD | 1:13 p.m. Aug. 14, 2008

To DearMatt @ 9:11 am 8/14

The law of Moses was full of little laws designed to spell out in excruciating detail what Moses' people were supposed to do to follow the Ten Commandments, because they were so stiff-necked and hard-hearted. There were also rules about how many steps they could take on the Sabbath and not lighting fires on the Sabbath.

I think we need to look at the law of Moses as instructive, not as something we need to live strictly today. The law of Moses was intended to prepare the Jews for Christ's coming. His coming fulfilled that law and all the little rules that went with it. Remember, the Jews wouldn't eat certain animals, yet one of the apostles had a dream in which he was told that restriction was lifted (it also meant they were supposed to preach to the Gentiles).

Yes, the law of Moses said to stone disobedient children, that doesn't mean we should do that today, but that God wants us all to be obedient. It also said people who did certain things should be put to death, but I believe we should take that as instruction that those things are sins.

MD | 8:35 a.m. Aug. 16, 2008

I hope that some day these gay men will realize that the world will definitely come to an END if these men continue to have unnatural sexual relationships with other men. The human body was NEVER meant for the kind of sex these homosexuals participate in. I hope someone out there can help them get their hormones normalized. I am quite tired of these spoiled, cry babies throwing childish fits all the time because people won't except their immoral behavior. It's just not natural nor is their fit throwing.

dan | 11:18 a.m. Aug. 16, 2008

I love the gay people of this world, I couldn't imagine a world, or even heaven for that matter without them. They are wonderful people, with a desire for companionship and love, just like heterosexuals. A quote from one of my favorite films says "If God wanted all of us to be the same, why did he create us all different?". Cherish diversity people! Like the scriptures say, there is opposition in all things!

pushing the envelope | 1:28 p.m. Aug. 16, 2008

I cannot believe Affirmation would make demands like that. Dictating what kinds of addresses should be said in General Conference, Appointing female spokes persons to let Church members know they are not responsible for their childrenï¿½s sexuality. The list goes on. Affirmation needs to understand this is not how the Church is run. The church has been really patient with this organization but when Affirmation crosses the line, they will no longer be a fringe group but will be totally on the outside because they kept pushing it.

ex | 2:09 p.m. Sept. 19, 2008

The mormon church is a cult. Since at least the 1940s, the approach of orthodox, conservative, or fundamentalist Christians was to apply the meaning of cult such that it included those religious groups who used (possibly exclusively) non-standard translations of the Bible, put additional revelation on a similar or higher level than the Bible, or had beliefs and/or practices that were not held by current, mainstream Christianity. This is particularly relevant within Evangelical Christianity, which places biblical sources above all others, and would necessarily consider religious movements that use additional sources from outside the Bible to be deviant and even un-Christian. Religious groups that reject sola scriptura (such as Quakers and Mormons) would not consider another group to be necessarily less Christian on this basis.

Richard | 7:24 a.m. April 7, 2009

No matter what is/is not discussed with the First Presidency, or anyone from church headquarters:

1) The fact that acting on the feelings of same-sex attraction is a sin. Having same-sex attraction is NOT a sin.

2) Everyone within the church should show empathy for everyone in the church. Empathy however does not mean acceptance of negative behavior.

3) The lord's commandments are his commandments and will not change.

4) It is not our responsibility or right to demand anything from the church leaders.

5) It is our responsibility to work with the church leaders and follow the commandments or policies put out by the leadership of the church.

This statement is entirely my opinion and I will stick to it.

These things take time | 7:46 a.m. April 7, 2009

I still remember the General Conference - 10 years ago this conference - where the LDS leadership finally stated that it is not okay for men to abuse their wives and children.

If it took the LDS church until 1999 to public state they do not support spouse and child abuse, do you really expect them to issue a statement that homosexuality is not a sin in and of itself any time in the foreseeable future?

t | 8:33 a.m. April 7, 2009

This article is misleading with the statement that the church has said it is not a sin to be attracted to the same gender. A better way to present the that thought is that it's not a sin to be tempted with same gender attraction.

To engage with a same gender realtion, practice, and encourage the same, is a sin.

Not gay but if I were | 8:42 a.m. April 7, 2009

I would just get the heck out of Utah and the Church. There is no reason to be part of an organization, even if it is led by God, that constantly attacks and denigrates something over which you have no control. Enjoy your life and treat others in a Christlike manner. That is all the Lord has asked and will require at the last day.

I called a gay man. . . | 8:57 a.m. April 7, 2009

. . . to be my counselor in the bishopric. When I submitted his name to the stake presidency for approval, I was cautioned, but they approved my request, thinking I could help him turn around his failing marriage and his conflicted feelings as a gay man. While he was serving with me he was marvelous and made substantial contributions to the faith and support of all the ward members. When he was released, however, some years later, he took his family to San Francisco. While his wife worked as a physician full-time, he stayed at home with the children. It wasn't long before the marriage collapsed and their "role reversal" experiment failed. He is now living in a gay marriage, one of 12,000 sanctioned by California at the time, and the full-time working doctor/mother remains a single parent struggling to cope with her status -- great job, fulfilling career, but emptiness beyond description, longing for the husband and father missing from her life because of his self-indulgent lifestyle that has robbed her and her children. I have family members, likewise, who have chosen the gay lifestyle. Try as I will, I keep wondering how is it positive?

Bill | 9:40 a.m. April 7, 2009

The First Presidency has stated that SAME SEX ATTRACTION is not a sin. Acting upon that attraction though is.

I have no problem with them talking to the leadership but I don't realy foresee anything changing. In fact, the Bishop's currently have a phamlet pertaining to same-sex attraction and steps to take with it.

For those who have stated they have an attraction and are dealing with it within the realm the LORD has set, I applaud you. Any member who has directed statements otherwise I ask you to cast the first stone if you are without sin. Everyone sins in this life. Everyone can be forgiven through repentance. The Church does not try and alienate anyone but ask that you live according to the commandments of God. Gay marriage is not in line with this law.

Another fascet is that those who have left and feel the Church today is not the same as when Joseph Smith restored are badly mistaken. The Church is the same as continued revelation continues to be received. This is the Lord's Church and he is the head of the Church. He speaks through Pres. Monson.

Bruce | 10:42 a.m. April 7, 2009

Has anyone done a study of why there are so many gays in the mormon church. Is it a product of the church, the family, utah or coincidence.

Jim | 10:19 p.m. Nov. 16, 2009

I invested every ounce of faith and energy in my many callings in the Church for more than 25 years and in my temple marriage. But, I was living a lie to appear acceptable since I had known since I was 5 years old that I was gay. It is wrong to use terms like 'life style,' ' my free agency,' ' same sex feelings,' 'self indulgence' or any other term that implies volition. When did a straight person decide to become straight? I have never met a young man who could answer that question. LGBT are no different. It was wrong for me to feel compelled to be a person I never was. It was wrong to drag any other person into that charade. Why the denegration when the Savior said not one word about homosexuality and all other NT and OT references are tied to the mores and ritual codes of that day? The KJV "abomination" does not mean immoral, but against ritual. Already our children have become color blind, so will their children become sexual-idenity blind. Let's get over it and celebrate the glorious creations that we are! No struggle. Fulfillment!

Page:
< Previous
1
2

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.