Quantcast

Comments about ‘LDS officials to meet with gay group’

Return to article »

Dialogue will be unprecedented move for church

Published: Monday, April 7 2008 12:18 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
More to the Equation

There is more the "gay individual" then sex, just as there is more to my relationship with my wife then sex. It seems that many of the comments above feel that homosexuality is ONLY sexual and therefore a sin. Perhaps being "open minded" and engagning in "dialogue" is good in terms of learning more about the individaul and how to understand their life experience so as to be able to show appropriate support and help. This doesn't mean the church has to condone sexual activity between same-gender individuals.

Many of those members of the church that struggle with SSA are faced with the difficult question of "how do I find meaning and satisfaction (non-sexual!!!) in the church?" When others discover their struggle, they are abandoned, shunned and treated as figurative lepers. Being rejected by the church and left alone, they may turn the other direction.

While I recognize this is not the case for all, many (I am a counselor and have worked with several) would gladly follow the teachings of the church, IF the members wouldn't treat them so poorly. In view of President Monson's plea yesterday, we should be more accepting and supportive.

Darin

What I find sad is that members of Affirmation don't just leave the church altogether. I know it's not easy - believe me, I know. But who needs the self-torture? Spirituality also exists outside the organized religions that continue to condemn homosexuality. Religions of all sorts do this without a thought to how desctructive it is, or how far away from the actual teachings of Christ. No religion has a monopoly on the Law of Love. In the majority of comments posted here there is some claim to speak for "the Lord". Could anything be more arrogant? Who needs this kind of company when the entire thinking, scientific, rational, and truly Christian world accepts you?

RE: KEN

I agree with you 100%. BOTH sides need to be willing to have an open discussion and be willing to listen or it will be a total waste of time.

To: More to the Equation /

Thank you...people like you give me hope that the church isn't filled with hateful, self-righteous people.

YOU GET IT...AND I THINK THAT IS RARE SOMETIMES.

Thanks!

Blake

To Interesting

I think it's funny how gays pull out the intolerance card and attempt to shame Church members by quoting our leaders on issues of tolerance. I especially love the line "guess not too many of you actually LISTENED to what was said at conference". That's rich. If YOU actually listened to what was said at conference, you wouldn't want to act out on your same gender attraction, you wouldn't seek for the church to conform to your twisted standards, you would seek to be obedient. Now, really, who isn't listening?

Mormon Mommy

When my 15-year-old son came out to me three years ago, my whole world came crashing down and the church I have loved all my life suddenly became useless in seeing me and my son through this crisis. My hope is that a dialogue between Affirmation and the church will lead to the church offering more support to families in our situation. It's long overdue!

Hypocrisy...


RE:To Interesting | 9:34 a.m. Apr. 7, 2008

"Can you show me where it says that this meeting is about asking the church to change it's doctrine? It clearly states the opposite, they are NOT asking for the church to change it's doctrine, but wants to discuss other topics. And I can handle blunt, just not hypocricy."

Let see, what's in the minds of the people sitting across the table from the LDS Church Representatives: "you need to accept us for who we are and should be freely allowed to express ourselves."

Would the Church accept that? I don't think so. I can see To Interesting's point here Interesting. I don't think it was hypocrisy in my book.

Come on...

The church would be more likely to allow members to drink and smoke before allowing gay, lesbian and transgender men and women into the temple. BYU would be more likely to give up their spot as "stone cold sobber" than to change for the gay agenda. It's true we should never look down upon them and always welcome them as people but this is a religion, not politics. You can talk all you want but as has been said above, a sin is a sin. We never keep anyone from coming to church. It's funny because this issue is one of the only issues the church has taken an official political decision on and activly campaigned against. Don't think that will change.

The Lord loves but he will not pander to the gay agenda. "If the Lord be God than follow him!"

Dialogue is Good

It's wonderful that the Church is meeting with this group. There's nothing to be gained by ignoring them. There's everything to be gained by listening and trying to be more understanding of the challenges gay people face.

No, the Church does NOT need to change its standards in any way, including the BYU Honor Code. Nor will they EVER do so as a result of this meeting. Not gonna happen, folks--nor should it. But individual members of the Church CAN greatly benefit, whether or not they choose to recognize it, by learning more understanding of and sympathy for the challenges homosexuals face. THAT'S THE PROBLEM. THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO LISTEN.

I'm an active, straight Mormon with a gay cousin, good bisexual friend, and several other past and present gay colleagues. No, their lifestyle is NOT correct. However, I definitely wish more people understood what they *really* think and feel. They may not have chosen wisely, whatever was in their power to choose--but they never stopped being children of God. Our unrighteous judgment, NOT endorsed by the Savior, hurts rather than helps them.

There are many among us . . .

who have suffered long in their efforts to remain sin-less while struggling with same-sex attraction. Of course, none of us is sinless and so we should all be very sensitive to any discussion about sin. And, there are many single church members who have remained celibate rather than marry, for example, because they choose that path towards righteousness. Have we included them enough? Or maginalized them? Have we recognized they are doing the best they can, or made them feel inadequate because of their "singleness?" Have we put our arms around them, and remembered who will ultimately judge each one of us for our actions and the intents of our hearts? Do you remember what Pres. Eyring said at Pres. Hinckley's funeral? [paraphrased -- with a finger on his chest -- "Hal, what are you doing for those who are atruggling?]

Is there something to talk about here?

Seems like it.

Ray

Diversity=Divide

Not the way to go.

Let God be their judge, I don't want to be.

To: More to the Equation

You said so much that I wanted to say as well. So many cannot imagine how difficult it is trying to stay faithful to the gospel in a culture that doesn't tolerate you. Would you want to stay somewhere where people constantly called you a sinner, even though you adhere to the teachings of the church? I think what Affirmation is trying to do is open dialog so that the general church membership welcomes homosexual members who choose to follow the gospel. On a side note, shouldn't church be a place for sinners? Shouldn't all who are trying to live a good life be welcome, regardless of who they are? We all need to feel like we belong.

Jumping to Conclusions

So many of you are jumping to conclusions that are completely implausable. The church agreed to a meeting to where it can "help". The church is not going to change its policy (doctrine) on this subject regardless of how many meetings are held. This is a time and place to better understand points of view, not change fundamental elements to the church.

As an active member of the church, I applaud the concept of a better understanding between the groups, but beyond that, core doctrine will not change.

Anonymous

If a dialogue between the LDS Church and Affirmation occurs, I would hope that Family Fellowship (a support group for families of Gay/Lesbian/Bi-sexual members) will also be included in the conversation. As members of that group, we have struggled for years hoping for a shred of recognition by church officials for our sons and daughters, and we sincerely hope that the church will eventually recognize the reality of homosexuality and other aspects of biological diversity in our families. Their failure in the past has caused untold suffering in families of homosexual children. I speak from experience.

Elder Holland's Ensign Article

Was a great help for me in understanding the church's stance on LDS homosexuals. I urge you to read it, I believe it was in the October '07 issue??? He stated that members with same-sex attraction may be active and hold temple recommends as long as they are not participating in a sexual relationship outside of marriage. The Same standard that every other member in the church is held to. The Family Proclamation states that marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman. The LDS Homosexual will face many choices in their life, just as the straight homosexual will about love, relationships, and intimacy. If Celestiality is the goal, the child of God will meet the standard that is set no matter what appetites, habits, etc they will need to overcome.

Not Doctrinal issue

I agree with the above statements stating that this is not a doctrinal issue.

However, I think there is much that can be done in the way homosexual tendencies are handled in the church. I come from a family that experienced sex abuse by a trusted member back in the late 70's. The way it was handled was simply atrocious and damaging. It was largely because the way sex abuse cases were handled in the church had not been developed, and nobody seemed to know what to do.

I believe a similar process must occur with dealing with homosexual cases in the church; not to condone or accept the practice, but to provide help, support, and realistic understanding of what the rest of a gay person's life in the church will be like.

Hopefull

RE: more to the equation and Blake.

I agree! and I wish people would put this article in context that it is about a DISCUSSION not conversion. Understanding people is needed to love them.

Thank you for voicing your belief that not all LDS are like those described above. Hopefully after this weekend, more people will focus on loving people not converting them.

comment

If Latter Day Saints are to carry the gospel message to all the world,to all people,to all cultures,to all societies,to all life styles,then we as Latter Day Saints need to have open dialog with all of the above. Are we going to continue to say I cant share the gospel with you because you are gay. Share the gospel with your gay friends,invite the Holy Ghost into your conversations with your gay friends and allow Hevenly Father to perform the mircle needed.Someone said in conference 2 people can perform mircles when one of them is God.Our missionaries go forth without fear. We cannot and will not fear the direction we need to go with our gay brothers and sisters.If the prophet says to do it, then do it.

room and respect

I think the most basic understanding that is sought by gay members (and gays generally) is for others to acknowledge that people don't choose their sexual orientation. If we accept this, then the standards of the Church would seem to require celibacy from these members. But there is little room for single and celibate members in the church (of any orientation), and almost no role for them to play.

A member who is open about being gay-even if celibate and trying to live the principles of the gospel-faces enormous ostracism in most LDS wards and even hostility in some cases. This is because the issue remains such a taboo and is almost never discussed in the church other than in terms of behavior-the sin. The church could teach members that gay people didnt choose their orientation and encourage members to be respectful and supportive of them, and of other single members. This would be a very welcome outcome of this dialogue.

kinlco

As a gay LDS man and not a member or believer of Affirmation, I am glad that they are speaking with some leaders. No one understands how it feels to sit in Sunday School or Sacrament meeting and have someone make a comment that God doesn't allow gays in his Church. I did not choose to have these feelings. I have not chosen the lifestyle, yet, when people learn of my struggle, I am not accepted. Maybe, just maybe, having the leaders accept those who are challenged with same-gender attraction will help others accept me also. And there are support groups for those who want to remain faithful to covenants that have been made and live according to the values and doctrines of the Church. It is just that they do not scream and yell about it.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments