Quantcast

Comments about ‘Role reversal: Gay-rights advocates 'not tolerant'’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, June 11 2011 11:38 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Vince here
San Diego, CA

Jeff | 9:04 p.m. June 13, 2011

According to your logic if neither gay nor heterosexual represent identity but only sexual practices, then, please explain the following,

"Do heterosexuals need to engage in sex in order to be heterosexuals?"

Vince here
San Diego, CA

The article does a poor job at generalizing who gay rights groups advocates are and moreover, the article shows those groups as anti-faith.

Nothing can be further from the truth.

There are gays of all kinds - religion, or the lack thereof, is not the standard by which to measure sexual identity. Should it?

That there exists bigotry is true. Bigotry and intolerance should not happen. Try growing up gay and see how much intolerance there is.

Faith (religious) people should, of course, feel that they have religious freedom, but not at the expense of denying others the same right, in terms of identity and rights.

One of the groups listed in the article, Exodus, however, is there to perpetuate nothing more than falsehoods and empty promises. Their studies are baseless, their logic thwarted, and the results dismal.

In other examples, again, religious-based organizations should not promote legislation based on outright lies for political purposes. Duly granted, families, of all types, nuclear and non-traditional, are the basis of society. Love and respect are the ties that bind family groups together.

Mick
Murray, Utah

LGBT community-

I believe in the definition of marriage between a man and a woman. I believe that the gay community should have all rights that the government has the ability to grant.

That is not hate. Please don't twist my words.

I hope youe afford me my beliefs without hate of my religion or beliefs.

1Infidel
APO, AE

I question again the DN policy of 4-posts per thread and the obvious inconsistency in allowing one P p p poster here, by whatever means and number of logins, to continue to abrogate that policy.

Jeff
Temple City, CA

"Vince here" asked me if, by my logic, "heterosexuals need to engage in sex in order to be heterosexuals?"

The answer would be yes.

I don't believe that we are defined by our temptations, but by how we choose to act.

Given that, I don't know what you mean by "growing up gay." Do you mean that you grew up having sex with other males, or simply wanting to? Or do you mean that you grew up identifying with tradtionally female activities as opposed to traditionally male activities? If you were sexualized at a very early age, what caused that?

All of us grow up with perceived intolerance from others, and most, if not all, of us feel "different," lonely, and rejected during various periods of our lives. Almost all of us question our sexuality in some way and worry about our relative normalcy.

What do you say to someone who was sexualized at a very early age, and is constantly tempted toward pedophilia. Is that person a pedophile even if they don't act?

lds4gaymarriage
Salt Lake City, UT

Mick
I believe that the gay community should have all rights that the government has the ability to grant.

LDS4
In a statement by Elder Lance B. Wickman, Church General Counsel in an interview he gave along side of Elder Dallin H. Oaks on the Church's Newsroom site, he stated - "If you have some legally sanctioned relationship with the bundle of legal rights traditionally belonging to marriage and governing authority has slapped a label on it, whether it is civil union or domestic partnership or whatever label it's given, it is nonetheless tantamount to marriage. That is something to which our doctrine simply requires us to speak out and say, 'That is not right. That's not appropriate.' " His statement is a clear call for the Church to continue getting involved in the realm of Caesar contrary to the Lord's call for separating Church and State and also contrary to D&C 134:4 and 1 Cor. 10:29 which denounce using our religious beliefs to prompt us to infringe upon the rights and liberties of others.

The Church has already fought against Civil Unions being adopted. This is why the LGBT community calls us haters.

JM
Lehi, UT

The Civil War was fought partially because some tried to override the majority opposition to slavery, and thus Government "by The People."

LDS4 The standard Works encourage voting on laws (and when majorities go against righteousness they ripen for destruction) Helaman5:2; and they also condemn homosexual acts.

In our Democracy, The People say we dont have certain rights. Murder; pot (once legal); polygamy (formerly legal); gay and bisexual marriage; speeding etc are not rights.
Voting is.

Im4gays, but now strongly oppose gay marriage. Marriage legally binds into crucial heterosexual relationships, sending a message to all that such are sacred.
I love my gay family, friends, and coworkers.

However activists have deceived us about homosexuality. While final causes are unknown, research indicates:

1 Homosexuality is more influenced by environment than genetics (see narth). We create environment.

2 Mainstreaming homosexuality through marriage, school courses (often including only history/studies manipulated by activists), etc increases homosexuality.

3 Increasing homosexuality increases suicide (even where gays are accepted majorities), addiction, violence, domestic violence, etc.

Ive seen the tears (some mine) and broken families caused by mainstreaming homosexuality.

I also oppose Jeffs (polygamist) and gays overturning voted upon laws concerning polygamy and gay marriage.

firstamendment
Lehi, UT

LDS have called for civility and love, and many activists have called to "destroy." LDS have had rocks thrown, been fired, had windows shot out, imitation anthrax sent (just "a prank") etc.

I hoped the HRC would call for a stop to this bullying, they didnt, still there is now a pretense to kindness, but the underlying hatred seems still there.

Here is one of many activist comments showing the attitude Ive encountered in media, most of the others the DN won't post:

"We are going to go after your church every day for the next two years unless and until Prop 8 is overturned...I would delight if everyone voting for 08 ended up unemployed, penniless and starving on the street...Boycott all Moron businesses. Drive them into the ground and let them know what we'll do when they spend money to hurt us."

Contrast this with LDS statements that bullying is never ok, that no one need feel guilt for desires, Christ was likewise tempted etc.

Activists are also fulltime posting anti-Mormon propaganda, and posting as offensive Mormons (I guess to increase hate towards LDS??) and otherwise attacking LDS and faith on unrelated articles.

lds4gaymarriage
Salt Lake City, UT

JM | 

LDS4 The standard Works encourage voting on laws (and when majorities go against righteousness they ripen for destruction) Helaman5:2; and they also condemn homosexual acts.

LDS4
I agree with 100%. Homosexual acts ARE in direct opposition to the scriptures and Church doctrine. No argument from me here. That isn't the issue though. We LDS are to promote democratic principles, but the scriptures rein us in a bit. D&C 134:4 and 1 Cor. 10:29 denounce us using our religious beliefs to prompt us to infringe upon the rights and liberties of others. We are forbidden in denying others their rights, even if it means people use their liberties to sin. Satan was all about forcing righteous behavior. We LDS are forbidden to use force to get others to behave righteously.

I also agree that when majorities go against righteousness they ripen for destruction. Does this justify using force? No. We are to use kindness gentleness, meekness, persuasion, long-suffering and love unfeigned to get others to eschew sin and live righteously.

Vince here
San Diego, CA

Jeff | 12:41

Jeff, it is clear by your comments that you haven't done your reading - my question was meant to see where your logic took you. NARTH, incidentally, argues that there is no such thing as homosexuality, there is only heterosexuality. I wanted to see your initial reactions, and sure enough, your comments are, sorry to say, superficial.

As to the comment of pedophilia - the vast majority of incarcerated pedophiles are self-identified heterosexuals.

What I mean by the comment of "growing-up gay" means that I, like many gay males, identify with a large part of feminine traits and behavior characteristics, nothing to do with sex, but with identity. To that effect, some heterosexual boys "grow out," so to speak, of feminine behavior from early childhood just as some girls grow out of being tomboys. Behavior and identity is not always synonymous.

If you equate homosexuality with temptation, I submit the alternative - what would gays do, if homosexuality is a temptation, as you defend? Marry a heterosexual? The vast majority of those marriages don't last. Become a heterosexual? Psychotherapy does not work. Be celibate and alone? And unhappy? I thought happiness was the purpose of life.

Jeff
Temple City, CA

To "lds4gaymarriage": I am increasingly troubled by your insistence on trying to use LDS doctrine and teachings to prove the prophet wrong. There is nothing wrong with your having a personal belief that so-called "gay marriage" is a good thing (though you're wrong); there is something wrong with your use of LDS scripture to try to justify something that cannot be justified by using LDS scripture. Your reading of D&C 134 is strained; there is nothing in that section that is meant to imply that the Church should sit back and allow unrighteousness to be sanctioned by law; nor does it prohibit the Church from reasonable lobbying; nor does it prohibit the Church from telling members what is right and wrong and asking them to defend the right. Do D&C 121 and 134 take away all of the rights of the Church? No. And they certainly don't take away a fundamental belief of the Latter-day Saints--that there is a modern prophet on the earth to direct us.

If we are called names by those who want to give legal weight to unrighteousness, then so be it.

Jeff
Temple City, CA

@ "Vince here": I think you read things into my response that weren't there or weren't intended.

I had never heard of "NARTH" before your post; so it's true that I haven't done any reading on that score, but I have read a lot on the subject from a variety of other sources both pro and con.

I do not equate pedophilia with either homo- or heterosexuality directly, except insofar as the sexuality manifests itself in same or opposite gender acts. I meant to suggest that, regardless of the strength of a person's passion, s/he does not become a pedophile until s/he acts on the impulse.

In my definition, "homosexuality" is not a temptation; it is an action. Same-sex attraction is the temptation. No, I do not believe people with same-sex attraction should marry someone from the opposite sex until or unless they find themselves attracted to the opposite sex (some do).

I do not believe that sexuality is a determiner of happiness or unhappiness. It is certainly possible to be celibate and happy, just as it is possible to be sexual and unhappy.

I agree with you that growing up effeminate is not necessarily gay.

lds4gaymarriage
Salt Lake City, UT

Jeff |
To "lds4gaymarriage": I am increasingly troubled by your insistence on trying to use LDS doctrine and teachings to prove the prophet wrong. (T)here is something wrong with your use of LDS scripture..
LDS4
The prophets have stated that their words are NOT official doctrine. Only the scriptures are. You don't like my take on D&C 134:4 and 1 Cor. 10:29? When IS it OK to use religious belief to justify infringing upon the rights of others? Is it OK for just us, or are antis, Muslims, etc...also allowed to?

...there is nothing .. to imply that the Church should sit back and allow unrighteousness to be sanctioned by law; nor ..prohibit..lobbying..

The Church should only use persuasion to promote righteousness. ETB stated,Government is force. Force is of Satan. McConkie stated,
In this present world where wicked men will not repent and come unto the fulness of the Lord's perfect order of government, there must be two separate powers 'ecclesiastical and civil' the one supreme in spiritual matters, the other in temporal. Neither power can dictate to the other. "

We need to obey scripture and render unto Caesar. The prophet isn't Caesar too.

A voice of Reason
Salt Lake City, UT

One cannot justify LDS doctrinal support for gay marriage.

The first presidency released a statement on this issue with the following quotation- "The Churchs teachings and position on this moral issue are unequivocal."

It is doctrine. It is from our prophet, the 12, the scriptures, etc. It is one thing if you want to argue about one source being fallible within the church. But when every official authority within the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints stands firm and gives us a clear definition of what is the truth from our Father in Heaven (a man who has more ability to reason than anyone on this Earth)... it is very clear, the truth has been given to us.

There are those who do not accept it regardless. While I urge those to reconsider, I understand that it happens. But to try to convince others that your own ideas of LDS doctrine are the truth, Joseph Smith both commanded and revealed in the Doctrine and Covenants the line of authority when receiving revelation. It is a serious transgression to try to sway people away from God's truth, if you feel you may be doing this, please reconsider.

firstamendment
Lehi, UT

Lds4 I agree with Jeff.

Activists often seek to silence religious voices. You seem to argue that if LDS speak out against ANYTHING (murder, pedophilia, speeding, gay marriage etc) that we are forcing our religion on others. This recurring argument means only Agnostics etc can speak/vote on moral issues.

This is contrary to the Standard works, so I reject it.

The research indicates that gay marriage is harmful to all. I've seen eternal procreative families destroyed by gay propaganda.

Gays will survive without marriage.

The World won't survive without keeping hetoerosexual marriage sacred.
Think of all.

Vince, stats on gays and pedophilia depend on who you get your info from. The claim that mainly heterosexual men are molesting males doesn't work for me.

Pedophile organizations are intertwined with the gay/lesbian coalition (See Mirkin H. 1999 and "Man/boy love and the American gay movement" in Journal of Homosexuality.

And Pedophile activists present arguments very much like gay activists: "the sexually privileged have disadvantaged the pedophile through sheer political force in the same way that blacks were disadvantaged by whites before the civil-rights movement."

From narth article: "On the Pedophilia Issue: What the APA Should Have Known"

Kevin J. Kirkham
Salt Lake City, UT

A voice of Reason - One cannot justify LDS doctrinal support for gay marriage.

KJK - I, and I'm sure LDSforgaymarriage, agree that homosexual acts, including marriage, are contrary to established LDS doctrine. The dispute is whether Mormons should try limiting the LEGAL rights of others preventing them from violating our faith's doctrines. The verses LDSforgaymarriage cites clearly show that God frowns on this idea and I haven't seen any interpretation of his and other verses that permit Mormons to infringe upon the rights of others.


AVOR - It is doctrine. It is from our prophet, the 12, the scriptures, etc.

KJK - John Widtsoe said, "In no sense can the Church be called autocratic. No one, from the President down, can dictate to the Church. All must be done in harmony with gospel principles, and by common consent. Even new revelations from the Lord are presented to the people for acceptance as part of the doctrine of the Church." Until the Proclamation or a First Presidency/12 Apostles statement is approved via Common Consent, they are NOT doctrine. They must bow to scripture and scripture condemns our infringing upon the rights of others as Proposition 8 objectively did.

Kevin J. Kirkham
Salt Lake City, UT

FA - Lds4 seem(s) to argue that if LDS speak out against ANYTHING (murder, pedophilia, speeding, gay marriage etc) that we are forcing our religion on others.

KJK LDS4 (and I) don't condemn speaking out against those things. I have read LDS4 state several times that that we are to use gentleness, meekness persuasion and love unfeigned to get people to live righteously. He condemns us using our religious beliefs to justify infringing upon the legal rights of others. Proposition 8 infringed upon the existing CIVIL rights of gay. The verses LDS4 quotes shows that infringing upon the rights of others, especially when founded upon our subjective religious doctrines, is condemned.

Pedophilia is objectively wrong because it involves harming children who don't and can't give their consent. I doubt LDS4 would support pedophilia or condemn laws against it.

Gays make up only about 2% of the population and even a smaller % of marriages. Allowing gays to marry won't affect whether straights get married or not. Do you REALLY believe that a straight couple will state that if gays are allowed to marry, that they will refuse to marry and instead simply live together? Of course not.

to comment

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