Reader comments
Gay Mormons to church: Don't fight California court ruling
48 comments | Read story
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 Mormon�s (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.
I think that the Mormon Church should oppose and fight ALL forms of immoral perversion.
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.
I see LDS people hating gay people because of this.
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.
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.
Also, the LDS church does not teach to hate gay people, it teaches to hate the sin, not the sinner.
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?
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.
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.
There's nothing new in this story, just more of the same anti gay rhetoric.
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.
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.
Our call is to love everyone, but again hate the sin, not the sinner, but sin is sin no matter what 4 judges say.
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.
� Idol worship
� Taking the Lord's name in vain
� Breaking the Sabbath Day
� Not honoring your father and mother
� Bearing false witness
� Coveting.
� Smoking
� Drinking
� Pre-marital sex
� Masturbation
� Unwed cohabitation
� 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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
- NHL roundup: Crosby leads Pens 10:27 p.m.
- Shelters seeing more hungry families 10:25 p.m.
- NBA roundup: Wolves lose again 10:24 p.m.
- New holiday meaning for Breinholt 10:23 p.m.
- Bruins edge Wild in shootout 10:16 p.m.
- News briefs 10:15 p.m.
- Scheyer leads Duke over ASU 10:14 p.m.
- Kidd 2nd all-time in assists 10:12 p.m.
- Birthdays for Thursday, Nov. 26 10:10 p.m.
- LeBron scores 34 against Detroit 10:10 p.m.
- Donny and Kym dance to victory
- Howard made the rivalry a rivalry
- Cave rescue crews must start over
- Cougars cruise past Southern
- Loyal to Cougarettes, Crimson Line
- Twitterati to BCS: 'We hate you.'
- Y. focused on 10-win season
- BYU has slim shot at BCS
- Thunder rolls by Jazz
- Witness describes '99 killing
- BYU would like friendlier rivalry
258 - Glenn Beck to enter politics?
227 - Protests against Phoenix LDS temple
208 - RSL wins MLS Cup on penalty kicks
202 - Bronco, Kyle rubber match
139 - BYU records with win
133 - Letters: Rushing to judge Palin
129 - Boys basketball rankings
108 - Thunder rolls by Jazz
103 - Hall, Johnson matchup key
102
Television has gone down hill since the mid 90s when the non-cable networks...
I agree, Collison and Bobby Brown are 2 examples of real talent that just...
for the line-up. Some of us will actually be sitting home watching TV.
I dont worry much about Maxs' blindside with Reynolds at Left Tackle....
It is a one horse race in 2A. South Sevier is deep and talented and have the...
"..if this happened at a west side school, there would not be additional...
Go Duke! The Stanford of the East!
If by not changing anything Whittingham means the Utes will be picking off...
Bunch of tightwads on this comment board upset about the money we're spending...
This is definitely a worthy cause, but a foolish way to go about shedding...


