Get today's headlines via email
Afternoon edition
Deseret News Family Deals
In News
Across Site
- Olympic Torch relay train engines...
- Morgan Philpot grateful after walking...
- 17-year-old hit and killed by TRAX train
- Man charged in gun flashing road rage...
- Doug Robinson: After TV, Hatches...
- Unfriendly theft: Educating against...
- Legislators vote to split, rename...
- Salt Lake City councilman questions...
- Vivint growth found in automated homes
- Senate committee says no to wine...
In News
Across Site
- Colliding causes: Gay rights and...
- Recent BYU grad found dead in tree in...
- Powells, Coxes put differences aside...
- Jason Chaffetz to Utah lawmakers:...
- Is technology making us stupid?...
- Despite data, Lyme disease sufferers...
- Crews searching recycling center in...
- Teaching the art and science of...
- Committee will explore new '22...
- LDS bishop ordered to stand trial for...
In News
Across Site
- Gay rights and religious liberty
146 - Chaffetz: Washington is 'disaster'
53 - Photos: Year of the Dragon
26 - Bill would cut auto safety checks
25 - DEA deal blow to Mexican cartel
24 - Utah takes $171M in settlement
19 - Powell told son he had 'surprise'
18 - Powell had 'incestuous' images
17 - Lawmaker: Powell warning signs
16 - Legislature: stop DUI checkpoints?
15












Church leaders have been wrong before on other things, church policies have changed, and the Sun still manages to rise each day.
I trust my inner moral compass. It tells me, in no uncertain terms, that the Church is wrong on this issue.
�If Joseph Fielding Smith writes something which is out of harmony with the revelations, then every member of the Church is duty bound to reject it. If he writes that which is in perfect harmony with the revealed word of the Lord, then it should be accepted.� - Joseph Fielding Smith
�The greatest fear I have is that the people of this Church will accept what we say as the will of the Lord without first praying about it and getting the witness within their own hearts that what we say is the word of the Lord.� - Brigham Young
Where was the common sense of church members who continued to "support" & "sustain" their church leaders in denying black members the priesthood -- despite the changes already brought about in society by the Civil Rights movement, and the lives of black church members which evidenced they were every bit as valiant and acceptable as white members. [And then, of course, there is always the fact that Joseph Smith himself ordained a black man to the priesthood].
Even the apostle Bruce R. McConkie was eventually constrained to admit, speaking of himself and other church leaders: "We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world....Forget everything that I have said ... or whoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation."
Because of the "limited" and conveniently racist understanding of church leaders and members on this issue, thousands of potential converts (black & white) never joined the church, and many active members (again both black & white) left the church.
I've been an active Mormon all my life, but I resent being told how I'm supposed to vote and which political causes I should support. In my case, this issue forces me to choose between my deeply held libertarian political philosophy and my just-as-deeply-held Mormon upbringing. The two should be perfectly compatible, especially given the church's belief in free agency.
Remember, Christ said, "Come, follow me." He didn't say, "Come, re-write the laws so everyone HAS to follow me."
There is no reason that the Church can't eventually make accomodations for the loving, committed, "earthly" relationships of same-sex couples and their children, adopted or otherwise. Doing so would apply both the principles of mercy and justice!
One other thing: with our belief that the bible is the word of God only "insofar as it is correctly translated," there is no reason that we should not reexamine the "homosexual" scriptures in the light of current day scholarship and science. Other churches have done so, and have realized that our past understanding of these scriptures were based in cultural and religious biases -- and a misunderstanding of who and what homosexuals are.
Many gays & lesbians have been in committed relationships for a lifetime.
There is a way that the LDS Church could accomodate this issue, and it is found in the fact that church members in many countries have to marry civilly first, before they can be "sealed" in a Mormon temple.
Such marriages are "for time only," in Mormon-mindset, and would thus not affect either Church doctrine nor their ideas about eternal families. After all, many things will NEVER be resolved in this live -- no matter how much we think we know.
These things, together with the fact that the LDS Church believes the bible is only God's word "as far as it is correctly translated," evidence that Mormonism needs to rethink it position and create an honorable space in its religious practices for gay & lesbian members who wish to live in loving, committed relationships.
After all, members of the Church throughout the world are often required to marry Civilly first, prior to their being "sealed" in a Mormon temple. These are "for time only" marriages, in contrast to "eternal" marriages.
Civil Marriage would provide gays & lesbians and their children the same level of security as their straight counterparts, without Mormons having to change either their present doctrines or practices.
And, ultimately, God will decide who is together in the next life.
I worry more about the rebels within the church who think they can change the doctrine of the church by lobbying.
I will stand with the prophet of the Lord and stand for marriage as between a man and a woman.
Their line about "fear of retribution" is just total hogwash. If they disagree with the teachings of the church why are they still in it?
I am tired of the wimpy, go with the flow, spineless people who on Sundays pretend to be faithful members of the church, but then spend the rest of the week opposing the teachings of the prophet.
Either we stand with the prophet and suatain him, or we reject him. He delivers God's word to us. God has called upon us to oppose the evil institution of same gender marriage.
Those who oppose the church on this by trying to twist the Doctrine and Covenants need to spend a little more time reading Alma, a little more time considering whose religious rights will be infringed upon and a little less time trying to fit in with mainstream society and be normal like everyone else.
There have been many denunciations of homosexuality in the scriptures. The Doctrine and Covenants clearly states a man should cleve unto his wife and none else. This totally excludes same gender relationships.
Your lack of knowledge about even the basics of Latter-day Saint doctrine and assumption that we have to turn to a dead prophet instead of the living Thomas S. Monson to denounce homosexuality as immoral tells me trying to answer your bated question is not worth while.
same Gender relations will never be sealed.
Your view that protest would have solved the issues related to blacks holding the priesthood is unfounded.
Why the Lord allowed the priesthood ban to remain in place I do not know.
I do not normally see church members of African descent bringing this issue up, and rarely even see church members who have many African descended friends and associates bringing up the issue with such hate and vitriol.
To people like you it is a staff to hit the church with. However you misunderstand the issue. The analogy to same gender relations is totally misplaced.
Those of African descent were not ordained to the priesthood, but they were not deemed by accepted church doctrine to be sinful by nature.
In the case of same gender marriage the church has always opposed it. The Lord has condemned it throughout history. The united first presidency has urged church members to support traditional marriage.
What is your analogy with the issue of people of Afrian descent. Maybe the statements by the First Presidency on the issue of civil rights legislation. Oh, except the first presidency came out in favor of that.
I stand with President Monson.
We get it that you're being obedient. Good for you.
What about those of us who cannot reconcile our desire to be obedient with what our heart-of-hearts tell us?
I caused a bit of a scandal in my ward when as a young man in 1975 I spoke in church against the policy denying blacks the priesthood. That was a mess.
In addition to discovering the ugly racism that many of my "friends" of the time embraced but about which I'd been clueless, I heard many people say, "You're wrong, I stand with the prophet on this issue."
Polygamy, skin color, ceremony changes, the church does change to correct itself.
My conscience, which has served me very well for decades, tells me that the church's stand regarding gays is wrong. I don't know if the church will ever agree with me, and it's really not important that they do, but I'm nonetheless going to speak my mind on the subject.
The church is wrong on this issue. It's irrational, indefensible, and hurtful. There's nothing Christ-like about it.