Comments about ‘BYU rehangs photo exhibit’

Nothing to see here. Move along folks.

This article should prove to be a real "lightning rod" to attract Forum posters of all shades of opinion. One can hope that none of the comments will be "abusive, offensive, off-topic," or "misrepresentative".

Nice story. I understand some things are different at BYU, but I thought they used the same calendar everyone else does.

So, if one proclaims to be gay yet he refrains from the act is he still gay?

The word tolerance was used twice here in the story and the words words hate and bigot were also used. Just because I don't tolerate certain lifestyles doesn't mean that I hate or am a bigot. Right is right and wrong is wrong. Those who accuse the L.D.S. community of intolerance ,are themselves hateful, and bigoted, and intolerant of my beliefs. Pictures are pictures, big deal.

What don't BYU students understand about the church's policy. The LDS church does not condone homosexuality. Does the church love gay people? Yes. Loving someone and accepting the lifestyle they choose are two completely different things. Why the church is has to continually answer this question is beyond me. People just don't seem to get it. I have two great friends, not my best friends but good friends. They are gay. Do I think less of them, NO! Do I still love them as friends? Absolutely! However, I DO NOT accept homosexuality as a righteous practice, nor should I be forced to do so.

Why is it that the gay community cannot accept my belief? Why is it that they cannot accept my vote by my conscience? It appears that in today's society I am being strong armed into accepting a practice that I STILL think is wrong.

Does my morality have a place in society? I guess whichever way you look at it someone will not be happy but quit asking me to defy what I believe to be correct. Thankyou.

The end result of this issue at BYU is an example of "patience is a virtue". That is why pentagenarians and above are called to lead at BYU. That sometimes patience and wisdom are required to make the correct decision.

I applaud the artist for his talents and willingness to develop them at BYU.In addition I hope that he will develop the wisdom to use his talent to reflect the good in society and not the bad.(Please, no hidden meaning.)

The Administration at BYU showed exemplary leadership with their judgement and decision. May Mr. Wiltbank strive to do the same in his quest.

Regards,
drw

While I have compassion for those who may suffer from same sex attraction I do not understand why BYU feels it needs to show an exhibit of openly gay students. In my mind to be openly gay means you not only have same sex attraction feelings but you act on those and have inappropriate same sex relationships. Why don't we have an exhibit of students who struggle with any other inappropriate behavior? The voice of the gay community is so loud and so constant it is beginning to wear us all down. I believe that to be the goal of the gay community. Wear us all down so we will finally admit that same sex attraction is normal and they can practice their craft with impunity from Church and state. Well, in my mind it is not normal, and never will be. Should we have tolerance and love for those who may struggle with this, absolutely. Should we view it as normal and good, absolutely not.

I believe that BYU did the right thing to correct the misunderstanding by re-displaying the exhibit, since it does not violate the honor code which Mr Wiltbank signed. The fact that the school did this, in spite of a clear policy against homosexual conduct, should be applauded.
I am disappointed with Mr Wiltbanks actions on this matter.
As quoted,
Wiltbank said he spoke with college leadership on Monday. Later that day, bloggers around the country began to criticize BYU and its owner, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Mr Wiltbank did the right thing to discuss it with BYU, and BYU did the right thing to redisplay the work.
However, for Mr Wiltbank to prematurely criticize BYU in his blog, before a decision was made, is detestable. His actions unleashed criticism and propagated misunderstanding throughout the country before BYU even had a chance to act in good faith.
Mr Wiltbanks premise of showing tolerance on both sides of the issue appears now to be an attempt to show tolerance on only one side of the issue. His actions have directly lead to further intolerance toward the LDS church and BYU. Poor form.

Does Wiltbank want the church to petition God to change eternal marriage to include gay partnerships in the celestial kingdom? Hmmm. I wonder how that dialogue will evolve. We'll have to change the words in the hymn, "Oh My Father". I was taught all my young life by my parents that I would live to see the day when every worthy male could hold the priesthood, and our family celebrated that revelation. But I was never taught that one day I would see temple sealings of anyone to anyone and that same-sex marriages are an eternal principle.

Many have missed the special thing about this display. They put it up November 31. As Paul Harvey would say, "Now that is news."

I agree with Missing the Point's comments. Tolerance is a two way road. More and more people are realizing how hateful, bigoted, and intolerant the gay movement is. I accept everybody as equals, but I do not accept certain behavior.

Wiltbank here seems to be walking a fine line. On one hand, his exhibit apparently doesn't violate the BYU Honor Code, since it doesn't engage in(!) or actively promote homosexual conduct. It's just photos of BYU students who claim to "be" gay.

On the other hand, what is Wiltbank's intent here? Is it to put a face with a condition, like an exhibit of cancer sufferers? Or is it to very subtly promote gay marriage or homosexuality itself as normal and harmless? If so, he's smart to leave that unsaid. And the lack of a clear, non-fluff statement on his intent leaves me suspecting that promoting gay marriage or homosexuality itself is his private desire and intent.

I think Milbank was trying to create controversy when he put up the display. This is a particularly sensitive subject at this time and he just enflamed the situation even more by creating the display. It was really bad form.

Under the circumstances, the School did the right thing by allowing the display and it will be nice if the whole thing just dies a natural death. But, it will probably be picked up nationally and cause even more controversy for the Church. Again, bad form on the part of Mr. Milbank.

Neither the Church nor the School will not be intimidated into changing a policy that is based on right and truth. These principles are eternal and no amount of pressure is going to change that. God is the same yesterday, today and forever.

What objective do gay individuals have in openly declaring that they are gay? If I was gay, I don't think I would be announcing it to the world. I would quietly strive to change, because I know that I want to become like my Savior. If I had a problem with pornography, should I try to defend my "orientation," or should I quietly meet with my bishop, and possibly counsel with loved ones, and strive to change and become virtuous in my heart?

Seems to me that "Missing the Point" misses the point. MtP says, "The LDS Church does not condone homosexuality." Homosexuality is the state of being burdened with homosexual attraction. My understanding is that the LDS Church does not condone homosexual relations, but neither condones nor forbids someone being born with homosexual attraction. The state of being born with homosexual attraction is not a sin. The Church condones righteous behavior or forbids sinful behavior. It does not condone or forbid states of being. Does the Church condone or forbid children born with too many or too few fingers or toes? With IQ's of 85 vs. 145?

What does a group of pictures have to do with homosexuality? These were not, and are not pictures of a sexual act decipting homosexual behaviors - they are of PEOPLE. What is so hard, or so threating to members of the church to have to look at the person, not the sin? I am a fourth generation member, I am active, and could hold a temple recommend if I chose, but I am first a mother of a gay son who I adore - and never see his gayness when I look at him. He is 20 years old and is proud to admit that he is not sexually active, not has never been - how many straight kids in the church can honestly state that? It is a world of small minds that assumes that gender preference infers sexual deviance and immoral behavior - I think this artists display was lost on most of you. When will we all recognize that life is not all about YOU!

What next? Maybe we could photograph pedophiles and the kids they are attracted to. Of course the photographer would not be promoting deviance would he? Wake up people or slide down the slippery slope! Any promotion of homosexuality is wrong. Get the photos out of BYU and make a statement. I'm tired of having to "tolerate" perversion.

Just as I would not view pronography, I will not view the "message photos", vote with your attendance. I will not be attending any other fine arts events for the next few months, voting with $ is my way of making another statment about this display.

@So and @Gary,

If you were a straight student at BYU, or just following the church's admonition not to have sex before marriage, does that make you asexual rather than heterosexual? You don't have to be actively having sex to be gay.