Comments about ‘Steve Young says he wants to build bridges with LGBT community’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, Sept. 14 2013 11:50 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Brahmabull
sandy, ut

Tuffy Parker

I am sorry but you are flat out wrong. Blacks not holding the priesthood was a DOCTRINE, not just a policy.

"Negroes in this life are denied the Priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty. The gospel message of salvation is not carried affirmatively to them... negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned, particularly the priesthood and the temple blessings that flow there from, but this inequality is not of man's origin. It is the Lord's doing, is based on his eternal laws of justice, and grows out of the lack of Spiritual valiance of those concerned in their first estate." (Mormon Doctrine, 1966, pp. 527-528)

Also:
Mike Wallace: From 1830 to 1978, blacks could not become priests in the Mormon church. Right?

Gordon B. Hinckley: That's correct.

Mike Wallace: Why?

Gordon B. Hinckley: Because the leaders of the church at that time interpreted that DOCTRINE that way.

Brahmabull
sandy, ut

continued....

also:

"The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time." (The First Presidency on the Negro Question, 17 Aug. 1949)

This was a stetement from the first presidency... you can't get much more doctrinal then that.

Please don't try to justify and sugarcoat and mislead. It was clearly a doctrine.

Hold on a second
Spring City, UT

No matter how much love and acceptance we or the Church gives, it won't change the fact that those who have same-sex relationships, who do not repent, cannot enter into the New and Everlasting Covenant of marriage, nor receive exaltation. Heavenly Father is eternal. His laws are eternal. Regardless of our personal views, He cannot and will not give into "political correctness". If He did, He would cease to be God.

Whether or not the tendency towards same-sex relationships is in-born or learned, it doesn’t matter. The point is, it runs counter to the Plan of Salvation and is abhorrent to the Lord. There is no challenge in life, but what the Lord has given us the power to overcome it. That's not to say it will be easy - but, through the atonement of Jesus Christ, all things are possible.

All who have been through the temple know what the doctrine is. We must be careful that in expressing our love and support that we aren’t subtly saying that it’s OK to be right where they are; in affect, giving up trying. If they truly desire exaltation - it's not OK!

O'really
Idaho Falls, ID

@ 273 River miles...Can you tell us how we as a church are persecuting gays? Some specific examples? I just don't see it. The only gay members I know left the church on their own because they knew their lifestyle wouldn't ( and shouldn't) be condoned. They essentially couldn't show their face at church. But they are loved and completely accepted by their families. All I see these days is members loving and accepting anyone who walks in the door of church no matter how they look or smell. If those gays decided to come to church, they would not be kicked out unless they were doing PDA with their partner or whatever.

So are we supposed to not talk about the doctrines of the church in front of homosexuals for fear of making them feel bad and "persecuted"? I believe homosexuals will feel embarrassed or self conscious during discussions like this. So Are we supposed to deny the realities of the Proclamation, of eternal families so that we prevent homosexual suicide? If so we better not talk about the Word of Wisdom around drinkers or obese, or about marriage around singles.

zoar63
Mesa, AZ

I think we are in for some troubled times. Because our minds have become grossly darkened, The Lord mentions a cleansing that will originate from a surprising location and spread from there to the rest of the world.
See D&C 112:23-27

Bob K
porland, OR

Young people do not see this issue the way most of the commenters do -- something like 75% of those under 30 see being Gay as natural, and suppression of equality as wrong. Most young people and most non-mormons see the "stay in the church but be celibate" concept as ranging from cruel and discriminatory to just plain idiotic.

I am so sick to death of the vicious lie, "The Gays do not just want rights, they want to force us to contradict our religious views and agree with them", in all its variations.
I am so sick of people who think they are mind-readers, qualifying them to say that Gays made a choice to be Gay.

LDS people tend to have large families and produce plenty of Gay offspring. I suppose it is progress to no longer cast them into the street or force them into therapy camps, but it is far from the progress made out in the rest of America.

God knows the answer -- we do not. The prophet and all mormons should be searching for what God wants, not for what is easy for the church to handle.

sukiyhtaky
us, CA

Frank...during the Prop 8 battle in California Steve Young had a sign in front of his house supporting LGBT marriage, so he is hardly the latest to cave. The natural question is if the LDS church says acting on being gay...having sex...is a sin then how can anyone supporting gay marriage be a faithful member? If you are condoning it, that would naturally prevent you from holding a temple recommend. If you encourage, support and profit from gay marriage Marriott hotels do when they sell wedding celebration packages specifically themed for gay marriages on a website they maintain strictly for their LGBT customers, how does that enable them to be members in good standing or be GA's? Romney opposed gay marriage while running for president, but now as a member of the Marriott Board of Trustees he profits from it. Is the deciding point now NOT one of doctrine, but of profit for members and the church? In California members were encouraged even by a letter read on Sunday to hold the line against gay marriage and to support its defeat. More than a few are grumbling they were left with egg on their faces.

Ophelia
Bountiful, UT

I'm an active LDS woman, who simply cannot believe the prejudice of a few isolated scriptures in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. As LDS people, we know the Bible hasn't been completely translated correctly, and there's not an iota about homosexuality in the Book of Mormon. In my mind, biases against gays are deep-rooted prejudices.

Those who suggest they "know" exactly what will happen in the hereafter are displaying an arrogance. No one "knows". We can only have faith. Women are going to continue to have periods, conceive, and deliver children in heaven? Really? With all the biological anatomy that goes along with reproduction here on earth? Really? Once again, can't wrap my head around that. I don't believe in a literal conception and deliverance in the hereafter. If I use my brain -- and I believe God wants me to -- I can definitely picture a gay family in heaven.

Brahmabull
sandy, ut

Tuffy Parker

Please don't try to mislead people and sugarcoat mormon doctrine. It most certainly was DOCTRINE. Consider the following:

"The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the DOCTRINE of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time." (The First Presidency on the Negro Question, 17 Aug. 1949)

This was a statement from the first presidency... you can't get much more doctrinal then that.

If you need more:"Negroes in this life are denied the Priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty. (mormon doctrine, p. 528) Elder McConkie was clearly repeating what the first presidency had said.

Mike Wallace: From 1830 to 1978, blacks could not become priests in the Mormon church. Right?

Gordon B. Hinckley: That's correct.

Mike Wallace: Why?

Gordon B. Hinckley: Because the leaders of the church at that time interpreted that DOCTRINE that way.

Silverprospector
SAN ANTONIO, TX

Zoar63

The lord never said that, Joseph Smith did. And given his track record of giving revelations that never came true, I wouldn't be too worried about it.

Beverly
Eden, UT

How short our memories are! The Church spent a large sum of money in support of Proposition 8 in California. Now that the United States Supreme Court has pointed out that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional, the Church is attempting to dance around this issue. It is a dance many of us enjoy - kind of like after the Civil War people in the South were dancing around slavery stating "It was not about slavery, it was about State's Rights." Yeah, sure!

JohnJacobJingleHeimerSchmidt
Beverly Hills, CA

The LDS Church can still maintain it's own policies without solemnizing civil same gender marriages. Yes, church and state can remain separate.

Baccus0902
Leesburg, VA

@ Hunam
You wrote:
"So who do I trust, when I can hardly trust my own mind and everyone claims they know what God wants..."

Nobody else knows what God wants for YOU Only you can know, "the Glory of God is intelligence" well, think about it: Are you a son of God? Does God make mistakes? Does God love you? Why am I gay? I have no idea, yet, I am.

What you are going through is what most of us have gone through. Praying, fasting, working hard in the church, read and mediate in the scriptures, hoping for that miracle that doesn't come.

My brother, the peace will be given to you when you accept yourself as a son of God. Accepting being gay or heterosexual for that matter, is not rejection of God, on the contrary, is actually accepting him, his creation and his designs for YOU.

You are not dirty, you are not an abomination, you are a child of our Heavenly Father. Please read Psalm 8 it was written for you.

JohnJacobJingleHeimerSchmidt
Beverly Hills, CA

I am LDS, educated, temple recommend holder and fully understand why there is a separation of Church and State in the Constitution. It was written to prevent and discourage the raising of one religion over another as the King of England did when he started his own church and became the head of it.

Separation of Church and State PROTECTS the LDS Church. It is what STOPS other religions from legislating the LDS CHurch as a cult. It protects the LDS CHurch from Southern states from enacting laws against being LDS or practicing our faith. Separation of Church and State is what keeps self labeled "Real Christians" from passing laws that say LDS Temple ordinances can be kept sacred and private and not open.

Separation of Church and State protects people from having to live under Sharia law if a state elected a Muslim legislature and governor. It keeps extreme right wingers from enacting Christian Sharia law on others that are not Christian. Want to see where Church and State mixed, ask Gov. Boggs and his extermination order on Mormons which was UnConstitutional yet was allowed to happen. Keep CHurch and State separate.

Truthseeker
SLO, CA

Re:BrahmaBull

From the LDS website:

"At some point the Church stopped ordaining male members of African descent, although there were a few exceptions. It is NOT KNOWN precisely why, how or when this restriction began in the Church, but it has ended."

"“The origins of priesthood availability are not entirely clear. Some explanations with respect to this matter were made in the absence of direct revelation and references to these explanations are sometimes cited in publications. These previous personal statements do not represent Church doctrine.”

donn
layton, UT

RE: Separation of Church and State PROTECTS the LDS Church. It is what STOPS other religions from legislating the LDS CHurch as a cult separation of Church and State PROTECTS the LDS Church. It is what STOPS other religions from legislating the LDS Church as a cult.
True, Signs of a cult:

1 Deify man: Man can become God. 2. Humanize God, Deny God is one eternally. 3. Minimize sin, Instead of man’s very nature. 4. Ostracize and add to scripture 5. A diiferent Jesus (exalted man) 6. Different spirit(familiar)7. Secret sacreds or sacred secrets closed to the outside 8. The only true church …..and many more

jskains
Orem, UT

It's strange this obsession with claiming God made gays that way. It's a logical fallacy that leads to the belief all behaviors are "God's design". Did God make achoholics that way? Did God make people who are depressed that way? Do we then have to accept achoholism as a lifestyle to be celebrated? It's a confused world we live in.

Say No to BO
Mapleton, UT

@Truthseeker
Thank you for your citation here. There appears to be some serious revising going on here, even changing some section headings of the Doctrine and Covenants to absolve leaders of their involvement in the matter.
But instead of clarity it clouds the issue. What is doctrine and what is merely "practice"? And do statements from the PR department and clarifications to curriculum materials have any real authority?
The church is facing political pressure to ordain women. Is there bedrock doctrine to ban such practices? Methinks it would have to be chapter and verse from canonized scripture to withstand revision.

RedShirtMIT
Cambridge, MA

To "JohnJacobJingleHeimerSchmidt" there is nothing in the Constitution about separation of church and state. That was invented later and has been perpetuated as fact when in reality it is a myth.

The Constitution states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" Establishing a religon means that the government cannot set up a state religion, like the Church of England.

Silverprospector
SAN ANTONIO, TX

jskains

Your train of thought is confusing. Did god make depressed people? Yes. Did he make bipolar, autistic, downs syndrome, obsessive compulsive, psychopathic, paranoid people? Yes, all of the above. I am in no way comparing homosexuals to a disease, but yes god does make people the way they are. Whether they are physical differences, or mental, yes god made them that way. Do you think somebody who is bipolar chose to be that way? Get real.

to comment

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