Comments about ‘Christian denominations sorting out how to navigate world with same-sex marriage’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Sept. 25 2013 4:15 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
RG
Buena Vista, VA

@ Ranch
"You keep calling us sinners."

How do I keep calling you anything, since that was my first comment?

Who is "us"?

And if you carefully read my original comment you will see that I said "we are all sinners." But you still accused me of having a beam in my eye.

It seems that you might be overly sensitive to what I considered a thoughtful comment. I wasn't thinking so much about funerals as about marriage, but reasonable people might disagree about what actions "condone" gay marriage.

Nevertheless, my overall point was that contrary to BYU Track Star's implication that Jesus' association with sinners might mean that sin was ok, that Jesus never said sin was ok.

Lagomorph
Salt Lake City, UT

Article: "The rules... also prohibit chaplains from acknowledging a spouse of the same gender at a retirement or promotion ceremony, or from assisting at a funeral if it would 'give the impression that the Church approves of same-sex 'marital' relationships.'"

I can think of few things more heartless or less Christlike (not to mention petty) than intentionally withholding comfort to a grieving person who has just lost a loved partner. Any person who could do so does not deserve to be called human, let alone chaplain.

At least if the chaplains won't come through, gay service members may be able to resort to the Commander in Chief. This paper reported elsewhere that former President G.H.W. Bush just attended a lesbian wedding and signed the legal documents.

Contrariuser
mid-state, TN

@sashabill --

"Moral standards, by definition, are discriminatory"

You don't seem to understand the legal definition of "discrimination".

"In Constitutional Law, the grant by statute of particular privileges to a class arbitrarily designated from a sizable number of persons, where no reasonable distinction exists between the favored and disfavored classes. ...."

Notice that essential phrase: WHERE NO REASONABLE DISTINCTION EXISTS.

In cases of moral standards, reasonable distinctions DO exist. Therefore, they are not legally discriminatory. In cases of sexual orientation, there are no such distinctions.

"The LGBT crowd has confused "love" or "tolerance" with relativism."

EVERY moral standard is relative.

"Thou shalt not kill" -- unless you support the death penalty. Unless you're killing in self defense. Unless you declare war on another country.

"Thou shalt not create graven images." -- unless you're a religious artist.

"Remember the Sabbath" -- even Jesus himself said that this one was relative.

Acknowledging the relativity of morals does NOT mean that morality doesn't exist!

"There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?"
-- James 4:12

" Judge not, that ye be not judged."
-- Matthew 7:1

Ranch
Here, UT

@RG;

You said:

"But associating with them does not mean condoning their sin. He told the adultress, go and sin no more, not to keep doing it."

The article is about same-sex couples marrying. Clearly, you are equating same-sex couples to "sinners" with your comment that essentially we "keep on doing it" by being a couple and getting married.

Perhaps I am a bit sensitive, but I'm really getting tired of religious hypocrites. If we're "all sinners" and we should "sin no more", then perhaps religious people should stop judging others and mind their own business.

I M LDS 2
Provo, UT

Navigating a world with legalized same-sex marriage is easy:

Follow the law.

Treat others with respect and dignity, especially those who subscribe to beliefs different than your own.

Treat others the way you would wish to be treated.

How hard is that?

Spider Rico
Greeley, CO

@Ranch. It's not bad for us to speak up against sin. Christ spoke against sin as well as all the prophets. Nowhere in the Bible does it say we should let sins pass by unnoticed. We all sin and have fallen short of the glory of God, but that doesn't mean we should let sin thrive. We must all stand up to sin and its encroachment into our homes and our communities. We should not be forced to accept sinful practices or become a part of them. Now you can quote some scripture to make me out to be a hypocrite - go ahead. I know I have my own faults and am working on them. But I will not sit idly by and let others attack my belief system.

RG
Buena Vista, VA

@ Ranch
I gave a lesson in Church recently about not judging. (Based on a talk by Dallin Oaks, August 1999 Ensign) We don't judge people, especially anyone's ultimate state in the hereafter, but we are supposed to judge between right and wrong. This is why the scriptures say "judge not" but they also say "judge righteous judgment." Judge not people's ultimate destiny, but judge what is right and wrong. God has said that certain things are wrong. All of us have problems with one or more of these things, but we're supposed to repent and stop doing them, not rationalize our behavior. One of those things God prohibits is intimate relations with those of the same gender (and while we're at it, of the opposite gender unless we're married.) But God made the rule; I didn't. As far as minding my business, true, someone else's relationship is not my business except 1) as a voter I vote for what I believe helps society, and 2) if I was a Church leader, I'd have to clarify Church standards. My 1st post was meant to clarify Jesus' position.

Contrariuser
mid-state, TN

@RG --

"One of those things God prohibits is intimate relations with those of the same gender "

Sez you.

1. Old Testament laws were replaced by the New Covenant.
2. Jesus never said a single word against homosexuality.
3. Homosexuality isn't mentioned anywhere in the Gospels, except for one passage in which Jesus acknowledges -- WITHOUT condemnation -- that some men are "born eunuchs" (in ancient texts, the term "eunuch" included homosexuals) and that such men should not marry women. (Matthew 19:12)
4. Paul didn't like homosexuals. Paul also supported slavery, believed that women were inferior to men, told everyone that nobody should ever get divorced, and claimed that it was better to remain single than to marry. He was a mortal, fallible man. Paul was the ONLY person in the New Testament who spoke against homosexuality.
5. Many religious people -- including Christians, Jews, and members of other faiths -- support gay rights. They have no trouble reconciling the text of the Bible with the full citizenship of gay people.
6. Many Christian denominations are already happy to perform gay marriages.
6. Even if God DOES consider homosexuality a sin, it isn't our job to judge. Judging is GOD'S job.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

Just remember --

How you judge others, is how you yourself will be judged.

RG
Buena Vista, VA

@Contrariuser
"Sez you."
No, says modern prophets.
Jesus and the Biblical prophets probably said lots more than we realize on the subject, but we don't have all they said. Thus, the need for modern revelation.

Just because you may not accept Joseph Smith and his successors as prophets of God, does not mean they were not. They were and are, and they said homosexual behavior is wrong.

I believe this is the last comment DN will let me make on the subject. Bye.

Contrariuser
mid-state, TN

@RG --

"No, says modern prophets. "

Fortunately, this country isn't a theocracy. Your personal version of "God" doesn't get to win over everybody else's, and your religion doesn't get to determine our laws.

skeptic
Phoenix, AZ

One solution would be to get rid of commercial corporate organized religion (big business) and follow the example of Jesus religion of individual conscious .

donn
layton, UT

@Contrariuser 1.Paul also supported slavery. True, “Paul a slave of Christ Jesus, chosen by God to be an apostle…”(Romans 1:1).

2. The O.T.the laws were replaced by the N.T. ?
….the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine. ( 1Tim 1: 9-10)

3.Paul was the ONLY person in the N. T. who spoke against homosexuality.
“…the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah and their neighboring towns, all full of lust of every kind, including lust of men for other men.” (Jude 10:7)

Contrariuser
mid-state, TN

@donn --

1.Paul and slavery --

--Also "Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything". (Col 3:22)

2. The New Covenant --

"...the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises." (Hebrews 8:6)

"By calling this covenant 'new,' he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear."(Hebrews 8:13)

"He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life." (2 Corinthians 3:6)

And many other passages about the New Covenant, which I don't have space for!

3. The NT and homosexuality --

"Jude 10:7"

There is no such thing as "Jude 10:7".

You probably mean Jude 1:7, which actually reads: "In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion."

Nope, nothing about homosexuality in particular. "Sexual immorality and perversion" covers a LOT of territory.

Spider Rico
Greeley, CO

I frankly don't see why what some other Christian denominations decide to do with homosexual marriage should have any effect on my view on the subject. I don't belong to those churches. There is no correlation between what they say and the truth in my eyes. If every other church in the world accepts gay marriage besides mine I will continue to believe it is a sin. And no, you don't have to accept my belief, but neither do I have to accept yours. And I will judge what is right and wrong every minute of every day. That is not wrong. Me condemning somebody to the eternal pit is, because that is my job. But my judging something a sin is my job. How can I avoid sin if I do not know what it is? You can disagree with me all you want but my stance will never change. Call me what you will, I know my sins and I will not stop fighting the world's sins.

RanchHand
Huntsville, UT

@Spider Rico;

Just as you don't have to accept the views of any other church on the issue, we DON'T have to accept the view of yours. Nor do we have to live by the rules of your church.

If you say otherwise, guess what, that is hypocrisy and Jesus actually did have something negative to say about hypocrites.

Lightening Lad
Austin , TX

The issue isn't cut quite as cleanly as one would suspect. It's good for the Catholic Church to take a firm stand against homosexuality and gay marriage but with a priesthood make up of more than a third, homosexual priests combined with the numbers of cases of sexual child abuse that has put many local units into bankrupcy the church should examine its failures on the topic first. The piece concluded with a statement connecting conservative politics with opposition to gay marriage, I have to wonder why is that so. The father of the conservative movement was Barry Goldwater, he spoke put consistently against mixing church church doctrine and party politics. The GOP has fallen off its popularity since the 1994 marriage with the evangelical movement, the Moral Majority, and Pat Robertson. It's time for a divorce so national cantidates have a chance to win. Less than 40% of US voters oppose gay marriage, it will be the law in all but a few states by 2020. Churches should work with legislatures to fashion protection within gay marriage bills as was done in New York. If not, they have no one to blame but themselves.

O'really
Idaho Falls, ID

It's interesting and very clear that those who are most defensive have something they feel guilty about. If one has a completely clear conscience, there is no need to worry what others think. And no need to defend oneself so vehemently.

I wonder if Jesus ever called someone a bigot. My guess is no.

m.g. scott
clearfield, UT

Since it is obvious from all these posts that there is much confusion about scripture, I feel we need some modern day revelation to clear things up. Wonder where we could get some?

aislander
Anderson Island, WA

Why can't people get it through their heads that SSM is an issue of CIVIL LAW, not religious marriage? As the inevitable outcome of 50 state SSM becomes fact, no religion nor church will be required to perform nor recognize ANY marriage that it chooses not to. But the many churches that DO support gay marriage will be able to perform and recognize them and those that choose no church at all will still be treated equally under civil law via civil marriage. It is our government which creates a legal marriage. Try getting married in a church without a government issued license!

No one has yet produced a single shred of legally sustainable harm nor legal argument against SSM. Until such time, people should live by their OWN beliefs and not try to force them upon everyone else. And LDS members should be especially aware that at some time the shoe could certainly be on the other foot.

And enough with the obvious and overused red-herring of incest. It belongs in the dustbin along with the similar arguments about bestiality and marriage to inanimate objects. Or if you feel that strongly about it, start a campaign.

to comment

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