Comments about ‘LDS Church responds to inquiries about Harry Reid comment’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Nov. 7 2013 10:01 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
dustman
Gallup, NM

@Worf: And there will be plenty who will just judge others because their beliefs differ.

VST
Bountiful, UT

@dustman,

We have been cautioned that not every utterance made by every general authority constitutes ‘official’ doctrine. There are many subjects about which the scriptures are not clear and about which the Church has made no official pronouncements [Encyclopedia of Mormonism, 1:395]. It has further been stated that, “Statements by leaders may be useful and true, but when they are expressed outside the established prophetic parameters, the do not represent the official doctrine of the Church. This includes statements given in General Conference” [Follow the Living Prophets, 118].

As I stated before, when we ALL hear it from the living prophet, then you will know that God’s views have changed. Until then, nothing has changed.

I seriously doubt we will ever see a revelation received from Him by a living prophet (aka 1978 and 1890) that embraces same-sex marriage. It just does not fit His plan for achieving the inmortality and eternal life of all man-kind, which is His work and glory.

NightOwlAmerica
SALEM, OR

Clearly there are individuals here that are more interested in "declaring" rather than "obtain" first.
So far I have seen posts about:

Exaggerated claims and twisting of LDS statements.
Serial posters and hacks that cling to an alternative lifestyle.
And only a few posts that make sense.

happy2bhere
clearfield, UT

Ranch

My main concern was not so much about how the LDS Church would handle marriage. I'm sure that Bishops will never marry same sex couples. And certainly there will not be sealings in Temples to same sex married people. My main point was how will the leadership of the Church address the issue of the public voting for a change in marriage laws, and or having the state legislature and govenor pass on such changes. The Church after all did take a public stance on Prop. 8 in California, and now would they just stay quiet, or would they take a public stance against legal same sex marriage here in Utah also? That will be a tricky road to travel in the social and political circles of a secular America. Especially when the amount of negative publicity coming would be unceasing, and likely focused specifically on the LDS Church.

Ldsrm
Spanish fork, UT

Harry Reid, D-Nev., had said The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its members are changing their views on gay rights.

The church reacted Thursday evening by issuing a statement that indicated its doctrine about traditional marriage has not changed.

Harry Reid is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and speaks for him self not the church

The Caravan Moves On
Enid, OK

Article quote: "On the question of same-sex marriage, the church has been consistent in its support of traditional marriage while teaching that all people should be treated with kindness and understanding. If it is being suggested that the church’s doctrine on this matter is changing, that is incorrect. "Marriage between a man and a woman is central to God’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children. As such, traditional marriage is a foundational doctrine and cannot change.""

Does the leadership of LDS church counsel its members to be kind to homosexuals?

Yes, it does.

Does the leadership of the LDS church say that homosexual activity of any and all kind is sin?

Yes, they do.

Will the leadership of the LDS church ever change their position?, that which they've told by the Lord?

No, they will not.

Like the hymn says:

"Then say, what is truth?
'Tis the last and the first,
For the limits of time it steps o'er.
Tho the heavens depart
and the earth's fountains burst,
Truth, the sum of existence,
will weather the worst,
Eternal, unchanged, evermore."

Amen to that!

Heidi T.
Farmington, UT

Thank you, play by the rules.

Georgie Baby
Denver, CO

So, in theory, I agree that discriminatory employment practices should be done away with. But there is a problem. Do we trust what Obama, Harry Reid, Orrin Hatch, and a Congress are saying this bill is about? The current administration and Congress have been very adept at the bait and switch through legislation. (Think Obamacare, Immigration Reform, etc.)

What is the REAL agenda behind this legislation? Who or what organization was involved in writing the bill? How many of us are commenting based upon emotion over the issue, and not a true knowledge about what the bill contains? Will this erode at our religious freedoms through crafty language? Why is it that we haven't heard about this bill before it hit the news cycle? Our representatives are intentionally keeping the answers to theses questions from us so that we, as a people, have no time to respond or become intelligently informed.

We are being corralled, and I don't trust it. I certainly don't trust the politicians in Washington.

bj-hp
Maryville, MO

Open Minded Mormon: I'm sorry to say but you are being deceived if the LDS Church has changed any of its views. First off they never excommunicated anyone for just having same-sex attraction. That is a fact. They have and continue to excommunicate members who are living the lifestyle, especially if they are an endowed member who has taken upon them the temple covenants that are completely and entirely against the gay lifestyle. The new website is not as it states for those who are comfortable with the homosexual lifestyle but for those who DO NOT want to live that lifestyle. There are alternatives. The church has always taught that we must love all of our brothers and sisters regardless of what they do. They have come out more because of the public attention that has been made by the church. As for more attention to Prop 8, Elder Oakes stated in a Stake Conference I attended that the LDS Church was asked by others to join in the matter in California but it probably would not get as involved in other states in the same manner. However, they still send letters to members before elections.

RBB
Sandy, UT

I love how with liberals it is always enlightened thinking if it agrees with their position. I believe the gornment has no more business twlling you who to sleep with than it does telling me to hire. If you do not like my views, actions or religion, you can quit any time. Why don't I gey the same right not to hire you. The problem with Democrats and some Republicans is they want to force you to do what they think is right. The constituion was meant to prevent this, but good luck finding a Democrat who believes in that any more.

elarue
NEW YORK, NY

Gay rights are much broader than just gay marriage. And while I haven't read Reid's exact words (which, for the convenience of your readers, DN, you could have quoted him directly ;-) ), the paraphrase in the beginning of the article says that the broad view of the members has changed, not the doctrines of the church. There is quite a difference, and we should look more closely to understand exactly before we pass judgment.

SuziQ
Springville, UT

While I find this subject rather fascinating, I do think an interesting point has been brought up. While it is interesting to speculate over Harry Reid's opinion of what "the Church members" are thinking and it is interesting to hear the official LDS Church response (same as it has always been), I think that the real issue will be what impact the law has on who can be hired or not hired and for what reasons. Just as same sex marriages delete references to mother and father (parent 1 and parent 2 are the preferred designations)and as Obamacare tried to force a birth control provision on Faithbased organizations that are opposed on moral grounds from using birth control, will this new law force similar types of compromises? I don't mind working with or hiring someone from the LGBT community if he/she keeps his/her sexual orientation and feelings to his/herself, but I have often found that this community wants to convert everyone around them into accepting, and even embracing their lifestyle. Defining oneself by one's sexual or gender orientation is rather limiting. I hope this law doesn't inadvertently reinforce that type of thinking.

Mel50
Nashville, TN

Heavenly Father's first commandment to Adam and Eve was to be fruitful and populate the earth. And Nephi said he knew God wouldn't make any commandment without preparing a way for them to keep that commandment. If God was okay with same-sex coupling, He would have made a way for them to reproduce. But He didn't. Of course the argument is brought up - "but what about old people, or infertile couples, or couples who choose not to have children?" It doesn't matter. The biology is there, regardless of the health, or age or desire of the couple. Two men together, or two women, can never conceive a child together, no matter how healthy they are, or how great their desire.

I can't imagine a time when the church will ever sanction gay marriage and anyone who thinks that some day temple sealings will be performed for same-sex couples is crazy, imo.

New to Utah
PAYSON, UT

Hatch,Heller,Flake and Udall represented themselves and not the LDS church in voting for ENDA. I'm disappointed in their vote because I think pressure from the gay and lesbian groups and corporations influenced their vote. Mike Lee and Mike Crapo were willing to take a courageous stand and vote against ENDA. DC is so disconnected to the people: lobbyist and influence peddlers seem to dictate what happens.

mark
Salt Lake City, UT

Hey SuziQ,

I don't mind working with or hiring someone from the LDS community if he/she keeps his/her religion and feelings to his/herself, but I have often found that this community wants to convert everyone around them into accepting, and even embracing their lifestyle. Defining oneself by one's religion is rather limiting.

Little Andy
Tremonton, UT

@Thinks: God did not change his views on blacks. It was always stated that "The day will come when all worthy men will recieve the Priestood. And it did..

1aggie
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

How can a Church with plural marriage part of its current doctrine keep claiming that it supports "traditional" marriage? I don;t get it.

kvnsmnsn
Springville, UT

Play by the rules posted:

=If the church wants to maintain any credibility being gained by devout
=followers of Christ they are going to have to part ways with Harry Reid.

I beg to differ. The LDS Church is a better place for having Reid as one of its members, even though I personally disagree with him.

Happyman
Middletown, MD

Yes - I will agree that the Church and many of its members are more accepting - and this is good!! God loves all people - all people are God's children - he doesn't love a straight person more than a gay person - God is sadden by sin - we all have sinned and we all need to repent - we all need to follow the commandments.

I'm grateful that we have Harry Reid and Orin Hatch in the Church - they are both faithful LDS -

Rick LT
GLENDALE, AZ

It's about time Harry was disciplined by the Church for his pretending to speak for it because of his senate position. He's also taken a number of other anti-constitutional positions that are basically in opposition to the Church.

to comment

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