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
UtahBlueDevil
Durham, NC

country berry..... not sure how old you are..... but yes.... the church does change with differing times. The gospel however does not. If you need a list of "changes" the church has made.... we can start a list.

Uncle John
Cape Coral, FL

It sounds like most are missing the issue here. The Church supports God's Law, marriage is between a "man and a woman". Period. Therefore the Church cannot support "gay marriage". Period. Does the Church support a "gay lifestyle"? No. Does the church reject gay people? No. "Love thy neighbor as thyself". Period. The question here is: Do you keep the law of chastity? Period. Think about it.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

@UtahBlueDevil
Durham, NC

country berry..... not sure how old you are..... but yes.... the church does change with differing times. The gospel however does not. If you need a list of "changes" the church has made.... we can start a list.
7:23 p.m. Nov. 11, 2013

========

recently --
Women saying prayers in General Conference.
Women saying prayers in Sacrament Meetings.
Blacks holding the Priesthood,
Polygamy [in the beginning - against it, then for it, then against it again.]

BTW --
The rigid, stiff-necked, "conservative" types usually leave the Church when things change - they are so set in following the "God NEVER" changes mantra.
When a change does come along, and their reality is shaken, they think Prophet has fallen.

Brahmabull
sandy, ut

UtahBlueDevil

The gospel clearly changes as well. Doctrine has changed several times over. You can try to deny it, but most people have at least come to terms with the fact that doctrine has changed.

Roundtrip
Thomasville, GA

TMR- please don't speak for me. I'm LDS and my views have not changed. I have always been kind to gays, as Jesus was kind to every child of God, but Jesus would have never accepted same sex marriage, so that's the bottom line. No offense intended.

Contrarius
mid-state, TN

@Roundtrip --

"Jesus would have never accepted same sex marriage,"

Are you speaking for Jesus?

Oddly enough, Jesus never said a single word against homosexuality. However, he did say that people who were "born eunuchs" (the term "eunuchs" included homosexuals in ancient texts) should not marry women. (Matthew 19:12)

twspears6007
Bakersfield, CA

Harry Reid has separated himself from some of the doctrine of the LDS Church as a member I support the doctrine of free agency. I do not support any member who tries to speak for any positions that are contradictory to Church Doctrine. Marriage is between a Man and a Women Harry Reid has chosen another position that does not support this sacred doctrine. Harry Reid also was instrumental in the passage of Obama Care. He voted for the bill knowing that it was basically flawed and some of the bill was based on a deception that Obama even after he was advised not to promised that if you like your Health care and your doctor you could keep it. Harry knew it was a deception and some Democrats after a meeting before the bill became law told Obama to not make that promise because it was not the truth. Harry Reid needs to refrain from making statements about LDS Doctrine that he knows are misleading. While the LDS Church excepts non-active homosexuals they will make every effort to convert the lifestyle because of its opposition to Gods laws. Trenton Spears

crunchem
Cedar City, Utah

The entire quote, from the Washington Blade, relevant to this story:

Reid, a Mormon, was asked by the Blade how he reconciles his faith, which says homosexuality violates God’s law, with his support for gay rights. Reid replied that he’s given a lot to his church and there are Mormons like him who share his views.

“When I attend church here in Washington, D.C., I bet more people agree with me than disagree with me, and so the church is changing, and that’s good,” Reid said.

part 1

crunchem
Cedar City, Utah

part 2

So here he claims that the entire church has shifted, but based only on his fellow DC attendees. Anyone want to guess the political makeup of a Washington DC ward? Anyone think that represents and average cross section of LDS political or social positions. Even remotely close to the official church position?

Notice also the author says (but doesn't use the quote, if there was one) that Reid has 'given a lot to the church' ; it's almost as if Harry is saying 'Look, I'm a mover and a shaker and have given A LOT of tithing money from those real estate scams, so my opinion ought to have an influence on God's position, you know'

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

ENDA has far too narrow a religious exemption. If it had an exemption for all religious employers, and if it made exemptions for certain other religiously motivated actions, it might be justifiable.

However with homosexuals earning more than comparable non-homosexuals, the case for why we need ENDA at all is not compelling.

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

ENDAs protections of "gender identity" are very disturbing for people who take seriously the Proclamation on the Families statement that gender has premortal origin. Gender and biological sex are the same, and those who think that they are the wrong sex are disordered.

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

The claims that the Salt Lake City ordinance was "similar" are missing the point. That ordinance had a very, very clear exemption for religious organizations, ENDA does not.

Reid should stop injecting religion into his speeches. If Orrin Hatch had attempted to say he understood the mind and will of the Church we would hear no end to the attacks. Harry Reid is not a Mormon Senator, he is a Senator who happens to be Mormon. He has no more authority to speak for the Church than I do, and definitely none to attempt to imply the Church supports a law it clearly does not.

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

I think people on both sides of this issue are being extreme. I have seen too many suits against Catholic schools for firing teachers for breaking Catholic doctrines to trust this law to not be used for more such attacks on religious freedom unless it has a much stronger religious freedom component.

I also don't want to deal with biological women who insist they are men using men's bathrooms. Considering how many companies already have non-discrimination policies in place that cover this matter, I am trying to figure out exactly why we need this law at all.

Federal laws need to be passed to address actual major corners. No one has shown there is a compelling need for this law. Other things are more than dealing with any problems.

cindy56k
TOK, AK

Those who follow the doctrine of the church and sustain our leaders, thoughts or views have not changed. It is not ok with us on the gay subject.

IMAPatriot2
PLEASANT GROVE, UT

Disappointed but not surprised that Orin Hatch voted for this bill. He needs to be shown the door because he isn't representing the majority of his constituents.

Red Neckerson
Goldsboro, NC

Why am I not surprised about Reid's commentary about the LDS Church. This is a man who believes in Conscripted Benevolence or in other words, you are financially responsible for others people's lack of financial responsibility.

grandmagreat
Lake Havasu City, AZ

The church Doctrine has not changed. However, we as members of the church are taught to love everyone, and not be judgemental of their actions. I personally know two young men that have had mission calls, However, one of them was sent home early, and the other did not act out on his Feelings until after he was married and had a family My heartaches for both of these mens family, because i have a Strong testimony that God Created Men and women differently and for a different purpose.

GiuseppeG
Murray, Utah

Uh yeah....Reid said the Church's and its members views are changing? The Church is just reiterating that its doctrine (ie...the Church's view) has not changed on this issue. The way many individual members may "see" and "feel" about gays certainly has changed. What's the big whoop, other than Reid misspoke by stating "the Church's views" rather than just saying "many members of the Church's views?"

bluesmule
Sandy, UT

I think we're all missing a key point. Harry said that the church and its members are changing their views on gay RIGHTS. Key word being rights. It's true that members are changing how they view gays and the church has always taught to love everyone regardless of what they do and the only reason it seems like the church is changing its mind is because this is a topic that wasn't really discussed before, because it wasn't really an issue. Now it's a growing issue and it needs to be talked about now, whereas 25 years ago no such discussion would need to take place. What the church's statement said is that the church has not changed its views on gay RIGHTS and neither does Harry Reid have the right to make a statement for the church like that. Maybe the members have changed their views on gay RIGHTS, but that isn't indicative of the church as a whole or of what the church's actual stance on gay RIGHTS is.

smith1
Provo, UT

TMR - how has the church's view changed?

to comment

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