LDS officials meet with with Soulforce group

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • SportsFann Bountiful, UT
    April 29, 2012 8:23 p.m.

    Religious freedom unless your religion and its beliefs upset a loud group.Free speech unless what you have to say might offend a special interest group. The LDS Church does not have to apologize for anything. I has its beliefs, just as gays have their beliefs. I am tired of the whole gay agenda being shoved down the throats of people who believe differently. In California, the whole marriage thing was put to a vote but because the gay community didn't like the democratic outcome we have to remain in this battle. I do not believe in hurting others or bashing another person's beliefs. Why can't the gay community accept the vote like everyone else. Seriously, this is getting real old.

  • Lane Myer Salt Lake City, UT
    April 27, 2012 2:32 p.m.

    jskains: "We ALL have a right to say what government tax dollars recognize, including the definition of marriage. That is just basic democracy."


    AND that is why we do NOT live in a democracy. We live in a constitutional republic. We are first govern by our Constitution. Any law that we or our representatives pass MUST be found to agree with our constitution.

    Prop 8 in CA was deemed unconstitutional. To pass a law that treats other Americans as less worthy citizens cannot pass per our 14th amendment.

    THAT is just basic civics.

  • Sorry Charlie! SLC, UT
    April 27, 2012 12:29 p.m.

    @freedom in danger

    with regards to your april 27 9:17 pm post to tolstoy, I suppose you are right you can base your vote on any flight of thought you may have if you are not interest in taking your civic duties serious, however, it does not mean that the law you voted for may not violate the constitution which is what happened with prop 8.

  • Ranch Here, UT
    April 27, 2012 10:53 a.m.


    Prove that any of those things were from GLBT Americans. IMO, they came from Mormon Leaders trying to divert attention from their Sinful Acts against other American Citizens. My theory is every bit as valid as yours on this matter.

    I didn't say that you can't say negative things about others. I asked the Moderators to be consistent in their moderating. Currently, they're allowing you Mormons to say negative things about other churches (implicitly calling them false and therefore of the devil), while refusing to print any negative, FACTUAL comments about the LDS Church. The moderators are currently being hypocrites, asking for civility but only requiring it of non-Mormon commentors.

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    April 26, 2012 10:12 p.m.

    @freedom in danger
    funny thing a lot of gay people actually do have kids, seems it does not really take a mommy and daddy in a heterosexual relationship anymore maybe you should shed that mountain of 18th century evidence you are clinging too.

  • Freedom-In-Danger WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    April 26, 2012 9:17 p.m.

    @Sorry Charlie!

    There's even a bigger mountain of evidence that two gay people can't have kids. Turns out it takes a daddy and a mommy to have em. It only makes sense that a daddy and mommy are the right people for the job... the only people for the job. As Bill said, "The Family,A Proclamation to the World is not just for MORMONS. It is for the entire world because our Father in Heaven is speaking through his prophets. Whether you believe it or not doesn't matter. You will be held accountable for that." I agree with him.


    So for us to keep it civil you have to be allowed to say negative and hateful things about other people and their beliefs. Yup... that makes a whole truckload of sense.


    I don't need evidence to cast a vote. It's amazing how that works.


    Mormons are voting and repaid with threats, terrorized with anthrax threats, and protested all for voting. If our votes don't count, we're the second-class citizens who will have lost our freedom to express our views (a real right)

    The truth can't be hid.

  • BCA Murrieta, CA
    April 26, 2012 5:41 p.m.

    "Love the member, but hate the church."

    By changing the words, it is easy to see how disrespectful that tired saying is.

  • xscribe Colorado Springs, CO
    April 26, 2012 2:06 p.m.

    Breaking the laws of the land are a sin. Those of you who knowingly and intentionally drive over the speed limit, only to slam on the brakes when you see a police car (which I get a great chuckle out of, by the way) are sinning. If you want to put some sort of hierarchy on sin, be my guest, but you are a sinner. And I'd be willing to bet there is no repentence for that particular sin, and you do it day in and day out. What I find amazing is that people feel they need to do "God's" work. If God exists and is so amazing, I'm quite certain God can manage on their own. How about focusing on your own family; let others worry about theirs.

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    April 26, 2012 12:18 p.m.


    Well considering that both pedophile and incest both have proven harms not really the same, but thanks for playing.

    As to not being a specifically enumerated right, I would remind you once again that almost everything we take for granite as a right in our society is not specifically enumerated in the constitution unfortunately for your argument the courts have found that denial of marriage to gay couples does violate their 14th amendment rights to equal protection (which does fall under the role of the federal government) based on the fact that there is no proven harm to allowing them marriage, again the same amendment that protects your right to do many of the things you take for granite as your right to do everyday. If there is no proven harm then people have the right to decide for themselves if they wish to engage in certain behaviors and it really is no ones business.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    April 26, 2012 11:26 a.m.

    "The real issue with the LDS Church will be if the day ever comes that same sex couples want to be Sealed in the Temple."

    I find that most people who support same sex marriage, including myself, are against the idea of forcing churches to marry same sex couples.

    "People scream rights, but where is the right to marriage in the Constitution? "

    So, according to you, the legislature, if it so desired, could pass a law banning LDS temple marriages tomorrow and that'd be a-ok because there's no right to marriage?

  • Ranch Here, UT
    April 26, 2012 10:24 a.m.

    @Utes Fan;

    Ultimately, it is going to come down to Equality Under the Law.

    You oppose treating other Americans equally to how you are treated by the government. You oppose providing the safety to families you don't approve of. That sir, is the very definition of bigotry. It really doesn't matter if you don't like it. It really doesn't matter if you find it "icky". It really doesn't matter that your religion opposes it.

    What is important is Equal Treatment by our government of all American Citizens.

    @Deseret News Moderators;

    You claim to want "civil discourse" yet refuse to print comments that say anything negative in the least about the LDS Church - but you will print very uncivil comments from Bill in Nebraska claiming that all other churches are false.

    Please discontinue the hypocrisy. Either print all comments that may be "offensive" to LDS or print NO comments that other religions may find offensive, like Bill's "Testimony".

  • jskains Orem, UT
    April 26, 2012 10:15 a.m.

    So what is next? Meeting with B4UACT, that group of mental health professionals who want pedophilia to not be demonized because it is an uncontrolled behavior they are born with and it isn't their fault?? Or that German couple who wants incest to be legalized, because they (brother and sister) want to get married?

    People scream rights, but where is the right to marriage in the Constitution? 10 Amendment says it isn't even the Federal government's business.... The LDS Church members are part of the tax paying community. We ALL have a right to say what government tax dollars recognize, including the definition of marriage. That is just basic democracy. Not having a say in these basic issues is why that little tea party happened oh so long ago.

  • Allen Salt Lake valley, UT
    April 26, 2012 9:13 a.m.


    Take away government regulation of marriage, and the LDS church would be the only group responsible for determining who can have a Temple marriage. With governmental regulation of marriage, governments have the final say as to who can be sealed in a LDS Temple. As you said, that will be something to talk about.

    As long as the LDS church and many LDS members cling to government regulation of marriage, they risk having government decide that couples of the same sex can be sealed in a LDS Temple. It seems to me that the safest approach is to push for deregulation of marriage, thus letting the LDS church have the final say who can be sealed in a Temple.

  • Allen Salt Lake valley, UT
    April 26, 2012 8:57 a.m.

    The LDS church advocates marriages between a man and a woman that are regulated by government. Only men and women who have obtained a government license can be married. Only persons approved by government can perform marriages. The LDS church recognizes marriages performed by persons approved by government, regardless of whether the persons being married are members a church or religion, as long as the persons are a man and a woman.

    What I don't understand is why members of the LDS church favor governmental regulation of marriage when they disagree with governmental regulation of other aspects of their lives.

    I don't know the history of marriage very well, but I suspect that governments began regulating marriages when the governments began regulating religion. In the case of Christianity, this was when the Roman government adopted Christianity as a state religion. It seems to me it is time for government to stop regulating marriage and to focus on civil rights through civil unions, and to let social groups, adopt what ever form of marriage the groups want.

  • m.g. scott LAYTON, UT
    April 26, 2012 7:31 a.m.

    Marriage these days is more of a civil union than a religious one. It was started by God in the Bible, but today you can go to Vegas and drive thru and get married and a Happy Meal to go. Or, you can have Elvis marry you at the "Hitchen Post". Frankly, I don't care if 2,3,5,or 10 people want to marry in todays irrerevent society. The real issue with the LDS Church will be if the day ever comes that same sex couples want to be Sealed in the Temple. Now that will be something to talk about.

  • m.g. scott LAYTON, UT
    April 26, 2012 7:15 a.m.

    To LDS Liberal

    HMMMMMMMM.... A little "judgemental" arn't we.

    Just between you conservatives and me, that is so typical of liberals. They like to think of themselves as the open minded tolerant, accepting ones, but that only applies to the ones on "their side".

  • raybies Layton, UT
    April 26, 2012 6:12 a.m.

    I find this article disappointing in that it doesn't specifically state the issues that soulforce claims to have with the LDS church. One of the reps claimed the church said one thing and did another, or something to that effect. Some reporter needed to call them on the carpet, to name specific instances where this was the case, and exactly where soulforce's expectations lie. It would certainly give the readers a better sense of the sort of organization soulforce is, and whether it is a radicalized group, one that's ignorant of LDS beliefs and practices, or whether it has legitimate concerns. Also a reporter should have asked SPECIFICALLY its concerns with Evergreen International, rather than just assuming that the two bodies can't coexist.

    Anyhow I was hoping for more from the article. Thanks.

  • Sorry Charlie! SLC, UT
    April 25, 2012 10:54 p.m.

    there is a mountain of evidence to support that gay parents are more the competent. A simple google search for the APA, NASW, AMA, APS will provide more research then you will ever want to read. "There are thousands and thousands who have overcome this." really please provide one credible study or research to support that claim. Again google any of the above organizations and they have a mountain of research showing what evergreen is doing is not only not effective but harmful. Know I will not sit here and claim that there are not some people such as counter intelligence that genuinely feel they have "overcome" being gay or may have chosen to remain celibate which they have every right to do but the bottom line is what evergreen does is go against all scientific evidence and facts and tries to repair people that are not broken.

  • Maudine SLC, UT
    April 25, 2012 10:42 p.m.

    @bill in Nebraska
    I have to wonder if you have the ability to understand that your beliefs are not the same as observable reality and that just because you believe something is true or history does not make it either one.

  • Bill in Nebraska Maryville, MO
    April 25, 2012 10:23 p.m.

    Just because someone is born with same-sex attraction doesn't mean they have to act upon it. Our Heavenly Father has given us weaknesses so that we will humble ourselves before him. Ranchhand: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the only true and living church of Jesus Christ in the world. All the others are not his Church PERIOD.

    The Family,A Proclamation to the World is not just for MORMONS. It is for the entire world because our Father in Heaven is speaking through his prophets. Whether you believe it or not doesn't matter. You will be held accountable for that. The joy you speak of is for this life only, not for the world to come. To sit there and judge me because I hold to the fact that Jesus Christ has spoken through his prophets. The warning is clear and any government that goes against that will be held accountable in due time by the Lord. Just because its been 5 years, 10 years doesn't matter. It is his time and his earth. We came here with the claim that we would obey all his commandments.

  • Utes Fan Salt Lake City, UT
    April 25, 2012 10:21 p.m.


    "They're being sued because they refuse to obey the law and not discriminate"
    Why is it no surprise that so many people are opposed to gay marriage then???? Here is an example:

    A hotel owner in Utah cannot be sued for refusing to host a gay marriage because gay marriage is illegal in Utah. That scenario won't happen. A hotel owner in Vermont CAN and has been sued because... drumroll... gay marriage is legal there! GET IT?

    It takes simple logic to conclude that the legalization of gay marriage simply erodes the freedom of conscience as I have just demonstrated. Not to mention that when many of these business owners started their business, it wasn't required then by law to be forced to allow gay marriage. I don't blame them for opposing gay marriage - their business was there first.

    The legalization of gay marriage gradually erodes the right to refuse to participate in gay functions as I just demonstrated. We all need to survive and work and start businesses and gay marriage forces us to accept it. Not to mention that the day will come when it will be taught in schools, etc.

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    April 25, 2012 9:23 p.m.

    @bill in Nebraska 8:36 pm
    So because your religious beliefs support you we should not find it insulting?

    @bill in Nebraska 8:36 pm
    So because you accept your religious beliefs as history george does not understand history and need to learn history? he may not understand your religion but it sound like he understands history and history does not support your claims.

    @freedom in danger
    “America is a diverse country with different beliefs. Sometimes yours won't win out in the end. Why is that such a problem for everyone?”
    If you could provide some actual evidence of a social harm I would agree but all we hear is les and religious dogma as justification. That is not winning out it is bullying into submission by pure force of numbers. The reason we fight on for a rational response is because for those that are being denied access to marriage this is not simply an intellectual exercise or simply a battle of wills.

  • George Bronx, NY
    April 25, 2012 8:50 p.m.

    So basically the refutation of my comments are that because your religion says it is a sin and equal to murder then it is a fact and people should accept it as fact not be offended, further we should exchange the stories in the bible as history rather then actual history and should blindly accept your beliefs and accept it is harmful to society despite all quantified and qualified evidence to the contrary and that gays do not have the right to marriage because you said so. Sounds reasonable to me I don't know why I was arguing with you. oh thats right its not rational.

  • Ranch Here, UT
    April 25, 2012 6:01 p.m.

    @Utes Fan;

    No, you failed to address the facts. They're being sued because they refuse to obey the law and not discriminate. If you CHOOSE to go into business, you CHOOSE to abide by the laws regulating businesses and if you don't you get sued. It's quite simple really. Using your religion to justify discrimination when you go into business doesn't justify failure to obey the law.

    For all of you using God's name in vain and quoting what he wants/says/etc., please provide one single shred of proof that your God is better than my God, and then perhaps, just perhaps, I'll follow his dictates. Until then, I'm under no obligation to follow your God in the least, so please, quit trying to force me to do so.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    April 25, 2012 4:47 p.m.

    When will the uber-right realize that being gay is not a sin?

    It’s sexual relations outside of wedlock, regardless of sexual orientation, that would constitute a religious sin.

    And being gay is not against the law.

    Therefore, why all the anti-gay discrimination laws?

    And as for neighbors….
    Give me a gay couple over a Conservative, Republican, drug addict, married and divorced 4 times with no Family and NO children [Rush Limbaugh, your hero] hypocrite any day….

  • Utes Fan Salt Lake City, UT
    April 25, 2012 4:14 p.m.

    "We're not the ones campaigning to revoke your rights ... Please, get your facts straight."

    Let's see. Photographers, fertility doctors, dating websites, hotel owners, etc have all been sued or forced to change by the pro-gay agenda.

    Please get your facts straight.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    April 25, 2012 2:46 p.m.


    Your church is the one that needs to apologize.

    They're the ones interfering in, and materially damaging the lives of GLBT American Citizens. It isn't us who is terrorizing Mormons, it's the other way around. We're not the ones campaigning to revoke your rights, you're campaigning to revoke our rights as Americans.

    Please, get your facts straight.


    Bigotry is a sin. Period.

    April 25, 2012 2:01 p.m.

    @Sneaky Jimmy:

    "Lastly, if homosexuality goes against God's plan why does he allow children to be born with attraction to the same sex? Please watch "Modern Family". The gay couple seem to be doing a good job of raising up a family."

    Really? Using a fictional TV show to prove that gay couples do a great job of raisin a family? Hollywood has been pushing the LGBT agenda for years. That has no bearing on what is truth.

    The simple truth is, people are not born with same-sex attraction, and they can change it with help. Evergreen has every right to help those who do not want to be gay. There are thousands and thousands who have overcome this.

    That is the big truth the LGBT Community does not want everyone to know. If you can change your sexual attraction, it is not something you can get governmental discrimination protection for.

  • Sneaky Jimmy Bay Area, CA
    April 25, 2012 1:59 p.m.


    so God has always been indecisive and tentative? Speaking of sophists, was your comparison vignette meant to support your premise that God doesn't change? I think we would all do well to be ready to accept change and make sure it is positive.

  • Kith Huntington Beach, CA
    April 25, 2012 1:45 p.m.

    Lagomorph, homosexual actions are a sin, period. Even if a homosexual couple were to marry, it is still a sin, period.

  • m.g. scott LAYTON, UT
    April 25, 2012 1:44 p.m.

    Re: Sneaky Jimmy
    ....why does he (God) allow children to be born with attraction to the same sex?"

    That assertion opens the door to a multitude of possible questions. Why does God allow people to be born with sexual attraction to children? Why does god allow people to be born with the desire to murder? Why does God allow people to be born with no malice or hatred toward their fellow man at all? Why does God allow some people to be born with exceptional intellence? Why does God allow people to be born with disabilities. Ect. ect. ect. I'd say that there is a lot of stuff, good and bad, that God allows. You can't judge peoples actions on just the fact that God allowed it. It is the old standard principle of Free Agency at work.

  • Freedom-In-Danger WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    April 25, 2012 1:35 p.m.


    "All semantic hair-splitting and sophistry."

    Here's a nice comparison. God commands man to "cut down this tree". Man says "sorry God but I got lazy and forgot to do it. Plus that Satan guy told me not to". God commands "Okay, now you must cut down these two trees instead but only the cherry trees."

    It's pretty simple. Man was the factor of change. God may require more or less of us, may command one thing then revoke it in another breath. But God doesn't change. You can call it sophistry, but then by your own way of thinking so is everyone else. You don't think we could apply that analogy to anyone else? It can apply to parenting and a million other examples.

    Just cause you want to label other people as sophists, doesn't make it true. Fact is, your own arguments are showing far more flaws than the religion you seem to oppose so much.

  • Sneaky Jimmy Bay Area, CA
    April 25, 2012 12:40 p.m.


    Wow, interesting "Spin". The truth shall set you free. Read about the various interpretations of the Word of Wisdom through church history. It changed many times. Plural marriage was "suspended"? Please read the BofM concerning marriage. Also, please explain how an African American was eligible for the priesthood prior to 1978. Lastly, if homosexuality goes against God's plan why does he allow children to be born with attraction to the same sex? Please watch "Modern Family". The gay couple seem to be doing a good job of raising up a family.

  • Lagomorph Salt Lake City, UT
    April 25, 2012 12:36 p.m.

    Cinefan: "For those of us who have testimonies of the reality of God and His teachings, that's the end of the discussion."

    As RanchHand asked, what of those who do not share your testimony (a testimony that is held by a distinct minority in the US and the world)? Why is YOUR belief the only one that matters? Why should Jews, Muslims, Roman Catholics, Protestants, Pastafarians, agnostics, etc. be bound in civil law by the standards of the LDS Family Proclamation?

    "Homosexuality goes against the most fundamental part of the Plan of Salvation--to raise up families..."

    About 30% of gay households have children, either through previous straight marriages, artificial insemination, surrogacy, or adoption-- all methods that are routinely used by straight couples to isssue children. They are families. Would you withhold salvation from these children by preventing them from having married parents and a "real" family? That seems unspeakably cruel.

    "...the Word of Wisdom was not "changed" it was introduced..."

    Changed, suspended, introduced... All semantic hair-splitting and sophistry. Supporters of Romney have bent over backwards to distance his campaign (and his church) from polygamy. Are you saying they're wrong and the evangelical critics are right?

  • Freedom-In-Danger WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    April 25, 2012 12:34 p.m.


    Bill in NE is right. Being that the two are sins they already are parallel. They might have very different results and one of the consequences is definitely more grievous, but if it is wrong it is wrong. I don't treat gays like murderers. But I show gays respect. I even show murderers respect. That's what it means to not judge people. The people not showing respect need to look in a mirror, cause so far all I see is people saying offensive things about a religion just for saying what it believes.

    I respect your disagreement, and I mean you respect. I bet you're even a pretty swell guy, but I don't think it's offensive just to take a gander at whether something is acceptable and give your opinion about it. America is a diverse country with different beliefs. Sometimes yours won't win out in the end. Why is that such a problem for everyone? No one's rights are being taken away. Life, liberty, property... gays are already free and the church isn't trying to take that away. Its trying to encourage citizens to value what's right.

  • Freedom-In-Danger WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    April 25, 2012 12:18 p.m.


    No one said the church should do anything different. But I do agree with Voice that if anyone should be expecting the other side to change or apologize... it shouldn't be gays expecting the church to consider changing but the other way around. After the threats, terrorist acts against the church, and yeah I'd even say libel (if you saw one of their commercials)... then there is need for many to humble themselves and apologize. The only thing anyone needs to ever do is repent and live right. I don't see the church doing anything to hurt that, so no offense but what's your problem?

  • AZRods Maricopa, AZ
    April 25, 2012 11:37 a.m.

    Without coming to the defense of voice of reason, which I seriously doubt they need much help in that regard.
    I wish springstreet and claudio would re read their own comments. claudio accuses someone for assuming the role of defending the church, then in his next comment pretends to speak for the church about it's policies for members' behavior.
    I see one here trying to be civil and others trying to pick apart someone's words.
    Which could be seen as looking for fault or finding offense.
    The fact that we each have strong feelings on this subject in particular means that we respectfully allow another to have an opinion and not expect them to agree with us.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    April 25, 2012 11:35 a.m.


    Please explain why those who don't believe as you do must follow the dictates of your god?

    Please. I thought that the Constitution granted ALL Citizens the right to worship as they would, not just the Mormons or other "Christian" religions.

    You have the right to follow your Proclamation. You. Nobody else has to, or is obligated in any way by your "proclamation".

  • Cinefan MIAMI, FL
    April 25, 2012 11:04 a.m.

    Sneaky Jimmy, the Word of Wisdom was not "changed" it was introduced, as was plural marriage. And plural marriage was suspended (not changed), it will be re-instituted when the people are ready to live the higher law, as was the Melchizedek priesthood. Priesthood eligibility was not changed by the "church," it was opened to all worthy males by Jesus Christ.

    Homosexuality goes against the most fundamental part of the Plan of Salvation--to raise up families, e.g., father, mother, and children, all which may be led to exaltation.

  • Sneaky Jimmy Bay Area, CA
    April 25, 2012 10:31 a.m.

    @voice of no reason

    The "church" has changed core doctrine on many occasions. Word of Wisdom, Plural marriage, priesthood eligibility to name a few, so it does happen.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    April 25, 2012 10:26 a.m.

    Though not Mormon, I support the Mormons 100% in their right to speak out against what is wrong.

    If they feel acting on gay feelings is wrong - speak up, keep up the good work Mormons!

  • Cinefan MIAMI, FL
    April 25, 2012 9:48 a.m.

    Lagomorph, we believe homosexual acts are wrong because God, Jehovah, Jesus Christ said homosexual acts are wrong, a sin, an abomination. For those of us who have testimonies of the reality of God and His teachings, that's the end of the discussion. It was, once more, reiterated in The Family: A Proclamation to the World.

    There is absolutely nothing than anyone--gay or straight--can say that makes it okay.

  • Lagomorph Salt Lake City, UT
    April 25, 2012 9:08 a.m.

    Bill in NE: "Next to murder, sexual sin is the most grievious..."

    Yet the game is rigged. When sin is defined as sex outside of marriage, but the opportunity for marriage is denied to some, then those people never have a chance to avoid sin. Anything they do is sin because they can never get the special exemption that marriage provides.

    Ironically, by denying gays the chance to marry, defenders of "virtue" only increase the social pathologies like STD's and promiscuity that sexual behavior codes (like the concept of sin) are intended to prevent. By stigmatizing homosexuality and legally discouraging gays from forming stable, longterm, committed monogamous relationships (i.e. marriage), you are guaranteeing that gays will sneak out to the bars, bathhouses, and alleys, have multiple partners, or enter into sham hetero marriages (which are bound to fail and are unfair to the spouses). If you think homosexuality is wrong because of HIV,hepatitis, high suicide rates, or the hidden subculture, then work to create social institutions that incentivize monogamy-- in a word, support gay marriage. If you think homosexuality is wrong because of Leviticus, then I hope you never eat bacon or wear wool/cotton blends.

  • Lagomorph Salt Lake City, UT
    April 25, 2012 8:45 a.m.

    Bill in NE: You failed to respond to any of the substance of my original post. Voice of Reason had claimed that the LDS were not "imfringing freedom" and were "allowing choice" vis-a-vis gays. Ironically (or incredibly) VOR maintained that liberals were the ones infringing freedom and limiting choice. I pointed out that there are churches (mainline ones, at that) that accept homosexuality and gay marriage as perfectly moral and that political eforts by LDS were preventing those churches from acting freely within their doctrine. The LDS church is perfectly within its rights to engage politically on issues it finds important, but for supporters to say that it unequivocally promoting religious freedom by doing so when it is curtailing the freedom of other churches to act according to their faith is simply incorrect.

  • xscribe Colorado Springs, CO
    April 25, 2012 8:22 a.m.

    Thanks, Ernest. Maybe those who say the church won't change its doctrine only mean the issue o homosexuals, because the church doctrine has certainly "changed" for other issues. And I'll bet one day it will change for this issue also, but not until they are the "last church standing" so to speak.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    April 25, 2012 7:51 a.m.

    @Bill in Nebraska;

    What you clearly don't understand that what your church thinks about same-sex marriages only applies within your church.

    You and your church have no business fighting against the civil equality of same-sex couples outside your church. Your "Proclamation" applies ONLY to Mormons. Nobody else needs to follow it. Nobody.

    We are not obligated to follow your beliefs in the same way that you are not obligated to follow ours, meaning that you don't need to have a same-sex marriage if you don't want one. Likewise, you have absolutely no business telling non-Mormons what they can and can not do outside the walls of your church. Period.

  • Cinefan MIAMI, FL
    April 25, 2012 7:39 a.m.

    The Walker said: "I wonder if they ever meet with the rank and file members to see how WE feel about the Church's increasing tolerance for homosexual lifestyles."

    If you are a member of the Church, then you clearly do not understand how the Church operates. It is the Church of JESUS CHRIST. He stands at the head of it. He directs the Church (members), not the other way around.

  • Bill in Nebraska Maryville, MO
    April 25, 2012 6:45 a.m.

    Claudio: If that is what you read that was not my intent. However, it is quite revealing when it stated that none of the Church Leadership was there. That leadership is First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve. The Quorum of the Seventy will act and do things that are given to them on a basis by the Twelve.

    George, evidently you've never studied the History of the World. Many of the decading empires through history have been destroyed from within. Many because of their own morality. The Bible and the Book of Mormon are quite clear on this. Just because some theologians and scientists try to prove otherwise, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of their wickedness. This country as a whole is still protected but as we go further down the road of immorality and the decadence of the family, yes it is opening itself to the same destruction.

  • momoftoo Albuquerque, NM
    April 25, 2012 12:13 a.m.

    Voice of Reason, you sound reasonable to me. Keep up the good work.

  • Claudio Springville, Ut
    April 24, 2012 9:01 p.m.

    Bill, maybe I misunderstood, but it sounded like you just told the members of the Seventy that what they do is meaningless. Might want to rethink that seeing as they have a lot more to do with the daily running of the Church than the FOP and Q12...something Boyd K. Packer has repeatedly said is one of the accomplishments he's most proud of.

  • George Bronx, NY
    April 24, 2012 8:51 p.m.

    @bill in nebraska
    after many many years of this debate both in the public forum and the court of law not one person has been able to present one valid shred of evidence to support your claim that gays and gay marriage have or will do any of the thing you claim. does any of the things you claim meaning not only is his comparison not note worthy but your claims only add to the pile of false and erroneous claims by those that appose gay marriage and gay rights.

  • Bill in Nebraska Maryville, MO
    April 24, 2012 8:36 p.m.

    George: The comparision the Voice of Reason uses between Homosexuality and murder is quite justified. Next to murder, sexual sin is the most grievious. This destroys societies, families and etc. So yes his comparision is quite note worthy.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    April 24, 2012 8:09 p.m.

    @the walker

    maybe they are not interested in what you think.

  • Lagomorph Salt Lake City, UT
    April 24, 2012 6:24 p.m.

    voice of reason: "[Liberals] take our votes away in favor of their literal dictating of their morality, disregarding all other opinions. The LDS membership isn't infringing freedom, just not recognizing gay marriage choices as moral while allowing choice."

    There are several Christian denominations that have no problem with gay marriage and do perform same-sex marriages where legal. The LDS Church's active promotion (directly or through its membership) of California's Prop 8 and other similar political efforts to keep gay marriage illegal seems very much to me to be a "dictating of their morality, disregarding all other opinions" and an infringement on freedom. Those other denominations are being prevented by law from being able to freely exercise their religious beliefs. Is this any less a "war on religion" than the insurance contraceptive mandate?

    As to the news item itself, I see this as a positive step on the part of the church, but it has been a very long time coming and is a very small step. Still, coupled with the non-opposition to LGBT antidiscrimination ordinances, there are signs of hope. Supertankers don't turn on a dime.

  • TheWalker Saratoga Springs, UT
    April 24, 2012 5:19 p.m.

    Church officials are meeting with the 'SoulForce' group? I wonder if they ever meet with the rank and file members to see how WE feel about the Church's increasing tolerance for homosexual lifestyles.

  • George Bronx, NY
    April 24, 2012 4:58 p.m.

    @voice of reason

    "The next time there is an article where I comment, you have my full permission to quote and recount all of the most offensive things I've ever put on here. I will more than willingly apologize for them and in sincerity."

    How about you start with your 12:17 comments where you attempt to draw parallels between being gay and being a murder. Do you really think murder is a fair comparison? could you see why that maybe offensive?

  • Claudio Springville, Ut
    April 24, 2012 4:56 p.m.

    Not to pile on, but when did "Voice of Reason" become responsible for defending the Church? They have a PR department that can handle that just fine. As a faithful member, you've been asked to share your testimony of the Gospel and the Church, not to accuse others of spreading libel, etc. or suggesting the Church could and should take legal action against others. It is not desired by the Church that you declare yourself a quasi-spokesman/woman to defend the Church against attacks, and certainly not to place people in groups and then attempt to defame them as you did with the term "liberals." There are those who by the definition of liberal are in the leadership of the Church, not to mention throughout the membership worldwide. With that in mind, you might consider how to more appropriately phrase your comments if you wish to continue to claim your strong representation to the Church. Absent that, a disclaimer stating that you don't represent my views, would be appreciated.

    The Church should meet with groups like this. It fosters constructive dialogue and encourages respect among those of differing opinions. Something more on this board could emulate.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    April 24, 2012 4:45 p.m.

    fair enough.

  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    April 24, 2012 4:39 p.m.

    spring street,

    I apologized in my last comment and again, I apologize now. I did include that I feel I am typically heated in response to arguments instead of my being on the offense. It has happened and I admit that, but I do feel you are dramatizing your account of my commentary.

    Furthermore, I have apologized several times on here and I will say yet again that my comments are forever available on this site to stand as evidence of it.

    The next time there is an article where I comment, you have my full permission to quote and recount all of the most offensive things I've ever put on here. I will more than willingly apologize for them and in sincerity. I have never claimed to be perfectly right or innocent- only that my imperfections (and others) say nothing about the LDS Church and that those criticizing my opinions, other's opinions, or the LDS Church's opinions are not exempt from the same judgement and have wrongfully been offensive all the same.

    I'm not sorry for what I believe, what I know, and what I hold as reasonable. For my mistakes/imperfections I absolutely apologize.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    April 24, 2012 3:10 p.m.

    @voice of reason

    you are not required to appreciate my criticism of you thats fine but I think it is more then fair. I to have yet to ever see you apologies for any of the very offensive things you say on these threads. As far as the LDS church is concerned their efforts to actively work to keep some citizens for being full members of society despite no evidence that allowing them to do so will cause any harm. The LDS church has also proven time and again they are not approve spreading miss information about such members of our society. Active suppression of others through the use of the force of law is not peaceful.

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    April 24, 2012 2:09 p.m.

    @a voice of reason

    The LDS church goes beyond not recognizing it is moral and actively work to prevent gay marriage which is a civil not religious contract and do so through campaigns of miss information and surrogate such as yourself. Aggressively oppressing others rights is anything but peaceful.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    April 24, 2012 1:44 p.m.

    @a voice of reason
    "The fundamental problem is that liberals aren't arguing for compromise "

    I don't see conservatives offering compromise. Utah pre-emptively banned civil unions too, as well as many other states.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    April 24, 2012 12:57 p.m.

    "Love the sinner, but hate the sin."

    And that is a troublesome position to handle right since it often appears to come across as hate. Consider that a lot of evangelicals who call the LDS church a cult probably would say that they don't hate mormons... they hate mormonism and consider that lifestyle choice to be endangering the standing in heaven of mormons. Now LDS members can react to that in a variety of ways, similarly, LGBTs would response to similar statements about hating homosexuality and not homosexuals in a variety of ways.

  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    April 24, 2012 12:17 p.m.


    "So it sounds like there's really no "middle ground" organization"

    That is because there is really no such thing as a "middle ground" regarding what is moral. The question of morality is irreconcilable, as plainly evidenced by asking someone to compromise with a murderer. The dichotomy is inherent to what the meaning of "moral" or "right" is.

    The only plausible compromise is choice, by choosing to agree on certain common principles- two people can compromise in sacrificing their own beliefs for the sake of peace.

    The fundamental problem is that liberals aren't arguing for compromise or democracy but a "right" to state recognition- a "right" to what we as a whole own. They take our votes away in favor of their literal dictating of their morality, disregarding all other opinions. The LDS membership isn't infringing freedom, just not recognizing gay marriage choices as moral while allowing choice. This is a peaceful position. The LDS Church has even promoted equal treatment, just not equal moral recognition.

    If anything, just as many owe apologies to the LDS Church leadership for libel, hatred, and violence. Sure, members have made mistakes- but the LDS Church has given no offense.

  • George Bronx, NY
    April 24, 2012 11:11 a.m.

    @Voice of reason
    No one has ever tried to silence you and I have never once seen you apologize for anything. You are anything but a victim.

  • huggyface Murray, UT
    April 24, 2012 9:52 a.m.

    The issue comes down to the popular statement: Love the sinner, but hate the sin. The church has room for improvement in teaching members how to do this. It requires a certain firmness to your own faith to be open and accepting of others who think and act differently than you.

    I have friends and colleagues that are Homosexual (I don't use the word "gay" as that means "happy") and we get along just fine. In my experience, many are more loving and less judgmental than I am and have a different set of strengths and weaknesses. Who has the greater sin? I'm glad I'm not the judge because I'm far from perfect. And it doesnt matter who has the greater sin anyways - we all need saving grace.

    I'm still learning how to love everyone for who they are and accept them as a whole person- good and bad. I believe that's what the Savior would do.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    April 24, 2012 8:17 a.m.

    Cats: it's changed many times before.

  • elarue NEW YORK, NY
    April 24, 2012 8:05 a.m.

    I know there's a lot of concern from the LGBT community about so-called "ex-gay" organizations, and from what I've heard about Evergreen, they certainly sound like an "ex-gay" organization. From what I understand about church doctrine, having gay feelings is not a sin, only acting on those feelings, but the whole mission of Evergreen from what I understand is to supposedly change those gay feelings. On the other hand, the only other LGBT organization that's connected with Mormonism is Affirmation, who sounds like their objective is to get the church to change doctrine. So it sounds like there's really no "middle ground" organization that demands neither a change in doctrine nor any sort of "reparative[sp?] therapy."

  • Cats Somewhere in Time, UT
    April 24, 2012 4:59 a.m.

    The Church won't change its doctrine and Evergreen won't change it's agenda. I don't know where we go from there. The Church will always be kind and loving, but it won't condone the behavior or agenda of these pro-gay groups. I don't know what else can be said.

  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    April 23, 2012 11:34 p.m.

    spring street,

    I'm not perfect and I often admit it. I often apologize if I over-step in my comments and I've learned to do it less over time. I think we all share in that, otherwise no one would ever argue. I don't appreciate your criticism of me at all. The most offensive of my comments are still only ever reactionary to others who are criticizing the LDS Church unjustly. Note that it is still in defense.

    It isn't right to judge others. Perhaps I have offended in my remarks, but it wouldn't have ever happened had people not been inappropriately attacking the LDS Church to begin with.

    I'm not claiming I'm always right and I apologize every last time I truly believe I've said something inappropriate. But I don't take offense to other opinions. I take offense when people don't think I have a right to express my own opinions as freely as they can their own.

    I'm truly sorry if I've offended you, but my actions say nothing about the truthfulness or appropriateness of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Period.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    April 23, 2012 9:46 p.m.

    @voice of reason
    what you say is true as far as it goes but I also know that sometimes the church and or one of its members actually is offensive and/or does act poorly. My experience with you in particular is that you are very quick to lay down very offensive comments then turn around and even more quickly take offense.

  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    April 23, 2012 6:57 p.m.

    "We feel that there are some places where there is a difference between what the church has said and what it is doing. We want to be able to talk about that."

    In the LDS Church, there is God and God's prophet. The two can't control the actions of the membership of the church and critics of the church (most often being former members) often like to disagree with how God or His prophet is "running the show". Some want the LDS Church to change its core doctrine (which can't happen). Others want the LDS Church to more swiftly punish members who 'misbehave'. I have heard calls for excommunicating leaders and members over the smallest of general complaints before.

    In my experience, I have witnessed many persons misbehave very seriously, make false and inappropriate accusations of others, and react with hatred to statements of loving concern- statements that while including no inappropriate or ill-willed remarks, were accused of such. I have seen people willingly choose to be offended where no offensive act existed- then blame the church in hatred.


    There is equally a difference in what is often accused, and what the church/members is doing.