cofchristcousin
-
Posts
304 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by cofchristcousin
-
-
Increased likelyhood of genetic birth defects in the children. Not all states have this restriction, but it meets the strict scrutiny standard. Consanguinity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The risks are shown at the bottom of the page.
-
Hi, the same standard applies. The 14th amendment requires that all people be treated equally in regards to fundamental rights, one of which is marriage. There are exceptions that meet the strict scrutiny standard, like minors and first cousins because of the potential for harm. The strict scrutiny standard fails to show reasons and evidence to deny gays the right of same sex marriage. Eventually, the legal process will reach the end of the line, and gays will have equality in marriage under the constitution. Religions can have other standards. I just wish this was a less polarizing and traumatizing process. Thanks, Stacie
-
Community of Christ policy is not all that different than the LDS. Currently, only celibate gays may be ordained, and our Priesthood may not marry same sex couple in countries and states where it is legal. Virtually all efforts and programs for dialog have failed.
A few areas where I'm noticing our denominations are different:
We have no counsel on masterbation. I think most people realize it's a personal matter. If it became a source of addiction or obsession then the person would be supported and guided to get appropriate health care.
The degree of acceptance of gays mirrors the culture where the church is found. In some areas the people are impatient for full affirmation and equality in marriage and Priesthood. In other countries gays and their allies might be stoned.
I live in the midwest and single, and I am accepted in my congregation. I preach regularly, plan worship services, play the piano and whatever else might be needed. My Apostle and some others know about me outside my congregation. I have been in worship services in our Independence Temple and the Kirtland Temple. I have some awkwardness and some fear sometimes outside my congregation. In the past 2 years I have had periodic harrassment, a couple of email suggestions about stoning, and one act of violence, so I'm careful.
Ok, I'm starting to ramble. Bottom line, There are policies in place that do not allow gay marriage or priesthood if you are in a relationship. Same as LDS. Stacie
-
That solution is gaining momentum. It is talked about alot. The state would have domestic partnerships and or civil unions and those would be for gays and straights. Marriage would be a religious event, if a couple chose to do it, and each religion would define the boundaries of marriage for their institution. I believe most gays and our allies would support this. Civil equality is what is mandated constitutionally. Religion do not have that mandate nor should it. Good solution oligith1!
Stacie
-
Hi everyone, thank you for the welcome! I think nearly every family will have a loved one with alzheimer's. It runs deeply on both sides of my family. We've been caring for one grandparent or another for 23 years. There are frustrations, but there are also joys and laughter. These kinds of forums help me pass the long quiet times. I will see you in the threads. Stacie
-
Well, we've been saving you a place Kristoffer. :) you are right, it might not be a good fit for everyone. it works for me.
-
HI, I'm Stacie and I'm a Community of Christ person for 29 years. I am a full time caregiver for my mom and grandmother who both have alzheimer's. Mom is in late stage, grandma is just beginning. I moderate on a board with a Community of Christ focus and frequently encounter LDS there. I don't know any in real life. My ministry interests are in the areas of addressing conflict and diversity via dialog, worship planning, and whatever ways I can think of. I'm the Communications officer for my Mission Center (a geographic area of about 20 congregations) and worship planner for my congregation. I look forward to learning more about you guys in the different discussions. Thanks, Stacie
-
Hi again, I think we agree on the slave issue. I'm thinking more about colored drinking fountains, prohibition of blacks from priesthood, and not allowing black kids in white schools; the choices and struggles of my lifetime.
-
Stacie's Quote:
I know that Christians are well-meaning, but from time to time we realize that we've been using God's Law in ways he didn't intend, like the ways we've treated blacks. We are coming to that place with gays, imo.
The science is not with you on this. Yes, there is predisposition to same-sex attraction. However, to claim that the biology is as hard-wired as race--that's overreaching. Most men would have multiple partners if they simply acted on their physical desires. That doesn't make adultery right or acceptable.
I see a place where we have missed each other. My point is not that race and orientation are equally hardwired. I'm saying that our religion was misguided when we oppressed blacks using Scripture passages without challenging our interpretations with serious listening to science, the ancient context of the scriptures, sociology, and the stories of those we harmed. I'm saying I believe Christianity is doing the same with gays.
We were trapped and blinded to the authentic worth and humanity of blacks by not being able to see beyond our cultural biases and our certitude that literal Scripture interpretation was all that was needed to make faithful decisions. Sometimes in our passion to be faithful to God's word, we miss God speaking in one another, and our culture's samaratins.
Stacie
-
Hi, No hard feelings. I have no doubt the LDS are following Christ as they understand him, and seeking the well-being of gays and all. Every Christian is. It is difficult to understand each other's perspectives when there is a language and cultural and life-experience gulf that needs bridged. We do our best, but we still miss each other. For today, that's the best we can do.
-
What the Mosiac Commandments meant is not cut and dried. We know what the kjv translation says, but many scholars differ on what these passages meant in the ancient culture. Same with Paul.
While Jesus did not address homosexuality he did tell stories and lived lessons regarding how the Law served, and how blind following of the Law could harm. He said that if your neighbor's ox falls in the ditch on the sabbath you get out there and help him. You don't let him suffer a loss of livelyhood and let the ox suffer. He allowed a hemoragging woman to touch him, which was against the law. He spoke to and accepted water from the Samaratin Woman at the Well. He did not stone the woman in adultery. He didn't follow the letter of the Law when doing so was unredemptive to the person.
Paul's writings were likely not speaking of gay unions that are in debate today. He was more likely talking about the sex cults that were rampant in Roman society. Men would go to temples and have sex with young men with perfect bodies, in a ritual slave sex cult that was believed to give the older man the qualities of the God's of the day. Same with women. With the contextual background to Paul's writings it seems very unrighteous to apply these condemnations to gays in committed unions.
Gay Christians and their allies are not looking to break God's laws. We believe that the Laws have been misinterpreted and misapplied. The medical sciences are revealing that being gay is biological, not a chosen orientation. The science of Psychology determined that being gay is not a mental illness and removed it as a diagnosis over 35 years ago. I know that Christians are well-meaning, but from time to time we realize that we've been using God's Law in ways he didn't intend, like the ways we've treated blacks. We are coming to that place with gays, imo.
Here is a balanced resource that gives a tiny look into the verses that are used to exclude gays. THE BIBLE AND HOMOSEXUALITY
-
The American Psychological Association has up-to-date information regarding sexual orientation and homosexuality. Answers to Your Questions For a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality It helps bring professional research into the discussion of this difficult issue.
-
In the united states judges use the Strict scrutiny standard to decide fundamental rights issues, not majority rule. And not the bible or other sacred book. The state must show a compelling reason to exclude gays from marrying each other. That's why judges decide in favor of gay rights. Civil marriage must be equal, unless there is a compelling government interest to deny it. 14th amendment.
I have no quarrel with the LDS keeping the one man, one woman standard, but there is no legal reason that justifies requiring that of all people.
-
Hi, just a couple rambling kinds of thoughts. I understand that marriage is unequivocally between a man and a woman in the LDS faith. I disagree that there is cause under the constitution of the united States to have the LDS concept of marriage be authoritative to all people, of many religions. Marriage is a fundamental right constitutionally, and to discriminate on this right the government must use strict scrutiny, meaning it has to show a really good reason to limit someone from marrying. First cousins is a good reason. Being a minor is a good reason. These are both upheld by the constitution. I do not see a good reason to deny gays the right of marriage. They are as likely to be responsible, pay their taxes, have jobs, and have lasting, loving relationships and raise healthy children as straight folks.
I do not support the violence and vandalism, but can you not see why so many people are legitimately heartbroken and angry with the LDS Church? The political action of LDS members and others has temporarily taken their fundamental right to be legally married, and denied what they know to be true, that they are a family. That's not going to make people see the LDS in a good light. The LDS has lost the respect of 48% of the voters of California, and probably about the same nationally. Different gender marriage may be good LDS policy and doctrine, but the LDS does not have the constitutional right to force others to live their way. Gay marriage may be a sin for LDS, but how many sins were committed in defying the law of the land, bearing false witness in diminishing, exagerated and unfair commentary about gays, and polarizing neighbor against neighbor in an effort to have dominion in this area.
I don't support the violence and vandalism, but strong and angry feelings have to be expected.
-
Thank you both. I appreciate both of your responses.
-
No. It's dismissive and belittling to the gay ones and their families who struggle, who pray for their loved ones and churches to hear and respect their circumstances. I think this kind of thing closes doors to people who carry a lot of heartache.
-
Is this kind of stuff common in LDS land? I'm curious. This issue is so marked with heartache that I'm surprised when care and respect are not evident. If not for gays, for those who do love them and see their humanity, and struggle with how to hold them in fellowship and love. As an outsider, this whole prop 8 forum is disturbing.
Prop. 8 Goes to State Supreme Court
in Preserving Marriage between a man and a woman
Posted
The issue of first cousin marriage is not the primary area of discussion. I was just trying to illustrate how the strict scrutiny standard works. Today we have genetic testing and first cousin marriage could probably be safe. Those restrictions will probably someday be challenged and the laws changed or turned over if it shown that there is not a compelling government interest to maintain those limits.