iinarihoudai

I would love it if there were a place for liberal Mormons. It's a bit disheartening for people to bear their testimony on fast Sunday and have them talk about being a conservative as if that is what defines us Mormons. =/ It sounds like your idea could facilitate that.

After listening to what people had to say on the original topic I've decided to bring it up during my next Temple recommend interview. I should be fine since I don't go to activist meetings or give support monetarily or anything like that. When this comes up in conversation I make it very clear that I agree with the church's stance on homosexuality. It's the method, not the message, that I disagree with.

Probably not, but I wish he'd come back and explain himself and hopefully apologize. We don't need to use extreme examples all the time to make a point. All he had to say was that homosexuality isn't beneficial to society because those couples cannot naturally have children. Opinion stated. Done.

I read his post. Please do not be so insulting as to blame me and other readers for being offended with his "poor choice of words" and claim that since we're saying something about the thing that caused offense we didn't read or understand his post. It was Traveler's duty to carefully consider his words. Did you not read Dravin's response? Dravin said, "Okay, but using the same logic we can conclude that premarital sex is more beneficial than celibacy. We can also conclude that philandry is more beneficial than fidelity, and that in the general case polygamy is more beneficial than monogamy. There is also the issue of infertility within an earthly time-frame. I understand that given the premise your logic does hold but I disagree that the potential for life is a reliable or desirable metric to be used for the benefit or value of a relationship, and if the government should recognize a relationship." Traveler could have used any of those other examples to make his point, which was that homosexuality is not beneficial because such a relationship cannot naturally beget children. Soulsearcher, I hope you have explained to your co-workers that a bunch of Mormons are calling BS on Traveler's comment. But your point is well made. We already have a hate stigma on us about the homosexuality issue. We have an oppressive stigma for not allowing women to hold the Priesthood. Those two together make it easy to believe that Traveler's comment is a common Mormon belief. We also have stigmas over previous issues such as practicing polygamy and for not allowing blacks to hold the Priesthood and for encouraging parents to use corporal punishment (which caused my step-mother serious emotional problems). We don't need to add to it. Everything we do and say has an impact and doubly so when it's so public. Vort, when you make the claim that we're overreacting and not understanding Traveler's point you add to the problem. How hard is it to say, dude, that's a terrible example you need to fix that?

If you look at the story of Lot, the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah are rife with rape being culturally acceptable.

That is the most offensive thing I have ever heard. 1 in 3 women have been raped. 1 in 6 *men* have been raped. Do you not know that the church does not discipline a woman for getting an abortion due to rape? Think about that. Where's your beneficial rape now? Homosexuality is better because it does not cause psychological trauma for two willing same-sex adults to be sexually intimate. Rape causes psychological trauma that is very difficult to heal from. We need to stop comparing homosexuality to rape or murder or to any other crime. Doing so makes us Mormons look like bigoted fools. Maybe then people won't be so anti-homosexual as to believe that rape is a better alternative.

PS: Not sure when I'll get back to you about this. I need to take it to prayer about talking to the Bishop. Sometimes timing is everything.

Look, I really really do not want this to devolve into another prop 8 debate. The question was about, does having a dissenting view regarding gay marriage disqualify someone from having a temple recommend under the question about sympathizing with groups that are contrary to the church even though the person still has a vibrant testimony of the gospel and sustains church leaders. But it appears that my memory of the question is flawed. Obviously, from the way the responses are going I am simply going to have to take the plunge and ask my Bishop. I'll report back what he says on the matter. edit: when did the thank you buttons go away on this section of the forums? Sadness. NM, they didn't load for some reason and now they are. Weird.

Forum gnomes?

Mamas_girl, Vort was be facetious. I was really asking if that question about sympathizing and affiliating with groups that are against the church (I thought it said that are contrary to the church) includes disagreeing about supporting prop 8 which simply stated that marriage was to between a man and a woman in California. Perhaps my faulty memory of the question is causing an undue concern. . . Annewandering, regarding the illegal things Vort mentioned I have encountered people making similar statements in all seriousness so on that one it was hard to tell if he was joking or not.

That's just it john, I DO support my leaders. I sustain my Bishop and the General Authorities and other leaders in their callings. That's never been a question. Ever. Vort, all the illegal things you mentioned are not specific to religious beliefs. I believe living a homosexual lifestyle is a sin because of my religious beliefs not for any secular reason.

Vort, you have me listed as the person you are quoting. I did not say any of that. Mrcharlie did. I kindly ask that you fix this error. I'm not even sure how that happened. . . I was also thinking that most people would not be comfortable sharing such spiritual experiences on a public forum since such things are held sacred and generally only shared as directed by the Spirit.

No. Not at all. If I denounced the church I wouldn't care about my recommend. . . I question the method employed by the church regarding gay marriage. I believe that making it a law that homosexuals can not marry is forcing them to follow our belief system which is not conducive to missionary work. I do NOT question that marriage is ordained of God.

I was wondering, do you think you can lose your temple recommend if you do not support prop 8 or anything like it? I believe that missionary work is the only right course of action not forcing people to adhere to our belief system. However, the question on whether or not you are sympathetic to groups that are contrary to the gospel leaves me wondering that if I were too open about this opinion I may run the risk of losing my recommend. I have noticed that other liberal Mormons also tend to use a pseudonym as well which makes me wonder if this is something I need to be concerned with. I can't ask my Bishop either because the last thing I want to hear is, Sister please return your recommend.

I, too, use the term cognitive dissonance. What is your problem with that terminology? Also, aren't we all making quick assessments when we read and respond to someone's posts on an advice forum?

Okay, I am going to post something here that is very difficult. My mother did not protect me. Her failure to do so has hurt me more than she can ever know. She had many reasons: Dad came from a bad family he just needs understanding, It's been a long time since anything happened (but inevitably something would happen again), Some days he can hardly believe he's the one sexually hurting us so it's not really him that's doing it (I agree that he was at times possessed, however, it was his choices that allowed it to occur in the first place), Since it's not happening all the time it's not really abuse, The police would take us away from her, We need to keep the family together, Note how compassion, charity, and a desire for family togetherness kept me and my siblings in a damaging situation. These are righteous desires and traits that became twisted and led to many years of cognitive dissonance and pain. I've gone through counseling, I'm happy with my life and I have my own family now. But sometimes, something will come out of the woodwork and I find myself feeling a victim all over again. You do not want to risk this with your children. Women's intuition is a very real thing. Trust it. Do not allow your children to be cared for by your husband's parents. And yes, I mean both because it's easy for Grandma to say, oh I gotta run to the store for a minute I'll be right back, and leave your children alone with Grandpa. Presentation of concerns matter. You do not want to falsely accuse anyone. However, what is proof? Catching the perpetrator in the act? The word of a child? So often, a child's word is discounted, not trusted or believed. Stranger danger is largely a false idea. It's easier to abuse someone if you are in a trusted position in the family (blood related or not) because the child is either afraid to say anything or is not believed. Also, sexual abuse does not always physically hurt. It can actually feel quite nice. . . which compounds the psychological trauma, the shame. We have all said, darn it, I wish I had listened to myself! I had a gut feeling but I didn't pay attention and now this happens! Well, be the mother you want to be, the mother your children need you to be, and listen.