iamdiamd

Right b/c at 14-16, you are a kid, you know absolutely nothing about the world. You haven't lived on your own, gone through major trials, supported anyone, you have done almost completely nothing with your life. And learning to obey all the commandments start out like that-it involves growth and mastery. First you teach a kid don't steal-okay that's good a kid can control himself to not physically steal. A child steals and you discipline them. Then they slowly learn self-mastery and that self-mastery includes understanding that if I think about stealing things all the time it becomes harder and harder to not steal. So you learn to control your thoughts so you stop thinking about stealing. This is the same principle. You only have sex with your spouse, okay good that's something most people can accomplish. Then you start learning how to control your sexual thoughts-and that can take a lot of time. It's not an easy task and it does take a lot of training your brain-but you intrinsically know that the less you sexualize other people the less likely you go seeking out sexual things. And it's not just natural urges, it's a maturation process and a learning process. If you can't actually have the real thing, then what is the point of thinking about it? If you can't actually have sex with the good-looking woman then what really is the point of sexualizing her? If you can't every have your neighbor's house, then what really is the point of spending your time and energy thinking about having your neighbor's house. That is basis of the 9th and 10th Commandment. https://www.dummies.com/religion/christianity/catholicism/catholicism-and-the-ten-commandments/ “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife.” The Ninth Commandment forbids the intentional desire and longing for immoral sexuality. To sin in the heart, Jesus says, is to lust after a woman or a man in your heart with the desire and will to have immoral sex with them. Just as human life is a gift from God and needs to be respected, defended, and protected, so, too, is human sexuality. Catholicism regards human sexuality as a divine gift, so it’s considered sacred in the proper context — marriage." “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods.” The Tenth Commandment forbids the wanting to or taking someone else’s property. Along with the Seventh Commandment, this commandment condemns theft and the feelings of envy, greed, and jealousy in reaction to what other people have. We are commanded to control our feelings, our feelings of envy, greed, anger, jealousy, lust, sexual desire. I am not saying these things are easy, b/c they aren't in any way shape or form. It is really hard and difficult to control our feelings-but God commands it.

Take out the word "sexually" and I agree. I remember when I was a kid, I'd get butterflies in my stomach when one of my friends would come over, I'd get very excited, I'd love to run/play with my friends (who were of the same sex) and I always felt very sad when they left. I was definitely attracted to them, every friendship is based upon an attraction. There is something about the person that I am attracted to-either their personality, something they have done, something. That attraction forms the basis of a friendship. What you appear to be saying is that if a person finds another person beautiful, good-looking, any word to describe an acknowledgement that another human being is beautiful it must mean that you are "sexually" attracted to them. Modern culture pushes this idea and it's totally false. It's how the media bashed Trump for saying that his daughter was a beautiful woman. The media equated the comment that says "she is beautiful" to "I am sexually attracted to her". Which is again totally false. In today's society b/c culture has molded people to equate a statement of beauty to a statement of sexuality and the two are separable. Because I say a painting is a beautiful painting doesn't mean I want to have sex with it, just like saying a person is a beautiful person doesn't mean I want to have sex with them. And you can differentiate between the two. People can have all kinds of weird sexual desires. Some people want to have sex with the earth or a painting or a gun etc. Sexual attraction means: "Sexual attraction is attraction on the basis of sexual desire or the quality of arousing such interest. Sexual attractiveness or sex appeal is an individual's ability to attract the sexual or erotic interests of other people, and is a factor in sexual selection or mate choice." Look at the words used, "sexual desire", sex appeal", "sexual or erotic", "sexual selection". Sexual attraction is all about SEX!!!! It's not, oh I think this person is a good-looking person, it's about the desire to have sex with that person-period. That's why Paul states "But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn." Because that is exactly what Paul is getting at, it is better to marry-therefore you can have sexual desire, passion, attraction for your spouse, rather than anyone you see. That is what chastity is about-that instead of directing sexual energy/desire/passion/attraction to strangers, you direct it to your spouse. To sexually desire anyone but your spouse is breaking Christ's commandment.

It's a really good question and you are correct they aren't necessarily the same thing. For starters you don't find a definition for the Law of Chastity in the scriptures and the older I get, the less I like our modern interpretations so I generally like to go directly to God's Word, rather than rely upon interpretation of the Word. We colloquially use the phrase Law of Chastity to mean sexual relations outside of marriage. The reason why there is such heavy emphasis on the phrasing "Law of Chastity" in the Church is b/c it's a requirement to obey it to enter the temple. So in general we define the Law of Chastity as sexual acts with others. If we are using that as the metric then no clearly SSA isn't a sexual act with another human being and does not fall under the "Law of Chastity". By the same token, being "sexually attracted" to the married woman who sits across the pew wouldn't be a violation of the "Law of Chastity" either. Yet that is clearly not what Christ taught. Christ taught not to "lust", i.e. have sexual thoughts/desires/feelings for someone not our spouse. In that sense it is a sin. And there is a difference between saying a person is an attractive person, or they are a beautiful person and saying "I am sexually attracted to them". The moment you say "sexually attracted" it means one thing-you'd like to have sex with them-which is a sin.

You are wrong. If we are baptized members of Christ's Church, then we are His disciples. Disciple-please think on that word. One who is disciplined in the way's of the Lord and one who seeks to disciple (i.e. teach/lead/guide-which is exactly what parents do!) others in the way's of the Lord. Loving others simply is NOT the highest form of the 1st Commandment. No where in scripture is that backed up.

Yes and Elder Holland is wrong if the interpretation is that SSA is no sin-this view is not supported by scripture. Alma 24:12 For our words will condemn us, yea, all our works will condemn us; we shall not be found spotless; and our thoughts will also condemn us; and in this awful state we shall not dare to look up to our God; and we would fain be glad if we could command the rocks and the mountains to fall upon us to hide us from his presence.

Some things for you to consider. Do you need to have contact with an abusive husband to know that it is bad? Do you need to have contact with an adulterer to know that what they are doing is wrong? Why are you making a special carve-out for this special sin? You do not understand the scriptures. We are commanded to judge. Not unrighteous judgement. You are making a judgement that children raised in a homosexual environment suffer no harm. That is a judgement.

I agree with much of what you wrote. Yet how can I "tolerate" homosexuality if it undermines their divine heritage. They weren't born homosexuals, something happened, something went wrong-either in action or in frame of mind. I disagree with " I’d suggest to you that by loving all of God’s children we are demonstrating the highest form of keeping both the 1st and 2nd commandments". Totally false. 1st Commandment is to love God. We love God by keeping his commandments. We don't love God by only loving others-that is a humanists philosophy not a religious philosophy and it's not based upon scripture. Before we can obey the 2nd commandment of loving others, we must obey the first. To say that to love others is the "highest form" of keeping the 1st and the 2nd is completely wrong-if that were the case, then there should only be one commandment, not two. To love God, means we must first understand what his commandments are. What does God expect us to do (and it's not just "loving others"). His commandments include things like "keeping the Sabbath day holy", "no other Gods","no swearings","no lusting after strange flesh", there is a slew of commandments of how we are to personally conduct ourselves. Only once we know what God's commandments are can we implement Commandment #2-loving others. What does loving others really mean? It's way deeper than just saying "I love you", it's way deeper than just giving someone a helping hand, a pat on the back, a kind word. Those things are part of it-but that is not all of it at all. I love my children dearly-yet many times I must discipline them. To truly love my children is to properly lead them in the way they should live their life! It means when appropriate saying words of encouragement, but also to not sugar-coat things. When they screw up, to let them know and to teach them-that was bad, don't do that. Sometimes that discipline requires very drastic measure. And most importantly it requires the Rod of God-i.e. the Word of God. To properly love someone else and to properly implement the 2nd commandment is to teach them about the Rod of God. When you leave out the Rod, then you might as well not have a religion and the 2nd commandment means nothing.

You are blinded my brother and for that I'm sorry. Homosexuality isn't a sin of omission. It's not just "good people" who mess up, it is one of the grossest sins out there. It messes with God's greatest gift-the power to give life. Have you ever noticed how God condemns the sins that deal with the giving of life and the taking of life the worst? Homosexuality takes God's ordained structure for bringing new life into this world turns it on it's head and pretends that it is great. You ought to see what homosexuals and homosexualist inside the church proclaim about homosexuals and children. They proclaim that homosexuals make better parents b/c they love their children more, they make better parents b/c they know what it's like to be on the margins. It's a pack of lies. I do not wish any harm on homosexuals, only that they repent, turn to God, change their desires, change their hearts and allow Christ to take their sins. Because if they don't, it will not be well with them at the last day.

It doesn't matter if I've never directly observed any of the people in the household or talked with them or had first hand experiences. I know how to raise children. And in every way, shape and form putting a child in a household with two homosexuals is absolutely emotional and spiritual child abuse. One of the biggest lies in our modern society about raising children to be adults is that all they need is "love". It's such a tripe. All a child needs is someone who "loves" them and that takes care of everything. Totally 100% false. Raising a child to be an adult is all about teaching, training, discipline and love. It is about modeling to a child appropriate human behaviors, inappropriate human behaviors, it's about modeling proper human relationships. Any homosexual who raising a child in a homosexual household, unequivocally does not have the child's best interest at heart. Any homosexual couple who is raising a child together, is extremely self-centered and narcissitic; they wrap it up in "love". They aren't parents, they are care-takers, baby-sitters, modeling a despicable lifestyle to an innocent child. We aren't just born and then viola we magically are who we are with no input. We are shaped, molded, formed. We absolutely have our own free will, agency and personality, but anyone who has children can clearly see we are molded and shaped. Every day of the entire life a child raised in a homosexual household is being modeled a wicked and perverse lifestyle-every single day. They will see them kiss, hug, etc. They will grow up missing a critical aspect of understanding male/female relationships. This isn't like just missing one part of the whole (single-parent households), it's ripping one part out and replacing it with a fake "family" and then everyone around them pretends like it's so wonderful b/c they want to virtue signal to the world how "tolerant" they are. Yet no one has the guts to actually tell the child (even later on in life), you know what, that situation you grew up in was absolutely horribly messed up-so incredibly wrong and evil. Any child raised in a homosexual household will almost certainly have mental or emotional problems down the road, hence child abuse. This is not like single-parent homes; there are many legitimate reasons why a suboptimal family situation such as single-parent household arise; it could be through death, sickness, or wickedness on the part of one spouse. There is no legitimate reason for a homosexual couple with children-it can only exist due to force of law. It really is quite sad at how wicked of a society we have become, where even inside the Church members can't determine right from wrong and they can't stand up for what's right. We are a wicked culture and we are unrighteous in the Church-we like to pretend we are righteous, but as a whole we are not (this is self-evident by the number of members who look at pornography and support such wickedness as SSM or homosexuals with children).

You've got a skewed view of being able to read other people's thoughts. Good to know you know my heart, should i pray to you too?

1st Commandment is to love God and to have no other Gods before him. I don't sense much in your post about love of God above the humanism of others. I love God above simply telling other people pleasing words that they want to hear. I love God enough to tell others that if they don't get their act together one day they will stand accountable before God for their own actions. I love God's children enough to proclaim repentance to those who are living in sin. True love isn't telling someone pleasing words. True love is telling someone what they need to hear not what they want to hear.

Yes, because again, I have read enough to know that yes while this community does lie quite a bit to get what they want-this guy in particular does not. You can draw your own conclusions and say, no,no,no this would NEVER happen in the Church. I have read enough to say, yeah this is actually quite likely-not widespread but likely.

Because I've read enough of them to know the guy isn't lying. He has pictures with Elder Costa (of the 70) when he went out to Utah, he has pictures of his SP, counselors, etc. I invite you to find out for yourself-I encourage you to do as Elder Ballard has asked us to do and to "listen to and learn from". I have and I have drawn my conclusions from doing so. I encourage you to spend some time on his blog, go the the facebook pages of "Mormons Building Bridges", "Affirmation", "NorthStar", etc. I encourage you to listen to what they are saying and to learn from what they are saying. Others can certainly draw their own conclusions, but my conclusions from listening to and learning from is that regardless of Elder Oaks talk (which was good)-this stuff isn't stopping. The only thing that will this community wants that will suffice for them is 100% full acceptance, meaning temple sealings. And they are certainly making plenty of progress.

I do not use the term lightly and I most certainly do not throw it around. The raising of a child to an adult is an extremely important process. It is most likely the single greatest act a human being will do for the rest of society-that is righteously raising the next generation. It is an extremely wicked, and evil ideology and just demonstrates how far removed we are as a culture from God that anyone could possibly fathom that a child raised in a household with two homosexuals is anything other than evil. Children are sponges and they model human behavior. If the parent swears in front of the child, the child will swear, if a parent throws and hits things the child will act out like that. Once they become old enough as independent human beings then they can start to self-regulate their behavior and say, my parents do xyz, but that is bad so I won't do xyz. But that takes years and years and almost inevitably anyone who has lived long enough, or who has any bit of self-reflection will almost immediately say, oh yes, I have this, this and this habit that was taught and trained to me by my parents. We know this, it is self-evident. And yet either because people are blinded by society, or because they don't want to say it (and look mean), or because they absolutely have no clue (or have an agenda), they self-delude themselves into saying, yeah, yeah, that's perfectly fine for a child to be raised by two homosexuals. Really? In a religion where we know that the foundation of everything is based upon a mother and a father we are taking one of the most perverted societal structures and saying, yeah, yeah that's okay that they are raised that way. It's stunning how blinded people can be. And this is a totally different situation than being raised by a single-parent, because their are only two ways for a child to end up being raised in a homosexual household. Either through adoption, or because one parent went down a sinful path and the courts allowed that parent to take custody. And either one is tremendously bad. It absolutely is child abuse, imposed by the state, to have an innocent child raised in a wicked, perverse, sinful relationship like a homosexual relationship and then have everyone around them pretend that it's okay. It's not okay-it will jack with their heads for the rest of their lives, they will absolutely have emotional, mental and relationship problems because of it. It's stunning the depths people go to so that they can avoid personal responsibility of standing up for what's morally right when the crowd is against them. Allowing children to be adopted into or raised by (through the custody courts) homosexual partners is a great, great sin. It absolutely offends God b/c it offends his little ones. And anyone who defends it, should take a real hard look at their own soul. The bottom line is that many people, even many members don't have enough faith in the God ordained structures of the family to really defend it and I mean to really defend it. Many are too scared of being intimidated that they half-heatedly defend it, they say things like "I'm personally against it, but people should have the right to do as they please, love who they love" . . .yeah, yeah, that's not a defense that a way to act like you defend it without having to actually take any responsibility. There is nothing that I'm saying that wouldn't have been common knowledge, common understanding 20 years ago and the responses opposing what I've written would be looked at the same way to which I'm looked at here.

Don't care the world is wrong on a whole lot of things these days.

And where did I say you should go up to some random person? No if you area youth leader you have some responsibility over the child. If the child is being abused your don't say... Oh that's nice your family is wonderful. Being raised in a homosexual family is child abuse.

Deflect from the reality of what is happening.

According to you. You do a person no favors by not teaching them reality. My way is the way things used to be.

Okay, stick your head in the sand. Cognitive dissonance. That's cool. I never said it was "the standard" only that it is happening. You should take Elder Ballard's advice and "listen to and learn from" a little more.

Actually most people have compassion, kindness and love messed up in today's culture. You do what is in the best long-term interest of the child. Is it in the best-long term interest of the child to pretend that they come from a good family? A normal family? Heck no. In fact, later in life they might hate you for it b/c they will say STE I grew up in a messed up home and NO ONE ever said to me, you know what you do grow up in a screwed up home and I'm sorry that occurred to you. Papering over the problem and pretending it doesn't exist or pretending everything is hunky-dory when it's not is not the right solution.

Rationalize much? I never said someone should lose their TR over drag parties-I simply used it as proof of the accuracy of what I'm saying. Someone is attending drag parties certainly shouldn't be someone who is a leadership position. And a drag show is definitely on a different level than going to Marine parties-they aren't sexually explicit, they aren't made specifically for sexual purposes. And yes he is going on homosexual dates with approval from his Stake President. The guy writes about it on his blog, you just have to read what he writes.

No they aren't completely different subjects. Before you can interact properly with kids you have to have your own house in order. You can't "serve them the best Christ-like manner" when the adult house isn't in order (or at least the teaching of it). Kids see and smell hypocrisy a mile away. When the rot is at the adult level from people they look up to, they will see the hypocrisy and tell you to bugger off.

Homosexual dates. You haven't been taking Elder Ballard's advice and "listening to and learning from our LGBTQ+ brothers and sisters". https://nerdygaymormon.tumblr.com/ Stake Executive Secretary with approval from his SP going on homosexual dates, going to drag parties, etc. All you have to do is "listen to and learn from". Sorry to burst your bubble-things are quite a bit further along then you might think.

Which part? The fact that homosexual members currently in the Church are now going on homosexual dates and are considered by Stake Presidents to be temple-worthy? Or the connection between children and homosexual lifestyle.

You are not understanding the larger picture. If you want to work with a kid who didn't choose who their parents are or what house they grew up in you MUST fix the overarching problem. Think of it this way. If a child grows up in an abusive household, simply focusing on the child who is abused (while it is a very good thing), will do nothing in the long-term to actually help FUTURE children from not being abused. You must strike at the heart of the issue, which is acceptance of homosexuality in today's culture. Otherwise you are just tilting at windmills. Furthermore, it is totally illogical to request that a child renounce a homosexual lifestyle (not publicly, just that they reject it as a good thing), when we have homosexual members who are "temple-worthy" going on homosexual dates!