Gay Marriage?

[captain_nephi]

I want to understand exactly what the prophet is saying when he is asking us to mobilize against gay marriage.

I understand and agree with the idea of saying that marriage is between a man and woman. That is easy enough.

But does that mean we are to oppose civil unions and other legal arrangements between same sex couples as well? Or other privileges, benefits, and rights that are the right of other married couples? Community property? Power of attorney? etc.

Without further clarification, I think it would be easy to push the intention too far or perhaps not far enough.

[Guest JHM-in-Bountiful]

I've read the letter the first presidency sent to the church in California. I do not live in California. My take on the letter is for church members, who can vote in California, should unite and pass the state admendment this November. This will only allow marriage between a man and woman. The church does not like to get into political issues. They don't tell you to vote for a particular party. However, this letter is a polite way to tell Californians to vote against "same gender attraction" marriage.

[Kirajo]

I think at this point it's just their way of saying it's time for us as members to lead by example, stand up and say " HEEEECKK NOOOO' marriage is too sacred and created for man and woman only.

[Stampede]

Agreed, I know that this descision was not an easy one for Thomas Monson to make. I;m sure he counseled with the lord and the Lord told him to do it.

If the people desire Evil they will get Evil, Even if this country becomes the new Sodom and Gomorrah, it will not change the Gospel and us LDS will not be required to change anything.

[captain_nephi]

so... is just a ban on same-sex "marriage," so if gay couples want to call it a "wedding" we are okay with it. Or are we saying that same sex couples cannot be joined, legally or otherwise (they cannot be a legally recognized couple).

[Guest JHM-in-Bountiful]

The church sees all people as Heavenly Father's children. We are commanded to love all of our brothers and sisters. Last year, the church published a booklet entitled "God Loveth His Children". It can be found on the church's main website. Heavenly Father and his church condone any same-sex practices. Basicly, it's is ok to be gay. But, it is sinful to act upon those same gender attraction feelings in anyway. The church has the authority to dis-fellowship or excommunicate it's members if they are not adbiding by this teaching. This will only effect a minority of people who have same gender attraction( church members). The LDS church wants as many brothers and sisters to follow Heavenly Father's commandments as possible. This includes all members as well as non-members. As stated in the Bible and The Book Of Mormon, any type of perverted sin is an abomination. God has and will bring harsh judgements to societies who embrace such practices. Of course, the LDS church is not the only Christian church against the issue. Here is the 12th article of faith the LDS church. "12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law." No matter where the church is in the world, we are required to live and obey the law of the land. Here is an opportunity for the church to make a stance. The letter, sent by the general authorities is basicly telling church members that they have a say in this type of lifestyle. Our leaders are wanting a winning vote against same-sex marriage. I am a person who has "same gender attraction". I've decided to give up the lifestyle and will be re-baptised in the church in July 2008. People who continue to live this lifestyle see this marriage between one another as a civil right. All they want is to have the same rights and privileges as regular marriages between men and women. These couples are left out of the mainstream and are denied recognition, insurance benefits, and other things. That explains why there is such a fierce debate on this issue. Again this type of life style goes against what the majority wants to see in their society. The teachings of Christ, living the commandments, obeying the law of the land, and the majority of the population against this issue, places the church in a good position. It appears that this type of marriage will fail for people who experience same gender attraction.

[Moksha]

Power of attorney?

Even the name "Power of Attorney" sounds somewhat satanic.

Almost like right after you utter the last word, you expect to

hear a cackle, "What fools these mortals be"!

Just a thought.

[rickg]

Aparently there are those who DO feel the chuch has "gone too far" with this. This was on KSL web site yesterday:

Some upset by LDS Church call for political participation

June 28th, 2008 @ 1:14pm

By JENNIFER DOBNER Associated Press Writer

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- Lester Leavitt wrote a letter asking family members to make a decision.

The Pompano Beach, Fla. man wanted his siblings and children to choose family over a call from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints leaders to support a November ballot initiative to define traditional marriage in California's constitution. A lifetime member of the Church who came out as a gay man in 2004, Leavitt wants his California relatives to walk out when a letter from the Church's leaders is read.

"I thought by asking my family to do this, I was simply asking them to send a strong message to Salt Lake City that they disagree with the idea that any church has the right to entrench clearly religious dogma into the constitution of a state or country," he wrote in a letter posted on an Internet discussion group called q-saints. "I was just asking them to defend my civil rights."

A letter from Thomas S. Monson, president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, was to be read from the pulpit in church congregations Sunday.

After working as an activist on behalf of gay members of the Church and surviving an excommunication attempt by his local bishop, Leavitt said Monson's letter was a disappointing last straw. He sent a certified letter to the Church's Salt Lake City headquarters Wednesday asking to have his name removed from the roles.

"I wanted to remain a cultural Mormon," Leavitt, 44, said Thursday. "I thought there was a way, an opening up, but then all of a sudden, the Church decides this ... and I'm not going to wait around."

Leavitt is far from alone. Since the letter first began circulating on the Web last weekend, hundreds of Church member blog postings have expressed disbelief, disappointment and outrage at the Church's decision to wade into politics.

"I don't really know anybody who takes issue with a Church's right to its moral position and teachings," said Nick Literski, of Seattle, a former Church member who is gay. "It's when they take a political action to impose those beliefs on society that people object. Even people who don't support marriage equality are still upset about this."

Officially, the Church teaches that homosexual sex is a sin, although celibate gays can remain active in church callings and activities. Since the 1990s the Church has been politically active in defeating same-sex marriage initiatives nationwide, including asking its members to vigorously help pass California's Proposition 22 in 2000, which prohibited California from legally recognizing gay marriages performed outside the state.

But over the last five years the church had seemed to undergo a subtle shift in position. Leaders have been more silent and limited the Church's activism to filing legal briefs and a signature on a 2006 letter to Congress supporting a federal marriage amendment.

In addition the rhetoric around what the Church calls same-gender attraction had softened and Latter-day Saints have been encouraged to encircle gay members with love and compassion.

Even a short statement of disappointment after last month's California's Supreme Court decision to legalize gay marriage was mild.

"Maybe I was just optimistic. I thought they might sit on the sidelines and not have any bad press," said Matt Thurston, a 39-year-old Church member from Corona, Calif., who is not gay. "Between (2000) and now, some of the things I've seen, some of the statements that have come out, they seemed much more sympathetic ... They don't treat it in the same way they used to."

Although President Monson's letter states the faith's "unequivocal" moral position that marriage between a man and a woman is an institution ordained by God seems to indicate no change of heart by leaders, many wonder if the general membership will rally to political participation with the same fervor as in 2000.

Wards were assessed fundraising goals and members walked door-to-door to get out the vote eight years ago.

"There is that culture of obedience that once the proclamation has been raised, that's it," said Jeffrey Nielsen, a professor of philosophy who was ousted from the Church-owned Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah in 2006 after criticizing the Church's position on gay marriage in a local newspaper column.

At the same time, the Church preaches that God blesses each person with the agency to make his or her own decisions and some may not surrender that freedom so easily, said Nielsen, who has submitted an open letter to his fellow Church members and to several California newspapers.

"A growing number of active Mormons, who have gay friends and family members are coming to the conclusion that our current leaders are as mistaken in promoting discrimination against gays and lesbians as was the Mormon hierarchy in the 60's when they opposed equal rights for people of color, and our Mormon leaders in the 70's when they opposed full legal equality for women," he writes. "No one is asking that you condone a behavior that might violate your religious faith, but we need to allow everyone the freedom to live their life as they see fit."

That the Church has changed in the past -- black men, for example were finally granted full ecclesiastical authority in 1978 -- gives Nielsen and others hope for its future. A generation of leaders who grew up alongside openly gay friends or relatives and a belief in continuing revelation offer opportunities for a new direction. "Even if you take this from the LDS point of view where changes can only be made by revelation, by God, you still have to have leaders who are willing to ask the question," said Literski, 41, who was married and has five daughters. "There will come a day, I believe, when there will be somebody in authority who is willing. It won't be overnight, but I think we will see an accommodation."

[Kirajo]

oh my gosh. wow. boo hoo...the church finally took a stand on something..its not like we're running around frantically with protest signs...seems like a pretty subtle approach to me to help out with our own beliefs here. If you're religion believes that same sex marriage is unauthorized by God, and homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God, why on earth would you watn to support and help other people to reach that point? I applaud Monson for stepping up and telling people to take a stand for what they believe.

[sixpacktr]

Who is mixing politics with religion? 'Get up and walk out' when the Bishop reads the letter from the First Presidency? Just what does he think he is going to accomplish with that? That the leaders of the church will 'reconsider', that this is all from them and that they are not being guided by our HF?

The church always takes stands on moral issues.

There is a sifting going on, it is that simple. Those that have trouble with this will have more with whatever is next. I envision that Nephi of 3rd Nephi was called 'controlling' and 'not with the times' as well when he was praying for the Nephite nation when it was on the brink. There were those that were pricked by the Spirit and understood what he was saying and repented. Then there those, like these people noted in the report, that felt that Nephi 'had gone too far (he is criticizing our judges!)'.

And some think the BOM isn't relevant to our day!

Homosexuality is wrong. We CAN'T condone it.

[Palerider]

Its morally wrong

[Hemidakota]

I want to understand exactly what the prophet is saying when he is asking us to mobilize against gay marriage.

I understand and agree with the idea of saying that marriage is between a man and woman. That is easy enough.

But does that mean we are to oppose civil unions and other legal arrangements between same sex couples as well? Or other privileges, benefits, and rights that are the right of other married couples? Community property? Power of attorney? etc.

Without further clarification, I think it would be easy to push the intention too far or perhaps not far enough.

Being a voter in California, my home state, I feel it was the necessary stand in 2000 to fight against another lifestyle or their beliefs being force onto others. By living here, we have been fighting against them pushing this in the educational arena to promoting their agenda in every forum of life here. It is not an issue of they do not have rights, it is an issue of someone forcing their views upon others. I am now offended by these claimed justices and for me, they had violated my rights under the constitution. If it was me, I would limited any justice term to eight years and removed them by voters if they fail in that position as necessary. Same goes for the national court.

As it is with any group demanding special privileges, it is an evil to force their views or agenda upon others.

Now, if you are a believer of GOD and the gospel of Christ, then you will clearly see who is the problem behind this push. It is not those of this lifestyle but one that brings down societies of the past using the same techniques. Nothing changes since Noah time to our time but rather repeating itself. People fail in learning past history...that is a given. As there is no room in the Celestial Glory for this lifestyle. So, the question is, why would we allow it here, when this earth is seeking to reside in that sphere?

Simple tidbit, if everyone was attracted to the same gender, would there be any children? No! Within a generation, the world would be lost.

[Hemidakota]

Meridian Magazine:: Family Leader Network: First Presidency Urges Californians to Protect Marriage

[NormalMormon]

Do you really think that Mormons will be able to sway a vote? No. First of all, there aren't enough Mormons who will vote in the first place, because many of them, like myself, are undecided. While our beliefs are a certain way, it doesn't mean we should push it on society. Are the adults consenting? Are they of age? No murder, no rape. It's simply their lifestyle. Same with polygamy. WE may not condone it, but that doesn't mean, first of all, that we should make the gays in our church feel uncomfortable (yes, they do exist). Secondly, we are contributing to hate. That's all there is to say. While we as a church don't approve of sodomy or the actual sexual ACTS - we do allow "non-practicing" gays to be in the church. My neice is only 13, and because she's been taught that being gay is wrong, and the church doesn't condone it - she now HATES gay people, makes fun of them etc.... This is NOT okay. Be aware that the CHILDREN are listening.

[Hemidakota]

It is not about LDS people....do you think the churches are not together in being united with this stand? We did before and will do it again.

[hordak]

Do you really think that Mormons will be able to sway a vote? No. First of all, there aren't enough Mormons who will vote in the first place, because many of them, like myself, are undecided. While our beliefs are a certain way, it doesn't mean we should push it on society. Are the adults consenting? Are they of age? No murder, no rape. It's simply their lifestyle. Same with polygamy. WE may not condone it, but that doesn't mean, first of all, that we should make the gays in our church feel uncomfortable (yes, they do exist). Secondly, we are contributing to hate. That's all there is to say. While we as a church don't approve of sodomy or the actual sexual ACTS - we do allow "non-practicing" gays to be in the church. My neice is only 13, and because she's been taught that being gay is wrong, and the church doesn't condone it - she now HATES gay people, makes fun of them etc.... This is NOT okay. Be aware that the CHILDREN are listening.

Whats not OK? Hating people yes that is wrong. But the church teaching Gods word is not. This is no different then asking people to follow the words of wisdom , chastity or tithing in church. And asking members to opposes new strip clubs or casinos being built in there neighborhoods.

[PapilioMemnon]

It is my understanding the church is not politically involved in anything, but it is involved and encourage the members to be involved citizens, and involved in the community.

This is about a law, not politician; and the church is asking us to be united by standing up for our beliefs, i.e., voting or supporting a law, the marriage ammendment, that will keep the definition of marriage intact, only between a man & a woman.

[Islander]

It is not a political issue. It is a moral issue. Others have turned it into a political issue not so the church and we must be very careful how we dissect the issue. We really have beaten this one to death for a very long time so I see no real value in doingm so again or every week to infinitum.

Since the earliest of time and before de advent of secular legislative existence, God dictated in simple terms how we humans, but more specifically, His children are to behave. There have always been people bent on ignoring God's law in favor of their own agenda. That has been at the crossroads of the debate. God interferes with man's social agenda. In other words, He gets in the way of what some would like to do. They want to live unencumbered by commandments of any kind or social reproach for their behavior. And they are free to do so, but at times, to force their will over the larger society's objection they HAVE to use the arm of the government to sanction their social agenda. This is one of those cases. This is a case where some want to exercise agency but refuse to deal with the social consequences. There are many diverse ways to ensure that those that chose to engage in relationships other than marriage can enjoy social protection. It has been done for years. But it is not enough, they claim.

So as believers in God's laws and His commandments we MUST make a stand against sin "personified" as law. We must decide if we obey man or God. That is where we stand today. The notions of right and wrong come from God although some will have you believe it was created in a vacuum. Ethics permeated from the same spirit. It is not an altruistic byproduct of man's social evolution. So, it is a moral issue.

[bytor2112]

I have a great deal of empathy for those members who struggle against same gender attraction. If one is truly honest, they will readily admit that these feelings are a curse and they wouldn't wish them on anyone. I once worked with a guy who was "gay". He told me that he had been this way since he was a child and felt powerless to be different. I think this must be a very confusing and frightening thing to have to deal with. On the one hand they must instinctively know it is wrong yet can't seem to force themselves to be "normal". Again, for those who recognize this is abhorrent and something to be resisted with every fiber of their being and strive to do so, my prayers go out for them. Those who have given in to this sinful behavior,why foist these views on the rest of society and try and pretend that it is ok and normal? They seek acceptance from society, government and institutions of religion because they can't convince themselves that it is normal, healthy behavior. How many tv programs now have a "gay" character? How many children are taught that it is ok to be gay and have to deal with growing up in a home with same gendered parents? Is it any wonder really that they now believe that it is ok to "marry"? Isn't it really scary that TV networks, MTV (which really promotes this behavior as normal and is down right awful anyways), political organizations and at least one Major political party(D) in the US help promote this lifestyle as normal. We really live in a bubble, this has been going on in other countries for a long time. They even attacked the Boy Scouts. Remember the 2000 Democratic convention and the incident with the Boy Scouts presenting the colors? I really do fear for our country, our children and decency.

[captain_nephi]

I am a staunch supporter of Marriage being between a man and woman. What I am trying grasp at, and that JHM-in-Bountiful, touched on is, is it using the word "marriage" that we are opposed to or the acceptance of a legal and temporal binding agreement that allows two people of the same sex to be recognized as a couple, with all the legal rights and privileges afford to heterosexual couples who are married.

Secondly, as LDS, we should all be very sympathetic to anyone who finds themselves in the position of same sex attraction--without, of course, comprising our own principles. It is difficult to say the least. But imagine if some one told you, you couldn't love and marry your wife. If someone told that to me, it would be fight time.

That is why I think it is so important that the Church understands the exact extent to which we are to be activists in either accepting or denying people in same sex relationships--and be willing to take a few bumps and bruises in the most humble and compassionate way possible. And leave the judging to those who have been called to do so.

Edited June 30, 2008 by captain_nephi

[StallionMcBeastly]

Marriage is very sacred and should not be made a mockery of by letting Greg and John tie the knot. Thats so foul.

[Stampede]

For those of you who are upset and are trying to support people to have Gay marriages. And are upset that the Lord has told Thomas S. Monson to take a stand-

Temple Recommend Requirement -

You must sustain the General Authorities and local authorities of the Church. When you raise your arm to the square when these leaders’ names are presented, you signify that you will sustain them in their responsibilities and in the counsel they give you.

Temple Recommend Question 6

6. Do you affiliate with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or do you sympathize with the precepts of any such group or individual?

LDS.org - New Era Article - Your Temple Recommend

[bytor2112]

I think that we should be opposed to the Government sanctioning of "gay" marriage. Personally, if they want to have a ceremony and call it marriage and have legal documents giving their "partner" rights to property and end of life or welfare decisions( the same legal rights granted to my wife) I am fine with that. That is a private matter. Government sanctioning is a completely public matter and I am ardently opposed as is the Church. This type of "union", besides being unholy is not equal to or the same as traditional marriage and should not be considered as such or promoted by the government. Just my opinion....

[captain_nephi]

I think bytor2112 is getting more to the point. God doesn't necessarily speak English. So lets not get lost with symantics. The million dollar question is should we oppose any legally-binding agreement that allows same-sex couples--regardless of what it is called--to have the same rights and privileges as heterosexual couples who are married.

Or are we only concerned with the use of the word "marriage". We need clarification on this. Because, same sex couples have been entering into civil union contracts for ever--which may not have the same benefits as a marriage, but can have very similar benefits. So are we opposed to those as well.

I really want to understand how far we are suppose to take it, because misunderstanding what we are or are not suppose to do is a giant step in the direction of hypocrisy.

[Guest User-Removed]

Aparently there are those who DO feel the chuch has "gone too far" with this. This was on KSL web site yesterday:

Some upset by LDS Church call for political participation

June 28th, 2008 @ 1:14pm

By JENNIFER DOBNER Associated Press Writer

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- Lester Leavitt wrote a letter asking family members to make a decision.

The Pompano Beach, Fla. man wanted his siblings and children to choose family over a call from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints leaders to support a November ballot initiative to define traditional marriage in California's constitution. A lifetime member of the Church who came out as a gay man in 2004, Leavitt wants his California relatives to walk out when a letter from the Church's leaders is read.

"I thought by asking my family to do this, I was simply asking them to send a strong message to Salt Lake City that they disagree with the idea that any church has the right to entrench clearly religious dogma into the constitution of a state or country," he wrote in a letter posted on an Internet discussion group called q-saints. "I was just asking them to defend my civil rights."

A letter from Thomas S. Monson, president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, was to be read from the pulpit in church congregations Sunday.

After working as an activist on behalf of gay members of the Church and surviving an excommunication attempt by his local bishop, Leavitt said Monson's letter was a disappointing last straw. He sent a certified letter to the Church's Salt Lake City headquarters Wednesday asking to have his name removed from the roles.

"I wanted to remain a cultural Mormon," Leavitt, 44, said Thursday. "I thought there was a way, an opening up, but then all of a sudden, the Church decides this ... and I'm not going to wait around."

Leavitt is far from alone. Since the letter first began circulating on the Web last weekend, hundreds of Church member blog postings have expressed disbelief, disappointment and outrage at the Church's decision to wade into politics.

"I don't really know anybody who takes issue with a Church's right to its moral position and teachings," said Nick Literski, of Seattle, a former Church member who is gay. "It's when they take a political action to impose those beliefs on society that people object. Even people who don't support marriage equality are still upset about this."

Officially, the Church teaches that homosexual sex is a sin, although celibate gays can remain active in church callings and activities. Since the 1990s the Church has been politically active in defeating same-sex marriage initiatives nationwide, including asking its members to vigorously help pass California's Proposition 22 in 2000, which prohibited California from legally recognizing gay marriages performed outside the state.

But over the last five years the church had seemed to undergo a subtle shift in position. Leaders have been more silent and limited the Church's activism to filing legal briefs and a signature on a 2006 letter to Congress supporting a federal marriage amendment.

In addition the rhetoric around what the Church calls same-gender attraction had softened and Latter-day Saints have been encouraged to encircle gay members with love and compassion.

Even a short statement of disappointment after last month's California's Supreme Court decision to legalize gay marriage was mild.

"Maybe I was just optimistic. I thought they might sit on the sidelines and not have any bad press," said Matt Thurston, a 39-year-old Church member from Corona, Calif., who is not gay. "Between (2000) and now, some of the things I've seen, some of the statements that have come out, they seemed much more sympathetic ... They don't treat it in the same way they used to."

Although President Monson's letter states the faith's "unequivocal" moral position that marriage between a man and a woman is an institution ordained by God seems to indicate no change of heart by leaders, many wonder if the general membership will rally to political participation with the same fervor as in 2000.

Wards were assessed fundraising goals and members walked door-to-door to get out the vote eight years ago.

"There is that culture of obedience that once the proclamation has been raised, that's it," said Jeffrey Nielsen, a professor of philosophy who was ousted from the Church-owned Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah in 2006 after criticizing the Church's position on gay marriage in a local newspaper column.

At the same time, the Church preaches that God blesses each person with the agency to make his or her own decisions and some may not surrender that freedom so easily, said Nielsen, who has submitted an open letter to his fellow Church members and to several California newspapers.

"A growing number of active Mormons, who have gay friends and family members are coming to the conclusion that our current leaders are as mistaken in promoting discrimination against gays and lesbians as was the Mormon hierarchy in the 60's when they opposed equal rights for people of color, and our Mormon leaders in the 70's when they opposed full legal equality for women," he writes. "No one is asking that you condone a behavior that might violate your religious faith, but we need to allow everyone the freedom to live their life as they see fit."

That the Church has changed in the past -- black men, for example were finally granted full ecclesiastical authority in 1978 -- gives Nielsen and others hope for its future. A generation of leaders who grew up alongside openly gay friends or relatives and a belief in continuing revelation offer opportunities for a new direction. "Even if you take this from the LDS point of view where changes can only be made by revelation, by God, you still have to have leaders who are willing to ask the question," said Literski, 41, who was married and has five daughters. "There will come a day, I believe, when there will be somebody in authority who is willing. It won't be overnight, but I think we will see an accommodation."

Oh please...another post siding with Apostates and Sodomites...sheesh