Kissing on Temple Square? Everybody?

[JohnnyRudick]

I think the security guard was over-zealous ........ If they were walking through as was reported . I have read this thread and boy have some assumed more than what is reported. I have read all the news reports and read this thread. i think it is just getting blown out of porportion by all sides.

"I have read this thread"

OK, then why don't you know that they were doing more then "were walking through as was reported", as the facts of the case showed that they were doing much more.

As reported in this thread.

Bro. Rudick

[Wingnut]

I think the security guard was over-zealous ........ If they were walking through as was reported . I have read this thread and boy have some assumed more than what is reported. I have read all the news reports and read this thread. i think it is just getting blown out of porportion by all sides.

Did you read the Church's press release? Here's a short quote:

There was much more involved than a simple kiss on the cheek. They engaged in passionate kissing, groping, profane and lewd language, and had obviously been using alcohol.

[cofchristcousin]

I believe it was an attempt at civil disobedience, and I agree it was not with the dignity of MLK and Ghandi. I do not personally support picketing a religion or this rather shallow civil disobedience against the LDS. I know Christians really do believe that they are being faithful to God, Christians both sides of the issue. I think it's important to give respect to a person's religious life even when I disagree and I also expect that respect returned. I know the LDS Church and others are not Fred Phelps kind of thinkers, although there are always individuals that might. Just as the vast majority of gltb advocates do not engage the political process on the low-respect level of this kissing couple.

I think it is very important that this country and our churches have serious and respecting conversations that include the gltb in their midst. It is beginning to happen some places. I even support some civil disobedience, but it needs to be with dignity and not simply a mocking of another group, the way we have been mocked over the years. imo, stacie

I'm surprised you would consider what this couple did to be civil disobedience. Further, doesn't it concern you that they attack a distrusted minority in order to gain support for themselves?

1. If they are pretending to be victims, having merely stolen an innocent kiss, then they are not traditional nonviolent resisters. MLK and Ghandi were very open about disobeying unjust laws. This couple lied, practicing the worst in shady politics, in order to make an already distrusted minority religious group even more ostracized by the public.

2. The couple, and the same-sex marriage proponents in general, choose to make LDS a target, rather than Catholics or socially conservative evangelicals. Why? Even I know that LDS are seen as a subculture, a close knit, somewhat separated group. Divide and conquer? Use distrust and prejudice to fight distrust and prejudice?

IMHO, gltb lose credibility when they are willing to play on distrust of one group (i.e. stoke prejudice) in order to being themselves closer to the mainstream.

[pam]

ksl.com - Second 'kiss-in' draws shouting, but no arrests

Another protest concerning this issue.

[prisonchaplain]

Stacie, I don't know how much respectful dialogue will help. However, in some ways conservative Christians have indeed changed. The vast majority of us would oppose returning to sodomy laws. Further, my guess is that a majority (less vast, to be sure) of conservative churches would welcome gltb individuals into their churches AS GUESTS. Some evangelical groups have sponsored missions efforts that provide support to those afflicted with HIV/AIDS.

A lot of this change comes with the realization that God has called us to be travelers. We're not home--we're just a passin' through. For awhile some of us got caught up with the belief that America could become something of a Christian republic--a city on a hill. We continue to work at being salt and light, but our eschatology points us not to a social-political-religious utopia of our own making, but rather to the second-coming.

"Love the sinner, hate the sin." It may be the best we can do.

[Just_A_Guy]

ksl.com - Second 'kiss-in' draws shouting, but no arrests

Another protest concerning this issue.

'K, now I'm confused.

Per this and the parallel Trib story, there was obvious and prolonged trespassing. Either the Church elected not to seek backup from the SLPD, or the SLPD chose to look the other way.

Both scenarios leave me baffled. I'd like to think the SLPD isn't so corrupt. As for the Church--yeah, another politically-incorrect eviction may cause more adverse PR; but at this point methinks we may as well hang for a chicken as an egg . . .

Edited July 20, 2009 by Just_A_Guy

[mightynancy]

Perhaps it's being C's mother, or perhaps it's my experience as an educator, but my first response to attention-seeking behavior is don't take the bait.

If the couple's goal was to mock, draw attention to themselves, and make the Church look bad, well, they achieved it. I imagine, if ignored, the drunken couple would've moved along, like a toddler whose tantrum didn't work.

[JohnnyRudick]

Perhaps it's being C's mother, or perhaps it's my experience as an educator, but my first response to attention-seeking behavior is don't take the bait.

If the couple's goal was to mock, draw attention to themselves, and make the Church look bad, well, they achieved it. I imagine, if ignored, the drunken couple would've moved along, like a toddler whose tantrum didn't work.

Ya think?

Having seen people similar to the "couple" described then the police report

before at work, I cannot even begin to write what I think would have happened

next if ignored.

Lets just say they would have "upped the annie".

Bro. Rudick

[mightynancy]

Do you have a link to the police report? I'd love to read it.

[JohnnyRudick]

I can't find for you what I read a few days ago but I do have this press report from the Church

From the LDS Newsroom:

Church Clarifies Record on Plaza Incident - LDS Newsroom

I could be wrong, again;)

But I do not think these two were toddlers.

Will look for what else I read earlier.

Edited July 21, 2009 by JohnnyRudick
Afterthought

[john doe]

Do you have a link to the police report? I'd love to read it.

A repost of the link from post #32, which some people seem to have skipped over. http://media.bonnint.net/slc/1273/127399/12739934.pdf

[Moksha]

I suppose multi-camera digital video recording of the event is still in the Church Security offices.

Perhaps photos taken by the BYU Security Gaydar Satellite System may also help clarify the Church's side of the story.

Edited July 21, 2009 by Moksha
To punch up the story

[its_Chet]

Perhaps it's being C's mother, or perhaps it's my experience as an educator, but my first response to attention-seeking behavior is don't take the bait.

If the couple's goal was to mock, draw attention to themselves, and make the Church look bad, well, they achieved it. I imagine, if ignored, the drunken couple would've moved along, like a toddler whose tantrum didn't work.

I still think the Church did the right thing. Some offenses are just too much to allow, even if you'd rather the perpetrators just go away quietly.

[JohnnyRudick]

I still think the Church did the right thing. Some offenses are just too much to allow, even if you'd rather the perpetrators just go away quietly.

Me too:D

But. what is it with some people who leap at the chance to take the

worlds part against the Church?

I am talking about members of the church who want to seem so fair

as to try to sound like the world.

Expand this outside the Church

I see this with citizens of the US taking sides with those who find fault with this country

in order to appear more reasonable.

Even leaders apologizing it seems for even existing.

OK, fine but to find this inside the Church against the Church?

What next?

"Well, yes Jesus is the head of the Church but He really shouldn't have stirred up the wrath of those Jewish leaders.":huh:

Just wondering:rolleyes:

Bro. Rudick

[MorningStar]

I still think the Church did the right thing. Some offenses are just too much to allow, even if you'd rather the perpetrators just go away quietly.

I agree. Too many decisions I have made because I didn't want to "make waves". But sometimes making waves is the right thing to do.

[Wingnut]

has this been posted?

Church Clarifies Record on Plaza Incident - LDS Newsroom

Yes. Twice.

[Jim108]

Sounds to me like we have some sinners. Just like you and me. Looks different from that point of view.

[prisonchaplain]

Sounds to me like we have some sinners. Just like you and me. Looks different from that point of view.

I may still wrestle against temptations, but I'm not sure this suggestion of moral equivalence is useful here. Mocking God is sin, and so is my frustration at other drivers. But, they are not the same. God does say to love our enemies and sinners, but also tells us not to walk in the counsel of the ungodly, nor sit with mockers. And again, not to cast pearls before swine. So...sure, we can pray that God will convict their souls, that they will repent, receive Christ, and forsake their sins. But, it would be appropriate to do so as we escort them and their sinful behavior off of dedicated holy grounds. BTW, if a couple were making out in a church, I'd give the same answer, regardless of how many genders were involved.

[Jim108]

I may still wrestle against temptations, but I'm not sure this suggestion of moral equivalence is useful here. Mocking God is sin, and so is my frustration at other drivers. But, they are not the same. God does say to love our enemies and sinners, but also tells us not to walk in the counsel of the ungodly, nor sit with mockers. And again, not to cast pearls before swine. So...sure, we can pray that God will convict their souls, that they will repent, receive Christ, and forsake their sins. But, it would be appropriate to do so as we escort them and their sinful behavior off of dedicated holy grounds. BTW, if a couple were making out in a church, I'd give the same answer, regardless of how many genders were involved.

Prison chaplain, you are looking at this through the lens of Earthly values. Sin is black and white to God. It either is or is not. Any one sin without Jesus to save us, is enough to seperate you from God for eternity. Lets us not think so high of ourselves as to seperate the really bad sinners from the not so bad sinners. We all sin. ...and we all need Jesus equally. The answer to this problem is love and forgiveness. We need to embrace these people, love them, teach them and forgive them. If Jesus were in the flesh, I can see him enjoying a glass of wine with them and teaching them in a loving way. Lets not point fingers. We all sin and we all need Jesus, for without Him we are lost.

[Dravin]

Yet Christ took issue with money changers and animal salesmen in the temple complex, so he apparently has some thoughts about what is appropriate behavior on sacred ground.

[Jim108]

Yet Christ took issue with money changers and animal salesmen in the temple complex, so he apparently has some thoughts about what is appropriate behavior on sacred ground.

Yes He did. But, Jesus is God and is without sin. My point, lets us not be so quick to point fingers at other sinners. Was their actions wrong? Yes. Are we any better then they? No. So lets bring them into our church and teach, and forgive and love.

[JohnnyRudick]

Yes He did. But, Jesus is God and is without sin. My point, lets us not be so quick to point fingers at other sinners. Was their actions wrong? Yes. Are we any better then they? No. So lets bring them into our church and teach, and forgive and love.

Yeah, right:)

Go for it:D

Bro. Rudick

[prisonchaplain]

Prison chaplain, you are looking at this through the lens of Earthly values. Sin is black and white to God. It either is or is not. Any one sin without Jesus to save us, is enough to seperate you from God for eternity.

It's not a matter of earthly values, but of how we responded as converted souls. Can any sin separate me from God? Yes. But, as a Christian, how I respond to someone making out in my church will be different than how I respond to the overweight church member taking a third piece of pie at a church potluck. Both may need to repent, but the one willing to mock the house of God demonstrates a hardness of heart, and a spirit of mockery that my Bible gives me plenty of warning about. So, while all sin is enough to damn an unrepentant soul, not all sin is the same.

Lets us not think so high of ourselves as to seperate the really bad sinners from the not so bad sinners. We all sin. ...and we all need Jesus equally. The answer to this problem is love and forgiveness. We need to embrace these people, love them, teach them and forgive them.

Yes, love the sinner hate the sin. But that love will ook different, depending on context. Jesus called the Pharisees vipers, He turned over the money-changers tables in the Temple, and He gave the rich young man a response that He knew would expose him as a money-loving hypocrite. Yet he was gentle with the Samaritan woman, the woman caught in adultery, and with the crowds that mocked him at his crucifixion.

A gay couple making out in a religious holy place, while likely intoxicated calls for loving, but definite removal. BTW, the Apostle Paul demonstrated the same rationale when he called for removal of a fornicator from the church--perhaps, if we give him over to Satan, he'll come to his senses and repent.

If Jesus were in the flesh, I can see him enjoying a glass of wine with them and teaching them in a loving way. Lets not point fingers. We all sin and we all need Jesus, for without Him we are lost.

Jesus spent time with sinners, but his gentleness and favor went to the open-hearted, not to mockers. Would you, as a pastor, really allow mockers, for example, to disrupt your service with taunts and disturbance...or would you have your ushers escort them out? The latter would not indicate hate and judgment, but rather a holy respect for the house of God. If they disrupters want to repent, they still can.

[its_Chet]

Me too:D

But. what is it with some people who leap at the chance to take the

worlds part against the Church?

I am talking about members of the church who want to seem so fair

as to try to sound like the world.

Expand this outside the Church

I see this with citizens of the US taking sides with those who find fault with this country

in order to appear more reasonable.

Even leaders apologizing it seems for even existing.

OK, fine but to find this inside the Church against the Church?

What next?

"Well, yes Jesus is the head of the Church but He really shouldn't have stirred up the wrath of those Jewish leaders.":huh:

Just wondering:rolleyes:

Bro. Rudick

I agree 100%. I'll never understand why some people feel the need to be the devil's advocate. You can be respectful without bashing your own country, religion, etc. If anything, I find less respect for people when they do that. What good is their faith when they are so willing to criticize it? What does that prove? All it proves to me is that they don't adequately respect their own religion. Sometimes I feel obliged to do that for them, even if it's a different one than mine.

And as far as America bashing goes, I say "Love it or leave it". Isnt' it interesting that after the Saints migrated to Deseret, they had big 4th of July parades? They'd been spit on by various state and lower level governments, and failed to get redress from President Van Buren, and yet their patriotism remained intact. And we've got "angst-ridden" teens in the suburbs wearing Che Guevara t-shirts. Go figure.

[Wingnut]

Yes He did. But, Jesus is God and is without sin. My point, lets us not be so quick to point fingers at other sinners. Was their actions wrong? Yes. Are we any better then they? No. So lets bring them into our church and teach, and forgive and love.

You mean like you do at the members of this forum?