Director of Affirmation Urges Mormons To stop Shunning Gay Family Members

[MrsAri]

Said by someone who believes that the govt should forcibly take money from those that have it and give it to those that don't in the form of healthcare.

Don't put words in my mouth.

[MrsAri]

And when you're old(er) and unable to support yourself we'll have "the right to privacy" also. The door swings both ways -- support your children and they'll support you. Shun your children -- and pray that you don't have a time of need.

To answer your question.. no, they are not responsible to support me. I'm thankful they do -- and they would even if they disagreed with my religious views (which they do). Perhaps my parents were forged from a more quality metal than those who would shun their children due to life style choices.

There are absolutely no guarantees in life!

Again, choosing not to enable someone in a lifestyle which is counterproductive to our belief system is not shunning. This is an argument used by the gay lobby to rally support.

[Misshalfway]

I think this interview makes the Church's counsel very clear.

As I understand it, this message is not making its way down into the ward level. Apparently in many wards, there is a large stima attached to anyone who is gay, whether they are a member in good standing, a member going through the repentance process to return, or even a member who is currently struggling, but wants to stop and return to the Church.

I don't doubt there are wards that welcome their gay brothers and sisters with open arms. I do sense, that in the west, this is often not the case. But then, that's only what I've read. I don't have first-hand experience. Perhaps people here have observed the situation differently.

I am going to disagree with this as I do live in down town mormon central and have some experience with this. I DO see that the message is getting to the local level and I have talked directly with bishops and others who "get it". I see people trying to process incredibly difficult emotions and trying their best as they try to learn what to do as parents and clergy. And this process is monumentally hard for many reasons. And inspite of it all, I am seeing some incredible acts and attitudes of compassion and understanding and charity on the parts of family and leaders.

I'll tell you what I do see though that is as problematic as the shunning you describe. I see that people who have SSA have trouble believing or accepting the help or love that IS offered. I think they have trouble accepting it because they wanted something different. They wanted acceptance of the lifestyle or maybe they want the church to change its policies or I think they can't accept the process that people sometimes need to pass through to be available to them in loving ways. I think when these "confessions" happen, I think tensions are already high and the SSA person has expectations of condemnation OR they unrealistically expect church and families to have all the answers and perfect reactions.

Pam said she wasn't ready. I loved that honesty. But I think sometimes people who aren't ready get labeled as unloving just because they didn't know what to do or say in the moment or because they didn't react the way the person wanted them too. And then I see them walking away saying that the church was mean or that the family was mean and using that one sided story to fuel their walk away from the mormon way. I also see them buy into a lot of the unfair political rhetoric about the church and use these human reactions as confirmation. It feels unfair to me at times as sometimes the religious are held to unrealistic standards.

I am not saying that shunning doesn't happen. I am not even saying the church doesn't have a ways to go to find better ways of dealing with people on a case by case basis. What I am saying is that there is a lot of victimhood mentality going on here, perhaps even innocently so.

How I hope that Pam's son, even filled with his valid fears, can have the patience to let Pam process this information and even the space to mourn her losses as she decides over time what to do. Feeling sadness and even reproach for SSA ISN'T unloving. Being hurt by our children's different behavior isn't necessarily unloving either. It would be just as 'shunning" for this boy to walk away and reject his mother because her reaction wasn't a perfect plate of love and cookies.

Perhaps what I am saying is that hyper reaction, no matter what side its coming from, isn't helpful. And that shunning happens from both sides.

Edited September 20, 2009 by Misshalfway
didn't write it well.

[Elphaba]

I am going to disagree with this as I do live in down town mormon central and have some experience with this. I DO see that the message is getting to the local level and I have talked directly with bishops and others who "get it". I see people trying to process incredibly difficult emotions and trying their best as they try to learn what to do as parents and clergy. And this process is monumentally hard for many reasons. And inspite of it all, I am seeing some incredible acts and attitudes of compassion and understanding and charity on the parts of family and leaders.

I am very glad to know this, and thank you for letting me know.

Elphaba

[Traveler]

I have a son who recently in the last few months admitted to me that he is gay. He was scared to death to tell me. I've been his only parent for the last 10 years. As he put it: his rock and his support and the one person that shows him love all the time. But he thought that would all go down the drain if he admitted it to me.

While it saddens me tremendously..I haven't kicked him out. He understands I'm just not ready to accept a "partner" of his. Not to sound mean..I'm just not ready.

But I wouldn't kick him out just for admitting to be gay. Now if he breaks rules of my home with it..that's another thing.

I would like to know what it would take for posters to encourage their children to leave home. Even if my children were 100% supportive of everything in my home – by the time they reached the age of 19 I would encourage them to be on their own. Maybe not all at once but with diminishing support from home. For example they should have started thinking about taking charge of such things as their health care, retirement, investments, their career and their values.

Asking someone to move out of your home is not sunning them – even if they are family members. I do not think that such a request is negative.

With all that is considered – I believe that everyone has the right to privacy to do anything that is lawful in the privacy of their homes. I do not believe that anyone has any rights to privacy to morally conflict with what a person feels should be going on in their home. I find it very odd that at this point there are those that are demanding that homosexuality be morally enjoined and accepted in the privacy of everyone’s home.

Anyone has the moral right to say – not in my home. I have discovered that it does not work to tell an adult child – you can do that somewhere else but you cannot bring it home. A person is what a person does. If what they do is unacceptable to you – we should be nice we should encourage them to do the better thing but we are complicit in what-ever it is that they do if we enable (allow) it when we are with them. I think it is okay to leave a neighbor’s home and tell them that I am uncomfortable with swearing and I am uncomfortable with asking them not to do it in their own home. I would communicate that they are welcome to visit my home if the refrain from swearing but if it is a problem for them our associations will be limited.

I do not believe that such things are me shunning them anymore than it is them shunning me and my life choices.

The Traveler

[FunkyTown]

I'm uncertain what the point of this article was. Living in his aunt's place, he said he was gay and was kicked out. Was it because he was gay, or because he was going to be bringing his boyfriends back to his aunt's place?

If it's the former, then it's wrong. If it's the latter, everyone has a right to decide what does and does not go on in their house. I guarantee that, if I were a father, I wouldn't allow a son or daughter to have extra-marital sex in my house. That would set a bad example for any other kids I have and would make me tacitly allow it.

Ultimately, though, we only have one side of that story: His.

Mormons Urged to stop shunning gay family members

Affirmation official recalls how his aunt kicked him out.

By Rosemary Winters

The Salt Lake Tribune

Updated: 09/18/2009 10:12:54 PM MDT

Robert Moore knew his long pause on the phone already had given him away. At age 19, he acknowledged to his aunt, "yes," he was gay, something he had known since the fifth grade.

She responded: "You can't come home."

Moore, who lived with his LDS grandmother and aunt in a small Oregon town, bought a bus ticket to Portland and spent the next five months homeless. He never knew his parents and had grown up thinking of his aunt, 13 years his senior, as a sister. But now she insisted his gay "lifestyle" would be a negative influence on her two kids.

"I was so scared and I didn't know what to do," Moore said Friday in Salt Lake City. "We can no longer keep kicking our youth to the curb like trash. We are all children of God."

. . . .

In recent years, church officials have stated they don't know what causes same-sex attraction, saying no one -- not parents or those who experience such feelings -- should be blamed.

"Above all, keep your lines of communication open," Elder Jeffrey R. Holland, of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, urged in a 2007 Ensign article. "Open communication between parents and children is a clear expression of love, and pure love, generously

expressed, can transform family ties."

Holland wrote that gay children "are welcome" to stay at home. But parents have "every right to exclude from [their] dwelling any behavior that offends the spirit of the Lord."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Elphaba

[MrsAri]

Did God shun Satan? Or did Satan shun God?

[Traveler]

The question is - what do we have the right to do within the privacy of our own homes? And who has the right to criticize what we do? I contend that those that support homosexuality have no more right or moral high ground to criticize what they do not like happening in homes (that is within the law) than do those that object to homosexuality have right or moral ground to criticize what homosexuals do in the privacy of their homes that is within the law.

Why is there a double standard?

The Traveler

[pam]

I would like to know what it would take for posters to encourage their children to leave home. Even if my children were 100% supportive of everything in my home – by the time they reached the age of 19 I would encourage them to be on their own. Maybe not all at once but with diminishing support from home. For example they should have started thinking about taking charge of such things as their health care, retirement, investments, their career and their values.

That is one thing that all my kids are starting to learn now that they are all at least 18. No more does mom help with car payments. No more does mom help with car insurance. No more does mom help with cell phone bills.

I had one child come home a few days ago and ask me what was for dinner. This is what I told him. "Hmmm...tell ya what. I'm no longer legally responsible to make sure you get fed every single meal..that you are eating correctly. You are now 18 and you are working..you can help now with groceries and find yourself your own meal."

They are learning step by step..that support from good ol' mom is dwindling down.

[pam]

Love the sinner; hate the sin. Loving someone and living with them are two different things. Enabling someone by supporting them in a lifestyle which is not in accordance with our beliefs is counterproductive.

I disagree with this to a point. Just because I allow my son to continue to live at home..is not enabling or supporting him in a lifestyle that is not of my choosing. Allowing him to continue to live at home is enabling him to finish school and hopefully do something better with his life. The key word of course is "hopefully." All I can do is continue to love and provide guidance as best I can..the rest is up to him.

For anyone to say that I or anyone else is wrong in doing that..honestly..it's really no one's business.

[Moksha]

Again, it is our right to refuse to associate with anyone for any reason. :)

This just sounds like more government intrusion into the home...speculation and "thought" crimes.

I would hate to have the government tell me who to love and appreciate, since my following Jesus should lead me to do things on my own. But alas, this is a rather large red herring. What's government got to do with it? The issue is about shunning gay family members.

The point I raised was about families remaining together despite differences of opinion. Addressing these differences seems to me, to be an issue of both loving others and turning the other cheek.

:)

[MrsAri]

I would hate to have the government tell me who to love and appreciate, since my following Jesus should lead me to do things on my own. But alas, this is a rather large red herring. What's government got to do with it? The issue is about shunning gay family members.

The point I raised was about families remaining together despite differences of opinion. Addressing these differences seems to me, to be an issue of both loving others and turning the other cheek.

:)

Indeed, what has the government...or anyone...have to do with how we interrelate in the Church...or anywhere for that matter. It's simply a matter of choice...with whom we wish to associate or disassociate...regardless of the reason. It's really nobody's business.

[Moksha]

I disagree with this to a point. Just because I allow my son to continue to live at home..is not enabling or supporting him in a lifestyle that is not of my choosing. Allowing him to continue to live at home is enabling him to finish school and hopefully do something better with his life. The key word of course is "hopefully." All I can do is continue to love and provide guidance as best I can..the rest is up to him.

For anyone to say that I or anyone else is wrong in doing that..honestly..it's really no one's business.

Super excellent point. Our individual task is to be a worthy disciple of Jesus. That does not involve my condemnation of others or accepting a non-loving stance because it somehow offends me, thus I am not going to pluck out their eyes, but rather turn my cheek and continue loving them and being at peace.

My own son of adult age does not seem to be moving forward. He has a terrible addiction to internet video games. He is with me as a last resort. His mother kicked him out. I furnish him room and board and not homelessness.

[Tarnished]

Growing up my dad told me that when I turned 19 that I was out of the house. As I got closer to that age he clarified it with, as long as you are in school and working you can stay, but if you are no longer in school then you should find your own place. It was clear to me, it was not shunning but the rules of the house.

In the circumstance of this article, we don't know the full story, we don't know what happened before and we only know the story from the side of the young adult. However, even as we only have our side of the story I still feel that she should have given him some time, a date at which he must be moved out. Telling him that he can not come home that night would be a very scary thing to have happen as a 19 year old.

Different families deal with things differently, however I will never feel that kicking a "new" adult out of the house with no notice to be a good thing.

[Maxel]

If Moore had to tell his Aunt, who he was living with, that he was gay over the phone because she read a letter his friend sent to him then there's probably other problems in the home besides the anti-homosexuality. And much more to the story.

Just a thought.

It infuriates me when those with anti-Christ agendas attempt to take the moral high ground and criticize the entirety of the Saints for the stupid actions of a relatively minor percentage of them. Yes... The LDS populace is so hate-filled and bigoted. That's why we fight back when our temples are picketed and threatened. That's why we seceded from an America that turned its back on us when we were kicked like dogs. That's why there's so many Mormon suicide bombers out there.

Oh wait... We don't do any of those things.

[MrsAri]

Mormons Urged to stop shunning gay family members

Affirmation official recalls how his aunt kicked him out.

By Rosemary Winters

The Salt Lake Tribune

Updated: 09/18/2009 10:12:54 PM MDT

Robert Moore knew his long pause on the phone already had given him away. At age 19, he acknowledged to his aunt, "yes," he was gay, something he had known since the fifth grade.

She responded: "You can't come home."

Moore, who lived with his LDS grandmother and aunt in a small Oregon town, bought a bus ticket to Portland and spent the next five months homeless. He never knew his parents and had grown up thinking of his aunt, 13 years his senior, as a sister. But now she insisted his gay "lifestyle" would be a negative influence on her two kids.

"I was so scared and I didn't know what to do," Moore said Friday in Salt Lake City. "We can no longer keep kicking our youth to the curb like trash. We are all children of God."

Interesting...where did he come up with the money to buy a bus ticket? And why did he leave his home town? Surely, he had made some friends there. Why didn't one of his gay friends take him in?

At age 19, one is considered an adult. Time to man up...get a job, enlist in the military, serve a mission...whatever.

Since this young man admitted to being gay, perhaps the aunt was concerned that he had AIDS and would infect her other children.

This entire story is utterly ridiculous. I believe it's a ploy to gain sympathy and ridicule LDS.

[Jenamarie]

Since this young man admitted to being gay, perhaps the aunt was concerned that he had AIDS and would infect her other children.

AIDS isn't that easily spread. Unless he tried to do some sort of blood exchange with his cousins, or was a pedofile, her kids would be just as safe with him in the house as with him out of the house.

[Maxel]

AIDS isn't that easily spread. Unless he tried to do some sort of blood exchange with his cousins, or was a pedofile, her kids would be just as safe with him in the house as with him out of the house.

There's not enough of the story to judge whether AIDS was a factor or not.

I'd still like to know:

-Where did he get the money for the trip to Portland? Who paid for it?

-Why did he go to Portland? Did he have no friends' houses to go to? Why go and be homeless in Portland instead of being homeless in one's hometown? Surely one is better connected where one is; no need to move unless there's better prospects there.

-What's the whole story? What was in the friend's letter that lead Moore's aunt to believe that Moore was gay? Was it because he just suffered from Same-Sex Attraction, or was he having gay sex or living an otherwise gay lifestyle?

-What contention and problems-- other than Moore's aunt's aversion to his sexuality-- were extant in the household?

There's simply too few facts presented in the article. If anyone has more information that would be great.

[MrsAri]

AIDS isn't that easily spread. Unless he tried to do some sort of blood exchange with his cousins, or was a pedofile, her kids would be just as safe with him in the house as with him out of the house.

AIDS is easily spread via bodily fluids...this would include saliva, mucous (coughing, sneezing), sharing the same toilet, etc.

Edited September 21, 2009 by GrandmaAri

[bytor2112]

Me thinks there is more to the story than what is presented. Just a hunch..... that being said, does anyone really believe this statement:

Affirmation supports Mormons -- active and former members of the faith -- in being openly gay, calling their sexual orientation a "special gift from God."

A special gift????? Do you think g/l people really feel like they have received a special gift or a really horribly painful curse? I bet the latter.

Edited September 21, 2009 by bytor2112

[Maxel]

Homosexuality can only be spinnned as a 'special gift' if it's viewed as healthy and normal. Then, one can revel in the 'individuality' and 'uniqueness' of it- disregarding the elephant of an uneasy conscience sitting in the corner of the room.

That's part of why I said Affirmation's goals are anti-Christ- they seek to rip some Saints away from the foundation of Christ by unwittingly rejecting His eternal laws and relishing in wickedness. This is accomplished by saying wickedness isn't actually wickedness.

Sounds like Korihor- only a lot more deceitful.

[MrsAri]

Biblical references to Sodom and Gomorrah is now considered politically incorrect. The Bible is being re-written (again) to exclude any Bible references deemed as degrading to homosexuals.

[Just_A_Guy]

AIDS is easily spread via bodily fluids...this would include saliva, mucous (coughing, sneezing), sharing the same toilet, etc.

Not all body fluids are equal. The threat of transmitting AIDS via saliva and mucous is negligible.

[MrsAri]

Not all body fluids are equal. The threat of transmitting AIDS via saliva and mucous is negligible.

I will agree to disagree with you on this one.

Why do dentists wear gloves? Medical assistants, etc., wear gloves...especially when drawing blood.

[pam]

Biblical references to Sodom and Gomorrah is now considered politically incorrect. The Bible is being re-written (again) to exclude any Bible references deemed as degrading to homosexuals.

Do you have a reference for that?