Same Gender Attractions: A "Special" Adversity?

[Gwen]

i read it the same way yall did but then i'm one of the ones giving out bad advise... reminded me of an anti pamphlet i read once, it said something like, "don't listen to all their talk on family. that's how they get you.... it's all from satan"

[Elgama]

I kinda thanked figured thirding would be a bit much:) but yes I got the same message from that quote maybe it just needs expanding, but like Gwen I have to been sorely deceived into using love and compassion whilst not condoning :)

[Elgama]

although I am not sure about who said not to listen to the Bishop? although right now not listening to mine wouldn't ordinarily recommend it

[Gwen]

i did not say don't listen to the bishop. i said to keep the bishop's stewardship in mind and do what you feel is right with the lord based on inspiration. a person's child is there stewardship, not the bishop's.

for example, i know someone that while in the process of a divorce when the ex said "you will never have custody, not even joint, this will never end if you ask for it" advised that he give that up to end the fighting, referencing the story about cutting the baby in half. even though the man's lawyer said it was a bad idea he decided to listen to the bishop. well our laws now are much different than in the day of king soloman. this man lost A LOT of rights with his child because of it. once the courts decided custody they don't like to change it. they assume it was set that way for a reason. no one cared that he gave it up to end the fighting. took 12 yrs before this man got his due rights as a father back with joint custody. the reality is the church handbook of instruction says that kind of advise is not in the bishop's stewardship. he was wrong in what he said. but this man listened to his bishop over seeking his own answer. this bishop was well intentioned, doesn't change the long term consequences.

my only point is make sure it really is the right thing to do. don't follow just cause it's the bishop. yes bishops can be wonderful and he may be right, but don't follow blindly.

[Elgama]

Plus Willow and her husband are entitled to greater revelation over their daughter than their Bishop is hence my current situation where I know my daughter was hurt by someone, and it did not become abuse because it was stopped, and my gut screams its bad for her, that is from Heavenly Father and my branch president is wrong.

[crazypotato]

Nice spins from all of you. Again, I never said to have no love or compassion towards those with SSA. I said, to not water down the gospel into saying that it is inborn and there is no way to overcome your thoughts or feelings. Elder Oaks clearly said that your thoughts should be controlled and if not then you are sinning.

Here is how the spinning works: people have feelings and inclinations that are very, very strong and cause them a lot of pain. We should have compassion towards those people and love and accept them, and here comes the spin - once a bishop I know gave bad advise, so don't be so quick to listen to your bishop. People gay bash and treat gay people like crap, so if you don't agree that we can't help it (being gay), you have no compassion, love, or kindness. Once a prophet said to have love and compassion, so let's spin it into homosexual feelings are not a sin and cannot be helped.

[Elgama]

it wasn't spinning it was a misunderstanding based on a badly worded post:) glad you clarified. Noone has said ignore your Bishop thats your spin, but as a Mother or Father you are also entitled to your own revelation and when it concerns your children you are the ones Heavenly Father will give the most revelation too

[Gwen]

Nice spins from all of you. Again, I never said to have no love or compassion towards those with SSA. I said, to not water down the gospel into saying that it is inborn and there is no way to overcome your thoughts or feelings. Elder Oaks clearly said that your thoughts should be controlled and if not then you are sinning.

Here is how the spinning works: people have feelings and inclinations that are very, very strong and cause them a lot of pain. We should have compassion towards those people and love and accept them, and here comes the spin - once a bishop I know gave bad advise, so don't be so quick to listen to your bishop. People gay bash and treat gay people like crap, so if you don't agree that we can't help it (being gay), you have no compassion, love, or kindness. Once a prophet said to have love and compassion, so let's spin it into homosexual feelings are not a sin and cannot be helped.

oh good i didn't do that so you must not have been talking to me. my caution about the bishop was due to the comment of 'the bishop told me.... now my daughter is in the hospital for self harm' that concerned me. i also stated that i could be way off and the bishop may be exactly who she needs right now. i explained my emotional reaction and conceded my possible error.

[GaySaint]

Crazypotato: Can you help me know what you think I said in regards to your “spinning” post so that I can explain my position better? I certainly don’t want anyone to get the wrong idea about what I said.

I never said someone should go against what their bishop said. I never said that if you don’t agree that homosexuality cannot be changed that you lack compassion, love, or kindness (although I would question your understanding, since both the church and science alike, as well as my personal experience in trying to change, have said otherwise), and the only reason I would say homosexual feelings are not a sin and cannot be helped is because prophets have also said so (please see my previous quotes, and read God Loveth His Children).

However, I would never discourage someone from trying to change if that is what they want. I would also admit that there have been cases of success. But it is fact that these cases are the exception, and not the rule.

I have probably offered a personal opinion that same sex behavior is not necessarily wrong (which I understand why people would say this is going against what the prophets have said), and have discussed my reasoning when people have expressed interest in why I believe the way I do, and how I can integrate my life with what I believe to be the teachings of the church – but I have never said that if someone doesn’t adopt my way of thinking they must not have compassion, understanding, or love. I have also never spun or masked this opinion, or tried to make the line between behavior and feelings muddy... at least not on purpose. If I have, please point me to where you are misunderstanding me so that I can clarify as well.

I realize that my presence here is going to irk some members of the church no matter what I say. These will also be the members who have a problem sitting next to me in sacrament meeting. It is my goal to make these members of the church a rare occurrence, by sharing what I have experienced in my life. Whether I am wrong or not, until you can see my point of view, you aren’t going to be able to correct it, or help others who are in my position.

[Seminarysnoozer]

“There’s no denial that one’s gender orientation is certainly a core characteristic of any person.”

Elder Lance Wickman, 2007 interview with Church Public Affairs,

Same-Gender Attraction - LDS Newsroom

“The Church does not have a position on the causes of any of these susceptibilities or inclinations, including those related to same-gender attraction. Those are scientific questions — whether nature or nurture — those are things the Church doesn’t have a position on.”

Elder Dallin H. Oaks, Public Affairs – Same Gender Attraction, (2007)

Same-Gender Attraction - LDS Newsroom.

“While many Latter-day Saints, through individual effort, the exercise of faith, and reliance upon the enabling power of the Atonement, overcome same-gender attraction in mortality, others may not be free of this challenge in this life.” (Note it is not said that this is through fault of the others “not trying to change” or not “trying hard enough.” The context of this paragraph makes it clear that there will be those who try, but find themselves unable to change).

God Loveth His Children

The question amongst LDS is not whether SSA is nature or nurture (as stated by Oaks) it is more of a question of it being a core characteristic of the body or the spirit.

Both "nature" and "nurture" in the worlds terms come from experiences of the body and have nothing to do with a spiritual nature or a spiritual nurture.

But as Oaks implied, it is one of the two ... in other words, it is not spiritual. It comes from the circumstances we find here, which is why we can let science figure that out. If it was spiritual in nature science could not figure it out. But because Oaks knows that it is possible that a 'core characteristic' of ones earthly, imperfect, mortal body can be SSA, he can say 'let science figure it out.'

There is a difference between core characteristics of the body and core characteristics of the spirit. I certainly don't think Moses, spiritually, was not eloquent in speech. But, that was one of his 'core characteristics' of this life for specific reasons. It was so 'core' that even after he was called of God and was close to God he still had that challenge. One should not go as far as saying though that his spirit was not eloquent in the pre-earthly life.

I think one of the biggest road blocks to LDS SSA is thinking that tendency is their spiritual nature, that it comes from some trait developed in the pre-earthly life. The reason God gave that test to any one individual comes from traits developed in the pre-earthly life that are unknown to most but that is not the same as saying it was the same trait. I could have been a powerful, eloquent speaker in the pre-earthly life and yet here made a person who is "slow of speech" (i.e - Moses).

Yes, SSA is a core characteristic of this test situation created by the physical body. But that does not necessarily mean it is a permanent (spiritual) trait. There are so many examples of that, I have a hard time understanding why that is so difficult for others to understand.

[GaySaint]

Seminary: The only answer I can give you in that regard is that many LDS SSA people (in fact, most of them) would disagree with you. There is no official doctrine or statement of the church that says that this is not a spiritual core characteristic, or that our spirits don't play some role. My personal experience with the issue does disagree with that.

I wouldn't consider Moses's speech issue a core characteristic. A characteristic, certainly, but not a core characteristic. Core characteristics to me, are indeed spiritual. They include things like a testimony of Christ and personality traits (which are influenced by the spirit, IMHO).

And as I have already said, whether or not the condition in and of itself did or did not exist in the pre-existence, the scriptures would suggest that it can exist after this life... IE: The same spirit that possesses this body in this life will have power to possess it in the next. We have been taught that if we have sinful desires here, we will still feel them in the afterlife. And as I said, if homosexual feelings or attractions are not sinful, as stated by prophets, there is no reason for them to be removed in the next life. Doing so would also remove important experiences that shape us as people, again, IMHO. To dismiss those experiences would cheapen and even destroy the purpose of life, especially if those experiences were not sinful, evil, or wrong (which, again, homosexual attractions per church policy are not).

Edit: That is not to say that I believe the attractions cannot change. I don't think there is anything but theory to suggest HOW same-sex attraction will or will not exist in the next life, but I have a hard time believing it will just vanish. Morph? Evolve? Probably...

Edited April 13, 2010 by GaySaint

[crazypotato]

Hello Forum people,

Let me give you some of my background. I am in a military family and I have a very direct style of communication. I think maybe my tone, more than my words, can come across as noncompassionate. While my heart is not made of stone, I am kind of a tough person.

I have great respect for the military - my spouse and all the people that I have been around in the military seem to have common characteristics that have been instilled in them or already were there beforehand. They are very focused, intense people. If you give them a mission to accomplish, there is no complaining, no whining, no asking for special treatment, no self-pity. Even if you are in pain, you assume so are your fellow soldiers. You will accomplish your mission or give your all trying. The military, when in training, are frequently given impossible tasks or unfair treatment. This is to mess with them and see what they are made of. The best soldiers are guys who are positive, can-do, team players that can focus and forget their physical, mental, and emotional exhaustion and pain and keep going.

When I hear people asking for more compassion, special treatment, reasons why the commandments don't completely apply to them, I find myself losing compassion, honestly, and saying, "Come on and accomplish your mission. We are all suffering but don't give in to excuses!" Why are soldiers trained in this way? To save their lives! There is no compassion in giving in to their excuses, whining, or complaining. There is compassion if you get shot or step on an IED. There is commisseration more than compassion.

GaySaint, can I just say to you that I think if I knew you personally, there is no way I would be quoting scriptures and talks from General Authorities? I completely think you are excusing your homosexual behavior. I think you have been deceived and are asking for too much compassion. But I also think that I have been deceived about things in my life, too. I have wanted more compassion from others when it wasn't really necessary and didn't help me see how I was being deceived. I have friends and family members that are living the gay lifestyle and I have never shunned them or thought I was better than them. The reason why I am so direct with you and all is because, if this were the military, and I kind of wish it was, I would tell you to quit whining and get to work. And I would say it with your best interest at heart because I don't want you to get killed in combat. Not out of self-righteous, I am so great and your the devil-attitude.

Hoo-ah!

Go Army!

[GaySaint]

Crazy: Haha. Ok. I get that.

But I want to clarify that I don't need your compassion, or even necesarily want it. When I ask for it I don't ask for it for me personally, but for homosexuals everywhere. I am where I am in life, and if you met me and this conversation were about me, I would not whine, complain, or make excuses. I am where I am because it is where I am the most happy and where I believe God wants me to be. Point blank. That's it. Good luck arguing.

But I'm no longer a 12 year old deacon. I'm no longer a 14 year old teacher, or a 16 year old priest. I'm no longer afraid of going to my bishop and tell him everything about me. I'm no longer scared that my parents might kick me out of the house if they only knew the way I was feeling. I'm no longer hiding my attractions, or lying to everyone who knows me. I'm no longer trying to force myself to love a daughter of God who I know deserves better.

It is those people that need your compassion. They don't deserve to be in a militia that they were drafted into unwillingly. They deserve understanding.

And what better way to get that than to ask someone who's been there - and since most of them are too scared to talk about it, I'm more than willing to step up to the plate and do so for them.

[crazypotato]

Oh, enough!!!!!!!

Drop and give me 20!

[Seminarysnoozer]

Seminary: The only answer I can give you in that regard is that many LDS SSA people (in fact, most of them) would disagree with you. There is no official doctrine or statement of the church that says that this is not a spiritual core characteristic, or that our spirits don't play some role. My personal experience with the issue does disagree with that.

I wouldn't consider Moses's speech issue a core characteristic. A characteristic, certainly, but not a core characteristic. Core characteristics to me, are indeed spiritual. They include things like a testimony of Christ and personality traits (which are influenced by the spirit, IMHO).

And as I have already said, whether or not the condition in and of itself did or did not exist in the pre-existence, the scriptures would suggest that it can exist after this life... IE: The same spirit that possesses this body in this life will have power to possess it in the next. We have been taught that if we have sinful desires here, we will still feel them in the afterlife. And as I said, if homosexual feelings or attractions are not sinful, as stated by prophets, there is no reason for them to be removed in the next life. Doing so would also remove important experiences that shape us as people, again, IMHO. To dismiss those experiences would cheapen and even destroy the purpose of life, especially if those experiences were not sinful, evil, or wrong (which, again, homosexual attractions per church policy are not).

Edit: That is not to say that I believe the attractions cannot change. I don't think there is anything but theory to suggest HOW same-sex attraction will or will not exist in the next life, but I have a hard time believing it will just vanish. Morph? Evolve? Probably...

If you take what you said about homosexual feelings but ask yourself about heterosexual feelings between a legally married man and woman here on earth that make it into the Terrestial Kingdom, you think either the man or the woman would still have heterosexual feelings? For what purpose?

There are situations created here for this existence that only serve purpose here. That is why Jesus will say, "enter into my rest." We won't have to deal with those things in the next life. Working for a living is not a sin but we know that we have to eat by the sweat of our brow here. I don't understand this reasoning either that if it is not sin it will continue in the next. That doesn't apply to many things in this life. There are several things that happened to human bodies after the fall of Adam and Eve, food, health and sex are among them.

I am also curious what you think personality is. ... I think my husband is going to be very glad that my personality doesn't change like it does here for a few days out of the month.

[Elphaba]

The reason why I am so direct with you and all is because, if this were the military, and I kind of wish it was, I would tell you to quit whining and get to work.

But this is not the military. When we joined this board, we didn't have to go through some sort of boot camp designed to turn us into hardened posters who think only in black and white, and refuse to acknowledge the gray.

This is a message board where everyone, as long as they follow the site rules, is allowed to share his/her opinions, experiences, beliefs, and yes, compassion, and it is unreasonable to expect us to not express these when that is what we are feeling and thinking.

In other words, dismissing someone's compassion because you don't agree with it is perfectly within the site's rules. But it is also within the site's rules that people can express empathy, in this case, for people who are gay, We get it you don't like that, and you get to not like it. But it's ridiculous to expect everyone on the board to act as if they are in the military. In other words, it's ridiculous to expect everyone to act like you.

Having said that, I believe you that if you were to meet GaySaint, you would be very nice to him. I also think the "Drop and give me 20" was hilarious.

Elphaba

Edited April 14, 2010 by Elphaba
typo

[crazypotato]

Elphaba, Elgama, GaySaint, JohnnyRudick, Seminarysnoozer, Suzie,

Thank you for telling me the world is not boot camp and that truth is not something I should not defend because of forum rules. I should be more polite and listen with great enthusiam and compassion to stories of personal apostacy. Thank you for reminding me that the doctrine is open to personal opinions and that the truth for each of us is relative according to our own experiences. I think Korihor and Sherem were unfairly treated by crazy military types like me. They should have been given more of a voice, especially with church members, and should have been shown more compassion.

Did you drop and give me 10? I don't think so! Drop and give me 50! After you do that, please take your Book of Mormon and hold it straight up over your head for 1/2 hour without bending your arms (great exercise!)

From CrazyPotatoArmyLady

[GaySaint]

Crazypotato: I finished my fifty pushups (thanks for suggesting that), true to military form (what, you didn’t think we gay people can be fit, or know what military form is?). Can I use the Book of Mormon on CD for the second exercise?

The one thing I will not let you do is put words in my mouth – and you do realize you are currently criticizing faithful, believing, practicing, temple recommend holding LDS members, right?

Nobody said you shouldn’t defend truth. I never said that, and neither did Elphaba. She simply stated that because of the forum rules, we are allowed to have this conversation, and hold differing beliefs.

I don’t understand why you think having greater personal compassion and charity is a bad thing especially considering that Mosiah wrote that charity is the greatest spiritual gift. Having compassion does not require you to stop defending truth, nor withhold chastisement. But attacking me personally (and others by calling them apostate) does nothing to defend truth. Address my questions if you wish – but stop the personal attacks.

Korihor and Sherem actually had their questions answered. All I have asked from you is that you consider what it is like to be a young adult struggling with these attractions by answering the questions that they will surely ask themselves. If you can’t answer them for yourself, how do you expect them to be able to? Instead of answering my questions (as the prophets did for both Korihor and Sherem), you tell me I am trying to mislead people into believing homosexuality is not a sin – something I have never said. I have simply brought up the DOCTRINAL questions that such a condition implies when examined under current church policy.

And no, I will not stop. As long as you keep addressing this topic, attacking people, and putting words in our mouths (and are your military comments supposed to be some sort of threat? I’m not sure what your point was about how you would address me if you met me in real life), I will continue to clarify my position, promote understanding, and lend a voice to the hundreds of thousands of members who deal with this issue, but are too afraid to stand up for themselves. As long as I follow the forum rules, the moderators have been kind enough to allow me to do so, and I have and continue to ask them to correct me if I am boardering on leading people away from the church.

But so far I have not been criticized of doing so... except by you. And when I ask you how, the best you have been able to answer is that I'm asking for too much compassion?

Edited April 15, 2010 by GaySaint
typo

[Saturnfulcrum]

you are a tuff potato. You Crazy! You would make an awesome drill sargent.

[GaySaint]

Seminary: We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one, unless you are aware of any official church doctrine that suggests that all attraction (including heterosexual attraction) will be taken from all people unless they are in the Celestial kingdom (and I’m assuming in the highest degree, since there will be single people in the Celestial kingdom as well).

I do remember a book on this subject written by an apostle, or someone a long time ago, that suggested that sexual organs would be removed, but as far as I am aware that is not an official teaching of the church, and the book is certainly not canonized (and may have even been pulled off the shelves for other undoctrinal teachings. Could have been Mormon Doctrine or some other McKonkie publication, but I can’t remember the details).

And if neither one of us can suggest a doctrinal source that implies one way or the other, we’ll just have to chalk it up to one of the mysteries of the universe we’ll discover once we die… and I’m ok with that :)

DISCLAIMER (for crazypotatoe’s sake): If anyone is being led away from the church because of my belief that heterosexual attractions very well may exist beyond this life, please report me to a moderator.

Ok, that was just snarky.

Edited April 15, 2010 by GaySaint

[Saturnfulcrum]

I believe I would prefer my sexual organs to stay intact. I'd feel...awkward to have extra room in my body where the organs should be.

That being said, I would hope that couples would still be attracted to each other in the next life. I'm sure Heavenly Father is attracted to Heavenly Mother in every way possible. It would be silly if they weren't wouldn't it?

[WillowTheWhisp]

Eternal marriage would seem rather strange if the partners were no longer attracted to each other wouldn't it?

[Seminarysnoozer]

I believe I would prefer my sexual organs to stay intact. I'd feel...awkward to have extra room in my body where the organs should be.

That being said, I would hope that couples would still be attracted to each other in the next life. I'm sure Heavenly Father is attracted to Heavenly Mother in every way possible. It would be silly if they weren't wouldn't it?

Thats why we said Celestial Kingdom.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Eternal marriage would seem rather strange if the partners were no longer attracted to each other wouldn't it?

Thats why we said Celestial Kingdom.

[Elphaba]

Thank you for telling me the world is not boot camp and that truth is not something I should not defend because of forum rules.

GaySaint beat me to it, but I want to be clear about this: I never said you should not tell the truth, as you see it, because of the board's rules; in fact, I said exactly the opposite. I said the forum rules allow you to say the things you do.

　

Additionally, my point was that the forum rules also allow those of us who disagree with you to say the things we do, and in a perfect world it would be with your disagreement, but without your condemnation; however, you can continue to do so if you want as long as you don't take it too far. But don't expect everyone to agree with you, and it would be nice if you stopped smearing those who don't.

I should be more polite and listen with great enthusiam and compassion to stories of personal apostacy.

Why not? Listening does not equate to agreeing. But you might learn something you didn't comprehend before.

　

However, that is not my call. You can choose to listen, or not, and you can choose to express yourself however you want as long as it doesn't break the rules. But demanding everyone else agree with you is unreasonable and off-putting.

　

It's almost as if you don't understand what a discussion board is because you seem to think everyone should think like you do, and if we don't, we're not as knowledgeable as you, and thus, we should end the conversation. But conversation is what this board is all about. So you can continue demanding we do what you expect us to, including ending conversations you think are inappropriate. But we will not.

　

Additionally, if you were to back off a bit, you might discover we all tend to have interesting personalities, and make a few friends here. I have, despite the fact that I am no longer LDS. I admit I can be blunt and assertive in my posts, but I always try to listen, and more importantly, I never insist members believe as I do. That is so not my call.

Did you drop and give me 10? I don't think so! Drop and give me 50! After you do that, please take your Book of Mormon and hold it straight up over your head for 1/2 hour without bending your arms (great exercise!)

I'm an old lady, and just the dropping would probably break every bone in my body.

　

Elphaba