The Worst Thing About Being Homosexual

[Ray]

Originally posted by curvette+Mar 4 2004, 06:20 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (curvette @ Mar 4 2004, 06:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Ray@Mar 4 2004, 05:20 PM

Stop making excuses for people and stand up for the truth!

That's exactly what I'm doing. So repent and quit being so judgemental!

I'm the one speaking out about the will of our Father in heaven, and you're the one speaking out about how people should do what makes them happy, so how is it that I am not the one doing the work of my Father? If I speak evil, you do well to witness against me, but if I do well, why do you persecute me? Do YOU ever take the time to share the truth with people?

[Guest Taoist_Saint]

If homosexuality is an addiction or disease, what is the cure?

I've heard of techniques for conditioning people to change to heterosexual...and the stories I heard reminded me of Clockwork Orange.

What options are left for an LDS homosexual?

Celibacy is really not an option for someone who believes in the Celestial Kingdom and desperately wants to go there, despite his "addiction".

[Guest TheProudDuck]

Originally posted by sgallan@Mar 4 2004, 03:39 PM

PD -

I can only hope you never have a Gay child. Or an addicted child. Or anything on the margin of what you consider proper (which is most of the rest of humanity). Because if you do, you'll be devestated. At a loss. And you won't know what to do. Suddenly it would be at your door step. Then what will you do. If it's drugs it will be harder to just toss a loved one in jail for possession. If they are Gay it will be one of those lost children. The one you'll talk to with the others in your Ward about that poor lost child of ours. I've seen people with their adult kids - who are far less conservative than you - do it with their lost sheep. I feel for them. Because of that kid who married outside of the faith. Or didn't go on a mission. Or might smoke or drink. They think of themselves as failures as parents to that child. And the kid (now adults).... yup, they know what the parents think.

I imagine you hope you never have an addicted child, either, or one who falls on the wrong side of your (admittedly more liberal) margins of propriety.

It's very likely that one or more of my children will be less than orthodox, or may have problems with their conduct. Elder Holland has pretty much declared it inevitable that the children of us clever, prideful skeptics or intellectuals will go astray. I love them, and want to protect them. I will do everything in my power to teach them what I believe to be right. If they choose another course -- I'll deal with that when I get to it. But my parents don't seem to think themselves failures because of my arguably major unorthodoxies.

I do hope, though, that if one of them did something absolutely terrible, I wouldn't be like the family of Scott Peterson (may he promptly hang), to the extent that my "unconditional love" led me to deny or excuse the obvious.

Compassion isn't the only virtue. I can empathize with a man who feels himself trapped in a marginal marriage -- but I can't think him honorable if he abandons his kids. I can emphathize with people who lose their jobs because of this government regulation or that, I can strive to ensure that their landings are as soft as possible -- but if I want to save the spotted owls or red-cockaded woodpecker or whatever, I may have at last to consider their misery a necessary cost of the greater good.

Or consider this, Scott. There may have been some true-believing, innocent Mormons who've read your skeptical thoughts on these boards and lost their faith. It may be that their faith was the only thing that kept them from self-destructive choices. There are probably people who would have been happier in their innocence. Yet your compassion for them is outweighed by your dedication to speaking the truth, as you understand it. I think your approach is the right one -- but how is it different from mine? Ultimately, you do as you do accepting some potential human suffering as a necessary cost. A thoughtful person should be mindful of the results of this kind of triage, and pained by it, but he shouldn't shrink from performing it.

Maybe I'm wrong on the "gay marriage" issue, and am causing unnecessary suffering because of it. Maybe you're wrong on some judgment you make, which causes people unhappiness. One of the things which I think Christians often overlook about the Atonement is that our fallible human judgment is one of the frailties for which we need forgiveness.

[Guest TheProudDuck]

Originally posted by Ray+Mar 4 2004, 07:11 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Ray @ Mar 4 2004, 07:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -curvette@Mar 4 2004, 06:20 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Ray@Mar 4 2004, 05:20 PM

Stop making excuses for people and stand up for the truth!

That's exactly what I'm doing. So repent and quit being so judgemental!

I'm the one speaking out about the will of our Father in heaven, and you're the one speaking out about how people should do what makes them happy, so how is it that I am not the one doing the work of my Father? If I speak evil, you do well to witness against me, but if I do well, why do you persecute me? Do YOU ever take the time to share the truth with people?

Curvette can hold her own without any help from me -- but Ray, don't you think it's a little presumptuous to compare yourself to the Savior, as you did with that quote?

I don't read Curvy as saying that people should just do whatever makes them happy -- only that she's reluctant to involve the law in questions where there is so much legitimate disagreement. Remember, not everyone has your Faith. Not everyone can be expected to be happy being compelled to follow laws derived from what you believe it has taught you.

[sgallan]

Maybe you're wrong on some judgment you make, which causes people unhappiness. ***

Could very well be. I am no saint. But when people I love get hurt I am nothing if not a fighter. And trust me on this one...... it hurts those people I mentioned. A lot. Deeply. They do often hate your religion (among others), and think all kinds of (often irrational) things about it as result. My family has been at least set straight on some of the weirder thoughts. But goodness knows - especially the Gays my age or older - they have gone through an awful lot. If they often have a persecution complex; well it was not too long ago they were literally persecuted if found out. Sometimes even killed. Now that they have a chance to be at least somewhat accepted..... they are jumping at it. And the recent snowballing events suggests there has been quite the pent up hope for this sort of thing.

[Tr2]

What...? You believe we have to follow every wind of doctrine, or fad or perverse thing and be very accomdating to sin...to be a follower of Christ????

You need to start reading what i actually write, and not read what you want me to say. Why don't you go back and read what I actually said. if you can think that you can say "good, you're going to hell" and then think that you follow Christ, I don't know what planet you are on. Maybe in Kolob that stuff is ok. That is one of the most anti-christ things you can say.

Scott Peterson (may he promptly hang)

So much for fulfilling the great commandment.

Scott,

You and I don't agree that dung stinks but I have to admit that I really admire your patience here. You have had person after person come along and insult your intelligence without any harsh words back. You've endured people talking down to you like you were a child. My admirations.

[sgallan]

Someday, when you’re standing before God, asking yourself why nobody on Earth tried to help you understand the truth, I hope you’ll remember that I did. ****

Ray -

You don't get it. If there is a God, and this God is how you portray Him, I don't really care what he says or may think. Because I would pretty much tell such a God he is not something I want to worship. If he smites me..... it figures.

[Behunin]

Originally posted by sgallan@Mar 4 2004, 09:50 PM

If there is a God, and this God is how you portray Him, I don't really care what he says or may think. Because I would pretty much tell such a God he is not something I want to worship. If he smites me..... it figures.

I do not believe that God will smite you or anyone else.

[Cal]

Originally posted by Ray+Mar 4 2004, 07:11 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Ray @ Mar 4 2004, 07:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -curvette@Mar 4 2004, 06:20 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Ray@Mar 4 2004, 05:20 PM

Stop making excuses for people and stand up for the truth!

That's exactly what I'm doing. So repent and quit being so judgemental!

I'm the one speaking out about the will of our Father in heaven, and you're the one speaking out about how people should do what makes them happy, so how is it that I am not the one doing the work of my Father? If I speak evil, you do well to witness against me, but if I do well, why do you persecute me? Do YOU ever take the time to share the truth with people?

Ray--I think some of us may be of the opinion that what YOU think is the will of God, is really the will of Man. Man wrote those scriptures. I don't think anyone has ever claimed that God, himself penned them. So just remember, that when you are asserting the will of God, there is one BIG step between God and the scriptures, and that comes in the form of the question: How do you know whether the person writing them was speaking for himself or for God? Remember, there are numerous cases where us mormons skate around having to "own up" to what scriptures or even Prophets have said by claiming that "prophets have a right to their own opinions" or "a prophet is a prophet only when speaking as such"---which again raises the question, how do you know when that is? It comes down to each individual to DECIDE for himself when that is, right?

So, again, how are you SO sure that you are speaking for God?

[sgallan]

I do not believe that God will smite you or anyone else.****

But maybe I want to be smite'd!

[Behunin]

Originally posted by sgallan@Mar 4 2004, 10:59 PM

I do not believe that God will smite you or anyone else.****

But maybe I want to be smite'd!

Well....... OK

[Rodney]

Originally posted by sgallan@Mar 4 2004, 10:59 PM

I do not believe that God will smite you or anyone else.****

But maybe I want to be smite'd!

And it came to pass, I doth smitest thee, thou lover of sodomites!

[Behunin]

Originally posted by Rodney+Mar 5 2004, 05:49 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rodney @ Mar 5 2004, 05:49 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--sgallan@Mar 4 2004, 10:59 PM

I do not believe that God will smite you or anyone else.****

But maybe I want to be smite'd! 

And it came to pass, I doth smitest thee, thou lover of sodomites!

Are you a lover of the sodomites?

Define smite.

[sgallan]

And it came to pass, I doth smitest thee, thou lover of sodomites! ****

Cool!

[Rodney]

Originally posted by Behunin@Mar 5 2004, 06:52 AM

Are you a lover of the sodomites?

Define smite.

Define sodomites.

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Ray@Mar 4 2004, 07:11 PM

I'm the one speaking out about the will of our Father in heaven, and you're the one speaking out about how people should do what makes them happy, so how is it that I am not the one doing the work of my Father? If I speak evil, you do well to witness against me, but if I do well, why do you persecute me? Do YOU ever take the time to share the truth with people?

Oh Ray. You really are such a big baby! No one is persecuting you (I'm not a "tar and feather" kinda gal!) I never said people should just "do what makes them happy". Where do you get this stuff? You seem to think I'm in favor of legalizing gay marriage. I've said several times (and you continue to ignore it) I AM NOT! What do you know about what truths I share with other people. How about the truth that we are supposed to: take the great big BEAM out of our own eye before we notice the speck of dust in someone else's. Jesus also said that men could only divorce their wives for fornication and the woman who remarries commits adultery. Do you want to start a crusade against all divorced, remarried women? How many divorced, remarried women do you know? I don't recall a single scripture where Jesus condemns homosexuals, but he says that the divorced, remarried woman commits adultery. That makes an awful lot of adulteresses walking around in your own neighborhood. Some of the most righteous women I know are divorced and remarried, but gee--I guess they are all adulteresses cause the scriptures say so. Maybe you could write a sermon to them on how much better it is to be married (even in a marriage where your husband beats you or molests your children) than it is to be divorced and remarried. Or to all the men who divorce their wives for any reason other than adultery.

The truth I will share with YOU is that it is good to let other people live their lives according to their own conscience as long as it isn't hurting anyone. I don't favor homosexual marriage. I'm not ready to support our society doing this. I'm also not going to nose around in other people's private business when their behavoir is not hurting anyone else.

[Guest Taoist_Saint]

Originally posted by curvette@Mar 5 2004, 10:31 AM

I don't recall a single scripture where Jesus condemns homosexuals, but he says that the divorced, remarried woman commits adultery. That makes an awful lot of adulteresses walking around in your own neighborhood.

I think this is a very important point. So important that I will basically repeat what Curvette just said...

Jesus specifically condemns divorce, yet he seems silent on the issue of homosexuality.

Why are Christians picking on the homosexuals and not divorced people?

[sgallan]

(I'm not a "tar and feather" kinda gal!) ****

DANG! And I thought you had potential!

[Guest Taoist_Saint]

You don't get it. If there is a God, and this God is how you portray Him, I don't really care what he says or may think. Because I would pretty much tell such a God he is not something I want to worship.

Yes, this is not the picture of a loving Father God. It is the picture of a deity who is drunk on his own power to judge our mistakes.

[Jenda]

Jesus also said that men could only divorce their wives for fornication and the woman who remarries commits adultery.

That's not an entirely accurate description of what Jesus said. He said that any man who divorces his wife for any reason except for adultery causes her, and her future husband, to be caught in adultery. The fault lies in the husband who puts her away.

At least, that is the way I read it.

[Ray]

You’re right, curvette, I didn’t see your statements condemning homosexuality. I never did judge you, but I did misunderstand what you were saying, and I apologize if you were offended.

I was only trying to express that I know that homosexuality is wrong, and while I don’t expect other people to do what I say they should do, I do feel that I have the right to express my testimony and help other people understand what I believe and why I believe it. I hope my position on this issue is now clear.

I’m always willing to respond to the beliefs of other people, including what appears to be your belief that divorce is totally wrong. Try to bear with me as I express my testimony about this issue now.

While divorce is never a good thing, divorce is sometimes necessary, and our Lord does approve of someone’s decision to divorce under certain circumstances, such as adultery and abuse.

When our Lord said that a man should not leave his wife except for adultery, He was not giving an all encompassing law concerning divorce. He was speaking about husbands leaving their wives, not wives leaving their husbands. He was speaking against a wife committing adultery against her husband, not a husband committing adultery against his wife. He meant that a husband should never leave his wife for any reason except those reasons out of his control, such as when his wife has committed adultery and is not willing to repent. To believe that a husband should be willing to remain with his wife when his wife is continuing to be unfaithful to him is just as ludicrous as believing that a husband should leave his wife when he is the one who has committed adultery.

It is also ludicrous to believe that a husband should remain with his wife when his wife is continuing to beat him, or abuse him in any other way. I don’t believe it even entered our Lord’s mind at that time that a wife could be abusing her husband, such as beating him or mentally abusing him, because if He had considered that I’m sure He would have spoken a word against that too.

Some people like to try to turn general counsel against one thing into explicit counsel against everything, supposing that they know the mind of the person(s) who gave that counsel when they really don’t. Instead of trying to understand the intent of our Lord’s counsel, some people try to interpret our Lord’s counsel only by the letter of the law, and words alone are seldom adequate. If we don’t understand exactly what someone means, we can easily misunderstand what they were talking about, and we can see evidence of that happening all around us every day.

Our Lord wants us to repent of our sins and work them out with those persons who are offended, but when someone isn’t willing to repent of heinous sins, the offended person is left with no other righteous alternative but to leave that person. Our Lord loves us, and He does not expect us to remain with people who abuse us.

If you don't understand what I was just now trying to say, I will be happy to respond with answers to your questions. Try not to assume that you know what I meant, unless the Holy Ghost bears witness to you that what you think I was saying is actually what I meant to say. Minimizing misunderstandings is now my #1 goal on this board. :)

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Jenda@Mar 5 2004, 01:04 PM

Jesus also said that men could only divorce their wives for fornication and the woman who remarries commits adultery.

That's not an entirely accurate description of what Jesus said. He said that any man who divorces his wife for any reason except for adultery causes her, and her future husband, to be caught in adultery. The fault lies in the husband who puts her away.

At least, that is the way I read it.

Either way she is considered an adulteress. (It's kind of a lose/lose situation for females) At any rate, I simply chose that scripture to give Ray a larger portion of the American public to exhort.

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Ray@Mar 5 2004, 01:50 PM

Minimizing misunderstandings is now my #1 goal on this board. :)

A very worthy goal! (I'm SO misunderstood!) There actually was no allowance at all in Jewish law at Jesus' time for a woman to divorce her husband under any circumstances. She was stuck. If she wanted out, her only option was to die, run away or do something to get her husband to divorce her. But that's neither here nor there. I only used that scripture as an example of something that is clearly spoken out against in the Bible, but that is very common in our society. I can't help but wonder why certain "sins" are tolerated in a Christian society and others (which only involve two consenting adults) are so violently opposed.

[Guest Taoist_Saint]

I can't help but wonder why certain "sins" are tolerated in a Christian society and others (which only involve two consenting adults) are so violently opposed.

Yes...divorce is a sin committed between two consenting adults. Why is it not seen as such by Christians?

[Guest TheProudDuck]

Scott Peterson (may he promptly hang)

So much for fulfilling the great commandment.

Trident -- Re: whether a Christian may properly wish to see justice be done to a murderer:

Romans 13:1-4

LET every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

As an aside, I believe this applies to legitimate governments, not unjust ones; otherwise, scripture would have to be seen as counseling subjection to dictators, or rulers who are a terror to good works and supporters of evil, rather than the other way around, as Paul describes the ruler's role.

But the point is, civil authorities and their punishments can serve a Godly purpose. I want justice to be done on earth, regardless of whether God will show mercy in the eternities. Scott Peterson, in my considered opinion, is so obviously guilty of such awful evil that I think anything but a speedy trial, sentencing, and execution would be a miscarriage of justice.

It may sound harsh, but Paul didn't refer to the ruler's bearing of a sword for nothing. Swords aren't for imposing community service requirements. Ultimately, they're for killing people who, because of the requirements of justice, need killing.