The Gay Appreciation Thread

[Anddenex]

Vort, I really have a hard time trying to understand the connection of homosexuality to rape, incest, stealing, arson, vandalism, etc. Raping someone isn't just a "sin", it is also a crime punishable by law. Same for the rest so how exactly is homosexuality thrown in the middle?

From my perspective Suzie, the idea that homosexuality isn't punishable by law doesn't relieve it from the punishment from God. Vort appears to be making the connection that rape, stealing, arson, are all wrongs before God and punishable by God, or as Elder Oaks made clear, “Similarly, laws legalizing so-called “same-sex marriage” do not change God’s law of marriage or His commandments and our standards concerning it."

We don't have an appreciation thread for other forms of sin, why have an appreciation thread for homosexuality when it doesn't change the laws of God?

[Guest]

Terminology correction:

Gay - sexually attracted to the same sex.

Homosexual - the same thing.

Not just being a pill. I think the distinction is quite important.

You're right. Thanks for pointing that out. It is an important distinction.

Uh...where is this the case?

Philippines. The land where divorce and abortion are illegal and artificial birth control stuff is treated like porn magazines...

Edited January 24, 2014 by anatess

[Suzie]

From my perspective Suzie, the idea that homosexuality isn't punishable by law doesn't relieve it from the punishment from God. Vort appears to be making the connection that rape, stealing, arson, are all wrongs before God and punishable by God, or as Elder Oaks made clear, “Similarly, laws legalizing so-called “same-sex marriage” do not change God’s law of marriage or His commandments and our standards concerning it."

Anddenex, personally I try not to put myself in God's position or speak for Him, I feel inadequate to do so because of my limitations, sins and wrongdoings. I believe only the Lord knows how exactly is he going to judge, not only practicing homosexuals but all of us.

I just find very hard to digest that an homosexual can be indirectly compared with a rapist or child molester.

We don't have an appreciation thread for other forms of sin, why have an appreciation thread for homosexuality when it doesn't change the laws of God

I am not sure if people (generally speaking) are purposely misreading the OP or what exactly? This thread is not about appreciating homosexuality. It says:

There has been a lot of threads lately on lds.net about gays. I've been involved in several of them. And I'm thinking, gays must be feeling beat up here and may forget that they are LOVED. Dearly.

So, this thread is here so that we can all express clearly and succintly (sic) our love for gays.

For me, it is just wonderful that someone would think about reaching out to those who struggle with same sex attraction or even those living an homosexual lifestyle. Reaching out and expressing love for them is what Christianity is supposed to be all about. It is not condoning behavior, it is loving others despite their choices.

[Bini]

It's been repeatedly posted to keep this thread positive.

If you want to keep beating this dead horse, will you please go to another thread?

[Soulsearcher]

Interesting read and must admit I appreciate the sentiment more so from a poster I usually clash with when the topic comes up but really the results were to be expected

[Suzie]

Another story.

When I was in Elementary School there was this cute boy who all the other boys in the class made fun of every single day because they said he talked and walked like a little girl. Even as a young child, I always felt the need to befriend those who were lonely or were considered "different", it is not something that has been taught to me or did it because I felt "sorry" for them, I genuinely wanted them to have a friend in me. I became friends with this boy and after Elementary school I did not see him again.

However, just a couple of years ago he found me through a mutual friend and emailed me. He told me that those years were very depressing for him as a child because he did not understand what was happening to him. Many years later, he told everyone that he was gay and ended his email thanking me for the many times I stood by his side and defended him when others were bullying him.

That experience alone shaped my view about social responsibility with three clear words: Be a friend.

[Just_A_Guy]

For those who want to continue on some of the tangents brought up here, I've opened a new thread:

Anatess Threadjackers Welcome Here!!!

[Vort]

Vort, I really have a hard time trying to understand the connection of homosexuality to rape, incest, stealing, arson, vandalism, etc. Raping someone isn't just a "sin", it is also a crime punishable by law. Same for the rest so how exactly is homosexuality thrown in the middle?

You said it yourself: They are all sins. Homosexuality used to be punishable by law. If it still were, would that make it worse than it is? Murdering your unborn child through elective abortion IS legal; does that make it any less sinful and horrendous? The gravity of a sin is not determined by whether or not it is legal, nor should a consideration of its relative sinfulness hinge on such a flimsy thing.

[carlimac]

Ah yes. I am not well read enough. Of course.

What, exactly, do you think the church teaches about "be ye therefore perfect"?

"Biological reaction" is entirely un-provable. I'm not about to turn my back on long taught truths based on a bunch of people's "I can't help it" arguments.

Here, instead of arguing who needs to read more on what the church says about it:

Same-Gender Attraction

Specifically note point 9.

As for Perfection, search for the term on lds.org. Read a couple of the conference talks that come up. I'll do the same. Then we'll talk more.

I think I've discovered the problem. When I talk about the "thoughts", I'm not talking about immoral thoughts. I'm talking about simple attraction. I'm talking about where people with SSA can be attracted to someone...ya know, think they are nice looking or like their personality without mentally undressing them or going to bed with them. If they let their thoughts go behind closed doors, obviously that's something to be repented of. But homosexuality doesn't necessarily go from 0 to 100 in a half a second. It can start with the merest, innocent thought of, " That guy has nice, friendly eyes." Or "he's in great shape." And for them it can then trigger the desire to get to know that person- the "ping".. Even up to this point, I don't believe the brethren would call this a sin or even something to be repented of. It's when that person starts to contemplate the action it would require to get closer physically and emotionally to that person when clearly they are off limits, THOSE are the thoughts that need to be controlled and eliminated. If you are saying they should be able to control their attractions, well they better pray to be struck blind and deaf because I think you're asking for the impossible.

[carlimac]

Can we go back on topic now? There are many other current threads out there where all these stuff y'all are arguing about are being discussed...

Apparently not.

[applepansy]

I do appreciate those gays who, because of their allegiance with the gospel, resist temptation, even though it may mean celibacy. Their burden is great, and I appreciate that the choose to call upon the one who can grant them the strength to endure.

Amen!

[applepansy]

There was a time in the recent past where we were urged not to classify people by their sexual preference. Rather, we were to recognize them as children of God and treat them as such. But of course, the homosexual movement insisted, and insists, on defining themselves by how they like to use their genitals, so such a course is all but impossible in public conversation.

I find it surreal, and a bit amusing, to consider having an "appreciation thread" for those who indulge in certain specific sins. I cannot imagine having an "adulterer appreciation thread" or a "child molester appreciation thread" or even a "shoplifter appreciation thread". There may well be people who indulge in such activities whom we nevertheless find admirable in some way or another, but it's laughable to think we would say, "You know, my wife's uncle Fred sexually abused all of his daughters from their infancy, and I've gotta tell you, that guy really cooks a mean omelet!"

(Note: If "daughter rapist" is just too severe for you, substitute "guy who exposes himself in public" or "arsonist" or "vandal" or whatever other sin you find less repulsive.)

Thus, I find it amazing and even appalling that we would dedicate a thread to celebrating the good acts or facets of specifically those people who enjoy indulging in fornication with their own sex. It seems a transparently superficial and false effort to say, "Look, we really love homosexuals!" That such a sentiment is (or should be) true is beside the point.

I would feel much less like that if we already had threads that said, for example, "Look, we really love child molesters!" Because, as with homosexuals, that sentiment is (or should be) true. But we don't have any such threads, because they would be considered absurd by most of the list. That this thread may not likewise be considered absurd by most of the list is a possibility I find disturbing.

Thank you Vort. As I read through this thread those were my thoughts minus a few descriptions. :)

[applepansy]

Vort, I really have a hard time trying to understand the connection of homosexuality to rape, incest, stealing, arson, vandalism, etc. Raping someone isn't just a "sin", it is also a crime punishable by law. Same for the rest so how exactly is homosexuality thrown in the middle?

Not too many decades ago homsexual sex was a crime too.

[LittleWyvern]

Can we go back on topic now? There are many other current threads out there where all these stuff y'all are arguing about are being discussed...

This subject has an inherent weakness in this kind of environment, as there are some who believe that even participating in the kind of appreciation in the subject is wrong/disturbing/appalling/etc. You may have to find a more positive venue for this kind of discussion to have a chance at ever happening, which is a bit of a bummer.

Edited January 24, 2014 by LittleWyvern

[Windseeker]

This subject has an inherent weakness in this kind of environment, as there are some who believe that even participating in the kind of appreciation in the subject is wrong/disturbing/appalling/etc. You may have to find a more positive venue for this kind of discussion to have a chance at ever happening, which is a bit of a bummer.

Yeah..this venue is way too negative about sin.

[Quin]

ALL of my GLBTQ friends & loved ones are amazing.

So are my straight friends and loved ones.

So are my: Single, married, black, white, Christian, Jewish, male, female, liberal, conservative, military, pacifist, steak eating, vegan friends... They're all utterly amazing people.

It's a basic requirement for my friendship: awesomeness.

((PS, I answered the various q's from earlier as to why I don't tolerate people being bigots towards ANY group of my friends or loved one on the thread jack post. In summation: part of my appreciating them means standing up for them, in person or alone...when people I like, or strangers, start abasing them. Regardless of how unpopular their group might be at the moment. Any further comments I'll answer over there.))

Q

[LittleWyvern]

Yeah..this venue is way too negative about sin.

I am constantly baffled how completely my posts can be misread with such regularity. I shouldn't have even bothered.

EDIT: To be clear, I was suggesting a venue that was more positive about homosexuals, not homosexuality. I'm sure Windseeker understood that anyway.

Edited January 24, 2014 by LittleWyvern

[Vort]

ALL of my GLBTQ friends & loved ones are amazing.

So are my straight friends and loved ones.

So are my: Single, married, black, white, Christian, Jewish, male, female, liberal, conservative, military, pacifist, steak eating, vegan friends... They're all utterly amazing people.

Are all of your pedophilic loved ones also amazing -- whether or not they actually indulge their tastes?

[Crash]

On topic I will say that I don't care if a person is gay. I have a friend who is gay and I don't want to treat him any differently because of it. If I see a flaming gay person, well, I'm going to stay away. That's my choice. My ex-wife is bisexual, has acted on her desires MANY times, and probably still does. I don't appreciate her.

The title of this thread is inappropriate or not applicable to its intention. Being gay has nothing to do with whether or not a person is appreciated, and to create a thread gives special attention to them. Gay people love to talk about being equal yet they have gay pride parades, special events for just gay people, and the like. That isn't equal, it is special attention to the fact that they are gay. There are no "straight" parades or "straight" pageants, etc. It's just people and everyone is equal.

So, while this thread was started with good intentions, it calls special attention to people who should just be treated like everyone else. I want to be treated like everyone else but that doesn't mean I want a thread started that calls special attention to people like me. Sometimes being treated fairly and equally just means to act as if they are no different, which this thread does not do.

[Guest]

Are all of your pedophilic loved ones also amazing -- whether or not they actually indulge their tastes?

I'm starting to get a glimmer of what is failing here.

By definition - a person is not a pedophile UNTIL they engage in the sinful act.

By definition - a person can be gay WITHOUT engaging in sinful act.

I'm starting to think that what is failing here is that some people hold by definition that a person is not gay UNTIL they engage in the sinful act.

[Guest]

On topic I will say that I don't care if a person is gay. I have a friend who is gay and I don't want to treat him any differently because of it. If I see a flaming gay person, well, I'm going to stay away. That's my choice. My ex-wife is bisexual, has acted on her desires MANY times, and probably still does. I don't appreciate her.

The title of this thread is inappropriate or not applicable to its intention. Being gay has nothing to do with whether or not a person is appreciated, and to create a thread gives special attention to them. Gay people love to talk about being equal yet they have gay pride parades, special events for just gay people, and the like. That isn't equal, it is special attention to the fact that they are gay. There are no "straight" parades or "straight" pageants, etc. It's just people and everyone is equal.

So, while this thread was started with good intentions, it calls special attention to people who should just be treated like everyone else. I want to be treated like everyone else but that doesn't mean I want a thread started that calls special attention to people like me. Sometimes being treated fairly and equally just means to act as if they are no different, which this thread does not do.

There are many threads on lds.net calling out certain people for appreciation. A lot of them start out as Happy Birthday <username>. That doesn't imply that they are somehow treated unfairly or unequally.

There are no "straight" parades or "straight" pageants because they are the majority therefore, in any parade or pageant they are well represented. Just like there are no White History Months because... there was no Civil Rights Movement for white people. Just like there is no American Club in college but there is a Foreign Student Club because most everybody you meet is American whereas Foreign Students are not as plentiful.

There are no LDS Appreciation Thread because there is no trend on lds.net where LDS community is getting more heat than none. There is no Disabled Appreciation Thread or Smelly-Armpits Appreciation Thread for the same reason. Although, if you feel a need for one, you can always go ahead and start one.

Edited January 24, 2014 by anatess

[Crash]

There are no "straight" parades or "straight" pageants because they are the majority therefore, in any parade or pageant they are well represented. Just like there are no White History Months because... there was no Civil Rights Movement for white people.

There is a fallacy in your argument. There are no "straight" parades not because straight people are the majority but because there is no need to show inequality by having one. Nothing shows inequality more than the need to point out our differences, like a gay pride parade, Ebony Magazine, Black Entertainment Television, etc. These things draw specific attention to what separates us as people. Being in a majority has nothing to do with it.

[Vort]

I'm starting to get a glimmer of what is failing here.

By definition - a person is not a pedophile UNTIL they engage in the sinful act.

By definition - a person can be gay WITHOUT engaging in sinful act.

I'm starting to think that what is failing here is that some people hold by definition that a person is not gay UNTIL they engage in the sinful act.

Whose definition? This inconsistency in definition is absurd. If mere homosexual impulses make someone homosexual, then mere pedophilic impulses make someone a pedophile.

[Guest]

There is a fallacy in your argument. There are no "straight" parades not because straight people are the majority but because there is no need to show inequality by having one. Nothing shows inequality more than the need to point out our differences, like a gay pride parade, Ebony Magazine, Black Entertainment Television, etc. These things draw specific attention to what separates us as people. Being in a majority has nothing to do with it.

You are incorrect. There is a marked inequality between the majority and the minority. Elevating the presence of minorities brings them on equal grounds with the majority so nobody forgets that they exist and they remain represented in the democratic process. Being in a majority has everything to do with it.

[Guest]

Whose definition? This inconsistency in definition is absurd. If mere homosexual impulses make someone homosexual, then mere pedophilic impulses make someone a pedophile.

Legal definition. For consistency, mere pedophilic impulses make someone a child-sexual.

But then English is my 3rd language.

So, if we get a general consensus on the use of the word homosexual as only those who has acted on it, then I will differ. Because, I'm fairly certain Quinn is using the term in the same manner as I.

And if your use of the word pedophile includes someone who is valiantly struggling with child attraction, then the answer to your previous question is Yes. I would also call my pedophile friend amazing and spread some love his way.

Edited January 24, 2014 by anatess