Children with gay parents

[iamdiamd]

12 hours ago, Scott said:

Here are some Church sources, including what Elder Jeffery R Holland said on the matter.  Interpret them as you will.  

I don't know if they were born with it or not (the above sources don't say either way), but they do indicate that people can be tempted with same gender attraction through no fault of their own (just like the rest of us have other temptations).  

https://mormonandgay.lds.org/articles/church-teachings

We may not know precisely why some people feel attracted to others of the same sex, but for some it is a complex reality and part of the human experience.

.......

While same-sex attraction is not a sin, it can be a challenge. While one may not have chosen to have these feelings, he or she can commit to keep God’s commandments. 

Jeffery R Holland had this to say on the matter:

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2007/10/helping-those-who-struggle-with-same-gender-attraction?lang=eng

Helping Those Who Struggle with Same-Gender Attraction

A pleasant young man in his early 20s sat across from me. He had an engaging smile, although he didn’t smile often during our talk. What drew me in was the pain in his eyes.

“I don’t know if I should remain a member of the Church,” he said. “I don’t think I’m worthy.”

“Why wouldn’t you be worthy?” I asked.

“I’m gay.”

I suppose he thought I would be startled. I wasn’t. “And … ?” I inquired.

A flicker of relief crossed his face as he sensed my continued interest. “I’m not attracted to women. I’m attracted to men. I’ve tried to ignore these feelings or change them, but …”

He sighed. “Why am I this way? The feelings are very real.”

I paused, then said, “I need a little more information before advising you. You see, same-gender attraction is not a sin, but acting on those feelings is—just as it would be with heterosexual feelings. Do you violate the law of chastity?”

He shook his head. “No, I don’t.”

This time I was relieved. “Thank you for wanting to deal with this,” I said. “It takes courage to talk about it, and I honor you for keeping yourself clean.

“As for why you feel as you do, I can’t answer that question. A number of factors may be involved, and they can be as different as people are different. Some things, including the cause of your feelings, we may never know in this life. 

...............

Next, if you are a parent of one with same-gender attraction, don’t assume you are the reason for those feelings. No one, including the one struggling, should try to shoulder blame. Nor should anyone place blame on another—including God. Walk by faith, and help your loved one deal the best he or she can with this challenge.

................

In doing so, recognize that marriage is not an all-purpose solution. Same-gender attractions run deep, and trying to force a heterosexual relationship is not likely to change them. We are all thrilled when some who struggle with these feelings are able to marry, raise children, and achieve family happiness. But other attempts have resulted in broken hearts and broken homes.

 

 

Yes and Elder Holland is wrong if the interpretation is that SSA is no sin-this view is not supported by scripture.

Alma 24:12

For our words will condemn us, yea, all our works will condemn us; we shall not be found spotless; and our thoughts will also condemn us; and in this awful state we shall not dare to look up to our God; and we would fain be glad if we could command the rocks and the mountains to fall upon us to hide us from his presence.

Edited October 27, 2018 by iamdiamd

[iamdiamd]

13 hours ago, let’s roll said:

To be frank, the more you explain yourself, the less I agree with you.  

Lots of faulty logic and bad analogies.  Two brief examples.  You say the way we keep the 1st Commandment to love God is to keep His other commandments.  Taking that statement as true, if you could only obey one of His commandments wouldn’t it necessarily be the 2nd Commandment which Jesus said was”like unto” the 1st, and that ALL other commandments are appertaining to those two.  Thus my “highest form” comment.

The reference to discipline as showing love for our children is a faulty analogy when referring to the love we are to show to our brothers and sisters.  They are not our children, they are His children.  He will discipline if necessary, we are to love and forgive.

 

You are wrong.  If we are baptized members of Christ's Church, then we are His disciples.  Disciple-please think on that word.  One who is disciplined in the way's of the Lord and one who seeks to disciple (i.e. teach/lead/guide-which is exactly what parents do!) others in the way's of the Lord.

Loving others simply is NOT the highest form of the 1st Commandment.  No where in scripture is that backed up.

Edited October 27, 2018 by iamdiamd

[Grunt]

58 minutes ago, iamdiamd said:

Yes and Elder Holland is wrong if the interpretation is that SSA is no sin-this view is not supported by scripture.

Alma 24:12

For our words will condemn us, yea, all our works will condemn us; we shall not be found spotless; and our thoughts will also condemn us; and in this awful state we shall not dare to look up to our God; and we would fain be glad if we could command the rocks and the mountains to fall upon us to hide us from his presence.

Is SSA a sin, or is breaking the Law of Chastity?  They aren't the same thing.

[iamdiamd]

16 minutes ago, Grunt said:

Is SSA a sin, or is breaking the Law of Chastity?  They aren't the same thing.

It's a really good question and you are correct they aren't necessarily the same thing.

For starters you don't find a definition for the Law of Chastity in the scriptures and the older I get, the less I like our modern interpretations so I generally like to go directly to God's Word, rather than rely upon interpretation of the Word. We colloquially use the phrase Law of Chastity to mean sexual relations outside of marriage.

The reason why there is such heavy emphasis on the phrasing "Law of Chastity" in the Church is b/c it's a requirement to obey it to enter the temple. So in general we define the Law of Chastity as sexual acts with others.  If we are using that as the metric then no clearly SSA isn't a sexual act with another human being and does not fall under the "Law of Chastity". By the same token, being "sexually attracted" to the married woman who sits across the pew wouldn't be a violation of the "Law of Chastity" either.

Yet that is clearly not what Christ taught.  Christ taught not to "lust", i.e. have sexual thoughts/desires/feelings for someone not our spouse.  In that sense it is a sin.  And there is a difference between saying a person is an attractive person, or they are a beautiful person and saying "I am sexually attracted to them".  The moment you say "sexually attracted" it means one thing-you'd like to have sex with them-which is a sin.

[Vort]

41 minutes ago, iamdiamd said:

For starters you don't find a definition for the Law of Chastity in the scriptures and the older I get, the less I like our modern interpretations so I generally like to go directly to God's Word, rather than rely upon interpretation of the Word.

Our temple endowment presentation, where we actually covenant to obey the law of chastity, gives a succinct yet comprehensive definition.

41 minutes ago, iamdiamd said:

We colloquially use the phrase Law of Chastity to mean sexual relations outside of marriage.

Or more correctly, to mean avoiding such relations.

41 minutes ago, iamdiamd said:

If we are using that as the metric then no clearly SSA isn't a sexual act with another human being and does not fall under the "Law of Chastity". By the same token, being "sexually attracted" to the married woman who sits across the pew wouldn't be a violation of the "Law of Chastity" either.

Yet that is clearly not what Christ taught.  Christ taught not to "lust", i.e. have sexual thoughts/desires/feelings for someone not our spouse.  In that sense it is a sin.

The question you were addressing was whether it was a violation of the law of chastity. I can list any number of sins that do not constitute a violation of the law of chastity. That a thing might be sinful doesn't make it specifically a violation of the law of chastity. That law is narrowly enough defined that it's not at all obvious that any sinful sexual attraction is a violation of that law.

Nevertheless, I think you have a point. But you seem not to consider the difference between a thought and an urge (or attraction). A "thought" is something that you entertain, while a mere "urge" is not, and to some extent originates from outside your spirit. You would probably agree that smoking a cigarette would in some sense be a "sinful" act for a Latter-day Saint. What about simply having the urge to smoke? Is that a sin?

As we progress and gain mastery over ourselves, our urges and attractions and physical desires begin to mirror our spiritual efforts. But that takes place over time, perhaps over a lifetime. Perhaps part of the delay of judgment we experience in this life is that mere urges or desires per se are not counted unto us as sin. I cannot believe that a perfected, celestial being would have any urge or compulsion or desire or attraction to sin. But in this sphere, we all do. Your definition makes those out as sin. I think I don't agree with that definition, primarily from a utility point of view: I don't think such a definition of "sin" is useful to us.

So I guess I disagree. SSA alone cannot be considered "sin" in any useful sense, at least not in our present sphere.

Edited October 27, 2018 by Vort

[anatess2]

2 hours ago, iamdiamd said:

Yet that is clearly not what Christ taught.  Christ taught not to "lust", i.e. have sexual thoughts/desires/feelings for someone not our spouse.  In that sense it is a sin.  And there is a difference between saying a person is an attractive person, or they are a beautiful person and saying "I am sexually attracted to them".  The moment you say "sexually attracted" it means one thing-you'd like to have sex with them-which is a sin.

The natural man is an enemy to God.  Our spirit has to inhabit this natural man.  The moment you acknowledge that you are sexually attracted to somebody other than your spouse, you acknowledge the presence of TEMPTATION of the natural man.  Acting on that temptation - which includes lusting in thought (which is different than acknowledging you are sexually attracted to someone) - is giving in to that temptation which then becomes a sin.

[let’s roll]

6 hours ago, iamdiamd said:

Some things for you to consider.  Do you need to have contact with an abusive husband to know that it is bad?  Do you need to have contact with an adulterer to know that what they are doing is wrong?  Why are you making a special carve-out for this special sin?

You do not understand the scriptures.  We are commanded to judge.  Not unrighteous judgement.  You are making a judgement that children raised in a homosexual environment suffer no harm. That is a judgement.

You’re so fixated on condemnation, you view every situation and comment as an opportunity to try to justify you judgements and find fault.

The comment regarding the Good Samaritan was about Jesus teaching about how to love our neighbors, all of them, including those who sin (which is all of them).  My invitation to you was to consider the fact that the Savior taught that we don’t  love of neighbors by “passing on the other side.”

And if you understand the commandment in the scriptures to “judge not” as a commandment to judge, well, see my first comment.  Btw, I’ve never said that children in a same sex home suffer no harm.  All children in all homes suffer.  

[The Folk Prophet]

2 hours ago, let’s roll said:

You’re so fixated on condemnation, you view every situation and comment as an opportunity to try to justify you judgements and find fault.

Irony?

[The Folk Prophet]

6 hours ago, Vort said:

That law is narrowly enough defined that it's not at all obvious that any sinful sexual attraction is a violation of that law.

I'm not entirely sure that's accurate. Read through the lessons here on the matter, for example. I feel quite confident that such an idea will be quite plainly defined by our prophets.

https://www.lds.org/topics/chastity?lang=eng

[The Folk Prophet]

6 hours ago, Vort said:

SSA alone cannot be considered "sin" in any useful sense, at least not in our present sphere.

This is an interesting topic and one that people, I think, tend to explore way too shallowly. (hmm..."way too shallowly" feels like bad English...but...)

I don't know that I agree. But I certainly understand what you're getting at. I know, very well, that certain temptations that I have are a direct result of choices I've made and poor attitudes I have had or have. I feel quite confident that those "urges" are, indeed, sinful because it was, at least at one point, well within my power to have put them aside where I chose instead options that strengthened them. My fault. My imperfection. My sin.

So, yeah...when someone is first hitting puberty and having natural drives towards certain things...sure...no sin. When they're in thier 30s, 40s, 50s, etc., and still having those same urges...well then. Maybe there is quite a bit of "sin" involved...both of commission and omission.

[iamdiamd]

16 hours ago, anatess2 said:

(which is different than acknowledging you are sexually attracted to someone)

Take out the word "sexually" and I agree.  I remember when I was a kid, I'd get butterflies in my stomach when one of my friends would come over, I'd get very excited, I'd love to run/play with my friends (who were of the same sex) and I always felt very sad when they left. I was definitely attracted to them, every friendship is based upon an attraction.  There is something about the person that I am attracted to-either their personality, something they have done, something.  That attraction forms the basis of a friendship.

What you appear to be saying is that if a person finds another person beautiful, good-looking, any word to describe an acknowledgement that another human being is beautiful it must mean that you are "sexually" attracted to them.  Modern culture pushes this idea and it's totally false. It's how the media bashed Trump for saying that his daughter was a beautiful woman. The media equated the comment that says "she is beautiful" to "I am sexually attracted to her".  Which is again totally false.

In today's society b/c culture has molded people to equate a statement of beauty to a statement of sexuality and the two are separable. Because I say a painting is a beautiful painting doesn't mean I want to have sex with it, just like saying a person is a beautiful person doesn't mean I want to have sex with them. And you can differentiate between the two. People can have all kinds of weird sexual desires.  Some people want to have sex with the earth or a painting or a gun etc.

Sexual attraction means: "Sexual attraction is attraction on the basis of sexual desire or the quality of arousing such interest. Sexual attractiveness or sex appeal is an individual's ability to attract the sexual or erotic interests of other people, and is a factor in sexual selection or mate choice."

Look at the words used, "sexual desire", sex appeal", "sexual or erotic", "sexual selection".  Sexual attraction is all about SEX!!!! It's not, oh I think this person is a good-looking person, it's about the desire to have sex with that person-period. 

That's why Paul states "But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn."

Because that is exactly what Paul is getting at, it is better to marry-therefore you can have sexual desire, passion, attraction for your spouse, rather than anyone you see. That is what chastity is about-that instead of directing sexual energy/desire/passion/attraction to strangers, you direct it to your spouse. To sexually desire anyone but your spouse is breaking Christ's commandment. 

Edited October 28, 2018 by iamdiamd

[iamdiamd]

12 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

So, yeah...when someone is first hitting puberty and having natural drives towards certain things...sure...no sin. When they're in thier 30s, 40s, 50s, etc., and still having those same urges...well then. Maybe there is quite a bit of "sin" involved...both of commission and omission.

Right b/c at 14-16, you are a kid, you know absolutely nothing about the world. You haven't lived on your own, gone through major trials, supported anyone, you have done almost completely nothing with your life.  And learning to obey all the commandments start out like that-it involves growth and mastery.

First you teach a kid don't steal-okay that's good a kid can control himself to not physically steal. A child steals and you discipline them.  Then they slowly learn self-mastery and that self-mastery includes understanding that if I think about stealing things all the time it becomes harder and harder to not steal. So you learn to control your thoughts so you stop thinking about stealing.

This is the same principle.  You only have sex with your spouse, okay good that's something most people can accomplish.  Then you start learning how to control your sexual thoughts-and that can take a lot of time. It's not an easy task and it does take a lot of training your brain-but you intrinsically know that the less you sexualize other people the less likely you go seeking out sexual things.

And it's not just natural urges, it's a maturation process and a learning process.  If you can't actually have the real thing, then what is the point of thinking about it?  If you can't actually have sex with the good-looking woman then what really is the point of sexualizing her?  If you can't every have your neighbor's house, then what really is the point of spending your time and energy thinking about having your neighbor's house.

That is basis of the 9th and 10th Commandment.

https://www.dummies.com/religion/christianity/catholicism/catholicism-and-the-ten-commandments/

“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife.”

The Ninth Commandment forbids the intentional desire and longing for immoral sexuality. To sin in the heart, Jesus says, is to lust after a woman or a man in your heart with the desire and will to have immoral sex with them. Just as human life is a gift from God and needs to be respected, defended, and protected, so, too, is human sexuality. Catholicism regards human sexuality as a divine gift, so it’s considered sacred in the proper context — marriage."

“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods.”

The Tenth Commandment forbids the wanting to or taking someone else’s property. Along with the Seventh Commandment, this commandment condemns theft and the feelings of envy, greed, and jealousy in reaction to what other people have.

We are commanded to control our feelings, our feelings of envy, greed, anger, jealousy, lust, sexual desire.

I am not saying these things are easy, b/c they aren't in any way shape or form.  It is really hard and difficult to control our feelings-but God commands it.