Stacey Harkey comes out


Fether
 Share

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

This discussion cannot move forward openly and honestly as long as it's corrupted by straight up falsehoods.

Agreed. I'm not entirely sure what is false and true in this discussion, but I agree that the discussion cannot move forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Women often have very close relationships with other women that men generally don't experience with other men. There isn't anything romantic about it but it's more than just hanging out with the guys and it helps meet a need on an emotional basis. So if two guys want to have a similar relationship because they are just hardwired differently than most men I don't see how we could say one is wrong and the other isn't.

The problem though is when we want to take on the appearance of something more and yet pretend its not. Men and women don't "date" each other unless they are at the very least exploring the possibility of taking the relationship further than just friendship and as soon as it's decided that the relationship will not progress further than friendship the dating stops. So in my mind there is no such thing as "just dating" between same-sex individuals.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MrShorty said:

I get it, but I see too many examples of people who claim exactly that -- that God lead them away from the Church and/or led them to not embrace the Church when brought to their attention.

Perspective and charachterisation.

I believe the closest the Lord actually comes to this is that He tries to save people from a greater level of condemnation.

We each receive the level light we are ready to receive.  And if he gives us more light when He knows we're not ready to receive it, He knows that will require even greater condemnation if we disobey.

This is NOT "leading us away" from the truth.  It is simply allowing us free agency while sparing as much condemnation as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MrShorty said:

I'm not convinced that dating is a homosexual act.

And being angry with your brother is not murder, yet Christ condemns both.

Its not a matter of where the line is, it’s a matter of the heart. I would say, at VERY LEAST,  homosexual dating is to breaking the LOC as anger is to murder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MrShorty said:

I'm not convinced that dating is a homosexual act. I also don't think the false equivalence (or is it more of fallacious slippery slope argument) between permitting same sex couples to go see a movie together automatically and inevitably means that we also have to ignore the strong romantic exclusivity promise that is part of marriage (and many dating relationships approaching marriage).

If you have read the Tribune article I mentioned, the big question in the article is whether or not dating and other romantic behaviors (that we don't bat an eye at when opposite sex couples engage in them) are okay for same sex couples. Many people feel that the Church has not been clear about that, so they feel drawn to make their own decisions. I just listened to an episode of Questions from the Closet (An episode titled Can I date from Jan 2021, if you want). For those unfamiliar with the podcast, Questions from the closet is hosted by Ben Schilaty (a gay man working in the BYU honor code office) and Charlie Bird (also gay and active LDS) talk about LGBT issues. In this particular episode they talk about their own experiences (including experiences with God/The Spirit approving of decisions to date or pursue romantic relationships). In they end, they don't officially want to give anyone permission to date, but they believe that it is an individual choice made as most of us make difficult decisions, by counseling with God and priesthood leaders. I also recently listened to an episode of Richard Ostler's Listen Learn Love podcast (episode 511) where Ostler interviews a David Bingham who is gay, left the Church in his youth, returned later (at the time of the podcast he had been in full fellowship for a few years and was then 60 years old) who is also in an exclusive same sex romantic relationship while staying in full fellowship. He seems to feel that God and the Church are fine with his status. I know these are not the only examples, but I would suggest that they show that there are at least some priesthood leaders/Bishops and congregations where active Church members are not bothered by same sex romantic relationships. Are we certain that they are forbidden by God?

If a man is dating a woman because he is interested in them that is a heterosexual act. If a man is dating another man because he is interested in them. That is a homosexual act. That is as plain and clear as it can be. There isn't any slippery slope, it presents the same idea of attraction.

If you are OK with a men dating a man and assuming it is just a date, then you must also be OK with a married man dating other women (despite the marriage contract) because it is just a date. There is nothing slippery about it, it is the reality. Choosing to be Ok with one, while saying the other is inherently wrong is the slippery slope.

The Church has been very clear. The Lord has been very clear on this matter. Because members choose to ignore the counsel, or seek to find a loop hole in the counsel doesn't make the counsel and teachings unclear. We are judged by the desires of our heart, as well as our actions -- both for good and evil.

If they are speaking of "gay" romantic relations, and the "Spirit" approving -- then they are listing to obey the wrong spirit. That is the slippery slope. What else then will they convince themselves of the Spirit approving when it is obviously against the commandments of God? In that same light, I once listened to a married man seeking to convince us that the Lord told him it was OK to commit adultery. Does that make it so? Obviously not.

Yes, same sex romantic relations are forbidden by God, there is no question on the matter, unless we are listing to obey the wrong Spirit. The Lord is an author of truth, not of confusion.

EDIT:
I'm wondering also (upon further thought), if there belief of God approving is similar (to the principle/idea) to God approving Joseph Smith saying "Go ahead" and then letting his children face the consequence of their decision. This "Spirit" approval is very different than God's actual approval.

Edited by Anddenex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, MrShorty said:

[1]  I'm not convinced that dating is a homosexual act.

[2]  . . . [T]h are at least some priesthood leaders/Bishops and congregations where active Church members are not bothered by same sex romantic relationships. Are we certain that they are forbidden by God?

1.  The inherent legalism in such a statement creates its own set of theological issues.  I fear that in our haste to establish what the definition of “is” is, we may have left weightier matters (such as the Plan of Salvation, the nature of God, whether or not there is an absolute need for a Heavenly Mother, the nature of exaltation and eternal increase, the long-term malleability/immutability of sexual orientation, and the role of sexual pleasure in both temporal and eternal love) by the wayside.

2.  If the relationships include sexual intercourse, then yes; we know that they are forbidden.

Or at least, we “know” it as well as we can know anything about God, the Gospel, sin, and God’s ultimate plan for us.  

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/1/2022 at 8:46 PM, Anddenex said:

I'm wondering also (upon further thought), if there belief of God approving is similar (to the principle/idea) to God approving Joseph Smith saying "Go ahead" and then letting his children face the consequence of their decision. This "Spirit" approval is very different than God's actual approval.

This sounds an awful lot like the Samuel Principle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

This sounds an awful lot like the Samuel Principle.

Yes, that would be a good description of what is highlighted with Joseph Smith and the 116 pages. Joseph learned through a very sad experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Anddenex said:

Yes, that would be a good description of what is highlighted with Joseph Smith and the 116 pages. Joseph learned through a very sad experience.

I see the Samuel principle differently than others.  It almost sounds like the Lord "gave permission" to do something that was wrong.  I don't buy that.  It is more along the lines of recognizing His gift of agency:

Quote

You know this is wrong.  But I wonder why you bothered asking me for permission if you've already decided to do it anyway.  You have your agency.  So, you're going to choose according to your own desires.  Just remember, I told you this was a bad idea.  And you're going to find out why.

Specific to Samuel and Joseph: If you're going to do this even though I told you not to, at least abide by these lesser rules... That will at least limit the damage.

In both cases, they didn't even follow the lesser rules.  So, I believe when people follow this idea of to same sex dating:

Quote

It's a bad idea to do same sex dating.  But if you're only going to do it anyway, then just don't do XYZ.  That should limit the damage.

Is it too big a leap to believe that when trying to abide by these lesser rules that they will fail miserably anyway?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Carborendum said:

I see the Samuel principle differently than others.  It almost sounds like the Lord "gave permission" to do something that was wrong.  I don't buy that.  It is more along the lines of recognizing His gift of agency:

My thoughts with God's "approval" was inline with your thought here. I don't see this as a "seal" of approval (as with the Holy Ghost and righteousness). This is why I brought up Joseph. After the experience, if I am remembering history correctly, Joseph felt like his soul was damned. If it were "God's permission" then there wouldn't be any consequence with regards to our soul. Yes, I agree, God honored Joseph Smith's agency, and let him suffer the consequence.

Quote

In both cases, they didn't even follow the lesser rules.  So, I believe when people follow this idea of to same sex dating:

Is it too big a leap to believe that when trying to abide by these lesser rules that they will fail miserably anyway?

Anytime, we go with our "own will" it tends to fail miserably (eternal perspective), especially when contrary to what is taught plainly and clearly. Joseph "clearly" knew the Lord's first two answers. :)

Edited by Anddenex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share