The LGBT stumbling block.

[Phineas]

The whole LGBT issue seems to be a major stumbling block for a lot of members.  I know of two high profile members who have recently become disaffected over this issue.  Many see the Church as being harmful and intolerant towards LGBT people.  I am curious to hear how other faithful Later-day Saints reconcile the Church’s teachings concerning this topic with Christ’s teachings on love and compassion.   

[unixknight]

The problem is that our culture is drifting toward the idea that the only way to show compassion and love toward someone is to support every single thing they do.  "Love the sinner, hate the sin" is an idea that people are forgetting in alarming numbers.

What makes it worse in the case of LGBT issues is that instead of someone's sexuality being an aspect of their personality, it's  treated as the core of their being... so if you disapprove of homosexual behavior, our culture interprets that as hating the person himself/herself.  "It's who I AM!!!!"

It's a completely illogical notion, but one that has taken in a LOT of people.

[mikbone]

How dare you not be inclusive?!

Its LGBTQIA!, or was it LGBTGIAZTR$@69?  

Personally I can't keep it all straight.

And I'm straight BTW.

[NeuroTypical]

What's a "high profile member"?

Reconciling Christ's emphasis on love and compassion with our teaching?  Not too hard if you believe the BoM is scripture... 

Quote

Do not suppose, because it has been spoken concerning restoration, that ye shall be restored from sin to happiness. Behold, I say unto you, wickedness never was happiness. And now, my son, all men that are in a state of nature, or I would say, in a carnal state, are in the gall of bitterness and in the bonds of iniquity; they are without God in the world, and they have gone contrary to the nature of God; therefore, they are in a state contrary to the nature of happiness. 

And now behold, is the meaning of the word restoration to take a thing of a natural state and place it in an unnatural state, or to place it in a state opposite to its nature? O, my son, this is not the case; but the meaning of the word restoration is to bring back again evil for evil, or carnal for carnal, or devilish for devilish—good for that which is good; righteous for that which is righteous; just for that which is just; merciful for that which is merciful.

As for "intolerant", take a look: https://mormonandgay.lds.org/

Edited March 6, 2019 by NeuroTypical

[NeuroTypical]

3 minutes ago, mikbone said:

I'm offended that furries aren't represented in this evil list of exclusion.  

[mikbone]

9 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

I'm offended that furries aren't represented in this evil list of exclusion.  

 

This is not my production.  Shamelessly lifted from the internet.  But probably more inclusive.  I'll keep looking for your Furries.  Maybe you could make a symbol for this poorly represented group???

[NeuroTypical]

Well, the symbols are all made, but half of 'em would violate the site rules.  

[unixknight]

24 minutes ago, mikbone said:

What does it say that I can't tell if this is legit or parody?

[mikbone]

23 minutes ago, unixknight said:

What does it say that I can't tell if this is legit or parody?

This is legit.  Seriously.

My point is that I don't really have a stumbling block with LGFBT-whatever.

To each his/her/its own.  I try not to judge.  And furthermore, I don't want to be in your bedroom or wherever you choose to do whatever it is that knocks your socks off.  

Come to church.  

“The church is not a place where perfect people gather to say perfect things, or have perfect thoughts, or have perfect feelings. The Church is a place where imperfect people gather to provide encouragement, support, and service to each other as we press on in our journey to return to our Heavenly Father.”  ― Joseph B. Wirthlin

 

Mark 2 16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners?

17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Come, Join with US.  Uchtdorf, Oct 2013

Edited March 6, 2019 by mikbone

[anatess2]

56 minutes ago, Phineas said:

The whole LGBT issue seems to be a major stumbling block for a lot of members.  I know of two high profile members who have recently become disaffected over this issue.  Many see the Church as being harmful and intolerant towards LGBT people.  I am curious to hear how other faithful Later-day Saints reconcile the Church’s teachings concerning this topic with Christ’s teachings on love and compassion.   

Let me ask you a question.  Do you believe that the teaching on Marriage being between a Man and Woman is harmful and intolerant towards LGBT people?

[mirkwood]

[unixknight]

25 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

Kinda says something about the people who don't realize this, doesn't it?  Think about the implications.

[Guest MormonGator]

2 hours ago, Phineas said:

  I know of two high profile members who have recently become disaffected over this issue.  

 

2 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

What's a "high profile member"?

 

My thoughts as well. If it was a "high profile" person, I think we'd all know about it. 

[scottyg]

If the church is intolerant towards people who choose to identify as LGBT, then one could also say that they are intolerant towards those who choose to use drugs for recreation, or who steal. Sin is sin, and while anyone may be inclined to commit certain acts that are wrong, the inclination in and of itself is not wrong. It is only when we entertain such thoughts and act on them that the sin occurs. The issue with the LGBT crowd is that they personalize their behaviors, and claim that it is a part of themselves...that they have no say in the matter. Other people have other weaknesses and are tempted to act on them, and they too need to learn to temper and control themselves. The biggest issue I believe revolves around marriage, which by definition is between a man and a woman. There is no such thing as gay marriage...it is by definition impossible. One cannot choose to alter something that was instituted and defined by God himself. So, although we love and care for everyone, that does not mean that we have to accept and sustain their life choices. If for example one of my young children ever chooses to become a criminal, or to use drugs, I will be sure to let them know that their actions are not right, and I do not approve nor support them. But I will still love them, and if they want to change I will help in any way I can. 

[Fether]

2 hours ago, Phineas said:

 I am curious to hear how other faithful Later-day Saints reconcile the Church’s teachings concerning this topic with Christ’s teachings on love and compassion

Nothing to reconcile. I suppose if there was no God and that this was just a club then maybe there would be stuff to reconcile. 

But like people said above, just because we disagree doesn’t mean we hate you. No one seems to understand that. 

[wenglund]

3 hours ago, Phineas said:

The whole LGBT issue seems to be a major stumbling block for a lot of members.  I know of two high profile members who have recently become disaffected over this issue.  Many see the Church as being harmful and intolerant towards LGBT people.  I am curious to hear how other faithful Later-day Saints reconcile the Church’s teachings concerning this topic with Christ’s teachings on love and compassion.   

As expected, the thinking is upside-down on several levels.

First, the issue isn't created by the Church, but is manufactured by influential forces in society. The restored gospel has been around since 1830, whereas LGBT et al. sprung up less than 50 years ago.

Second, the primary question is morality rather than love and tolerance. Indeed, morality is the reference point by which love and tolerance ought to be assessed.. It isn't loving or tolerant to any party involved to promote immorality. Quite the opposite. And, vice versa.

Third,  while the forces behind the cultural movement make a pretense of love and tolerance, they could care less about the groups they selectively target, and view them instead as "useful idiots" to manipulate  into creating cultural strife, with the end goal of fomenting proliferating government dependency and  accruing power to themselves. Whereas the Church cares deeply about the eternal welfare of all individuals and enabling them to become their very best selves. 

In spite of the pretense of love evoked by the PR sculptured image of happiness within the LGBT... community,  disease and mental illness and deaths have skyrocketed since the movement began, not to mention the noticeable degradation of Western civilization. The o-called progressive  agenda is anything but...

On the other hand, the source for true joy as well as the power to counter destructive influences, is Christ, and this through his Restored Gospel. It is the true and proven plan of progression and salvation. It is the real way of love.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited March 6, 2019 by wenglund

[unixknight]

If somebody's ready to leave the Church over the issue, they're essentially putting the moral cues of society over those of the Church and calling it "acceptance." 

It's unclear to me why a culture that values self gratification over self control is somehow the premier guide to morality these days.

[mordorbund]

3 hours ago, Phineas said:

The whole LGBT issue seems to be a major stumbling block for a lot of members.  I know of two high profile members who have recently become disaffected over this issue.  Many see the Church as being harmful and intolerant towards LGBT people.  I am curious to hear how other faithful Later-day Saints reconcile the Church’s teachings concerning this topic with Christ’s teachings on love and compassion.   

I'm curious as well. How do you resolve it yourself?

[Tyme]

Since I'm allowed to say it I''ll say what I've previously said again.

 

Gays will be allowed to be married in the Temple someday. 👹

Edited March 6, 2019 by Tyme

[unixknight]

1 minute ago, Tyme said:

Since I'm allowed to say it I''ll say what I've previously said again.

 

Gays will be allowed to be married in the Temple someday.

What makes you think so? (Honestly curious.)

[NeuroTypical]

Hi folks, just a random reminder of site rule #6, which everyone agreed to in order to use this forum:

Quote

6. Posting issues you have with a moderator or administrator anywhere on the site will not be allowed. Please follow the chain of authority if you have any concerns. Any such posts will be removed and the poster will be subject to the consequences of breaking the rules.

https://thirdhour.org/forums/announcement/1-third-hour-forum-rules-please-be-familiar-with-these-rules-before-posting/

 

Edited March 6, 2019 by NeuroTypical

[wenglund]

31 minutes ago, Tyme said:

Since I'm allowed to say it I''ll say what I've previously said again.

 

Gays will be allowed to be married in the Temple someday. 👹

Evidently, there is no board rule against you saying things that are demonstrably false.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[carlimac]

4 hours ago, unixknight said:

The problem is that our culture is drifting toward the idea that the only way to show compassion and love toward someone is to support every single thing they do.  "Love the sinner, hate the sin" is an idea that people are forgetting in alarming numbers.

What makes it worse in the case of LGBT issues is that instead of someone's sexuality being an aspect of their personality, it's  treated as the core of their being... so if you disapprove of homosexual behavior, our culture interprets that as hating the person himself/herself.  "It's who I AM!!!!"

It's a completely illogical notion, but one that has taken in a LOT of people.

From what I've heard and experienced in talking with a few of these people is that they don't see their lifestyle choice to be sinful. So the "Love the sinner..." mentality is offensive to them. It's probably one of the biggest barriers to seeing eye to eye with them. They simply don't see their attraction and subsequent actions as sinning. Those of us who believe the prophets and interpret the Bible to be a condemnation of homosexual relations think it is sin. And ne'er the twain shall meet in the middle. 

[unixknight]

3 minutes ago, carlimac said:

From what I've heard and experienced in talking with a few of these people is that they don't see their lifestyle choice to be sinful. So the "Love the sinner..." mentality is offensive to them. It's probably one of the biggest barriers to seeing eye to eye with them. They simply don't see their attraction and subsequent actions as sinning. Those of us who believe the prophets and interpret the Bible to be a condemnation of homosexual relations think it is sin. And ne'er the twain shall meet in the middle. 

That's true, they don't see it as sinful.  Then again, there's plenty of things that Christians in general view as sinful that others don't, but the gay community is the only one that seems bent on attaching the worst possible motives to it and playing the victim.

[Phineas]

4 hours ago, mikbone said:

How dare you not be inclusive?!

Its LGBTQIA!, or was it LGBTGIAZTR$@69?  

Personally I can't keep it all straight.

And I'm straight BTW.

LGBT is easier to write and say.  Just like the terms LDS and Mormon😔