Fether

Church policy change on same sex marriage

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

Unixknight, I'm glad that Ken is doing well and is inspiring to you and perhaps others as well. You realize though that this is ONE story. Right?  

You're kidding!  really?

/sarcasm

I didn't think I needed the disclaimer.  Yes, I'm aware that he's ONE example.  But you know, Ken, like other people in his situation, isn't just some data point.  They're each unique with their own story, their own feelings and their own reactions.  That was my point.  You can't take an entire collection of people living with a particular set of challenges and talk about them as if they're all experiencing the same thing in the same way.  Ken is one example but he isn't unique.  Lots of members of the Church with same sex attraction deal with it the way Ken does, and lots don't.  Some find it easy, some find it hard.  Some go back and forth a few times on their path.

I didn't share his story to make a debate point.  I shared it because his is a story that deserves to be told and honored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

I don't know why you are celibate, and I'm not asking.  I just want to say that if someone chooses to be celibate because they are LGBTQ, then I don't believe they have failed to keep the first commandment. I don't think an LGBTQ person should marry a heterosexual just to multiply and replenish the earth. Mixed orientation marriages have a higher divorce rate than other marriages.  

This is one of the reasons that God has told us not to make eternal judgments. We don't know enough about other people's lives to judge them, only God does. I trust His judgement will be right, even if they may be surprising.

There is a strong tendency these days to rationalize not doing what God desires of us and what is in our best interest. I don't see any written exceptions to the first commandment, but maybe there is. As you suggest, that would be between God and each individual. Nevertheless, it is good to stress the general rule, and that is what I was doing.,

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, wenglund said:

There is a strong tendency these days to rationalize not doing what God desires of us and what is in our best interest. I don't see any written exceptions to the first commandment, but maybe there is. As you suggest, that would be between God and each individual. Nevertheless, it is good to stress the general rule, and that is what I was doing.,

I think the biggest problem with today's cultural patterns is that our collective "best-interest-o-meters" are badly malfunctioning and we're at a point where people equate one's best interest with their desires and feelings, to the point where people's entire identity is defined by what they want and how they feel instead of what they contribute and what they do.  

People feel pity for guys like Ken because he isn't giving in to his physical desires instead of admiring him for having the level of self control and wisdom to make his choices by his faith.  I WISH my faith were as strong as his.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Yup, and I can't blame them for failing. After all, would you (generic) want to be married to someone who didn't find you sexually attractive?

That is understandable, particularly in an age where romance and sexuality has been given such paramount importance.

However, I would caution you in making such statements because it could rile the gay community of all places. For their own reasons, they have been working tirelessly to down play the sexuality aspect of their relationships, and dramatically magnify the love and care and "family" dimensions,. Whereas, what you stated above inadvertently does the opposite. 

I understand your good intention, though they may not. Just say'in.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, unixknight said:

 They're each unique with their own story, their own feelings and their own reactions.  That was my point.  You can't take an entire collection of people living with a particular set of challenges and talk about them as if they're all experiencing the same thing in the same way.  

On this we agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, unixknight said:

People feel pity for guys like Ken because he isn't giving in to his physical desires instead of admiring him for having the level of self control and wisdom to make his choices by his faith.  I WISH my faith were as strong as his.

It is possible that the problem is worse than just that.  We have developed a condition in our society where it is not just impossible to do scientific research to determine ways and methods to help "Ken" but it has become illegal to even formally try to help or understand why in order to bring about a cure.  There is such strong resistance that to even suggest the idea of helping a "Ken" in many quarters will get someone labeled as a homophobe bigot.  Jesus addressed this in talking about the symbolic difference between light and darkness - see John 3:19-20

Quote

19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil

20 For every one the doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light lest his deeds should be reproved.

Note verse 20 where some avoid being reproved because their deeds are not of light.  In essence Jesus says they defend themselves by saying if they are reproved that they have the right to hate the light because of reproof.   And thus light is reproved because of the world's love of darkness and hatred of light.

Also sad because those that would help "Ken" - have no idea how to actually help and those that would not help "Ken" hate him for seeking a way out of the darkness.  So in ignorance we can only cry faith in Jesus Christ and declare repentance. 

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mores
2 hours ago, MormonGator said:

Yup, and I can't blame them for failing. After all, would you (generic) want to be married to someone who didn't find you sexually attractive?

This has happened historically for centuries (even millennia).  They were called arranged marriages or political marriages.  And they didn't result in divorce.  Aside from extreme cases such as abuse or adultery, etc. people divorce because they see an "out", not because it is difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Mores said:

This has happened historically for centuries (even millennia).  They were called arranged marriages or political marriages.  And they didn't result in divorce.  Aside from extreme cases such as abuse or adultery, etc. people divorce because they see an "out", not because it is difficult.

But we do need to recognize that it is the method and desire of G-d that his saints need to willingly choose to seek to do good and keep the commandments - even in the face of strong and difficult adversity.  The more difficult the task the greater needs to be the desire to do it as well as the encourage from others to succeed.  Just because something is difficult (or seemingly impossible) is not a "good" excuse to give up and no longer attempt to achieve it.  (think of the difference between Nephi and Laman and Lemual in seeking the brass plates).  There is always a way prepared for each individual to be obedient to G-d.

I do not believe we ought to encourage anyone to give up on doing good because it is difficult or even more difficult in the circumstance than for others.  I believe a Saint of G-d has a greater obligation to encourage the keeping of commandments than to justify not keeping the commandments because it is difficult (or even more difficult than it is for others).  It is never good nor right to encourage anyone to turn their backs to keeping the commandments of G-d.  I do not believe that anyone need not prepare to marry for eternity according to the commandment of G-d.

 

The Traveler

Edited by Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Mores said:

This has happened historically for centuries (even millennia).  They were called arranged marriages or political marriages.  And they didn't result in divorce.  Aside from extreme cases such as abuse or adultery, etc. people divorce because they see an "out", not because it is difficult.

I had no idea that marriages were arranged for centuries. Thank you for telling me. I seriously didn't know that. No, really. I had no idea. None. I've gone from supporting gay marriage to being totally against it. Because of this. In fact, I'm going to start going to church again. And quit smoking. 


And oh yeah, it's 2019. Or 2018. I haven't checked lately. Or 2017. 

Sadly, divorce is more common now than at any time in our history. And I mean that seriously, divorce is a problem in our society. Yes, there are valid reasons for it. No, that doesn't mean a person is evil for getting divorced. But it's like eating a pineapple pizza. It's not a pleasant experience for anyone and the after effects can last for many years. And damage future generations. They lose their faith because of it. 

Getting married to a partner that you have no sexual attraction to is a horrible idea, and yes, it'll probably end in divorce.

Edited by MormonGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

I had no idea that marriages were arranged for centuries. Thank you for telling me.


And oh yeah, it's 2019. So....

Sadly, divorce is more common place now than at any time in our history. Getting married to a partner that you have no sexual attraction to is a horrible idea, and yes, it'll probably end in divorce. 

All marriage that is not done in G-d's name will end when men are dead - which is a type of divorce.  Having a marriage that will last is the great exception.

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Getting married to a partner that you have no sexual attraction to is a horrible idea, and yes, it'll probably end in divorce.

I think that's very true but only within the context of modern western culture.  

I have a Caucasian, American friend who married a Vietnamese girl through an arranged marriage.  Here's the story:

My buddy (we'll call him Tony) had married a girl from Vietnam a few years prior.  She had a cousin back home who was looking for a husband.  Enter our buddy (whom we'll call Jeff), who was single and feeling lonely.  Strings were pulled, phonecalls were made, one thing leads to another and pow... marriage arranged.  He goes to Vietnam to meet her, at which point he also formally accepts her to become his wife and they're married.  He brings her home to the U.S. where they get married again here.  (There's no international agreement between the U.S. and Vietnam to honor marriages done in the other country) Now, I am pretty sure that she had some agency in all this... She could have said no, although I suspect it would have cost her personally, and her reputation and the family's reputation may have suffered... but I'm not sure.  Either way, Jeff could have walked away at any time with no loss to him.

A few years go by and that marriage is in a state of total collapse.  I'll leave out the details but here's the thing... Other parts of the world do still practice arranged marriages and within the context of their cultures, it works.  Try to cross cultural boundaries and that's where you have trouble.  Here in the west in 2019 we have a radically different idea of marriage, to where any marriage that feels compelled is unthinkable.  We don't even do shotgun weddings anymore.  It just isn't in our cultural identity.  But that doesn't invalidate the practice of arranged marriage per se, it just doesn't work in this culture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, unixknight said:

I think that's very true but only within the context of modern western culture.  

Agree, and since most of us (most, yes, not all. Most. You live in the DC area so you don't count) live in America, it matters. 

 

Edited by MormonGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mores
14 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

I had no idea that marriages were arranged for centuries. Thank you for telling me. I seriously didn't know that. No, really. I had no idea. None. I've gone from supporting gay marriage to being totally against it. Because of this. In fact, I'm going to start going to church again. And quit smoking. 

And oh yeah, it's 2019. Or 2018. I haven't checked lately. Or 2017. 

Sadly, divorce is more common now than at any time in our history. And I mean that seriously, divorce is a problem in our society. Yes, there are valid reasons for it. No, that doesn't mean a person is evil for getting divorced. But it's like eating a pineapple pizza. It's not a pleasant experience for anyone and the after effects can last for many years. And damage future generations. They lose their faith because of it. 

Getting married to a partner that you have no sexual attraction to is a horrible idea, and yes, it'll probably end in divorce.

You made a case and offered logic behind it.  I pointed out historical evidence that the logic behind it is flawed.  You chose to respond sarcastically rather than addressing the actual point I made.

Why is divorce a problem? You offered in the previous post that one major cause is people not being attracted to each other.  I pointed out that was not the true reason, but only an excuse.

You said that having no sexual attraction to someone will result in divorce.  I say that people believing they have an out is the cause of divorce.

Your point may be considered accurate for the past couple of centuries (or less).  My point is accurate in any age.  Which point should we use to help people considering divorce?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Mores said:

 You chose to respond sarcastically 

Dude, chill. 

Both of us have massive egos, are convinced of our own moral superiority and spend 50-60 minutes a day looking in the mirror. 

Since we don't see eye to eye it'll be easier (and more fun!) to accuse the other of being "sarcastic" or "rude" and not seeing the humor-even attempted humor. 

35 minutes ago, Mores said:

Why is divorce a problem?

I'm going to let you answer that one.  

35 minutes ago, Mores said:

 Which point should we use to help people considering divorce?

We should understand that people getting married who aren't sexually attracted to one another can lead to problems down the road. No, a marriage isn't just about sex-but it's an important part to any successful marriage. 

Edited by MormonGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

 

We should understand that people getting married who aren't sexually attracted to one another can lead to problems down the road. No, a marriage isn't just about sex-but it's an important part to any successful marriage. 

This sounds logical on the surface but twisted when you scratch.  It stems from the hedonistic sexual revolution cow dung that has plagued modern society that posits sexual attraction is purely a byproduct of biology (natural man) and not Christian Love.  And even goes so far as to say Love cannot exist unless sexual attraction is there first.  I would posit that divorce happens not because sexual attraction is not present but Christian Love is not present.  And that with Christian Love, sexual expression can follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

This sounds logical on the surface but twisted when you scratch.  It stems from the hedonistic sexual revolution cow dung that has plagued modern society that posits sexual attraction is purely a byproduct of biology (natural man) and not Christian Love.  And even goes so far as to say Love cannot exist unless sexual attraction is there first.  I would posit that divorce happens not because sexual attraction is not present but Christian Love is not present.  And that with Christian Love, sexual expression can follow.

I think @MormonGator has a point though, in the way we in the West see this stuff. 

It's a fact that we're constantly bombarded with media and clothing styles meant to appeal to peoples' sexual desires, and it isn't just men.  Pick up any random romance novel, any drama TV show or movie, and most comedies... Somebody is getting cheated on.  It's our favorite source of drama as a culture, and boy, does this culture love to lure people away from their spouses.  We're surrounded by media that wants us to think about sex 24/7 if at all possible and so it's more critical now than ever before that the marriage be able to push back against it. 

If the bedroom cools down in a marriage then temptation has a much easier time getting in.  Even marriage counsellors and therapists will tell you exactly the same thing @MormonGator said.  

I agree with you that divorce has more to do with a lack of love than a lack of pouncing each other, but a bad sex life where there used to be a good one is one of the primary symptoms of that emotional loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, unixknight said:

I think @MormonGator has a point though, in the way we in the West see this stuff. 

It's a fact that we're constantly bombarded with media and clothing styles meant to appeal to peoples' sexual desires, and it isn't just men.  Pick up any random romance novel, any drama TV show or movie, and most comedies... Somebody is getting cheated on.  It's our favorite source of drama as a culture, and boy, does this culture love to lure people away from their spouses.  We're surrounded by media that wants us to think about sex 24/7 if at all possible and so it's more critical now than ever before that the marriage be able to push back against it. 

If the bedroom cools down in a marriage then temptation has a much easier time getting in.  Even marriage counsellors and therapists will tell you exactly the same thing @MormonGator said.  

I agree with you that divorce has more to do with a lack of love than a lack of pouncing each other, but a bad sex life where there used to be a good one is one of the primary symptoms of that emotional loss.

It’s not just that culture promotes cheating; it’s that it sets unrealistic expectations for what “love” and “marriage” are supposed to look like and the role they are supposed to play in one’s overall identity.  

When the final tallies are in, it may be that just as many divorces are attributable to Walt Disney as to Hugh Hefner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

It’s not just that culture promotes cheating; it’s that it sets unrealistic expectations for what “love” and “marriage” are supposed to look like and the role they are supposed to play in one’s overall identity.  

When the final tallies are in, it may be that just as many divorces are attributable to Walt Disney as to Hugh Hefner.

I think Hugh Hefner has caused much more damage than sweet little Disney movies ever could. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mores
 
 
 
5 hours ago, MormonGator said:

Dude, chill. 

I did.

 
 
 
5 hours ago, MormonGator said:

Both of us have massive egos, are convinced of our own moral superiority

Yup.

 
 
 
5 hours ago, MormonGator said:

and spend 50-60 minutes a day looking in the mirror. 

No, not more than 45 minutes.  Honest.

5 hours ago, MormonGator said:

Since we don't see eye to eye it'll be easier (and more fun!) to accuse the other of being "sarcastic" or "rude" and not seeing the humor-even attempted humor. 

Well, I went and looked back on the conversation and realized I threw the first sarcastic caveat.  So... sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new-fangled progressive gospel:

For the natural man is an enemy to God (except for sexual orientation), and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit (except in the case of sexual orientation), and putteth off the natural man (except for, of course, sexual orientation) and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him (unless it means marrying someone who doesn't sexually thrill you), even as a child doth submit to his father.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mores said:

This has happened historically for centuries (even millennia).  They were called arranged marriages or political marriages.  And they didn't result in divorce.  Aside from extreme cases such as abuse or adultery, etc. people divorce because they see an "out", not because it is difficult.

OK, but could you marry someone from a different sex that you didn't find attractive?  I know I couldn't.  

Just curious.  

I don't know if your example is in the same league.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MormonGator said:

Getting married to a partner that you have no sexual attraction to is a horrible idea, and yes, it'll probably end in divorce.

Your post had me chuckling. 

However, joking aside,  if you think the lack of sexual attraction makes marriage a horrible idea, then logically wouldn't that mean that the loss of sexual attraction would make staying in a marriage a horrible idea as well? Isn't the high divorce rate argument the same?

Where is the social sympathy for the high-powered males who marry raving beauties only to later find them gaining weight and wrinkles, sagging in places, and experiencing the unpleasantness of menopause, etc.  If these alpha types subsequently lose sexual interest in their spouses, particularly when there are willing, younger raving beauties about, should they not follow their heart and their sexual attractions? Many of them do now anyway--not just by way of divorce, but also adultery?.

To me, this is the problem with secular-social "reasoning." There is nothing to prevent  "immorality" creep" and the eventual normalization thereof.

Besides,  isn't the "high rate of divorce" argument a product of " immorality creep"--the increased acceptance of divorce and immoral sexual activities?  Prior to the gay movement in the mid 70, not a few gay men got married, and stayed married. It was only afterwards, when gays divorcing their heterosexual spouses became vogue, that the high rate of divorce became a factor. 

Supposed compassion and understanding made matters worse for gays.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited by wenglund

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

The new-fangled progressive gospel:

 


I'm not calling The Folk Prophet out specifically, but it is amazing to me how many conservatives on this forum (which shall remain name-less) condemn those with same gender attraction while refusing to even criticize the president (who should be a role model) for far greater sins including having sex with other people's wife's; cheating on his own wives (several times of course), committing marital rape, brag about grabbing women's "intimate parts" without consent, etc. 

 

Edited by Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now