Suzie

David Archuleta Reveals He Is Part Of LGBTQIA+ Community

Recommended Posts

Didn’t we know about this, like three years ago? Or am I thinking about some other LDS popular youth icon person…

Edited by NeuroTypical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Didn’t we know about this, like three years ago? Or am I thinking about some other LDS popular youth icon person…

Everyone called out his homosexuality when  he was on American Idol. He is really the only person of note in The Church that has come out. Stacy Harley came out lot too long ago, maybe you were thinking of him?

Edited by Fether

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a personal note, I certainly wish Archuleta the best.

On a broader cultural note:  I wonder whether we will ever see the day when men who publicly commit to chastity while maintaining that their attraction to children was God-created and God-approved, can get the same degree of sympathy and support and acceptance as men like Archuleta who publicly commit to chastity while maintaining that their attraction to other men was God-created and God-approved.

I rather don’t think we will.

Because I think that in our heart of hearts we all know that when someone says “this is how I was created and God doesn’t mind”—they are, consciously or not, laying the foundation to justify a future course of tangible action.

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

On a broader cultural note:  I wonder whether we will ever see the day when men who publicly commit to chastity while maintaining that their attraction to children was God-created and God-approved, can get the same degree of sympathy and support and acceptance as men like Archuleta who publicly commit to chastity while maintaining that their attraction to other men was God-created and God-approved.

I rather don’t think we will.

Because I think that in our heart of hearts we all know that when someone says “this is how I was created and God doesn’t mind”—they are, consciously or not, laying the foundation to justify a future course of tangible action.

Is my natural attraction to women God given? Is an attraction to the same gender god given or is it a form of mutation on what was intended?
 

the obvious answer is “we don’t know” but I naturally draw myself toward the idea that God didn’t have much of a direct control in our creation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Fether said:

Is my natural attraction to women God given? Is an attraction to the same gender god given or is it a form of mutation on what was intended?
 

the obvious answer is “we don’t know” but I naturally draw myself toward the idea that God didn’t have much of a direct control in our creation.

Agreed.  At any rate, the very doctrine of the Fall reminds us that the way we are isn’t necessarily the way we were intended to be.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Agreed.  At any rate, the very doctrine of the Fall reminds us that the way we are isn’t necessarily the way we were intended to be.  

I do always forget about the fall when considering these types of questions. It is a very simple, but true, answer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly wasn't surprised. I recall thinking in the past "Why hasn't that Archuleta boy been snatched up yet?" Then it became "Why hasn't that Archuleta boy been snatched up yet... by anyone?" Which then led me to theorize "Maybe he's just not interested enough..."

I do think it's fascinating with a tendency toward asexuality being part of this along with interest in both genders that such a thing like asexuality can be frowned upon by society. I think it's neat it's kind of working for him here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Because I think that in our heart of hearts we all know that when someone says “this is how I was created and God doesn’t mind”—they are, consciously or not, laying the foundation to justify a future course of tangible action.

In the community of folks "who walk around carrying this or that intrinsic ungodly predilection or orientation but can't see anything in their past that so burdened them", this notion is not widely accepted.  And the worse the burden (measured in negative consequences should the predilection or orientation be expressed), the fewer are in agreement.

Not everybody accepts the assumption made by the TV show Dexter.

To bring the notion down to practical reality, since alcoholism runs strongly in my wife's family, it's quite possible one or both of our offspring has the gene/weakness/predilection.  This is how God created them, and God doesn't mind.  We've let them know to watch out for this potential weakness and educated them about the increased odds of ruining their lives and relationships.  Other than living life with a slightly increased level of caution about the subject, neither kid seems to give the matter a second's thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

In the community of folks "who walk around carrying this or that intrinsic ungodly predilection or orientation but can't see anything in their past that so burdened them", this notion is not widely accepted.  And the worse the burden (measured in negative consequences should the predilection or orientation be expressed), the fewer are in agreement.

Not everybody accepts the assumption made by the TV show Dexter.

To bring the notion down to practical reality, since alcoholism runs strongly in my wife's family, it's quite possible one or both of our offspring has the gene/weakness/predilection.  This is how God created them, and God doesn't mind.  We've let them know to watch out for this potential weakness and educated them about the increased odds of ruining their lives and relationships.  Other than living life with a slightly increased level of caution about the subject, neither kid seems to give the matter a second's thought.

NT, would you mind rephrasing this?  I think I’m grasping a shadow of the point you’re trying to make, but it’s not quite clear to me (then again, maybe it’s just too early in the morning for me; and also the fact that I never watched Dexter!).  Thanks.  :) 

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

 

Not everybody accepts the assumption made by the TV show Dexter.

 

I never thought he was true psychopath myself. I think his dad assumed wrong and raised him accordingly. He made the "good psychopath for justice" Dexter's norm, which Dexter accepted, instead of getting the kid some proper therapy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I think I’m grasping a shadow of the point you’re trying to make, but it’s not quite clear to me (then again, maybe it’s just too early in the morning for me; and also the fact that I never watched Dexter!).  Thanks.  :) 

Sorry - I have an overabundance of highbrow notions in the morning.  Most of them don't survive the morning shower and remain worthy thoughts.  This one may eventually fall by the wayside too, time will tell.

Here's an attempt to rephrase: Yesterday's Elders Quorum lesson went well.  The instructor is a school teacher, who has dealt with an astounding amount of student mental health issues in the last year.  He brought in one of the signs that appear all over his school.  It said "Don't worry, you are good enough just the way you are."  He then opened the floor for comments, and we spent the whole hour trying to figure out how to crystalize our thoughts on the thing. 

Various salient points that were made, in no particular order: 
- It is not possible for a person to behave in a way that will result in God valuing or loving them less.
- Some folks out there have never been exposed to (or do not believe) the notion that God loves you.  Satan's lies are popular: "In order to be loved, you have to..."  "You can't come back from what you did."  For such folks, the sign's message is valuable.  

- Lots of voting to change "good enough" to "capable" or "able".
- Lots of discussion about how we should not stay where we currently are.
- Comparison is the destroyer of happiness.
- Sign ok when used for specific completed tasks.  Sign horrible when thinking about a life plan, or upcoming necessary tasks.
- Yes, the notion "this paves the way to justify bad things" saw a lot of discussion and widespread support.

We never really got to any sort of statement that covered our response, that covered every aspect of this sign.  For every declarative or blanket statement, there were always exceptions or other facets not covered by the statement.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Fether said:

Is my natural attraction to women God given? Is an attraction to the same gender god given or is it a form of mutation on what was intended?
 

the obvious answer is “we don’t know” but I naturally draw myself toward the idea that God didn’t have much of a direct control in our creation.

I do not want to create condemnation but there are things that are scientifically obvious that do not seem to be socially obvious.  There has been a great deal of research into behaviors and how different species acquire behaviors.  But before I go there I would point out that the scientific definition of intelligence is the ability to learn and alter cognitive behaviors or cognitive responses.  It is obvious that one must be cognitive or aware for controllable behavior or response.  In the human species there are three physical neurological responses - the sympathetic and the parasympathetic both of these systems are associated to cognitive awareness.  Sexual arousal is well defined as a parasympathetic response that can be altered by what is called the lowest cognitive levels of learning.  This was proven by the famous Pavlov's dog experiments.  The third system is called enteric and has nothing to add to this discussion.

The point is that science has demonstrated that parasympathetic responses (including sexual arousal) can be alter and controlled by various learning processes - including the lowest cognitive level of learning.  The other point that demonstrates that sexual arousals are not "G-d" given or genetic imbedded responses in the human species is the vast variety or means by which individuals are sexually aroused. 

At this point I will add my personal conjecture for a reason that sexual attractions may seem unobvious is because - like with Pavlov's dog we may not be aware when and how we are acquiring various parasympathetic responses.  This can also accrue with various fears, like fear of spiders, heights, fire or any number of fears.  In addition in 1973 the American Psychiatric Association, without what I would consider a viable explanation, defined sexual attractions as a none treatable behavior - despite knowing full well that sexual attractions are parasympathetic.   It would seem that in our modern society that many scientist are not very scientific.

Something else that we need to understand is that any cognitive behaviors that are directly connected to the release of endorphins present unique problems in learning override behaviors; especially when addictions are involved at any of many levels.

The final thought I would add is that of "Agency".  As a firm believer in the LDS doctrine of agency - I believe that G-d has given the human species (with the cognitive ability to be "accountable") the power of agency.  The primary concern I have for the LBGTQ+ community is a claim that their responses are not within their ability of agency.  It is my personal belief that one can lose their agency - I am not sure that the loss of agency is something that can be completed in this life.    I could be convinced on way or the other by significant scientific evidence or by revelation that is confirmed to by by the Holy Ghost - that has not happened to my understanding.

I remain unconvinced that a railing accusation is NOT the best or primary means to call anyone to repentance -rather from the D&C 121:

Quote

41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;

42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—

43 Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy;

44 That he may know that thy faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death.

45 Let thy bowels also be full of charity towards all men, and to the household of faith, and let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly; then shall thy confidence wax strong in the presence of God; and the doctrine of the priesthood shall distil upon thy soul as the dews from heaven.

 

The Traveler

Edited by Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is why can some people look at attractive individuals and not feel any arousal while others look at individuals and it becomes sexual attraction? Why does it become a sexual attraction? Also how is it that some people can be so very happily married to someone who is not physically attractive and produce children with them when sexual attraction is so darned important- like so important that it defines the very labels and identity we give ourselves!? (sarcasm alert)
 

I feel pity for David because if he decides  to lay hold onto what little attraction he has for women in order to obtain the family he wants, he will have to fight the world and community that wants him for their own. He’s kind of a meek guy. I’m not sure he’s strong enough for that fight. The cat’s out of the bag and it’s not ever getting back in!! 

Edited by carlimac

Share this post


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

The cat’s out of the bag and it’s not ever getting back in!! 

I do not understand why people share such intimacies with the world. On an anonymous discussion list, I can understand. But to broadcast it as if it were newsworthy? What on earth are people thinking?

But this observation probably belongs in the modesty thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, carlimac said:

My question is why can some people look at attractive individuals and not feel any arousal while others look at individuals and it becomes sexual attraction? Why does it become a sexual attraction? Also how is it that some people can be so very happily married to someone who is not physically attractive and produce children with them when sexual attraction is so darned important- like so important that it defines the very labels and identity we give ourselves!? (sarcasm alert)
 

I feel pity for David because if he decides  to lay hold onto what little attraction he has for women in order to obtain the family he wants, he will have to fight the world and community that wants him for their own. He’s kind of a meek guy. I’m not sure he’s strong enough for that fight. The cat’s out of the bag and it’s not ever getting back in!! 

Both Pavlov and Skinner demonstrated that learning by association (lowest cognitive level of learning) that we may not be aware of the association - thus we may wonder, as the dog, why we are salivating when a light is turned on.   Freud believed that there was a lot of learning going on in infancy and because mothers are the primary care givers that mothers are critical to a child's learning.  Other research has demonstrated that learning is taking place in the womb even before a child is born.   As I stated before - because there are so many varied physical attractions is strong evidence that such types of behaviors are learned or acquired.  If a behavior does not vary across a species it is evidence that such behavior is not acquired but rather genetically imbedded (aka - from G-d).

As for Dave - I believe he has to power to make choices.  I also believe that we make choices difficult by our own inner conflicts that we create for ourselves.  Mostly I fell sad because our society has made it impossible for David to get professional help if he wants to change his sexual conflicts with his chosen religion.  Thus he is only left with his own devises and his personal faith.   I believe that there are ways David can be helped but any help has been defined, not only as bad or evil but illegal.  I believe this creates more inner conflict that leads to more inner inabilities to deal with such issues.

 

The Traveler

Edited by Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Vort said:

I do not understand why people share such intimacies with the world. On an anonymous discussion list, I can understand. But to broadcast it as if it were newsworthy? What on earth are people thinking?

....

I believe it feeds into learned relationship.  They are incentivized by the relationships they trust and respect the most.  Thus they broadcast what gives them the feedback they most desire or believe to be appropriate from those they believe or trust to respond. 

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Traveler said:

I believe it feeds into learned relationship.  They are incentivized by the relationships they trust and respect the most.  Thus they broadcast what gives them the feedback they most desire or believe to be appropriate from those they believe or trust to respond. 

 

The Traveler

That, and we just live in a society where things like this are more open now. We can talk about sexuality, mental illness, and things that were considered "taboo" just a few years ago. I'm not saying I think it's all good-I don't, some things should be kept private-but it's not the world we live in now.

To be clear, I don't think sexuality and mental illness are among those "things" we should be quiet about.  

Edited by LDSGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/14/2021 at 8:28 AM, NeuroTypical said:

"Don't worry, you are good enough just the way you are." 

Just out of curiosity. Did anyone happen to express the fact that this statement is, for all but the Savior Himself, 100%, absolutely, totally wrong?

Edited by The Folk Prophet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:
On 6/14/2021 at 7:28 AM, NeuroTypical said:

"Don't worry, you are good enough just the way you are." 

Just out of curiosity. Did anyone happen to express the fact that this statement is, for all but the Savior Himself, 100%, absolutely, totally wrong?

I guess the question is, "Good enough for what?" Good enough to be worth the air you breathe? Sure. Good enough for the rest of eternity? Nope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/14/2021 at 12:31 AM, Fether said:

Is my natural attraction to women God given? Is an attraction to the same gender god given or is it a form of mutation on what was intended?
the obvious answer is “we don’t know” but I naturally draw myself toward the idea that God didn’t have much of a direct control in our creation.

No.  We DO know.  Scriptures are replete with such references.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/14/2021 at 8:07 AM, Backroads said:

I honestly wasn't surprised. I recall thinking in the past "Why hasn't that Archuleta boy been snatched up yet?" Then it became "Why hasn't that Archuleta boy been snatched up yet... by anyone?" Which then led me to theorize "Maybe he's just not interested enough..."

I do think it's fascinating with a tendency toward asexuality being part of this along with interest in both genders that such a thing like asexuality can be frowned upon by society. I think it's neat it's kind of working for him here.

I guess my gaydar was a bit more accurate than others.  I heard some of his songs.  Sounded nice.  But once I saw him in an interview, I thought, "Is he gay?"  Seriously.  It was the first question that popped into my head.  And it's not like I'm constantly wondering that about everyone I ever see.  It just came into my head all on its own.

No judgment included.  He just seemed like it -as much as when I look at someone and immediately determine if they are male or female.

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