Sign in to follow this  
Phineas

Tolerance vs inclusion.

Recommended Posts

Is it just me or is the word “tolerance” not used as much these days?  The word “inclusion” seems to be thrown around more often. 
 

Tolerance, as I understand it, means that we disagree with each other and have different sets of values but we all strive to get along and live with each other nonetheless.

Inclusion seems to mean that we change our beliefs in order to accommodate others.  When it comes to LGBT issues, it seems the church is no longer being asked to be tolerant.  It would appear we are being asked to change in order be more inclusive.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tolerance is for the weak. As long as the political left formed a minority, they were all for tolerance. Now that (they believe) they have a majority of the population behind them, tolerance is no longer seen as a virtue. Inclusion is the watchword, and those who fail to conform merit whatever social or even legal consequences that can be applied to them to leverage them into compliance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me or is the word “tolerance” not used as much these days?  The word “inclusion” seems to be thrown around more often. 

Inclusion seems to mean that we change our beliefs in order to accommodate others.  When it comes to LGBT issues, it seems the church is no longer being asked to be tolerant.  It would appear we are being asked to change in order be more inclusive.

Well, if we check the official Church web site about this topic this is what you will see:

 

529784776_Same-Sex_Attraction__Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints_-_2021-06-18_18_54_49.thumb.png.abd108b86e4ddc397072d751824ab212.png

Inclusion doesn't mean you have to agree,  it means we truly put in practice 2 Nephi 26:33 " For none of these iniquities come of the Lord; for he doeth that which is good among the children of men; and he doeth nothing save it be plain unto the children of men; and he ainviteth them ball to ccome unto him and partake of his goodness; and he ddenieth none that come unto him, black and white, ebond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the fheathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile. "

From the same web site:

How can I include or reach out to those who experience same-sex attraction in my ward or stake?

 
 
“Do we teach the Proclamation on the Family? Do we teach Heavenly Father’s plan? Do we teach the first chapter in the second handbook? Yes, we do. We have a plan of salvation. And having children come into our lives is part of Heavenly Father’s plan. But let us be at the forefront in terms of expressing love, compassion, and outreach to those. And let’s not have families exclude or be disrespectful of those who choose a different lifestyle as a result of their feelings about their own gender. I feel very strongly about this, as you can tell. I think it’s a very important principle.” —Elder Quentin L. Cook
 

Share this post


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

 

....

How can I include or reach out to those who experience same-sex attraction in my ward or stake?

 
,,,,,

There is a problem with youth involved with LGBTQ+  -- There are few parents that encourage their children to befriend other children with gender confusion on the same level as other relationships.  For example, sleep overs and unsupervised activities are off the table.  I recall raising my kids and confronting situations with friends with standards contrary to principles and values we were trying to teach our children.  The list was quite long - from word of wisdom to shoplifting to pornography and cutting classes at school. 

In short, I tend to withdraw from those intent on criticizing or altering my personal standards.  But I (and my wife) also have friends that are gay that do not try to convince us of anything other than friendship.

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been thinking about this thread.  I agree that we should be open and kind towards all that come to church to worship G-d.   @Suziehas provided some very good links about being kind to the LGBTQ+ community.  But I must admit that beyond being kind - I have no idea what to do with LGBTQ+ individuals within the church community????  Especially involving youth?????

If a biological male (or female) wishes to be identified as the other gender - If they are youth, how should the other youth respond.  Do we encourage attendance according to their biological or preferred gender for priesthood or young women?  How are we to be inclusive for summer camps or sleep overs?  If they are an adult - do they attend Relief Society or Priesthood?  Do they go to where they feel most comfortable?  Regardless of anyone else's comfort level?

I am not sure I understand what it means to be inclusive with someone that identifies as LGBTQ+

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I hear the word tolerance I am reminded of this talk from Elder Packer, "These Things I know," and the following quote from it, "Tolerance is a virtue, but like all virtues, when exaggerated, it transforms itself into a vice. We need to be careful of the “tolerance trap” so that we are not swallowed up in it. The permissiveness afforded by the weakening of the laws of the land to tolerate legalized acts of immorality does not reduce the serious spiritual consequence that is the result of the violation of God’s law of chastity."

Yes, I agree that we are no longer hearing about tolerance, but inclusion -- unless you're religious and you adhere to the doctrinal truths (as God sees it). There appears to be two types of "inclusion" in our world. The one @Vort portrayed, and the one @Suzie portrayed.

God, and His Son Jesus Christ, are the most inclusive beings in this world, and yet as the most inclusive beings in this world there is an Outer Darkness, Telestial Kingdom, Terrestrial Kingdom, and Celestial Kingdom (which kingdom has three separate levels itself). There are laws which can't be broken, or as Elder Packer suggested, "serious spiritual consequences," and being inclusive doesn't change the laws given by God.

So, to be frank/honest, I'm not sure the boundary of inclusion. I have read that Zion will be a place for the righteous and the wicked will flee from it. Is that the same inclusiveness spoken by Elder Cook? Note the scripture shared and highlight the point given, "come unto me." When people come unto Christ -- they repent, which means they repent of anything that is contrary to the will of God.

We are so inclusive now that women (as ONLY women bear children) are now deemed as "birthing people." In order to be inclusive, should I now refer to my wife as simply a birthing person, so that women who want to be men (as it is a choice) can feel included? So now, my children should call -- mom and dad -- birthers. Talk about a confused world we live in.

EDIT:

This is what bothers me about the canceling of priesthood general conference. Was this accomplished in order to try to be more inclusive to a ever 'whining' crowd, or was this something truly done because God inspired it. Remember, not everything a prophet and apostle will do is because it is the right thing. Sometimes God takes away something because of sin, or because of some other matter. God doesn't want to lose the wheat among the tares, so to speak, and thus a decision is made.

Edited by Anddenex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and the one @Suzie portrayed.

@Anddenex I just wanted to clarify that the information related to inclusion isn't Suzie's personal opinion but it came straight from the official Church web site. The following (and more) is found there:

1. The Church does not take any position on the cause of same-sex attraction.

2. Feelings of same sex-attractions are not sinful and some people may not choose to have these feelings  (Elder Ballard).

3. Acting on these feelings is sinful.

4. " The parent of a child who experiences same-sex attraction or identifies as gay should choose to love and embrace that child. As a community of Church members, we should choose to create a welcoming community." (Elder Ballard, from the same web site)

" And we want people to feel that they have a home here. That we have much, much more in common than anything that’s different about us." (Elder D. Todd Christofferson)

“I think that the lesson that I learned from that is that as a church, nobody should be more loving and compassionate. No family who has anybody who has a same-gender issue should exclude them from the family circle. They need to be part of the family circle.” —(Elder Quentin L. Cook )

Are there restrictions on Church participation for members who identify as gay or experience same-sex attraction?

“Someone who is adhering to the norm of chastity, someone who is following the covenants, and the standards, teachings of the gospel of Christ, though they may be dealing with same-sex attraction, really there is no reason they cannot be fully participative, that they can’t be a full-fledged member of the Church, and hold callings, and speak, and enter the temple, and serve there, and all the other opportunities and blessings that can come from Church membership will be available to them.

“There are examples of this among Church members. There are multiple examples. And though no one would say it is always easy, all of us are endeavoring to maintain those norms and keep our covenants. And we’re all in the same boat, in the same company in that regard. So, I say there are many, relatively speaking, who are finding that success in their lives, and that happiness.” —Elder D. Todd Christofferson

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/topics/gay/leaders?lang=eng

Share this post


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

I am not sure I understand what it means to be inclusive with someone that identifies as LGBTQ+

The Traveler

It makes for a tricky situation to be sure. Partly because we identify certain eternal truths with certain societal norms that it's tough to pull them apart. A couple years ago we had a young woman transition (no pun intended) from primary to young women's but who always wanted to be doing what the young men were doing during mutual. I think largely because she was surrounded by boys at home and that was the kind of activity she grew up with. But the young women leaders would come and gather her up to participate with the young women. I think in time she came to appreciate the young women's activities but I remember thinking at the time that it must be hard to want to do what the boys are doing but told she can't because she was a girl. The gospel of Jesus Christ does not say girls have to prefer sewing over dodgeball. There have always been more feminine boys and more masculine girls and there is nothing wrong with that. Part of it is I think nurture and part I think is nature (temporally speaking) and I think there ought to be accomodations for that. But it can never be allowed to overshadow the eternal truth of who we are. Gender is not fluid, but eternal, and for those wishing to participate there must be the recognition that while they deserve to be treated with love and kindness like everyone else the tenets of our faith will not be compromised. I think this is where the new youth programs are truly inspired. Instead of youth being told what they ought to pursue (whether with scouts or young women awards) youth now choose their own goals that allow them to pursue their own interests but still within the framework of the gospel. There will still be difficult situations to address but I think the Lord has provided His church a much better structure to deal with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/18/2021 at 1:52 PM, Phineas said:

Is it just me or is the word “tolerance” not used as much these days?  The word “inclusion” seems to be thrown around more often. 
 

Tolerance, as I understand it, means that we disagree with each other and have different sets of values but we all strive to get along and live with each other nonetheless.

Inclusion seems to mean that we change our beliefs in order to accommodate others.  When it comes to LGBT issues, it seems the church is no longer being asked to be tolerant.  It would appear we are being asked to change in order be more inclusive.  

 

This is a complicated balancing act. Tolerance portrays the concept of non-acceptance or viewing
something as being wrong whereas inclusion could also give one the impression that their actions
are okay from God's view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A friend sent this over and I thought it applied nicely to this thread. 

Quote

Though gradually, though no one remembers exactly how it happened, the unthinkable becomes tolerable. And then acceptable. And then legal. And then applaudable.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

President Ezra Taft Benson from a talk from 1971 entitled, Satan's Thrust - Youth

Quote

A state of confusion is an effective environment for Satan. There is much confusion today. He employs several methods to create it. One is the distortion of definitions...

Tolerance is a word valuable in the service of Satan.
Alexander Pope warned 200 years ago that:

‘Vice is a monster of so frightful mien
As to be hated needs but to be seen;
Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face,
We first endure, then pity, then embrace.’

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/18/2021 at 11:52 AM, Phineas said:

Is it just me or is the word “tolerance” not used as much these days?  The word “inclusion” seems to be thrown around more often. 
 

The way it's been SJW-splained to me is that tolerance is just pretending to care.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Backroads said:

The way it's been SJW-splained to me is that tolerance is just pretending to care.

 

The real meaning is even less than that. It’s choosing to not care at all. not be offended by it, fight it, or love it.

Edited by Fether

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Suzie said:

and the one @Suzie portrayed.

@Anddenex I just wanted to clarify that the information related to inclusion isn't Suzie's personal opinion but it came straight from the official Church web site. The following (and more) is found there:

Yes, that is correct, and I didn't mention it because I thought it was self-evident from your original response; however, your clarification might be good for others who are reading through the thread.

The official Church thoughts is why I mentioned the concept of Zion where the righteous dwell and the wicked flee from (Is that inclusive in light of what Elder Cook mentioned?). It is also why I mentioned the kingdoms of glory which is official Church doctrine. We are discussing the concept of inclusion, while the most inclusive being (glorified being) will ultimately judge his offspring, his heirs, and they will be divided into kingdoms. According to the worldview, as Vort mentioned (and the OP), this isn't inclusive at all.

Official Church doctrine is that we are to call sinners to repentance. In our worldview, modern age, to call a sinner to repentance is an act of intolerance and a lack of inclusivity of a person's chosen lifestyle. This is also why I mentioned I am confused as to the boundary of inclusion within the Church, and in the world we live in. If we truly love our children we will do all we can to keep them on the covenant path. That means we call sinners to repentance, which isn't tolerant or inclusive according to the current worldview.

Share this post


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

Official Church doctrine is that we are to call sinners to repentance. In our worldview, modern age, to call a sinner to repentance is an act of intolerance and a lack of inclusivity of a person's chosen lifestyle. This is also why I mentioned I am confused as to the boundary of inclusion within the Church, and in the world we live in. If we truly love our children we will do all we can to keep them on the covenant path. That means we call sinners to repentance, which isn't tolerant or inclusive according to the current worldview.

Amen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a biological male (or female) wishes to be identified as the other gender - If they are youth, how should the other youth respond.  Do we encourage attendance according to their biological or preferred gender for priesthood or young women?  How are we to be inclusive for summer camps or sleep overs?  If they are an adult - do they attend Relief Society or Priesthood?  Do they go to where they feel most comfortable?  Regardless of anyone else's comfort level?

I am not sure I understand what it means to be inclusive with someone that identifies as LGBTQ+.

I think it is completely understandable. The Church has been publishing tons of information online about Church activity and members of the LGBTQ+ community. In many cases such as those who identify themselves as transgender, the areas presidencies are involved:

How Can I Participate In The Church?

All are welcome to attend sacrament meeting, other Sunday meetings, and social events of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. There are many ways to participate at church both in Sunday meetings and in other capacities such as callings and committees. You are encouraged to attend, be active, and look for opportunities to share your talents and skills by serving in your ward and stake. All who attend are expected to avoid creating disruptions or distractions contrary to worship or other purposes of the meeting.
 
Since circumstances vary greatly from ward to ward and from person to person, bishops and stake presidents counsel with Area Presidencies to determine how to address individual situations sensitively, such as the use of restrooms and attendance at various meetings and activities.
 
Most Church participation and some priesthood ordinances are gender neutral. Examples include being baptized and confirmed, partaking of the sacrament, and receiving priesthood blessings. However, priesthood ordination and temple ordinances are administered according to birth sex.
 
What is the Church's position on transitioning?
 
Leaders also counsel against social transitioning. A social transition includes changing dress or grooming, or changing a name or pronouns, to present oneself as other than his or her birth sex. Leaders advise that those who socially transition will experience some Church membership restrictions for the duration of this transition.

Restrictions include receiving or exercising the priesthood, receiving or using a temple recommend, and receiving some Church callings. Although some privileges of Church membership are restricted, other Church participation is welcomed.

Transgender individuals who do not pursue medical, surgical, or social transition to the opposite gender and are worthy may receive Church callings, temple recommends, and temple ordinances.

Some children, youth, and adults are prescribed hormone therapy by a licensed medical professional to ease gender dysphoria or reduce suicidal thoughts. Before a person begins such therapy, it is important that he or she (and the parents of a minor) understands the potential risks and benefits. If these members are not attempting to transition to the opposite gender and are worthy, they may receive Church callings, temple recommends, and temple ordinances.

If a member decides to change his or her preferred name or pronouns of address, the name preference may be noted in the preferred name field on the membership record. The person may be addressed by the preferred name in the ward.

The Church does not take a position on the causes of people identifying themselves as transgender.” (General Handbook, 38.6.21)
 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Official Church doctrine is that we are to call sinners to repentance. In our worldview, modern age, to call a sinner to repentance is an act of intolerance and a lack of inclusivity of a person's chosen lifestyle. This is also why I mentioned I am confused as to the boundary of inclusion within the Church, and in the world we live in. If we truly love our children we will do all we can to keep them on the covenant path. That means we call sinners to repentance, which isn't tolerant or inclusive according to the current worldview.

Yes, we are 100%. Including ourselves, let us not forget that. We all sin differently and we know that God "cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance”. I feel as though sometimes we are quick to point out the sinful lifestyle of others while we have our own skeletons in the closet. I'm grateful for a loving Heavenly Father who knows our hearts.

Having said that, we cannot force others to keep on the covenant path no matter how much we love them.  But showing disdain, anger, intolerance or bitterness isn't the way. And no, we don't have to behave this way in order to show we don't agree with what others are doing (do we even have time to do that while we deal with our own sins and imperfections?).

We influence others by our example, by our love and compassion... and if you noticed, all the information the Church put out there are based on these two principles. It isn't by chance, it isn't to appease the gay community but because they know how some members feel about this topic and they also know how our LGTBQ+ members feel when they come to Church and encounter gossip, rejection and harsh judgments. Sometimes, I feel a bit discouraged (not about this topic particularly but generally)...we could do so much better about how we treat others. It's almost like we know all the scriptures, all the theory, all the golden answers...but then we fall so short in being understanding of other people's burdens. But we are all a work in progress...

I suppose this is the reason why Apostle D. Todd Christofferson feels strongly about this topic because his own brother Tom is gay and left the Church many years ago, and was in a relationship with a male doctor. Elder Christofferson never stopped showing his brother love, kindness and respect even though he was living with a man and this is an Apostle of the Lord. Elder Christofferson even called him when the Church changed the 2015 policy that automatically labeled Mormons in same-sex marriages as apostates and barred their minor children from being baptized. Tom returned to the Church after decades! His brother had an admirable kind and compassionate influence on him, this is what we all need to do!

The Church has a difficult road ahead with this topic, I just hope we don't lose focus on how we should treat one another.

 

Edited by Suzie
Added extra information about Tom.

Share this post


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

Transgender individuals who do not pursue medical, surgical, or social transition to the opposite gender and are worthy may receive Church callings, temple recommends, and temple ordinances.

To expand on Suzie's quote, and just to reinforce what is and what is not being said [emphasis added]:

Handbook 26.5.7:

Worthy members who identify as transgender but do not pursue a medical, surgical, or social transition to the gender opposite of their biological sex at birth (“sex reassignment”) may receive a temple recommend and temple ordinances.

Temple ordinances are received according to a person’s biological sex at birth. For this reason, the following members may not receive a temple recommend, including a limited-use recommend:

  • Members who have received elective medical or surgical intervention for the purpose of attempting to transition

  • Members who have socially transitioned to the gender opposite of their biological sex at birth

In other words, if you feel gender dysphoria and thus identify as "transgender", the mere identification of self as such is not considered something that prevents temple attendance. But acting on those feelings, as in pursuing even a "social transition to the gender opposite of [one's] biological sex at birth", does indeed preclude temple attendance.

I'm all for showing love and tolerance at Church, and for that matter in all aspects of our lives. That is what Christ would do, and what each of us should do who have taken his name. I confess that I am bothered by the seemingly unmitigated hypocrisy of those Saints who insist on criticizing, berating, and pointing out the flaws of their fellow Saints who are uncomfortable with open displays of homosexuality or gender dysphoria, yet themselves exhibit discomfort with displays of e.g. pedophilic or racist tendencies. Such virtue-signaling strikes me as pride-based and phony.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other words, if you feel gender dysphoria and thus identify as "transgender", the mere identification of self as such is not considered something that prevents temple attendance. But acting on those feelings, as in pursuing even a "social transition to the gender opposite of [one's] biological sex at birth", does indeed preclude temple attendance.

Correct. It is interesting because this is the part where I think things can get rather confusing. First, the Church says:

“Leaders also counsel against social transitioning. A social transition includes changing dress or grooming, or changing a name or pronouns, to present oneself as other than his or her birth sex. Leaders advise that those who socially transition will experience some Church membership restrictions for the duration of this transition.

Restrictions include receiving or exercising the priesthood, receiving or using a temple recommend, and receiving some Church callings.”

But then says this:

“If a member decides to change his or her preferred name or pronouns of address, the name preference may be noted in the preferred name field on the membership record. The person may be addressed by the preferred name in the ward.”

I know why the Church is doing it but I think it can be confusing/taken the wrong way.

Edited by Suzie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Suzie said:
Quote

 

“Leaders also counsel against social transitioning. A social transition includes changing dress or grooming, or changing a name or pronouns, to present oneself as other than his or her birth sex. Leaders advise that those who socially transition will experience some Church membership restrictions for the duration of this transition. Restrictions include receiving or exercising the priesthood, receiving or using a temple recommend, and receiving some Church callings.”

“If a member decides to change his or her preferred name or pronouns of address, the name preference may be noted in the preferred name field on the membership record. The person may be addressed by the preferred name in the ward.”

 

I know why the Church is doing it but I think it can be confusing/taken the wrong way.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. 

  • Why is the Church doing ... what? 
  • What can be taken the wrong way? 
  • What is it "really" saying?  vs.
  • How would some people take it that would be incorrect?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Came across this video by Elder Bednar. If you are going to watch it, you need to watch it all because the title alone could make you think 'X' but he is actually try to say 'Y'.
Anyways, I enjoyed this part in particular:

Quote

A related point is that there is a divinely designed difference between a female spirit and a male spirit. You need to read and study over and over again the family proclamation. It teaches that gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal and eternal identity and purpose. Whenever you take those divinely designed differences - the capacities and talents of a female spirit and a male spirit, and they are sealed together by the power of the priesthood it creates a unity and oneness, a whole that can not be achieved by any other way. 

 

Edited by NeedleinA

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
Sign in to follow this