Homosexuality: Disorder

[Dannyk]

So is gossip. And pride. Anger. Theft. Lying. Worship of a god other than God. Many active LDS people are guilty of these sins, yet because these sins aren't as socially unacceptable as homosexuality is among our culture, they are perceived as less harmful. I have good friends who are homosexual, they are moral, decent, and honorable people in spite of their choice to live in a sexually destructive manner. Because my gay professor friend sins differently than I do doesn't mean I can treat him with any less love and acceptance than I do my wife's judgmental and pious family.

:eta:

I am using the word pious here like the Zoramites were pious, not as the Ammonites were.

This. There is no limit to the number of ways that people sin. I generally stay away from these threads because they are generally rabid with people lined up to cast their first stone. I have learned that the people most fervent about the subject are generally those with the most issues overall. Another disorder is people who are unwilling to extend mercy, love, or compassion, and yet think they themselves will fill the heavenly halls. That's insane. I remember an article in the KSL about a number of Homeless kids (yes KIDS!) in Salt Lake being kicked out by their parents after being told they "were" homosexual (feelings/tendencies), keeping up appearances seems to be more important than their covenant duty to rear their offspring.

Thanks, both of you!

I can only imagine the paradigm shift that any of us would have if our own children came to us saying they were homosexual or had SSA tendencies. I think it is good for us to ask ourselves, "Based on my rhetoric and the way I discuss this issue, if my child was secretly dealing with this, would my words be causing them shame and depression beyond what they already feel for having these feelings they don't understand and have most definitely tried to pray away? Would they be more likely or less likely to feel loved? Would they be more likely or less likely to be suicidal? And when they come out, will I be the kind that sends them out on the streets to keep appearances, or will I insist on changing them (which causes even more depression and despair)?"

I'd be more inclined to listen to some commenters if I knew one of your children struggled with SSA, and that you'd really had to wrestle with the reality instead of the hypothetical. I can't help but wonder how much of this "disorder" (like all the mental illness) comes from the way the rest of us treat those who struggle with this.

It's also worth noting that despite your quoting of a "Born Gay" urban legend...studies in recent years have shown remarkable similarities between gay men that are not found at large in heterosexual men. Simple things like the direction of their cowlick in their hair (clockwise vs. counter-clockwise), the length of their index finger to their ring finger (if I remember, gay men are more likely to have a longer index finger compared to their ring finger, where as most men have a longer ring finger). There are a few other things I remember reading in a study...but it's been a few years. But it was interesting to note that a statistically significant number of gay men differed from straight men in a few related genetic markers. It would be like discovering that gay men are statistically more likely to be left handed than straight men. Though that doesn't mean you've found a "gay gene" it does suggest a number of genetic similarities that gay men share that their straight counterparts do not.

I support the church's stance on marriage. I also worry less about the actions of gay people than whether or not my own actions and words will help them feel the love of God and follow Christ in whatever way they are ready for. The best part is...God is a perfect judge and will judge righteously. If it turns out that people truly are born this way, than He will judge them fairly based on their genetic tendencies and the unique problems that generated for them (problems the rest of us may not have to deal with). If it turns out they aren't born gay but it is because of environment or abuse...God will take that into consideration and judge them perfectly. If it turns out they simply chose that lifestyle of outside any influence...he'll judge them perfectly for that too. He'll do the same with me and my unique family situation. I trust completely in God to be both just and merciful in a way that will be appropriate for all.

[jnjnelson]

I'd be more inclined to listen to some commenters if I knew one of your children struggled with SSA, and that you'd really had to wrestle with the reality instead of the hypothetical. I can't help but wonder how much of this "disorder" (like all the mental illness) comes from the way the rest of us treat those who struggle with this.

I believe anyone who currently has children in this society inevitably finds the need to explain same gender attraction to their children. If parents do not explain sexual morality clearly and with the Spirit, their children are much more likely to struggle with sexual sin. That is the nature of the adversary's fight against our agency.

I have seven children. I have found the need to explain same gender attraction to my children at the same time that they learn about the birds and the bees, merely because the topic comes up among their friends. When discussing same gender attraction with my children, the words of Elder Oaks have been very helpful to me.

The distinction between feelings or inclinations on the one hand, and behavior on the other hand, is very clear. It’s no sin to have inclinations that if yielded to would produce behavior that would be a transgression. The sin is in yielding to temptation.
…
The Church does not have a position on the causes of any of these susceptibilities or inclinations, including those related to same-gender attraction.

The cause of same gender attraction doesn't really matter. What matters is that each individual understands the distinction between inclinations (or feelings) and behavior. If children don't understand that they have agency over what happens to them throughout their life, they will not assert that agency and make good choices, and they will be controlled by their feelings and inclinations instead of controlling their feelings and inclinations.

I have one son in particular who is struggling to understand this principle of having control over himself, rather than being controlled by his feelings and inclinations. He has been told by others that they think he might be "gay", and, thankfully, my relationship with him is such that he talks to me about it. He struggles with very strong feelings and inclinations. I am confident, however, that as I teach him the principles of the gospel, he will be more able to make correct choices.

I don't like labeling any struggle my children have as a "disorder", even if doing so helps medical professionals do their job. Labels can be too damaging to a child's understanding of agency. Children who are labelled learn that they have no control over their behavior, which is a nefarious idea and an evil and incorrect principle.

I think it is an accurate statement to say that some people consider feelings of same-gender attraction to be the defining fact of their existence. There are also people who consider the defining fact of their existence that they are from Texas or that they were in the United States Marines. Or they are red-headed, or they are the best basketball player that ever played for such-and-such a high school. People can adopt a characteristic as the defining example of their existence and often those characteristics are physical.

We have the agency to choose which characteristics will define us; those choices are not thrust upon us.

The ultimate defining fact for all of us is that we are children of Heavenly Parents, born on this earth for a purpose, and born with a divine destiny. Whenever any of those other notions, whatever they may be, gets in the way of that ultimate defining fact, then it is destructive and it leads us down the wrong path.

[SpeedRacer]

I can only imagine the paradigm shift that any of us would have if our own children came to us saying they were homosexual or had SSA tendencies. I think it is good for us to ask ourselves, "Based on my rhetoric and the way I discuss this issue, if my child was secretly dealing with this, would my words be causing them shame and depression beyond what they already feel for having these feelings they don't understand and have most definitely tried to pray away? Would they be more likely or less likely to feel loved? Would they be more likely or less likely to be suicidal? And when they come out, will I be the kind that sends them out on the streets to keep appearances, or will I insist on changing them (which causes even more depression and despair)?"

...

I support the church's stance on marriage. I also worry less about the actions of gay people than whether or not my own actions and words will help them feel the love of God and follow Christ in whatever way they are ready for. The best part is...God is a perfect judge and will judge righteously. If it turns out that people truly are born this way, than He will judge them fairly based on their genetic tendencies and the unique problems that generated for them (problems the rest of us may not have to deal with). If it turns out they aren't born gay but it is because of environment or abuse...God will take that into consideration and judge them perfectly. If it turns out they simply chose that lifestyle of outside any influence...he'll judge them perfectly for that too. He'll do the same with me and my unique family situation. I trust completely in God to be both just and merciful in a way that will be appropriate for all.

Love it. I just had this discussion with the spouse and another close family member. Engaging charity in all situations is key. You cannot cast out the sinner. If it is your child, you cannot cast them out. You must love them. The Lord loves them. He loves you despite all your sin. Ensure they know you abhor the sin, and that sinful ways are not welcome, but that the loved one always is. I have a relative who is on the road well traveled and is struggling. We always, always welcome him, with all of his bodily mutilations, with open arms, giving him that sense that he is always welcome. Should he decide to divest himself of his current friends, and seek the path less traveled, there are loving arms waiting to assist such difficult things.

[jdawg1012]

Thanks, both of you!

I can only imagine the paradigm shift that any of us would have if our own children came to us saying they were homosexual or had SSA tendencies. I think it is good for us to ask ourselves, "Based on my rhetoric and the way I discuss this issue, if my child was secretly dealing with this, would my words be causing them shame and depression beyond what they already feel for having these feelings they don't understand and have most definitely tried to pray away? Would they be more likely or less likely to feel loved? Would they be more likely or less likely to be suicidal? And when they come out, will I be the kind that sends them out on the streets to keep appearances, or will I insist on changing them (which causes even more depression and despair)?"

I'd be more inclined to listen to some commenters if I knew one of your children struggled with SSA, and that you'd really had to wrestle with the reality instead of the hypothetical. I can't help but wonder how much of this "disorder" (like all the mental illness) comes from the way the rest of us treat those who struggle with this.

It's also worth noting that despite your quoting of a "Born Gay" urban legend...studies in recent years have shown remarkable similarities between gay men that are not found at large in heterosexual men. Simple things like the direction of their cowlick in their hair (clockwise vs. counter-clockwise), the length of their index finger to their ring finger (if I remember, gay men are more likely to have a longer index finger compared to their ring finger, where as most men have a longer ring finger). There are a few other things I remember reading in a study...but it's been a few years. But it was interesting to note that a statistically significant number of gay men differed from straight men in a few related genetic markers. It would be like discovering that gay men are statistically more likely to be left handed than straight men. Though that doesn't mean you've found a "gay gene" it does suggest a number of genetic similarities that gay men share that their straight counterparts do not.

I support the church's stance on marriage. I also worry less about the actions of gay people than whether or not my own actions and words will help them feel the love of God and follow Christ in whatever way they are ready for. The best part is...God is a perfect judge and will judge righteously. If it turns out that people truly are born this way, than He will judge them fairly based on their genetic tendencies and the unique problems that generated for them (problems the rest of us may not have to deal with). If it turns out they aren't born gay but it is because of environment or abuse...God will take that into consideration and judge them perfectly. If it turns out they simply chose that lifestyle of outside any influence...he'll judge them perfectly for that too. He'll do the same with me and my unique family situation. I trust completely in God to be both just and merciful in a way that will be appropriate for all.

I have mentioned this on a previous thread, but a few years ago we were invited by our Bishop to spend Christmas Day with his family.

As he introduced each of his children and their families, I was having trouble keeping up with all of the names/relations.

Several times over the afternoon one daughter was referred to (I'll call her "Jane"), but I had trouble putting a name to the face. Finally, I asked which of the women was being referred to, and my bishop indicated that it was a different daughter that was not in attendance. After a pause of a second or two as he mulled his thoughts over (undoubtedly to determine how best to phrase what he wanted to say) he said, "(So-and-so) is not here this year. My daughter, 'Jane,' is currently in a relationship with another woman named (Let's say 'Mary'), and they are spending the holidays this year with Mary's family."

I think that he was waiting for a some kind of reaction or response, but since I didn't have one, he went on. We all really love Jane, and Mary, and Mary is a really great gal. We love having her (Mary), around when they come up for family gatherings treat her just like any one of the other in-laws (he may have said 'children/kids')." He said something like, "It's not what we expected, but we love our daughter, and aren't going to ostracize her, or exclude her in any way."

Then (if I remember right) he went on to talk about the world wide leadership talk the dealt with treating people with Same Gender Attraction better. (I later saw the video).

In any event, I learned more about Same Gender Attraction and dealing with it, than I ever did in any other time in my life, in the span of about 5 minutes. This man, a bishop, and one of the kindest people I knew, a big blue collar man by professional trade, and pious as far as I'd ever seen, spoke openly, lovingly, sincerely and unabashedly about his daughter.

Since that moment, I have never once doubted that Heavenly Father, infinitely more perfect, loves ALL of his children, and I shun the ridiculous, hateful (whether self-righteous individuals think it's hateful or not), and bigoted comments other people make. God doesn't hate sinners, and he doesn't willfully curse anybody, or want anyone to suffer. People may have pain and despair over bad choices, but those include innumerable paths that people are willing to accept, like sporting events on the sabbath, going into imprudent debt, profanity, degrading media (of any type), coveting, lying (including things like "fibbing" on surprises), etc. etc.

That having been said, I don't want to drift too far off the subject of the thread, but still, same gender attraction (and even acting on it), is unlikely to be any more damning that divorcing one's spouse, or failing to provide for one's family, or even, I daresay, the practice of having one's wife put one through college, heck public schooling may even make that list if we take prophetic statements at face value. ALL sin and fall short of the glory of God. I'm far more worried about whether or not I rectify my own rectifiable issues, and repent to the entirety of my own ability, and then, I worry about how I can assist, not condemn others.

Outside the carnal nature of sexual sin, all of the other concerns about homosexuality being "taught/imposed" are due to a lack of constitutional government, and general apathy of both Saints and the Populace with regard to true personal liberty (Saints like the nanny state when it provides them with free daycare and subsidies on their tax returns):
-Children being taught in school; Solution: Don't abdicate your divine mandate to others.
-Tax issues and health benefits; Solution: Get Government back on track both out of private contracts and in minimal government/taxation.
-Boy Scouts, etc.; Solution: Return Government to it's Constitutional Role, and get rid of all Equal Opportunity nonsense on private individuals, churches organizations, housing, and employers, et al.

[skmo]

-Boy Scouts, etc.; Solution: Return Government to it's Constitutional Role, and get rid of all Equal Opportunity nonsense on private individuals, churches organizations, housing, and employers, et al.

Hawaiian court rules a bed and breakfast must acommodate lesbians

I understand why the government has to be open and equal to all people, but I disagree that they should have the right to tell people how they can run their businesses. Forcing people to rent to someone they don't want to is just one more step toward having a monstrous tyranny who forces people into things against their beliefs. How many private companies are now forced to provide their employees with access to abortions when it's completely against their religious beliefs? We're so lost as a people.

[jdawg1012]

-Boy Scouts, etc.; Solution: Return Government to it's Constitutional Role, and get rid of all Equal Opportunity nonsense on private individuals, churches organizations, housing, and employers, et al.

Hawaiian court rules a bed and breakfast must acommodate lesbians

I understand why the government has to be open and equal to all people, but I disagree that they should have the right to tell people how they can run their businesses. Forcing people to rent to someone they don't want to is just one more step toward having a monstrous tyranny who forces people into things against their beliefs. How many private companies are now forced to provide their employees with access to abortions when it's completely against their religious beliefs? We're so lost as a people.

I agree. Unfortunately, there are only a few who fight for the God-given freedom (agency) afforded to man. Most people are "pro-liberty" in tongue only. As soon as their slice of tyranny is threatened, they squawk (See public education funding for further details). The solution to bad laws isn't more bad laws. Like the Book of Mormon teaches, laws are often (mostly) used by the wicked to subdue the righteous, the wicked ignore the multitude of ever expanding laws, anyway. The solution to government's invasion into areas it shouldn't be is a reduction in government and removal from those areas, not more government regulations. People forget when you use politics to restrict agency (even the Satan followers here on Earth that want to force us all to do good/make more and more things restricted or illegal), that eventually the pendulum swings the other way. Always. Their self-righteous tyranny will always swing back on their own heads, limiting their agency, because they forfeited the agency of another by abdicating self governing authority to a third party. The only way to stop it from swinging back is to stop it from swinging altogether.

[skmo]

...Their self-righteous tyranny will always swing back on their own heads, limiting their agency, because they forfeited the agency of another by abdicating self governing authority to a third party. The only way to stop it from swinging back is to stop it from swinging altogether.

And it's funny how often people just use whatever issue is at hand in order to gain power and control. It's like Rahm Emanuel said, never let a crisis go to waste. That's not concern for humanity or God's laws, it's a desire to dominate.

[EmmaLee]

-Boy Scouts, etc.; Solution: Return Government to it's Constitutional Role, and get rid of all Equal Opportunity nonsense on private individuals, churches organizations, housing, and employers, et al.

Hawaiian court rules a bed and breakfast must acommodate lesbians

I understand why the government has to be open and equal to all people, but I disagree that they should have the right to tell people how they can run their businesses. Forcing people to rent to someone they don't want to is just one more step toward having a monstrous tyranny who forces people into things against their beliefs. How many private companies are now forced to provide their employees with access to abortions when it's completely against their religious beliefs? We're so lost as a people.

I agree. Unfortunately, there are only a few who fight for the God-given freedom (agency) afforded to man. Most people are "pro-liberty" in tongue only. As soon as their slice of tyranny is threatened, they squawk (See public education funding for further details). The solution to bad laws isn't more bad laws. Like the Book of Mormon teaches, laws are often (mostly) used by the wicked to subdue the righteous, the wicked ignore the multitude of ever expanding laws, anyway. The solution to government's invasion into areas it shouldn't be is a reduction in government and removal from those areas, not more government regulations. People forget when you use politics to restrict agency (even the Satan followers here on Earth that want to force us all to do good/make more and more things restricted or illegal), that eventually the pendulum swings the other way. Always. Their self-righteous tyranny will always swing back on their own heads, limiting their agency, because they forfeited the agency of another by abdicating self governing authority to a third party. The only way to stop it from swinging back is to stop it from swinging altogether.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7053 ... tml?pg=all

Quotes from article -

Salt Lake City has become the first Utah city to offer housing and employment protections for gays and lesbians — an action supported by the Mormon church.

The City Council, in a unanimous vote Tuesday, passed a pair of nondiscrimination ordinances that would bar landlords and employers from discriminating based on sexuality — a protection not currently afforded under state or federal laws.

In a rare public appearance before local lawmakers, a representative from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints read a supporting statement at a public hearing before the Salt Lake City Council regarding the ordinances proposed by Mayor Ralph Becker.

"The church supports this ordinance because it is fair and reasonable and does not do violence to the institution of marriage," said Michael Otterson, managing director of the LDS Church's public affairs office.

"It's a great opportunity that the city has to bring together its divergent ideas and populations," said LGBT activist Jim Debakis. "It's a great moment, I think, in our city's history."

LGBT activist Jacob Whipple said he hopes church leaders will extend their support beyond the Salt Lake City Council chambers.

"We hope this is the beginning of a working relationship between the LDS Church and the LGBT community," Whipple said, "and they will help us by endorsing and sponsoring further laws both on the local, state and federal levels and all places where the church has influence."

[Fairminded]

I don't know if this is a symptom or a cause of the liberal media jumping fully behind the LGBT movement, but the TV shows and movies that go out of their way to promote the homosexual lifestyle all have a few things in common. For one all of their characters tend to be absolutely vile. Self indulgent, hedonistic, intolerant, and backbiting, with few or any redeeming qualities. The lives the characters lead also tend to be empty and miserable, a point driven home by how desperately the show tries to portray them as elegant and glamorous.

This phenomenon isn't limited solely to these kinds of shows, but I've noticed they tend to be the worst offenders.

(Note that this observation has nothing to do with homosexuals in real life or the lives they lead, merely how they're portrayed in the media.)

[jdawg1012]

Exactly Stella.

That is exactly in line with what church policy (not doctrine), has been throughout the entirety of recorded history. If the people are unwilling to keep the highest laws (in this case, the Constitution), the fall back has always been to get people to not let things get worse.

Ideally the Government would not be involved in marriages etc., but if they're going to be involved in equal opportunity etc., then it should at least be equitable. There is no fundamental reason why two people of the same sex should not be able to enter into a beneficiary contract that two people of opposing sexes can. That's inequitable. A Constitutionally sound government wouldn't get involved, but since it is involved, the idea is to at least make it equitable. However, the ideal is still to promote liberty and the Constitution, not lay down and give way to one sided discrimination making some classes of people better than others.

(P.S. I don't believe in government employees receiving any benefits, whatsoever, but if they're going to give them to some, then equality means they must give them to all.)

[JohnnyL]

-Boy Scouts, etc.; Solution: Return Government to it's Constitutional Role, and get rid of all Equal Opportunity nonsense on private individuals, churches organizations, housing, and employers, et al.

Hawaiian court rules a bed and breakfast must acommodate lesbians

I understand why the government has to be open and equal to all people, but I disagree that they should have the right to tell people how they can run their businesses. Forcing people to rent to someone they don't want to is just one more step toward having a monstrous tyranny who forces people into things against their beliefs. How many private companies are now forced to provide their employees with access to abortions when it's completely against their religious beliefs? We're so lost as a people.

Hey don't worry, you can still do "No shoes, no service" discriminations.

[jdawg1012]

Hey don't worry, you can still do "No shoes, no service" discriminations.

Now, if only we could hire lifeguards who could swim...

Political correctness gone wild: Minority lifeguards hired who can't swim

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/039949_lifeg ... z2QmNWGgtn" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Thinker]

Goals of the homosexual fetish agenda...

1."Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible." (They use late night air waves and special channels, as well as their right to peacefully assemble to do so.)
2."Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers."
3."Give homosexual protectors a just cause."
4."Make gays look good."
5."Make the victimizers look bad."
6."Get funds from corporate America."

Congratulations on all of you who have supported some of these, even on this thread! 8-|
You've been trained well!

THANK YOU!! I had been wanting to find my research from a few years ago about this stuff and put it up, but haven't.

It's not about marriage. It's not about equal rights. It's not about tolerance.
Deep down, it's about a very hostile, bellicose, vociferous, vengeful, hypocritical group trying to forcefully shove its wicked agenda down everyone's throat.

Thank you, Johnny, for pointing this out.

Even when axiomatic truth from the United States Center for Disease Control, is brought up - if it makes homosexuality look bad, some are quick to shoot the messenger... "make the victimizer look bad", "make gays look good, "Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers" &"Give homosexual protectors a just cause" - the goals of the homosexual fetish agenda.

[Thinker]

I believe in calling things what they are. If it is a "state of confusion" which proves to cause harm, it is a disorder.
It's a bit ironic when those who are so quick to call HUMAN BEINGS with homosexual fetishes, the fetish themselves... "gays", or homosexuals - but then are also so quick to hypocritically call anything that sheds light on the negative side of homosexuality, "hate."

Bullies usually harass by picking on one aspect of a person & calling them by it... "Hey, Big Ears" etc.
So, here we have people calling those with homosexual fetishes, "gays" or "homosexuals" as if that one thing is who they are... No wonder some homosexual fetish supporters cry, "hate" when they are presented by objective information showing how the practice of such festishes is a disorder, because they define the entire person by one tiny part of that person.

A disorder like the practice of homosexual fetishes can and often does negatively affect one's life in many ways - yet, a person is not their disorder. We are not our sins. We are much more than that. There are many other cognitive distortions involved with the homosexual movement.

Goals of the homosexual movement:

1.Ignoring Christian morals and discouraging religiously based laws.
2.Ignore the clear message of the Bible that homosexuality is a sin and an abomination unto God because their first amendment rights allow them to. (Note the hypocricy there.)
3.Censoring evidence that the "gay gene" is a hoax. After all, it would have to be multiple genes interacting together.
4.Censoring speech against homosexuality by branding it to be "hate-speech"
5.Censoring biblical statements condemning homosexuality
6.Expand hate crimes legislation to include sexual orientation, which would be equally wrong for heterosexuals to do.
7.Ending the military's and Boy Scout's restrictions on homosexuality
8.Stopping children as young as 5 years old from attending therapy to repair their sexual preference
9.Teach tolerance of homosexuals in schools.
10. Pushing for legalized adoption by gay individuals and couples
11.Indoctrination of public school children to support the homosexual agenda

Clearly not everyone in the homosexual movement is an extremist. Many are solid, law-abiding citizens who make important daily contributions to our society and do not believe in confrontation or hard-line rhetoric. However, many militant homosexuals and their supporters have different beliefs. They have adopted the following tactics with the goal of forcing their beliefs on society:

*Eliminating free speech by harassing and attempting to silence anyone who disagrees with them;
*Preying on children by indoctrinating and recruiting them into their lifestyle;
*Imposing their beliefs on others through activist judges and lawmakers requiring that everyone actively promote homosexuality in every institution (schools, workplace, churches, etc.);
*Destroying marriage and undermining the traditional family in order to annihilate any moral standard of behavior;
*Intolerance toward anyone who does not willingly submit to their agenda;
*Fighting for a discriminatory and unconstitutional double standard of justice by demanding that crimes against homosexuals be punished more severely than the same crimes against heterosexuals through 'hate crimes' legislation; and
*Deceptively portraying homosexuality as a harmless and victimless behavior.

Another tactic is calling someone homophobic or closet homosexual, if they bring up negative aspects about homosexual fetishes.
They ignore the possibilities that one does not like the way the homosexual movement has been bombarding society, or one has family or friends who have suffered because of homosexual fetish lies, or one has been harassed by many in the homosexual fetish herd, or one wants to stand for truth - to shine light on the realities of the practice of homosexual fetishes.

A Self-Styled 'Gay Revolutionary' Offers a Challenge to Straight America:
"We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, ...wherever men are with men together. Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us. All churches who condemn us will be closed. Our holy gods are handsome young men. ...We shall be victorious because we are fueled with the ferocious bitterness of the oppressed..."
Michael Swift - Boston Gay Community News - February 15-21, 1987
http://www.truenews.org/Homosexuality/real_agenda.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Fiannan]

Here is something to Think about. The link to the two homosexual men...is there something pro-Gospel there?

Think about it. We have been told by our prophets that birth control is vile, evil and a rejection of the temple covenants. Yet most Americans, and many LDS members, use birth control and see it as a cherished right. Yet isn't the whole reason a man and woman come together is to create life? What is the difference between two men getting married and a man and woman gettiing married and deciding not to reproduce, even when they possess the ability to do so and possess healthy genes?

now look at these two men. They are spending a tremendous amount of money and time desperately finding a way to have a baby in their household. They are showing that they really have good hearts and are, even if they might possibly deny it, following the first commandment God gave to mankind.

Now while their pairing off might be against the scriptures they are at least fulfilling an important portion of the Gospel -- beyond trying to create life they are saying they want to have one of God's spirits and show him or her love. I hope the child will not be influenced to be gay as well, let me make that clear. However, maybe instead of condemning such people "good Christians" should reject the anti-God message of curtailing thier birth rates.

[Elizabeth]

It is ridiculous to even consider that these two issues are related.

[jimmy]

Fiannan are you serious?

[Fiannan]

It is ridiculous to even consider that these two issues are related.

Both involve pro-creation, right?

Joseph F. Smith:

"I regret, I think it is a crying evil, that there should exist a sentiment or a feeling among any members of the Church to curtail the birth of their children. I think that is a crime wherever it occurs, where husband and wife are in possession of health and vigor and are free from impurities that would be entailed upon their posterity. I believe that where people undertake to curtail or prevent the birth of their children that they are going to reap disappointment by and by. I have no hesitancy in saying that I believe that is one of the greatest crimes of the world today, this evil practice."

Got any references from a prophet that employs this harsh a description for homosexuality?????

[Elizabeth]

Flannan, such comments are off topic and inappropriate. As I have posted many times on this very forum I personally support the LDS stance on birth control... however this has nothing whatsoever to do with the immorality and sinfulness of homosexual activity.

[Thinker]

Fiannan,
Why are you attempting to make evil appear good - & taking far stretches, at that?
The greatest commandments, which prioritize above "all the laws and the prophets" are to love God and to love others as ourselves. (Matt 22; 36-40) And as we love others, we love God.

What does it mean to love - to truly love?
Is love doing what I want to be with someone, even if what I want is not healthy for the person I want to be with? No!
Love is striving for what is best - what is most healthy physically, psychologically, spiritually - for those we love & for ourselves.
These men are intentionally putting a child and his/her mother at risk, and purposefully denying the child of his/her mother.
That isn't love, but seeking what they want, at the expense of this child.

It is not loving oneself to engage in a sexual fetish that proves to be harmful - physically, psychologically & spiritually.
These men would show love best by putting their energy & resources into healing themselves, & then establishing a family, including a mother and father to parent children, as nature & God obviously intends.
Children learn primarily through imitation. Is it NOT loving to put up a dysfunctional sexual fetish up as an example to imitate for a child.

Not only do children need both a mother and father to EXIST, children also need both parents to learn by example and how to get along with the opposite sex...

"Children Need Both A Mother And A Father" Dr. A. Dean Byrd
http://www.narth.com/docs/needboth.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Why Children need both Mother-Love and Father-Love" Glenn T. Stanton
http://www.jashow.org/Articles/_PDFArch ... I0804G.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Mothers' and Fathers' Socializing Behaviors in Three Contexts: Links with Children's Peer Competence"
Pettit, Gregory S.; Brown, Elizabeth Glyn; Mize, Jacquelyn; Lindsey, Eric
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/se ... o=EJ563106" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Why Children Need a Mother and a Father" Bill Muehlenberg
http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2010/10/ ... -a-father/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Fiannan]

Flannan, such comments are off topic and inappropriate. As I have posted many times on this very forum I personally support the LDS stance on birth control... however this has nothing whatsoever to do with the immorality and sinfulness of homosexual activity.

I commend you for opposing birth control. Note, I was not accusing you of being part of the masses that have bought into Satan's plan (in and out of the LDS Church) though.

As for being off-topic I beg to differ. Ultimately sexual immorality is a mis-use of the powers of pro-creation. Adultery is wrong because it can cause either the birth of a child out-of-wedlock and denied the rest of their family or give the non-adulterous partner a sexually transmitted disease. Birth control thwarts the ability of spirits to come to earth and have a chance to progress and homosexuality ultimately falls into the category of the latter since, without a third party, there can be no reproduction to bring spirits to earth. This is why I see little if any difference between a male and female couple possessing good health and intelligence getting married and refusing to have kids and a homosexual or lesbian couple. In fact I would say that if, for instance, a lesbian couple opts for IVF to raise a family they are far more righteous than the double-income-no-kids heterosexual couple.

[jnjnelson]

… In fact I would say that if, for instance, a lesbian couple opts for IVF to raise a family they are far more righteous than the double-income-no-kids heterosexual couple.

So you believe the sin of using birth control is a "far more" serious a sin than extramarital sexual relationships? Even your quote of Joseph F. Smith doesn't go that far. I'm definitely not with you on that point.

[Fiannan]

… In fact I would say that if, for instance, a lesbian couple opts for IVF to raise a family they are far more righteous than the double-income-no-kids heterosexual couple.

So you believe the sin of using birth control is a "far more" serious a sin than extramarital sexual relationships? Even your quote of Joseph F. Smith doesn't go that far. I'm definitely not with you on that point.

Well, if you go by the Bible lesbian sex is not real sex...in fact Judaism has traditionally seen it is improper but not in the same category as adultery or fornication. In fact, were midwives acting improper in the 1800s when they treated women for depression?

Of course we can rely on modern prophets for more insight on the matter. Modern prophets have said that people who refuse to have kids are...well, practicing an act of evil, a vile act and one that violates the covenants of the temple. So I will ask you, who is being more sinful towards both nature and the intent of God regulating sexuality, the DINKS or the pregnant lesbians?

[Thinker]

Finnan,
You seriously think that practicing homosexual fetishes is better than not producing offspring? /:)
The twisted use of logic, or rather lack of logic, reminds me a little of this hypothetical "debate" over whether reading is good or not...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou4yaF-gACs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; (Brian Regan on Reading)

As I mentioned, you're attempting to make evil/sickness appear to be good/healthy - and in the process of using extreme logical fallacies, are making your ability to reason seem questionable.

[skmo]

1. Homosexuality is a sin, one that hurts the people involved. If you're not one of the people involved, it shouldn't hurt you, as we believe than people are responsible for their own sins and transgressions and not the actions of another. Whatever the cost on society, these things have been borne by all people throughout history. How we face these challenges depends on our faith. I have a responsibility to preach the gospel, but that does not extend to me trying to force my beliefs on others. I do not have to justify the actions of others, nor do I have to condemn them. All I have to do is be Christlike in my behavior to others.

2. Birth control is not a sin. It is a medicine or medical tool that people may choose to employ to guide their lives as they see fit. Refusal to have children is contrary to our purpose, but using birth control is not refusal to have children. They are separate incidents. One is wrong. One may or may not be wrong depending on its application.

3. Unrighteous judgment is as destructive or even more so than almost all other sins in our LDS community.