Homosexuality: Disorder

[SouthernMormon]

I will say that three great tests, I think, of a person's faith are their positions on (1) the sexual revolution generally (2) belief in reward / punishment in afterlife (3) whether the state is punitive or saving.

Support for (1) indicates desire for instant gratification and pleasure over commitment to living holy. Yes, it is not the only issue, but as McConkie said sex sin is second only to murder. This goes for issues relating to homosexuality, abortion, artificial contraception, divorce, pornography, parental consent in marriage, extra-marital sex, deliberate abstinence from marriage, and even revealing clothing and attire. Things were NOT ok in the 1950s. The sexual revolution began no later then the 1780s / 1790s - not the 1960s. The issue of sex sin is THE major fault line separating liberals and conservatives politically and seculars and believers (in any faith - Christianity, Judaism, Islam) religiously. Belief in God destroys your ability to enjoy sex sin or sex sin destroys your ability to believe in God. It is that simple.

Support for (2) Shows that we believe in a standard of justice in God's terms rather then antinomian humanitarianism. The religion of humanity that JS Mill and August Comte promoted could not imagine such a system in the afterlife, even if they believed in an afterlife.

Support for (3) a saving state attributes to government powers that only God has. It also indicates a desire to punish the good rather then the wicked - e.g. massive taxation on productive business, subsidized abortion, contraception vacation et al opposition to the death penalty for murder, supporting humanitarian militarism (nation building). The principle of compassion is used to legitimate punishing good and rewarding evil.

A person with a belief in God would not desire 1, 2 or 3. A person who believed 1, 2 or 3 would necessarily despise Christianity as the ultimate barrier to "progress" - and they would be correct.

[Thomas]

I will say that three great tests, I think, of a person's faith are their positions on (1) the sexual revolution generally (2) belief in reward / punishment in afterlife (3) whether the state is punitive or saving.

Support for (1) indicates desire for instant gratification and pleasure over commitment to living holy. Yes, it is not the only issue, but as McConkie said sex sin is second only to murder. This goes for issues relating to homosexuality, abortion, artificial contraception, divorce, pornography, parental consent in marriage, extra-marital sex, deliberate abstinence from marriage, and even revealing clothing and attire. Things were NOT ok in the 1950s. The sexual revolution began no later then the 1780s / 1790s - not the 1960s. The issue of sex sin is THE major fault line separating liberals and conservatives politically and seculars and believers (in any faith - Christianity, Judaism, Islam) religiously. Belief in God destroys your ability to enjoy sex sin or sex sin destroys your ability to believe in God. It is that simple.

Support for (2) Shows that we believe in a standard of justice in God's terms rather then antinomian humanitarianism. The religion of humanity that JS Mill and August Comte promoted could not imagine such a system in the afterlife, even if they believed in an afterlife.

Support for (3) a saving state attributes to government powers that only God has. It also indicates a desire to punish the good rather then the wicked - e.g. massive taxation on productive business, subsidized abortion, contraception vacation et al opposition to the death penalty for murder, supporting humanitarian militarism (nation building). The principle of compassion is used to legitimate punishing good and rewarding evil.

A person with a belief in God would not desire 1, 2 or 3. A person who believed 1, 2 or 3 would necessarily despise Christianity as the ultimate barrier to "progress" - and they would be correct.

All sin keeps you from God. Jo has just pointed out that Christ taught, the law must be kept perfectly. There is no prize for second place. It is perfection or be cast out. No one will receive redemption by obeying the law.

2 Nephi 2:

And men are instructed sufficiently that they know good from evil. And the law is given unto men. And by the law no flesh is justified; or, by the law men are cut off. Yea, by the temporal law they were cut off; and also, by the spiritual law they perish from that which is good, and become miserable forever

Why would you try to say, you are keeping the law better than someone else, when it profits you nothing? You are just as lost as the homosexual. You are not on higher ground than anyone else.

[Elizabeth]

Satanic nonsense !

All sin keeps you from God. Jo has just pointed out that Christ taught, the law must be kept perfectly. There is no prize for second place. It is perfection or be cast out. No one will receive redemption by obeying the law....
Why would you try to say, you are keeping the law better than someone else, when it profits you nothing? You are just as lost as the homosexual. You are not on higher ground than anyone else.

[Thinker]

Frank,
Frankly, I get tired of repeating this, but I will again...
Love the sinner, not the sin.
I have family & friends who have developed homosexual fetishes and I love them & honestly don't think much about our sexual differences, just as I don't think about that with others. However, it is a little difficult to not think about someone's sexual deviations, when they are flashing it for all the world in "gay pride" parades & media, pushing it at us legally & indoctrinating our children in schools and boy scouts. I am all for standing up for the underdog, and have stood up for people being made fun of because of their opposite sex mannerisms. But that's people. I will not stand up for harmful behavior, and pretend it's healthy when I know it not to be.

We are commanded to love one another and true love is based on truth, not lies.

[Thomas]

Satanic nonsense !

All sin keeps you from God. Jo has just pointed out that Christ taught, the law must be kept perfectly. There is no prize for second place. It is perfection or be cast out. No one will receive redemption by obeying the law....
Why would you try to say, you are keeping the law better than someone else, when it profits you nothing? You are just as lost as the homosexual. You are not on higher ground than anyone else.

Wow! These are quotes right out the scriptures! This is what Jesus Taught!

[SmallFarm]

Jo,
The greatest of all commandments are to love God (Truth/Light) and love others as ourselves...
..."on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."

Jesus didn't kiss peoples' behinds, trying to win a popularity contest & call that love.
Jesus spoke boldly about what was of God and what wasn't - and was even killed for speaking truth that others took to be hard.

It appears you have not understood what I shared.

Yes, Jesus spoke boldly and was killed for it. Yet, He forgave those who were killing Him. He loved with a divine love; and it was completely unconditional.

Many participants on this thread are loving with a conditional, worldly love. They think that by judging others and pointing to these others the errors of their ways that they are manifesting love which saves. Through the act of judging, they are binding themselves to the world; and with what judgment they mete, the same will be meted to them. That is worldly love; it is conditional.

Peace,

jo

If a person was convinced poison was good it would not be loving to let them drink the poison. You can love a person and warn them of danger.

[Thinker]

Jo has just pointed out that Christ taught, the law must be kept perfectly. There is no prize for second place. It is perfection or be cast out.

This is both illogical and spiritually inaccurate.
I agree that one needs to remove the mote from one's eye before one can help another remove theirs.
Yet, God created us each unique, so we can help each other.
You have strengths & weaknesses that I don't & I have strengths & weaknesses that you don't.

If we had to be 100% sinnless, then we're all up the creek without a paddle.
God created us all to be imperfect works in progress & saw that it was good.
Sin is a paradox - it is both good & bad... good because it's the method of learning... we must toddle/fall before walking.
Bad because it causes us and others suffering.
So, sin is not evil in itself.
Real evil is the attempt to deny sin and to make another pay for our sins, instead of doing what we can to make things "at one" again.
(Consider the parables of the tax-collector & priest, & the different approaches of the 2 thieves crucified on each side of Jesus.)

Those pushing the homosexual movement are attempting to deny homosexual fetishes as sin & instead attempting to put down anybody who points out statistics from the US CDC regarding AIDS, STD & mental illness statistics & anal sex risks prevelant among those practicing homosexual fetishes. Especially put down and ridiculed is anybody who objects to homosexuality based on religious reasons. They believe in rights, as long as it has to do with the right for them to have their sexual fetishes legally honored and publically praised.

[Thinker]

If a person was convinced poison was good it would not be loving to let them drink the poison. You can love a person and warn them of danger.

Exactly!
I am impressed by your perspective.

[Thomas]

All I can do is invite you to read the scriptures I posted again, along with those Jo posted. Salvation comes from Christ not from obeying the commandments.

2 Nephi 2: 5 And men are instructed sufficiently that they know good from evil. And the law is given unto men. And by the law no flesh is justified; or, by the law men are cut off. Yea, by the temporal law they were cut off; and also, by the spiritual law they perish from that which is good, and become miserable forever.

6 Wherefore, redemption cometh in and through the Holy Messiah; for he is full of grace and truth.

7 Behold, he offereth himself a sacrifice for sin, to answer the ends of the law, unto all those who have a broken heart and a contrite spirit; and unto none else can the ends of the law be answered.

I am not making any of this stuff up. It comes straight from scripture.

10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all

.

This is what Christ has said, if you break the smallest commandment, it is the same as breaking all the commandments. You are just as lost as the homosexual. It is the same in God's eyes.

[SmallFarm]

Commandments were given to us so we could be happy in this cruel world. The consequence of sin is built into the sin itself. We can't choose the consequence but we have our agency to choose to sit or not. I warn against sin to warn against earthly consequence, something I know too much about.

[SmallFarm]

The family is the foundation of society.
Children are an inheritance of God.

Love God with all your might, mind and strength.
Love your neighbor as you love yourself.

[jo1952]

All I can do is invite you to read the scriptures I posted again, along with those Jo posted. Salvation comes from Christ not from obeying the commandments.

2 Nephi 2: 5 And men are instructed sufficiently that they know good from evil. And the law is given unto men. And by the law no flesh is justified; or, by the law men are cut off. Yea, by the temporal law they were cut off; and also, by the spiritual law they perish from that which is good, and become miserable forever.

6 Wherefore, redemption cometh in and through the Holy Messiah; for he is full of grace and truth.

7 Behold, he offereth himself a sacrifice for sin, to answer the ends of the law, unto all those who have a broken heart and a contrite spirit; and unto none else can the ends of the law be answered.

I am not making any of this stuff up. It comes straight from scripture.

10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all

.

This is what Christ has said, if you break the smallest commandment, it is the same as breaking all the commandments. You are just as lost as the homosexual. It is the same in God's eyes.

Hi Thomas,

Some here are speaking from the perspective of the Law; others are speaking from the perspective which is outside of the Law. Our perspective...whether it is from inside the Law or from outside of the Law, is also constantly changing...readjusting as we continue to learn more and more. As such, those who are within the Law also do not see eye to eye, nor is there much tolerance for those who do not agree with them; and those outside of the Law also do not agree on everything, albeit they allow for every possibility. Line upon line, precept upon precept.

Love,

jo

[jo1952]

Commandments were given to us so we could be happy in this cruel world. The consequence of sin is built into the sin itself. We can't choose the consequence but we have our agency to choose to sit or not. I warn against sin to warn against earthly consequence, something I know too much about.

Christ fulfilled the Law. Those who still live by the Law are bound to the Law which Christ already fulfilled. Those bound to the Law require commandments; even requesting to be given more commandments so that they can prove even more obedience. They cannot live any other way; they cannot serve God any other way. So, God gives them commandments to live by. This is as it should be; as it is part of the Plan of Salvation which exists under the Law.

Those who are able to accept that Christ fulfilled the Law are no longer bound to it. They are no longer required to live under the Law. This is also as it should be; as it is also part of the Plan Salvation. This part of the Plan exists outside of the Law.

Regardless of whether we are bound to the Law, or whether we are no longer bound to the Law, God's purpose to bring to pass the eternal life of man will not fail. None can stay His hand; not even, and especially, not us.

Love,

jo

[Rensai]

The family is the foundation of society.
Children are an inheritance of God.

Love God with all your might, mind and strength.
Love your neighbor as you love yourself.

:ymapplause:

I think that about says it all.

[Elizabeth]

Can anyone in this world truthfully say they love their "neighbour" as they love themself?

[SmallFarm]

Can anyone in this world truthfully say they love their "neighbour" as they love themself?

We all fall short, in different ways. The point is to try your very best, Christ is there to fill in the margins.

[Franktalk]

Frank,
Frankly, I get tired of repeating this, but I will again...
Love the sinner, not the sin.
I have family & friends who have developed homosexual fetishes and I love them & honestly don't think much about our sexual differences, just as I don't think about that with others. However, it is a little difficult to not think about someone's sexual deviations, when they are flashing it for all the world in "gay pride" parades & media, pushing it at us legally & indoctrinating our children in schools and boy scouts. I am all for standing up for the underdog, and have stood up for people being made fun of because of their opposite sex mannerisms. But that's people. I will not stand up for harmful behavior, and pretend it's healthy when I know it not to be.

We are commanded to love one another and true love is based on truth, not lies.

What does love the sinner, not the sin mean? Does it mean hate the sin? If the person is of the world and knows not the law do you think their sin will be imputed to them? According to Paul the sin will not be imputed to them. And if it happens that their behavior is from a judgement do you think God will punish them for something outside of their free will? Or is the curse of living with the desire for strange flesh enough punishment?

My daughter is gay and I love her no matter what she decides on her sexual orientation. When faced with what you think are conflicting courses of actions always take the course of loving each other.

I have tried to be clear on this issue but feel I may not have hit the mark. I am not sure I can. This issue is filled with emotions and strong scriptural biases.

[SmallFarm]

Frank,
Frankly, I get tired of repeating this, but I will again...
Love the sinner, not the sin.
I have family & friends who have developed homosexual fetishes and I love them & honestly don't think much about our sexual differences, just as I don't think about that with others. However, it is a little difficult to not think about someone's sexual deviations, when they are flashing it for all the world in "gay pride" parades & media, pushing it at us legally & indoctrinating our children in schools and boy scouts. I am all for standing up for the underdog, and have stood up for people being made fun of because of their opposite sex mannerisms. But that's people. I will not stand up for harmful behavior, and pretend it's healthy when I know it not to be.

We are commanded to love one another and true love is based on truth, not lies.

What does love the sinner, not the sin mean? Does it mean hate the sin? If the person is of the world and knows not the law do you think their sin will be imputed to them? According to Paul the sin will not be imputed to them. And if it happens that their behavior is from a judgement do you think God will punish them for something outside of their free will? Or is the curse of living with the desire for strange flesh enough punishment?

My daughter is gay and I love her no matter what she decides on her sexual orientation. When faced with what you think are conflicting courses of actions always take the course of loving each other.

I have tried to be clear on this issue but feel I may not have hit the mark. I am not sure I can. This issue is filled with emotions and strong scriptural biases.

Well my parents made it clear they did not agree that it was okay to be "gay". Still, they also let me know that I was free to live my life as I saw fit, and as long as I didn't break the rules of the house, I was always welcome there, and they always loved me no matter how I chose to use my agency. Even my boyfriends were welcome over, again, as long as the rules of the house were obeyed.
Eventually I saw the error of my ways and was (and am) very thankful I had "goodly parents" which were patient and longsuffering with me.

[SouthernMormon]

As for the causes of homosexuality, it is unfortunate to see the false dichotomy of "inborn" vs "choice". I strongly suspect it is influenced by the environment. Heritability for homosexuality is .35 to .4. In contrast heritability for intelligence is .85. My view is that some people are more susceptible based on genetic background to the disease of homosexuality (note: often times sexual sin is referred to as a plague) but clearly it can not be totally or near totally in-born as is the case for traits like eye color.

The cover story of the February, 1999 Atlantic Monthly profiled Cochran and his research partner Paul Ewald, a prominent Amherst evolutionary biologist and author of Plague Time: The New Germ Theory of Disease. They argued that, for two centuries, the fraction of diseases that we know to be caused by germs has constantly increased. For example, peptic ulcers were shown in 1983 to be caused by germs—and easily cured by antibiotics. Cochran and Ewald predicted that future research will discover germs play a major role in many big, bad diseases - such as cancer, heart disease, and schizophrenia.

The New Germ Theory actually originated in 1992 when Cochran got to wondering about the causes of male homosexuality. "The only thing we've seen worse in magnitude of genetic load [i.e. homosexuality's negative effect on Darwinian fitness] was sickle cell anemia," Cochran told me on Friday.

Male homosexuality could be a similar "self-destructive" genetic defense against a major infectious disease, just as the "sickle cell gene" defends against malaria at the price of increasing susceptibility to sickle cell anemia. But nobody knows what that illness could be. It would have to be major – and, presumably, relatively modern, like falciparum malaria, which is puzzling.

Or, as Cochran suggests, an infectious disease itself could cause homosexuality. It's probably not a venereal germ, but maybe an intestinal or respiratory germ. If it spreads like the flu, and if it needs to strike at a particular stage of development before or shortly after birth, then more male homosexuals might be born in one season than another, just as more schizophrenics are born in late winter and in early spring, especially in cities with cold winters. This should be easily testable.

[SouthernMormon]

I have often wondered if there is any connection between urbanization and homosexuality. It seems that homosexuality flourishes in urban areas more so then rural. Currently, ~2 to 3% of the populace identify as homosexual. I do not think it would have been possible to suppress homosexuality as effectively as it was in medieval and early modern Europe if 2 to 3% of the populace were homosexual. The number of prosecutions for homosexuality was vastly higher in the 1950s then in the 1590s (on a per capita basis as well). Could it be that far more people consider themselves to be homosexual today or feel same-sex sexual attraction then in earlier times? I think this is the most likely answer.

[Elizabeth]

Pesticides and chemical changes to the environment and food chain all adversely affect the human body. Immorality and perversions promoted and spread by the so called entertainment industry, general media, educational authorities etc detrimentally influence the standards of morality.

[jo1952]

We are taught that valiant ones have been saved for the end times. What if this includes homosexuals being sent to help teach us something which we still need to learn? Surely their burdens are great; due in great part to the judgments the saints (at the behest of Church leaders!!) are placing upon them.

[Elizabeth]

Not so Jo.

[Elizabeth]

CARMEL, N.Y. — The duo voted "cutest couple" in the senior class at a suburban New York high school say they're getting teased about it - but not because they're both boys. "Yeah, our friends are giving it to us about being Internet famous," said 18-year-old Dylan Meehan, a senior at Carmel High School. "We've never had any problems at all," added 17-year-old senior Brad Taylor. "As a matter of fact, before the results, people were telling us ahead of time, 'You guys are going to win hands down.'" The gay couple's selection - a first at Carmel High - has become an online sensation, driven by a yearbook photo of the smiling boys in a close embrace. A friend's blog with the photo had more than 110,000 hits Monday, and it was cited in stories on several major news sites. They received so much attention that they released a statement saying "the whole thing has been a bit surreal." They said that when they first started dating a year ago, "the thought of a photo of us traveling throughout the world would be a bit frightening, but now we are proud to be part of the LGBT community."

http://www.kansas.com/2013/06/04/283131 ... rylink=cpy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[jo1952]

Church leaders are asking the members to judge knowing full well what happens to those who judge.

Matthew 7:1-5

7 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

John 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

It is believed by some that the woman was Mary Magdelene, and that Jesus later married her. Isaiah was commanded to marry a harlot. The sins of both woman are punishable by death under the Law. Jesus did not condemn Mary. Isaiah did not condemn the harlot he married. Jesus did not judge Mary; Isaiah did not judge the woman he married. THE CHURCH LEADERS ARE ASKING THE MEMBERS TO JUDGE OTHERS FOR THEIR SEXUAL SIN. The Church is causing the circumstances by which the members will also be judged; "with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again". The Leaders are asking the members of the Church to sin.

Now, even if you choose to not agree with the above, let us consider personal "sin" in general as it applies under the Law:

James 2:8-11

8 If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:

9 But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.

10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

11 For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.

Under the Law, if an individual offends in one point, then that individual is guilty of transgressing the whole Law. I do not think Church members understand this; they may not even be aware of this teaching.

This leaves me with a heavy heart.

jo