The tide is turning...

[mahalanobis]

I think there are elements of truth to what both Lizzy and Dr. T are saying.

Dr. T is correct that the top leadership have continually reaffirmed God's definition of marriage (at least the traditional doctrine as it stands in 2019).

Lizzy is correct that large swaths of the membership have jumped on the LGBT bandwagon and go as far as ridiculing members who embrace traditional values. I've seen many ward members over the years (many different wards) who mock pro-proclamation members on social media, especially during pride month.

I'll add that it's great to know the opinions of the top leadership, but it's unclear what the opinions are of bishopric members and youth leaders are, statistically speaking(church-wide). That group of leaders is what matters in regard to the direction of the membership opinion over time. If there is no discipline or correction of the members who teach false doctrine, then false doctrine will spread. The doctrine of Christ is not "love and acceptance".

[PressingForward]

The goose is cooked, the Church has most certainly embraced the gay culture in order to be politically correct. Just knowing that the Washington DC gay men’s choir is performing on Temple grounds is disgusting and should merit a revolt amongst members, but nope......
Acceptance is coming, most likely in my lifetime, Pathetic and sad to witness, but the kool aide drinkers will choke it down.

[drtanner]

I think there are elements of truth to what both Lizzy and Dr. T are saying.

Dr. T is correct that the top leadership have continually reaffirmed God's definition of marriage (at least the traditional doctrine as it stands in 2019).

Lizzy is correct that large swaths of the membership have jumped on the LGBT bandwagon and go as far as ridiculing members who embrace traditional values. I've seen many ward members over the years (many different wards) who mock pro-proclamation members on social media, especially during pride month.

I'll add that it's great to know the opinions of the top leadership, but it's unclear what the opinions are of bishopric members and youth leaders are, statistically speaking(church-wide). That group of leaders is what matters in regard to the direction of the membership opinion over time. If there is no discipline or correction of the members who teach false doctrine, then false doctrine will spread. The doctrine of Christ is not "love and acceptance".

They are not just reaffirming the definition of marriage. Read / listen to what president Nelson just taught at BYU on the law of chastity. The church will never ever ever accept gay marriage or condone gay behavior. My opinion is that many members who bash on the church’s direction / stance with gay marriage and attempt to place words in there mouth most of the time have other bones to pick with the church and this just happens to be the scapegoat topic of the day.

[MMbelieve]

The goose is cooked, the Church has most certainly embraced the gay culture in order to be politically correct. Just knowing that the Washington DC gay men’s choir is performing on Temple grounds is disgusting and should merit a revolt amongst members, but nope......
Acceptance is coming, most likely in my lifetime, Pathetic and sad to witness, but the kool aide drinkers will choke it down.

We know that homosexuality is against the plan because it produces no offspring and does not join male and female into one.
If Christ was walking the streets today, I do wonder how he would address homosexuals in the church and their family members. Would he cast them off or tell them to come unto him and sin no more? Is the church being politically correct only? Or also compassionate towards an extremely pervasive problem inflicting too many families? I see the church as very strong on the marriage and gender arena and clear as to what is condoned and accepted and ideal to obtain in this life where possible.

My question (because I’m not involved in homosexuality or have immediate family that is) is why members of the church refuse to marry just because they are not physically turned on by the opposite sex. I have heard too many stories/examples of members coming out as gay after years of marriage and children. So it’s possible to create a family and not be denied children and companionship just because of homosexuality.
Not too much different than heterosexual marriages where the lust and physical attraction naturally declines overtime. I do not see why homosexuals need to suffer without a family and children in this life. But maybe I just don’t get the whole thing and don’t know what I’m talking about.

[Lizzy60]

I think there are elements of truth to what both Lizzy and Dr. T are saying.

Dr. T is correct that the top leadership have continually reaffirmed God's definition of marriage (at least the traditional doctrine as it stands in 2019).

Lizzy is correct that large swaths of the membership have jumped on the LGBT bandwagon and go as far as ridiculing members who embrace traditional values. I've seen many ward members over the years (many different wards) who mock pro-proclamation members on social media, especially during pride month.

I'll add that it's great to know the opinions of the top leadership, but it's unclear what the opinions are of bishopric members and youth leaders are, statistically speaking(church-wide). That group of leaders is what matters in regard to the direction of the membership opinion over time. If there is no discipline or correction of the members who teach false doctrine, then false doctrine will spread. The doctrine of Christ is not "love and acceptance".

They are not just reaffirming the definition of marriage. Read / listen to what president Nelson just taught at BYU on the law of chastity. The church will never ever ever accept gay marriage or condone gay behavior. My opinion is that many members who bash on the church’s direction / stance with gay marriage and attempt to place words in there mouth most of the time have other bones to pick with the church and this just happens to be the scapegoat topic of the day.

When Nelson and Oaks are gone, the Church will accept homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle choice. It will take longer for temple sealings, but gay couples will be treated on par with a mixed-religious couple (LDS and Baptist, for example).

[Lizzy60]

The goose is cooked, the Church has most certainly embraced the gay culture in order to be politically correct. Just knowing that the Washington DC gay men’s choir is performing on Temple grounds is disgusting and should merit a revolt amongst members, but nope......
Acceptance is coming, most likely in my lifetime, Pathetic and sad to witness, but the kool aide drinkers will choke it down.

We know that homosexuality is against the plan because it produces no offspring and does not join male and female into one.
If Christ was walking the streets today, I do wonder how he would address homosexuals in the church and their family members. Would he cast them off or tell them to come unto him and sin no more? Is the church being politically correct only? Or also compassionate towards an extremely pervasive problem inflicting too many families? I see the church as very strong on the marriage and gender arena and clear as to what is condoned and accepted and ideal to obtain in this life where possible.

My question (because I’m not involved in homosexuality or have immediate family that is) is why members of the church refuse to marry just because they are not physically turned on by the opposite sex. I have heard too many stories/examples of members coming out as gay after years of marriage and children. So it’s possible to create a family and not be denied children and companionship just because of homosexuality.
Not too much different than heterosexual marriages where the lust and physical attraction naturally declines overtime. I do not see why homosexuals need to suffer without a family and children in this life. But maybe I just don’t get the whole thing and don’t know what I’m talking about.

The homosexual allies in the Church will tell you that family and offspring are totally possible with adoption, surrogacy, and IVF. They teach that these possibilities that make it possible for every gay couple who want children to have them is why GOD placed so many gay kids into LDS families -- so the Church will seek for revelation and further light and knowledge that homosexuality is righteous, and will be part of the Celestial Kingdom.
Yes. They are teaching this, in classrooms, at firesides, and on podcasts.

[drtanner]

I think there are elements of truth to what both Lizzy and Dr. T are saying.

Dr. T is correct that the top leadership have continually reaffirmed God's definition of marriage (at least the traditional doctrine as it stands in 2019).

Lizzy is correct that large swaths of the membership have jumped on the LGBT bandwagon and go as far as ridiculing members who embrace traditional values. I've seen many ward members over the years (many different wards) who mock pro-proclamation members on social media, especially during pride month.

I'll add that it's great to know the opinions of the top leadership, but it's unclear what the opinions are of bishopric members and youth leaders are, statistically speaking(church-wide). That group of leaders is what matters in regard to the direction of the membership opinion over time. If there is no discipline or correction of the members who teach false doctrine, then false doctrine will spread. The doctrine of Christ is not "love and acceptance".

They are not just reaffirming the definition of marriage. Read / listen to what president Nelson just taught at BYU on the law of chastity. The church will never ever ever accept gay marriage or condone gay behavior. My opinion is that many members who bash on the church’s direction / stance with gay marriage and attempt to place words in there mouth most of the time have other bones to pick with the church and this just happens to be the scapegoat topic of the day.

When Nelson and Oaks are gone, the Church will accept homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle choice. It will take longer for temple sealings, but gay couples will be treated on par with a mixed-religious couple (LDS and Baptist, for example).

You must have not have heard any of the others apostles recently. President Oaks and Nelson are not on an island on this issue, in fact they have all never been more united. Elder Bednar in a few very poignant settings I’ve seen personally does not mince words on this topic.

[gkearney]

I think there are elements of truth to what both Lizzy and Dr. T are saying.

Dr. T is correct that the top leadership have continually reaffirmed God's definition of marriage (at least the traditional doctrine as it stands in 2019).

Lizzy is correct that large swaths of the membership have jumped on the LGBT bandwagon and go as far as ridiculing members who embrace traditional values. I've seen many ward members over the years (many different wards) who mock pro-proclamation members on social media, especially during pride month.

I'll add that it's great to know the opinions of the top leadership, but it's unclear what the opinions are of bishopric members and youth leaders are, statistically speaking(church-wide). That group of leaders is what matters in regard to the direction of the membership opinion over time. If there is no discipline or correction of the members who teach false doctrine, then false doctrine will spread. The doctrine of Christ is not "love and acceptance".

They are not just reaffirming the definition of marriage. Read / listen to what president Nelson just taught at BYU on the law of chastity. The church will never ever ever accept gay marriage or condone gay behavior. My opinion is that many members who bash on the church’s direction / stance with gay marriage and attempt to place words in there mouth most of the time have other bones to pick with the church and this just happens to be the scapegoat topic of the day.

When Nelson and Oaks are gone, the Church will accept homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle choice. It will take longer for temple sealings, but gay couples will be treated on par with a mixed-religious couple (LDS and Baptist, for example).

You must have not have heard any of the others apostles recently. President Oaks and Nelson are not on an island on this issue, in fact they have all never been more united. Elder Bednar in a few very poignant settings I’ve seen personally does not mince words on this topic.

Not to be too morbid here but the problem with a gerontocracy, which is what we in effect have in the case of the senior leadership, is that they all die.

So those pushing this narrative know that all they have to do is two things, change the thinking of the rising generation on this issue, which one can argue has already been accomplished, and then wait. At some point, and not that far in the future the members of the 12 start to die and so will have to be replaced with others, there is no guarantee that those others will see this issue as burning as brightly in the future as it does today. In the short term, yes you can continue to find men who will see this issue the way the current members of the 12 do, but what happens in 20, 30 or 50 years from now?

Let's take as an example the matter of interracial marriages, now it is true that Mormons never viewed this topic in quite the same way there seems to have been little concern expressed about marriages involving non African races but all the same it was once considered by church leaders as a very serious matter requiring addressing the same in church materials and across the pulpit at times in rather startling terms.

Yet times marched on and views both in the general population and in the church on the subject changed. The generations that found it so troubling died away and with them all mention of the subject in church circles. You would be hard pressed to find any mention of it newer than 30 years old, which is a generation ago. Is the same going to be true here? Will today's youth really care to keep this torch burning into their adulthood. Do they care even now? The problem isn't those who are agitating for acceptance of same sex marriages in the church, no, the real problem is the members and in particular the younger members who simply do not care one way or the other about it. to employ an old saying "they don't have a dog in the fight". Just as there came a time when there were members who no longer cared about interracial marriages any longer they simply stopped giving the matter any thought. Here in lies the danger if you will, not some effort to subjugate and marginalize the saints by those promoting the agenda but rather the slow drip, drip, drip of time marching onwards.

This is an example, albeit an imperfect one of how time is the ultimate enemy of all gerontocracies. Time is never on their side.

[Rick Grimes]

We shouldn't at all be surprised there are so many members on the LGBT wagon. Even the early Christian saints were divided on many doctrinal issues as well. The Epistles to the early saints often start off with phrases like, "How quickly you are moved unto another gospel..." or some variation of it. Our own members are no exception. As Peter wrote in warning the early Saints what it would mean for people to translate the scriptures to their own private interpretation, "they wrest the scriptures to their own destruction."

[drtanner]

They are not just reaffirming the definition of marriage. Read / listen to what president Nelson just taught at BYU on the law of chastity. The church will never ever ever accept gay marriage or condone gay behavior. My opinion is that many members who bash on the church’s direction / stance with gay marriage and attempt to place words in there mouth most of the time have other bones to pick with the church and this just happens to be the scapegoat topic of the day.

When Nelson and Oaks are gone, the Church will accept homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle choice. It will take longer for temple sealings, but gay couples will be treated on par with a mixed-religious couple (LDS and Baptist, for example).

You must have not have heard any of the others apostles recently. President Oaks and Nelson are not on an island on this issue, in fact they have all never been more united. Elder Bednar in a few very poignant settings I’ve seen personally does not mince words on this topic.

Not to be too morbid here but the problem with a gerontocracy, which is what we in effect have in the case of the senior leadership, is that they all die.

So those pushing this narrative know that all they have to do is two things, change the thinking of the rising generation on this issue, which one can argue has already been accomplished, and then wait. At some point, and not that far in the future the members of the 12 start to die and so will have to be replaced with others, there is no guarantee that those others will see this issue as burning as brightly in the future as it does today. In the short term, yes you can continue to find men who will see this issue the way the current members of the 12 do, but what happens in 20, 30 or 50 years from now?

Let's take as an example the matter of interracial marriages, now it is true that Mormons never viewed this topic in quite the same way there seems to have been little concern expressed about marriages involving non African races but all the same it was once considered by church leaders as a very serious matter requiring addressing the same in church materials and across the pulpit at times in rather startling terms.

Yet times marched on and views both in the general population and in the church on the subject changed. The generations that found it so troubling died away and with them all mention of the subject in church circles. You would be hard pressed to find any mention of it newer than 30 years old, which is a generation ago. Is the same going to be true here? Will today's youth really care to keep this torch burning into their adulthood. Do they care even now? The problem isn't those who are agitating for acceptance of same sex marriages in the church, no, the real problem is the members and in particular the younger members who simply do not care one way or the other about it. to employ an old saying "they don't have a dog in the fight". Just as there came a time when there were members who no longer cared about interracial marriages any longer they simply stopped giving the matter any thought. Here in lies the danger if you will, not some effort to subjugate and marginalize the saints by those promoting the agenda but rather the slow drip, drip, drip of time marching onwards.

This is an example, albeit an imperfect one of how time is the ultimate enemy of all gerontocracies. Time is never on their side.

Time may not be on there side but foreordination to lead the church through these difficult times is. Add with that modern revelation and the work moves on. Now if you don't believe in either of those things then I can see why some have the fear and paranoia (which actually may explain a lot about some who post on the topic)

[Lizzy60]

When Nelson and Oaks are gone, the Church will accept homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle choice. It will take longer for temple sealings, but gay couples will be treated on par with a mixed-religious couple (LDS and Baptist, for example).

You must have not have heard any of the others apostles recently. President Oaks and Nelson are not on an island on this issue, in fact they have all never been more united. Elder Bednar in a few very poignant settings I’ve seen personally does not mince words on this topic.

Not to be too morbid here but the problem with a gerontocracy, which is what we in effect have in the case of the senior leadership, is that they all die.

So those pushing this narrative know that all they have to do is two things, change the thinking of the rising generation on this issue, which one can argue has already been accomplished, and then wait. At some point, and not that far in the future the members of the 12 start to die and so will have to be replaced with others, there is no guarantee that those others will see this issue as burning as brightly in the future as it does today. In the short term, yes you can continue to find men who will see this issue the way the current members of the 12 do, but what happens in 20, 30 or 50 years from now?

Let's take as an example the matter of interracial marriages, now it is true that Mormons never viewed this topic in quite the same way there seems to have been little concern expressed about marriages involving non African races but all the same it was once considered by church leaders as a very serious matter requiring addressing the same in church materials and across the pulpit at times in rather startling terms.

Yet times marched on and views both in the general population and in the church on the subject changed. The generations that found it so troubling died away and with them all mention of the subject in church circles. You would be hard pressed to find any mention of it newer than 30 years old, which is a generation ago. Is the same going to be true here? Will today's youth really care to keep this torch burning into their adulthood. Do they care even now? The problem isn't those who are agitating for acceptance of same sex marriages in the church, no, the real problem is the members and in particular the younger members who simply do not care one way or the other about it. to employ an old saying "they don't have a dog in the fight". Just as there came a time when there were members who no longer cared about interracial marriages any longer they simply stopped giving the matter any thought. Here in lies the danger if you will, not some effort to subjugate and marginalize the saints by those promoting the agenda but rather the slow drip, drip, drip of time marching onwards.

This is an example, albeit an imperfect one of how time is the ultimate enemy of all gerontocracies. Time is never on their side.

Time may not be on there side but foreordination to lead the church through these difficult times is. Add with that modern revelation and the work moves on. Now if you don't believe in either of those things then I can see why some have the fear and paranoia (which actually may explain a lot about some who post on the topic)

I totally believe in foreordination, and I also believe that the events of the latter days leading up to the Second Coming were revealed to prophets like Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel, and that we are seeing those prophecies come to pass.
Ezekiel 34 is a good one to start with. Then Isaiah 48 and 49.

[Michelle]

Homosexuality is a spiritual virus. It use to only be passed by direct contact (usually abuse,) but is now "airborne" and can be passed socially as well.

[drtanner]

You must have not have heard any of the others apostles recently. President Oaks and Nelson are not on an island on this issue, in fact they have all never been more united. Elder Bednar in a few very poignant settings I’ve seen personally does not mince words on this topic.

Not to be too morbid here but the problem with a gerontocracy, which is what we in effect have in the case of the senior leadership, is that they all die.

So those pushing this narrative know that all they have to do is two things, change the thinking of the rising generation on this issue, which one can argue has already been accomplished, and then wait. At some point, and not that far in the future the members of the 12 start to die and so will have to be replaced with others, there is no guarantee that those others will see this issue as burning as brightly in the future as it does today. In the short term, yes you can continue to find men who will see this issue the way the current members of the 12 do, but what happens in 20, 30 or 50 years from now?

Let's take as an example the matter of interracial marriages, now it is true that Mormons never viewed this topic in quite the same way there seems to have been little concern expressed about marriages involving non African races but all the same it was once considered by church leaders as a very serious matter requiring addressing the same in church materials and across the pulpit at times in rather startling terms.

Yet times marched on and views both in the general population and in the church on the subject changed. The generations that found it so troubling died away and with them all mention of the subject in church circles. You would be hard pressed to find any mention of it newer than 30 years old, which is a generation ago. Is the same going to be true here? Will today's youth really care to keep this torch burning into their adulthood. Do they care even now? The problem isn't those who are agitating for acceptance of same sex marriages in the church, no, the real problem is the members and in particular the younger members who simply do not care one way or the other about it. to employ an old saying "they don't have a dog in the fight". Just as there came a time when there were members who no longer cared about interracial marriages any longer they simply stopped giving the matter any thought. Here in lies the danger if you will, not some effort to subjugate and marginalize the saints by those promoting the agenda but rather the slow drip, drip, drip of time marching onwards.

This is an example, albeit an imperfect one of how time is the ultimate enemy of all gerontocracies. Time is never on their side.

Time may not be on there side but foreordination to lead the church through these difficult times is. Add with that modern revelation and the work moves on. Now if you don't believe in either of those things then I can see why some have the fear and paranoia (which actually may explain a lot about some who post on the topic)

I totally believe in foreordination, and I also believe that the events of the latter days leading up to the Second Coming were revealed to prophets like Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel, and that we are seeing those prophecies come to pass.
Ezekiel 34 is a good one to start with. Then Isaiah 48 and 49.

Daniel 2 and D&C 65 are also really good.

[MMbelieve]

The goose is cooked, the Church has most certainly embraced the gay culture in order to be politically correct. Just knowing that the Washington DC gay men’s choir is performing on Temple grounds is disgusting and should merit a revolt amongst members, but nope......
Acceptance is coming, most likely in my lifetime, Pathetic and sad to witness, but the kool aide drinkers will choke it down.

We know that homosexuality is against the plan because it produces no offspring and does not join male and female into one.
If Christ was walking the streets today, I do wonder how he would address homosexuals in the church and their family members. Would he cast them off or tell them to come unto him and sin no more? Is the church being politically correct only? Or also compassionate towards an extremely pervasive problem inflicting too many families? I see the church as very strong on the marriage and gender arena and clear as to what is condoned and accepted and ideal to obtain in this life where possible.

My question (because I’m not involved in homosexuality or have immediate family that is) is why members of the church refuse to marry just because they are not physically turned on by the opposite sex. I have heard too many stories/examples of members coming out as gay after years of marriage and children. So it’s possible to create a family and not be denied children and companionship just because of homosexuality.
Not too much different than heterosexual marriages where the lust and physical attraction naturally declines overtime. I do not see why homosexuals need to suffer without a family and children in this life. But maybe I just don’t get the whole thing and don’t know what I’m talking about.

The homosexual allies in the Church will tell you that family and offspring are totally possible with adoption, surrogacy, and IVF. They teach that these possibilities that make it possible for every gay couple who want children to have them is why GOD placed so many gay kids into LDS families -- so the Church will seek for revelation and further light and knowledge that homosexuality is righteous, and will be part of the Celestial Kingdom.
Yes. They are teaching this, in classrooms, at firesides, and on podcasts.

I have heard nothing of the sort. How exactly is this being preached in classrooms and firesides? Is there seriously no one in the entire room with any conviction of right and wrong to stand up and keep things correct? If this is being taught in the church by church leaders then they need to be reported and removed. That simple. If it’s random noise from random members in random places...who gives a care. People will always have their “own opinions” when they go against the commandments to make themselves feel better. Happens constantly, everywhere. I do not worry about the noise but I would 100% put a stop to crap being preached anywhere in the church building.

[Aprhys]

The goose is cooked, the Church has most certainly embraced the gay culture in order to be politically correct. Just knowing that the Washington DC gay men’s choir is performing on Temple grounds is disgusting and should merit a revolt amongst members, but nope......
Acceptance is coming, most likely in my lifetime, Pathetic and sad to witness, but the kool aide drinkers will choke it down.

We know that homosexuality is against the plan because it produces no offspring and does not join male and female into one.
If Christ was walking the streets today, I do wonder how he would address homosexuals in the church and their family members. Would he cast them off or tell them to come unto him and sin no more? Is the church being politically correct only? Or also compassionate towards an extremely pervasive problem inflicting too many families? I see the church as very strong on the marriage and gender arena and clear as to what is condoned and accepted and ideal to obtain in this life where possible.

My question (because I’m not involved in homosexuality or have immediate family that is) is why members of the church refuse to marry just because they are not physically turned on by the opposite sex. I have heard too many stories/examples of members coming out as gay after years of marriage and children. So it’s possible to create a family and not be denied children and companionship just because of homosexuality.
Not too much different than heterosexual marriages where the lust and physical attraction naturally declines overtime. I do not see why homosexuals need to suffer without a family and children in this life. But maybe I just don’t get the whole thing and don’t know what I’m talking about.

The homosexual allies in the Church will tell you that family and offspring are totally possible with adoption, surrogacy, and IVF. They teach that these possibilities that make it possible for every gay couple who want children to have them is why GOD placed so many gay kids into LDS families -- so the Church will seek for revelation and further light and knowledge that homosexuality is righteous, and will be part of the Celestial Kingdom.
Yes. They are teaching this, in classrooms, at firesides, and on podcasts.

I have heard nothing of the sort. How exactly is this being preached in classrooms and firesides? Is there seriously no one in the entire room with any conviction of right and wrong to stand up and keep things correct? If this is being taught in the church by church leaders then they need to be reported and removed. That simple. If it’s random noise from random members in random places...who gives a care. People will always have their “own opinions” when they go against the commandments to make themselves feel better. Happens constantly, everywhere. I do not worry about the noise but I would 100% put a stop to crap being preached anywhere in the church building.

The church will one day fully accept and allow gay dealings in the temple. I am absolutely sure of this. Ever heard the phrase "demographics determine destiny?" Homosexuality is accepted by society like never before. When I was in school being labeled as gay was a derogatory term. Now, according to my wife who teaches high-school in a nice suburb of SLC, kids claim to be gay/lesbian for popularity. Its the cool thing now. My sis-in-law who has a flamboyantly gay son has just as many rainbow flags in her home as she does pictures of the Savior. She openly advocates for gay sealings now. Mark my prophetic words, this subject will absolutely separate the church within the next 30 years. Those who follow the correct gospel will become the outcasts. We will be seen as religious bigots and hateful extremists.

[MMbelieve]

We know that homosexuality is against the plan because it produces no offspring and does not join male and female into one.
If Christ was walking the streets today, I do wonder how he would address homosexuals in the church and their family members. Would he cast them off or tell them to come unto him and sin no more? Is the church being politically correct only? Or also compassionate towards an extremely pervasive problem inflicting too many families? I see the church as very strong on the marriage and gender arena and clear as to what is condoned and accepted and ideal to obtain in this life where possible.

My question (because I’m not involved in homosexuality or have immediate family that is) is why members of the church refuse to marry just because they are not physically turned on by the opposite sex. I have heard too many stories/examples of members coming out as gay after years of marriage and children. So it’s possible to create a family and not be denied children and companionship just because of homosexuality.
Not too much different than heterosexual marriages where the lust and physical attraction naturally declines overtime. I do not see why homosexuals need to suffer without a family and children in this life. But maybe I just don’t get the whole thing and don’t know what I’m talking about.

The homosexual allies in the Church will tell you that family and offspring are totally possible with adoption, surrogacy, and IVF. They teach that these possibilities that make it possible for every gay couple who want children to have them is why GOD placed so many gay kids into LDS families -- so the Church will seek for revelation and further light and knowledge that homosexuality is righteous, and will be part of the Celestial Kingdom.
Yes. They are teaching this, in classrooms, at firesides, and on podcasts.

I have heard nothing of the sort. How exactly is this being preached in classrooms and firesides? Is there seriously no one in the entire room with any conviction of right and wrong to stand up and keep things correct? If this is being taught in the church by church leaders then they need to be reported and removed. That simple. If it’s random noise from random members in random places...who gives a care. People will always have their “own opinions” when they go against the commandments to make themselves feel better. Happens constantly, everywhere. I do not worry about the noise but I would 100% put a stop to crap being preached anywhere in the church building.

The church will one day fully accept and allow gay dealings in the temple. I am absolutely sure of this. Ever heard the phrase "demographics determine destiny?" Homosexuality is accepted by society like never before. When I was in school being labeled as gay was a derogatory term. Now, according to my wife who teaches high-school in a nice suburb of SLC, kids claim to be gay/lesbian for popularity. Its the cool thing now. My sis-in-law who has a flamboyantly gay son has just as many rainbow flags in her home as she does pictures of the Savior. She openly advocates for gay sealings now. Mark my prophetic words, this subject will absolutely separate the church within the next 30 years. Those who follow the correct gospel will become the outcasts. We will be seen as religious bigots and hateful extremists.

If we believe that demographics is what our church is determined by then I’m pretty sure we can chalk the whole thing up (from the beginning) to a nice social experiment and a scam. This premise is exactly what is said to religious people to mock them for believing in a religion or God - that they are being duped and scammed and essentially are nut cases.

By the way, the gay issue is already dividing us. There are those who advocate for it and believe the church will or could be persuaded to accept it in the temple AND there are those who know it’s wrong and know the church will never condone it. So yeah, we may split off in the future (the gay sealing folks) but it sure won’t be 30 years away!

[tdj]

The goose is cooked, the Church has most certainly embraced the gay culture in order to be politically correct. Just knowing that the Washington DC gay men’s choir is performing on Temple grounds is disgusting and should merit a revolt amongst members, but nope......
Acceptance is coming, most likely in my lifetime, Pathetic and sad to witness, but the kool aide drinkers will choke it down.

We know that homosexuality is against the plan because it produces no offspring and does not join male and female into one.
If Christ was walking the streets today, I do wonder how he would address homosexuals in the church and their family members. Would he cast them off or tell them to come unto him and sin no more? Is the church being politically correct only? Or also compassionate towards an extremely pervasive problem inflicting too many families? I see the church as very strong on the marriage and gender arena and clear as to what is condoned and accepted and ideal to obtain in this life where possible.

My question (because I’m not involved in homosexuality or have immediate family that is) is why members of the church refuse to marry just because they are not physically turned on by the opposite sex. I have heard too many stories/examples of members coming out as gay after years of marriage and children. So it’s possible to create a family and not be denied children and companionship just because of homosexuality.
Not too much different than heterosexual marriages where the lust and physical attraction naturally declines overtime. I do not see why homosexuals need to suffer without a family and children in this life. But maybe I just don’t get the whole thing and don’t know what I’m talking about.

The homosexual allies in the Church will tell you that family and offspring are totally possible with adoption, surrogacy, and IVF. They teach that these possibilities that make it possible for every gay couple who want children to have them is why GOD placed so many gay kids into LDS families -- so the Church will seek for revelation and further light and knowledge that homosexuality is righteous, and will be part of the Celestial Kingdom.
Yes. They are teaching this, in classrooms, at firesides, and on podcasts.

I have heard nothing of the sort. How exactly is this being preached in classrooms and firesides? Is there seriously no one in the entire room with any conviction of right and wrong to stand up and keep things correct? If this is being taught in the church by church leaders then they need to be reported and removed. That simple. If it’s random noise from random members in random places...who gives a care. People will always have their “own opinions” when they go against the commandments to make themselves feel better. Happens constantly, everywhere. I do not worry about the noise but I would 100% put a stop to crap being preached anywhere in the church building.

There ARE a few left that would stand up. My husband is one of those. He won't even refer to homosexuals as "gay". He either calls them homosexuals, queers or perverts. In one sunday school class, he said that gay meant happy, and to think about what it was these people do to get "happy". He then said, Now go enjoy your lunch. He made the classroom feel quite uncomfortable, but I think it's a bluntness that is desperately needed.

If and when the meetings start going in the direction of justifying the perversion, then our family will walk. Plain and simple. It's already getting to the point of getting too close to the edge.

[Eulate]

No demographics, no time. Jesus Christ will return before many people think. The church will be cleansed from within.

[Silver Pie]

Regarding the news piece, the substitute teacher had no right to call the boy's soon-to-be-adoptive parents on the carpet. She asked the kids what they were grateful for. He replied that he was grateful that he was going to be adopted. Even if she disagreed with his parents both being male, she could have said, "That's great you're going to be adopted!"

If his parents were unmarried, would she have lectured him on the fact that they should be married to each other?

And what can a kid do, anyway? It's like that damnable policy punishing children of actively gay parents, denying them baby blessings and baptism as though they were guilty of their parent's (or parents') sins.

A just God would not do that. Neither would a just God lecture and condemn a child who was happy to be adopted by someone, even if their parents were living in a way the dominant religion disagreed with.

I'm not saying the parents' lifestyle is good or bad. I'm saying the teacher had no right to lecture the boy about the behavior of adults (which he can in no way control) and make him feel bad for being adopted.

[Moon1943]

A study of history shows that there is a density of homosexual /bi-sexuals in the upper echelons of power, it also shows that many were totally detached from reality to the point that they brought their respective empires close to and beyond ruin as a result of their megalomania and hubris. Whenever we see signs of sex obsession and attempts at normalizing perversity onto the culture, look out, it won’t end well. We can now add Obama to that list as he becomes the new Rainbow tyrant of the modern age.



King Alexander the Great of Macedonia, 336-323 BC
King Demetrius Poliorcetes of Macedonia, 294-288 BC
King Antiochus I of Macedonia, 280-261 BC
King Antigonus II Gonatas of Macedonia, 276-239 BC
King Ptolemy VII of Egypt, 221-205 BC
Emperor Gaozu of China, 206-194 BC
King Ptolemy IV of Egypt, 145-244 BC
Emperor Wu of China, 140-86 BC
King Nicomedes IV of Bithynia, early first century BC
Julius Cesar, consul of Rome, 60-44 BC
Emperor Augustus of Rome, 31 BC to AD 14
Emperor Ai of China, 6 BC to AD 1
Emperor Tiberius of Rome, 14-37
Emperor Caligula of Rome, 37-41
Emperor Claudius I of Rome, 41-54
Emperor Nero of Rome, 54-68

[MMbelieve]

No demographics, no time. Jesus Christ will return before many people think. The church will be cleansed from within.

Some things others have said recently and your words has entered a thought that what if Christ is the one who does this internal cleansing? That would mean, the second coming could be way way sooner than later. Who better to clean up the church and set it straight than the Man himself who it belongs to?

[ori]

We know that homosexuality is against the plan because it produces no offspring and does not join male and female into one.
If Christ was walking the streets today, I do wonder how he would address homosexuals in the church and their family members. Would he cast them off or tell them to come unto him and sin no more? Is the church being politically correct only? Or also compassionate towards an extremely pervasive problem inflicting too many families? I see the church as very strong on the marriage and gender arena and clear as to what is condoned and accepted and ideal to obtain in this life where possible.

My question (because I’m not involved in homosexuality or have immediate family that is) is why members of the church refuse to marry just because they are not physically turned on by the opposite sex. I have heard too many stories/examples of members coming out as gay after years of marriage and children. So it’s possible to create a family and not be denied children and companionship just because of homosexuality.
Not too much different than heterosexual marriages where the lust and physical attraction naturally declines overtime. I do not see why homosexuals need to suffer without a family and children in this life. But maybe I just don’t get the whole thing and don’t know what I’m talking about.

The homosexual allies in the Church will tell you that family and offspring are totally possible with adoption, surrogacy, and IVF. They teach that these possibilities that make it possible for every gay couple who want children to have them is why GOD placed so many gay kids into LDS families -- so the Church will seek for revelation and further light and knowledge that homosexuality is righteous, and will be part of the Celestial Kingdom.
Yes. They are teaching this, in classrooms, at firesides, and on podcasts.

I have heard nothing of the sort. How exactly is this being preached in classrooms and firesides? Is there seriously no one in the entire room with any conviction of right and wrong to stand up and keep things correct? If this is being taught in the church by church leaders then they need to be reported and removed. That simple. If it’s random noise from random members in random places...who gives a care. People will always have their “own opinions” when they go against the commandments to make themselves feel better. Happens constantly, everywhere. I do not worry about the noise but I would 100% put a stop to crap being preached anywhere in the church building.

The church will one day fully accept and allow gay dealings in the temple. I am absolutely sure of this. Ever heard the phrase "demographics determine destiny?" Homosexuality is accepted by society like never before. When I was in school being labeled as gay was a derogatory term. Now, according to my wife who teaches high-school in a nice suburb of SLC, kids claim to be gay/lesbian for popularity. Its the cool thing now. My sis-in-law who has a flamboyantly gay son has just as many rainbow flags in her home as she does pictures of the Savior. She openly advocates for gay sealings now. Mark my prophetic words, this subject will absolutely separate the church within the next 30 years. Those who follow the correct gospel will become the outcasts. We will be seen as religious bigots and hateful extremists.

We are already seen as religious bigots and hateful extremists. Alcohol is accepted by the wide majority of society but the demographics of alcohol use hasn’t changed the church.

[ori]

Regarding the news piece, the substitute teacher had no right to call the boy's soon-to-be-adoptive parents on the carpet. She asked the kids what they were grateful for. He replied that he was grateful that he was going to be adopted. Even if she disagreed with his parents both being male, she could have said, "That's great you're going to be adopted!"

If his parents were unmarried, would she have lectured him on the fact that they should be married to each other?

And what can a kid do, anyway? It's like that damnable policy punishing children of actively gay parents, denying them baby blessings and baptism as though they were guilty of their parent's (or parents') sins.

A just God would not do that. Neither would a just God lecture and condemn a child who was happy to be adopted by someone, even if their parents were living in a way the dominant religion disagreed with.

I'm not saying the parents' lifestyle is good or bad. I'm saying the teacher had no right to lecture the boy about the behavior of adults (which he can in no way control) and make him feel bad for being adopted.

Yes maybe she was out of line. But getting fired for speaking the truth about these perversions is also wrong.

No, what is disgusting about this situation is that we have “free” government schools that actively undermine what our religion teaches, yet we send our kids to them anyway. What’s really disgusting is that we can’t take our public education money out of these wicked schools. What’s disgusting about this is a very large part of society is against school choice. What’s really disgusting is that so many temple recommend holding teachers agree with the greedy, harmful, terrible unions on these issues. Those unions are hurting our kids.

If there were no government indoctrination mills, then this would be a much smaller issue. Don’t like what your kids’ teacher is saying? Send them to another school. (You can still do this, but it’s much harder when doing so means going from “free” tuition to paid. With no government schools, all schools would be paid so it’s be an easier choice to make.)

[DesertWonderer2]

Meanwhile, more sad news:

https://fox59.com/2019/12/01/utah-banni ... h-backing/

[[email protected]]

If you take 100 gay people, how many will be celibate and stay active in the Church?

I think you are concerned that the Church will change, I don't see that happening.

What do you think of the OP?

If people want to be gay, they will.

What do you want to be done to gay people?

I want them back in the closet that's what I want. They don't want me "in their bedrooms" apparently their bedrooms extend to all public places both physical and virtual. Russia has the right idea on the gay issue.