Is there a middle ground? The Church and gay marriage

[catcatinabox]

I have friends who are gay and we get along just fine.

Gay people are welcome in church just like the rest of us sinners are welcome. Smokers are allowed in church but if they smoke in church they'll be asked to leave. If they preach that smoking is OK they'll be corrected. If they continue the behavior they'll be asked to leave. Then there will probably be some Word of Wisdom talks and lessons in church making sure everyone knows that smoking is not OK.
Church is not a place to argue that your sin isn't actually a sin nor is it a place to promote your contrary behaviors. It's not a place to get support for your sin. Wearing rainbow ties to show support is about as stupid as wearing a tie with naked ladies on it to show support for those addicted to pornography. Those addicted to pornography come to church but they don't brag about their sin and if they do they'll be asked to leave. Same with the gay community. We as a church will support the person but not their sin. Gays seem to want support for their sin.

I live on the East coast, recently moved from one state to another. I've had several openly gay people attend the wards I am in. None of them acts the way you are describing.

How is it that you know they are homosexual?

They say things in Sunday School talking about their struggle or they will actually say that they are gay in casual conversation.

Which tells me they don't really care to change or want to change.

Does a normal person go around telling everyone they have sexual thoughts about other men's wives?
Does a normal person in casual conversation tell other men, "you know I have real problems controlling my sexual thoughts about women".
Does a normal person in casual conversation tell other men, "you know I have real problems controlling my thoughts about killing people and doing violence to them"?

Yes there is a time and place for that (in private settings or ecclesiastical)-but I don't want to know or care. And if you start saying stuff like that I don't think I'm inviting you over for dinner. I don't particularly care to have someone over to my house who openly states to people "I have problems controlling my thoughts about killing people and doing violence to them".

[Art Vandelay]

That breaks my heart. Its sad to see. I wish I didnt have to see it with people that struggle.

Amen to that!
My Mom had a similar situation on her ward, the ward I grew up in. A husband cheated on his wife and came out as gay. He separated from her and I believe moved in with his boyfriend (not sure on that). The ward still tried to work with him and were kind. The Stake president continued to work with him. Eventually he moved back with his wife and they were working it out- a life-long struggle. The ward welcomed him back and he resumed his calling- a damn good organist. Unfortunately his wife suddenly passed away a few years ago. He's now engaged to a man- an ex Bishop. His days of going to church are over, yet again. His fiance is an anti Mormon. That's fine. What gives me joy is seeing how the ward has been there for him. He's never flaunted his homosexuality on facebook before but apparently he's now doing it. I'm not sure if his old ward and friends will un-friend him but now it's in their face. My Mom feels a bit betrayed because of his in your face behavior.

[thestock]

I am no longer willing to debate you on this. You can call that a victory if you like. If you will not allow me to disagree with you.....that is only a you problem, because I do, and I do not need to prove anything to you. I am not a scientist. But the assertion that a gay person is gay by choice the same way I am heterosexual by choice and not biology does not compute with me.

Facts don't care about your feelings.

What you have is a belief, a feeling that homosexuals don't have a choice. You are welcome to that belief-absolutely.

However, your belief needs to be consistent. When it's not you get cognitive dissonance. Which is exactly what you have right now.

You believe really, really, really badly that homosexuality is not by choice but by biology. Okay, fine.
Then how does your belief account for twins which come from the same egg, same sperm, which have the same DNA where one is homosexual and one is not?

You're belief that it is biology cannot stand up in the face of these facts. Which means you can either be dogmatic in the face of all evidence and reason (that's fine) or you can find a way to resolve these contradictions and modify your belief.

If you are unwilling to recognize the contradictions and attempt to solve them, then you can simply admit your viewpoint is one based on faith-i.e. it is a religious ideology and one that you can't prove. Again, that's fine just be honest with it. Unfortunately, you do prove the point that most individuals simply follow the dogmatic crowd-the power of belief in the face of overwhelming facts is quite impressive.

Whatever you say. It matters not really. What matters is how we treat people. I wont take my example on how to treat gay people from you.

Yes how we treat others matters very much. I don't doubt your sincerity in believing what you are doing is really helping. I do see your point of view. I'm trying to help you see mine (and others here).

If homosexuality is biological and there is absolutely nothing one can do about it. Then the Mormon Building Bridges, LGBTQ+ groups are right. It means that if 2 men show up to church, holding hands, hugging, being affection etc. it means that it will have absolutely no impact upon how my children, your children and others behave. If your belief (i.e. your religious worldview) about it being biological is correct-then absolutely every one who tells homosexuals they shouldn't be together, they should repent, they should change, etc. every one who is doing that is causing them pain and suffering. I concede that.

However, what if you are wrong? What if instead of being biological, it comes about from a set of circumstances, that maybe because of either childhood abuse, neglect, or rebellion, maybe it comes about because some individuals have learned over time to become thus. What if it is changeable, what if it's neither innate nor inborn? What if it is possible to become clean of and change? What if human beings are way more complex than their biology, what if that by seeing 2 men holding hands, hugging, etc. it gives small children (who are very impressionable) more reason to experiment themselves to see if they enjoy it?

If I am right, then what is the kind thing to do? Would it be kind to allow my children (or other children) to see such behavior and possibly try it out themselves? Would it be kind for the one who is engaged in the behavior to allow them to do so in a Church where the objective is to help sinners become saints!?

You want middle-ground. I'm giving you middle-ground! If your belief is correct, then everything else you say is accurate and I'm absolutely wrong and I will pay for it when I stand before God.

Can you do the same for me? Can you at least come to the middle-ground and concede that if I'm correct, that if my belief is correct, then you are doing things completely backwards and you are reaping damnation?

I am growing weary of this, because I just dont see how you and I will see eye to eye on this topic. I dont view it so black and white as you. I think I very much do see your side of it, I just happen to disagree. People dont "change" from being gay. Conversion Therapy is being made illegal in states across this country, and for good reason. Why dont you start there? If "changing" from gay to hetero is a matter of just changing your behavior......then why is Conversion Therapy against the law?

I like more to compare it to a heterosexual who has no prospects for marriage, like a friend of mine who has this struggle and confides in me. He is in his 40's now, still a virgin, has kept himself chaste....still looking to get married, but facing dim prospects. Why doesnt he just give up and go whoring around town? Because he believes in the gospel of Jesus Christ. I afford the same to homosexuals. Regardless of their sexual orientation.......they can choose to be chaste or no. If they are coming to Church....then I assume they mean well and intend to keep the commandments. I do my best to assist them in that endeavor. If they fail from time to time.....they have God and Priesthood authority to help them out.

But for me to assert that gay people can suddenly just be "not gay" is disrespectful......just as disrespectful as when Church members question my friend on why he's single and a "menace to society" at this point in his life? Why dont we just change his marital status to make members happy? Its the same logic with me, asking people to change their sexual orientation.

[thestock]

I am not a scientist. But the assertion that a gay person is gay by choice the same way I am heterosexual by choice and not biology does not compute with me.

I agree with you on this. I don't necessarily believe homosexuality is a choice. I don't think it's in their genes either. How one responds to being gay is a choice just like it's a choice on how one responds to being "straight". I know many people who have not been married, some are old, but they still keep themselves chaste. If a straight person can live a chaste life as a single person so can a gay person, and many gay people already do.

Careful there Art! Agreeing with me will certainly invite scorn for you on this board.

Seriously though.....well put my friend. How we respond is everything. I dont see most alcoholic church members I know with a beer in their hand at Church. They do very well most of the time, and they screw up from time to time....then they get back up and keep trying. Its the same for gay people that come to Church. The ones that are out living a lewd lifestyle arent much into going to Church. The ones that are really trying often screw up....but then they keep trying. That is what I have seen. We had a guy who's wife left him because he came out as gay (he wasnt cheating though). She divorced him and took the kids and left. He kept coming to Church. He sat alone for a long time, because once his secret was out, people treated him differently.

That breaks my heart. Its sad to see. I wish I didnt have to see it with people that struggle.....but one thing I have learned about humans is that our natural tendency is to be A-holes towards one another.....unfortunately.

Why be open? Why is it that the homosexual WANT others to know of their deviant sexual desires.

At the heart of it, when someone says they are homosexual, they are telling you they desire to have sex with someone of the same sex . . . that's why. You can dress it up all you want but at the end of the day it's about sex.

The alcoholic doesn't show up with a beer b/c no one else needs to know. The only other person who needs to know is the ecclesiastical leader. The pornographer doesn't show up with pornography b/c no one else needs to know. As much as open homosexuals claim it's about love-it's not. The only reason to be open is for other people to see it as normal. It's to normalize it; it's to make it seem like not a big deal.

Divorces are more complicated than that-I'm positive that wasn't the only reason for her leaving-it was probably the straw that broke the camel's back. What he probably did was say "I'm homosexual AND I look at homosexual porn". Yes, that's when protecting your children starts to play a big factor.

Jeez you really do lack compassion huh? Maybe your husband keeps a porn addiction from you. If he does....I can see why he does it. You basically are telling people to suffer in silence....dont involve me in your wicked desires.

[thestock]

I live on the East coast, recently moved from one state to another. I've had several openly gay people attend the wards I am in. None of them acts the way you are describing.

How is it that you know they are homosexual?

They say things in Sunday School talking about their struggle or they will actually say that they are gay in casual conversation.

Which tells me they don't really care to change or want to change.

Does a normal person go around telling everyone they have sexual thoughts about other men's wives?
Does a normal person in casual conversation tell other men, "you know I have real problems controlling my sexual thoughts about women".
Does a normal person in casual conversation tell other men, "you know I have real problems controlling my thoughts about killing people and doing violence to them"?

Yes there is a time and place for that (in private settings or ecclesiastical)-but I don't want to know or care. And if you start saying stuff like that I don't think I'm inviting you over for dinner. I don't particularly care to have someone over to my house who openly states to people "I have problems controlling my thoughts about killing people and doing violence to them".

No please continue.....I love seeing how easy it is for you stick an entire group of people with whom you dont identify into a huge box so you can discount them, marginalize them, and cast them aside. Its actually quite entertaining......and I am just sitting here thinking to myself how glad I am not to know you in real life.

[catcatinabox]

Facts don't care about your feelings.

What you have is a belief, a feeling that homosexuals don't have a choice. You are welcome to that belief-absolutely.

However, your belief needs to be consistent. When it's not you get cognitive dissonance. Which is exactly what you have right now.

You believe really, really, really badly that homosexuality is not by choice but by biology. Okay, fine.
Then how does your belief account for twins which come from the same egg, same sperm, which have the same DNA where one is homosexual and one is not?

You're belief that it is biology cannot stand up in the face of these facts. Which means you can either be dogmatic in the face of all evidence and reason (that's fine) or you can find a way to resolve these contradictions and modify your belief.

If you are unwilling to recognize the contradictions and attempt to solve them, then you can simply admit your viewpoint is one based on faith-i.e. it is a religious ideology and one that you can't prove. Again, that's fine just be honest with it. Unfortunately, you do prove the point that most individuals simply follow the dogmatic crowd-the power of belief in the face of overwhelming facts is quite impressive.

Whatever you say. It matters not really. What matters is how we treat people. I wont take my example on how to treat gay people from you.

Yes how we treat others matters very much. I don't doubt your sincerity in believing what you are doing is really helping. I do see your point of view. I'm trying to help you see mine (and others here).

If homosexuality is biological and there is absolutely nothing one can do about it. Then the Mormon Building Bridges, LGBTQ+ groups are right. It means that if 2 men show up to church, holding hands, hugging, being affection etc. it means that it will have absolutely no impact upon how my children, your children and others behave. If your belief (i.e. your religious worldview) about it being biological is correct-then absolutely every one who tells homosexuals they shouldn't be together, they should repent, they should change, etc. every one who is doing that is causing them pain and suffering. I concede that.

However, what if you are wrong? What if instead of being biological, it comes about from a set of circumstances, that maybe because of either childhood abuse, neglect, or rebellion, maybe it comes about because some individuals have learned over time to become thus. What if it is changeable, what if it's neither innate nor inborn? What if it is possible to become clean of and change? What if human beings are way more complex than their biology, what if that by seeing 2 men holding hands, hugging, etc. it gives small children (who are very impressionable) more reason to experiment themselves to see if they enjoy it?

If I am right, then what is the kind thing to do? Would it be kind to allow my children (or other children) to see such behavior and possibly try it out themselves? Would it be kind for the one who is engaged in the behavior to allow them to do so in a Church where the objective is to help sinners become saints!?

You want middle-ground. I'm giving you middle-ground! If your belief is correct, then everything else you say is accurate and I'm absolutely wrong and I will pay for it when I stand before God.

Can you do the same for me? Can you at least come to the middle-ground and concede that if I'm correct, that if my belief is correct, then you are doing things completely backwards and you are reaping damnation?

I am growing weary of this, because I just dont see how you and I will see eye to eye on this topic. I dont view it so black and white as you. I think I very much do see your side of it, I just happen to disagree. People dont "change" from being gay. Conversion Therapy is being made illegal in states across this country, and for good reason. Why dont you start there? If "changing" from gay to hetero is a matter of just changing your behavior......then why is Conversion Therapy against the law?

I like more to compare it to a heterosexual who has no prospects for marriage, like a friend of mine who has this struggle and confides in me. He is in his 40's now, still a virgin, has kept himself chaste....still looking to get married, but facing dim prospects. Why doesnt he just give up and go whoring around town? Because he believes in the gospel of Jesus Christ. I afford the same to homosexuals. Regardless of their sexual orientation.......they can choose to be chaste or no. If they are coming to Church....then I assume they mean well and intend to keep the commandments. I do my best to assist them in that endeavor. If they fail from time to time.....they have God and Priesthood authority to help them out.

But for me to assert that gay people can suddenly just be "not gay" is disrespectful......just as disrespectful as when Church members question my friend on why he's single and a "menace to society" at this point in his life? Why dont we just change his marital status to make members happy? Its the same logic with me, asking people to change their sexual orientation.

I never asked you to see eye to eye (i.e. agree with me), I only asked for you to see it from my point of view. Which you won't do. I did it for you, but you won't do the same for me. I told you if your underlying premise is right, then I would be on your side. But you won't even consider that my underlying premise might be right.

Hence, there is no middle-ground. As much as you like to claim you are put-upon here or that you are really compassionate, you should really take a look in the mirror. You are only compassionate when others agree with your viewpoint. You certainly aren't compassionate towards me, you certainly aren't understanding towards my viewpoint. All I get is "your viewpoint is disrespectful, hateful, blah, blah, blah".

You have a severe inability to look at other people's viewpoints. I did it for you, but you won't do it for me . . .very typical of those who would your viewpoints.

[John Tavner]

I agree with you on this. I don't necessarily believe homosexuality is a choice. I don't think it's in their genes either. How one responds to being gay is a choice just like it's a choice on how one responds to being "straight". I know many people who have not been married, some are old, but they still keep themselves chaste. If a straight person can live a chaste life as a single person so can a gay person, and many gay people already do.

Careful there Art! Agreeing with me will certainly invite scorn for you on this board.

Seriously though.....well put my friend. How we respond is everything. I dont see most alcoholic church members I know with a beer in their hand at Church. They do very well most of the time, and they screw up from time to time....then they get back up and keep trying. Its the same for gay people that come to Church. The ones that are out living a lewd lifestyle arent much into going to Church. The ones that are really trying often screw up....but then they keep trying. That is what I have seen. We had a guy who's wife left him because he came out as gay (he wasnt cheating though). She divorced him and took the kids and left. He kept coming to Church. He sat alone for a long time, because once his secret was out, people treated him differently.

That breaks my heart. Its sad to see. I wish I didnt have to see it with people that struggle.....but one thing I have learned about humans is that our natural tendency is to be A-holes towards one another.....unfortunately.

Why be open? Why is it that the homosexual WANT others to know of their deviant sexual desires.

At the heart of it, when someone says they are homosexual, they are telling you they desire to have sex with someone of the same sex . . . that's why. You can dress it up all you want but at the end of the day it's about sex.

The alcoholic doesn't show up with a beer b/c no one else needs to know. The only other person who needs to know is the ecclesiastical leader. The pornographer doesn't show up with pornography b/c no one else needs to know. As much as open homosexuals claim it's about love-it's not. The only reason to be open is for other people to see it as normal. It's to normalize it; it's to make it seem like not a big deal.

Divorces are more complicated than that-I'm positive that wasn't the only reason for her leaving-it was probably the straw that broke the camel's back. What he probably did was say "I'm homosexual AND I look at homosexual porn". Yes, that's when protecting your children starts to play a big factor.

Jeez you really do lack compassion huh? Maybe your husband keeps a porn addiction from you. If he does....I can see why he does it. You basically are telling people to suffer in silence....dont involve me in your wicked desires.

Pretty sure cat is a dude... though if I'm wrong I'll freely admit it.

[catcatinabox]

I agree with you on this. I don't necessarily believe homosexuality is a choice. I don't think it's in their genes either. How one responds to being gay is a choice just like it's a choice on how one responds to being "straight". I know many people who have not been married, some are old, but they still keep themselves chaste. If a straight person can live a chaste life as a single person so can a gay person, and many gay people already do.

Careful there Art! Agreeing with me will certainly invite scorn for you on this board.

Seriously though.....well put my friend. How we respond is everything. I dont see most alcoholic church members I know with a beer in their hand at Church. They do very well most of the time, and they screw up from time to time....then they get back up and keep trying. Its the same for gay people that come to Church. The ones that are out living a lewd lifestyle arent much into going to Church. The ones that are really trying often screw up....but then they keep trying. That is what I have seen. We had a guy who's wife left him because he came out as gay (he wasnt cheating though). She divorced him and took the kids and left. He kept coming to Church. He sat alone for a long time, because once his secret was out, people treated him differently.

That breaks my heart. Its sad to see. I wish I didnt have to see it with people that struggle.....but one thing I have learned about humans is that our natural tendency is to be A-holes towards one another.....unfortunately.

Why be open? Why is it that the homosexual WANT others to know of their deviant sexual desires.

At the heart of it, when someone says they are homosexual, they are telling you they desire to have sex with someone of the same sex . . . that's why. You can dress it up all you want but at the end of the day it's about sex.

The alcoholic doesn't show up with a beer b/c no one else needs to know. The only other person who needs to know is the ecclesiastical leader. The pornographer doesn't show up with pornography b/c no one else needs to know. As much as open homosexuals claim it's about love-it's not. The only reason to be open is for other people to see it as normal. It's to normalize it; it's to make it seem like not a big deal.

Divorces are more complicated than that-I'm positive that wasn't the only reason for her leaving-it was probably the straw that broke the camel's back. What he probably did was say "I'm homosexual AND I look at homosexual porn". Yes, that's when protecting your children starts to play a big factor.

Jeez you really do lack compassion huh? Maybe your husband keeps a porn addiction from you. If he does....I can see why he does it. You basically are telling people to suffer in silence....dont involve me in your wicked desires.

I was being compassionate, I wasn't casting condemnation upon the women who divorced-which you did.

[catcatinabox]

How is it that you know they are homosexual?

They say things in Sunday School talking about their struggle or they will actually say that they are gay in casual conversation.

Which tells me they don't really care to change or want to change.

Does a normal person go around telling everyone they have sexual thoughts about other men's wives?
Does a normal person in casual conversation tell other men, "you know I have real problems controlling my sexual thoughts about women".
Does a normal person in casual conversation tell other men, "you know I have real problems controlling my thoughts about killing people and doing violence to them"?

Yes there is a time and place for that (in private settings or ecclesiastical)-but I don't want to know or care. And if you start saying stuff like that I don't think I'm inviting you over for dinner. I don't particularly care to have someone over to my house who openly states to people "I have problems controlling my thoughts about killing people and doing violence to them".

No please continue.....I love seeing how easy it is for you stick an entire group of people with whom you dont identify into a huge box so you can discount them, marginalize them, and cast them aside. Its actually quite entertaining......and I am just sitting here thinking to myself how glad I am not to know you in real life.

Your loss . . . .and I guess you do identify with them? Are you closeted?

[thestock]

Whatever you say. It matters not really. What matters is how we treat people. I wont take my example on how to treat gay people from you.

Yes how we treat others matters very much. I don't doubt your sincerity in believing what you are doing is really helping. I do see your point of view. I'm trying to help you see mine (and others here).

If homosexuality is biological and there is absolutely nothing one can do about it. Then the Mormon Building Bridges, LGBTQ+ groups are right. It means that if 2 men show up to church, holding hands, hugging, being affection etc. it means that it will have absolutely no impact upon how my children, your children and others behave. If your belief (i.e. your religious worldview) about it being biological is correct-then absolutely every one who tells homosexuals they shouldn't be together, they should repent, they should change, etc. every one who is doing that is causing them pain and suffering. I concede that.

However, what if you are wrong? What if instead of being biological, it comes about from a set of circumstances, that maybe because of either childhood abuse, neglect, or rebellion, maybe it comes about because some individuals have learned over time to become thus. What if it is changeable, what if it's neither innate nor inborn? What if it is possible to become clean of and change? What if human beings are way more complex than their biology, what if that by seeing 2 men holding hands, hugging, etc. it gives small children (who are very impressionable) more reason to experiment themselves to see if they enjoy it?

If I am right, then what is the kind thing to do? Would it be kind to allow my children (or other children) to see such behavior and possibly try it out themselves? Would it be kind for the one who is engaged in the behavior to allow them to do so in a Church where the objective is to help sinners become saints!?

You want middle-ground. I'm giving you middle-ground! If your belief is correct, then everything else you say is accurate and I'm absolutely wrong and I will pay for it when I stand before God.

Can you do the same for me? Can you at least come to the middle-ground and concede that if I'm correct, that if my belief is correct, then you are doing things completely backwards and you are reaping damnation?

I am growing weary of this, because I just dont see how you and I will see eye to eye on this topic. I dont view it so black and white as you. I think I very much do see your side of it, I just happen to disagree. People dont "change" from being gay. Conversion Therapy is being made illegal in states across this country, and for good reason. Why dont you start there? If "changing" from gay to hetero is a matter of just changing your behavior......then why is Conversion Therapy against the law?

I like more to compare it to a heterosexual who has no prospects for marriage, like a friend of mine who has this struggle and confides in me. He is in his 40's now, still a virgin, has kept himself chaste....still looking to get married, but facing dim prospects. Why doesnt he just give up and go whoring around town? Because he believes in the gospel of Jesus Christ. I afford the same to homosexuals. Regardless of their sexual orientation.......they can choose to be chaste or no. If they are coming to Church....then I assume they mean well and intend to keep the commandments. I do my best to assist them in that endeavor. If they fail from time to time.....they have God and Priesthood authority to help them out.

But for me to assert that gay people can suddenly just be "not gay" is disrespectful......just as disrespectful as when Church members question my friend on why he's single and a "menace to society" at this point in his life? Why dont we just change his marital status to make members happy? Its the same logic with me, asking people to change their sexual orientation.

I never asked you to see eye to eye (i.e. agree with me), I only asked for you to see it from my point of view. Which you won't do. I did it for you, but you won't do the same for me. I told you if your underlying premise is right, then I would be on your side. But you won't even consider that my underlying premise might be right.

Hence, there is no middle-ground. As much as you like to claim you are put-upon here or that you are really compassionate, you should really take a look in the mirror. You are only compassionate when others agree with your viewpoint. You certainly aren't compassionate towards me, you certainly aren't understanding towards my viewpoint. All I get is "your viewpoint is disrespectful, hateful, blah, blah, blah".

You have a severe inability to look at other people's viewpoints. I did it for you, but you won't do it for me . . .very typical of those who would your viewpoints.

You wont do it for me AT ALL. You attack my position by trying to prove to me why I am wrong. That is not seeing it from my view point at all. That is why I said "Agree to disagree" but apparently you think you can control me and wont allow me to disagree with you from what you said. LOL.

[thestock]

Careful there Art! Agreeing with me will certainly invite scorn for you on this board.

Seriously though.....well put my friend. How we respond is everything. I dont see most alcoholic church members I know with a beer in their hand at Church. They do very well most of the time, and they screw up from time to time....then they get back up and keep trying. Its the same for gay people that come to Church. The ones that are out living a lewd lifestyle arent much into going to Church. The ones that are really trying often screw up....but then they keep trying. That is what I have seen. We had a guy who's wife left him because he came out as gay (he wasnt cheating though). She divorced him and took the kids and left. He kept coming to Church. He sat alone for a long time, because once his secret was out, people treated him differently.

That breaks my heart. Its sad to see. I wish I didnt have to see it with people that struggle.....but one thing I have learned about humans is that our natural tendency is to be A-holes towards one another.....unfortunately.

Why be open? Why is it that the homosexual WANT others to know of their deviant sexual desires.

At the heart of it, when someone says they are homosexual, they are telling you they desire to have sex with someone of the same sex . . . that's why. You can dress it up all you want but at the end of the day it's about sex.

The alcoholic doesn't show up with a beer b/c no one else needs to know. The only other person who needs to know is the ecclesiastical leader. The pornographer doesn't show up with pornography b/c no one else needs to know. As much as open homosexuals claim it's about love-it's not. The only reason to be open is for other people to see it as normal. It's to normalize it; it's to make it seem like not a big deal.

Divorces are more complicated than that-I'm positive that wasn't the only reason for her leaving-it was probably the straw that broke the camel's back. What he probably did was say "I'm homosexual AND I look at homosexual porn". Yes, that's when protecting your children starts to play a big factor.

Jeez you really do lack compassion huh? Maybe your husband keeps a porn addiction from you. If he does....I can see why he does it. You basically are telling people to suffer in silence....dont involve me in your wicked desires.

I was being compassionate, I wasn't casting condemnation upon the women who divorced-which you did.

Oh yeah you are just so full of compassion

[thestock]

They say things in Sunday School talking about their struggle or they will actually say that they are gay in casual conversation.

Which tells me they don't really care to change or want to change.

Does a normal person go around telling everyone they have sexual thoughts about other men's wives?
Does a normal person in casual conversation tell other men, "you know I have real problems controlling my sexual thoughts about women".
Does a normal person in casual conversation tell other men, "you know I have real problems controlling my thoughts about killing people and doing violence to them"?

Yes there is a time and place for that (in private settings or ecclesiastical)-but I don't want to know or care. And if you start saying stuff like that I don't think I'm inviting you over for dinner. I don't particularly care to have someone over to my house who openly states to people "I have problems controlling my thoughts about killing people and doing violence to them".

No please continue.....I love seeing how easy it is for you stick an entire group of people with whom you dont identify into a huge box so you can discount them, marginalize them, and cast them aside. Its actually quite entertaining......and I am just sitting here thinking to myself how glad I am not to know you in real life.

Your loss . . . .and I guess you do identify with them? Are you closeted?

I identify with people who get treated like they dont matter and are inferior by people like yourself. All too frequent in this Church.

[Lizzy60]

[thestock]

Careful there Art! Agreeing with me will certainly invite scorn for you on this board.

Seriously though.....well put my friend. How we respond is everything. I dont see most alcoholic church members I know with a beer in their hand at Church. They do very well most of the time, and they screw up from time to time....then they get back up and keep trying. Its the same for gay people that come to Church. The ones that are out living a lewd lifestyle arent much into going to Church. The ones that are really trying often screw up....but then they keep trying. That is what I have seen. We had a guy who's wife left him because he came out as gay (he wasnt cheating though). She divorced him and took the kids and left. He kept coming to Church. He sat alone for a long time, because once his secret was out, people treated him differently.

That breaks my heart. Its sad to see. I wish I didnt have to see it with people that struggle.....but one thing I have learned about humans is that our natural tendency is to be A-holes towards one another.....unfortunately.

Why be open? Why is it that the homosexual WANT others to know of their deviant sexual desires.

At the heart of it, when someone says they are homosexual, they are telling you they desire to have sex with someone of the same sex . . . that's why. You can dress it up all you want but at the end of the day it's about sex.

The alcoholic doesn't show up with a beer b/c no one else needs to know. The only other person who needs to know is the ecclesiastical leader. The pornographer doesn't show up with pornography b/c no one else needs to know. As much as open homosexuals claim it's about love-it's not. The only reason to be open is for other people to see it as normal. It's to normalize it; it's to make it seem like not a big deal.

Divorces are more complicated than that-I'm positive that wasn't the only reason for her leaving-it was probably the straw that broke the camel's back. What he probably did was say "I'm homosexual AND I look at homosexual porn". Yes, that's when protecting your children starts to play a big factor.

Jeez you really do lack compassion huh? Maybe your husband keeps a porn addiction from you. If he does....I can see why he does it. You basically are telling people to suffer in silence....dont involve me in your wicked desires.

Pretty sure cat is a dude... though if I'm wrong I'll freely admit it.

Why would a dude have the user name "cat cat in a box"......maybe he is closeted? lol.....guess I shouldnt assume so much.

[thestock]

No I dont interact with the gay community. I know some people who are gay, and I dont have any problems with them whatsoever. They are nice and hard working people. Again if the gay community is organizing against the Church, let them organize! Let them do whatever is in their agency to do. Christ taught us to turn the other cheek. Most of them just want a safe space in the Church. Put yourself in their shoes.....imagine you actually have same sex attraction and you are struggling with it. Occasionally you screw up, but mostly you are doing things correctly. But you come to Church where A) The Leaders are talking constantly about it, and B) The church members mostly as a whole voice their disgust with the lifestyle and those who "choose" it. How would that feel? Would you want to remain in the Church? Would you just up and leave? Perhaps you feel like its not fair that gay people and others dont have a place in the Church.

Lets take a look at our own doctrine. We believe that gay people who choose to act out their gay lifestyles can be rewarded with what? Telestial glory? Terrestrial glory? We try to elevate people to Celestial glory.....but there are kingdoms within kingdoms. Many many MANY MANY of our members fall short of Celestial glory. But they have a place in the church. Lets give one to people who struggle with bieng gay. If Terrestrial glory is their cut-off....lets help them get the highest degree of it.

I have friends who are gay and we get along just fine.

Gay people are welcome in church just like the rest of us sinners are welcome. Smokers are allowed in church but if they smoke in church they'll be asked to leave. If they preach that smoking is OK they'll be corrected. If they continue the behavior they'll be asked to leave. Then there will probably be some Word of Wisdom talks and lessons in church making sure everyone knows that smoking is not OK.
Church is not a place to argue that your sin isn't actually a sin nor is it a place to promote your contrary behaviors. It's not a place to get support for your sin. Wearing rainbow ties to show support is about as stupid as wearing a tie with naked ladies on it to show support for those addicted to pornography. Those addicted to pornography come to church but they don't brag about their sin and if they do they'll be asked to leave. Same with the gay community. We as a church will support the person but not their sin. Gays seem to want support for their sin.

I live on the East coast, recently moved from one state to another. I've had several openly gay people attend the wards I am in. None of them acts the way you are describing.

How do you know they are gay?

People will tell me they are gay. They will tell me they are gay. They will sometimes make comments in Sunday School or Priesthood that make it clear they are gay or strongly hint at it, at least.

[catcatinabox]

Yes how we treat others matters very much. I don't doubt your sincerity in believing what you are doing is really helping. I do see your point of view. I'm trying to help you see mine (and others here).

If homosexuality is biological and there is absolutely nothing one can do about it. Then the Mormon Building Bridges, LGBTQ+ groups are right. It means that if 2 men show up to church, holding hands, hugging, being affection etc. it means that it will have absolutely no impact upon how my children, your children and others behave. If your belief (i.e. your religious worldview) about it being biological is correct-then absolutely every one who tells homosexuals they shouldn't be together, they should repent, they should change, etc. every one who is doing that is causing them pain and suffering. I concede that.

However, what if you are wrong? What if instead of being biological, it comes about from a set of circumstances, that maybe because of either childhood abuse, neglect, or rebellion, maybe it comes about because some individuals have learned over time to become thus. What if it is changeable, what if it's neither innate nor inborn? What if it is possible to become clean of and change? What if human beings are way more complex than their biology, what if that by seeing 2 men holding hands, hugging, etc. it gives small children (who are very impressionable) more reason to experiment themselves to see if they enjoy it?

If I am right, then what is the kind thing to do? Would it be kind to allow my children (or other children) to see such behavior and possibly try it out themselves? Would it be kind for the one who is engaged in the behavior to allow them to do so in a Church where the objective is to help sinners become saints!?

You want middle-ground. I'm giving you middle-ground! If your belief is correct, then everything else you say is accurate and I'm absolutely wrong and I will pay for it when I stand before God.

Can you do the same for me? Can you at least come to the middle-ground and concede that if I'm correct, that if my belief is correct, then you are doing things completely backwards and you are reaping damnation?

I am growing weary of this, because I just dont see how you and I will see eye to eye on this topic. I dont view it so black and white as you. I think I very much do see your side of it, I just happen to disagree. People dont "change" from being gay. Conversion Therapy is being made illegal in states across this country, and for good reason. Why dont you start there? If "changing" from gay to hetero is a matter of just changing your behavior......then why is Conversion Therapy against the law?

I like more to compare it to a heterosexual who has no prospects for marriage, like a friend of mine who has this struggle and confides in me. He is in his 40's now, still a virgin, has kept himself chaste....still looking to get married, but facing dim prospects. Why doesnt he just give up and go whoring around town? Because he believes in the gospel of Jesus Christ. I afford the same to homosexuals. Regardless of their sexual orientation.......they can choose to be chaste or no. If they are coming to Church....then I assume they mean well and intend to keep the commandments. I do my best to assist them in that endeavor. If they fail from time to time.....they have God and Priesthood authority to help them out.

But for me to assert that gay people can suddenly just be "not gay" is disrespectful......just as disrespectful as when Church members question my friend on why he's single and a "menace to society" at this point in his life? Why dont we just change his marital status to make members happy? Its the same logic with me, asking people to change their sexual orientation.

I never asked you to see eye to eye (i.e. agree with me), I only asked for you to see it from my point of view. Which you won't do. I did it for you, but you won't do the same for me. I told you if your underlying premise is right, then I would be on your side. But you won't even consider that my underlying premise might be right.

Hence, there is no middle-ground. As much as you like to claim you are put-upon here or that you are really compassionate, you should really take a look in the mirror. You are only compassionate when others agree with your viewpoint. You certainly aren't compassionate towards me, you certainly aren't understanding towards my viewpoint. All I get is "your viewpoint is disrespectful, hateful, blah, blah, blah".

You have a severe inability to look at other people's viewpoints. I did it for you, but you won't do it for me . . .very typical of those who would your viewpoints.

You wont do it for me AT ALL. You attack my position by trying to prove to me why I am wrong. That is not seeing it from my view point at all. That is why I said "Agree to disagree" but apparently you think you can control me and wont allow me to disagree with you from what you said. LOL.

How many times did I say if your underlying premise is right I would agree with you. That is seeing your point of view.

You have not once even conceded that you might be wrong. You have not once said, if you are right catcat that it's not biological then your actions would be okay. You seem to believe that seeing it from your point of view means I must agree with you-but that's not it.

It's like building a house. I can easily say, if your foundation is solid then the rest of the house you've built upon your foundation would be valid. That is middle-ground.

You won't say the same for me.

[thestock]

I am growing weary of this, because I just dont see how you and I will see eye to eye on this topic. I dont view it so black and white as you. I think I very much do see your side of it, I just happen to disagree. People dont "change" from being gay. Conversion Therapy is being made illegal in states across this country, and for good reason. Why dont you start there? If "changing" from gay to hetero is a matter of just changing your behavior......then why is Conversion Therapy against the law?

I like more to compare it to a heterosexual who has no prospects for marriage, like a friend of mine who has this struggle and confides in me. He is in his 40's now, still a virgin, has kept himself chaste....still looking to get married, but facing dim prospects. Why doesnt he just give up and go whoring around town? Because he believes in the gospel of Jesus Christ. I afford the same to homosexuals. Regardless of their sexual orientation.......they can choose to be chaste or no. If they are coming to Church....then I assume they mean well and intend to keep the commandments. I do my best to assist them in that endeavor. If they fail from time to time.....they have God and Priesthood authority to help them out.

But for me to assert that gay people can suddenly just be "not gay" is disrespectful......just as disrespectful as when Church members question my friend on why he's single and a "menace to society" at this point in his life? Why dont we just change his marital status to make members happy? Its the same logic with me, asking people to change their sexual orientation.

I never asked you to see eye to eye (i.e. agree with me), I only asked for you to see it from my point of view. Which you won't do. I did it for you, but you won't do the same for me. I told you if your underlying premise is right, then I would be on your side. But you won't even consider that my underlying premise might be right.

Hence, there is no middle-ground. As much as you like to claim you are put-upon here or that you are really compassionate, you should really take a look in the mirror. You are only compassionate when others agree with your viewpoint. You certainly aren't compassionate towards me, you certainly aren't understanding towards my viewpoint. All I get is "your viewpoint is disrespectful, hateful, blah, blah, blah".

You have a severe inability to look at other people's viewpoints. I did it for you, but you won't do it for me . . .very typical of those who would your viewpoints.

You wont do it for me AT ALL. You attack my position by trying to prove to me why I am wrong. That is not seeing it from my view point at all. That is why I said "Agree to disagree" but apparently you think you can control me and wont allow me to disagree with you from what you said. LOL.

How many times did I say if your underlying premise is right I would agree with you. That is seeing your point of view.

You have not once even conceded that you might be wrong. You have not once said, if you are right catcat that it's not biological then your actions would be okay. You seem to believe that seeing it from your point of view means I must agree with you-but that's not it.

It's like building a house. I can easily say, if your foundation is solid then the rest of the house you've built upon your foundation would be valid. That is middle-ground.

You won't say the same for me.

I cannot say the same for you because even if you are right.....it does not justify treating them like they are any less of a human being than I am.

[catcatinabox]

I have friends who are gay and we get along just fine.

Gay people are welcome in church just like the rest of us sinners are welcome. Smokers are allowed in church but if they smoke in church they'll be asked to leave. If they preach that smoking is OK they'll be corrected. If they continue the behavior they'll be asked to leave. Then there will probably be some Word of Wisdom talks and lessons in church making sure everyone knows that smoking is not OK.
Church is not a place to argue that your sin isn't actually a sin nor is it a place to promote your contrary behaviors. It's not a place to get support for your sin. Wearing rainbow ties to show support is about as stupid as wearing a tie with naked ladies on it to show support for those addicted to pornography. Those addicted to pornography come to church but they don't brag about their sin and if they do they'll be asked to leave. Same with the gay community. We as a church will support the person but not their sin. Gays seem to want support for their sin.

I live on the East coast, recently moved from one state to another. I've had several openly gay people attend the wards I am in. None of them acts the way you are describing.

How do you know they are gay?

People will tell me they are gay. They will tell me they are gay. They will sometimes make comments in Sunday School or Priesthood that make it clear they are gay or strongly hint at it, at least.

Look I get it, you are wedded to this belief system b/c it defines you. But it doesn't have to. Through Christ you can change, you can be different. Give your will to Him, instead of holding onto your own pride and your own will and He can change you.

[catcatinabox]

I never asked you to see eye to eye (i.e. agree with me), I only asked for you to see it from my point of view. Which you won't do. I did it for you, but you won't do the same for me. I told you if your underlying premise is right, then I would be on your side. But you won't even consider that my underlying premise might be right.

Hence, there is no middle-ground. As much as you like to claim you are put-upon here or that you are really compassionate, you should really take a look in the mirror. You are only compassionate when others agree with your viewpoint. You certainly aren't compassionate towards me, you certainly aren't understanding towards my viewpoint. All I get is "your viewpoint is disrespectful, hateful, blah, blah, blah".

You have a severe inability to look at other people's viewpoints. I did it for you, but you won't do it for me . . .very typical of those who would your viewpoints.

You wont do it for me AT ALL. You attack my position by trying to prove to me why I am wrong. That is not seeing it from my view point at all. That is why I said "Agree to disagree" but apparently you think you can control me and wont allow me to disagree with you from what you said. LOL.

How many times did I say if your underlying premise is right I would agree with you. That is seeing your point of view.

You have not once even conceded that you might be wrong. You have not once said, if you are right catcat that it's not biological then your actions would be okay. You seem to believe that seeing it from your point of view means I must agree with you-but that's not it.

It's like building a house. I can easily say, if your foundation is solid then the rest of the house you've built upon your foundation would be valid. That is middle-ground.

You won't say the same for me.

I cannot say the same for you because even if you are right.....it does not justify treating them like they are any less of a human being than I am.

Which means rather than me being the bigoted one, you are.

Bigot
"a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions."

I have conceded multiple times that if you are correct then what you are doing is right. Yet you won't even believe, you won't even consider for one minute that just maybe there is someone on the other side who cares just as much as you do about these individuals.

You won't consider for one minute that my actions are driven by an underlying belief system that is consistent. That if you held that same belief system you would be doing what I'm doing. You think that by calling someone to repentance is treating them "less than a human being"? Why?

You won't afford the same thing to me. Why not?

Are you so inconsiderate and without compassion that you cannot see another's viewpoint?

[RocknRoll]

Facts don't care about your feelings.

What you have is a belief, a feeling that homosexuals don't have a choice. You are welcome to that belief-absolutely.

However, your belief needs to be consistent. When it's not you get cognitive dissonance. Which is exactly what you have right now.

You believe really, really, really badly that homosexuality is not by choice but by biology. Okay, fine.
Then how does your belief account for twins which come from the same egg, same sperm, which have the same DNA where one is homosexual and one is not?

You're belief that it is biology cannot stand up in the face of these facts. Which means you can either be dogmatic in the face of all evidence and reason (that's fine) or you can find a way to resolve these contradictions and modify your belief.

If you are unwilling to recognize the contradictions and attempt to solve them, then you can simply admit your viewpoint is one based on faith-i.e. it is a religious ideology and one that you can't prove. Again, that's fine just be honest with it. Unfortunately, you do prove the point that most individuals simply follow the dogmatic crowd-the power of belief in the face of overwhelming facts is quite impressive.

What you have is a belief as well.

"For men, new research suggests that clues to sexual orientation may lie not just in the genes, but in the spaces between the DNA, where molecular marks instruct genes when to turn on and off and how strongly to express themselves.
On Thursday, UCLA molecular biologist Tuck C. Ngun reported that in studying the genetic material of 47 pairs of identical male twins, he has identified “epigenetic marks” in nine areas of the human genome that are strongly linked to male homosexuality.
In individuals, said Ngun, the presence of these distinct molecular marks can predict homosexuality with an accuracy of close to 70%."

[RocknRoll]

Why be open? Why is it that the homosexual WANT others to know of their deviant sexual desires.

At the heart of it, when someone says they are homosexual, they are telling you they desire to have sex with someone of the same sex . . . that's why.

Really? So, if I say I am heterosexual, I’m saying I desire to have sex with someone of the opposite sex? Or am I maybe just stating which group I’m attracted to?

You can dress it up all you want but at the end of the day it's about sex.

Is your relationship with your spouse just about sex? Or does it include friendship, comfort, companionship, and love?

Divorces are more complicated than that-I'm positive that wasn't the only reason for her leaving-it was probably the straw that broke the camel's back. What he probably did was say "I'm homosexual AND I look at homosexual porn". Yes, that's when protecting your children starts to play a big factor.

Total speculation on your part.

[catcatinabox]

Facts don't care about your feelings.

What you have is a belief, a feeling that homosexuals don't have a choice. You are welcome to that belief-absolutely.

However, your belief needs to be consistent. When it's not you get cognitive dissonance. Which is exactly what you have right now.

You believe really, really, really badly that homosexuality is not by choice but by biology. Okay, fine.
Then how does your belief account for twins which come from the same egg, same sperm, which have the same DNA where one is homosexual and one is not?

You're belief that it is biology cannot stand up in the face of these facts. Which means you can either be dogmatic in the face of all evidence and reason (that's fine) or you can find a way to resolve these contradictions and modify your belief.

If you are unwilling to recognize the contradictions and attempt to solve them, then you can simply admit your viewpoint is one based on faith-i.e. it is a religious ideology and one that you can't prove. Again, that's fine just be honest with it. Unfortunately, you do prove the point that most individuals simply follow the dogmatic crowd-the power of belief in the face of overwhelming facts is quite impressive.

What you have is a belief as well.

"For men, new research suggests that clues to sexual orientation may lie not just in the genes, but in the spaces between the DNA, where molecular marks instruct genes when to turn on and off and how strongly to express themselves.
On Thursday, UCLA molecular biologist Tuck C. Ngun reported that in studying the genetic material of 47 pairs of identical male twins, he has identified “epigenetic marks” in nine areas of the human genome that are strongly linked to male homosexuality.
In individuals, said Ngun, the presence of these distinct molecular marks can predict homosexuality with an accuracy of close to 70%."

"epigenetic"

And epigenetics, i.e. gene expressions that turn on or off given environmental factors . . .i.e NOT born that way.

Congratulations! Thank you for proving my point.

[RocknRoll]

Facts don't care about your feelings.

What you have is a belief, a feeling that homosexuals don't have a choice. You are welcome to that belief-absolutely.

However, your belief needs to be consistent. When it's not you get cognitive dissonance. Which is exactly what you have right now.

You believe really, really, really badly that homosexuality is not by choice but by biology. Okay, fine.
Then how does your belief account for twins which come from the same egg, same sperm, which have the same DNA where one is homosexual and one is not?

You're belief that it is biology cannot stand up in the face of these facts. Which means you can either be dogmatic in the face of all evidence and reason (that's fine) or you can find a way to resolve these contradictions and modify your belief.

If you are unwilling to recognize the contradictions and attempt to solve them, then you can simply admit your viewpoint is one based on faith-i.e. it is a religious ideology and one that you can't prove. Again, that's fine just be honest with it. Unfortunately, you do prove the point that most individuals simply follow the dogmatic crowd-the power of belief in the face of overwhelming facts is quite impressive.

What you have is a belief as well.

"For men, new research suggests that clues to sexual orientation may lie not just in the genes, but in the spaces between the DNA, where molecular marks instruct genes when to turn on and off and how strongly to express themselves.
On Thursday, UCLA molecular biologist Tuck C. Ngun reported that in studying the genetic material of 47 pairs of identical male twins, he has identified “epigenetic marks” in nine areas of the human genome that are strongly linked to male homosexuality.
In individuals, said Ngun, the presence of these distinct molecular marks can predict homosexuality with an accuracy of close to 70%."

"epigenetic"

And epigenetics, i.e. gene expressions that turn on or off given environmental factors . . .i.e NOT born that way.

Congratulations! Thank you for proving my point.

Some of these "environmental factors" come into play while still in the womb. Keep studying. Some day you'll get it.

[catcatinabox]

Facts don't care about your feelings.

What you have is a belief, a feeling that homosexuals don't have a choice. You are welcome to that belief-absolutely.

However, your belief needs to be consistent. When it's not you get cognitive dissonance. Which is exactly what you have right now.

You believe really, really, really badly that homosexuality is not by choice but by biology. Okay, fine.
Then how does your belief account for twins which come from the same egg, same sperm, which have the same DNA where one is homosexual and one is not?

You're belief that it is biology cannot stand up in the face of these facts. Which means you can either be dogmatic in the face of all evidence and reason (that's fine) or you can find a way to resolve these contradictions and modify your belief.

If you are unwilling to recognize the contradictions and attempt to solve them, then you can simply admit your viewpoint is one based on faith-i.e. it is a religious ideology and one that you can't prove. Again, that's fine just be honest with it. Unfortunately, you do prove the point that most individuals simply follow the dogmatic crowd-the power of belief in the face of overwhelming facts is quite impressive.

What you have is a belief as well.

"For men, new research suggests that clues to sexual orientation may lie not just in the genes, but in the spaces between the DNA, where molecular marks instruct genes when to turn on and off and how strongly to express themselves.
On Thursday, UCLA molecular biologist Tuck C. Ngun reported that in studying the genetic material of 47 pairs of identical male twins, he has identified “epigenetic marks” in nine areas of the human genome that are strongly linked to male homosexuality.
In individuals, said Ngun, the presence of these distinct molecular marks can predict homosexuality with an accuracy of close to 70%."

"epigenetic"

And epigenetics, i.e. gene expressions that turn on or off given environmental factors . . .i.e NOT born that way.

Congratulations! Thank you for proving my point.

Some of these "environmental factors" come into play while still in the womb. Keep studying. Some day you'll get it.

Oh really, which ones? . . .silence . . .as in total BS.

Environmental factors such as sexual abuse . . .physical abuse-sure . .otherwise it's just a bunch of magicians waving their magic wands to help make people like you buy Satan's lies.

Keep studying maybe one day you'll realize Christ can heal all.

[catcatinabox]

Oh and their metric . ..An algorithm using epigenetic information from just nine regions of the human genome can predict the sexual orientation of males with up to 70 percent accuracy

ROFLOL. They use a machine learning algorithm to get 70% accuracy!!! OMG.

That's insanely stupid. A ML algorithm isn't good unless it starts getting 97+% accuracy. 70% . ..that's barely better than a coin toss. The guy biased the data, then biased the algorithm to get those results.

They used 47 pairs of twins!!!! ROFLOL that is ridiculous. Crack-pot science to justify behavior.

There is a reason why this isn't bigger news, b/c anyone who knows ANYTHING about ML knows a data set of 47 is complete and utter trash. You can't do jack with 47 for ML algorithms. Why? B/c when doing ML you divide the data into thirds, 1/3 to train, 1/3 to test, 1/3 to validate.

Basically the guy used 15 twins to train. How much you want to be he mixed and matched the data sets to get his biased results. If he used 10000s then it might be worth taking a serious look. 15 for training, nope anyone who using 15 to train probably can't spell machine learning correctly!

Absolute trash science . . .and that's probably why the link on the page https://www.ashg.org/press/201510-sexua ... ation.html
is down.

Weak sauce. . . get that crap outa here!