PBS special and a homosexual question

[_ajax18]

Those who study human sexuality find multiple patterns of sexual orientation ranging from those exclusively attracted to one sex to myriad preferences inbetween.

Right which goes back to my previous point that I don't really see how a gay man who has to suck it up and get married to a woman in this life and repress his same gender tendencies is really that much worse off than a straight man who has to repress his own illicit tendencies, especially in the case of young men who are called upon to repress longer and longer as the marriage age gets raised older and older.

This is why I can't understand why gay people are pushing for the Church to change. If homosexuality becomes acceptable, than I think we have just as much right to ask the church to do away with the whole no premarital sex thing as well.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Nehor...

Was this Oliver Cowdery's Article on Marriage canonized at the same time as the Proclamation on Government?

We've taken stuff out of canon before. We don't claim an infallible canon. The Lectures on Faith were taken out long ago.

OMG... Oliver Cowdery's Article on Marriage? You have got to be kidding!

This was official doctrine... canonized... scripture... voted on by the brethren and the church, taught by the prohpet... believed by followers.

And I do realize that the LDS no longer claims doctrine to be true, or binding, or correct, or of God. Yes the Lectures on Faith were removed as well.

Funny... to you, changing doctrine seems to show the church is true.

To me, it shows the church is... the doctrine of man mingled with scripture. :-)

Oh well... glad it brings you peace!

~dancer~

[_ajax18]

Do you really think you could or would want to choose to be gay? I just don't see it.

I think some do indeed choose it. I agree that there are others who do not. It seems like humans have more gay individuals than any other species. The amount of gayness we see in society today simply cannot be due to strictly genetics. IMHO

I would also see it as pretty sad if someone were to purposely alter a child's environment so that he be more likely to turn out gay.

[_truth dancer]

Hi ajax...

I would also see it as pretty sad if someone were to purposely alter a child's environment so that he be more likely to turn out gay.

I'm really trying but WHAT?

First of all, how would one alter a child's environment so that they will turn out gay?

And secondly who in their right mind would do such a thing as try to alter a child's sexual orientation?

Are we in some sort of alternative universe here or what?

Maybe it would help you understand if you visited with some gay or lesbian folk? You know... listen to their stories and get to know them?

A few houses down from me are two lovely women who have three children, two adopted from an orphange in Siberia. They are a fabulous couple with a darling family! As in any family there is a lot more to a relationship and a family than sex. I think if you knew them you would not feel such disgust toward those who have a different sexual orientation than do you.

I get the impression that you don't have any friends who are gay?

~dancer~

[_The Nehor]

Hi Nehor...

Was this Oliver Cowdery's Article on Marriage canonized at the same time as the Proclamation on Government?

We've taken stuff out of canon before. We don't claim an infallible canon. The Lectures on Faith were taken out long ago.

OMG... Oliver Cowdery's Article on Marriage? You have got to be kidding!

This was official doctrine... canonized... scripture... voted on by the brethren and the church, taught by the prohpet... believed by followers.

And I do realize that the LDS no longer claims doctrine to be true, or binding, or correct, or of God. Yes the Lectures on Faith were removed as well.

Funny... to you, changing doctrine seems to show the church is true.

To me, it shows the church is... the doctrine of man mingled with scripture. :-)

Oh well... glad it brings you peace!

~dancer~

Ummm, if I remember correctly Joseph wasn't there to approve of either of those two proclamations (why I still take the Proclamation on Government with a grain of salt) but were put in place by the 12 while he and Frederick G. Williams were on a Mission in Michigan. Both were written by Oliver and not approved by the Prophet. While the Prophet later spoke in support of the Proclamation on Government I have seen nothing that says he supported the Article on Marriage at any time.

Neither of them were presented as revelations and I do not feel obligated to treat them as such.

[_Mister Scratch]

Those who study human sexuality find multiple patterns of sexual orientation ranging from those exclusively attracted to one sex to myriad preferences inbetween.

Right which goes back to my previous point that I don't really see how a gay man who has to suck it up and get married to a woman in this life and repress his same gender tendencies is really that much worse off than a straight man who has to repress his own illicit tendencies, especially in the case of young men who are called upon to repress longer and longer as the marriage age gets raised older and older.

Not sure what you mean here. Why do you think the marriage age in the Church is getting raised "older and older"? Last I checked, the Brethren were still urging marriage straight out of the mission.... Well below the national average for getting marriage.

This is why I can't understand why gay people are pushing for the Church to change. If homosexuality becomes acceptable, than I think we have just as much right to ask the church to do away with the whole no premarital sex thing as well.

There is a world of difference between waiting for sex, and totally abstaining from sex. The Church teaches that it is the only true path back to God. To force someone to be something they are not in order to obtain this seems unfair, to say the least.

[_ajax18]

I think if you knew them you would not feel such disgust toward those who have a different sexual orientation than do you.

I said the act was disgusting to me not the people. I said that to explain my own orientation. The act isn't even disgusting to me because the Church says it's sinful. It's even disgusting to the natural man in me. That was my point.

[_ajax18]

Not sure what you mean here. Why do you think the marriage age in the Church is getting raised "older and older"? Last I checked, the Brethren were still urging marriage straight out of the mission.... Well below the national average for getting marriage.

My point being that the national average is pushing the marriage age for young people in the Church as well regardless of what the Brethren say. Young women don't want to marry till they're older and older women are very vocal in encouraging this. As a result this makes life more difficult for the young men in the church, but who cares about them anyway?

I'm just saying the most difficult time for any man in the Church is probably in your teens and early twenties regardless of orientation. That's why I was surprised this Brother on the PBS special decided to come out after all these years and still believed in the Church.

[_ajax18]

There is a world of difference between waiting for sex, and totally abstaining from sex. The Church teaches that it is the only true path back to God. To force someone to be something they are not in order to obtain this seems unfair, to say the least.

Sure there is a huge difference. Force them to be something they are not? That was my question. What exactly are these people? I am not naturally inclined to monogamy as many would like to force me to believe that I am, but I know myself, and I'm not. The Church forces me to be something I'm not. What's the difference?

[_truth dancer]

Hi Ajax...

I said the act was disgusting to me not the people. I said that to explain my own orientation. The act isn't even disgusting to me because the Church says it's sinful. It's even disgusting to the natural man in me. That was my point.

I apologize... I didn't mean to suggest you found the people themselves disgusting. I know you were talking about the interaction/orientation.

My point being that the national average is pushing the marriage age for young people in the Church as well regardless of what the Brethren say. Young women don't want to marry till they're older and older women are very vocal in encouraging this. As a result this makes life more difficult for the young men in the church, but who cares about them anyway?

Ohhhh dear. I'm doing some deep breathing here! :-)

Ajax, my friend... from reading your posts, you seem to think women have no interest in sex, that marriage is just so guys can screw someone, and that an intimate relationship is only about sex.

Maybe I'm reading you wrong here but I have yet to see any indication that you think marriage is about bonding, love, emotional connection, care, compassion, companionship, sharing of lives, etc. etc. etc.

I'm just saying the most difficult time for any man in the Church is probably in your teens and early twenties regardless of orientation. That's why I was surprised this Brother on the PBS special decided to come out after all these years and still believed in the Church.

I understand you do not get this. It is about living authentically vs living a lie. It is about integrity of one's own true nature. It is about wishing for a few years of life in a way that feels natural and complete.

I'm guessing this man spent forty years of his life living a lie which he felt was harming his spirit ... perhaps he, like all of us want to express who we are in a way that feels honest and true.

Just a guess... :-)

~dancer~