Part of the problem is this verse in 1 Corinthians:
Paul the self-appointed Apostle wrote: 13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.
This verse can serve as both a comfort and a cause of misery. As a believer, I was convinced by this verse that any temptation I faced was within my power to resist and overcome. About the worst temptation I faced was playing with my little factory, but such "is common to man", and I knew that it was overcomeable, just apparently not by me. Thus the second part, that this verse was a cause of misery. As I faced my inability to "overcome" masturbation, this verse convicted me - it was by definition a sign of weakness in me, since this verse promised that God
would not do that to me, ie: God would not put me in a position of temptation that I couldn't resist if only I were righteous and pure of heart enough.
I think Packer still thinks this. By definition, God will not put a person into a position where the temptation for them to sin is not within their capability to resist. Homosexuality (or at least, homosexual acts) must, then, be amenable to resistance by a suitably pure or righteous individual. Thus, Packer concludes that when scientists say that homosexuals are born that way, they
must be wrong. An innate tendency toward homosexuality certainly smacks of "temptations beyond that which ye are able" and, as he mentioned in Conference, "Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone?" He wouldn't, of course. The Bible says so.
Interestingly, the Book of Mormon doesn't necessarily agree:
Joseph Smith, author and proprietor of this work wrote:28 But that ye would humble yourselves before the Lord, and call on his holy name, and watch and pray continually, that ye may not be tempted above that which ye can bear, and thus be led by the Holy Spirit, becoming humble, meek, submissive, patient, full of love and all long-suffering; [emphasis added by yours truly]
The Book of Mormon leaves room for someone to be tempted beyond that which they can bear, but only as a consequence of their not being watchful and praying enough. I guess the question still remains whether this is compatible with the notion that a newborn baby with latent homosexual tendencies that will eventually express themselves has fairly had the opportunity to be watchful and prayerful enough.
Still, as the scientific consensus drifts toward "innate homosexual tendencies" as conclusively demonstrated, my guess is that the church sees this potential conflict with LDS doctrine coming, and wants to leave a little bit of wiggle room. My guess is that they may be leaning toward the idea that homosexuality may indeed be innate, but still overcomeable. At least, the whole "you can be a gay Mormon as long as you never have sex with anyone you love and never masturbate, and never kiss passionately, hold hands with, or in any other way express physical attraction to a person of the gender you are attracted to" seems to be evidence of this.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen