BYU Professor comes out as gay

[_harmony]

Get some help and sow medication.

If he sows medication, what will he reap?

Street level drugs, and then jail time.

[_Yoda]

How many Mormon women would ADMIT to you or anybody they had sex before marriage? Unless they had a child, I would say 100% would deny it!!! And every ONE of them would be a liar.

Let me ASSURE you....this guy has at least one male lover, has had many male lovers, both before he was at BYU and during his tenure, and he will eventually REVEAL this truth, but not until BYU kicks him out.

I see....so when you said this:

If you dug a little you'll find he has at least one male lover, and is being "backed" by the guy who owns Signature Books and finances Sunstone, who has the money needed for lawyers to sue BYU once this guy is fired.

You had no basis of reading for stating this. The male lover who owns Signature Books, finances Sunstone, and has money for lawyers to sue BYU is, in actuality, a figment of your imagination. There is no article you have read which is pointing you to this information. Is that what you are saying?

And...if you are "assuring" us that this rumor you just spun is true, please share how you came across this information. In other words...CFR or withdraw the statement, and admit that it is a lie.

[_Jaybear]

He is doing this in order to get fired then sue the Church, and challenge BYU hiring practices in court.

Nope.

In Utah county, a private employer can fire an employee if he/she is gay.

However, firing him would bring attention to his movie, which brings attention to how poorly gays are treated in the LDS Church.

More likely when his existing contract ends, it will not be renewed, and BYU will offer no comments.

[_Jason Bourne]

Darrick does not need fact. Darrick just needs Darrick. Did you not see on another thread that Darrick thinks he is the most introspective person he knows? Do you not see posts where Darrick refers to himself in the third person? Darrick is delusional and literally a legend in his own mind. Everyone is wrong he is right. If you cross him or disagree you are a liar. Everyone lies except for Darrick. His characterization of women, and especially Mormon women is so warped. He is a misogynistic pig.


Please just ban him.

[_stemelbow]

If he had said that he was "dealing with same sex attraction (SSA), or had a "homosexual orientation," that would have been one thing, but "coming out" as "gay" is perhaps indicative of deeper coming-to-terms with his SSA then might by though healthy, within a gospel context.

"Gay" is a term of accepted core self identity, acceptance or support for which the General Authorities, and especially Dallin Oaks, has counseled active LDS who deal with or counsel those with SSA to avoid when discussing such issues with others.

We should note that the words homosexual, lesbian, and gay are adjectives to describe particular thoughts, feelings, or behaviors. We should refrain from using these words as nouns to identify particular conditions or specific persons. Our religious doctrine dictates this usage. It is wrong to use these words to denote a condition, because this implies that a person is consigned by birth to a circumstance in which he or she has no choice in respect to the critically important matter of sexual behavior.

http://LDS.org/ensign/1995/10/same-gend ... osexuality

If bro. Wilcox has "come out" as "gay," then it would seem he has accepted wholly the idea of the essentialist "born that way" theory of homosexual orientation, within which homosexuality is not a complex feature of psycho-sexual development with any number of variables contributing to its ultimate manifestation, but a simple genes = homosexuality throwing up of the arms.

Homosexuality is, as Oaks correctly states, a body of "particular thoughts, feelings, or behaviors." "Gay" is a designation of core self identity; an assertion that the thoughts, and feelings attendant to SSA are primary and intrinsic.

Ahh...shoot, it sounds to me like this is nothing but a semantics thing on your end. Oh well, can't ask the same from everyone.

[_LDSToronto]

http://mormonstories.org/?p=1762

He's a celibate gay man. His goal appears to be trying to change church culture rather than agitating for changes in policy. Smart guy. If BYU or the church retaliate, they're going to look like tyrants.

Perhaps this is out-of-character for me to say, but this line in the Salt Lake Tribune article doesn't sit well with me:

Wilcox, an executive producer with Brigham Young University Broadcasting, "lacked wisdom" of a different kind: why God made him Mormon and gay and how he was supposed to handle the conflict.

Is it fair to state that God made this gentleman "Mormon" and "gay"? Mormonism is a choice - albeit a choice that can be hard to reverse. Sexual orientation does not involve agency, and may not involve God's intervention.

It is unclear whether Wilcox made this remark or if it was editorial license. Either way, it seems to counter LDS theology surrounding agency.

H.

[_LDSToronto]

If he had said that he was "dealing with same sex attraction (SSA), or had a "homosexual orientation," that would have been one thing, but "coming out" as "gay" is perhaps indicative of deeper coming-to-terms with his SSA then might by though healthy, within a gospel context.

What kind of gibberish is this? Within a gospel context, it's only healthy to come to grips with one's sexual identity at a superficial level? I suppose that matches my experience of LDS culture; I'd hardly classify it as a healthy attitude.

"Gay" is a term of accepted core self identity,

Let's assume that using the term 'gay' to self-identify is a sign of accepting one's core self-identity. If that is true, who cares what anyone else thinks?

We should note that the words homosexual, lesbian, and gay are adjectives to describe particular thoughts, feelings, or behaviors. We should refrain from using these words as nouns to identify particular conditions or specific persons. Our religious doctrine dictates this usage. It is wrong to use these words to denote a condition, because this implies that a person is consigned by birth to a circumstance in which he or she has no choice in respect to the critically important matter of sexual behavior.

Wha...!?! Which part of LDS doctrine dictates the terms homosexual, lesbian, and gay are adjectives, not nouns? Did I miss the Strunk and White sections of the Doctrine and Covenants?

And, if that is the case, I'd propose an addendum doctrine - that the words prophet, seer, and revelator are also adjectives that describe particular thoughts, feelings, or behaviours, and we should refrain from using these words to identify particular conditions or specific persons.

If bro. Wilcox has "come out" as "gay," then it would seem he has accepted wholly the idea of the essentialist "born that way" theory of homosexual orientation, within which homosexuality is not a complex feature of psycho-sexual development with any number of variables contributing to its ultimate manifestation, but a simple genes = homosexuality throwing up of the arms.

Huh? Isn't 'gay' always an adjective? So isn't Wilcox using the word 'gay' in a doctrinally correct way? In fact, I've only ever heard the word gay used as a noun in my High Priests group: "the gays", "the gay", etc. Seems my ward needs to listen to Dallin Oaks a little more closely.

Homosexuality is, as Oaks correctly states, a body of "particular thoughts, feelings, or behaviors." "Gay" is a designation of core self identity; an assertion that the thoughts, and feelings attendant to SSA are primary and intrinsic.

And how would Dallin Oaks know?

H.

[_Runtu]

As I recall, several years ago a BYU professor (I think he taught Spanish) came out as gay. He too said he would remain celibate and keep his temple covenants. He was either fired or encouraged to resign.

[_daheshism]

Jason,

When I told Mormon bishops that my roommates were banging all sorts of young Mormon girls and women, they said: "You're DELUSIONAL....Mormon girls and women would NEVER DO what you are saying they do!"

FACT: they were banging all sorts of young Mormon women and girls.

When I told everybody I could that Mark Hofmann was forging documents and would "spill innocent blood" I was told by Mormon bishops and institute teachers and others: "You're DELUSTIONAL....the brethren CANNOT BE FOOLED!"

FACT: they WERE fooled, over and over again for five years, and Mark Hofmann DID spill innocent blood

Jason, you're just a TYPICAL "Mormon bishop"; a self-righteous CLOWN. A BOZO. A self-righteous "FOOL".

FACT: this gay man at BYU is NOT celebate, never was, and this will be revealed in the years to come.

Darrick does not need fact. Darrick just needs Darrick. Did you not see on another thread that Darrick thinks he is the most introspective person he knows? Do you not see posts where Darrick refers to himself in the third person? Darrick is delusional and literally a legend in his own mind. Everyone is wrong he is right. If you cross him or disagree you are a liar. Everyone lies except for Darrick. His characterization of women, and especially Mormon women is so warped. He is a misogynistic pig.


Please just ban him.

[_Droopy]

If he had said that he was "dealing with same sex attraction (SSA), or had a "homosexual orientation," that would have been one thing, but "coming out" as "gay" is perhaps indicative of deeper coming-to-terms with his SSA then might by though healthy, within a gospel context.

"Gay" is a term of accepted core self identity, acceptance or support for which the General Authorities, and especially Dallin Oaks, has counseled active LDS who deal with or counsel those with SSA to avoid when discussing such issues with others.

We should note that the words homosexual, lesbian, and gay are adjectives to describe particular thoughts, feelings, or behaviors. We should refrain from using these words as nouns to identify particular conditions or specific persons. Our religious doctrine dictates this usage. It is wrong to use these words to denote a condition, because this implies that a person is consigned by birth to a circumstance in which he or she has no choice in respect to the critically important matter of sexual behavior.

http://LDS.org/ensign/1995/10/same-gend ... osexuality

If bro. Wilcox has "come out" as "gay," then it would seem he has accepted wholly the idea of the essentialist "born that way" theory of homosexual orientation, within which homosexuality is not a complex feature of psycho-sexual development with any number of variables contributing to its ultimate manifestation, but a simple genes = homosexuality throwing up of the arms.

Homosexuality is, as Oaks correctly states, a body of "particular thoughts, feelings, or behaviors." "Gay" is a designation of core self identity; an assertion that the thoughts, and feelings attendant to SSA are primary and intrinsic.

Ahh...shoot, it sounds to me like this is nothing but a semantics thing on your end. Oh well, can't ask the same from everyone.

You see stak, why I emphasize "intellectual substance" so frequently here?