One in five young adult Mormons in the US are gay, lesbian or bisexual

[IHAQ]

Jana Riess writes...

The Nationscape dataset, which canvassed more than 318,000 Americans on a rolling basis in 2019 and 2020, had 3,881 self-identified members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the survey. This makes it one of the largest studies of Mormons ever fielded in the United States.

https://religionnews.com/2021/06/21/one ... -bisexual/

More than a fifth of Generation Z Latter-day Saints do not self-identify as heterosexual, according to a major national study.
One in 10 is bisexual.

23% of Gen Zers who identify as LDS say they are lesbian, gay, bisexual or other. And nearly as many (19%) of millennials did as well. It’s notable that this finding is nearly double the 10% that Benjamin Knoll and I found among millennials in the 2016 Next Mormons Survey (which broke down into 7% bisexual, 2% gay or lesbian, and 1% “other”).

It’s not surprising that it’s harder for LGBTQ members to stay. The church has made a point for years of fighting same-sex marriage, condemning nontraditional families as “counterfeit,” and preventing church members who are in a same-sex relationship from attending the temple, holding certain callings or exercising the priesthood. While there have been important steps toward compassion and understanding in the past few years, that damage still runs deep.

So the percentage of queer Gen Z Latter-day Saints will probably not be as high as 23% in future studies. That won’t be because these people will have magically become heterosexual as they get older. It will be because they will have ceased to be Mormon, and will drop out of the pool of respondents who currently identify as members.

With Dallin H. Oaks slated to be the next President, I'd suggest this haemorrhaging of young people is set to continue for the foreseeable future.

I wonder if David A. Bednar still thinks..."there are no homosexual members of the church"

[Moksha]

Let's hope their parents encourage them to go somewhere they can feel safe and accepted for an education. Someplace without a paid tattletale brigade.

[TheSonOfKorihor]

Also in that article it says that 94% of Utah Mormons report being heterosexual while it’s 83% for non Utah Mormons.

I’m afraid this will turn Utah into more of a bubble than it already is. I can see the leaders already saying that the world is going to hell and it’s only the Utah church that can save it.

Incidentally, the Nationscape study showed a double-digit difference between Mormons who lived in Utah (94% heterosexual) and those who did not (83% heterosexual). This echoes and widens a smaller, 4-point difference we found in the 2016 NMS regarding the sexual orientation of Mormons in Utah versus Mormons elsewhere.

[drumdude]

I’m afraid this will turn Utah into more of a bubble than it already is.

I think the LDS church is at a huge crossroads, and it's over the LGBT issue. I don't think they will be forced to take the correct position, like they were with the Civil Rights movement. I think they have a free choice here.

1) Become accepting of LGBT, which has the same effect ending polygamy did. Core Mormon doctrines will be discarded and the church will become more generic and like any other evangelical Christian religion.

2) Double down against LGBT, and start pushing the narrative that the purpose of the LDS church is no longer to spread, but to endure these horrible end times. With hundreds of billions of dollars in the bank, the LDS church can afford to lose any number of members and still retain their power among those remaining in Utah.

[dastardly stem]

I’m afraid this will turn Utah into more of a bubble than it already is.

I think the LDS church is at a huge crossroads, and it's over the LGBT issue. I don't think they will be forced to take the correct position, like they were with the Civil Rights movement. I think they have a free choice here.

1) Become accepting of LGBT, which has the same effect ending polygamy did. Core Mormon doctrines will be discarded and the church will become more generic and like any other evangelical Christian religion.

2) Double down against LGBT, and start pushing the narrative that the purpose of the LDS church is no longer to spread, but to endure these horrible end times. With hundreds of billions of dollars in the bank, the LDS church can afford to lose any number of members and still retain their power among those remaining in Utah.

I think the Church will be forced to change sometime down the road. It'll do so and pretend things like "God knew the people weren't ready for it".

But, I have another comment I wanted to make. Speaking with my Sister-in-law recently she announced she's an LGBTQ advocate. It surprised me because she is active LDS and frankly I had never heard her mention any related issues over the years. Later my son and I were talking and he wondered, "can someone be a member of the church and still be an advocate for LGBTQ?" I thought so. I mean it's never a zero or nothing thing, or shouldn't be.

In a sense the Church is a good thousand miles away on the topic from where it was a few short decades ago, or a decade ago. It no longer advocates, at least not explicitly, conversion therapy. It no longer wonders, necessarily, if God would allow such a thing. It speaks of love and inclusion, although, I grant, that's hard to take seriously in a complete sense.

If it's true the Church is no longer where it used to be on this topic, then it must be true it's more complicated then a doubling down on vs accepting completely.

I thought I heard something about a recent speech by a leader of the Church who said how the Church, as in the members, keep moving closer to the "ways of the world" and that leader suggested they should be staying clear over on the polar side away from the world. Of course it all sounded like empty talk to me since the Church has been operating by following the principles of the ways of the world behind the scenes. I think, though, in time, in spite of what the leader said, the members tend to pull the Church to more reasonable positions in time. It might not have been that way a hundred years ago, but it seems to be the case now.

[TheSonOfKorihor]

But, I have another comment I wanted to make. Speaking with my Sister-in-law recently she announced she's an LGBTQ advocate. It surprised me because she is active LDS and frankly I had never heard her mention any related issues over the years. Later my son and I were talking and he wondered, "can someone be a member of the church and still be an advocate for LGBTQ?" I thought so. I mean it's never a zero or nothing thing, or shouldn't be.

One of the temple recommend questions is something along the lines of “do you affiliate with any person or group who advocates for things the church is against?” Ok i butchered that and I don’t have time to look up the exact question sorry. But to me, it would seem the church would have to frown upon people who claim to be lgbtq advocates if they want to be true to their own temple recommend question.

[dastardly stem]

One of the temple recommend questions is something along the lines of “do you affiliate with any person or group who advocates for things the church is against?” Ok i butchered that and I don’t have time to look up the exact question sorry. But to me, it would seem the church would have to frown upon people who claim to be lgbtq advocates if they want to be true to their own temple recommend question.

Anyone can answer anything they want for the questions. The Church knows that. On that I would suggest if the Church really wanted the members to refrain from being LGBTQ advocates they'd throw a specific question in there.

Here's the question as it reads now, apparently:

Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

Any member can say, "I advocate for LGBTQ rights and I do not support or promote teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church because my advocacy is bourn out of a desire to love my fellow human and that's what the Church wants from me". It may be, though, for instance, my Sister-in-law thinks she's an advocate but others, while viewing her advocacy or learning her views, may not. My son decided, "I don't think you can do both". I can be sympathetic to that view. Although, ultimately, I like to see people feel encouraged and would say someone can do both, even if that person is a bit compromised one way or the other.

[TheSonOfKorihor]

Anyone can answer anything they want for the questions. The Church knows that. On that I would suggest if the Church really wanted the members to refrain from being LGBTQ advocates they'd throw a specific question in there.

Here's the question as it reads now, apparently:

Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

Any member can say, "I advocate for LGBTQ rights and I do not support or promote teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church because my advocacy is bourn out of a desire to love my fellow human and that's what the Church wants from me". It may be, though, for instance, my Sister-in-law thinks she's an advocate but others, while viewing her advocacy or learning her views, may not. My son decided, "I don't think you can do both". I can be sympathetic to that view. Although, ultimately, I like to see people feel encouraged and would say someone can do both, even if that person is a bit compromised one way or the other.

Good point.

I feel like your sister in law. The less orthodox I’ve become the more lgbtq friendly I’ve become. If it weren’t for ignorant family members I’d even add the pride logo on my Facebook profile. At this point in my life I’m still PIMO, for a variety of reasons.

Interestingly the bishop (who had been called a month prior) asked us if we (my wife is still TBM) would teach the 14 year olds. I told him i didn’t believe the Book of Mormon was a literal history and that Joseph Smith and BY were bad people. Not only did he not care, he said that he and his wife have those same discussions. So I’m wondering if my bishop is a PIMO.

Anyway I personally feel like the church is going to have to become more tolerant towards lgbtq people. Yes it could live off of its dragon hoard of money, but Russell M. Nelson has given every indication that he wants to become more mainstream Christian. And to retrench into hardcore anti lgbtq ideology would undo everything he’s worked so hard to achieve.

Although…there always the nov 2015 policy he proclaimed was inspired, until it wasn’t so

[dastardly stem]

Sorry, PIMO? That's new to me.

[Moksha]

Here's the question as it reads now, apparently:

Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

When I first walked away from the LDS Church, I did so because I thought my support for civil rights conflicted with the Church. They used to say openly racist things in my ward which made me feel they were devoid of goodness.