I foresee a time...

[_CaliforniaKid]

Give us another hundred thousand years (if we survive this long),

Unlikely, in my opinion, unless we get on the whole Mars-terraforming and space colonization thing pretty quick.

[_Scottie]

Ok, religious dogma aside, if the government were giving the church an option of equal rights for gays or removing tax exemption, do you think they would stand fast to their beliefs?

Thus far, we've seen that the God of the LDS church is very much swayed by the government. Eternal doctrines aren't quite so eternal when the government is pushing.

If there is one true LDS church, I would vote for the FLDS. They don't let the outside pressures sway Gods commandments like the LDS church has done.

Think about it. If the government did pressure religions to allow equal treatment of gays, the LDS church would fold in a heartbeat where the FLDS would proverbially flip the government off. The government won't dictate what the FLDS believe!!

[_Blixa]

Its an interesting question to consider, but I don't think the LDS church will succumb to cultural pressure like they did over racism, uh, the priesthood ban. The dynamic of belief/prejudice is different and they'd have to toss or violently rework thier investment in gender hooha. And since they just endorsed the most ahistorical stance possible (i.e. the Proclamation), I don't see that happening soon. However, since a live prophet Trump's not only a dead one but apparently all doctrine itself, who knows?

[_wenglund]

Perhaps society will get there, perhaps not.

However, if it does, it won't be for a long, LONG time. Long after you and I are dead.

But, think about it. Don't you think that members in the mid 1800's scoffed at the idea of letting a black man hold the priesthood?

Polygamy was an eternal principle that was required for exaltation. A world without polygamy was outside of the realm of rational thought. There was just no way that God could do away with such an important part of His plan.

Why should this be any different?

Actually, there were black men who held the priesthood in the 1800's, but I get your point.

The sizeable difference to me is blacks and the priesthood are about policies regarding race--which have changed over the history of the Church (starting back in Moses' day when the gospel was restricted to literal descendants of Abraham, and that was changed at the time of Christ to include gentiles), whereas homosexuality and "gay marriage" concern moral laws and the foundational institution of the Church (the family), which doesn't appear to me to have changed much at all since the Adamic era.

But, this is all just so much speculation on my part. I just don't think that societies will long countenance the demonstrably unhealthy and delitarious practice of homosexuality, and by extension "gay marriage".

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

It’s possible. But in spite of all the politicians cozying up to God presently, by the time arrives of which you speak, most all religious superstition will be regarded as irrelevant.JAK

I have heard this speculation before. However, it has been fatally countered (in my opinion) by the renown sociologist, Rodney Stark during his Templeton Lecture Series, particularly the one on "Subsidized Religions: 6000 Years of Negligence and Laxity."

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_harmony]

It’s possible. But in spite of all the politicians cozying up to God presently, by the time arrives of which you speak, most all religious superstition will be regarded as irrelevant.JAK

I have heard this speculation before. However, it has been fatally countered (in my opinion) by the renown sociologist, Rodney Stark during his Templeton Lecture Series, particularly the one on "Subsidized Religions: 6000 Years of Negligence and Laxity."

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Although I like Rodney, I don't think he's exactly "renown", Wade. Very few sociologists are. You just like him because he's said some things supportive of your church.

[_Scottie]

I think you guys are stuck in the mindset that it will happen tomorrow.

I'm thinking that, culturally, we will slowly begin to accept homosexuality in our every day lives. We might not get to the point where we accept this for 200-300, maybe 500 years. Maybe we never will.

If after, say, 200 years, there is no more fear and bigotry towards homosexuality, I don't see it as being a big jump to change the doctrine to allow for this. If our grandchildren are the future apostles, and they are growing up in a gay-friendly society, then they wouldn't be saddled with all of the cultural stigma that we face today.

If an apostle today were asked to make this decision, I'm sure he'd pahrumph and tell you it's ludicrous! But, why? Because he was raised in a culture where homosexuality is horribly wrong. Hopefully our grandkids won't be raised in such a culture, and when asked to make this decision, will be much more open minded about it.

Heck, they've even starting changing small doctrines. It is now ok to be gay, as long as you don't succumb to your instincts. Could someone point me to anywhere in the scriptures or LDS doctrine that this has ever been ok? If this change can be made, it's not much further to allow gay couples to be married in the temple.

[_Boaz & Lidia]

When both homosexual marriages and polygamy are legal and recognized, will we see gay polygamous unions?

[_moksha]

I think there would need to be greater acceptance of homosexuals in general society first before the LDS would accept them as well.


by the way, I find Bozo and Labia's avatar of LDS garments to be offensive.

.

[_truth dancer]

Unlikely, in my opinion, unless we get on the whole Mars-terraforming and space colonization thing pretty quick.

I agree it is unlikely we will survive much longer... I was thinking A.I. may be the way we will make it. ;-)

~dancer~