The future is almost here.

[_EAllusion]

EAllusion ~ I have to understand what it is we're anticipating apologetics for. Do you believe that the LDS church (or any other conservative religious faith tradition, for that matter) is going to switch to full-scale tolerance of homosexual relationships---and by that I mean not only acceptance of gay rights on a civil level, but acceptance of gay sexuality within their own ranks and clergy?

I think the former is inevitable, but the latter is questionable, especially where Mormonism is concerned.

I had civil marriage in mind here. I think at some point in the not too distant future it will become necessary for those wanting to defend the moral integrity of the Church to downplay it's opposition to same sex marriages and general focus on homosexuality. As the shock-aversion "therapy" for gays has become an embarrassment that will have to be whitewashed, so too will the efforts of today. I don't know if that would translate into acceptance of homosexuality within its ranks. Large conservative niches can exist within a more liberal society. It's hard to say how that will evolve.

[_xolotl]

Bible and the Book of Mormon says divorce is a sin and yet the church blithely ignores that. That’s why momons have no credibility projecting its beliefs on others ..

Divorce as a sin is not comparable to homosexual activity. To the church that's like lying being equivalent to murder, just because they state its a sin does not determine that they are going to view it as equal to the other. I do wonder if perhaps homosexual relationships will at some point be comparable to the church's past and present comparison and treatment of interracial marriages. I think that the potential for the church to change its stance on gays is there, but I don't think the church will ever cross that line at least until a few generations of leadership dies out. Even then, its improbable, in my opinion.

[_JohnStuartMill]

I wouldn't be surprised if the Church actually got more conservative in the upcoming years. If theologically-moderate members disproportionately leave the Church, then the only congregants left will be the conservative ones, and the Church's voice will probably reflect this new constituency.

Our culture is shifting pretty rapidly toward secularism and social liberalism. This means that the Church will either retain its size (or grow) and become more theologically liberal; or it will shrink in size, and become more conservative. This latter scenario is frightening: such an organization wouldn't fit in well with the broader culture, and would be embattled and paranoid. The Intermountain West could potentially become a ground-zero for religious terrorism in twenty or thirty years.

[_The Nehor]

I see the entire gay marriage fight as some kind of weird attempt to redefine a word that has never meant what they want it to in order to be like everyone else.

You don't know much about the history of marriage, do you?

I actually have studied quite a bit.

It's only in the last couple hundred years that marriage has been "religious".

Nothing to do with what I said. I also have no idea what you mean but the 'last couple hundred years'. How involved religion is with marriage has varied throughout history from culture to culture. A 2nd century Jew and a 2nd century Roman marriage were both heavily religious.

Prior to that, marriage was reserved for those with property and titles... and a need to legally establish lines of progeny.

What the hell are you talking about? Even in feudal Europe the lowest of the low (serfs) married.

None of us here would have had a need for marriage at all... well, unless Packer is here under a pseudonym...

I don't think you or Porter with his ignorant 'ice-burn' trolling have any concept of history.

If you mean to suggest that marriage has only recently become religious I suggest an overview of marriage rituals in different cultures throughout history. Except in a few modern atheistic cultures marriage has almost always involved religious customs, obligations, and rituals.

As for marriage only belonging to the elite, I have no idea what you are trying to say here. Every culture in history has a concept of marriage and while there are occasionally those excluded from it (usually slaves and usually not even them) it is everywhere at every level of society.

What are you trying to say here?

[_The Dude]

This latter scenario is frightening: such an organization wouldn't fit in well with the broader culture, and would be embattled and paranoid.

Oh yeah, embattled and paranoid like MADB. I can see that.

The Intermountain West could potentially become a ground-zero for religious terrorism in twenty or thirty years.

I hope someone in the bloated US security agency is archiving posts from Cold Steel and USU78.

[_Infymus]

Packer phoned. He said he sees your little factory drawn into the graph.



Now stop that.

[_TAK]

xolotl

Divorce as a sin is not comparable to homosexual activity. To the church that's like lying being equivalent to murder, just because they state its a sin does not determine that they are going to view it as equal to the other.

Thanks for making my point.. The church compares divorce a sin less serious than lying.. Christ in both the Bible and Book of Mormon compares divorce to ADULTRY.. And it’s the capricious views of the old white men in SLC that deserves to be criticized for pushing its 19th century views on others.

xolotl

I do wonder if perhaps homosexual relationships will at some point be comparable to the church's past and present comparison and treatment of interracial marriages. I think that the potential for the church to change its stance on gays is there, but I don't think the church will ever cross that line at least until a few generations of leadership dies out. Even then, its improbable, in my opinion.

I can predict the day the church changes it’s views on Gays.. When it’s charitable tax free status is threatened…

[_The Nehor]

I can predict the day the church changes it’s views on Gays.. When it’s charitable tax free status is threatened…

So when the government decides to use it's powers to selectively persecute religions that they don't agree with? At that point I think we will have much bigger problems.

[_Tchild]

I can predict the day the church changes it’s views on Gays.. When it’s charitable tax free status is threatened…

Or when popular opinion (ten to twenty years after) is in favor of marriage equality for gays. The church will no doubt be consistent in laging behind positive social change and equality by a few decades.

[_Analytics]

I wouldn't be surprised if the Church actually got more conservative in the upcoming years. If theologically-moderate members disproportionately leave the Church, then the only congregants left will be the conservative ones, and the Church's voice will probably reflect this new constituency.

Our culture is shifting pretty rapidly toward secularism and social liberalism. This means that the Church will either retain its size (or grow) and become more theologically liberal; or it will shrink in size, and become more conservative. This latter scenario is frightening: such an organization wouldn't fit in well with the broader culture, and would be embattled and paranoid. The Intermountain West could potentially become a ground-zero for religious terrorism in twenty or thirty years.

Excellent point. But to quibble, if it got more conservative, it's possible that it could actually grow--a lot. If, say, 20% of the total U.S. population is intrinsically conservative, the Church shedding the liberal members and becoming more conservative would make it more attractive to other conservatives. So if the church were to shed a million liberals, whose to say they wouldn't pick up three million conservatives?