Proclamation to the World...vs...LDS Gay leadership

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Proclamation to the World...vs...LDS Gay leadership

Post by _Droopy »

bcspace wrote:
Nothing has changed. Certain aspects of the doctrine have merely been emphasized for PR purposes. In fact, homosexuality itself continues to be sin as one who believes they are homosexual must not self identify as such.


This is how I understand the relevant doctrine. One may perceive himself/herself to be same-sex attracted (which, in and of itself, is not a sin per se), but one should not adopt the "gay" identity (nor, as Elder Oaks made clear, should Latter-day Saints identify others with such labels).
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Proclamation to the World...vs...LDS Gay leadership

Post by _Droopy »

Jason Bourne wrote: BC also does not agree with official statements by the Church that to have homosexual feelings and tendencies is not a sin to the LDS Church.


CFR (however, while "having" such desires and feelings may not itself be a sin, indulging and encouraging fantasies and ideations of that kind, as with heterosexual fantasizing of activities outside the boundaries of the Lord's laws of human sexuality, would very well be so).

So one can identify as gay and as long as they do not practice homosexual acts and remain essentially celibate they can hold callings and hold the priesthood.


On a case by case basis, this would appear to be so, to some extent, at least.

BC believes though that the gay just has to shut the hell up.


I see none of this in anything bc has actually said. A person with SSA should not adopt the "gay" identity and take an essentialist view of his condition.

Same as he has his own doctrine on the creation, Adam, Eve, doctrinal politics, what the law of consecration was and on and on and on. See BC needs to do this or he would not maintain his fragile testimony.


I see you continue to deteriorate intellectually, psychologically, and emotionally, as your apostasy develops. You're now beginning to approach Kevin Graham territory, Jason, an ill omen indeed.

Even his comment above the doctrine trumps scripture disagrees with LDS prophets teaching on such things as well as his fellow apologists who mostly argue, like other LDS leaders, that we judge doctrine someone teaches by the standard works.


Which is why the members of the Church still live the Law of Moses, right Jason (notice all those verses in the Old Testament in which numerous aspects of Mosaic law are said to be eternal in nature?)? Which is why Jesus revealed all that new doctrine and told the Jews that in him, the law was fulfilled and the Mosaic ordinances and observances superseded.

If doctrine never supersedes, clarifies, or amends scripture (which contains doctrine), how then is new scripture generated and new gospel knowledge revealed?
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Markk
_Emeritus
Posts: 4745
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:04 am

Re: Proclamation to the World...vs...LDS Gay leadership

Post by _Markk »

Droopy wrote:
bcspace wrote:
Nothing has changed. Certain aspects of the doctrine have merely been emphasized for PR purposes. In fact, homosexuality itself continues to be sin as one who believes they are homosexual must not self identify as such.


This is how I understand the relevant doctrine. One may perceive himself/herself to be same-sex attracted (which, in and of itself, is not a sin per se), but one should not adopt the "gay" identity (nor, as Elder Oaks made clear, should Latter-day Saints identify others with such labels).



LoL...droppy, did you read the article in the "Gay" publication by a Gay priesthood leader."
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Proclamation to the World...vs...LDS Gay leadership

Post by _Droopy »

Markk wrote:LoL...droppy, did you read the article in the "Gay" publication by a Gay priesthood leader."


A ward executive secretary is a clerk. He sets appointments, coordinates meetings, etc. He is not a "priesthood leader," and, gay or not, unless he is living the law of chastity, he, like all who refuse to live that law, is liable to find himself neither a ward executive Secretary or a Latter-day Saint.

The very fact that he would write an article such as this in a venue such as the Huffington Post is, of itself, a red flag for his own priesthood leaders. I think this statement here,

I was pleased to see use of the term "gay" more regularly, instead of the primitive and mythical label "same-sex attracted" we've used to describe LGBT individuals for decades. This gives me a bit of hope that we might someday emerge from our archaic and misguided understanding of what it really means to be an LGBT individual: a complete human in the eyes of our Savior, with desires, feelings, and a sexual orientation as complex as and equal to that of our straight fellows.


Should probably get this guy called in for a serious discussion with his Bishop. Secondly, Elder Oaks, in a major talk on the subject, cautioned members to not use terms such as "gay" that imply innate, immutable characteristics that are in some sense essential features of the spirit person.

The following is the naked, pustulent evil of the Great and Spacious Building in all its stygian glory:

That means that every LGBT Mormon who chooses can be part of our ward family as their authentic selves: whether they're living inside the confines of the policy as we understand it today, in a monogamous committed relationship with a spouse of their same gender, or dating someone new every night.

Our Savior's message was simple: "Love one another." There was no asterisk on that statement. There is no test to take to be included in His circle. And once we, as Mormons, grasp that more fully and include our LGBT brothers and sisters unconditionally, we can begin to consider ourselves one step closer to emulating the kind of love our Savior already has for all of us.


This is cacophonous sophistry, and utterly out of harmony with the core, central doctrines of the Church regarding human sexuality and its purpose. There is no doctrine or policy in the Church allowing same sex couples to live together in a sexual relationship. They could certainly live together, but would have to be wholly celibate in so doing. Men dating men, whether a few now and then or a new one each night, is not part of the Lords plan and purpose for his children.

In a place such as San Francisco, where nearly 20% of the population is homosexual, this might appear plausible, but in the broader culture, where homosexuals represent between 2% and 3% of the population, and given that there is no evidence that male homosexuals generally speaking ever have - or ever will - have any appreciable desire to ape the sexual norms and disciplines of Judeo-Christian marriage and family structure, Mr. Mayne is as deep in fantasy as Simon offering to pay Peter for a priesthood ordination.

Want the doctrine of the Church, folks? Good. Here it is: Homosexual sex, or the homosexual lifestyle and its associated practices, are gross wickedness and are a serious transgression of the Lord's laws of human sexuality, little different in severity from premarital sexual relations, adultery, or other perversion/transgressions of the bounds and conditions governing sexual conduct as established by the Savior.

The entire Church of Jesus Christ went into apostasy after the early First Century, and, given what the revelations have to say regarding conditions in the latter days immediately preceding the Second Coming of the Savior, it would not surprise me in the least if entire bishoprics and large segments of entire wards and stakes went into general apostasy over fashionable cause celebs such as homosexual "rights" and were excommunicated en mass or removed themselves from membership of their own accord.

It would not surprise me in the slightest. I am prepared for this eventuality, and prepared to ride out the storm - no matter how high the winds or loud the thunder - until the very end.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Markk
_Emeritus
Posts: 4745
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:04 am

Re: Proclamation to the World...vs...LDS Gay leadership

Post by _Markk »

Hi droopy

Your wrong, he is a leader.... https://www.lds.org/handbook/handbook-2 ... =eng#7.3.3 at least according to "the church."

The entire Church of Jesus Christ went into apostasy after the early First Century, and, given what the revelations have to say regarding conditions in the latter days immediately preceding the Second Coming of the Savior, it would not surprise me in the least if entire bishoprics and large segments of entire wards and stakes went into general apostasy over fashionable cause celebs such as homosexual "rights" and were excommunicated en mass or removed themselves from membership of their own accord.

It would not surprise me in the slightest. I am prepared for this eventuality, and prepared to ride out the storm - no matter how high the winds or loud the thunder - until the very end.


Well, hang on, the LDS church is getting a little more every year, and the leadership seems to be in the caboose of a run away train...if they can't real in this guy and stop openly gay folks at BYU...then again hang on, the "very end" may be closer than you think.
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"
_Sethbag
_Emeritus
Posts: 6855
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:52 am

Re: Proclamation to the World...vs...LDS Gay leadership

Post by _Sethbag »

by the way, I question the whole premise of the article, saying the LDS church appointed a gay dude into "leadership" as the ward executive secretary. I could probably gerrymander the term enough to see their point, but with the usual straightforward definition, I'd say the guy's not a "priesthood leader".

Show me a gay (non-practicing) Apostle or member of the 70, or hell, even stake president, and then we can talk.

Of course that'll never happen, because for bishop on up in the church they want married men only, unless you take a non-practicing gay dude who married a woman because he thought it was the righteous thing to do.
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
_lulu
_Emeritus
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 12:08 am

Re: Proclamation to the World...vs...LDS Gay leadership

Post by _lulu »

Do you have to be a HP to be a ExS?
"And the human knew the source of life, the woman of him, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, 'I have procreated a man with Yahweh.'" Gen. 4:1, interior quote translated by D. Bokovoy.
_Markk
_Emeritus
Posts: 4745
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:04 am

Re: Proclamation to the World...vs...LDS Gay leadership

Post by _Markk »

Sethbag wrote:by the way, I question the whole premise of the article, saying the LDS church appointed a gay dude into "leadership" as the ward executive secretary. I could probably gerrymander the term enough to see their point, but with the usual straightforward definition, I'd say the guy's not a "priesthood leader".

Show me a gay (non-practicing) Apostle or member of the 70, or hell, even stake president, and then we can talk.

Of course that'll never happen, because for bishop on up in the church they want married men only, unless you take a non-practicing gay dude who married a woman because he thought it was the righteous thing to do.



Then he should be ex'd for lying?

It is obvious that your not comfortable with this, as I would have been if I was still LDS...


Bottom line...He is LDS, a LDS executive secretary, holds the high PH, considers himself Gay, not "same sex attracted", and with other movements moving forward it is clear that the LDS church is a breath away from complete acceptance of this lifestyle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym0jXg-hKCI

Justification of this, like all progressive decisions the church makes is always interesting...for the record, where is the line here for you, when will you say enough is enough?

thanks
MG
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"
_Markk
_Emeritus
Posts: 4745
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:04 am

Re: Proclamation to the World...vs...LDS Gay leadership

Post by _Markk »

Sethbag wrote:by the way, I question the whole premise of the article, saying the LDS church appointed a gay dude into "leadership" as the ward executive secretary. I could probably gerrymander the term enough to see their point, but with the usual straightforward definition, I'd say the guy's not a "priesthood leader".

Show me a gay (non-practicing) Apostle or member of the 70, or hell, even stake president, and then we can talk.

Of course that'll never happen, because for bishop on up in the church they want married men only, unless you take a non-practicing gay dude who married a woman because he thought it was the righteous thing to do.


good question?
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"
_Infymus
_Emeritus
Posts: 1584
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 7:10 pm

Re: Proclamation to the World...vs...LDS Gay leadership

Post by _Infymus »

Markk wrote:Now that "the church" has called an openly gay male to leadership roll in the PH, what and how does this reflect on the Proclamation to the World "revelation?"


Ward secretary isn't a leadership role. If the guy is really gay then it won't be long until he melts down. Otherwise, he's a liar. Someone should hand him a copy of Mirror, Mask, and Shadow.
Post Reply