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

[_Infymus]

It is not a revelation but a proclamation. And should be treated as such.

So if it is a proclamation then nobody needs to obey it because it came from men - who were speaking as men.

[_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.

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...

You've got me completely, totally wrong. What I'm saying is that it's overhyped. They're saying the LDS church may have turned some corner by appointing an open but non-practicing gay man to a position in the priesthood leadership of the church. The man is the ward executive secretary. What I'm saying is that I don't think that really counts as "the leadership".

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.

Is this in the same sense that fame and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks? Because you say "and other movements", but these would have to be doing all the work here, because the executive secretary thing isn't. You really think that a non-practicing gay dude being executive secretary indicates the LDS church is a breath away from complete acceptance of this lifestyle? If so, you're delusional.

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

Um, about eight years ago? Apparently you're mistaking me for someone else.

As for the "it gets better" at BYU thing, who am I to tell a person what they should be willing to put up with? My view, as a non-homosexual apostate, is that it would "get better" if these students went somewhere else, not because I'm trying to get rid of them, but because I'm urging them to get rid of the LDS church. I've never been gay, so I can only imagine what it's like trying to fit in as a gay person in the LDS church, but I imagine it would be like trying to get used to always hitting yourself in the face with a wooden board. Who needs that?

But if some feel they do need that, my hat's off to them.

[_Jaybear]

You've got me completely, totally wrong. What I'm saying is that it's overhyped. They're saying the LDS church may have turned some corner by appointing an open but non-practicing gay man to a position in the priesthood leadership of the church. The man is the ward executive secretary. What I'm saying is that I don't think that really counts as "the leadership".

Why do you say he is a "non-practicing" gay man? From the interview I heard, he didn't strike me as someone that was promoting celibacy for gay men. My impression was that his leaders were simply willing to look other way, ... don't ask don't tell, which made the story sort of remarkable to me. That would put the LDS only 20 years behind the times.

[_Sethbag]

It's been months since I read his story, but in an article I read a while back he indicated that he was living the law of chastity, and was committed to the non-practicing thing.

[_Darth J]

You know what your problem is, Droopy? Those low-budget kung fu movies you like to watch are making you gay.

Spencer with. Kimball, October 1976 General Conference

The path to the grievous sins of fornication, adultery, and homosexuality can begin, too, with the viewing of some of the sex- and violence-oriented programs now being shown on television, including network television.

See? A modern prophet of God has identified a cause-effect relationship between violent programs and homosexuality. The Church said it, so it's true.

I commend Droopy in advance on his decision to throw away his collection of kung fu movies, so that the Adversary will not be able to continue leading him down the path of homosexuality.

[_Darth J]

http://www.lds.org/topics/family-proclamation?lang=eng

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?"

Thanks
Mark

It is not a revelation but a proclamation. And should be treated as such.

QFT.

See also: The Book of Mormon; Doctrine and Covenants; Pearl of Great Price

[_Droopy]

Hi droopy

Your wrong, he is a leader....

He is a ward clerk.

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.

Bring it on.

[_Droopy]

You know what your problem is, Droopy? Those low-budget kung fu movies you like to watch are making you gay.

Spencer with. Kimball, October 1976 General Conference

The path to the grievous sins of fornication, adultery, and homosexuality can begin, too, with the viewing of some of the sex- and violence-oriented programs now being shown on television, including network television.

See? A modern prophet of God has identified a cause-effect relationship between violent programs and homosexuality. The Church said it, so it's true.

I have probably a couple hundred such films, none of which contain nudity, let alone sex scenes.

I commend Droopy in advance on his decision to throw away his collection of kung fu movies, so that the Adversary will not be able to continue leading him down the path of homosexuality.

I have never supported forced sterilization. In the case of lawyers, however...

[_Darth J]

You know what your problem is, Droopy? Those low-budget kung fu movies you like to watch are making you gay.

Spencer with. Kimball, October 1976 General Conference

The path to the grievous sins of fornication, adultery, and homosexuality can begin, too, with the viewing of some of the sex- and violence-oriented programs now being shown on television, including network television.

See? A modern prophet of God has identified a cause-effect relationship between violent programs and homosexuality. The Church said it, so it's true.

I have probably a couple hundred such films, none of which contain nudity, let alone sex scenes.

I commend Droopy in advance on his decision to throw away his collection of kung fu movies, so that the Adversary will not be able to continue leading him down the path of homosexuality.

I also commend you in advance on your decision to take an arc welder and...

And what? Do something homoerotic with it?

See, Droopy, this is what President Kimball was warning everyone about. It starts with some violent kung fu schlock, and soon you are preoccupied with homosexual thoughts.

[_Darth J]

You know what your problem is, Droopy? Those low-budget kung fu movies you like to watch are making you gay.

Spencer with. Kimball, October 1976 General Conference

The path to the grievous sins of fornication, adultery, and homosexuality can begin, too, with the viewing of some of the sex- and violence-oriented programs now being shown on television, including network television.

See? A modern prophet of God has identified a cause-effect relationship between violent programs and homosexuality. The Church said it, so it's true.

I have probably a couple hundred such films, none of which contain nudity, let alone sex scenes.

That's right, Droopy. Rationalize away, just like Lucifer is urging you to. But President Kimball was talking about violence, not just sex. Why do you reject the words of the prophet, Droopy? Are the homosexual fantasies that started with the violent movies you like just too compelling?

In fact, the Church has been consistent in not only decrying violence in entertainment, but in equating it with pornography. E.g.,

Of course the most basic way to protest negative-impact media is simply not to watch it, see it, read it, or play it. We should teach our family members to follow the First Presidency's counsel to young people. From the For the Strength of Youth pamphlet, their instruction regarding entertainment and the media is very clear:

“Do not attend, view, or participate in entertainment that is vulgar, immoral, violent, or pornographic in any way. Do not participate in entertainment that in any way presents immorality or violent behavior as acceptable. . . .

”Have the courage to walk out of a movie or video party, turn off a computer or television, change a radio station, or put down a magazine if what is being presented does not meet Heavenly Father's standards. Do these things even if others do not.“]

“Do not attend, view, or participate in entertainment that is vulgar, immoral, violent, or pornographic in any way. Do not participate in entertainment that in any way presents immorality or violent behavior as acceptable. . . .

”Have the courage to walk out of a movie or video party, turn off a computer or television, change a radio station, or put down a magazine if what is being presented does not meet Heavenly Father's standards. Do these things even if others do not.“ http://www.lds.org/topics/pornography/a ... d?lang=eng

Why do you reject the Bretheren's inspired counsel, Droopy? Has Satan so corrupted your heart with the homosexual desires that are caused by violent programs?

I commend Droopy in advance on his decision to throw away his collection of kung fu movies, so that the Adversary will not be able to continue leading him down the path of homosexuality.

I have never supported forced sterilization. In the case of lawyers, however...

You would really sterilize Dallin H. Oaks, a Living Apostle Of The Lord Jesus Christ? Or Quentin L. Cook? Or D. Todd Christofferson?

Evil speaking of the Lord's anointed, Droopy. No wonder you are in Lucifer's power.