quote:Originally posted by ladyday: Anthonie, I remember meeting you many years ago (I won't be at all offended if you don't remember me, but this is Billie, from, ah, EnderCon weekend, [geez, that long ago] when Katie came out to visit and I stayed with her at her parent's house) and you struck me as an irrepressibly bright and charming gentleman (yes, you made an impression ). I am sorry to hear that you are going through such a difficult time with your family. You don't have to have a bazillion posts or comment on every thread in order to rant or seek (and hopefully find!) support here. Best wishes and good vibes to you.
Wow, blast from the past! What a great memory you have. Katie introduced me to the forums here. Yes, I do remember meeting you at her parents' home. I hope you and yours are well.
Thanks for the kind words.
...and yeah, I don't even come close to qualifying with a bazillion posts (168 over ten years...)
Posts: 293 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
BlackBlade, I feel I should apologize to you and Scott R for my last post... I think ended up being far more venomous than I intended, as well as a little underhanded. I've felt the frustration of having an organization I'm part of derided because of the actions of a few members, and I realized I allowed myself to become far too judgmental.
I suppose what I mean is, if it wasn't for this board, I probably wouldn't know any active Mormons who share your opinion. Some of my perception was colored by a Mormon acquaintance of mine (from Idaho) who referred to gays as "f'ing faggots" and was pretty verbally abusive and hateful. Likewise, I've known many lapsed Mormons (many of them in the military) who've talked to me at length about what drove them away from the Church. From the media and my experiences in my daily life, I've seen the Church as a disproportionately large and powerful part of the current political movement to oppose equal rights for gays.
I understand that perception isn't reality. Yet I have a hard time understanding why there's such a common and pervasive misconception of the LDS Church as being more bigoted towards gays than the general population if there isn't some basis in fact.
I appreciate being able to read your posts and see that your experience with Mormonism has been far different from mine, and hope you can forgive me for my angry words earlier.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Out of curiosity, is there a difference in how the Mormon church treats gay men versus lesbians?
It seems like most of the references in this thread have been to stories about gay men, so I'm wondering if there's a difference. Or it could just be because the main focus of this thread is about a gay man so those are the stories.
I had two second cousins who are in their mid-40s now who hid their sexuality until well into their 30s. A great deal of my family is very conservative, and many of them are greatly religious as well. There's even a youth minister on the other side of my family. I've never really gone in depth with them about why they kept it hidden for so long, but really it's not surprising given the negative reaction they were likely to receive.
When they finally did come out though, the family was surprisingly accepting. My mom, who isn't really a big fan of gay people in general, even went to one of their commitment ceremonies a few months ago and was just as giddy as anyone at weddings with taking pictures and what not. She's not a big fan of the "gay lifestyle," but she said it was family, and you always support family. I was pretty proud of her, and very happy for my cousin, who is a great guy.
My family is a weird bunch. I know that if I ever had a major problem or revelation to put before them, they might disapprove on one hand, but they would band together to support me because they believe in the power of family so strongly. I realize more with each passing year how thankful I should be for that.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by just_me: Like I said... these are just some thoughts I had reading this thread and they may not be worth the time it takes to read them, but I felt like I should at least share them with you.
They are definitely worth the time to read them. Thank you. I appreciate you sharing some of your thoughts relating to experiences with your brother. Perhaps I would do better to visit with my family in smaller groups.
Posts: 293 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dogbreath: Apology accepted. It'd be hypocritical for me not to forgive you.
I completely understand that many LDS men and women face being ostracized by their family and community when they come out. In the past the church has absolutely mis-stepped (It's not the first time, and it won't be the last) on how to respond to homosexuality. KarlEd does not post much here anymore but his stories of how he was handled when he came to terms with it boils the blood.
I think much of the vitriol stems from ignorance. Many people in Utah don't know any openly gay people who are comfortable in their sexuality, and have the patience to bear with them. So they have media portrayals, and pretentious self-righteous shows like Glee where the gay characters are decent folks, while the religious people are blithering idiots who don't know anything about why they believe what they do, much less why they don't agree with the gay characters. This fosters a martyr complex where members of the church think it's "Us vs Them, and they will mock and scorn us for our belief just as all believers in all times have been treated."
This sentiment is usually met with, "Who gives a crap how they feel, I won't tolerate intolerance!" Well great, when we don't tolerate each other there can't be dialogue anymore, and differences have to be resolved in some other manner that doesn't involve talking. I don't see any positive alternatives.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Out of curiosity, is there a difference in how the Mormon church treats gay men versus lesbians?
FWIW, the only hint of lesbianism in the bible is in Romans 1:26 where Paul says "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature." Some interpret that to mean gayness. Others think maybe prostitution, or bestiality, or anything else, really. There's no specific condemnation of women having sex with each other anywhere in the bible. Because of this, most conservative Christian groups have focused most of their condemnation on gay men. (I don't know about the LDS Church specifically)
quote:So they have media portrayals, and pretentious self-righteous shows like Glee where the gay characters are decent folks, while the religious people are blithering idiots who don't know anything about why they believe what they do, much less why they don't agree with the gay characters.
I watched Glee about halfway through season 2 before I got too sick of it to continue. They've basically made Kurt into a walking ball of negative stereotypes, which makes me wonder what the guy who plays him (who is also gay) must think - especially since all of the other gay and lesbian characters on the show are portrayed far more realistically. He was actually an enjoyable character in the first season, before they decided to turn the show into a weekly hour long political statement.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
"And lo, be they both women who lie with each other, well, so, if they are both pretty hot, I mean..."
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:is there a difference in how the Mormon church treats gay men versus lesbians?
Not officially.
Unofficially, I think male homosexuality is a bit more frowned upon because the male gender role is so...set. Like, you can be a lesbian and still be womanly. For many Mormons (and people in general) I think there is a sense that when a man is gay he is no longer manly somehow.
Note again that this isn't doctrinal but cultural, and is an element shared by society in general.
quote:Scott- if your small kids asked, would you really go into all that detail? Do you think a 4 year old has the capability to understand those concepts?
Yes, I would really go into all that detail. I might simplify the words a bit, and I'd use flannel board to illustrate, but sure: I think a four year old can conceive of eternal families and the laws governing them just fine.
(BTW-- my oldest, who is now a teenager, was also an atheist when she was a little kid.)
quote: It also sheds a lot of light for me on one of OSC's most common themes (that the most important part of life is having kids).
Xenocide is Mormonism.
But let me correct something-- the most important part of life, in terms of family, is marrying the right person, and building and strengthening that relationship. Kids will come and will hopefully leave to start their own families-- but your spouse is meant to be with you forever.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: I think there is a sense that when a man is gay he is no longer manly somehow.
Again, this may be due to many of my friends being military, but I know several big hulking linebacker-in-high school gay men who would strongly disagree with this.
Our media often broadcasts ridiculously over the top gay stereotypes - similar to the black stereotypes seen in 70s movies. Glee has already been mentioned. I think part of the stereotype comes from the fact that it's more socially acceptable for effeminate gay men to *act* effeminate in public than for effeminate straight men to do the same. (And boy have I met some girly straight men in my life) And also because the effeminate gay men are the ones who you typically notice as being gay right off the bat. So we've somehow come to believe as a society that if you're born gay, you must also be born with a strong fashion sense, a lisp, and a love of Broadway musicals.
It's gotten so pervasive that a buddy of mine was once accused of "acting straight" because he likes drinking beer and watching football and wearing flannel shirts and driving his pickup. Which is odd, because none of those activities is in any way related to sex or sexuality. I'm pretty sure the only way you could "act straight" is, you know, act like you are interested in women.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:The only vestiges of homophobia I ever dealt with were of my own making, and I dealt with them, with the help of my religion.
quote:In any case, you are wrong that the leadership of my church feels anything but compassion and love for gay LDS men and women who are trying to work out their own relationships with their fellow man and with God. If you ever heard them speak at our annual conferences you'd be hard pressed to find that sort of evil in them.
If this is true, would there be something potentially useful in Anthonie (or people in more direct conflict with their LDS families) appealing to church authorities in dealing with his family? I have no real grasp of the situation, but I'm just throwing out the idea to see if there are resources that are in place to help.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll note that when I say Church Leadership or Authorities, I mean the general authorities that govern the church as a whole, not local leaders.
But yes-- a bishop or branch president SHOULD be able to counsel the folks involved in Anthonie's situation.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:The only vestiges of homophobia I ever dealt with were of my own making, and I dealt with them, with the help of my religion.
quote:In any case, you are wrong that the leadership of my church feels anything but compassion and love for gay LDS men and women who are trying to work out their own relationships with their fellow man and with God. If you ever heard them speak at our annual conferences you'd be hard pressed to find that sort of evil in them.
If this is true, would there be something potentially useful in Anthonie (or people in more direct conflict with their LDS families) appealing to church authorities in dealing with his family? I have no real grasp of the situation, but I'm just throwing out the idea to see if there are resources that are in place to help.
A member of the bishopric or stake presidency absolutely should be able to help with the rift, even if Anthonie no longer identifies as LDS.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The only vestiges of homophobia I ever dealt with were of my own making, and I dealt with them, with the help of my religion.
quote:In any case, you are wrong that the leadership of my church feels anything but compassion and love for gay LDS men and women who are trying to work out their own relationships with their fellow man and with God. If you ever heard them speak at our annual conferences you'd be hard pressed to find that sort of evil in them.
If this is true, would there be something potentially useful in Anthonie (or people in more direct conflict with their LDS families) appealing to church authorities in dealing with his family? I have no real grasp of the situation, but I'm just throwing out the idea to see if there are resources that are in place to help.
Mostly a lurker here, but I don't think that local authorities would do anything different. I think that Anthonie's family appears to be following the church's policy here. While the church definitely teaches love and acceptance, it looks like this: (This is Elder Oaks a member of the quorum of the 12 apostles - second highest governing body of the church):
quote: PUBLIC AFFAIRS: At what point does showing that love cross the line into inadvertently endorsing behavior? If the son says, ‘Well, if you love me, can I bring my partner to our home to visit? Can we come for holidays?’ How do you balance that against, for example, concern for other children in the home?’
ELDER OAKS: That’s a decision that needs to be made individually by the person responsible, calling upon the Lord for inspiration. I can imagine that in most circumstances the parents would say, ‘Please don’t do that. Don’t put us into that position.’ Surely if there are children in the home who would be influenced by this example, the answer would likely be that. There would also be other factors that would make that the likely answer.
I can also imagine some circumstances in which it might be possible to say, ‘Yes, come, but don’t expect to stay overnight. Don’t expect to be a lengthy house guest. Don’t expect us to take you out and introduce you to our friends, or to deal with you in a public situation that would imply our approval of your “partnership.”
There are so many different circumstances, it’s impossible to give one answer that fits all.
posted
That is cold. Nothing on earth or in heaven would make me be that cold towards a kid. Besides, gay isn't really contagious you know. It's not like standing in an elevator full of gay people turns you gay.
Man.... It's like they are using this part of a person to ostracize them. Not cool.
Also, womanly?
I think I will stop reading that link now. I'm home with a horrible stomachache.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Synesthesia, again, I think you are misreading what is going on here. I don't think that parents want to shun their children. I think that it probably breaks their hearts. They are just trapped.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, yes. That is easy to see from where we are. But, remember these parents believe that they are doing what is best for their children. They are considering not only the happiness of their children in this life but what they believe is happiness eternally. Being accepting of homosexuality would be like being accepting of drug abuse (for example).
Some do rebel, but that is because their beliefs change.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
A change must ensue. Even Beardy Orthodox Dude is against this sort of thing. He says folks should be held accountable for gay suicides. Perhaps if there is a God such a thing might happen.
It might not be respectful to call him Beardy Orthodox Dude. He's so cool! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TQwuDYANhQ&feature=related This guy. He also has a video about transgendered people. I will have to read one of his 40 books. Also check out what he has to say on evolution. He's interesting.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anthonie, those are some interesting statistics. I can't believe there are that many parents willing to kick out their children and write them off so easily. I don't have kids yet, but I can't imagine ever kicking my child out for being who he is.
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
A bit further into the discussion with Elder Oaks and Elder Wickman:
quote: ELDER WICKMAN: It’s hard to imagine a more difficult circumstance for a parent to face than that one. It is a case by case determination. The only thing that I would add to what Elder Oaks has just said is that I think it’s important as a parent to avoid a potential trap arising out of one’s anguish over this situation.
I refer to a shift from defending the Lord’s way to defending the errant child’s lifestyle, both with him and with others. It really is true the Lord’s way is to love the sinner while condemning the sin. That is to say we continue to open our homes and our hearts and our arms to our children, but that need not be with approval of their lifestyle. Neither does it mean we need to be constantly telling them that their lifestyle is inappropriate. An even bigger error is now to become defensive of the child, because that neither helps the child nor helps the parent. That course of action, which experience teaches, is almost certainly to lead both away from the Lord’s way.
ELDER OAKS: The First Presidency made a wonderful statement on this subject in a letter in 1991. Speaking of individuals and families that were struggling with this kind of problem, they said, “We encourage Church leaders and members to reach out with love and understanding to those struggling with these issues.” Surely if we are counseled as a body of Church membership to reach out with love and understanding to those ‘struggling with these issues,’ that obligation rests with particular intensity on parents who have children struggling with these issues… even children who are engaged in sinful behavior associated with these issues.
I tend to emphasize "case-by-case basis" over the explicit examples given by Elder Oaks.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Those statistics are horrifying and, yes, change must happen. I object to the word "easily" though. I don't think that it is easy for those parents.
Geraine, what about an adult child who was abusing drugs and influencing younger children? As much as it would break your heart, couldn't you imagine withholding support to that child both to save the others and to hope that the first child gets help? That is what these misguided parents believe they are facing.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Forgive me for not reading every word of this thread (I read the first half and skimmed the second). I just wanted to give some unasked for advice to Anthonie...I don't know a lot about you, only what you chose to share here, but perhaps you might consider doing some traveling. I'm not sure your job is one that would allow that, or if you can afford a vacation, but I tend to think that it really helps to gain perspective to see other places, filled with other people who have different attitudes. Maybe New York or San Fran, maybe get involved into some community theater there. At the risk of making an asshat of myself, if you were to find a gay community and learn to accept the part of yourself so thoroughly that your family rejects that it might give you impenetrable armor when dealing with them. The ol' "I'm so comfortable in my own skin that I just don't care what you think anymore." kinda deal. Of course I should say that I am only speaking from general knowledge of rejection and pain, and not specifically your pain. I'm married with children and my parents are pretty live and let live to boot. I've just found that if you are confident, passionate and utterly comfortable with yourself then the rejections of others, even those close to you, tend to flow right off you like the proverbial water from a duck's back.
As to God and gays, I tend to think that if God cares about us as individuals, it is more that he cares who we hurt intentionally, and not who we love. Were I god (thank Me I'm not!) I would be happy that people found each other, and shared their happiness regardless of who they found.
Happiness is hard work, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. It takes guts to look for it, and even more guts to risk going after it once you've found it. Sometimes you have to disregard what other people want for you, and how your happiness will make them feel, but to live a life with perimeters set by others, with a slow, burning resentment building of their loving imprisonment is not a good thing. Love is acceptance. Have faith that although it may take time and hard work those you love will accept you no matter what. And know that even if they don't, that it is their loss and it should not stop you from reaching for your stars.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: A bit further into the discussion with Elder Oaks and Elder Wickman:
quote: ELDER WICKMAN: It’s hard to imagine a more difficult circumstance for a parent to face than that one. It is a case by case determination. The only thing that I would add to what Elder Oaks has just said is that I think it’s important as a parent to avoid a potential trap arising out of one’s anguish over this situation.
I refer to a shift from defending the Lord’s way to defending the errant child’s lifestyle, both with him and with others. It really is true the Lord’s way is to love the sinner while condemning the sin. That is to say we continue to open our homes and our hearts and our arms to our children, but that need not be with approval of their lifestyle. Neither does it mean we need to be constantly telling them that their lifestyle is inappropriate. An even bigger error is now to become defensive of the child, because that neither helps the child nor helps the parent. That course of action, which experience teaches, is almost certainly to lead both away from the Lord’s way.
ELDER OAKS: The First Presidency made a wonderful statement on this subject in a letter in 1991. Speaking of individuals and families that were struggling with this kind of problem, they said, “We encourage Church leaders and members to reach out with love and understanding to those struggling with these issues.” Surely if we are counseled as a body of Church membership to reach out with love and understanding to those ‘struggling with these issues,’ that obligation rests with particular intensity on parents who have children struggling with these issues… even children who are engaged in sinful behavior associated with these issues.
I tend to emphasize "case-by-case basis" over the explicit examples given by Elder Oaks.
That is a fair reading, but Elder Oaks explicitly states that the response of most parents to a request to bring a boyfriend home would be: "I can imagine that in most circumstances the parents would say, ‘Please don’t do that. Don’t put us into that position.’"
While I agree that he leaves the door open for other possibilities, If I were a parent reading that looking for guidance, I don't know that I'd react any differently than Anthonie's do/did.
Edited to add: The bulk of what you quoted seems to be aimed at making sure the parents don't commit the even bigger error ("an even bigger error is now to become defensive of the child")
Posts: 6 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Geraine, what about an adult child who was abusing drugs and influencing younger children? As much as it would break your heart, couldn't you imagine withholding support to that child both to save the others and to hope that the first child gets help? That is what these misguided parents believe they are facing.
It depends on what you mean by support. I could see withholding monetary support; I could see demanding that when he or she comes into my home, they do so clean and sober.
I could even see preventing them from having contact with my other children, if their addiction and the lengths they go to to feed it are serious enough.
But I'd like to think that I'd never withhold my love or my involvement with their life.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I left "support" fairly open as the point was to see what Geraine could imagine.
Scott, you are a great dad. I can't imagine you withholding love or involvement either. My point here is that, even when parents do withhold something it isn't done easily.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I do not think they should withhold anything at all really... but. I wonder if folks will learn that being gay isn't like drug addiction. Though, depression can lead you into the arms of that particular dark angel. Though on Intervention folks are taught not to enable their children by giving them money they could use towards drugs. I would hope folks would eventually think, hmmm. Huge difference...
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that parents should sometimes withhold stuff. Too much candy, sharp knives for toddlers, freedom to cross busy streets or start fires, approval for bad behaviour. All of which have to potential to make children unhappy.
It will be great when people of all faiths and their leaders recognize that homosexuality is not bad behaviour, but until that happens we can know that they are wrong, but thinking that they are (in general) uncaring is neither helpful or fair.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: It will be great when people of all faiths and their leaders recognize that homosexuality is not bad behaviour, but until that happens we can know that they are wrong, but thinking that they are (in general) uncaring is neither helpful or fair.
I really like this and hope this day comes soon. I see so much positive in my life that has come from my LDS church membership, but it pains me whenever I read stories like this one, where church teachings lead to so much sorrow and separation.
Posts: 6 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, you can work towards that day as well as hoping for it. (Of course, you may already be doing that. )
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Probably don't do as much as I should, but I do push the issue with family, coworkers, and neighbors. Unfortunately change can be slow.
Posts: 6 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:It will be great when people of all faiths and their leaders recognize that homosexuality is not bad behaviour
Homosexual behavior can stifle eternal progress. That's the reason why, in simple terms, it is "bad" and why Mormons (at least) can't accept it as a neutral factor.
Given the doctrine as I understand it, there will never be a day when Mormonism accepts homosexual behavior as anything but detrimental to our eternal welfare.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Scott, I understand that you believe that - and why*. I choose to be more optimistic. The Vatican has said that its stance is never going to change and I don't believe that either.
*ETA: Not because I claim any insight due to our internet interactions but because you have explained it pretty clearly.
posted
"and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God"
Part of me thinks that you are right Scott. But a larger part of me just thinks we haven't started asking the right question yet. Does being married to someone for time only damn your eternal progression? I have an ancestor who was not sealed to his wife nor his children (she was sealed to her first husband who died before she made the trek to Utah). Is his eternal progress stifled because he was not sealed in this life to his spouse and children, and will not be in the life to come? From his writings he appears to have thought so. I think there is way too much that we don't know.
I don't think we have reached the point where the church leadership has seriously taken this issue to the Lord for further light and direction. While David O McKay was open to the idea of blacks holding the priesthood (unlike many of his predecessors), it wasn't until Spencer W Kimball spent years on his knees, imploring the Lord on the matter, and seeking the counsel of those around him that further light was given. I don't think we have seen all there is to see on this issue. I also recognize that I might ultimately be wrong, but that won't stop me from weeping after those that feel such pain from the current doctrine of the my church.
Posts: 6 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged |
Gay folks are totally welcome in my web of life. (I never got that in that book. A dude can't be with a dude he loves? Adopt a child? Get someone to be a surrogate? Lesbians do have two uteruses to work with at least.) I wish they'd hurry up and see the light. This causes so much pain. Why cause more pain in this life when you don't have to? Also, I read that homosexuality has an evolutionary function. Gay uncles. But they didn't mention lesbian aunts.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
I think I've explained it pretty well, Syn, and in this very thread. I'm fairly certain I've explained it before, too.
quote:I have an ancestor who was not sealed to his wife nor his children (she was sealed to her first husband who died before she made the trek to Utah). Is his eternal progress stifled because he was not sealed in this life to his spouse and children, and will not be in the life to come? From his writings he appears to have thought so. I think there is way too much that we don't know.
Salvation is between an individual and the Lord; I don't have a say in others' salvation.
That said, the Lord has made it quite clear through the Prophets, especially modern day prophets, what He thinks of homosexual behavior. Elder Oaks in your link:
quote:Homosexual behavior is and will always remain before the Lord an abominable sin.
It's the Lord's prerogative to judge as He sees fit. He knows the ins and outs of the soul, all the nature/nurture questions, and He knows best to say, "John is not responsible for his actions, and so is covered under the grace of Jesus Christ; David is a willful rebel who refused to repent."
It's my duty to teach the doctrine as I understand it, and to love those around me. If the doctrine on homosexual behavior changes-- and there's no scriptural, historical, canonical, or even anecdotal support for the idea that it will-- then I suppose I'll change what I teach.
quote:Why cause more pain in this life when you don't have to?
Again: the path to God is not accommodating.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Those statistics are horrifying and, yes, change must happen. I object to the word "easily" though. I don't think that it is easy for those parents.
Geraine, what about an adult child who was abusing drugs and influencing younger children? As much as it would break your heart, couldn't you imagine withholding support to that child both to save the others and to hope that the first child gets help? That is what these misguided parents believe they are facing.
Illicit or illegal activity has to be treated differently. I would not stop loving my child. I would try to get them help. If they didn't want help I would try to convince them to seek it.
As long as they weren't high or brought any drugs to my home, I would certainly invite them to family functions. If my child needed something and asked for financial assistance, I would go with them to purchase the item. I wouldn't give them cash.
It has to be a case by case basis. I may not agree with my child's actions, but they are still my child, and it is my responsibility given by God to do whatever I can to make sure they have someone that is always there for them and that will love them no matter what. That doesn't mean I let them do whatever they want, nor try to help them sidestep the consequences for their actions.
I think the problem is that so many parents (Especially in the LDS community) think that if their son or daughter is gay, it means they were a failure as a parent. They don't know how to cope with that, so they just write the child off, not realizing how difficult life is (or will be!) for their child.
I spoke to my cousin last night about coming down to Las Vegas and staying with us for a while, but I didn't realize that he hasn't graduated from high school yet. He has 15 days left before he graduates (early). For the last 3 months since coming out and being kicked out by his parents he has been living with a high school friend. He goes to school during the day and works at a restaurant at night as a host.
He said he might come down to visit everyone in a couple months, so we planned to go get some sushi. I'll probably ask him if he wants to stay with us then. The community here in Vegas is a lot more accepting then in Utah. I have a couple of friends I used to work with that are gay, and they have been through what he is going through now. They have a large support group of friends, and I think that could really help my cousin out right now.
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: Again: the path to God is not accommodating.
quote:John 14 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
quote:Acts 16 ...Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
quote:Jesus, Matthew 25 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
Of course, Jesus and the Apostles simply forgot to add on "unless you're gay, then all that doesn't count" when they spoke on the subject of salvation? Because the Bible makes the path to God pretty clear.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
I'm curious as to how much of the Bible you believe to be true. How do you account for discrepancies?
If you accept the Old and New Testaments in your standard King James Version of the Bible, here are some verses from both books commanding against the sin of homosexuality:
quote: Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
quote:Romans 1
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
In regards to salvation, recall that Jesus also said the following:
quote: St. John 3:
5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
quote:Matthew 28: 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
quote: Mark 16: 16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Don't mistake me: I believe that the parable of the sheep and the goats is immensely valuable and absolutely true. I don't believe that those, even those who have been baptised and who work miracles in Christ's name, can neglect the poor, sick, or need and expect to obtain salvation. Christ said:
quote:
quote:36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Loving God, and loving others does NOT mean that the rest of the commandments magically disappear. ALL the commandments hinge on our obedience and dedication to those primary attitudes; when we love God, we seek to follow His will and to do good to those who are around us. The commandments give us specifics on how God expects us to accomplish that.
And yes: it's obviously more complicated than the parable of the sheep and goats (assuming acceptance of the rest of the bible).
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anthonie, I have no idea if you are still following this thread. If you are, I think you could benefit from interacting with other gays from Mormon families. There are a couple of such people who used to post here and who still post on the sakeriver forum.
I'd also like to encourage you to be patient and accepting of your family. I know that when you are lonely and struggling that's hard, but they are clearly also struggling. Since you grew up Mormon, you are undoubtedly aware of how important the Church is to many members. I have no idea how religious your family is, but many members of the LDS Church see Mormonism is a central defining characteristic of themselves. For many Mormons, their entire life revolves around Church activity, socially, politically, financially, intellectually and spiritually. If this is true for your family, leaving the church would create difficulties even if you weren't gay. I have a sister who is no longer active in the church and she often feels awkward in family gatherings because so much of the small talk revolves around the church. My parents struggle balancing wanting her to feel loved and accepted in the family and wanting her to return to the church. None of us want the Church to be something that divides our family, but the fact is that it does and as long as it remains very important to some members of the family and not others it will.
You are asking your family to accept you fully as a gay man, without any reservations or regrets or desire that you change. Can you accept them as devout Mormons without wanting them to change?
I know that analogy isn't perfect. Deeply held religious beliefs aren't identical to deeply ingrained desires and inclinations, but they do have do have a great deal common. You can't make them accept that you are gay but perhaps as you work on accepting, embracing and loving your family as they are, the pain you feel will diminish.
edit to add: I hope that this doesn't come across as insensitive or accusatory. I know its very painful to feel like an outsider in your own family. The way they are treating you is not right. It's not your fault and I did not mean to imply it was. One of things I've learned as a Mormon is that people don't have to change in order for me to forgive them and accept them. Forgiving people and accepting them without expecting change helps me hurt less. I don't expect other people to be able to do that. If you can't do it, I understand. I'm not sure its even possible without divine grace.
[ December 02, 2011, 11:07 AM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
I'm curious as to how much of the Bible you believe to be true. How do you account for discrepancies?
You mean, how much of it should be followed? I view the book of Leviticus as being human laws, written to govern a human society of that time. There is, of course, inspiration to be taken from it, but not specific commandments. For example,
quote:Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woolen come upon thee.
In the same way I wouldn't really condemn someone for wearing polyester, or breeding mules, or planting a garden with more than one vegetable, I wouldn't take the laws from Leviticus as being a statement of "this is what is right and wrong", merely "this is what is and is not permissible for this nation at this time." The vision the Lord sends Peter in Acts 10 is often interpreted as why we don't follow the Kosher laws (or for that matter, almost any of the laws in the OT) any more - I don't see why the laws in the OT should be any different.
I realize you're LDS, so if you believe the Lord has actually spoken in recent times condemning homosexuality, it gives you a lot more legitimate reason to feel that way than, say, someone merely justifying their argument from the Bible.
I actually quoted Romans 1 in this thread earlier. While I find that far more troubling, you'll notice it's not a commandment or a condemnation, it's simply a result of the fall. It still means Paul saw it as something less than desirable. He also saw women speaking in Church as being less than desirable. I don't want it to sound like I'm dismissing it out of hand - I've wrestled with that passage frequently, but I think if he was was actually going to condemn homosexuality (which was a very common practice in the cities he was writing to) he would do it in a more direct way, like he condemns numerous other sins. I've also heard that this passage was written referring to the common practice of pederasty.
The words of the Savior, on the other hand, are something I take to be the literal words of God (albeit imperfectly scribed by men), and I don't think there's as much wiggle room - though I do have my own interpretations and beliefs. I absolutely believe if you mean to call yourself a follower of Christ you should confess him as lord and be baptized. I don't think if you die unbaptized that God won't be merciful to you. (many even regard the sheep and the goats as his judgement of the pagans - since the sheep apparently didn't know him, but are accepted anyway) Nonetheless, if you mean to call yourself a Christian, the bible clearly demonstrates you should be baptized.
Yet for all that the Savior speaks about sexual sins (he explicitly condemns lust, adultery, and divorce), he never once speaks on the matter of homosexuality.
quote:Loving God, and loving others does NOT mean that the rest of the commandments magically disappear. ALL the commandments hinge on our obedience and dedication to those primary attitudes; when we love God, we seek to follow His will and to do good to those who are around us. The commandments give us specifics on how God expects us to accomplish that.
And yes: it's obviously more complicated than the parable of the sheep and goats (assuming acceptance of the rest of the bible). [/QB]
I suppose my problem is twofold - first, I don't believe the Bible provides enough substantial evidence to condemn homosexuality as a sin. I've read it through several times, and I feel like the entire thing, as a whole, paints a pretty accurate picture of what the Lord considers to be important - and that always seems to be (by the amount of times it's mentioned) love, respect, and adoration for himself, justice for the poor, the stranger, and the oppressed (which could be seen as love, respect, and adoration for his creation), and righteous and holy living. (the same, but for ourselves) The laws of Leviticus seem to be the "training wheels", so to speak. A very ridged and regimented set of instructions for a stiff necked people to follow. But then Jesus came and gave the new covenant, the old has passed away.
Second, if you are going to accept the condemnation from Leviticus as indication that it's a sin, then there's a LOT of sins committed by Christians in America that have not been acknowledged or repented of. There are a lot of sins we probably don't even know we're committing!
And even of the sins we do know to be sins, such as gluttony, for example (which, unrepented, causes obesity, a drastic shortening of one's lifespan, and a highly detrimental effect on one's relationship with himself, others, and the natural world), many are often ignored or accepted by the Church. And the key element seems to be - what is socially acceptable? In America, because we as a people are greatly crippled by the sins of overindulgence, those sins are often ignored or sidelined in order to attack the sins which your congregation is less likely to be guilty of.
Anyway, I hope this post demonstrates that I do take the Bible seriously, and that my careful and diligent study of it, along with my current relationships with other human beings and my observation of creation, has led me to believe what I do. I've seen plenty of people completely disregard the Bible - except when they can use it to score a cheap shot against people who do respect it. I want to assure you I'm not one of those people.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm just like- science. Science has caught up when it comes to sexuality. Homosexuality is even considered by some to have an evolutionary function. Plus it's not a big deal. Why don't the churches spend more energy on child abuse and domestic violence instead of something that hurts no one? In fact, all of this viewing homosexuality as a sin stuff hurts gays a lot more and alienates them from their families and friends.
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: Why don't the churches spend more energy on child abuse and domestic violence instead of something that hurts no one?
Many of them *do*. In fact, many of the churches that condemn homosexuality also spend time condemning child abuse and domestic violence. Those aren't exactly controversial things to condemn, though, so it's not like you're going to read many stories about it.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Many of them *do*. In fact, many of the churches that condemn homosexuality also spend time condemning child abuse and domestic violence. Those aren't exactly controversial things to condemn, though, so it's not like you're going to read many stories about it.
I'm glad someone else told her this time. Maybe she'll believe you.
Dogbreath, a quick amendment to my post above: there are things I disagree with, but I'm having a hard time articulating right now. Maybe later...
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dogbreath and others who might be interested in what the Bible says about homosexuality (and other things like slavery and racism) and how to put ancient writings into context and understand what was really meant, I would highly recommend The Good Book by Peter Gomes.
The Reverend Dr. Gomes was a highly respected scholar and the Plummer Professor of Christian Morals at Harvard.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
). I am sorry to hear that you are going through such a difficult time with your family. You don't have to have a bazillion posts or comment on every thread in order to rant or seek (and hopefully find!) support here. Best wishes and good vibes to you. 
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
