Church makes gays and their children apostates

[Archaea]

http://www.sltrib.com/news/3144035-1...s-apostates-of

The Church is making another huge mistake in this. Prop 8 was a major lack of vision and this is another.

[MikeWaters]

This is another head-scratcher.

Outreach to Mormon gays is dead.

[MikeWaters]

This is the first time we see that good standing in the church REQUIRES active and affirmative disavowal of gay marriage.

It's a precedent and could very well be expanded. Imagine if this is added to temple recommend criteria.

[ute4ever]

A lawyer friend shared this:

Legally, if an organization can be shown to be interfering with a child and their relationship with their parents, a lawsuit can be brought against them. Even if a gay couple has consented to an underage child being baptized, that child would be learning that their parents' marriage was something their new religion considered a sin. Can you imagine the confusion and heartache it could cause, plus the potential legal ramifications?

This is not only to protect the church, but also those families. I truly believe it is meant to be merciful, not hateful.

[ute4ever]

In what event would an apostate-behaving person seek the blessings of membership in The Church of Jesus Christ, anyway? In what event would such parents seek blessing for their children, anyway? Children, while wards of their parents, are subject to the environment of their parents. It's just a staging of yet anther political circus and doesn't allow these parents to use their children as props.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by ute4ever

A lawyer friend shared this:

Legally, if an organization can be shown to be interfering with a child and their relationship with their parents, a lawsuit can be brought against them. Even if a gay couple has consented to an underage child being baptized, that child would be learning that their parents' marriage was something their new religion considered a sin. Can you imagine the confusion and heartache it could cause, plus the potential legal ramifications?

This is not only to protect the church, but also those families. I truly believe it is meant to be merciful, not hateful.

Really, you're buying into that logic? Reminds when people argue God killing all the people during Noah's time was an act of mercy. Or Nephi killing Laman was merciful and necessary.

This is a head-scratcher. I wonder if leadership considered how alienating such a policy would be.

[MikeWaters]

The signaling on this is awful. Many teens are baptized even though their nonmember parents don't believe. The parents consent to their teen's baptism and it happens.

We have a teenager in our ward who attends church every week and scouts. But he is not baptized because his father does not consent.

We have an excommunicated male who attends with his family every week.

Apostle Todd Christofferson's excommunicated brother attends church with his gay partner.

There are all kinds of people who attend.

Another problem with this is putting one group of people into a specific bucket giving them different requirements. What bout the child of an unwed parent? What about the child of two persons living together who are unmarried? Should their be language requiring them to disavow the circumstances of their parents?

[ute4ever]

The church planned to make this announcement yesterday, and you can see the Deseret News article for the least skewed depiction. However, somehow, John Dehlin got his hands on it hours ahead of time, and leaked the document to KUTV and The Salt Lake Teibune: two media outlets who further the adversary's work in stirring contention and pain in Heavenly Father's children. The media picked it up and twisted it all around to sound creepy and horrible.

Here's what's really going on:

1. Same sex marriage is not approved by God, so it will not be a part of the Lord's church. The church does not support the practice.
2. Because the practice is against the church's teachings, those who practice it (I.e. Those who go against the teachings of the church) are apostates
3. Apostates are subject to church discipline.
4. Children of nonmembers, who want to be baptized, have to wait until they are eighteen to do so.
5. Children who are living in a home where home life sharply contrasts the gospel would not be in a good position ... And would probably need more maturity before being able to lovingly reconcile gospel standards with mom/dad's different lifestyle. An eight year old is too black-and-white in his/her thinking.
6. So kids have to wait until they are 18 OR get special first presidency permission to join the church.

That's all.

But the adversary, through his soldiers (like Dehlin & the media) wants to portray this as some new move by the church to render innocent children as apostates.

Knowing that this portrayal will turn more outsiders against the church, weaken members who struggle in this area, and cause other members to misinterpret it and use it as reason to persecute.

Handbook 1 is a document to help bishops and stake presidents know the course of action to take with some of these unique situations. It's not meant for people who do not hold the keys of those offices to Pharisize over.

[MikeWaters]

Another point is this language of "counterfeit families" which were L. Tom Perry's parting words to the church. And then the description from the church about a recent apostle's "authentic LDS family."

This may tap into the desire of some to root out and expunge these "counterfeits" in order to "protect" the church.

Perry's son was trying to de-emphasize his father's words after his death. But I'm not sure that L. Tom Perry would want any de-emphasis. He theoretically it sounds like, might have been a big proponent of this new policy.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

The signaling on this is awful. Many teens are baptized even though their nonmember parents don't believe. The parents consent to their teen's baptism and it happens.

We have a teenager in our ward who attends church every week and scouts. But he is not baptized because his father does not consent.

We have an excommunicated male who attends with his family every week.

Apostle Todd Christofferson's excommunicated brother attends church with his gay partner.

There are all kinds of people who attend.

Another problem with this is putting one group of people into a specific bucket giving them different requirements. What bout the child of an unwed parent? What about the child of two persons living together who are unmarried? Should their be language requiring them to disavow the circumstances of their parents?

It is a PR nightmare. Given the limited number of situations where it might actually apply, it was short-sighted decision, one lacking illumination or insight.