Intellectually, I'll pose the question to you LDS liberals and the few apostates here

[SteelBlue]

Originally Posted by Venkman

Uh, yeah Fusnik. Five or six years ago, the church threw it's weight around an ammendment in CA to declare gay marriage illegal. The church had members go door to door getting signatures to get the ammendment on the ballot.

Yes, I had to chuckle a bit when I read that as well. There was MUCH asked of us here in California during those times. Signature gathering, sign dispersement, calling voters (that one was very tough for me). The church was also very publicly involved in similar efforts in Hawaii and Nebraska. I'm sure there have been others as well.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by SteelBlue

Yes, I had to chuckle a bit when I read that as well. There was MUCH asked of us here in California during those times. Signature gathering, sign dispersement, calling voters (that one was very tough for me). The church was also very publicly involved in similar efforts in Hawaii and Nebraska. I'm sure there have been others as well.

Definetly a worthwhile cause

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by SteelBlue

Yes, I had to chuckle a bit when I read that as well. There was MUCH asked of us here in California during those times. Signature gathering, sign dispersement, calling voters (that one was very tough for me). The church was also very publicly involved in similar efforts in Hawaii and Nebraska. I'm sure there have been others as well.

Come on dude, five years ago I only knew of the church and it's stance on Nightline when they showed clips of what the church had said and testimonials of homosexuals who had forsaken their lifestyle.

As far as broadcasting over the pulpit I never heard an edict read strong arming the membership to protect that family that is currently under attack.

Again to say the family is under attack is highly misleading. I'll submit that the family is under attack, but it's under attack by heterosexuals, not homosexuals...

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

Come on dude, five years ago I only knew of the church and it's stance on Nightline when they showed clips of what the church had said and testimonials of homosexuals who had forsaken their lifestyle.

As far as broadcasting over the pulpit I never heard an edict read strong arming the membership to protect that family that is currently under attack.

Again to say the family is under attack is highly misleading. I'll submit that the family is under attack, but it's under attack by heterosexuals, not homosexuals...

Fuz, you're naive if you don't believe it's under attack by everybody. Anything that attacks chastity, proper love between husband and wife, proper trust and caring between husband and wife, drives men away from women and women away from men, anything that encourages abuse and so on.

There are numerous attacks, and gays are just one item of attack.

Boyd K. Packer has given talks attacking homosexuality, as have others. The Church really is not a place for practicing gays. It's also not a place for practicing alcoholics, wife beaters and any other type of sin. If you wish to repent, then yes, otherwise no.

Should sinners with no intent of repenting be made to feel comfortable in their sins around us?

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Fuz, you're naive if you don't believe it's under attack by everybody. Anything that attacks chastity, proper love between husband and wife, proper trust and caring between husband and wife, drives men away from women and women away from men, anything that encourages abuse and so on.

There are numerous attacks, and gays are just one item of attack.

Boyd K. Packer has given talks attacking homosexuality, as have others. The Church really is not a place for practicing gays. It's also not a place for practicing alcoholics, wife beaters and any other type of sin. If you wish to repent, then yes, otherwise no.

Should sinners with no intent of repenting be made to feel comfortable in their sins around us?

You are painting with a VERY broad brush here. Why do you assume this debate is about homosexual members who are practicing AND have no intention of repenting??? This, to me, is exactly the problem. Many LDS people hear about LDS homosexuals, and immediately they take two gigantic leaps: 1) the person must be practicing (or will be soon) and 2) they have no desire to repent.

There are lots of non-practicing homosexuals within the church who feel ostracized by comments they hear within the church.

For example, how often do we hear church members say that being gay has nothing to do with genetics (i.e., nobody is born gay)? Most homosexuals don't feel that they ever made a choice to be gay. They never remember a time when they didn't feel gay. But comments like the one above are typically used to imply that merely being gay is the product of evil choices on the part of the member and, therefore, the member is bad solely for having certain thoughts and emotions.

The church leadership apparently understands this problem, given that they have said there is nothing wrong with being gay per se, so long as you don't practice (which clearly suggests they did not choose to be gay, since I presume that would be a sinful choice making your status as a homosexual wrong per se). But virtually ANY discussion in a church meeting will include the above statement and will go unchallenged by other church members. Frequently, the discussion then takes a far worse turn and focuses on how "those people" are destroying families (which again is fails to draw a distinction between those who are practicing and those who are struggling to overcome very powerful urges).

The end result is that a member who has been fighting a very lonely battle begins to feel like the church is not helpful to overcoming any challenges (which can lead to self-loathing and suicide, presumptions that the church (and its doctrine) are wrong and that there really is nothing sinful about homosexual activity, etc.).

Church MEMBERS in the US overall are far too insensitive and callous. As a result, our brothers and sisters fall away or fall apart.

So what can church leadership do about it? For one, they could make a better effort to understand the trials being faced by homosexuals within the church. Offer to meet them. Create an open dialogue with them. Understand where the strongest pressures come from. If they are doing this, I have never heard about it.

They could also focus more on caring for homosexuals. The focus, to me, is currently on fighting to prevent homosexuals from destroying the family (as if heterosexuals aren't doing enough of that on their own). For every one statement I have heard from the church on loving homosexuals, I have heard far more focusing on eliminating their influence in the world. Certainly it is within the prerogative of the church to decry sinful behavior. I simply wish they would be more cognizant of the collateral effect of their statements, particularly on good LDS homosexuals who are doing everything they can to deal with the hand they have been dealt.

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Fuz, you're naive if you don't believe it's under attack by everybody. Anything that attacks chastity, proper love between husband and wife, proper trust and caring between husband and wife, drives men away from women and women away from men, anything that encourages abuse and so on.

I said the family is under attack, but to say that homosexuals are the ones ruining marriage with their desire to be married, is highly misleading. Thus my suggestions earlier, if the church really wants to protect the family, get more proactive about saving our communities. Does the church do volunteer work? Yes, but could it do lots more? I believe so.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

I said the family is under attack, but to say that homosexuals are the ones ruining marriage with their desire to be married, is highly misleading. Thus my suggestions earlier, if the church really wants to protect the family, get more proactive about saving our communities. Does the church do volunteer work? Yes, but could it do lots more? I believe so.

I doubt doing more volunteer work will save families, as families must save themselves through application of successful principles. The Church does this through example of its members and education. Service important but it alone will not or principally save the family. This is a naive organizational belief that simply makes no sense.

Service shows you care so somebody might listen and change himself. People who believe the Church doesn't render enough service aren't looking in the right directions.

[Venkman]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

Come on dude, five years ago I only knew of the church and it's stance on Nightline when they showed clips of what the church had said and testimonials of homosexuals who had forsaken their lifestyle.

As far as broadcasting over the pulpit I never heard an edict read strong arming the membership to protect that family that is currently under attack.

Again to say the family is under attack is highly misleading. I'll submit that the family is under attack, but it's under attack by heterosexuals, not homosexuals...

The reason you didn't hear anything five years ago is because five years ago, there wasn't a federal constitutional ammendment being considered. Five years ago, when the issue was on the table in California, the church made their stance known.

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by Venkman

The reason you didn't hear anything five years ago is because five years ago, there wasn't a federal constitutional ammendment being considered. Five years ago, when the issue was on the table in California, the church made their stance known.

Questions:

What does a gay couple getting married do to your family?

What does it do to the family in general?

How does it attack the traditional family?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

Questions:

What does a gay couple getting married do to your family?

What does it do to the family in general?

How does it attack the traditional family?

Red herring alert, red herring alert.

You pose some strawmen then knock them down? Good for you.

Gay activity violates chastity. Anything diminishing chastity affects the public's view of sexuality which in turn negatively affects those who wish to become sexual and eventually married.

The ambience of accepting any ole arrangement people can concoct shows that man gets to make them up and that tradition be damned.

Will it necessarily affect those properly taught? Probably not significantly. But the milieu will affect those without the Gospel and will make them probably non-receptive to the Gospel.