73 Comments | leave a comment | RSS 2.0 for this post | trackback |
I was in Stuart’s ward. I was completely ignorant of the torment he faced. I like to think that the ward would have been supportive of him if more people had known, but I can’t claim to know that such a thing would have helped. I do know that our bishop at the time was a very supportive person and several times I heard him make gay-friendly statements that I think would have been shocking to more conservative LDS. |
One of my favorite characters in literature if the priest in Les Miserables. If you read the unedited version (took me a looooong time), you find that he’s the true hero of the story. I think of him when I hear of people like your bishop. He must agonize over that today. When my James shot himself, people who barely knew him felt responsible. I got a letter from a boy who was about four years older than he, who was serving a mission in Japan (Sean’s brother, bookslinger). He wrote about feeling guilty for not being nicer to him when he’d been James’ order of the arrow leader, almost five years prior to that. So that had to have been hard on your ward, John. How old were you then? |
Thanks Anne - 1) It seems reasonable to me that if someone repents of their sins (whatever they might be) and are worthy, then theoretically they could be called to any position. However, I also realize that it is unlikely they would be called into a position such as Bishop, but it is possible. 2) Not sure what you are getting at here. Do you have any data to support this supposition? I think men, in general, are more sexually focused due to testosterone, but to posit that homosexuals have more partners than heterosexuals is purely a guess without data. Speaking to colleagues of mine, it seems that many of them (heterosexuals) had a lot of partners in college… 3) I like your thought that we have all been the “other” in some circumstances. Can I equate with what it means to be gay? No, but I know how it is to be the “other” in other instances and it gives me compassion to those who are left out… 4) I would agree with you on this point. |
I was going off Carol Lyn’s sentence about the sheer numbers of partners, Devyn, but that has been my assumption. I would like to be corrected or enlightened because I’ve wondered about that for a long time. I’m not sure if it’s true, it’s just what I thought. I agree that a homosexual man who had been promiscuous might never be called to be a bishop, but based on Elder Holland’s statements, one could make a blanket assumption. However, let’s say a wonderfully spiritually gifted young man never marries, and never engages in homosexual sexual activities, although knowing he’s gay—wouldn’t he be worthy to be a bishop? Although perhaps there’s an unspoken rule that single men can’t be bishops. Sort of like the unspoken rule about divorced men being bishops. Or in the case of my stake, women not being allowed to open a meeting with prayer. I’m so going to picket the next stake conference. I will wear my red dress. |
Regarding your second point. I have read statistics on couples that indicate gay men have more sex than straight men and that lesbian women have less sex than straight women. Generally men have more desire for sex than women. Gay men are men. Put two men in an relationship and apparently it results more sex. Lesbian women are women. Put two women in a relationship and it apparently results in less sex. My guess is that gay men establish committed relationships in the same way straight men do, by eventually finding the right partner. |
Anne - I have never know a single Bishop, but I don’t know if there is a “rule” about a Bishop being married. Picket away - that is one of the silliest rules I have ever heard of. Howard - that makes sense, but do gay men have more partners? |
Although perhaps there’s an unspoken rule that single men can’t be bishops. Sort of like the unspoken rule about divorced men being bishops. From the mouth of a current SP who had multiple candidates rejected by SLC, the current rule is that a man who was sealed and divorced must have been sealed to his current wife for 20 years to be called as a bishop. |
Or in the case of my stake, women not being allowed to open a meeting with prayer. A leader somewhere doesn’t have enough to do, obviously. |
As the aunt of a much loved 16-year-old nephew, who came out to his mother this weekend, my first thoughts were I wish he didn’t live in Utah and I wish he wasn’t LDS. Things are not going to be easy for him. |
This does raise an interesting thought - Say a kid is baptized at age 8, following the custom if he was born into the Church. At 16, he discovers his latent homosexuality (which the Church has said could be a naturally occurring state). The covenant he made at baptism would seem to preclude him from engaging in homosexual activity. But how could he have even known that was an issue at age 8? (I don’t have an answer, and I’m not criticizing any sides.) |
Anne, you might want to follow up by reading In Quiet Desperation: Understanding the Challenge of Same-Gender Attraction by Fred Matis, Marilyn Matis, Ty Mansfield. Two of the authors are Stuart’s parents. I don’t agree with everything they have to say about homosexuality but I really respect them for discussing the topic with love rather than hate or dismay, and for the acceptance and love they have given hundreds of gay LDS men in the last five years or so. (My disagreement with the Matis’s is that they say homosexuality is a “challenge” which should be met with celibacy one’s whole life.) I have a cousin who’s pushing 60 now, never married. My guess, based on stereotypical stuff (so not necessarily correct) is that he probably is gay, but celibate. He’s been in a bishopric as a counselor, in a regular ward for several years,in Utah, but he’s the only single man I’ve ever known of called to a bishopric (as opposed to being in a ward with very few males, etc.) |
Also, take a look at the videos about Understanding LDS Homosexuality here: ( My FIL was gay, so this is a topic close to our family.) |
Ty Mansfield’s book is good because it gets beyond a lot of the fruitless arguments over change, fairness, etc. and focuses on what exactly the Atonement means for people in this situation. |
I’ve always taken it for granted that bishops have to be married. I believe the reasoning is that they have to show themselves capable of managing their personal family before being entrusted with the ‘ward family’. I’ve never heard of any non-married man being called to be a bishop (or anything higher in the hierarchy), gay or straight. The thing about masturbation is that it is a misuse of one’s sexual powers–the same reason that premarital or gay sex is wrong. It’s only a non-issue if you discount the sacredness of sex. [Full disclosure: I’m a nineteen-year-old gay mormon. It sucks at times, but–thank God–sex isn’t everything.) |
I feel that there are still too many question about homosexuality and not enough answers. I’m hoping in the next years or so that science will tell us more about same-sex attraction. |
I know of a single straight guy (age 23) who is a branch president in Spain. However, I think it’s a question of available leadership in some more remote areas of the church. Don’t expect to see one in Utah or Idaho anytime soon. I also heard a tragic story of a single 50-something man in my home ward we all assumed was (celibate) gay. He was very active (if I say how actively involved he was with the church I will out his identity), 2nd counselor in the ward, etc. Eventually, some members were adamant that his status be addressed by ward leadership. He was so mortified that he never came back to church. It seems to me that it’s best to assume chastity (regardless of preference) in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Although I imagine some heterosexuals have probably been subject to prying personal questions (more personally directed than the temple recommend interview) as well. |
Devyn (#3) and annegb, concerning Point #2, I don’t know how reliable various stats are, but my impression is that homosexual men generally have more partners than heterosexual men and are proportionally more promiscuous than heterosexual men. (I have no clue about women.) Though, I’m prepared to be proved wrong with reliable data. I read a statement a while back in a Human Development textbook that I thought was awkward. Being a reasonably gay-affirming text, it discussed various myths about homosexual relationships being qualitatively different than heterosexual relationships. Then, in the same breath, it states that “About half of committed gay male couples do have an open relationship that allows for the possibility of sex (but not affectionate love) outside of the relationship). Lesbian couples usually do not have this open relationship.” And then it provides a 2002 study by Peplau & Beals as reference. And this is in a section that positively portrays gay relationship culture. While I’m sure there are plenty of promiscuous heterosexual men, I have a difficult time believing that the number of open heterosexual relationships comes even close to 50%, or even a small fraction of that. Any other thoughts on that? |
I’ve wondered about the sheer numbers of sexual partners a homosexual (men?) will have in their lifetime and how they can establish a committed relationship when the grass is always greener. All objections to the contrary, it appears to me that homosexuals place greater emphasis on sex than most heterosexuals. Reliable data on this point is hard to come by, as most “studies” of homosexual activity have worked from horribly skewed samples. Many anti-gay activists like to cite a study performed in Amsterdam, without mentioning that the study specifically excluded anyone over 30, and anyone involved in a monogamous relationship. My own anecdotal observation is that on average, gay men have more sex, with a greater number of sexual partners, than straight men. Still, I know gay men (even non-religious ones) who are celibate outside a committed monogamous relationship. I also know gay men who represent the opposite extreme. As for establishing a committed relationship, I would submit that “the grass is always greener” for straight individuals, as well. As Howard notes, it’s mostly a matter of finding the right person. I’m blown away by the wisdom of Stuart’s bishop and as a person who struggles with self hatred for different reasons, Stuart’s words of despair spoke to my soul. Keep in mind that Stuart’s pressures were heightened by the fact that the LDS church was exerting incredible pressure on Californian members at the time to promote anti-gay legislation. The bishop may have said the right things, but that doesn’t mean he was able to outweigh the “big picture” which the LDS church presented to young men like Stuart at that time and place. |
The thing about masturbation is that it is a misuse of one’s sexual powers–the same reason that premarital or gay sex is wrong. It’s only a non-issue if you discount the sacredness of sex. A gay, formerly-LDS friend of mine has a few sons. He was contacted by his ex-wife, who was freaking out because their ten year old (yes, ten) was spending “too much time” in the bathroom. She wanted my friend to talk to him about how evil masturbation was. As my friend pointed out, LDS-ism considers masturbation to be “sexual sin,” and also considers sexual sin “second to murder” in seriousness. Ultimately, some LDS would rather have their child caught shoplifting, than find out he pleasured himself. |
I know of a single straight guy (age 23) who is a branch president in Spain. There is a big difference between a bishop and a branch president. For starters, the branch president does not have to be a high priest. I was a branch president on my mission. I did not have to be sustained or formally set apart — it was simply an assignment. I had all of the rights normally associated with the calling. However, there were certain bishop-level keys that I did not have. |
I was not aware of that (btw, this bishop is not a missionary in the role). In my home ward, we were a branch for many years, and it was always a HP in the role–although small, it was a branch with a lot of strong leadership. Thanks for clarifying! |
Queuno- I had never heard that the church fostered a position that latent homosexuality could be a naturally occurring state. I admit I subscribe heavily to nurture doctrine rather than nature in this matter, but I’m interested to know where that is from for personal eye-opening purposes rather than discussion on this post. The masturbation issue is fairly grey to me, namely in it being part of the sin next to murder. One of my old stake presidents had a personal policy of putting off missionaries’ service 3 months when they did it, regardless of whether they had a departure date set or not. For actual fornication, the minimum is 1 year, as set by the Church as far as I know. We might consult Kinsey on some of the sex-related issues for some understanding, but I think we’d regret it. |
Regarding masturbation, the sacred practice of White Tantra is an option that facilitates high levels of spirituality and self discipline without orgasm. |
I also heard a tragic story of a single 50-something man in my home ward we all assumed was (celibate) gay. He was very active (if I say how actively involved he was with the church I will out his identity), 2nd counselor in the ward, etc. Eventually, some members were adamant that his status be addressed by ward leadership. He was so mortified that he never came back to church. Do those same standards apply to women? Should we assume that Sheri Dew is a celibate lesbian since she’s over 50 and not married? Do different rules apply to ‘bachelors’? |
Amber, I think it would be highly intrusive and improper for you to attribute celibacy to Sherri Dew, without evidence. |
Well, as to standards, that’s just a tragic story I heard, so I don’t know if that has happened elsewhere. Even if it has, that doesn’t make it a standard. Perhaps others can comment on that. Personally, I am against all outings, aside from the temple recommend interview. I would presume worthiness (in this case, celibacy) unless I had evidence to the contrary (of actions, not tendencies) or if the person confessed something. However, this was several years ago. I hope that people are becoming more accepting of differences. |
Nick - you rock! I should clarify, too. By “all outings” I meant well-intentioned people targeting questions at others based on circumstancial evidence, hunches, or perceptions. I also meant “outings” regardless of what the sin is presumed to be, not just sexual outings. Confession shouldn’t be forced or extracted. Good old fashioned guilt, though . . . |
Here’s a hypothetical though- Why would you need to tell your bishop/sp in a temple recommend interview that you were living with ’ssa’ (to be church pc) if you were celibate? If you hadn’t acted on those feelings, and were living a morally clean lifestyle why would it ever come up in a temple recommend interview? |
My husband Gerald lived and died in the great excess of the 1980’s when so many gay people behaved much like tipsy teenagers at their first all-nighter, unchaperoned even by good judgement. The “great excess” of the 70s and 80s was the thrust of the struggle for gay rights. The focus was on the right to have homosexual sex. That is what gays were fighting for at the time. So that desire for general liberation was very much expressed as part of the general sexual liberation of the time. The advent of AIDS tempered that thinking. Today, the gay rights movement seeks equality in treatment, job discrimination, the right to serve in the military, the right to have homosexual relationships given the same rights, privileges, responsibilities and honor as heterosexual relationships. Today, gays and lesbians seek to be no longer treated as second class citizens or as a danger to society. I’ve wondered about the sheer numbers of sexual partners a homosexual (men?) will have in their lifetime and how they can establish a committed relationship when the grass is always greener. That some homosexual men have a large number of sexual partners is most likely due to the fact they are simply more successful than heterosexuals. But promiscuity is a bit more complicated. There are those who have multiple partners and then there are those who are promiscuous and have casual, even anonymous sexual encounters. Promiscuity among some gay men probably can be attributed to a number of factors: 1. There is no model of appropriate sexual behavior established by society or the church other than celibacy. There are no Gold and Green Balls inclusive of gays and lesbians, nor encouragement to date in a non-sexual mode for same-sex couples. Gay people in society who reject celibacy as a lifestyle, can only look to the social model of the the heterosexual world, which derived from a long history where premarital sex could result in pregnancy, where marriages were arranged, and where wives were the property of husbands. So, where same-sex relationships have been for so long forbidden, the openly gay person is charting new waters as to what is right and proper behavior outside of the traditional heterosexual union. If all homosexuality is forbidden, what is appropriate behavior for a non-celibate homosexual? 2. Oppression, discrimination, self loathing, and relegation to the “closet” breeds dysfunctional and self-defeating behaviors. We only need to point to the likes of Ted Haggard and Senator Larry Craig to demonstrate the damage that homophobia and self-hatred can contribute to behaviors such as anonymous and casual sex. I believe that much of the uncontrolled, addictive promiscuous behavior is directly related to the internal conflicts of being gay in a straight, and often hostile society. 3. All the years of fearfully hiding in the closet and, of necessity, living dishonest and secret lives led to a culture among the gay community where intimate and non-intimate relations were sought out under the cover of night, in public rest rooms, wooded parks, back rooms and bath houses. Only when society encourages appropriate and honest behavior for homosexuals, including stable, monogamous relationships, will we begin to see these old entrenched patterns of behavior begin to diminish among the gay community. |
Thanks, you guys, for your comments. I spent 15 minutes answering each of you only to lose it because my sucky keyboard is haunted and sometimes things just diappear. I have to go have family home evening with Bill—I’ve made this killer mousse cake (bi-polar meds stimulate my appetite, I’m eating leaves as I pass the tree) with rasberries and cream. Eat your hearts out. But I appreciate every comment that has been made and I’ll see you in the morning. May I take this opportunity to say I hate daylight savings time? |
My 1st Counselor is single. It’s not an issue and I never thought he was gay just because he isn’t married. Much of the leadership in my ward is single. Several leaders struggle with same gender attraction. In some, sex is the struggle, in others, they would like to have the intimacy and closeness that married members enjoy. My heart goes out to them. Masturbation: it is not even close to being a sin next to murder. With what our youth face today, I would be somewhat happy that they would only MB and leave out the porn or petting. The level of porn use is *way* high - in spit of how much effort the Church has been putting in to teach against this destructive practice. |
Steven B, I love your comments. One question regarding #2- “I believe that much of the uncontrolled, addictive promiscuous behavior is directly related to the internal conflicts of being gay in a straight, and often hostile society.” I agree with this entirely. What would you prescribe as the way out of this downward spiral? This is one of the biggest dilemmas of this generation. From a very early age- 3rd grade- I was taught about sex in public school. By middle school, I was taught about homosexuality and gender confusion. By high school I was taught about the many ways of having sex and all about masturbation as a perfectly normal means of not getting an STD. I would be willing to bet that much of our sexually liberated and educated society contributes to what many see as a challenge in battling same-sex attraction. And if the numbers are growing and the bar is already set, it seems like there has to be a pattern outlined in the church to address it in atonement terms, not just by those who live it (Ty Mansfield), but by those in charge. There is no doubt we need awareness and a lot of injected compassion in this issue. |
I think I got carried away in rant a little. I wanted to say that I agree that “much of the uncontrolled, addictive promiscuous behavior is directly related to the internal conflicts of being gay in a straight, and often hostile society.” And there seems to be at least three roads for approaching the issue: 2) Accept the behavior, let it ride, as long as no one is hurt- incorporate a 100% acceptance mindset. In a way, address the hostility as the issue. This has merits based on (what seems to me as an exaggeration of) the spirit of the law. 3) Somewhere in the middle is a different path that talks about same-sex attraction as a challenge and provides the Gospel as support in facilitating the fulfillment of the law- with absolute compassion. I envision a process that is so open and supportive by members of the church that the only way one could turn from it is to simply be more enticed by “indulging”. I don’t think we’re anywhere near that point. I think many people struggling with such issues and many other issues characterized as “sins” by Mormon culture often find life is simply safer elsewhere, physically, psychologically, and even spiritually. 3) |
I am an LDS man who happens to be gay. When I told one bishop about it as a way of clearing up some prior experimentation, his response was to hug me. Later he called me to be his counselor, and he warned that there might be some who would vote against me because I was single. (No one did.) I told him he couldn’t call me because I was gay, and his comment was that it might look that way on the surface, but he was more sure of this calling than of any other calling he had ever given. After being released several years later, I had some more problems, and the stake presidency member who counseled me for months later became my bishop, and called me to be exec. secretary. I was never open about my sexuality, but neither did I keep it a secret from those in the ward I became close to. There were probably a fifteen or so members over the years that I told. So yes, there are single men in leadership positions, and some of them might be gay. They might be struggling, but everyone struggles and deserves the ward’s support. |
nasamomdele: What would you prescribe as the way out of this downward spiral? This is one of the biggest dilemmas of this generation. Well, the problem is, of course, bigger than addictive and promiscuous behavior. The first section in Carol Lynn’s book deals mainly with the suicides and attempts at suicide by LDS members. It is heart wrenching reading. Yet there is still the drone of demonization spewed from both the pulpit and the statehouse. Just a couple of days ago an Oklahoma State Representative called homosexuality a cancer on society, and a greater threat than terrorism to the United States. And only a few weeks ago a prominent Christian preacher near Seattle said that if an effeminate man tried to hold a door open for him, the preacher would rip off the man’s arm and beat him with the bloody stump. So it is no wonder that when the young 15 year old Lawrence King was recently shot dead by a classmate, because he did not conform to gender norms and had recently told a few people that he was gay, a shocked Ellen DeGeneres painfully remarked, “when the message out there is so horrible that to be gay you can be killed for it, we need to change the message.” I recently heard of a pro-tolerance campaign in Britian, or Europe somewhere that said simply, “Gay people exist. Get over it!” Perhaps I don’t see the threat to mankind. But I believe honesty is always the best policy. People should be allowed to be honest and open about who they are. Both in society and in the church. If the LDS doctrine insists that homosexual activity is morally wrong, and incompatible with the Plan of Happiness, fine. But encourage the members be open about who they are. The current position of the church is that members who discover they are sexually attracted to the same sex should remain silent and not talk about it. Sorry but I don’t agree with that. Such council only breeds secrecy, dishonesty, and internal disharmony. If the LDS church believes in lifelong celibacy for its homosexual members, then the practice (celibacy) should be encouraged and celebrated at all levels. Such individuals should be able to stand in Sacrament meeting without fear and say, “I’m gay, and I’m among the celibate class.” |
Whoops, the word “council” in the last paragraph should have been “counsel.” (Spell checkers can be so evil!) |
Two remarks: 1) I made a point of telling my kids when they were teenagers that masturbation was normal, harmless and absolutely nothing to worry about. I’ve noticed that the Church has recently begun moving away from focusing on masturbation from the pulpit, at least in General Conference. Instead, pornography seems to be the current hot button issue. 2) Being gay is as much about love as it is about sex. Gay people fall in love with persons of the same sex. For humane reasons we need to quit encouraging gay people to marry members of the opposite sex. These are awkward marriages that lack an appropriate pair bonding dynamic. Tremendous misery results. It would be, in my opinion, much more humane to permit stable same-sex relationships, even if only to reduce the number of straight partners who unwittingly become involved in mixed-orientation marriages. Would you want your daughter to marry a man who could never love her romantically and who never desired her physically? Is that the life you would wish for your own daughter? Similarly, would you wish a life of isolation and loneliness on your own son if he were gay? Wouldn’t it be better if he had a cherished companion, even if that companion were a man? Shouldn’t we advocate the path that avoids human misery and gives everyone the best chance for happiness in this life? |
37) I think falling in romantic love is overrated. Seriously. It’s nice, but it’s not necessary to feeling fulfilled as a person. Nor is it necessary to being a good spouse. The sort of love necessary to be a good spouse and part of a marital unit is the sort of love that Christ feels for each of us. That love grows as a person works on it, no matter who you are. It doesn’t just happen, though it may be facilitated by romantic love at first. That’s not a comment on homosexuality alone, just a comment on the illusion of love and marriage we feed ourselves. More with the main topic and to “come clean”, I want to say that I’ve known quite a few gay and lesbian people in the course of my life. I’ve known some I am friends with, and others I can’t stand. The difference between the two groups is that the former might state their homosexuality early on, but then they go on to live their lives, build real friendships and talk about other things. The latter group continually pushes their sexuality, always forcing comments on it where they don’t really flow, making jokes about it, basically defining their personalities on it. Frankly, heterosexuals who behave similarly are also on my “can’t stand” list. It’s your sex life, people. I get that. Move on! As amazing as it might seem, I really don’t want to talk about you having sex all the time. It doesn’t interest me. For what it’s worth, a similar thing goes for religion. I might tell someone I am LDS early in a new friendship. It might come up occasionally in conversation. I don’t turn every single conversation I have over to it. I don’t try to find ways to force a conversation to make way for it. A person is not defined by a single attribute, no matter how important that attribute might be to their personal makeup. |
I’m with danithew in comment #15
And until we know more, we should be very mindful about how we judge this or that individual. |
I agree with MoHoHawaii’s point
It really demeans and undermines marriage and family if you force a gay man to marry a woman. It really does bring about tremendous misery. |
re: Masturbation, #14 and #22 I strongly believe that masturbation is NOT part of the “sin next to murder.” I believe punishment for sin is reasonable, so the punishment or seriousness of a sin should be proportional to the damage it causes to my soul or the souls of those around me. The power of creation is sacred: True. But there’s nothing inherently sacred about my genitals (at least not moreso than my ears, for example) or my sperm. Masturbating kills cells, that’s all. So while it should be avoided, it cannot be equated with adultery or murder. Adultery, on the other hand, destroys lives and families. Adultery destroys the fabric of God’s plan. Thus, like murder, adultery is extremely destructive to souls, and so it is far more serious than masturbation, smoking, buying food on Sunday, and other various and sundry sins. Masturbation is a sin and as with all sins should be avoided, but it’s not as serious as many make it out to be. |
I strongly believe that masturbation is NOT part of the “sin next to murder.” . . . But there’s nothing inherently sacred about my genitals (at least not moreso than my ears, for example) or my sperm. Masturbating kills cells, that’s all. So while it should be avoided, it cannot be equated with adultery or murder. I think it’s important to realize that the taboo on masturbation arose largely from the mistaken “medical” idea that each sperm contained an extremely tiny, fully-formed human, which needed only be “planted” in the womb. Such theories denied that the woman contributed anything to offspring, aside from “fertile ground.” For those who believed such things about sperm, it was certainly no stretch to nearly equate masturbation with murder. There are, of course, religionists who point to the Old Testament account of Onan (hence the archaic term, “onanism”) as a prohibition on masturbation. A simple reading of the passage in question makes it clear that Onan exercized coitus interruptus, not masturbation. |
#37: I’m currently reading a rather interesting book, called Rereading Sex: Battles over Sexual Knowledge and Suppression in Nineteenth-Century America by Helen Lefkowitz Horowitz. Interestingly, Horowitz discusses how early efforts to eliminate “obscene” images and literature relied heavily on the fear/threat that such materials would cause young men to masturbate. In other words, it wasn’t that the “porn” (at that time “obscene material” included any discussions of female physiology and birth control) was a huge problem in itself, but rather that it might lead to masturbation. |
I have a close, personal friend who recently announced his homosexualtity to family, friends and anyone who reads the local newpaper (he wrote an editorial about being a ‘gay’ Mormon). My reaction was to tell my friend exactly what Elder Holland told the young man he counseled. I told my friend that I loved him, the Lord loves him and that his Heavenly Father loves him. End of story. Like other commenters have pointed out, there are more questions than answers about same-gender attraction. Until we know more, and even when we do know more about it, we should reach out to homosexuals with love. |
Second comment: And until we know more, we should be very mindful about how we judge this or that individual. Except that there are ecclesiastical circumstances in which judgment is appropriate, and we need to respect that those circumstances and judgments exist. |
The current position of the church is that members who discover they are sexually attracted to the same sex should remain silent and not talk about it. Sorry but I don’t agree with that. Such council only breeds secrecy, dishonesty, and internal disharmony. If the LDS church believes in lifelong celibacy for its homosexual members, then the practice (celibacy) should be encouraged and celebrated at all levels. Such individuals should be able to stand in Sacrament meeting without fear and say, “I’m gay, and I’m among the celibate class.” I think you’ve overstated the Church’s position. Unless I’ve misread the Church’s recent statements, I don’t see that your last scenario is expressly forbidden. |
#46 queuno: |
Nick - I acknowledge the counsel that gay LDS shouldn’t mix with other gays, but I just didn’t find a reading there that it must be a “don’t ask, don’t tell” situation within one’s ward, for instance. Maybe I’m not reading it right. Perhaps more likely, I’m not directly impacted by it, so there are hidden meanings I’m not equipped to detect. At any rate, the idea that SLC is promulgating an idea of “Don’t talk about being a celibate gay Mormon” just doesn’t ring true. |
#35 Steven B, I couldn’t agree with you more. Gays are out there, get over it. And perhaps even more importantly, “gay people don’t bite. But if they do, you won’t need a shot.” |
#42 Nick, are you saying that’s not true? No tiny people? |
#48: On a meta-level, you’re absolutely right, queuno. In fact, so long as gay LDS stress the point that they’re either (a) celibate, or (b) “succesfully” married to an opposite-sex partner, it appears that SLC actually encourages them to talk about it, in very public ways. A number of these individuals (more so the marrieds, it seems) have been popping up in the news media in the past year, in ways that really do appear that they’re being held up as examples. In particular, I’m thinking of AMCAP’s 2006 conference, which paraded three married gay LDS men in front of the attendees and media. The fact that the conference was held in the Joseph Smith Memorial Building at LDS HQ indicates that the content met the approval of LDS representatives (be they beauracrats or GA level). The poster boys didn’t claim their marriages were perfect by any means, but they certainly portrayed a unified “this can work just fine” message. I expect this was aimed at encouraging gay LDS who already found themselves in heterosexual marriages to remain married, as we know the official direction these days is not to encourage gay LDS to marry heterosexually as some sort of “therapy.” |
Brian wrote in comment 44:
I appreciate the attitude of kindness and understanding behind this comment. Truly. If I look at the situation from your friend’s point of view, a message of God’s love can’t be the end of the story. There are still many practical details to resolve. He still has to navigate his way through life and through the Church. And unfortunately, the Church’s plan for him is unappetizing– lifelong celibacy and isolation. Most people, regardless of sexual orientation, are not capable of going through an entire life alone, without romantic companionship and love. Almost everyone needs hearth and home. Celibacy is feasible for very, very few of us. So what are your friend’s real options? This to me is the bottom line: despite the fact that the Church is coming around and beginning to recognize the humanity and dignity of its gay members, the life it offers them is a meager one. The current doctrinal workaround is “everything will be made whole in the post-mortal existence.” Most people can’t wait that long. I agree with the sentiment that we don’t know everything yet. Our understanding is still evolving, so we should be very, very cautious before we judge. |
#46 queuno: In addition to filling your garden with positive influences, you must also avoid any influence that can harm your spirituality. One of these adverse influences is obsession with or concentration on same-gender thoughts and feelings. It is not helpful to flaunt homosexual tendencies or make them the subject of unnecessary observation or discussion. It is better to choose as friends those who do not publicly display their homosexual feelings. There are some who see a chilling, silencing tone in the phrase: “. . . flaunt homosexual tendencies or make them the subject of unnecessary observation or discussion.” |
So … are we complaining about the official position or the one the average member takes? There is a difference, right? Obviously, there are are bigoted individuals who need reeducating. I think those who find chilling, silencing tones are looking for them to be there. But I concede there’s not much middle ground here. One apparently accepts the current position of the church leadership or one does not. |
Well, I don’t know how others understand the text, but to me, the official position is clear: Being open and honest about your sexual orientation [read=openly gay] can “harm your spirituality” and be an “adverse influence.” It is best to not associate with those who “publicly display their homosexual feelings.” Yes, God Loveth His Children, but open and honest gays are still dangerous, so best not get too close. |
Howard, that makes sense to me. Never thought of it that way. Although your comment just doesn’t sound any fun to me at all. queno I always appreciate and usually enjoy your comments (except when you rip me a new one LOL). I’m so glad you come here to comment, it adds to every discussion. Thanks for sharing about the 20 year rule. I’ll tell my friend her husband only has to stick with her for five more years, although they weren’t sealed, she’s sealed to her former husband, who died. I don’t think the issue of awareness at eight–or non-awareness invalidates the covenants. Gay individuals can take upon them the name of Christ as easy as anybody else. to be continued….(don’t want to lose it again |
Paula, thanks so much for the reference. I will read that book. Would you feel comfortable sharing more of your story? I’m wondering how your husband handled his father’s homosexuality, how long he was married, etc. When I follow up on Carol Lyn’s book, I’m gong to talk about the gay young men who feel the pressure to marry, to the detriment of all concerned. Potentate |
Oh, anne, you make me smile. I’m doing fine. Having a gay ‘ole time, you might say. Last I heard, most men in the general population masturbate at least once a month even after marriage. I wouldn’t be bothered by the concept either, except that if masturbation’s okay, why isn’t gay sex? Both are natural [to me, anyway]. ‘Natural’ and ‘what God wants’ often don’t coincide. Regarding being publicly gay, part of the reasoning behind the first presidency’s statement is that a.) sexuality, hetero or homo, isn’t to be a topic for everyday, frivolous conversation and so shouldn’t be constantly paraded, and b.) talking about being gay leads to focusing on it more, just like talking about politics and sports. For homosexuals, who already focus on their sexuality quite a lot [thanks in large part to explicit and implicit social prejudice], it can easily become an unhealthy and embittering fixation fixation. I don’t think the church leaders are asking for silence–just that we treat the subject with the gravity and respect it deserves. And as far as the age eight thing goes . . . I, for one, understood very little about anything at eight years old, and I don’t think I’m that far behind the majority. I assume that’s why we take the sacrament every week, reaffirming the baptismal covenants as we learn more about them and ourselves. |
danithew, that’s interesting. The idea that science could figure this out never occurred to me. I thought we’d have to wait till the millenium. Nick, thanks for your insight and honesty. It must make you a little defensive to hear people talk about gay male promiscuity. I know it would me. I think so many ideas are ignorant assumptions held over from the 19th century or earlier. For instance, the idea that suicide was a mortal sin, resulting in an eternity in hell, started with the Catholic Church, who knows when. The priests became concerned that there were so many suicides and people were leaving their money to their families instead of the church. Coitus interuptus, now that doesn’t sound right to me. |
Steven B. wow. You are a wise person, thanks for sharing with us. A lot of food for thought. I recall my kids, it was about, oh, 1984-ish, calling each other and their friends (well, they all did it anyway, I don’t know who started it) “AIDS Victim” like they called each other “dork” or other insults. I yelled at them for it. It was when those brothers in Florida(?) all had AIDS. My son’s friend later died of AIDS, in 1993, I think. And they evolved. He had hemophilia. “Only when society encourages appropriate and honest behavior for homosexuals, including stable, monogamous relationships, will we begin to see these old entrenched patterns of behavior begin to diminish among the gay community.> That bears repeating again and again and again. Wow. There was a kid in Cedar who was gay who was tortured, sodomized with a tire iron, and murdered by two guys, can’t remember their names. But I remember his name. Chris Church. from Delta. Mathew Shepherd got all the publicity, but what Chris went through, I can’t forget it. They were caught and convicted, but I can’t remember their sentences. Life in prison, or death sentence, one. |
Nebraska, my sentiments exactly. That kind of hyperbole reminds me of the post someone put up that said something like “fir |