Add Reply
Related Information to LDS Perspective: Gay Marriage - Mormon GaysLDS Perspective: Gay Marriage - Mormon Gays - Page 14 of 42
Gary Lawrence sounds like a GOP neo-con who - Page 14 - Mormon Doctrine Studies - Posted: 17th Jul, 2008 - 1:34am
Play Text RPG
- Location:
- International Discussions
- ➢
- ➢ Discuss
- ➢ General Religious Beliefs
- ➢ Mormon Doctrine Studies
Posts: 329 - Views: 41244
Poster says, "At first I was against it because of the sanctity of marriage and it's eternal purpose, but now I am not sure. I agree that a Temple marriage can only be between male and female. This is because of the religious sanctity of marriage for eternity, for propogation and simply because that is how God intended it. However, the Church recognizes the validity of civil marriages that are only for this life and not eternity, even though this is not how God intended it. "Your view is... ?" Other interests: Gay and serve a mission? Boyd K. Packer's talk about same sex attraction. Related Information to LDS Perspective: Gay Marriage - Mormon Gays
LDS Perspective: Gay Marriage - Mormon Gays - Page 14
What the law does and what the church does is two different things. It is lawful for people to drink and smoke, so what does the Church do about it? Drinkers and smokers can come to meetings and participate to a certain point but if they want to get a recommend and continue their progression then they know what they have to do. The same goes for those who will be leaglly married in a gay relationship.
Sponsored Links:
Gays Mormon Marriage Gay Perspective LDS
Rather off topic, but...
I just had to say that this would make me a murderer, as I support most of those policies. Is the above quote hyperbole or do you really believe I am advocating the murder of many of my countrymen. A very large portion of the country (Red states) support GOP policies and are republican. I disagree with the liberal portions of democratic party but I do not believe they are killing individuals(I believe they are incorrect in their views). I would only state that most of the poor areas that you say the GOP is killing are in fact lead locally by democratic leaders. The poorest areas have had Democratic Leadership for 40+ years and that leadership has not brought significant portion of the population out of poverty. I am pretty sure that you are speaking figuratively, and not literally when you say the Gop policies and action are killing the Middle class and the poor, but maybe not. |
As to the lord condemning a nation, I agree with you that we cannot judge if the Lord condemns a nation, but he has in the past destroyed nations based on primarily on sexual sin and spiritual adultery. I know this has little baring on support or disagreement on Homosexual Marriage, but it does not take away from the fact that a nation can be cursed because of sin. This is true if it is Sexual sin or a rejection of charity for the most vulnerable of our population (by individuals).
There is no comparison, in my opinion, to the racial questions that revolved around the Priesthood and the allowing practicing homosexuals to enter the Temple or be in full fellowship if they are sexually active with their partners. Sexual sin (Homosexual or Heterosexual) is very serious and will bring condemnation on the individual or the nation that does not repent (turn away) from such actions. The Book of Mormon (Alma 39:5) clearly states that sexual sin is second only to murder in seriousness. We do know, that Sexual sin will never be tolerated by the Lord.
I just can't see, however, the comparison between Homosexual Marriage and the race issues. I am sure (but I cannot know) that there are many minorities that would be offended by the comparison of the Civil Rights movement of the 60's and the current trend to normalize homosexual marriage. They are not the same.
LDS Perspective: Gay Marriage - Mormon Gays Studies Doctrine Mormon
| QUOTE |
| Sexual sin (Homosexual or Heterosexual) is very serious and will bring condemnation on the individual or the nation that does not repent (turn away) from such actions. |
Yes it is but what does that have to do with gay Marriage being legalized. Why don't we then make co-habitation without marriage illegal? It does more to destroy marriage then homosexuals.
| QUOTE |
| As to the lord condemning a nation, I agree with you that we cannot judge if the Lord condemns a nation, but he has in the past destroyed nations based on primarily on sexual sin and spiritual adultery. |
Perhaps but if so we are are ready there with non-married co-habitation. Why do we make Homosexuals the scapegoats? remember Sodom and Gamorah were not destroyed because of sexual specifically homosexual sin. They were destroyed for how they treated the stranger or the alien in the community. Remember the ancients put a high priority on how you treated a stranger, traveler, and alien in your land. It is the same basic story of Zeus and Hermes who travel to a village in disguise as a stranger.
This was Sodom and Gamorah's sin. Read any well respected bible commentary and you will see this. It was very much a cultural law that is violated here.
| QUOTE |
| There is no comparison, in my opinion, to the racial questions that revolved around the Priesthood and the allowing practicing homosexuals to enter the Temple or be in full fellowship if they are sexually active with their partners |
I am not quick to agree with this. Remember when the priesthood ban was in place the most common logic for this ban was that blacks were less valiant in the pre-existence, or had some curse or sin upon them. Thus they were in some way immoral or less chosen then a white member. Again in most of LDS history race was a moral issue. Just as we today are dealing with a moral issue. I am not saying that this will change our views of gays, I just think that we need to be more open and humble about what we do not know. Vision is the ability to realize that the truth is always larger then the partial present that we know.
| QUOTE |
| I just can't see, however, the comparison between Homosexual Marriage and the race issues. I am sure (but I cannot know) that there are many minorities that would be offended by the comparison of the Civil Rights movement of the 60's and the current trend to normalize homosexual marriage. They are not the same. |
I do not know but many of the civil rights leadership that is still around seem to be in support of Gay rights. I am just hesitant to push for a gay ban, simply because history shows that the church does not have a good record with civil and human rights. We always seem to be behind crying moral reasonings. Its just that I have heard this all before.
Page 14 Gays Mormon Marriage Gay Perspective LDS
What do you all think about this article by Gary Lawrence who compares the pre-mortal war in Heaven with the issue of gay marriage? Yes, those who are against gay marriage follow Jesus and those who agree with it well, take a guess?
| QUOTE |
| "There was a war in heaven," my dad said as he taught me about our pre-earthly existence and the purpose of life. It had only been a few years since he had returned from service as a Marine in World War II, so it was natural that his 10-year-old son immediately imagined a great battle with planes, tanks, and bazookas. What a war it must have been, I thought. How disappointed I was when he told me the implements of that special conflict were "¦ words. Words? How exciting could that have been? I liked my version better. But I soon grasped the importance of this hinge event in our existence and the "weapons" we used to defend the principle of agency and God's plan for the happiness of His children. And I grew to understand that this war has not ended, that only the battlefield has changed. That battlefield is now California and the parallels between that pre-mortal conflict and the battle over the definition of marriage are striking. The scriptures tell us the beginning ("Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man" 1) and the end of the heavenly phase of that war ("he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him." 2), but they do not reveal the details of the conflict itself. We can deduce, however, that Lucifer and his followers must have used very effective arguments to turn a third of the hosts of heaven away from the Father despite pure knowledge of God's will. From 35 years of studying arguments in political campaigns, and a bit of reverse engineering, here is my stab at what these arguments might have been. Argument 1: Equality. Lucifer sets the foundation by appealing to fairness and the equal worth of every spirit child. We are all children of the Father. It's only fair that all of us be together forever and enjoy the same things the Father has. Argument 2: Sympathy. Having set the logic, Lucifer turns to emotion. Under the Father's plan, some of your friends will never return. Look at Brother Jones here, or Sister Smith over there. How are you going to feel when you find out that people such as they - good, deserving people - may not make it back? Argument 3: Hate. After playing on the victim angle, Lucifer gradually steers emotions to the negative. Knowing that rebellion against righteousness can never be sustained without hate, he sows doubt about the Father Himself and leads the gullible step by step to that absolutely necessary ingredient if he is to win. Father doesn't really love you as much as you think He does. He has already prepared three kingdoms for us - a first-class kingdom, a second-class kingdom, and a third-class kingdom. None of us should be second-class citizens. This is unfair. This is discrimination. This is bigotry. This is hatred. "¦ And it's okay to hate in return. Argument 4: Change. Now Lucifer returns to logic. The old ways have not worked. On the worlds without number the Father has created, too many were left behind and never returned to the Father's presence. It's time to do things differently. It's time for change. Argument 5: Guarantee. Amid the arguments about the consequences of each choice, Lucifer administers his clincher. Follow me and do what I say and I will guarantee that we will all return and live in celestial glory. And when I have the glory and power of the Father, I will make you my leaders and we will rule over those who did not follow us. It's the familiar guarantee of happiness and power that every tyrant in history has promised his followers. If he had been asked the details of his plan, Lucifer never would have admitted that he did not know how to create physical bodies for his followers to inhabit, and would not have revealed his plan to take over the bodies the Father would create. Lucifer would have couched his guarantee in amorphous language that appealed to those looking for an easier way without work. He's not called the father of lies for nothing. Now turn to the present battle. Whereas the principle under fire in the war in heaven was agency - the right to choose - the target in 2008 in California is marriage, both a principle and an institution. Just as agency is essential to our progress and happiness, so is marriage "central to the Creator's plan for the eternal destiny of His children." 3And the arguments of those supporting same-sex marriage are eerily familiar... |
Post Date: 13th Jul, 2008 - 7:56pm / Post ID: #
Gays Mormon Marriage Gay Perspective LDS
Personally I think it is a bunch of rubbish. He is so enamoured with the belief that somehow temporal gay marriage is a threat to the eternal marriage that God created that he misses the more blaring similitude that the whole war in heaven was about agency.
The agency we fought for in the pre-existence is the same agency that so many people seem happy to give up or take away in their mortal existence. The right to make a choice; and we have no business telling someone else what choice they can and cannot make.
LDS Perspective: Gay Marriage - Mormon Gays
For me, his view is way far-fetched and indirectly insulting. Those who believe in the rights of gays being married (whether we agree with it or not) are not being deceived by Satan. His interpretation is silly in my opinion.
LDS Perspective Gay Marriage Mormon Gays - Page 14
I do not agree with the comparison to the War in Heaven regarding this topic. It clouds the issues , essentially calling someone who disagrees with you a follower of Satan.
We have a disagreement of opinion, and that is essential in a pluralistic society.
Many of my objections to homosexual marriage, however, are less religious (the objections that I have discussed so far) then they are societal,political. In almost every case the people were not allowed to decide this issue, but rather small group of Judges. In the cases where the people were allowed to decide this issue, they overwhelmingly chose to define Marriage as between a man and a women (California voters already voted on the issue supporting traditional marriage aka Prop 22). A group of 4 judges said the people were wrong and that they could not govern themselves by defining a State institution.
If it is to remain a state institution, then a majority of the people should make the decision on how its defined and no one else. When, and if the people want to change that definition of marriage as currently defined, then so be it. But that is not how this issue is being decided.
I also believe that Marriage has been an institution that until recently has strictly been between a man and woman. The battle today is to keep this definition or to change it. I believe it is a definition that needs to be maintained, but I can understand those that would choose to allow same sex union defined as a Homosexual marriage. I just disagree with them. Could we ever convince each other? Probably not. But the discussion is interesting none the less.
LDS Perspective Gay Marriage Mormon Gays Mormon Doctrine Studies - Page 14
Gary Lawrence sounds like a GOP neo-con who is teaching the philosophies of men mingled with scripture. I read that article and it was so politically loaded. I can't believe that meridian magazine bought that load of garbage. Then again it is meridian magazine so it is not that surprising.
TOPIC: LDS Perspective: Gay Marriage - Mormon Gays