My good friend and author Devery Anderson posted a note on his Facebook status about gay marriage. I thought what he wrote was insightful and needed to be published on our blog. I have edited it for formatting and anything marked with a * are my additions.
Here is a short bio of Devery:
Devery Anderson is the editor of The Development of LDS Temple Worship, 1846-2000: A Documentary History, and co-author of Joseph Smith’s Quorum of the Anointed, 1842-1845: A Documentary History, and The Nauvoo Endowment Companies, 1845-1846: A Documentary History. He has nearly completed an in-depth study of the 1955 racial lynching of 14-year-old Emmett Till, called The Boy Who Never Died: The Saga of the Emmett Till Murder, and also expects to complete a biography of early Mormon Apostle Willard Richards next year. He is an editor at Signature Books.
I’m Amazed by how accepting most of my friends have been regarding gay marriage in Utah. Yes, the opponents are keeping silent, for the most part, probably because it is difficult to form a response to this issue that doesn’t sound–for want of a better word–stupid. The responses that people would like to tell me probably will go something like this:
1. “Marriage is under attack.”
Response: Well, if it was under attack, people would be wanting to abolish it, not expand it so that others can enjoy it too. Gay people, like most, think marriage is great. That’s why they want it too!
2. “We need to stand up and defend TRADITIONAL marriage!”
Response: How will any heterosexual marriage be threatened by gay people getting married? Tell me! And what is traditional marriage anyway? You have to focus on a certain time period and say, “This is traditional.” You can’t look over all of American history (let alone, world history) and say marriage has consistently meant one thing.
3. “But the Bible says homosexuality is a sin!
Response: Yes, a few books within a collection of 66 written and compiled by humans through debate and other give-and-take over several centuries say homosexuality is a sin. Never a recorded word by Jesus, however. He preached more against divorce. Why aren’t Christians out there fuming over divorce, and making it illegal? Keep in mind, however, that the Bible is a faith document, accepted by many Americans, but in varying degrees. Some see this compilation as the inerrant word of God–even though God never made that claim for this collection, which people put together long after the individual books were written. Others just sort of believe in it because they have been taught to believe in it since birth, and likely know little beyond a few stories. But the bigger question is: Should a particular religion’s faith document become law for everyone? Is the Bible the Constitution? Churches can still believe and practice what they want and not impose those beliefs on secular law. And do you really want to make legal or illegal everything the Bible endorses or opposes? Do you really want to go there?
4. “But the thought of gays being married is just weird! It isn’t right!”
Response: So, if we keep gay marriage illegal, gays will just go away, is that right? If we keep their relationships illegal, then guess what? We will be griping that they are promiscuous.
5. “But they can change!!”
Response: No, they can’t. Look at how many teen suicides there are over this issue. Talk to any gay person about how they have tried, how they never felt they chose their sexual orientation, and how liberating it felt to finally accept who they are and love who they are. Proponents of change are basically telling people to change, or else go through life not being happy with the person they are. They are saying that gay people should always, always wish they were straight; that if they have any self-confidence and move beyond the “guilt” of not being straight, that they are in rebellion. Science is showing more and more that sexual orientation is not a choice. *The Church’s stance: “…Even though individuals do not choose to have such attractions…” (Mormonsandgays.org) So if they don’t choose to have such attractions are they then not born that way?
6. “OK, maybe gays are born that way, but they should just be celibate.”
Response: So, you are saying, with a straight face (no pun intended), that you want to tell a gay teen, “Hey, just hold out alone for the next 70 years, and the next thing you know, you will be a straight spirit in heaven”? Ask any straight person to do that, and see what happens.
7. “But there are straight people who never get married. If they can do it, gays should be able to also!”
Response: Yes, but they are not told from a young age that they HAVE to be celibate. They are encouraged to meet people, date, go out, etc. Heterosexuals who don’t marry are either not interested in getting married, or no one is interested in them. The parallel would be telling a heterosexual couple who are in love that they can’t marry. See how well that one goes over.
8. “But the prophet said! [this, from my fellow Mormons]”.
Response: An LDS prophet, John Taylor, also said in the 1880s that blacks were preserved through the flood so that Satan could have a representative on earth just like God would. How many of you still believe that one? Mormon leaders said stuff just as bad or worse hundreds of times, right down until the very recent past. Just a few weeks ago, the church came out and disavowed all of the racist things it had said and taught.
9. “OK, all of those racist things they said were just their opinions because they lived in a culture that thought that way.”
Response: Bingo! And we are likely hearing lots of “opinions” today.
10. “But doctrines never change!”
Response: As a Mormon historian, I am here to tell you that they do. Most have. Some more than once.
11. “But gay people can’t procreate! Doesn’t that tell you right away that gay relationships aren’t natural?”
Response: I guess that means that people who are infertile should never marry, or that older widows and widowers should not remarry. The fact that so many people remarry before their spouses bodies are even cold tells us that it is no fun, not natural, to be alone. Relationships are about love, not just procreation.
12. “But still–marriage between a man and woman is sacred. It can’t be changed.”
Response: Sacred according to one’s religion, but again, should that be forced upon everyone? If gay marriage being legal means that it is still business as usual for heterosexuals, what’s the big deal? Also, if marriage is a SACRED union in the sense that most Christians refer to it, it would follow that they would be infuriated when a justice of the peace marries a couple, when an atheist with authority from the state marries a couple, when someone marries a spouse so they can stay in the country, etc. Heck, it is perfectly legal for an 18-year-old boy to marry a 90-year-old woman for her money, or some other reason. Doesn’t that violate marriage being sacred also? *Keep in mind that we practiced polygamy before the government forced us to stop. During that time period monogamy (one man and one woman) was the enemy.
“Monogamy, or restrictions by law to one wife, is no part of the economy of heaven among men. Such a system was commenced by the founders of the Roman Empire… Rome became the mistress of the world, and introduced this order of monogamy wherever her sway was acknowledged. Thus this monogamic order of marriage, so esteemed by modern Christians as a hold sacrament and divine institution, is nothing but a system established by a set of robbers.”
– Prophet Brigham Young, Deseret News, August 6, 1862
13. “Yes, and we don’t like that either!”
Response: But you aren’t freaking out about it. And yet marriage has survived these “threats” to its sacred nature.
*14. “But what about The Family: A Proclamation to the World that defines marriage between a man and a woman?”
Response: The proclamation states: “Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan.” It doesn’t say this is the ONLY way. This doesn’t say anything about gay marriage. It only says that this type of marriage is essential. In our belief system, this is how we complete the commandment to “replenish the earth.”
It also states: “Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity.” This goes directly to rearing children. See #11. There are many in our Church that are single mothers and single fathers, how does this apply to them? This is a big issue because Utah has the highest divorce rate. (Channel 4 News)
Also when reading the Proclamation one must also consider these two things:
1. Boyd K. Packer’s redacted talk about the Proclamation:
Original: It qualifies according to the definition as a revelation and would do well that members of the church to read and follow it.
Redacted: It is a guide that members of the Church would do well to read and to follow.
2. This year the Church released a new edition of the scriptures. The Proclamation was not added.
*Conclusion
All in all one must consider the LGBT community we are shunning with this marriage rhetoric. By hyper-focusing on this issue of gay marriage, we are missing a good opportunity to extend our love and compassion to our gay brothers and sisters. We have a growing number of homeless teens that identify as LGBT. These kids are being kicked out by their families because they are LBGT. Suicide is especially high amongst them. People are killing themselves and all we can talk about is gay marriage. People are killing themselves because they can’t fit in. Can we change this?
We can change the conversation to love. We need to change the conversation to love. We need to make room in our hearts and in our chapels for them. Nothing else matters. I find it very disturbing the amount of time and money the Church has spent on lobbying politicians for this singular losing cause. It is shocking and very disturbing. For a report of the Church’s lobbying activities click here. I just can’t get past the time, energy and money we spend on this while kids are killing themselves. Why not focus on strengthening marriages? Why not focus on feeding the poor? Why not focus on lobbying efforts to stop human trafficking? Why not focus on child/spouse abuse? Why not focus on welcoming our gay brothers and sisters? Why not send a clear message that it is not ok to kick your child out of the house because they are gay? Why not focus on stopping suicide? There are a ton of worthy causes to throw in our efforts where humans are suffering. We as a community can shift the conversation to a conversation of love and understanding. This shift needs to happen today. Is there anything more important than caring for each other? Nothing else matters.
Insightful and rational.
Rational? More like rationalization. Devery & Rebecca (below) you need to understand the difference between doctrine and policy. Policy can change (the example of blacks & the priesthoold was based wholly on policy, NOT doctrine) doctrine does NOT change.
Color of skin is not a sin. Immoral sexual behavior – that is a sin. If you are a believing member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints how can you believe that homosexuality is not a sin? If you believe it is a sin, then how can you be OK with gay marriage? You cannot honestly reconcile the two. Sin is not a matter of opinion.
Go to your local Deseret Book and check out “this is my doctrine” the evolution of Mormon theology and you will see many examples of how doctrine changes. Since there is a whole book about it, I feel like I don’t need to explain it here. It changes all the time.
Oh there are some basic judeo-Christian values out there that humanity has agreed on – like murder, killing during war though that’s ok. Or killing when God tells you to, like Nephi or when God tells you to commit genocide… Man that can be confusing when we read our scriptures!
Our approach to being gay has changed dramatically! We use to try to cure them, we use to use shock therapy, we used to tell them to marry a woman – all of these things we don’t do anymore. We used to say being gay is a sin, now it is just acting on it. So you can be gay you just can’t have any physical contact with anyone? Is that what we are saying?
We’ll change, that’s what Mormons do.
When you say we used to do all these things you have to consider who was trying to do them. The practice of marriying them off to “cure them” was a tradition that went around and ignorant ward or stake leaders counseled that at the time. That still may happen today, but that isn’t the stand of the church and never was. When you say “we” or “our” you need to remember that everyone is human and makes mistakes. The doctrines and practices have never counseled gay men to marry women to “cure” them, and on the contrary pres Hinckley said that was wrong.
Money talks – The Church used to donate to these programs and our leadership used to be on their boards. We have stopped since because the result in trying to change them was terrible
And yes we use to use shock therapy at BYU.
I know very well the difference between policy and doctrine, and when I say doctrines change, I am referring to doctrines, not policy. Let me repeat: doctrines change. Some more than once.
@david. I have some doctrine for you. “he among you who is without sin, let him first cast a stone at her.”
Do you think God is gay? Does asking this question defame God in any way? I believe in following the example of God and His Son. Take that for what it’s worth. What would they do? Would God marry a man? Would he marry a woman? Multiple women? Women and men?
A great article. I will be able to make good use of this as I visit with my family for Christmas. Thanks for posting!
Thoughtful answers to just about every question. Good post.
Devery..are you an active member of the church? Also…are you homosexual?
active and straight.
I too am an active and straight Mormon, and I too support gay marriage.
This is an interesting post. I too am in favor of gay rights. However, I have a problem with #7 and the implications that singles are single by choice… Sometimes that is the case but in a church where the unfortunate ratio of women to men leaves many attractive, intelligent women without the opportunity, saying that they either don’t desire it or are undesirable is simplistic and offensive.
Of course, the point is that heteros can marry whereas gays have not had that blessing. Still, the pain of many singles in the church is too often dismissed with the belief that they didn’t try hard enough or they are unattractive, lazy, gay or weird, etc.
The bottom line is that gay or straight, being alone and celibate is often miserable. I am excited to see things changing for my LGBT friends but I am saddened that singles in the church still remain overlooked. For me, I have had to ask myself if church membership is worth a life of physical and emotional isolation. Sadly, it doesn’t seem worth it to me any longer. However, that is just my experience.
1.) “But Devery, I’ve never seen any rational opponent of same-sex marriage offer such short, easy-to-refute arguments– which they then refuse to defend!!”
Response: Well, that’s because you’ve never written a self-congratulatory, one-sided debate.
2.) “I guess you’re right. You always are!! But, how could you defuse their arguments so stoically and calmly? I mean, they used SO MANY EXCLAMATION MARKS!!”
Response: Why, they sure did! They’re the uneducated, conservative masses after all; they have a hard time expressing their thoughts. As for the first part of your question– it’s easy to be calm in the face of the Straw Man. He can’t really hit back!
I would love to hear your side of things Matthew and where we went wrong with this post.
Matthew,
I like where you are going in that Devery did have to use arguments that he formulated himself. I believe that he did ask simplistic questions without rebuttal, but I do think that he covered the most common statements that are used to resist gay marriage. I believe that was his intent. I thought he had intelligent answers.
I would be interested in a well thought out conservative view. Maybe you could provide one.
THANK YOU. I assume that your words are available for sharing and educating others. I will be doing so.
I agree with the author. Religion and what people perceive as moral shouldn’t be a factor in any laws. If two, consenting people love each other they should enjoy the same rights and privileges as heterosexual couples. But it shouldn’t just end at gay couples: polygamy, polyandry and even some cases of underage marriage should all be legalized and encouraged. Morality and right and wrong are subjective to culture and shouldn’t play an issue in this (or any debate) about what is legal or illegal. If a responsible, gay 40 year old man and a 12 year old boy who consents would like to date, marry, etc, it should be ok. As a culture, and as human beings, we should never condone any behavior or practice that we dislike or don’t understand, just because we think it’s not right.
Aaron – nice try with the 12 year old crap. We are talking about consenting adults.
Actually, state laws on marriage ages vary, and many (if not most) states allow those not yet considered adults to marry. None as young as 12, but in some states marriage can occur at 14 or 15. So, asserting “we are talking about consenting adults” may not always be true.
I do not understand why the gay community is so hateful towards those that do not support their lifestyle. I have many friends whom I love that live their lives outside of the moral compass I choose for myself. Many of my friends, smoke, drink, smoke dope, use profanity, or other practices I choose not to participate in. Yet, I care for and associate with them and don’t call them a name like “homophobic” just because they don’t agree with the way I live. They certainly don’t clamor for my religion to condone their activity and they aren’t looking to join my church. One of Mormonism’s basic premises is modern and living revelation and the prophets today state that marriage is only between a man and a woman. If you don’t agree, the answer is very simple…..leave the Church! If you want to pick and choose the things you want to believe in……start your own church. Just don’t tell me that I’m an idiot or hateful because I don’t agree with the homosexual lifestyle.
When you say leave the Church, you remind of someone named Jesus. No wait, that statement doesn’t resemble anything close he would say at all, ever.
Mark 9:43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
Jesus is frequently not as lovey-dubey as people like to think.
And re: the Jesus was ok with gay marriage riff that is so commonly suggested. He pretty much ripped apart all the things He saw wrong with the Jewish religionists of the day, but we never see him declaiming their rejection of homosexuality. The woman taken in adultery story does indicate that folk shouldn’t physically harm those don’t live up to His standard for sexual behavior, but that we shouldn’t say it’s ok either. (“Go, and sin no more”)
warm and fuzzies – no wonder we have gay kids committing suicide.
Have you ever heard any of our leaders say that? Pretty sure this kind of talk would make them cringe. “Come Join with Us” sounds more like the community I belong to.
I don’t believe Jesus said “and take my gospel into the world and make ten thousand churches all with different interpretations of what I say” either. Obviously we would like everyone to believe in the gospel in the way we believe it was given and restored, but if someone doesn’t choose to it’s their decision. Bill isn’t saying don’t come to our church at all if you’re gay, he’s just saying if you don’t believe in what we’re saying, why would you stick around? We respect the constitutional right for everyone to practice what they believe, but if you don’t believe what we preach don’t ask us to change to accommodate you, find somewhere you will be comfortable. Ultimately it comes down to your relationship between you and God. Ask Him what he wants and follow what he says. If you believe he want’s you be be in the LDS (or Mormon) Church then do all you can to follow God’s council. That’s what members of any church should do.
Thank you Nate! That is exactly what I meant. Paul, you only confirm what I was saying by turning my message into one of hatred. Obviously, if I am a Christian I don’t wish anyone to hurt themselves. Both Nate and DD cleared up some of my ineptly written statements.
But that’s what our teachings are doing.
No, Paul. That’s what sin leads to: depression, self-loathing, pain, misery, remorse, etc. Satan is the master at getting us to justfiy ourselves and tell ourselves that anything we do is OK. Immoral behavior is always followed by anguish. You can’t avoid that no matter how far away you get from God.
Yeah they don’t feel bad because we tell them everything about them is a sin. They are the ones kicking themselves out of their houses.
Utah boast a very high number of gay homeless teens. Why? Because their self righteous families kick them out for being gay.
When a gay person tries to change who they are, it ends terribly. That is why the Church has stopped trying to “cure” them. They have stopped funding programs that try to cure homosexuals, because it was all ending badly. Suicide. The church sees it, can you?
So we shouldn’t ask for women to pray in conference? What about if we want changes in the garment? What about changes in the temple ceremony? How about if we don’t want to drink out of communal cup when taking the sacrament? If we want those changes we should just leave? All those changes were brought on by complainers like us.
Many times when we see results of actions we jump to conclusions about how they happened. Maybe instead of parents kicking their gay teens out on the street, the teenagers are intolerant of their parents views and leave. Many times Utah Mormons are accused of living in a “bubble,” but Mormons can’t be in a bubble without everyone else in Utah being in there with them. Maybe these teens or others are in their own little “bubble” thinking that in other states people are more tolerant or accepting. Maybe their conception of how “momonized” we are is skewed because they think it’s different everywhere else. I don’t think we can necessarily look at one statistic about the results of some action and state the cause right of the bat. The gospel of Christ teaches tolerance and the articles of faith do that as well. Maybe some members are better at living their faith than others, I know I’m not perfect, but the teachings are there for us to get better. Although we may not like the actions, we’re taught to love the sinner and hate the sin as Christ did with the adulterous woman. I can’t say that all Mormons or are perfect at living the principles of the gospel, but I can’t say that about members of any church or organization. We’re all human and make mistakes and have opinions that are sometimes viced rashly and without thought of consequences. There was an interview done a few years ago that answer a lot of questions on the Church’s stand: http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/interview-oaks-wickman-same-gender-attraction
Good point, Paul. In my book, I document that the prophet at the time, I believe Joseph F. Smith, said that the pattern for the garment was revealed from heaven and could not be altered. People didn’t like them, complained, and as a result, they got shorter and shorter to accommodate fashion. This is just how it is. Period. I say this as an active Mormon and until this last Sunday–gospel doctrine teacher. Brigham Young said that the penalty for a white person marrying a black was death on the spot. “This was God’s law and will always be so.” That sounded like more of a sin to marry interacially than being gay is currently, even in the church. There would have been a big argument on the morality of blacks and white intermarrying seeing this punishment as the result. When I hear some of the arguments from above in this thread, I just want to say–tell me how ridiculous you feel in 20 years. You will. Mark my words.
Hi guys, this list works great for people who are ok with challenging the church, or who are willing to dismiss the bible, but you should reconsider your approach to #3. By dismissing the bible at the top of the list, you’re alienating the audience you’re probably trying to reach. Maybe get some ideas from a guy named Matthew Vines (google him). He presents a very well thought out approach to biblical interpretations of the “homosexuality as sin” perspective.
A clarifying question, directed to LDS supporters of SSM: If you had your druthers, would you support solemnizing gay marriages in LDS temples? Surely we’re not just talking about civil marriages here. Your logic seems to lead ineluctably to that conclusion.
Honestly, I’m just tired of the entire conversation about gay, not gay. Seriously, we are talking about sexual preferences, plain and simple. I don’t care what someone’s preference is, gay, straight, dog, cat, machine – just keep it to yourself. We as a people need to respect everyone’s decision to live how they choose. We have the privilege of being able to choose for ourselves what we will do with our lives. I believe everyone has the right to this. What I am tired of is it being pushed at me all the time. I’m tired of the people pushing for same sex marriage, I’m tired of the people fighting against it. I think perhaps the biggest fear with the religious is that allowing same sex marriage will mean religions will then have to acknowledge this as an acceptable alternative, and that they may be forced at some point to allow it so as to not be sued for discrimination. I don’t believe this is something the government should even be involved in. People cry about separation of church and state, but when there is a issue on belief – they tell the state to step in, what’s up with that? This is probably something that should be left to religious leaders to decide whether or not they will perform a gay marriage, and some churches will do them. If the proponents of the same sex marriage would proposition a law that would allow for marriage, but also allow for religions to teach what they will in regards to it – I think this would solve some of the issues. There is never going to be a winner in this, it will never be fully accepted, or go away. The best we can hope for is everyone agreeing to disagree, to allow people to be who they are, and to love one another. After all, isn’t that the greatest of all laws – to love one another?
Wonderful post! Thank you.
If you want the opinion of the “Mormon Church,” go to the source about what they think with mormonsandgays.org officially published by the church. Point number 14 was also unnecessary in my opinion. The proclamation is clearly stating the standpoint of marriage being between man and woman and shouldn’t be twisted and interpreted to mean anything else. Also, the “new edition” of the scriptures that is mentioned was a new formatting of the SAME scriptures. There were additions to the title page of a couple books, but the scripture was not added to. All in all, as with most quotes and articles about Mormons, I don’t feel like this post does a very good job of really explaining how Mormons believe.
Nate how do explain the Boyd K. Packer talk?
The Proclamation was origionaly read by Gordon B. Hinckley and in that talk he said “In furtherance of this we of the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles now issue a proclamation to the Church and to the world as a declaration and reaffirmation of standards, doctrines, and practices relative to the family which the prophets, seers, and revelators of this church have repeatedly stated throughout its history.” It is the standards and the doctrine of the Church. The entire talk is found here http://www.lds.org/general-conference/1995/10/stand-strong-against-the-wiles-of-the-world?lang=eng
Is it revelation or a guide? Can you explain the Boyd K. Packer talk?
Your comments are smart and make sense, and they do a good job of making your point. However, including the link to the church’s lobbying activities could only have been added to inflame. I reviewed the document and the most recent was from 1998. 15 years ago! I don’t see how this is relevant to the church’s current position and actions (I know they are not silent on this topic today, but to pull out 15 year old documentation does more to reduce the credibility of your arguments than support it). It is also imbalanced since you do not provide the minutes from all of the hundreds of meetings that are held on the topics you mention as worthy: strengthening marriages,feeding the poor, human trafficking,child/spouse abuse,welcoming our gay brothers and sisters, stopping suicide, conversations of love and understanding.
Good point! I would need to do that. I think another thing that would strengthen my argument is the amount of gay marriage talks we have heard compared to the talks we have heard about helping gay people.
Paul Barker,
Yo Paul, I don’t think it’s necessary to comment on everyone’s opinion.
I know sometimes I just can’t help myself.
I think everybody is missing the most important point. if you’ve prayed about the church and know its true then why are any of these things issues? the prophet said that that the only way to the highest degree of the celestial kingdom is through marriage between a man and woman. so why shouldn’t we stand up for our brothers and sisters? if we KNOW that the doctrine is true than we can’t contest the fact that those who refuse to marry the opposite gender well never be happy for eternity. if you are active in church and don’t know that doctrine to be true then that should be your first priority. why should I give in and allow my gay friends to be happy in this life when I know for a fact that for eternity they will not be fully happy. what will I say to them then? “I’m sorry I didn’t want to ruin your 70 years on earth so I decided to not help you have a better eternity” well some friend I would be. if my kid comes to me and is mad because I won’t let him pay with my gun, I don’t give it to him because he because to cry. he might blow his head off. instead I lovingly teach him the truth. I personally can attest to the fact that Thomas S. monson is God’s representative on the earth today and when he talks they are God’s words. Devrey please think of it that way before you say you are active in the church and then continue to support satan’s agenda. I don’t want this to sound harsh but if you know the church to be true then you know what I am about to say us true also. satan wishes us to be miserable, part of that is to prevent us from reaching the highest degree of the celestial kingdom. he will confuse and trick us to believe that we can do what makes us happy and still be rewarded. but God has laid out the rules. those that follow are rewarded. yes I believe we should love and not hate, but true love is teaching truth, not accepting lies from the great deceiver. if anyone has anything to say about this please by all means email me rodsreelsandflies@gmail.com.
merry Christmas to all!
You know for a fact?
Thank you for this piece. I just noticed a lot of dissenting opinions (among other things) in the comments and felt like I should express my appreciation for the article. I loved it, keep up the good work!
Paul Barker,
yeah, you don’t?
Like the brother of Jared saw the finger of God that type of know?
Paul Barker,
yep. I don’t get you though Paul. do you have a testimony of the restored gospel or do you just believe the doctrine as long as it goes along with your personal preferences?
Well the doctrine has a tendency to change – do you have a testimony and know that there won’t be any gays in heaven?
Paul Barker,
answer my question first. do you have a testimony of the restored gospel? by your answers I’m guessing the answer is no
Yes and it also believe our leaders can make mistakes – weird eh?
Have you studied homosexuality and have you received an answer to your prayers that there will be no homosexuals in heaven?
yeah well no man is perfect but marriage between man Abbs woman is not a mistake you’re just giving a classic cop out for not verifying the doctrine you are taught. pray to God and ask him, that’s what he says to do. but yes I can testify of the fact that there will be no gay marriages in the celestial kingdom. its not part of the plan. but I can’t convince you and I’m not going to try. let God be your teacher
Have you studied it or are you leaving that responsibility and your agency to the prophet? Have you studied that out for yourself?
So prophets are human – but can they be wrong about this? Can they be wrong about their teachings?
well read true to the faith page 30. that is official church cannon. I don’t need to pray about every little thing because a long time ago I asked God if his church is true and restored to the earth. he said yes so men can make mistakes but God doesn’t. he told me this church is true and this church teaches that marriage is between a man and a woman. it will be that way long after this world, and for all eternity. so pretty much you need to makes choice. follow God or not. ask him and then email me. I’m not going to argue this with you. LET GOD GUIDE YOU, NOT MAN!!!
Skyler what do you think about this statement from Brigham Young? Do you think black people are cursed because they are from the seed of Cain as Brigham taught? Was Brigham wrong about this?
“What is that mark? you will see it on the countenance of every African you ever did see upon the face of the earth, or ever will see. Now I tell you what I know; when the mark was put upon Cain, Abels children was in all probability young; the Lord told Cain that he should not receive the blessings of the priesthood nor his seed, until the last of the posterity of Able had received the priesthood, until the redemption of the earth. If there never was a prophet, or apostle of Jesus Christ spoke it before, I tell you, this people that are commonly called negroes are the children of old Cain. I know they are, I know that they cannot bear rule in the priesthood, for the curse on them was to remain upon them, until the residue of the posterity of Michael and his wife receive the blessings, the seed of Cain would have received had they not been cursed; and hold the keys of the priesthood, until the times of the restitution shall come, and the curse be wiped off from the earth, and from Michael’s seed. Then Cain’s seed will be had in remembrance, and the time come when that curse should be wiped off.”
Was Brigham correct when he said this?
“The moment we consent to mingle with the seed of Cain the Church must go to destruction, – we should receive the curse which has been placed upon the seed of Cain, and never more be numbered with the children of Adam who are heirs to the priesthood until that curse be removed.”
How about when he said this:
“Cain slew his brother…. and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race – that they should be the ‘servant of servants,’ and they will be, until that curse is removed; and the Abolitionists cannot help it, nor in the least alter that decree.”
Or how about this:
“Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a sin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the Holy Priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death.”
Here is some John Taylor for you… was he wrong or right?
“For instance, the descendants of Cain cannot cast off their skin of blackness, at once, and immediately, although every should of them should repent…. Cain and his posterity must wear the mark which God put upon them; and his white friends may wash the race of Cain with fuller’s soap every day, they cannot wash away God’s mark.”
How about some David O. McKay – right or wrong?
“I know of no scriptural basis for denying the Priesthood to Negroes other than one verse in the Book of Abraham (1:26); however, I believe, as you suggest that the real reason dates back to our pre-existent life.”
How about some Joseph Fielding Smith – right or wrong?
“Not only was Cain called to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race. A curse was placed upon him and that curse has been continued through his lineage and must do so while time endures…. they have been made to feel their inferiority and have been separated from the rest of mankind from the beginning.”
ps. True to the Faith is not official church cannon. Only the scriptures are official church cannon.
Well that’s funny Doctrine and covenants is Cannon according to you and the verse I keep coming back to is D&C 1:38. The lord CLEARLY states that when the first presidency (they are his servants) speak on his behalf it is the same as when he says it. Scripture is the word of God, according to many places in the Book of Mormon. so this statement by the first presidency of the Church says:
“Use it (true to the faith) as a resource when you prepare talks, teach classes, and answer questions about the church”
Following you definition of cannon I have concluded that True to the faith was a book inspired by God, and we can use it to answer questions about the church. Tell me with all of the scriptures that teach us that modern day revelation is so important why do you refuse revelation so much? You can’t pick and choose what you want to believe. Just pray and ask God. Why is that so hard for you to just do and talk about on here?
Joseph, again this isn’t about ME. This is about if the prophets can error or not. I think according to you they can not error, which would put them at a God level. This in my mind is bad.
Joseph what happens when the prophets make an error? In your mind can they make an error? Do you even know how scripture becomes scripture? In order for something to be scripture, we have to vote on it, by common consent.
Have you heard of Lectures of Faith? They used to be a part of our canon and then it was removed in 1921. Here is an excerpt tell me what you think:
“There are two personages, who constitute the great, matchless, governing,
and supreme power over all things, by whom all things were created and
made, that are created and made, whether visible or invisible, whither in
heaven, on earth, or in the earth, under the earth, or throughout the immensity
of space. They are the Father and the Son—the Father being a personage
of spirit, glory, and power, possessing all perfection and fullness, the Son,
who was in the bosom of the Father, a personage of tabernacle, made or fashioned like unto man, or being in the form and likeness of man, or rather man
was formed after his likeness and in his image; he is also the express image
and likeness of the personage of the Father, possessing all the fullness of the
Father, or the same fullness with the Father…[the son possesses] the same mind with the Father, which mind is the Holy Spirit…and these three constitute the Godhead, and are one…”
(Lectures on Faith Num 5, 5:2a-5:2e)
So lots of conference talks get changed. What do we do about this? So when is it the word of God when they say it over the pulpit or when it is in print form? Did God get misspeak? Or did the prophet misspeak? see this link where I compiled things that were changed in conference. http://rationalfaiths.com/changing-the-word-of-god/ Tell me what you think.
Can the prophets ever make a mistake in your mind Joseph?
Again we are talking about the prophets NOT ME.
Okay Paul,
I agree to do all that you ask of me, but before I do. Will you pray to About this whole subject and tell me how it goes? That is all I ask, you should have nothing to fear.
Best Wishes
Joseph
You assume I already haven’t.
But again we are discussing if prophets can make errors, not me.
well Paul nice job changing the subject. but the nice part is that I don’t have to explain any of those quotes. I am at peace with what God tells me through personal revelation. thus I don’t question what I can’t explain, if I don’t get I ask and God answers. and devrey I just don’t get it. you understand that God’s eternal plan consists of creating worlds and having offspring in the next life? well two men can’t have offspring thus putting a hitch to the eternal plan. if you really loved all like you say then you would be spending your time spreading the truth rather than trying to change God’s plan.
I was not trying to change the subject – The point is Skyler is that the prophets can get it wrong as I shown here. So if they can get it wrong with the curse of Cain that was taught for SOOOO long, what else can they get wrong? Could they possibly be wrong about homosexuality? Has their views of homosexuality have changed? Things in your mind are very black or white – right or wrong. The world nor the Church works that way. As soon as we claim certainty about something, then you have just shut the door on learning anything new or progressing. The prophets declared with absolute certainty that the blacks were cursed. There was no doubts in their claims. Until someone questioned this “doctrine” that is when the Lord was able to teach. Certainty is the opposite of faith.
No, certainty is not the opposite of faith. It is the same as faith. Knowledge is the opposite of faith.
Ask and you shall receive – it is when you question is when you will get the answers.
In the book “Common Ground Different Opinions” Petrey discusses how many of our current objections against homosexual marriage stem from our conception of relationships in the afterlife, but that early sealings often dealt in terms of kinship apart from procreation and that this practice has important implications for the possibility of homosexual sealings. Williams argues an opposing view by warning against the trivialization of sexuality as mere animalistic expression and arguing that we ought to interpret sexuality within a moral context. His arguments follow the outline of Natural Law philosophy, but they are tailored to an LDS perspective.
Paul you appear to be a Liahona and Skyler you appear to be an Iron Rod (www.zionsbest.com/people.html). At some point I think you have to agree to disagree. You both seen to be logical people who see the world through different paradigms.
It has been interesting to watch you two debate because it remind me of what it would be like if me now would debate me 3 years ago. Personally I now see things more along the lines of Paul now days.
Skyler if you have not read the article above by Richard Poleman please do. I hope it shows you how Liahonas think and that their views are valid even if at times it seems to conflict with what we are generally taught in Sunday School.
Amen.
cool well I’m done here you and me are immovable objects and unstoppable forces meeting. all I have to say is please inquire of God and not the doctrines of man mingled with scripture. and yes this subject is black and white because sin is sin there is no justification it changing its name. it will always be sin.
The subject of what prophets say is not black or white – as I have clearly shown you prophets can be wrong.
Then in that moment they weren’t being a prophet.
Isaiah prophesied of our time on this very subject when he said, “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” (Isa. 5:20.) Satan offers a strange mixture of just enough good to disguise the evil along his downward path to destruction, as described by Nephi, an ancient prophet, when he said:
“For behold, at that day shall he rage in the hearts of the children of men, and stir them up to anger against that which is good.
“And others will he pacify, and lull them away into carnal security, that they will say: All is well in Zion; yea, Zion prospereth, all is well—and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell” (2 Ne. 28:20–21).
This surely is a sign of the times. If you don’t agree with the teachings of the church, you have no obligation to live it. But to say you believe the church to be true, and then to turn around and contradict that very statement, makes it really hard to take you seriously. I don’t understand all of the reasons for all of the teachings of the LDS church(maybe this is because I can’t completely see the end from the beginning and a little faith is required through this journey), but when I sustain the prophet as a prophet, seer (one who can see what is afar off and has further insight to the will of God), and revelator, I actually mean it. You can’t fence sit forever. At some point you will have to fully choose your side. Yes, love should be the focus…but I do not need to agree with a behavior to love the person. My issue is not with people having their own opinions about different issues, it is with people claiming to believe the LDS church to be Gods restored church on earth but picking and choosing which teachings are convenient for them. Believe it or don’t, but for goodness sake make a choice. If you believe God is the head of the church, do you really believe He would allow it to be led astray? Or that He doesn’t have the power to stop that from happening?
Thank you for your comment, but please keep you comments directed at the subject manner and not the person who created the content.
Flip the side those scriptures could be aimed at, and read them again.
“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” (Isa. 5:20.)
What if this is a warning to people within the church to watch their own behavior, and their own pride in “knowing.” and thus casting out any possibility that they, or somebody else within the faith (even a leader) could make mistakes. And making mistakes is not leading astray, it’s simply being imperfect and… well, making a mistake.
“For behold, at that day shall he rage in the hearts of the children of men, and stir them up to anger against that which is good.”
There is much anger no matter the side you take. Though to claim your side is what is unquestionably good is a bit dangerous and possibly prideful isn’t it?
You can find good, and merit in both sides of this divisive argument. It is good to follow your faith, and put honest, whole heart intention into it. It is also good to seek the loving and equal treatment of your fellow man.
And lastly “…but I do not need to agree with a behavior to love the person.”
I agree with you, but part of loving is seeking understanding. To see it as a behavior and brushing it away as sin and choice, rather than just a part of who they are is where much of the disconnect, argument, and anger/lashing out from both sides comes from, as well as fails to listen to gay peoples own personal testimonies and pleas, many times begging just to be heard and not treated as though they are lying about who they are, and the way they truly feel. A testimony of who they are that is no less strong than your testimony of faith. Theirs deserves as much consideration as yours.
Interesting read. My personal opinion as to the reason opponents remain “silent” is that they are tired of being called heartless bigots, who must lack love and compassion because they disagree with society’s popular ideals. I have seen many people who I know to be the kindest, most caring and compassionate people in the world called horrible names for standing by their faith. This alone is reason for many to remain quiet.
It also seems the majority of your responses are reasons people may oppose homosexuality, not same-sex marriage. There is a big difference there.
This is exactly the reason for the silent majority. You take a regular, faithful member of the Church who decides that he wants to support traditional marriage, but he can barely do so without immediately being labeled as a bigot. Moreover, you have progressive members that circle wagons and do the exact same thing, never seeing the irony of their love of conventional wisdom and being able to answer “no” when asked if they support any organizations who’s teachings are contrary to the Church.
Let’s be upfront about this. Mormons who support gay marriage are not interested in having a conversation about this topic. They just want to sling mud and label those who disagree with them to ensure that they remain the SILENT majority.
As I’ve read through these comments, I feel a need to share my personal wrestle with this issue. Skylar – my thoughts will address your position – please understand that I 100% respect your testimony – but I cannot support your conclusion that if you receive an answer that the church is true, you must accept everything that comes from the church leadership to be God’s only position. I will say that if I read this post two years ago, I would have echoed your position. Things changed for me when my first born son (now 6) was attracted to nearly all things feminine. He wasn’t interested in sports, he preferred dolls. He didn’t want to watch super-heroes, he preferred shows about princess’s. Bear in mind that he is our first son. Unfortunately, first-born kids get the brunt of rookie parent insecurities. Don’t believe me? Watch what a first-time mom does when their kid drops their pacifier on the ground vs. a mom with four kids. My wife and I were very concerned with his behavior. We stayed up late at night talking about it. We tried to model only masculine behavior for him. We scolded him for doing things that were just his nature. We talked to our parents (which wasn’t very helpful) we talked to our church leaders (still not very helpful) and finally we concluded that my wife and I, for our own sanity needed to see a professional counselor. We got a baby sitter for our two kids and paid a highly recommended LDS counselor $100 for an hour of his time. He explained that even though we saw our son as just a little five year old, that his soul, his being was thousands of years old and that the reason our kids come to earth with such distinct personalities is because they’ve had thousands of years to develop them. At that moment, call it the spirit, call it revelation, call it an epiphany, whatever you want to call it, I realized that my son is who he is and I couldn’t change his nature any more than I could change his eye color. That was the game-changer, it shifted my paradigm. I had to move from a framework of “we’re doing something wrong as parents” to “my son may be gay”. My son is only six and I have no idea what his ultimate sexual preference will be, but forcing myself to look at my long-held beliefs through the prism of “my son may be gay” has changed a number of things for me. My son is an innocent child and has not been persuaded by media or experimentation of any other rationalization for why somebody is gay. If he grows up and is gay – it will be because he was born that way and both my wife and I will have known he was that way since he was four years old. In the new testament, we really don’t see the use of the word “atonement” the more commonly used word to express that thought is “reconciliation”. I’ve had to reconcile my faith and it has not been easy. I think we view the atonement strictly as a method for the absolving of sin, I think it is more than just that. I think it is a power than allows somebody to believe the church to be true while still questioning or even doubting the official stance of the church. I think it gives people the ability to “reconcile”. This last Sunday, an elderly gentleman in my gospel doctrine class said that the Proclamation on the family gave no honest, self-respecting member any wiggle room on the question of gay marriage and that we shouldn’t be swayed by popular opinions. If people like me don’t have any wiggle room, we are ultimately forced out. I won’t ask any of my fellow saints to change their opinion on this issue, but I will ask that they afford me the same level of respect.
Very powerful story. Thank you so much for sharing.
Can anyone truly be born gay? I ask this because I honestly don’t believe anyone is born with a sexual preference. I think this is something that is developed as they grow. Just because you like things that are not typical of your gender, does not mean you will be gay. I understand people believe they cannot control who they love, I agree. However, you can control how you love them. Just like with food, you may love one kind of bread, but you’ll eat another. Will this make you happy, maybe not – but you can do it, right? Would this even be a conversation if someone said they were born with bestiality tendencies? Would there be the same push for these people to be allowed to marry an animal? You may argue this isn’t the same thing, but isn’t it? Aren’t they both sexual preferences? I’ve heard arguments about how it isn’t fair that gay couples can’t get married, they need that right… So what they are asking for is more rights, aren’t they? They already have the right to be married – because of their sexual preference, they choose not to marry someone of the opposite sex. I write this because this whole conversation is ridiculous. Why do we have to be pc all the time? Maybe I’m wrong, maybe we should be able to marry anyone or anything.
I’m going to go out on a limb here and agree with a lot of Skylar said. The fact remains, as a member of the LDS faith and in order to be temple worthy, you must have a testimony of the church and you must support and acknowledge the prophets and apostles. Can they make mistakes, well sure. Anyone can make mistakes. But they were called of god, were they not? In arguing against what they are currently teaching, you are arguing against god – right? Right now things are they way they are, it is not up to you to decide when the church should shift it’s views, or if it should. Unless you’ve been called as a prophet to preach his word, you’ve been commanded to live by it. Maybe there will be a change someday, this has happened. Modern revelation happens. But for now, it is what it is.
Gay marriage = two consenting adults
Being gay is not a sickness.
Mentioning beast in the same breath as gays is insulting to every gay person out there.
Prophets are not gods. Saying arguing with the prophets is like arguing with God is something you should never say, why don’t we worship them then? They can not be put on the same level as God, and that’s what you did.
You can still disagree with them and support them. Could you disagree with all the racist things are prophets said? Did you agree with any of what I quoted above? It isn’t all or nothing.
We are turning the responsibility over to our leaders when we say – my leaders told me so I now don’t have to think about it, I just do it. We are not robots.
Funny, I never once called being gay a sickness.
How is preferring the sexual company of beast any different? I was stating that it is a sexual preference, just like bestiality, heterosexuality, etc… You seem to enjoy twisting words.
I never said prophets were gods – you compared them to that. I said arguing with the teachings of the prophets is like arguing with God – or rather the word of God. Is not the prophet called to be the voice piece of God? You cannot argue that and call yourself LDS, because that is denying one of the basic beliefs of the religion. You cannot disagree and support them, how would that be possible? You cannot serve God and mammon, correct? (again, not calling them Gods – tools and spoke person of God).
We are commanded to love one another, this doesn’t mean we have to agree with everything that goes against our beliefs. Maybe instead of trying to convince everyone else that they are wrong for being firm in their faith, you should reflect on your own? You say it isn’t all or nothing, tell me where God says that. We are to always live according to the commandments to the best of our abilities. We are to strive always to be perfect, as Christ was perfect – not as perfect as Christ, but to strive to be perfect like he was. If you are striving to be perfect, how can you say it isn’t all or nothing – you either give it all, or you don’t.
We are all put on earth with our own challenges, they are not the same for everyone. Mine may be a handicap, another could be the loss of their family, another with same sex preference, some may struggle with their faith because of the teachings of the world. I’m sorry you don’t sustain your church leaders, which is my assumption if you believe you do not have to support them when you feel they are wrong.
You say they are asking for more rights because they already have the right to get married to the opposite gender. Well, fortunately they would be asking for this right for you too and not just them, as it would allow you to marry the same gender too. So no special rights for just them as a group, it would apply to all people. And it is nowhere close to bestiality. We are talking about consenting adults, love, and people with intellects capable of grasping complex ideas. Not animals, incapable of giving or even understanding consent.
Anyway, the LDS church even teaches that it is not good for man to be alone. They have even criticized the Catholic church for its practices of having nuns and priests be celibate, yet isn’t that exactly what they are asking of gay people? Official stance is being gay is just fine, acting on it is not, and therefor gay people are asked to live a life of celibacy that is contrary to the very thing they criticize. As Paul has stated many times, in many responses. Men are fallible, and could be wrong on things. Even church leadership. It doesn’t negate their standing, nor ability for revelation, it just means they could be wrong on some things as they have been in the past (race being a big one, with a certain recent statement put out on the LDS website.)
Asking to abstaining from gay sexual relations is not the same as asking to be celibate. They can get married to someone of the opposite sex and not be celibate.
Okay I can’t take any more of this. Please read the talk Obedience to the Prophet by Elder Acosta given in General Conference October 2010. Here are his main points
“First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything”
“The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works”
“The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet”
“The prophet will never lead the Church astray”
“The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time”
The prophet does not have to say ‘Thus saith the Lord’ to give us scripture
The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know”
“The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning. …
The prophet can receive revelation on any matter—temporal or spiritual. …
The prophet may be involved in civic matters. …
The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly. …
The prophet and his counselors make up the First Presidency—the highest quorum in the Church. …
The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and the first presidency—follow them and be blessed; reject them and suffer”
The LIVING prophet is more important that a dead one. That means that for us right now Thomas S. Monson is the most important prophet for us to listen to, however the prophet is not limited to the logic of man. Paul, first of all, please stop commenting, every time someone brings up a good point you change the subject or say that it isn’t pertinent to the subject at hand. But you have zero credibility by now. D&C 1:38 says; “Whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants it is the same” So yes we don’t worship the prophets however what they say at the pulpit during General Conference is THE WORD OF GOD. If you disagree with that then well, you’re rebelling against God my friend. There is no other way of putting it. “By their fruits, you shall know them” If Pres. Monson were leading us astray he would be giving forth bad fruit and thus couldn’t be prophet any more. You can’t argue with scripture and prophet and then profess to have a testimony of the restored gospel. You said earlier that the world nor the church works in right or wrong, but in Moroni 7:12 we read that “wherefore all things which are good cometh of God; and that which is evil cometh of the devil; for the devil is an enemy unto God, and fighteth against him continually, and inviteth and enticeth to sin, and to do that with is evil continually.
Paul you are rejecting the words of the prophets and as we have learned that means you are fighting against God, Mormoni says that the devil fights against God. Saying that arguing with Prophets is not arguing with God, contradicts what the Lord said in D&C 1:38. Because God said that it’s the same coming from his mouth or his servant. You also Told poor Skyler that due to his way of thinking he isn’t open to new ideas, but why does that matter? Yes we should open our minds, but if we are following God’s council then what other “new ideas” do we need? You sound more like the person to me that isn’t open to new ideas. Stop this nonsense you are trying to get others to listen to. Kneel down and pray to the one and only being with all the answers. Ask God, that is what I am asking you to do. You can’t say that there is error in that challenge. Ask God how he feels on this subject, and don’t come back to respond here until you have done so. For I testify unto you that the following statement is from God himself, it is the official standpoint of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day saints declared by his servants. If you rebel against this then yes, I tell you that you are rebelling against God himself.
The Church has been consistent in its support of traditional marriage while teaching that all people should be treated with respect. This ruling by a district court will work its way through the judicial process. We continue to believe that voters in Utah did the right thing by providing clear direction in the state constitution that marriage should be between a man and a woman and we are hopeful that this view will be validated by a higher court.
I have used past examples only to show that prophets can error and even lead the church astray, even though it will end up correcting itself. The example I used was the teachings of Cain. When that was taught it came from the prophet. So were those prophets correct teaching that when it was taught? The Church has come out and said those teachings were incorrect. So were all those prophets wrong?
You are taking a very all or nothing stance. You will find in life this is rarely the case. Life is not full of black or white thinking, life is more complex than that.
The degree to which Mormons conflate God with Church leaders is troubling. I have pointed it out before, but it apparently bears repeating.
God is not Church leaders. Church leaders are not God.
I suggest you re-read Elder Uchtdorf’s General Conference address from last October, which is quoted in the article above:
“And, to be perfectly frank, there have been times when members or leaders in the Church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles, and doctrine.”
The Priesthood ban is one of those things Church leaders said and did that “were not in harmony with our values, principles, and doctrine.”
Church leaders “simply made mistakes.”
Those “mistakes” were racist.
People were harmed as a result.
I use this example so that you can clearly see that prophets can and will make mistakes.
Brigham Young warned of this very thing:
“What a pity it would be, if we were led by one man to utter destruction! Are you afraid of this? I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken the influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation continually.” (JD 9:150)
Since Brigham was wrong in so many other things, perhaps he is also wrong in this?
That talk you quote from was given by Ezra Taft Benson in 1980 or so, called Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet. After he gave it, President Spencer W. Kimball was upset and made him apologize. Benson did such a horrible job apologizing that he made him do it again, this time in front of the entire quorum. That talk was bad, self-serving, and unless you now the “behind the scenes” activity, it is crazy to quote it.
Paul,
Brigham Young also stated
“The Lord Almighty leads this Church, and he will never suffer you to be led astray if you are found doing your duty. You may go home and sleep as sweetly as a babe in its mother’s arms, as to any danger of your leaders leading you astray, for if they should try to do so the Lord would quickly sweep them from the earth.” (JD 9:289, Discourses of Brigham Young, p. 137.)
Wilford Woodruff also echoed this plain teaching:
“[T]he Latter-day Saints throughout Israel should understand that the First Presidency of the Church and the Twelve Apostles are led and guided by the inspiration of the Lord, and the Lord will not permit me, nor any other man, to lead the people astray.” (given October 25, 1891, Collected Discourses 2:281-282.)
If you really feel that the Lord lead us astray then please pray. Pray and ask him, stop using logic to justify your thinking. For the ways of the Lord are not our ways, nor his thoughts our thoughts. All I’m asking you to do is pray and ask him. I bear solemn witness that the church on the earth today is God’s church and he runs it how he wants. D&C 1:38 says that From prophet or God it is the same. So you need to ask yourself. Who is lying? God? His servants (which would be him)? Or Satan? Who is the master of all lies? Please pray, you keep coming back with remarks, but you refuse to inquire the Lord, making me to believe that you are afraid of what he will say. I testify that the prophets guide us how God wants and don’t lead us astray.
Why would God give you a brain, agency and personal revelation if he didn’t want us to use it?
It comes down to this:
Can the Prophets make errors? Yes or no?
Have they made errors in the past? yes or no?
Will they make errors in the future? Yes or no?
Or the prophets human? Yes or no?
Your statement assumes that I haven’t prayed or thought about these things – again we are not discussing ME – we are discussing what the prophets say.
The MOST recent talk we have heard on this subject comes from the 1st Presidency, Pres Uchtdorf:
“And, to be perfectly frank, there have been times when members or leaders in the Church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles, and doctrine.”
They have made mistakes that are against our values, principles and doctrine. I will align myself up with God himself by using my god-given brain, my agency and personal revelation. If the prophets and God happened to be aligned EVEN BETTER. But there have been times when they “were not in harmony with our values, principles, and doctrine.”
I never said God din’t want us to use our brains and agency. We need to use them to chose to follow his word. When the prophet commanded all young men to serve missions they didn’t follow from not using their brains, they prayed and asked God if this council was what they should do, or if they already believed that the prophet spoke for God, then they obeyed but this wasn’t mindless, it takes faith my friend. Not all things can be explained by the reason of God.
Can prophets man errors? Yes, they are men.
Can the lead the church astray? No, God wouldn’t allow it
Have they made errors in the past? Yes, THEY ARE MEN
Have they lead the church astray in the past? No, God wouldn’t allow it.
Will they make mistakes in the future? Yes, THEY ARE MEN
Will they lead the church astray in the future? No, GOD WON’T ALLOW IT!!!!!!!!!
I love how when I challenge you to pray you still skirt the subject. If you would just do it with a contrite heart you will see the truth.
I went back and read what Pres. Utchdorf said, and you’re putting words in his mouth. He said church members and leaders. A Bishop, a State President, and will even a deacon quorum president are all leaders, he never said prophet, he said leader. The fact that you are so much in open rebellion against God’s chosen is troubling. I don’t profess than these men are perfect, however when they lead the church it is direction from God. He makes the decisions. I don’t care if all you want to do is argue, all I wan’t to do is share the truth and light. I do so by challenging you to pray about this. That is why I continue to return to this point. Everything else is trivial compared to our salvation. Please inquire the lord in fasting and prayer and then reply. I say this with love and kindness.
Best wishes
Joseph
My gosh Joseph. Your logic is so circular.
Micheal,
If you read all of my posts you will see that all I want is for people to pray and ask God about this subject. I am getting so sick of the little battles going on. We all follow the same God, and if you want to criticize me for asking men to inquire of the Lord in humble prayer instead of being swayed about by every wind of doctrine then I am sorry I will never stop. I may not be the most logical person but I don’t care. I know what I know and I know that it came from God.
Best Regards
Joseph
What about for those that have prayed, and are getting a different answer than you are apparently like Paul is? Must they be disregarded so vehemently because they don’t fall in line with what you personally believe to be true and unquestionable?
Perhaps they’re getting an answer from the wrong source?
Yeah but if you pray and ask God we won’t have this debate any more. Every time you say “you assume I haven’t,” but you never come out and say it, leading me to assume you haven’t. You know the easiest way to end this is to do it. Since you keep avoiding the question with this and taking it back to prophets and errors, I challenge you once again to ask God what he thinks about the prophets he has called, and then get back to me. You want us all to listen to you and do what you ask, just do this one thing, not for me, but for you and God. I don’t want to come across as arrogant, or self righteous. I’m not going to lie English is my worst subject and I have a hard time explaining what I think or feel. But I testify to you once again that having prayed to God I know that the council that Pres. Monson is the word of God. I also know that all of his predecessors were called of God. They weren’t perfect, but they didn’t lead the church astray. Christ is our redeemer and only by following his teachings through prophets and our own revelation can we be saved. I love you and don’t want you to feel otherwise. Please pray humbly.
Take care
Joseph
Yes I already have. But this isn’t about me.
You keep saying that. But yet this blog is all about you and your need for self-centered attention.
This bothers me greatly. I understand where you are coming but few things are clearer in the gospel than the fact that marriage is between a man and a woman. To say that such is an expressed opinion to me is to question a foundational doctrine, one that I do know to be true.I also take issue with point 3, I feel like people have been up in arms about divorce for a long time. Same-sex marriage is just more popular now because its a relatively new thing, and hadn’t been legal anywhere as opposed to divorce which has been legal for much longer.
Marriage is much more than just a sign of commitment. I do not garner any malevolence towards gays who wish to be married but I refuse to support something I know to be wrong. Which I know that same-sex marriage is, just as I know that stealing is wrong. Man can vote whatever he wants legal, but that doesn’t change eternal laws. Marriage is too important of a principle to bend on.
Clear as one man one woman, or was that one man – many woman – which one is clear to you?
Paul your last comment is just ridiculous, thank you Daniel you nailed it perfectly. Paul earlier you said the Scripture to be canon. So do you believe the book of mormon to be the word of God? Or is it full of holes and erroneous just like following the prophet is?
In Jacob 2:27 the Lord states “not any man among you have save it but one wife, and concubines he shall have none”
Clearly we should only marry one wife right? Well then in verse he says;
“For if I will saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people, otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.”
Your whole little game of polygamy has nothing to do with traditional marriage. Like you always say to Joseph this isn’t about polygamy it’s about gay marriage. The church has made it clear through every method possible. Marriage is between a man and a woman. It always will be and always has been. I don’t believe that discrimination is the answer, I for one will love someone for whatever they do, but I’m sorry I can’t condone something that the Lord has commanded us not to do. I believe that we should help them with love and support. Saying that since they are born that way it is unfair to ask them to change is like saying that someone born with sociopathic tendencies that tries to kill for an emotional release should not have to fight it as it is unfair to them. This life is full of trials we all have to face different ones. Please don’t condemn church members for their actions, if you do you are just as guilty as they are for judging homosexuals. Christ teaches love, and there is very little of that in these conversations.
Amen to that Ping
The problem with gay marriage is just the term marriage. I support the civil union of gay couples as a legal outward showing of their love for each other. To the government marriage and the legality is just for legal purposes such as taxes and work benefits and such. I support all of that for any couple. What I don’t like seeing is the confusion between legal and religious. Marriage, to me, is more than just an outward showing for legal purposes. It’s a union between my wife and I with a covenant made between us and God. I believe, personally, that that union and covenant is between a man and a woman only. What I don’t want to ever see is the government forcing religious institutions to preform marriages because it is their “legal right” to be married. Well, I think they do deserve a legal civil union, but institutions that don’t support their actions should not EVER be required to perform marriages for them. And the problem is that the government has already started to infringe on that freedom to operate a business when they ruled against the t-shirt maker that wouldn’t print t-shirts for a rally, or the bakery that wouldn’t make a cake for a gay wedding, or the photographer that didn’t want to take pictures. The freedom of speech dose not mean you can yell out “fire!” in a packed auditorium, and the freedom to believe how you want (to be gay) shouldn’t infringe on the rights of others to believe contrary to what you do.
I am surprised and disappointed at how easy it is for people to say that same sex marriage has more in common with bestiality than with interracial marriage. The church was wrong on interracial marriage, wrong up to the highest level of human authority. As with Paul and Michael and the author of this article, I think the church is now wrong about same sex marriage. I don’t understand how some LDS folks can sensibly claim we have a history of ‘traditional marriage’ given our history on the topic. It’s kind of farsical to me. I hope that the church moves forward and chooses love and families over exclusion and shaming. I am not at all optimistic that that will happen.
Been a reader of the blog for months, this was my first comment. I love what you guys do here.
The reason it has more in common with bestiality than interracial marriage is purely the fact that being gay is not a race. There is no such thing as the gay race. Being gay is a matter of sexual preference. It may not be the same as bestiality because it doesn’t involve animals, but it is still a preference.
If you think that being gay is a choice, then this conversation will go no where.
Being gay, for some, is not a choice. My sister is gay and she has told me in no uncertain terms that it was a choice for her. Furthermore, not everyone who practices homosexual sex is gay in the sense of same-sex attraction. So, also for them it is a choice.
Gay sexual relations, however, *is* always a choice.
As a brief follow-up comment, to Nate, I am utterly dumbfounded at how you feel that in all of this, it is your rights that are infringed upon.
Construction contractor and businessman I have the right to accept jobs and reject jobs as they come to my discretion. That’s my right. If I want to reject an offer to build a gay marriage reception center because of what I believe, whether I’m Mormon, Jewish, Muslim, Catholic, or Atheist. I shouldn’t be forced to do something contrary to my beliefs. That’s what gays are fighting for, freedom of expression. The only problem is they are suing others for expressing their freedom of expression when they refuse to make a cake for a wedding or take pictures at it. That is the business owner’s freedom to express. Those are the rights being infringed upon.
Can you discriminate because someone is black? Do you see any similarities?
Similarities in that being black is the same as being gay? Are all black people gay? No, because being black has nothing to do with your sexual preference, you are born that way. It is a race.
Should people be able to discriminate against serial killers? What if they were gay serial killers, or black gay serial killers? Where do we draw our lines to discrimination rules and laws? Should people not have the right to decide who they provide services too? Should all girls schools be required to allow boys? Should all schools accept people into any education program they want to be in, regardless of their qualifications – that’s discriminating as well.
If you don’t think people are born gay, then this conversation will go no where.
The problem is that there exists discrimination in society, and it’s nearly impossible to eliminate it. Whether it’s race, gender, sexual preference, age, or anything else, it exists. Personally I think the sexual preference discrimination campaign is blown out of proportion. In an attempt to make the playing field “equal” for everyone, laws are made which help some and handicap others. Laws that many times encourage discrimination against the majority. A white male growing up has considerable less help getting jobs, education, and scholarships than females or minorities. Title IX requires that schools have the same amount to sports programs offered for both females and males. Unfortunately that creates inequality because there is generally a larger percentage of males who want to play sports than females. It also creates inequality when a female can make it to the national wrestling championships, in a male sport, but a male cannot be on the female volleyball team even though a male team is not offered at his school. Or when a university turns away qualified male students from the engineering program because the ratio of male to female applicants is too high and already they have a 60 to 40 population, but the secondary education program continues to accept female applicants even though the population is dominated by females with a 85 to 15 female to male ratio. The fact that children can’t vote or drive based solely on age rather than maturity levels or ability when some 16 year olds could make a much better informed decision voting than an 18 year old because the 16 year old actually cares. Discrimination is everywhere in society and affects everyone, not just the minorities or under privileged. I’m not saying it’s good, but making a law to help minorities has almost always hurt the majority, especially the low-income majority. People who have religious beliefs have not always been protected. Mormon history, Baptist history, and other religious history is full of hateful mobs oppressing the rights of believers to worship how they see fit. But I thought we were over that as a country. I thought we all believed whatever we wanted to and didn’t pass laws and award lawsuits to inhibit the freedom to to live or express our beliefs.
Wow, well said!
Excellent post. Excellent points. Thank you.
Polygamy was doctrine, it changed.
David,
Was the doctrine of plural marriage ever changed? Or was it postponed until the would would allow it to practiced again? “The Bible and the Book of Mormon teach that monogamy is God’s standard for marriage unless He declares otherwise” (Official Declaration 1, Doctrine and Covenants). The government passed laws making marriage between a man and more than one woman illegal. Because of that the practice of plural marriage was discontinued so that the church and the temples would not be destroyed. The doctrine was never changed. Read what really happened http://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/od/1
Funny thing – monogamy was taught as Satan’s plan by many of the prophets. Weird eh?
Show me a quote. Not everyone even practiced plural marriage. It wasn’t a general practice for everyone, but a calling for some, so it would be “weird” as you put it to say that they would teach it as Satan’s plan when most members were told to practice it.
That’s a lie.
How are people born a specific way? We develop as individuals through our experiences in life. As a child, you don’t know what you are – because you weren’t born with preferences, you develop them. Were you born to love pizza? Were you born to love soda? Were you born to be heterosexual? We were all born as children of our heavenly father, we were given a clean slate to be the person we would be, to have our chance to be worthy of life with him again. So no, I do not believe anyone is born gay. I do believe people develop a very real preference for being gay in their life time though. It is their challenge to deal with, if they didn’t want people to give their opinions on it, they should keep it private. What they are looking for is someone to tell them it’s ok for them to live the way they have chosen. I’m not going to agree with their lifestyle, but I will support their decision to have the choice to live the way they want. I will not support the thought that I have to agree that it is a good choice for everyone, and that it should be taught as such.
Please see mormonsandgays.org for further information about being born gay. The question you are asking is like asking a black person if he developed that tone of skin because he was out in the sun too much. Again if you don’t see it that way then we will have to agree to disagree.
so being gay is a pigment in the skin? If we all agreed to disagree, this would never have been an issue. People make much more out of this than is needed. This is not a race of people being oppressed, this is a growing group of people that have a sexual preference. A group which is now forcing their preferences on the world and asking them to say “it’s ok”. What is ok is their choice to be who they are, what is not ok is their trying to force everyone to agree with it. While I agree everyone should be given the equal privileges to make the choices they want, I will disagree that I have to accept their choices as a viable option for all. They are only viable to the ones that choose to make them and should not be forced on anyone else. If you can’t agree with that, then you should agree to disagree.
I’m saying just like people are born black people are born gay. If you don’t agree that people are not born gay then we have nothing further to talk about.
And how are they forcing you to do anything?
“Even though individuals do not choose to have such attractions” – The current stance of the LDS Church. mormonsandgays.org
Thanks for sharing.
I enjoyed this article very much. But it also troubled me. I’ve been reading an praying about the Book of Mormon, but the churches’ stance on Gay marriage really bothers me and I wish the LDS community were as loving, accepting and nice as they seemed. For every passage in the Bible or Book of Mormon that I read, for every Mormon message I watch, there is comments or articles about how much money the LDS church is pumping into the prevention of same-sex marriage. Negative comments that explain to me how people wish to remove rights from others.
If Heavenly Father does exist, I’m sure he would want us all to be able to enter in a marriage with whomever we please. He would want us to live like his son, and he would want us to love and respect our partners, no matter their gender. He would want us to raise children in a loving family, rather than be shamed or made guilty for the people that surround us.
This article was amazing! I completely agree with those last two editorial paragraphs.
About a year ago, I wrote a blog post around this very concept – inspired by Elder Oaks’ “Good, Better, Best” conference talk from years back. If you’re interested, the link is here (the most salient part is from “the Heart of the Issue” on): http://www.kurt-anderson.com/main/775/writing/essays/mea-culpa
How do you not see that it is forcing their view on to those that disagree? If these laws pass, will we have a choice but to accept things we may or may not agree with? Will I still have the option to express my opinion against it without the repercussions of an all out barrage of “he’s anti gay, anti american, he’s a biggot”? Clearly if we need a law to make a law to make people feel better about their choices, or to force people to accept their choices, there is an issue. The only purpose such a law will accomplish is further breaking down the family unit. The reason god made man and women was for the fact that you cannot have one without the other. You cannot have children unless there are heterosexual relations. We have manipulated science and our bodies to allow for children without the need of sexual relations – but it still requires a man and a woman, this is because that was how we were made – not any other way. If it didn’t matter, we would be able to asexually reproduce. Homosexuality is a sexual preference, there isn’t a gay gene. We decide who we will be, we decide who we love, we decide how we love. This is why we are here on earth, so we can make these decisions. To say someone is born gay, straight, bi, etc… is saying god’s plan is satan’s plan where we don’t have a choice. We do have a choice, some choices are harder than others, sometimes we can’t see past the choices we want to make – sometimes we can’t see other choices, but they are always there.
Really? would you like your child to marry an abuser? What if they really love that person, would it be ok then? Why do you think Heavenly Father would want anything but the best for his children? I believe he wants us to be happy, but he also wants us to make good choices. He wants us to have the option of doing what we want, but choosing what is right. He isn’t going to stop you from making a bad choice, but you must be willing to accept the consequences of all of your choices, good or bad. If you would feel shamed by someone else’s opinion of your relation, then it sounds like a personal problem. If the choice is a right choice you should not feel shame. Just because you get enough people to say it’s ok, doesn’t mean it’s “OK”. It just means you have other people that agree. If it’s right, you’ll know – you won’t doubt, you won’t feel shame, you just know.
BTW, not saying being gay makes you an abuser – just to make that clear.
The Mormon Church could not simply “recognize” legal and lawful same-sex marriages without addressing a slew of other, interrelated concerns. The Church would have to say something about accepting a marriage arrangement that has been a non-starter for 6,000 years. The Church would also have to say something about the Temple. Here are some possibilities:
(1) “We recognize legal same-sex marriages, and the sexual relations within them, as acceptable to God – but only in mortality. Such unions are dissolved by death and will not be reconstituted thereafter. Therefore, these unions will not be sealed in the temple.”
Related issues:
Will same-sex attraction be felt after death?
Can for-time-only same-sex marriages be performed in the temple?
Will spouses in same-sex marriages be available to be called as bishops, Stake presidents, Youth leaders, Primary and Relief Society presidents? If not, why not?
(2) “We recognize legal same-sex marriages as valid in mortality, but we don’t know all the conditions operative in the next world or in the resurrection and therefore cannot comment on them. So we will accept legal same-sex marriages but will not seal such unions in the temple, and wait to see what comes. Spouses in same-sex marriages will have to hang on and hope for the best.”
Related issues: See above
(3) “We recognize the validity of same-sex marriages in this life and because we don’t know what will obtain in the next life, we will go ahead and seal these unions in the temple anyway and let it all get sorted out in the next world.”
Related issues: See above, minus the temple restrictions
(4) “We have expanded our understanding of doctrine: We now hold that marriages in heaven are of three types – man and woman, man and man, and woman and woman. Eternal same-sex unions are an exact analog to eternal heterosexual marriages in their rights, privileges and destinies. Being eternal, same-sex marriages have always existed, though we knew it not until now. It is on this understanding that we will seal these unions in the temple.”
Related issues: Presumably, all issues above are resolved.
In recognizing same-sex marriages as valid in the Church, some form of the above would have to be considered. Policies and rationales would need to be articulated. Same-sex marriage doesn’t exist in a theological vacuum. Nothing does. And which policy would same-sex couples settle for?
How would such decisions be made? The LDS Church being what it is, and to be true to its claims, there can be only one answer: Revelation.
And here is the sticking point, the deciding line: For Mormons, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not run by a group of men in Salt Lake City. The head of the Church is Jesus Christ.
What if Jesus Christ says no?
For Mormons who want the Church to recognize same-sex marriages, what is their contingency plan for this?