Originally Posted By utahjosh <Gays adopt all the time. Your position would deny that child a family. Pretty shameful. No, my position would send that family to a mom and a dad. There are many Moms and Dads who are desperately seeking to adopt.
Originally Posted By utahjosh <There are many stories like this, but you'd deny them all.> No, I would not deny those stories. I already said that there are some good people in these usually bad situations. I rejoice when good comes out of these bad situations. It's just not the norm.
Originally Posted By utahjosh <And think of the time and dollars that will be spent on this, instead of helping people in desperate need. > We can, and do, spend dollars on both and many other good things.
Originally Posted By utahjosh I find it funny how often people who don't believe in Him claim they know what Jesus would do.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "I find it funny how often people who don't believe in Him claim they know what Jesus would do." I find it hard to believe you know what he'd do, either. "No, my position would send that family to a mom and a dad. There are many Moms and Dads who are desperately seeking to adopt." What if there's no mom and dad and a gay personis the only option?
Originally Posted By ecdc >>The church will NEVER encourage same-sex marriage. (The right for same-sex It's not the same situation as priesthood rights for blacks - the eternal doctrines about this are clear and concise for us, which was not the case about blacks and the priesthood.)<< Oh how I wish I were at home and had access to my books and files. I'd post quotes from Brigham Young to Bruce R. McConkie that said exactly the same thing about blacks and the priesthood, Josh. They insisted that African-Americans would never hold the priesthood. McConkie, when confronted on it, was forced to admit he was wrong, a rare feat for a Mormon leader.
Originally Posted By utahjosh <What if there's no mom and dad and a gay person is the only option?> I don't think that has ever or will ever happen.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "<What if there's no mom and dad and a gay person is the only option?> I don't think that has ever or will ever happen." I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you don't understand the question. Would you rather a child stay homeless in foster care if being adopted by a gay person was the only other option?
Originally Posted By utahjosh <...quotes from Brigham Young to Bruce R. McConkie...They insisted that African-Americans would never hold the priesthood. McConkie, when confronted on it, was forced to admit he was wrong, a rare feat for a Mormon leader.> Such statements were opinions of church leaders trying to explain why the policies were in place. None of those statements has ever been official church doctrine. The eternal nature of Gender, the roles of Fathers and Mothers, are clear and concise doctrines of the church.
Originally Posted By utahjosh <Would you rather a child stay homeless in foster care if being adopted by a gay person was the only other option?> It's really hard to answer this question, because I don't think the situation is real. Would I send a child to the streets before sending them to a gay couple? No. Would I keep a child in foster care, or in a foster family, before sending them to a gay couple? Probably. ut my faith in the foster system isn't that strong, knowing foster parents aren't always the best parents.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Such statements were opinions of church leaders trying to explain why the policies were in place. None of those statements has ever been official church doctrine.<< Except they were. That's how they're being played off now, but there's really no way to distinguish between what is doctrine and what isn't. >>The eternal nature of Gender, the roles of Fathers and Mothers, are clear and concise doctrines of the church.<< Josh, tell me where the "eternal nature of gender" was first taught. You'll find that, like many Mormon doctrines, it's relatively new. Gender is eternal is a modern teaching that arose *after* homosexuality became a national debate. Again, so much for revelation actually revealing anything unique or new. These things always conveniently pop up in the face of new social movements.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "It's really hard to answer this question, because I don't think the situation is real." It's very, extremely, incredibly real. I see it all the time.
Originally Posted By utahjosh They were NOT doctrine. They were opinions. Many followed and believed those opinions, because that specific thing had not been revealed directly through the Prophet. It was the "best guess" theory that became popular through time and culture.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>It's really hard to answer this question, because I don't think the situation is real.<< Of course, this is a key component for religious people who feel like it's their business to tell other people how to live and what they can and can't do. They first have to be able to demonize or somehow explain why they know better than the person actually experiencing it. Therefore, gay people have gone from perverted deviants to somewhat tragic characters who have a "lifelong struggle" they need to overcome. It's astounding how some people who have not experienced something themselves will tell other people what's going on with them. Rather than simply listening to gay people and taking their word and experience for it, they create nonsense explanations. Then, they deny reality when it conflicts with their worldview.
Originally Posted By mele <<The boy is thrilled beyond words to be where he is now. He calls the guy "Dad", gave him 13 different cards for Father's Day because he wanted to make up for all the Father's Days he had no one to buy for>> Thank you for sharing that, SPP. What a wonderful (although heartwrenching) story. He sounds like a wonderful kid.
Originally Posted By utahjosh Of course, this is a key component for athiest people who feel like it's their business to tell other people how to belive and what they can and can't know. They first have to be able to demonize or somehow explain why they know better than the person actually experiencing it. (Belief in God) Therefore, believers people have gone from good, wholesome people to somewhat deluded characters who have a warped mind. It's astounding how some people who have not experienced communion with God or a religious experience themselves will tell other people what's going on with them. Rather than simply listening to believers and taking their word and experience for it, they create nonsense explanations.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>They were NOT doctrine. They were opinions.<< You can claim this all you want. But if it walks like a duck.... It's pretty tough to claim something wasn't a doctrine when it was taught and believed for over 100 years, Josh. You can't then turn around and go, "psych!" "That thing that Mormons taught and believed for over a century wasn't really a doctrine. It was just an opinion. Our bad!" Of course, this is part of the larger point, Josh. The church has been on the wrong side of a civil rights issue before. It only changed when the culture changed. That's not a coincidence. It is, however, a coincidence that revelations only come in the face of cultural and social changes. A temperance movement sweeps the nation in the early 1830s - voila, the Word of Wisdom appears! The church is disenfranchised and has its property seized after church leaders are jailed for polygamy in the late nineteenth century - voila, the Manifesto is issued. Anti-communist sentiment explodes in the United States following World War II and the advent of the Cold War - voila, church leaders say Communism is evil. Civil rights gains momentum for blacks and the church faces enormous political pressure - voila, the revelation on priesthood. I'm not trying to pick on you Josh. But you have no evidence that bigoted teachings about gays comes from God. I have a myriad of circumstantial evidence that Mormon church revelation and changes and teachings are cultural, not revelatory. This is no different. If you claim that God is making you do something that impedes the rights of others, I'm going to call you on it.
Originally Posted By ecdc The problem with your 571 Josh is I'm not telling you to not believe, I'm not telling you that you shouldn't or can't practice your religion. I'm not telling you that you haven't had communion with God. You, however, are trying to tell a gay person what they feel. You're trying to tell them they aren't entitled to the same rights you have. Try as you might, this is indefensible. By your logic, I could claim a revelation from God that you are supposed to give me all your money, and the fact that you haven't experienced it doesn't mean I'm wrong, therefore you should listen to me.
Originally Posted By DAR Josh people thought that women shouldn't have the right to vote, we survived that. People thought that blacks were inferior and shouldn't have the same rights as white people, we survived that. As a society we'll certainly survive this.
