Mormon Church To US Supreme Court: Ban Gay Marriage

[JayJayDee]

What version is this? I just looked up a few different versions and it stated nothing about them being married. Also even within your verses it states that they became man and wife not that god married them. Though I also find it strange that even if it explicitly stated that he married them this is in no way the way it has been done since then.

I am puzzled by your reading of this scripture....regardless of the version.

(Gen 2:22, 24, 25) "Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib, and he brought her to the man.......
This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.
Now the man and his wife were both naked, but they felt no shame." (NLT)

"The Lord God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.....For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed." (NASB)

"And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man.....Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed." (ESV)

All these state that God brought the woman to the man and thereafter, they are called "man and wife". Did you imagine a church wedding? LOL That is a human invention.
The ancient Jews, as I have already explained, did not have a wedding ceremony at the temple. The poor just took their betrothed home along a route lined with well wishers, but the more wealthy invited guests to a marriage feast. There is no formal ceremony mentioned. Jesus' first miracle was at such a feast.

None of Jesus's words indicated he was against homosexuality. He was speaking on the bond between a married couple. Though he referenced the Hebrew scripture which means he indicated that they were being used as a parable much like his other messages. Do you really think all of the parables that Jesus spoke about were real stories from actual people? Or were they made up to make his point?

Sexual sin was clearly defined in Jehovah's laws. Read Lev 18 and you will see the detail. Verse 22 says....."You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." If this was part of the law, then Jesus as a devout Jew, upheld it. He is the one who stated "male and female" as the standard for marriage.
If God considers homosexual sex to be an abomination, then who are we to say otherwise?

This is somewhat to my point. Marriages have only recently become a public thing. Whoever you were with was your wife/husband. Homosexuals did the same thing. Its not new.

God does not recognize any "marriage" that is not according to HIS definition. It is his arrangement and he will not alter it to suit the unnatural sexual preferences of flawed humans.
"Man and wife" were "male and female" as Jesus stated. There are no loopholes, regardless of how much people want to find them.

God does not hate homosexuals any more than he hates any other abnormal trait in sinful humanity....what he hates is their unlawful behavior. Stop the behavior and he has no problem with anyone. In fact he will support those who sacrifice for him in that way. But he will not force anyone to obey him.......though he will demand an accounting at the end of the day, whether we believe in him or not.

Pedophiles too have an unnatural sexual attraction to children but no one is suggesting that they be given free reign to satisfy their appetites....are they? In order to please the Creator, some have to make greater sacrifice than others. We are assured that the rewards will be worth it.

 

[JayJayDee]

What does this exactly have to do with my sarcastic post that was meant to show you that the bible isn't anything special by any objective means. There is no shortage of holy books that have impressive backings from followers who all claim it is god's truth. How do you know that the bible is real? Is it because god spoke to you? Do you not believe that people in other religions have the exact same experiences? Are their experiences somehow less real than your own?

Actually, it is not we who choose God as much as he facilitates a relationship with him by means of his spirit. (John 6:44) Non believers will not ever understand this.
The reality of God is not something you read in a book.....it is so much more than that. It is experienced at a spiritual level.

The Bible stands alone as a book of wisdom and prophesy.
I have had a relationship with God all my life. I cannot explain why or how I gained my trust in God as Creator, and the Bible as his sole communication with us, but it has guided me all my life. I am at peace when many are stressing about how much trouble the world is experiencing.....I am confident in the promises of the Creator. He alone can give us a future when man seems hell bent on destroying life on this planet.

I am sorry for those who have no faith or any real hope. I cannot live without either.

 

[McBell]

First and foremost, marriage is only legally meaningful upon certain key events, primarily dissolution (or divorce) and death.

Seriously?
Now I know you are trolling.

 

[gsa]

Seriously?
Now I know you are trolling.

Perhaps "legally meaningful" is too broad, since it also creates a status before either death or dissolution. But the point stands: Marriage creates a presumptive set of rules that apply to recognize the status of the partners as a single unit, one that assumes the number 2 upon death or dissolution. The alteration of those rules to accommodate three or more partners requires a fundamental change in the rules themselves. That's because these rules are designed around 2 partners.

Moreover, it is not simply death or dissolution. We can easily imagine the problems of government recognition of multipartner marriages, including immigration sponsorship, tax exemption for property transfers, next-of-kin status for major emergency medical decisions or for the purpose of wrongful death liability, etcetera. Just use the example of a major medical decision in the event of an incapacitated partner: Who has the status that is presumed to apply to the partner that is not incapacitated? What if there is a conflict between the non-incapacitated partners? And so we can imagine a legislative fix to that, but there are countless more examples.

The larger point is that no one actually wants what we call "traditional marriage," save perhaps fundamentalists, because the marriage that we have today is the product of innumerable reforms aimed at creating a partnership status as opposed to subordinate status of "man and wife" intended to create, and did create, with "coverture." And while unmarried single women (and to a much greater extent widows, the latter having fulfilled social obligations) did enjoy greater freedom, they still could not vote and were subject to plenty of restrictions on work, including bans on apprenticeships and the professions. And of course, without the legitimacy of marriage, they were subject to prosecution for fornication (or adultery), and their children suffered a number of legal impairments as well.

Polygamy certainly requires us to revisit and, at least in its religious forms, reinstitute a different but similar subordinate status. And even if we did not recognize polygamy per se, but instituted some system of polyamory, we would have to create hierarchies within the marital unit. It is difficult to see how the partnership theory of marriage would survive multipartner arrangements. In some ways, privatizing marriage and creating de facto rules for people with children would be preferable.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Actually, it is not we who choose God as much as he facilitates a relationship with him by means of his spirit. (John 6:44) Non believers will not ever understand this.
The reality of God is not something you read in a book.....it is so much more than that. It is experienced at a spiritual level.

Sure sure. But every religion out there has just as much faith and spiritual experiences as christianity. Doesn't that seem odd to you?

The Bible stands alone as a book of wisdom and prophesy.
I have had a relationship with God all my life. I cannot explain why or how I gained my trust in God as Creator, and the Bible as his sole communication with us, but it has guided me all my life. I am at peace when many are stressing about how much trouble the world is experiencing.....I am confident in the promises of the Creator. He alone can give us a future when man seems hell bent on destroying life on this planet.

The bible is no more adept with prophecies than any other religious book. It does not stand alone and it has nothing that offers it more credibility than any other religious text. To think otherwise is deluding yourself.

I am sorry for those who have no faith or any real hope. I cannot live without either.

I have faith and hope. Just not in god

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I am puzzled by your reading of this scripture....regardless of the version.

(Gen 2:22, 24, 25) "Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib, and he brought her to the man.......
This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.
Now the man and his wife were both naked, but they felt no shame." (NLT)

"The Lord God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.....For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed." (NASB)

"And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man.....Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed." (ESV)

All these state that God brought the woman to the man and thereafter, they are called "man and wife". Did you imagine a church wedding? LOL That is a human invention.
The ancient Jews, as I have already explained, did not have a wedding ceremony at the temple. The poor just took their betrothed home along a route lined with well wishers, but the more wealthy invited guests to a marriage feast. There is no formal ceremony mentioned. Jesus' first miracle was at such a feast.

And where does it say that it has to be a man and a wife and not just for these two in particular? And you can be puzzled all you want. Also try the KJV. That was the version I read.

Sexual sin was clearly defined in Jehovah's laws. Read Lev 18 and you will see the detail. Verse 22 says....."You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." If this was part of the law, then Jesus as a devout Jew, upheld it. He is the one who stated "male and female" as the standard for marriage.
If God considers homosexual sex to be an abomination, then who are we to say otherwise?

Do you cut your hair and wear clothing of different fabrics? Ever worked on sunday? Jesus broke many laws and reformed many as well.

God does not recognize any "marriage" that is not according to HIS definition. It is his arrangement and he will not alter it to suit the unnatural sexual preferences of flawed humans.
"Man and wife" were "male and female" as Jesus stated. There are no loopholes, regardless of how much people want to find them.

God does not hate homosexuals any more than he hates any other abnormal trait in sinful humanity....what he hates is their unlawful behavior. Stop the behavior and he has no problem with anyone. In fact he will support those who sacrifice for him in that way. But he will not force anyone to obey him.......though he will demand an accounting at the end of the day, whether we believe in him or not.

If god doesn't hate homosexuals then that means they shouldn't be barred from heaven for loving another individual. But you probably won't view it as love. Though this still beggs the question of why you think that your particular version of god has any real authority rather than any other version of god? Or any god at all?

Pedophiles too have an unnatural sexual attraction to children but no one is suggesting that they be given free reign to satisfy their appetites....are they? In order to please the Creator, some have to make greater sacrifice than others. We are assured that the rewards will be worth it.

Sex with children is always abuse. They have no ability to understand what is going on, give consent or even be physically ready for sexual intercourse. This is a matter of abuse and protecting children from abuse. Homosexuality has no such issues. If it is done between two consenting adults then there is no abuse involved.

 

[JayJayDee]

Sure sure. But every religion out there has just as much faith and spiritual experiences as christianity. Doesn't that seem odd to you?

Odd? Not in the slightest. The Bible tells us that there are only two kinds of religion in the world.....true and false.
All false worship has the same author, that is why they fundamentally teach the same things under different labels....a multiplicity or trinity of gods....immortality of the human soul....and a fiery hell of torment for the wicked. Many also feature crosses in various configurations as a religious symbol. All such teachings can be traced back to ancient Babylon. None of these teachings are found in ancient Jewish scripture and none of them were taught by Jesus Christ.

The bible is no more adept with prophecies than any other religious book. It does not stand alone and it has nothing that offers it more credibility than any other religious text. To think otherwise is deluding yourself.

You are free to believe whatever you wish. But the Jews were expecting the Messiah at the very time he began his assignment because of the prophesy in Daniel. The very same formula was used to calculate when Messiah would begin his rule thousands of years before it happened.

Cyrus the Persian was also named hundreds of years before his birth as the one who would be instrumental in overthrowing Babylon. Even the manner in which the city fell was detailed. It all happened just as the scriptures said.

I have faith and hope. Just not in god

All the best with that.

 

[JayJayDee]

And where does it say that it has to be a man and a wife and not just for these two in particular? And you can be puzzled all you want. Also try the KJV. That was the version I read.

The KJV? That explains a lot.

Since the command was to "be fruitful and become many and fill the earth" with their "kind".....that would be a tad difficult for two males or two females to accomplish, wouldn't you say?

Do you cut your hair and wear clothing of different fabrics?

No, because those things were contained in the law to Israel. I am not Jewish. Christians were told to specifically refrain from immorality and from blood....those two things were incumbent upon both Jews and Christians.

Paul also mentioned homosexuality in his letter to the Romans.

"Therefore, God, in keeping with the desires of their hearts, gave them up to uncleanness, so that their bodies might be dishonored among them. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for the lie and venerated and rendered sacred service to the creation rather than the Creator, who is praised forever. Amen. 26 That is why God gave them over to uncontrolled sexual passion, for their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; 27 likewise also the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full penalty, which was due for their error." (Rom 1:24-27)

Ever worked on sunday?

Are you talking about the Sabbath? The Jewish Sabbath was on Saturday.....and there is no command for Christians to keep a Sabbath anyway. Gentile Christians were never under obligation to keep the law.

Jesus broke many laws and reformed many as well.

No he did not. He was the son of God who was the only one capable of keeping the law perfectly. He understood the law in every detail. It was the Pharisees' rigid interpretation of the law that he came to correct.

If god doesn't hate homosexuals then that means they shouldn't be barred from heaven for loving another individual.

God gives everyone an opportunity to clean up their lives both spiritually and morally. He does not force anyone to obey him, but holds out rewards for those who do. Those who want to dictate the terms of their worship to God, will not inherit the kingdom.

"Or do you not know that unrighteous people will not inherit God’s Kingdom? Do not be misled. Those who are sexually immoral,nidolaters, adulterers, men who submit to homosexual acts, men who practice homosexuality, thieves, greedy people, drunkards, revilers, and extortioners will not inherit God’s Kingdom. And yet that is what some of you were. But you have been washed clean; you have been sanctified; you have been declared righteous in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God." (1 Cor 6:9-11)

But you probably won't view it as love.

Love and lust are two different things. But I do not think that all gay couples are just in lust. I know that they probably do love one another.....but it is their sexual practices that God finds "obscene".

Though this still beggs the question of why you think that your particular version of god has any real authority rather than any other version of god? Or any god at all?

I have faith that my God is real and that his word gives hope for all humanity. We choose whom we will worship...if we choose to worship at all.

Sex with children is always abuse. They have no ability to understand what is going on, give consent or even be physically ready for sexual intercourse. This is a matter of abuse and protecting children from abuse. Homosexuality has no such issues. If it is done between two consenting adults then there is no abuse involved.

It isn't sexual "abuse" that we are speaking about. It is aberrant sexual practice that is unnatural and cannot produce children....the noble purpose of the sexual act is to conceive children through love in a committed marriage between a man and a woman...to "fill the earth". The fact that it was pleasurable was a bonus......it was not the primary purpose.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Odd? Not in the slightest. The Bible tells us that there are only two kinds of religion in the world.....true and false.
All false worship has the same author, that is why they fundamentally teach the same things under different labels....a multiplicity or trinity of gods....immortality of the human soul....and a fiery hell of torment for the wicked. Many also feature crosses in various configurations as a religious symbol. All such teachings can be traced back to ancient Babylon. None of these teachings are found in ancient Jewish scripture and none of them were taught by Jesus Christ.

Good. That means you and I can agree that most christians sects are wrong. However I go a little further and hold yours on the same level. Though now I am curious as to what you think of Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Wicca, Shinto, scientology. Many of these lack the qualities given for a "Fake church".

You are free to believe whatever you wish. But the Jews were expecting the Messiah at the very time he began his assignment because of the prophesy in Daniel. The very same formula was used to calculate when Messiah would begin his rule thousands of years before it happened.

Cyrus the Persian was also named hundreds of years before his birth as the one who would be instrumental in overthrowing Babylon. Even the manner in which the city fell was detailed. It all happened just as the scriptures said.

The dating of the biblical sources indicate that it is possible that it was written after the fact rather than when it was stated to have been written. Also there was no calculation of "when" Jesus was to come. Its why Jews are still waiting. Jesus also failed to fulfill most of the requirements set up in the Jewish texts the Messiah was supposed to have fulfilled.

The KJV? That explains a lot.

I assume you have the original manuscripts and can read them in their native language then?

Since the command was to "be fruitful and become many and fill the earth" with their "kind".....that would be a tad difficult for two males or two females to accomplish, wouldn't you say?

Even if the story was literally true (impossible btw but for the sake of argument) then that situation would really only apply to them. We are at full capacity for population as it is now. What possible argument is there against two males or two females if we no longer need ample production of offspring?

No, because those things were contained in the law to Israel. I am not Jewish. Christians were told to specifically refrain from immorality and from blood....those two things were incumbent upon both Jews and Christians.

Paul also mentioned homosexuality in his letter to the Romans.

"Therefore, God, in keeping with the desires of their hearts, gave them up to uncleanness, so that their bodies might be dishonored among them. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for the lie and venerated and rendered sacred service to the creation rather than the Creator, who is praised forever. Amen. 26 That is why God gave them over to uncontrolled sexual passion, for their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; 27 likewise also the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full penalty, which was due for their error." (Rom 1:24-27)



Are you talking about the Sabbath? The Jewish Sabbath was on Saturday.....and there is no command for Christians to keep a Sabbath anyway. Gentile Christians were never under obligation to keep the law.



No he did not. He was the son of God who was the only one capable of keeping the law perfectly. He understood the law in every detail. It was the Pharisees' rigid interpretation of the law that he came to correct.

What I seem to be getting out of most of this is that god changed his mind about what he wanted. Jews had to act one way but now that Jews were no longer the chosen people he liberal-ed up?

God gives everyone an opportunity to clean up their lives both spiritually and morally. He does not force anyone to obey him, but holds out rewards for those who do. Those who want to dictate the terms of their worship to God, will not inherit the kingdom.

"Or do you not know that unrighteous people will not inherit God’s Kingdom? Do not be misled. Those who are sexually immoral,nidolaters, adulterers, men who submit to homosexual acts, men who practice homosexuality, thieves, greedy people, drunkards, revilers, and extortioners will not inherit God’s Kingdom. And yet that is what some of you were. But you have been washed clean; you have been sanctified; you have been declared righteous in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God." (1 Cor 6:9-11)


Love and lust are two different things. But I do not think that all gay couples are just in lust. I know that they probably do love one another.....but it is their sexual practices that God finds "obscene".

And why does god find homosexuality obscene? It doesn't really sound like a god to me. Sounds more like bigoted old men in control of religion as a form of social control thousands of years ago

I have faith that my God is real and that his word gives hope for all humanity. We choose whom we will worship...if we choose to worship at all.

Just realize that every other person of faith in every religion in the world feels exactly as strong as you. If you still keep strong then more power to you.

It isn't sexual "abuse" that we are speaking about. It is aberrant sexual practice that is unnatural and cannot produce children....the noble purpose of the sexual act is to conceive children through love in a committed marriage between a man and a woman...to "fill the earth". The fact that it was pleasurable was a bonus......it was not the primary purpose.

Pedophilia is abuse. Always. Homosexuality isn't abuse. That is why we are tolerant of one and not the other. No one is harmed with homosexuality and in fact many are helped by the act. Unless you don't believe people to be born gay.

 

[Tengri]

Homosexuality is a biological thing. Most of homo people didn't chose this way. But, homosexuality has a cultural, psychological reasons.

In Western cultures, there is a "being different" fashion. "don't be regular" Good. But this type of thinking is increasing the gay/lesbian etc population.

Of course biologic reasons are important, but I know and believe that some of gays chose this way. Their culture, beliefs, family etc effected.

And homosexual sex is not healthy especially for men.

And there is no reason to have sex, you can't create a human.

But I know you will say, "It is my way, you can't criticize me" Right. But you are on a wrong way.

You can have biological issues but It doesn't mean you have to sex in anus. Sorry.

 

[McBell]

Homosexuality is a biological thing. Most of homo people didn't chose this way. But, homosexuality has a cultural, psychological reasons.

In Western cultures, there is a "being different" fashion. "don't be regular" Good. But this type of thinking is increasing the gay/lesbian etc population.

Of course biologic reasons are important, but I know and believe that some of gays chose this way. Their culture, beliefs, family etc effected.

And homosexual sex is not healthy especially for men.

And there is no reason to have sex, you can't create a human.

But I know you will say, "It is my way, you can't criticize me" Right. But you are on a wrong way.

You can have biological issues but It doesn't mean you have to sex in anus. Sorry.

Nice sermon.

 

[Apex]

Homosexuality is a biological thing. Most of homo people didn't chose this way. But, homosexuality has a cultural, psychological reasons.

In Western cultures, there is a "being different" fashion. "don't be regular" Good. But this type of thinking is increasing the gay/lesbian etc population.

Of course biologic reasons are important, but I know and believe that some of gays chose this way. Their culture, beliefs, family etc effected.

And homosexual sex is not healthy especially for men.

And there is no reason to have sex, you can't create a human.

But I know you will say, "It is my way, you can't criticize me" Right. But you are on a wrong way.

You can have biological issues but It doesn't mean you have to sex in anus. Sorry.

 

[Ingledsva]

The KJV? That explains a lot.

Since the command was to "be fruitful and become many and fill the earth" with their "kind".....that would be a tad difficult for two males or two females to accomplish, wouldn't you say?

...

It doesn't actually say that.

In fact the Jewish writings say Adam had sex with all the animals trying to find a mate.

Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

Gen 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

Gen 2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

I think if bestiality was OK, there should be no problem with NORMAL - NATURAL - HOMOSEXUALITY.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

I am puzzled by your reading of this scripture....regardless of the version.

(Gen 2:22, 24, 25) "Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib, and he brought her to the man.......
This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.
Now the man and his wife were both naked, but they felt no shame." (NLT)

"The Lord God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.....For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed." (NASB)

"And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man.....Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed." (ESV)

All these state that God brought the woman to the man and thereafter, they are called "man and wife". Did you imagine a church wedding? LOL That is a human invention.
The ancient Jews, as I have already explained, did not have a wedding ceremony at the temple. The poor just took their betrothed home along a route lined with well wishers, but the more wealthy invited guests to a marriage feast. There is no formal ceremony mentioned. Jesus' first miracle was at such a feast.



Sexual sin was clearly defined in Jehovah's laws. Read Lev 18 and you will see the detail. Verse 22 says....."You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." If this was part of the law, then Jesus as a devout Jew, upheld it. He is the one who stated "male and female" as the standard for marriage.
If God considers homosexual sex to be an abomination, then who are we to say otherwise?


God does not recognize any "marriage" that is not according to HIS definition. It is his arrangement and he will not alter it to suit the unnatural sexual preferences of flawed humans.
"Man and wife" were "male and female" as Jesus stated. There are no loopholes, regardless of how much people want to find them.

God does not hate homosexuals any more than he hates any other abnormal trait in sinful humanity....what he hates is their unlawful behavior. Stop the behavior and he has no problem with anyone. In fact he will support those who sacrifice for him in that way. But he will not force anyone to obey him.......though he will demand an accounting at the end of the day, whether we believe in him or not.

Pedophiles too have an unnatural sexual attraction to children but no one is suggesting that they be given free reign to satisfy their appetites....are they? In order to please the Creator, some have to make greater sacrifice than others. We are assured that the rewards will be worth it.

LOL! There is no God definition of marriage. Which is why - according to the Rabbis - Adam tried out all the animals first = Bestiality! - and then it just became patriarchal grabbing of women = rape, buying children for sex, concubines, multiple wives, and sex slaves. The word translated "wife" is actually "woman!"

*

*

 

[Serenity7855]

There is a topic in the LDS DIR but I think it is a debate worthy topic, so I am adding it here.

Note the irony:

The LDS Church filed an amicus brief alongside faiths such as the Southern Baptist Convention, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, the National Association of Evangelicals, the Free Methodist Church – USA, and the International Pentecostal Holiness Church in urging the court to uphold a traditional definition of marriage.

Nothing quite like teaming up with people who think you are going to burn in hell in order to gang up on the gays, huh?

The Advocate also has an interesting response to this from a gay Mormon:

Recently, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints declared that my family is counterfeit. Or in other words, my family is without value because it lacks the “traditional” family standard of a father and a mother.

I’m not sorry to say that I whole heartily disagree. The words used by the speaker, Elder L. Tom Perry, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, are as harmful and damaging as his position that gay Mormons are welcome in the church as long as they remain celibate. Forcing someone to reject who they are can only bring pain and heartache. I know this first hand.

Calling an entire group of people and their families counterfeit is not only dangerous and destructive to the LGBT community but just as hurtful to the active and stalwart members of the church. These amazing members love their LGBT children, family members, and friends.

I fear that your post is a little deceptive. You are not lying but you are omitting to tell the whole truth, that is, that it only relates to those who are Mormons and those who are thinking about becoming a Mormon. It bares no relevance to the world at large. There are 14 million church members world wide, only about 4 million are active Mormons. There are 7 billion members of the human race in the world. That is just 0.000000006% who have given their interpretation of marriage and who do not want to have homosexuals in their organisation. An organisation, set up by them, administered by them, controlled by them, structured for them and accepted by them, all without trying to influence the secular world with their beliefs. Come on, let's get it into perspective and stop arguing over trivialities, like, they will not let me into their gang. It is their private social club, like it or lump it, but mind your own business.

 

[Curious George]

It doesn't actually say that.

In fact the Jewish writings say Adam had sex with all the animals trying to find a mate.

Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

Gen 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

Gen 2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

I think if bestiality was OK, there should be no problem with NORMAL - NATURAL - HOMOSEXUALITY.

*

I hadn't heard that before.

 

[Serenity7855]

No, Yahweh and other imaginary gods are definitely not worth sacrificing happiness in this world.

That is interesting. How can you qualify your assertion that Yahweh is imaginary. Only he seems pretty real to me, but I do not say he exists to everyone, yet you are making a general statement that he is imaginary. What evidence do you have to substantiate your claim?

 

[columbus]

Come on, let's get it into perspective and stop arguing over trivialities, like, they will not let me into their gang. It is their private social club, like it or lump it, but mind your own business.

It is the Mormons who refuse to do this.
They insist on both having special tax laws while also insisting on the right to special access to the Supreme Court.
That's the problem.
Religious people who want it both ways. They want special tax status, but they don't want the rules that come along with getting that special tax status.
Tom

 

[Serenity7855]

You realize there are non-Judaic marriages yes? Native American's had marriages prior to settler invastion. Europe has had marriages prior to christian or Judaic influence. Africa the same. Asia the same. Australia the same. Marriage has been a concept that far predates Judaism and VASTLY predates Christianity. The vast majority of marriages in the world are non-Judaic. The government version of "marriage" has little to do with the religious version of marriage. You can have one without the other and as Catholics know this is fairly common.

You do know that Christians use both the Old testament and the New to refine themselves with. Although Christianity did not really exist until 300 years after Christ, it's principles and precepts did and that is what a Christian strives to maintain in their lifestyle. That means that marriage, as instigated by God between Adam and Eve , is a ceremony that dates back thousands of years before Christ, but is a fundamental principle of Christianity. It is therefore a Christian Ceremony performed by Christians.

 

[Serenity7855]

It is the Mormons who refuse to do this.
They insist on both having special tax laws while also insisting on the right to special access to the Supreme Court.
That's the problem.
Religious people who want it both ways. They want special tax status, but they don't want the rules that come along with getting that special tax status.
Tom

The Mormon church have no money of their own. It all belongs to their members. If I were a member I would like to think that the charities that they support get as much of my money as they can. They think the same, which is why they maximise what they have. All legally and ethically, I might add. But that is the secular part of the organisation. Marriage is the spiritual side, the doctrinal side, the religion, however, without the administration no church could exist. You are mixing their beliefs with their civil responsibilities. A bit like mixing religion and politics, not heard of in my society.