Mormon Church To US Supreme Court: Ban Gay Marriage

[Serenity7855]

Great leaders who are poor spellers realize that they're poor spellers, and part of what makes them great leaders is that they don't attempt to critique the writing of others who are better at it than they.

Neither have I

I don't have such a problem. Just pointing out the rampant hypocrisy. I'm here to help. ;-)

A bit rich.

What, exactly, are you "defending?" Because it ain't homosexuals or homosexual marriage.

The word of God

Might I suggest, then, that you get about those "better things," because, thus far, provocation is about all you've accomplished here.

I have retaliated against your insults

So, which is it? Are you fer it, or agin it? According to your posts here, you're talking out both sides of your mouth.

As I have clearly stated, I have no axe to grind with homosexuals. You would have thought that you might of known that considering how many times I have said it.

See above. You referred to #478: "I don't have a problem with homosexuals..." yet, here, you obviously have some kind of problem with them.

Not at all, I was just responding to your poorly thought out remark.

What "envelope?" They love, they want to be loved, they express that love, just like everyone else.

And you have concluded that that makes one normal. Understandable

I object to your use of the term "educated" in this context.

You love the insults don't you. But that is not provocative is it.

In what way does "abuse" = "unconditional love???" Abuse and love are patently incompatible. This rot is precisely why I object to your use of the term "educated" above.

To be frank, you do not have the capacity to understand that.

Uh huh. Prove that I have not. This is just more of your narrow, bigoted perspective. I disagree with you, therefore, I must not be a real Christian. You've managed to stuff a whole shoe store in your mouth here.

It is all to apparent by the level of hostility in your post when you are proven wrong.

 

[Ingledsva]

...

The Devil's Misfits: The True Face of Homosexuality - My Testimony
Jay Hudson.a former homosexual, and now a born-again, Spirit-filled preacher of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, has a God-ordained Call to expose the true face of homosexuality. He is anointed to operate in the Spiritual Gifts of Prophecy, Word of Knowledge, Healing and Exhortation. He is passionate to reach out to those individuals who are desiring to depart from the homosexual lifestyle; while he also desires to encourage and educate parents and siblings who have a loved one who is currently living in the gay or lesbian lifestyle. He offers sound biblical advice to loved ones, as well as, sharing with Church Leaders, on the proper manner in which to ready the Church, for ministering to those homosexuals who are exiting out of the lifestyle.
...

And I actually know a real Christian Gay man, - that let his congregation "pray the gay out" of him!

He married and had two children.

At which point he could no longer live the lie.

And the result of the church interfering with who he actually was?

Divorce, exclusion from his congregation, an angry wife whom won't let him see his children, and of course his children growing up without their father.

It is truly stupid to try and change someone's sexual orientation.

If your Jay Hudson above is real, - he is probably headed at some point for the same realization as my friend, or is actually having gay sex on the side, like other preachers, or was actually Bi - allowing him to comfortably live in the heterosexual lifestyle.

*

 

[Aquitaine]

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.

Don't Mormons practice one-sided polygamy? Who're they to talk about "traditional marriage".

 

[Serenity7855]

Substitutionary atonement is neither the only interpretation, nor is it the best.

What a croc. Jesus Christ did not die whilst taking on the sins of mankind. He should have considering the suffering that he had to endure. He atoned for our sins in the Garden of Gethsemane whilst the disciples slept'. It was there that he bled from every pore in his body. You really astound me with your poor knowledge of the Plan of Salvation.

And that refutes my point ... how, again? The ones who are lost are, in general, the ones who are shunned by "polite society."

It does not refute your point it shows that your point is a very small part of Christianity.

The problem here is that you have no idea what I do or do not know. Of course it encompasses a great deal more, but we're dealing with the specifics of a group that has been systemically oppressed. My statements are cogent to that context.

You may be dealing with the specifics, however, the atonement and resurrection are two extremely important events to me. So when you try your trickery on me to discredit by using the Mission of Jesus Christ then I find that disconcerting, to say the least.

So, why don't you forgive the supposed "sin" of homosexuals, if you're a follower of Jesus?

Me, Forgive? In order to forgive I would first have to judge. The commandments forbids us to judge. That is a responsibility that only God and His son, Jesus Christ, can do. Didn't you know that?

Yet you imply that all women want what your wife wanted.

No, you assume. I implied nothing.

yeah, it really is. You said that in your day, women were treated like gold; that they didn't have to work outside the home and could just raise the kids, which was the most honorable thing they could do. That statement implies that women want to do those things. It also implies that any other course of action is "less honorable." IOW, you're fashioning a gilt chain for them that most don't want to be tied down to.

and for the third time, I said "Most women were treated as gold dust, precious and with great value." Did you notice that there was no mention of my wife and that I referred to Gold Dust and not Gold.

I am not going to defend the rest as it is not what I said.

 

[Serenity7855]

Don't Mormons practice one-sided polygamy? Who're they to talk about "traditional marriage".

No

 

[Serenity7855]

Shadow Wolf

Public schools have no right teaching religious dogma. That homosexuality is normal and perfectly fine is a scientific fact. It's not even an issue of morality, other than that everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, religion, sex, gender, ethnicity, and so on deserve to be treated with respect, dignity, and should be entitled to the same rights as everyone else in society.

Tell me, what human rights do homosexuals not enjoy? Gay people have exactly the same rights as anybody else, they always have done.. They just used it as an excuse to put our governments under pressure. Everyone that lives and breath has human rights.

Can you just imagine how much worse our society would be if morality was not taught in schools. The first to be shot and abused would be the teachers, followed by the parents and then anyone in authority. You got it all worked out, haven't you?.

It's disgusting that you would want your children to believe someone is an abnormal sinner who doesn't deserve basic human rights.

That is not what he said.

Public schools have equal rights to teach religion as they do teaching human biology dogma. To make a distinction would victimize Christians and as fair and just people we wouldn't want to do that, would we?. There are 2.2 billion of us with only a relatively small handful of gays. Why is it that the majority get to have their sexuality taught in schools but the majority are being surprised by bigots and unscrupulous activists. There is a very good answer to that which can be found in the sexual orientation of many in our government, the media and places of authority. A handful they may be but they are very organised..

That homosexuality is normal and perfectly fine is a scientific fact

.

Maybe you could give us a link to a published paper by a scientist that confirms your assertion. I have yet to see one, so it will be interesting to read. If you cannot then your answer is, of course, anecdotal.

It's not even an issue of morality, other than that everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, religion, sex, gender, ethnicity, and so on deserve to be treated with respect, dignity, and should be entitled to the same rights as everyone else in society.

Homosexuals are.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

and for the third time, I said "Most women were treated as gold dust, precious and with great value."

And for how many ever time, women back then weren't treated as gold dust or with great value. Hell, my grandmother endured an abusive relationship because that is what was expected of her as a woman. My grandmother wasn't afforded the opportunities her daughter was, and my mom wasn't afforded the opportunities that I am.

In order to forgive I would first have to judge.

Really, you can't see the forest for the trees or smell the **** on your knees.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

what human rights do homosexuals not enjoy?

Up until recently, they couldn't get married. They had next-of-kin issues. Many places even denied them adoption and hospital visitation.

Gay people have exactly the same rights as anybody else, they always have done..

They haven't always had the same rights. They haven't even been able to get married in all 50 states for a year yet.

Everyone that lives and breath has human rights.

Oh bull! Tell that to millions of people who still live as slaves!

Maybe you could give us a link to a published paper by a scientist that confirms your assertion. I have yet to see one, so it will be interesting to read. If you cannot then your answer is, of course, anecdotal.

If you missed it, it's not my fault. I posted a ton of links giving a ton of research. And I'm not the only one who has been posting them.

Homosexuals are.

Many are beated, harassed, and some are even killed. I know one guy whose car windows were busted in. Just because he's gay. Another poster doesn't want his kids to learn that homosexuals are normal. What prompted that post was that a member said he doesn't want schools teaching his kids that homosexuals are normal. And when you teach someone isn't normal, it puts a target on them.

 

[The Mormonator]

Don't Mormons practice one-sided polygamy? Who're they to talk about "traditional marriage".

You are a bit rusty on your facts. Mormons abolished polygamy over 120 years ago. You are thinking of fundamentalist groups that have been excommunicated from our Church.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I asked you to stop trying to mislead and distract with this red herring.

Just raising a fist and shouting 'red herring' does not actually make it so.

You are, again, trying to paint the LDS Church’s constitutional right to petition the government as an effort to establish religious laws or a theocracy.

No, I paint, and rightly so, the LDS or any church's wishes of government mandated religious law against same-sex marriage as unconstitutional. As has already been established in court.

I never said that there was no “legal” difference between people advocating interracial or “same-sex marriage”. What I said was that there was a “fundamental” difference between the two.

There isn't. Also already been established in court.

To the religious, something being established as the Word of God is more important than someone’s personal opinion.

Good thing civil marriage isn't a matter of religious people's opinions on what the 'word of god' is.

Interracial marriage is not condemned in the scriptures,

A modern view of the scripture, yet it was considered to be condemned by the scriptures as Christians were opposing interracial marriage. And it doesn't matter, really. Their motivations are still religious, and that's still not a good enough argument for mandate and civil law.

Not wanting “marriage” and “family” to be redefined is not “bigotry”.

Religious people do not control the definition of 'marriage' and 'family.'

In regards to the issue of “same-sex marriage” the violations of the First Amendment did not begin with the Supreme Court’s decision. These violations have been occurring on a State level for years.

Except they aren't and they haven't.

There has been much discrimination against those who refuse to redefine “family” and “marriage” over the years.

This red herring about people of color still does not strengthen your position.

This continuous calling it a red herring to dismiss it, despite it being clearly a legal precedent and relevant to modern law doesn't actually strengthen yours.

They do not have to provide any evidence and your insistence that they need to is a sham.

Yes, they do. For the same reason they must provide evidence that POC are insufficient parents. Because, guess what? It's illegal to refuse to place in a POC home even if your personal belief is that different races or biracial couples aren't fit parents. The same is true of homosexual parents.

I never mentioned “gender roles”. What a mentioned were the differences in parenting had by males and females. The sexes are different. They manage situations differently. They react differently. Children should learn to know those differences. I believe there would be less “gender confusion” in this world if people revered those differences rather than supplant them.

What you believe is irrelevant, the evidence shows otherwise.

there are many religion owned community centers in the U.S. which provide a lot of charitable services.

So what? I'm talking about a community center sponsored by community taxes only, not religious services. This is equivalent to government.

Second, homosexuals do not “own” Catholic Churches.

And catholic churches don't own marriage or family. Besides, I'm not talking about a church, I'm talking about a courtroom. No gods necessary to do any civil service there including marriage ceremonies.

Third, if you believe that you “own” a community center because you pay taxes and can therefore dictate what is done in one, then you should also believe that I “own” public schools and have the right to dictate what they teach?

Sure, so long as there is no state sponsored religion, which is unconstitutional.


I really tire of this. I don't have the time or energy to go over the same points. Like it or not, gay marriage and gay adoption is and will remain legal and a protected right. LDS, Catholic, and anyone else stuck in the past will just have to deal with it. I don't particularly care if they're mad, any more than I care if skinheads are mad that POC continue to enjoy the same rights they do.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You are a bit rusty on your facts. Mormons abolished polygamy over 120 years ago. You are thinking of fundamentalist groups that have been excommunicated from our Church.

It still add merit to the point that there is no such thing as a "traditional marriage." Not in form, type, reason, those involved, nothing.

 

[sojourner]

Yes, of course it is if you are blinker visioned.

Welcome to your blinders...

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Sadly, I know too many who are like that (the religious guy with the tie, that is). The guy who called me "demonically possessed" in high school when I left Christianity and converted to neo-Paganism, boy you should hear/read his FB rants. The way he talks, you'd think there was a torches-and-pitch forks mob chasing after him for denouncing homosexuals.

 

[sojourner]

Neither have I

You critiqued mine...

The word of God

You have failed to do that, because you have not produced one defensible, exegetical argument for your position.

I have retaliated against your insults

My "insults" aren't the point of this thread.

have clearly stated, I have no axe to grind with homosexuals. You would have thought that you might of known that considering how many times I have said it.

But they wear pink, talk funny, are disingenuous, outside the envelope, and misfits. I'd say that constitutes you "having a problem" with them.

You love the insults don't you. But that is not provocative is it.

It's not an insult. It's an observation. You have yet to produce anything approaching education on either biblical exegesis or the homosexual psyche. Therefore, I object to your use of that term. It's OK. If you just want to spout baseless opinion, that's OK. but don't call baseless opinion "educated." Because it's not.

To be frank, you do not have the capacity to understand that.

Precisely because I don't have the capacity to misapply terms.

It is all to apparent by the level of hostility in your post when you are proven wrong.

Huh. Even Jesus beat the crap out of the moneychangers and ruined their stock-in-trade, called the religious authorities all kinds of unsavory names, and damned Chorazin and Bethsaida. And he was full of the Spirit. Sounds pretty hostile to me...

 

[sojourner]

What a croc. Jesus Christ did not die whilst taking on the sins of mankind. He should have considering the suffering that he had to endure. He atoned for our sins in the Garden of Gethsemane whilst the disciples slept'. It was there that he bled from every pore in his body. You really astound me with your poor knowledge of the Plan of Salvation.

You understand that your "Plan of Salvation" is not the official stance of Xy? I understand it just fine. I reject it as poor theology.

It does not refute your point it shows that your point is a very small part of Christianity.

How is hospitality, inclusion, love and breaking down barriers considered "a very small part of Xy?" It's All. Jesus. Talked. About.

You may be dealing with the specifics, however, the atonement and resurrection are two extremely important events to me. So when you try your trickery on me to discredit by using the Mission of Jesus Christ then I find that disconcerting, to say the least.

To you. To. YOU. Perhaps not to everyone. I can't help it if you can't find reconciliation and resurrection in the act of setting free. But your lack of theological depth doesn't make me stupid.

Me, Forgive? In order to forgive I would first have to judge. The commandments forbids us to judge. That is a responsibility that only God and His son, Jesus Christ, can do. Didn't you know that?

You already have judged. The minute you said homosexuals are misfits and "outside the envelope" of what's "normal." You have done what is forbidden. You have usurped God's responsibility.

No, you assume. I implied nothing.

You implied plenty.

and for the third time, I said "Most women were treated as gold dust, precious and with great value." Did you notice that there was no mention of my wife and that I referred to Gold Dust and not Gold.

And for the last time, I opined that by equating women with gold dust, you objectify them and make them possessions instead of human beings in their own right. You're picking nits. My point stands.

 

[Ingledsva]

Don't Mormons practice one-sided polygamy? Who're they to talk about "traditional marriage".

Oh - the perfect spot to put this in again -

 

[Serenity7855]

You critiqued mine...

No I didn't

You have failed to do that, because you have not produced one defensible, exegetical argument for your position.

You are bearing false witness or you have not understood my post. I have made my interpretation clear and precise.May I suggest that you take a look again.
My "insults" aren't the point of this thread.

But they wear pink, talk funny, are disingenuous, outside the envelope, and misfits. I'd say that constitutes you "having a problem" with them.

I have merely listed their anomalies, i have not made any judgement. You asked what makes them misfits and this is the answer.

Why do you find it necessary to contradict me i my beliefs. Why would I say that i have no problems with gays if I do. What would be my motive to do that? If I had issues with them then I would say that. I don't know you or care what you think of me so why should i shroud the truth.

It's not an insult. It's an observation.

Whatever

You have yet to produce anything approaching education on either biblical exegesis or the homosexual psyche.

When considering your lack of knowledge over Christianity the your slur here comes as no surprise, You wouldn't recognise it if you saw it because if you were not ignorant to it the you wouldn't write such nonsensical rubbish.

Therefore, I object to your use of that term.

In order for your opinion to effect me in anyway I would first have to care what you think, sadly I don't.

It's OK. If you just want to spout baseless opinion, that's OK. but don't call baseless opinion "educated." Because it's not.

I didn't, you did during one of your hostile denigrations

Huh. Even Jesus beat the crap out of the moneychangers and ruined their stock-in-trade, called the religious authorities all kinds of unsavory names, and damned Chorazin and Bethsaida. And he was full of the Spirit. Sounds pretty hostile to me...

I think that you will find that was righteous indignation.

So, what unsavory names did He call the authorities and what if he did, they crucified Him.

 

[Serenity7855]

You understand that your "Plan of Salvation" is not the official stance of Xy? I understand it just fine. I reject it as poor theology.

Yes, I bet it is easy for you to reject the perfect Plan of Salvation as poor theology.

How is hospitality, inclusion, love and breaking down barriers considered "a very small part of Xy?" It's All. Jesus. Talked. About.

I have no idea what Xy is, but you would know that as you have written it to stupefy me. You are not a very nice person are you?

To you. To. YOU. Perhaps not to everyone. I can't help it if you can't find reconciliation and resurrection in the act of setting free. But your lack of theological depth doesn't make me stupid.

No, my superior knowledge of Christianity makes you look stupied.

You already have judged. The minute you said homosexuals are misfits and "outside the envelope" of what's "normal." You have done what is forbidden. You have usurped God's responsibility.

Do you know the difference between a judgement and a fact. Homosexuals are infact misfits and outside of the envelope of what is normal. I have made no judgment there, it is a fact. You just keep on pitching and I will keep on knocking them out of the ball park.

You implied plenty.

That is what you percieve it is not reality

And for the last time, I opined that by equating women with gold dust, you objectify them and make them possessions instead of human beings in their own right. You're picking nits. My point stands.

When you say "opined" do you mean "conjecture" or simply that you just "said" it. Damn thesaurus.

You misrepresent me by making false assertions without any evidentiary corroboration. You seem to think that if you say it then it is right, you are wrong. You want to portray me as someone who has the lack of integrity and probity as to treat a woman in any other manner then respectful geniality and conviviality in your fumbling attempt to discredit me, thus weakening my position here. It is clandestine trickery and shameless sophistry.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Your insults are a part of this thread. You have called homosexuality a mental disorder, which is not supported by science. You got confused over the pronoun of she. You claimed homosexuals want to attack the church despite the fact many homosexuals are Christian, you claim their is a guilt and stink over homosexuality even though neither exists. You even so boldly proclaimed that those who don't follow your view of Christianity are not Christians.

 

[Peter Hans]

Can you kind folks show me where I can find donate?