Mormons in Gay Pride Parade

[Apex]

Utah gay pride parade draws hundreds of Mormon participants – CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs

A gay pride parade in Mormon-heavy Salt Lake City drew thousands of participants, including a few hundred Mormons, whose church has been criticized by gay rights activists for its activism against same-sex marriage.

The Mormon contingent for Sunday's parade wasn’t made up of gay members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but rather straight Mormons who want to show support for gay and lesbians, according to CNN affiliate KSTU-TV in Salt Lake City.

It is nice to see more of this stuff happening now.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Do you think this may be related to the backlash that occurred when the LDS provided financial backing for Prop 8 in California?

And do you foresee the CoJCoLDS changing it's official position of gay marriage?

 

[Apex]

Do you think this may be related to the backlash that occurred when the LDS provided financial backing for Prop 8 in California?

Not sure. It probably helped to make these kinds of things more public than anything else. Although, IMO, the Prop 8 backlash did more harm to the Gay rights community than good.

And do you foresee the CoJCoLDS changing it's official position of gay marriage?

Probably not. What I hope for is that they just adopt a live/let live policy. They may not agree with it, but they will not stand in its way either.

 

[tumbleweed41]

As it is, I am glad to see LDS members marching in support.

 

[Alceste]

Do you think this may be related to the backlash that occurred when the LDS provided financial backing for Prop 8 in California?

And do you foresee the CoJCoLDS changing it's official position of gay marriage?

There is historical precedent for the LDS church radically changing their views on marriage due to popular pressure, is there not? They weren't always a "marriage = one man + one woman" church.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Utah gay pride parade draws hundreds of Mormon participants – CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs



It is nice to see more of this stuff happening now.

What message do you think these Mormons are trying to send, and do you think it goes against LDS Church teachings?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

As it is, I am glad to see LDS members marching in support.

So am I. It puzzles me why they'd stay members of the LDS Church while also being so supportive of homosexuality that they'd march in a Gay Pride parade, but I realized quite a while ago that I'd rather people be inconsistent and kind than consistent and cruel.

 

[Katzpur]

So am I. It puzzles me why they'd stay members of the LDS Church while also being so supportive of homosexuality that they'd march in a Gay Pride parade, but I realized quite a while ago that I'd rather people be inconsistent and kind than consistent and cruel.

I'm kind of surprised to hear you say this; I'd have thought that having talked to me and other Mormons like me for so many years, you'd have a better understanding of us than you apparently do. For starters, I think you may have missed the point of the LDS participation in the parade. If you were to ask each of the 300 participants who marched why they did, you may very well get a whole variety of different reasons. I didn't march because I wasn't even aware that it was going to happen (I knew about the parade, but not about any LDS people participating). Had I marched, it would have been as a statement that I don't believe we as Americans have the right to impose our own moral standards on society. In other words, while I believe that homosexual intimacy is sinful, I believe it is up to God -- not me -- to punish the sinner. And we are attempting to punish people when we deny them their civil rights for not conforming to our own ideas of what's right in God's eyes and what's wrong. It's not about "supporting homosexuality." It's about treating people in a Christlike way and it's about the separation of church and state.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'm kind of surprised to hear you say this; I'd have thought that having talked to me and other Mormons like me for so many years, you'd have a better understanding of us than you apparently do. For starters, I think you may have missed the point of the LDS participation in the parade. If you were to ask each of the 300 participants who marched why they did, you may very well get a whole variety of different reasons. I didn't march because I wasn't even aware that it was going to happen (I knew about the parade, but not about any LDS people participating). Had I marched, it would have been as a statement that I don't believe we as Americans have the right to impose our own moral standards on society. In other words, while I believe that homosexual intimacy is sinful, I believe it is up to God -- not me -- to punish the sinner. And we are attempting to punish people when we deny them their civil rights for not conforming to our own ideas of what's right in God's eyes and what's wrong. It's not about "supporting homosexuality." It's about treating people in a Christlike way and it's about the separation of church and state.

I think our disagreement is more with what marching in a Pride parade means. I think it's most definitely supporting of homosexuality.

At a bare minimum, I think it means supporting the idea that LGBT people should have pride in the orientation. That's the whole point of the event, in fact.

IMO, marching in a Gay Pride parade would be a very poor way to express a sentiment like "God might punish you for being gay, but I support your legal right to 'sin' if you choose." I think the message that every person watching the parade would take from a person's participation would be something like "it's okay to be gay."

If you were to march in a Pride parade, any bystander would take this as you standing up to be counted with those who support homosexuality and think that it's not a sin. If this doesn't match up with your views, then you'd create a false impression by participating, IMO.

 

[Katzpur]

I think our disagreement is more with what marching in a Pride parade means. I think it's most definitely supporting of homosexuality.

If the Church hadn't been as involved as it was in Prop 8, I might agree with you. I know there are Mormons like myself who are opposed to the Church getting involved in issues of this sort. To me, these 300 people were just trying to make a simple statement: "Not all of us are judging you as not deserving to have the same rights we have." If I'd marched (as I might very well have done had I known in advance about this group), that's all I'd have expected my presence to be conveying.

At a bare minimum, I think it means supporting the idea that LGBT people should have pride in the orientation. That's the whole point of the event, in fact.

Well, to me, the whole issue of "pride" when it comes to sexual orientation is pretty laughable. IMO, it's ridiculous for gays to argue that they were "born that way" and at the same time say it's something they're proud of. That's like being proud to be born male, with curly red hair and blue eyes. I believe gays were "born that way" but to me, pride is something we should have in our accomplishments, not in something we have no control over.

[IMO, marching in a Gay Pride parade would be a very poor way to express a sentiment like "God might punish you for being gay, but I support your legal right to 'sin' if you choose."

Is this honestly what you think I was trying to say?

If you were to march in a Pride parade, any bystander would take this as you standing up to be counted with those who support homosexuality and think that it's not a sin. If this doesn't match up with your views, then you'd create a false impression by participating, IMO.

Well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then. It would be interesting to hear from some of the 300 people who participated to see how they really feel and what they were really trying to convey by their participation. As it is, we simply have two contradictory opinions, neither of which can be proven.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If the Church hadn't been as involved as it was in Prop 8, I might agree with you.

I'm not sure how Prop 8 is relevant here.

I know there are Mormons like myself who are opposed to the Church getting involved in issues of this sort. To me, these 300 people were just trying to make a simple statement: "Not all of us are judging you as not deserving to have the same rights we have." If I'd marched (as I might very well have done had I known in advance about this group), that's all I'd have expected my presence to be conveying.

I think that's a bit more nuanced than the straightforward message that a person's presence would suggest to me: simply "we support you" (i.e. LGBT people) or "we support this" (i.e. homosexuality/bisexuality/etc.).

Well, to me, the whole issue of "pride" when it comes to sexual orientation is pretty laughable. IMO, it's ridiculous for gays to argue that they were "born that way" and at the same time say it's something they're proud of. That's like being proud to be born male, with curly red hair and blue eyes. I believe gays were "born that way" but to me, pride is something we should have in our accomplishments, not in something we have no control over.

Like cultural heritage?

It doesn't seem that different from a St. Patrick's Day parade in that respect, IMO.

Is this honestly what you think I was trying to say?

I'm not sure that this would be the message you'd be trying to communicate by your presence, but I think it's a fair re-phrasing of what you said in your post earlier.

Well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then. It would be interesting to hear from some of the 300 people who participated to see how they really feel and what they were really trying to convey by their participation. As it is, we simply have two contradictory opinions, neither of which can be proven.

I think that the opinion of the people seeing the parade would be more relevant to how their participation is perceived. To me, it suggests that they're supportive of homosexuality.

And I don't think it's so much that we have contradictory opinions as we both occupy different points on a spectrum of interpretations, and I think it's a spectrum that's reasonably foreseeable. I think that it would be reasonable for the marchers to realize that many people seeing them would interpret their act as support for homosexuality, so IMO, they likely participated knowing that they would create this impression, whether or not it was their specific motivation.

 

[idea]

There is historical precedent for the LDS church radically changing their views on marriage due to popular pressure, is there not? ...

it's the "ask and receive" doctrine - (not really LDS doctrine, just my take on it)

Luke 11:9 - 10
9 And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
10 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

There's a famous account of Joseph Smith arguing with God over who could see some of the original Book of Mormon Doctrine, Joseph kept asking until God changed and said "yes", then the documents were stolen etc. etc. God allows us to have what we ask for, but as Mother T would say "there are more tears shed over answered prayers, than unanswered ones" ... the "be careful what you ask for, because you just might get it" kind of thing.

The polygamy thing was taken away, but the principle still stands (It was still practiced in the old testament among the prophets, and Jesus was still born to "a handmaid" - Mary... We do not currently live it, but we see ourselves as currently living a lower law because we were unable to handle the higher law...

I think with gay marriage, the church does listen, and has gained a better understanding, people understand that homosexuality is something you can be born with, not just a choice etc. etc. and have more compassion now that they have more knowledge. I think more members now see it as one of those tests of faith in doing what we are asked to do, rather than a condemning attitude. sort of like Abraham being asked to kill his son Issac as a test... at least that is how I see it, as a test of faith.

 

[Katzpur]

I'm not sure how Prop 8 is relevant here.

Really? Seems like the LDS Church's stance on it was pretty relevant a while back, and everybody was coming down on Mormons for being hateful bigots who want to ruin gay people's lives.

I think that's a bit more nuanced than the straightforward message that a person's presence would suggest to me: simply "we support you" (i.e. LGBT people) or "we support this" (i.e. homosexuality/bisexuality/etc.).

I do support "them" in terms of their right to equality under the laws of the land. I don't personally believe homosexual intimacy is right, but I support people's rights to do what they want to do in privacy of their own homes. You're turning my "nuances" into something much more complicated than I ever intended they be.

Like cultural heritage?

It doesn't seem that different from a St. Patrick's Day parade in that respect, IMO.

Well, we have a St. Patrick's Day parade in Salt Lake City, too. If people are "proud" to be Irish, that's stupid, in my opinion, too.

I'm not sure that this would be the message you'd be trying to communicate by your presence, but I think it's a fair re-phrasing of what you said in your post earlier.

Wow. Well, I'm sorry you read it that way. I don't know if the sarcastic overtones were intentional or not, but they were kind of hurtful.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Really? Seems like the LDS Church's stance on it was pretty relevant a while back, and everybody was coming down on Mormons for being hateful bigots who want to ruin gay people's lives.

I meant that I don't see how it changes how we should interpret what a Mormon is intending to express when they participate in a Pride parade. I think "we support homosexuality" is always going to be built into it. If Prop 8 is relevant, I think it would be to make the message more like "my church doesn't support you, but I do."

I don't see how the fact of Prop 8 removes "we support you" from the message they communicate.

I do support "them" in terms of their right to equality under the laws of the land. I don't personally believe homosexual intimacy is right, but I support people's rights to do what they want to do in privacy of their own homes. You're turning my "nuances" into something much more complicated than I ever intended they be.

I think that any message more complicated than "we support homosexuality" or "we support gay people" is too complex to be communicated merely by participation in a Pride parade.

Well, we have a St. Patrick's Day parade in Salt Lake City, too. If people are "proud" to be Irish, that's stupid, in my opinion, too.

Really? it's cultural mythology. It's not really that different from religion when it comes right down to it. It's a matter of using stories to thread a common bond through a community.

Wow. Well, I'm sorry you read it that way. I don't know if the sarcastic overtones were intentional or not, but they were kind of hurtful.

Homosexuality isn't just an abstract concept for me - it has a very human face. I have many dear friends who are gay, lesbian and bisexual. When you say things like "while I believe that homosexual intimacy is sinful, I believe it is up to God -- not me -- to punish the sinner", you're speaking about real people, including many people who I care deeply about.

When you say that homosexuality is "sinful", you're speaking against the character of my friends and loved ones.

When you say that God will punish the "sinner", you're talking about the punishment (torment?) of my friends and loved ones... presumably at the hands of a god you think very highly of.

If my re-phrasing felt hurtful to you, it was only because it captured the hurt and anger that I felt reading your statement.

 

[brambleberry]

Good on them! It's nice to see some thoughtful and caring individuals participate in such a way. :yes: