Let's stop beating around the bush

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by non sequitur

Let me give you a hypothetical:

Suppose there were a person with same sex attraction that was in love with another man but never physically acted on his attraction. Let's also suppose that he lived with the person he was in love with and that he made no secret to people in the ward that he was in love with his partner. How do you suppose his verbal expressions of love would go over in the ward?

Again I ask - isn't the Honor Code more stringent in it's rules than the LDS Church?

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by jay santos

Is this so hard to understand? The church is against homosexual sex. The church has in the past and will in the future jump in the political arena on morality issues.

You may not like the reason but that is the reason.

That's correct. Once again Mormonism is an enemy of science and societal progress, which, once again, will route Mormonism. Celtics v. Div. IA HS team. Dunk fest.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

That's correct. Once again Mormonism is an enemy of science and societal progress, which, once again, will route Mormonism. Celtics v. Div. IA HS team. Dunk fest.

Link?

[LA Ute]

And when the bill proposing them was in the California State Legislature, the Church said and did nothing. Draw your own conclusions.

The current debate in California is really over what "marriage" means, because registered domestic partners have all the rights of married people. That's what I find fascinating about this -- the entire bruising battle is over the meaning of a word: marriage. It not about whether same-sex couples can be together and enjoy all the benefits of marriage. That has been decided.

(Disclosure: I am part of the Prop 8 grass roots heirarchy, with responsibility for supervising the effort in 10 stakes. So I have a dog in this fight.)

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by LA Ute

And when the proposing them was in the California State Legislature, the Church said and did nothing. The current debate in California is really over what "marriage" means, because registered domestic partners have all the rights of married people. That's what I find fascinating about this -- the entire bruising battle is over the meaning of a word: marriage. It not about whether same-sex couples can be together and enjoy all the benefits of marriage.

(Disclosure: I am part of the Prop 8 grass roots heirarchy, with the effort in 10 stakes under my responsibility. So I have a dog in this fight.)

I feel like I've just seen a sasquatch. I can scarcely believe my eyes.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by LA Ute

And when the bill proposing them was in the California State Legislature, the Church said and did nothing. Draw your own conclusions.

The current debate in California is really over what "marriage" means, because registered domestic partners have all the rights of married people. That's what I find fascinating about this -- the entire bruising battle is over the meaning of a word: marriage. It not about whether same-sex couples can be together and enjoy all the benefits of marriage. That has been decided.

(Disclosure: I am part of the Prop 8 grass roots heirarchy, with responsibility for supervising the effort in 10 stakes. So I have a dog in this fight.)

Then it really is about a word. Good luck with your efforts.

[exUte]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I think this is pretty accurate. The church is anti-homosexuals.

They ask us to love homosexuals, but to hate everything about them that has to do with their desire for intimacy, love, and physical affection (even hugging and kissing are abhorred and punishable). In other words, the very thing that some would argues makes us human, they ask us to hate in homosexuals.

Of course, they don't say this outright. They just wink and try to get everyone on the same page.

Does God believe in what is stated in the Proclamation on the Family, marriage between man and woman is ordained of Him, or not?

Answer that simple question and you'll see why the Church just might be against homo marriage.

[LA Ute]

I am delighted to see you here - a guy who loves a good argument.

I think you make an enormous assumption when you suggest that "science and societal progress" favor same-sex marriage. Do you see that?

[smokymountainrain]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I think this is pretty accurate. The church is anti-homosexuals.

They ask us to love homosexuals, but to hate everything about them that has to do with their desire for intimacy, love, and physical affection (even hugging and kissing are abhorred and punishable). In other words, the very thing that some would argues makes us human, they ask us to hate in homosexuals.

Mike, you're an idiot. Can you show me where the church has asked us to "hate" anything about homosexuals?

Of course, you won't find anything - it's much easier to simply exaggerate the church's position and run your mouth.

[LA Ute]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

I feel like I've just seen a sasquatch. I can scarcely believe my eyes.

Hey, Dan, that works both ways. I kinda wondered where you had disappeared to as well! I also kinda forgot about this board. It seems a lot like the Ute board once was.