Theology of marriage

[ERCougar]

For those that oppose Prop 8, are you rethinking your view of what eternal marriage is, i.e. does marriage in the eternities necessarily involve a man and a woman (I guess I have to include "at least" one of each)? Or do you think the Church may someday redefine/clarify what eternal marriage involves?

For me, the issue about Prop 8 involves the involvement of the church in politics but I get the sense from some that they feel like the Church's definition of marriage needs to change as well.

[Clark Addison]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

For those that oppose Prop 8, are you rethinking your view of what eternal marriage is, i.e. does marriage in the eternities necessarily involve a man and a woman (I guess I have to include "at least" one of each)? Or do you think the Church may someday redefine/clarify what eternal marriage involves?

For me, the issue about Prop 8 involves the involvement of the church in politics but I get the sense from some that they feel like the Church's definition of marriage needs to change as well.

For me, no, I'm not rethinking anything. My opposition to Prop 8 does not stem from a desire to make Gay Marriage part of the church's doctrine, but rather because civil marriage, to me, has little to do with Eternal Marriage. I don't expect the Church to change the definitions and requirements for a temple marriage, and don't have any desire for them to do so. Civil marriage has always encompassed a lot of things that would not be acceptable for a temple marriage, such as open marriages. I don't believe that open marriages should be accepted by the church, but I have no argument with people who want this for themselves, or at least no legal argument.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by Clark Addison

For me, no, I'm not rethinking anything. My opposition to Prop 8 does not stem from a desire to make Gay Marriage part of the church's doctrine, but rather because civil marriage, to me, has little to do with Eternal Marriage. I don't expect the Church to change the definitions and requirements for a temple marriage, and don't have any desire for them to do so. Civil marriage has always encompassed a lot of things that would not be acceptable for a temple marriage, such as open marriages. I don't believe that open marriages should be accepted by the church, but I have no argument with people who want this for themselves, or at least no legal argument.

That pretty much captures my feelings on the subject, other than I think that ideally, marriage (homosexual or heterosexual) shouldn't be sanctioned by governments at all, but should be a purely religious ceremony. But that's just semantics, I guess. I do suspect that there are a few who feel that marriage in the eternities is just a union of two people, regardless of gender. I'm not sure how you could be gay in the church and not want the church to change its definition of marriage.

[LA Ute]

Here's a question worth pondering: Let's say a man who was raised by two married gay parents joins the Church in 25 years. His parents are dead. He wants to do temple work for them. What does the Church say to him?

I don't pretend to know the answer. It's just a fascinating question.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by LA Ute

Here's a question worth pondering: Let's say a man who was raised by two married gay parents joins the Church in 25 years. His parents are dead. He wants to do temple work for them. What does the Church say to him?

I don't pretend to know the answer. It's just a fascinating question.

"Sorry, we don't do temple work for gays."

????

[cougjunkie]

Originally Posted by LA Ute

Here's a question worth pondering: Let's say a man who was raised by two married gay parents joins the Church in 25 years. His parents are dead. He wants to do temple work for them. What does the Church say to him?

I don't pretend to know the answer. It's just a fascinating question.

Not a chance in hell a man raised by gay men will be anything but gay, as well as a detriment to society.

Signed,

Cougarboard

[T Blue]

Originally Posted by LA Ute

Here's a question worth pondering: Let's say a man who was raised by two married gay parents joins the Church in 25 years. His parents are dead. He wants to do temple work for them. What does the Church say to him?

I don't pretend to know the answer. It's just a fascinating question.

Temple work for two married men? Two married women?

Fascinating question, exactly how?

God is no respecter of persons, if you have faith the LDS Church is true than you would know that he is not going to allow same sex marriage throughout the eternities.

Prop. 8 may lose in Ca, but it will not make the church change it's position no matter how many of you feel the church is wrong and should allow same sex marriages in the temple.

But hey you guys keep wishing upon your lucky stars that it will happen.....

[LA Ute]

Originally Posted by T Blue

Temple work for two married men? Two married women?

Fascinating question, exactly how?

God is no respecter of persons, if you have faith the LDS Church is true than you would know that he is not going to allow same sex marriage throughout the eternities.

Prop. 8 may lose in Ca, but it will not make the church change it's position no matter how many of you feel the church is wrong and should allow same sex marriages in the temple.

But hey you guys keep wishing upon your lucky stars that it will happen.....

I am up to my eyeballs in the "Yes On 8" campaign, so I am no supporter of same-sex marriage. I was just posing the question to put the subject in a real "Gospel context" and to provoke some serious discussion. Except for your post, I got nothing but wisecracks in response, which tells me that those who responded have no serious answer. The only credible answer is, "That will never happen."

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

For those that oppose Prop 8, are you rethinking your view of what eternal marriage is, i.e. does marriage in the eternities necessarily involve a man and a woman (I guess I have to include "at least" one of each)? Or do you think the Church may someday redefine/clarify what eternal marriage involves?

For me, the issue about Prop 8 involves the involvement of the church in politics but I get the sense from some that they feel like the Church's definition of marriage needs to change as well.

THE principled argument in support of Prop. 8 is, "I think homosexuality is a sin and God wants only men and women to marry." I disagree with it, but it's the only principled argument I can think of. That's all I would have put in the LDS press release, were I LDS jefe.

[ute4ever]

Originally Posted by LA Ute

Here's a question worth pondering: Let's say a man who was raised by two married gay parents joins the Church in 25 years. His parents are dead. He wants to do temple work for them. What does the Church say to him?

I don't pretend to know the answer. It's just a fascinating question.

When temple names are submitted, I've never known research to be done on the deceased's moral character before approval is given. I don't recall being asked whether my great-great grandfather was gay or straight. So why would a known deceased a homosexual be denied temple baptism and endowment?

I agree though that the sealing issue is a fascinating question. Christ said what ye seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven. However, modern prophets say the sealing is merely a promise, and a person must remain worthy until judgment day in order for that promise to be realized. So why not allow dead homosexual couples to be sealed? If their relationship is found unworthy on the day of judgment, so be it. Conversely, church leaders could essentially say "we are so confident that homosexual marriage will be deemed unworthy, that we're not even going to waste our time doing those sealings." And that statement would have to come from the mouth of the same church that allowed Adolph Hitler's temple work to be performed multiple times.