Are LDS people that support gay marriage

[NorCal Cat]

sustaining the first presidency, and the twelve apostles? I am serious. If we vote to sustain them in this capacity, doesn't that include following their counsel on an issue they obviously feel is very important?

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by NorCal Cat

sustaining the first presidency, and the twelve apostles? I am serious. If we vote to sustain them in this capacity, doesn't that include following their counsel on an issue they obviously feel is very important?

Wow....I've never thought of it that way before. Thanks for coming back.

[NorCal Cat]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

Wow....I've never thought of it that way before. Thanks for coming back.

Anyone have any serious responses?

Don't get too excited. I doubt I will be back for long. It was actually quite nice not reading the bullshit here for a while.

[danimal]

Originally Posted by NorCal Cat

sustaining the first presidency, and the twelve apostles? I am serious. If we vote to sustain them in this capacity, doesn't that include following their counsel on an issue they obviously feel is very important?

Your post has the usual grammatical markers of a legitimate question yet none of the substance.

[CardiacCoug]

Originally Posted by NorCal Cat

sustaining the first presidency, and the twelve apostles? I am serious. If we vote to sustain them in this capacity, doesn't that include following their counsel on an issue they obviously feel is very important?

The Church has not added any questions concerning gay marriage to the temple recommend questions. They could start asking about it immediately if they considered it a core doctrine of the Church. Thus, I must conclude that they do not require a member to support gay marriage bans in order to remain a member of the Church in good standing.

This is a political question. You don't have to support a legal ban on abortion, either, as far as I know. Why don't they add this to the temple recommend questions? Probably because they respect the right of the individual member to disagree with Church leadership on this issue.

[NorCal Cat]

Originally Posted by danimal

Your post has the usual grammatical markers of a legitimate question yet none of the substance.

Why don't you just answer the question?

[NorCal Cat]

Originally Posted by CardiacCoug

The Church has not added any questions concerning gay marriage to the temple recommend questions. They could start asking about it immediately if they considered it a core doctrine of the Church. Thus, I must conclude that they do not require a member to support gay marriage bans in order to remain a member of the Church in good standing.

This is a political question. You don't have to support a legal ban on abortion, either, as far as I know. Why don't they add this to the temple recommend questions? Probably because they respect the right of the individual member to disagree with Church leadership on this issue.

Wrong, the brethren have clearly stated this is not a political issue, but a moral issue.

Does anyone honestly think the First Pres, and the Quorum of the Twelve have NOT prayed about this issue, and what they should tell the members? Obviously they have, and their directions are clear. Therefore, how can anyone who claims to sustain these men as prophets, be in favor of gay marriage? It makes no sense.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by NorCal Cat

Wrong, the brethren have clearly stated this is not a political issue, but a moral issue.

Does anyone honestly think the First Pres, and the Quorum of the Twelve have NOT prayed about this issue, and what they should tell the members? Obviously they have, and their directions are clear. Therefore, how can anyone who claims to sustain these men as prophets, be in favor of gay marriage? It makes no sense.

I don't know what they've done about it. However, I am straight and will forever seek heterosexual companionship.

What goes on in California is of little concern of mine. If gays wish to be miserable like straights, why not let them.

[Levin]

Originally Posted by NorCal Cat

Wrong, the brethren have clearly stated this is not a political issue, but a moral issue.

Does anyone honestly think the First Pres, and the Quorum of the Twelve have NOT prayed about this issue, and what they should tell the members? Obviously they have, and their directions are clear. Therefore, how can anyone who claims to sustain these men as prophets, be in favor of gay marriage? It makes no sense.

I don't think you know what it means to "be in favor of gay marriage." Many people may oppose gay marriage on a religious level -- they think God does not condone it -- but that in our pluralistic, democratic society, gay marriage should be respected as a civil right.

It is the same with abortion: many believe God does not condone it -- even forbids it -- but that in our democratic, free society, it is not the place of the State to forbid it and strip a woman of her agency in that regard, no matter the choices she made that resulted in her pregnancy.

BTW, I fully intend to have light-hearted moments in my next Sacrament meeting talk. Do I sustain the Brethren there?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Archaea

What goes on in California is of little concern of mine. If gays wish to be miserable like straights, why not let them.

That's not inspiring either.