Intervention show--gay LDS guy

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by SoCalCoug

"Hate the sin, love the sinner"

A lot of people forget that last part.

Reminds me of the saying that people who are brutally honest love the brutality rather than the honesty. I think it is a difficult issue though. It is hard to assimilate a person into fellowship who is openly gay for the same reason it is hard to assimilate someone who is out in the open about their belief that Joseph was not a prophet. Sine qua non. At some point we lose our identity.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by splitbamboo

I don't believe we as a people teach hate.

We don't teach hate. But we tolerate an amazing number of homophobic comments. Things that have nothing to do with the actual sin, but are very derogatory towards the person. That's not right. We would never (I hope) tolerate some of the same comments applied to other races.

And spare the "a black person doesn't choose to be black" comments. We're talking about same-sex attraction here, not the homosexual act; why in the hell would anyone choose this? God saddled them with a huge challenge in life; we shouldn't add to their difficulties.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

Reminds me of the saying that people who are brutally honest love the brutality rather than the honesty. I think it is a difficult issue though. It is hard to assimilate a person into fellowship who is openly gay for the same reason it is hard to assimilate someone who is out in the open about their belief that Joseph was not a prophet. Sine qua non. At some point we lose our identity.

If they're claiming that homosexual acts are OK, then no, we don't have an obligation to assimilate. If they're "openly gay" (whatever that means) but not acting out (or trying to change the church's stance on homosexuality), we have every obligation to welcome them.

I think most people would. The problem I see is the homophobic comments more than anything else. I think most Mormons are good people and do their best to be kind to others. I just don't think they realize how hurtful and insensitive some comments can be.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

If they're claiming that homosexual acts are OK, then no, we don't have an obligation to assimilate. If they're "openly gay" (whatever that means) but not acting out (or trying to change the church's stance on homosexuality), we have every obligation to welcome them.

I think most people would. The problem I see is the homophobic comments more than anything else. I think most Mormons are good people and do their best to be kind to others. I just don't think they realize how hurtful and insensitive some comments can be.

I agree with that first paragraph. When I say openly gay, I guess I mean someone who has intimate relations with other men but doesn't view it as wrong, and yet wishes to remain in the fellowship of the church. As I type that I realize that such a person probably doesn't exist. SoCal is right, those people who are embracing their gayness have by and large already discarded the church.

I will say too, that I have rarely in my life been aware of much talk at all about homosexuality at church or been aware of homosexuals being at church who might be offended. Obviously some of you have had different experiences than I have; I don't discount them.

[MikeWaters]

If you had a gay relative who was out of the closet, would you encourage him to attend church, even if he had no intention of giving up sexual relationships with the same sex?

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

If you had a gay relative who was out of the closet, would you encourage him to attend church, even if he had no intention of giving up sexual relationships with the same sex?

This is the crux of the difficulty. I suppose I would, but could I really expect other members to accept him? I don't know. If I had a brother who I knew was going to be half drunk every Sunday morning would I encourage him to come to church? I suppose, but again, do I expect people to tip toe around the issue that he is half drunk every week?

I tend to think that if people aren't welcome at church then where are they welcome. On the other hand we do stand for certain things and if we can't teach them at church for fear of offense, then where?

[splitbamboo]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

If you had a gay relative who was out of the closet, would you encourage him to attend church, even if he had no intention of giving up sexual relationships with the same sex?

Why not? We run a hospital, not a country club. We're all sick.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

This is the crux of the difficulty. I suppose I would, but could I really expect other members to accept him? I don't know. If I had a brother who I knew was going to be half drunk every Sunday morning would I encourage him to come to church? I suppose, but again, do I expect people to tip toe around the issue that he is half drunk every week?

I tend to think that if people aren't welcome at church then where are they welcome. On the other hand we do stand for certain things and if we can't teach them at church for fear of offense, then where?

It is quite different to be under the influence than it is to be gay.

Terrible analogy.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

It is quite different to be under the influence than it is to be gay.

Terrible analogy.

Well there really is no good analogy. But I only make it in the limited sense that in each case you have a person who is unapologetically living contrary to the teachings of the church. Again, in the case of one who is embracing his gayness rather than struggling not to act on it. It raises the question of at what level to we accept those who refuse to conform. At some level, we all refuse to conform. But we also all recognize that certain non conformance is going to place us outside of the group.

What do you tell your brother to do? Should people in his ward be worried that he will be offended at a teaching that gay sex is wrong? I'm not saying I know the answer. I am almost always on the side of the big tent, but there is a line somewhere even if I can't articulate where it is.

[splitbamboo]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

It is quite different to be under the influence than it is to be gay.

Terrible analogy.

I know I'm stupid to respond to this, but here goes.

They both constitute sin. If you don't believe that, you don't believe in modern prophets. And both sins can be recognizable and things we don't want our children or neighbors to emulate so we will most likely find it hard to deal with.

But both can also be used for teaching and that is good. And maybe, by being in Church, the offender (like each of us) will come to figure out how he can cope/change/whatever. And maybe we'll become more tolerant as well.

Sounds like a good thing and a reasonable analogy in my opinion...