Gay Marriages/Parenting?

Great Debates
81

Phil wrote:

My father is a scientist and he believes that, too. I simply don’t know one way or the other–I’d have to devote a lot of study time to the issue before I could come to any definite conclusions.

I agree that religions shouldn’t take the place of the government. Yet government forbids and punishes murder, rape, robbery, prostitution, etc. I just think that we, as a society, should preserve the institution of marriage. You can vote the way you want, and you can elect the officials you want, as can I and every citizen. I’ll vote to preserve marriage as defined currently and against homosexual marriage becoming recognized as “normal,” because by my belief it will help preserve America from God’s wrath.

Just my opinion, yes, but my opinion matters just as much as yours does, and a billion people believing a falsehood doesn’t make that falsehood right.

82

I’m sorry to butt in folks. But I have a question for you, Snarkberry.

If (purely theoretically) you were to discover convincing evidence that your father and Polycarp are right, and decide that homosexuality is in part genetic in origin, how would that affect your relationship with God? You’ve said that you don’t want to believe that God would have made you in a certain way and then told you not to be that way. Have you given any thought to how you would resolve the issue should it ever arise?

Please disregard my prying if you don’t want to talk about it, but I think the issue of nature v. nurture is essential to any possible resolution of the OP.

-andros-

83

Andros: It wouldn’t really require that much of an attitude change. There is apparently a genetic basis for alcoholism too, but I don’t think God intended for anyone to become an alcoholic. I guess I would just consider it one of the weaknesses that I was to overcome as my test in this life.

84

And those are analogous to people in love being married because . . . ?

Allowing more people to marry is not going to destroy marriage. And, as I am married and you are not, I think my opinion carries somewhat more weight, although my vote does not.

If your invisible sky man hasn’t destroyed America yet, he isn’t about to.

Wow, that’s what I say about Christianity every single day.

“I love God! He’s so deliciously evil!” - Stewie Griffin, Family Guy

85

Phil wrote:

Have you read the link I gave to the Proclamation on the Family? It says that marriage is to be between a man and a woman, and that the destruction of traditional family values will bring upon us calamities foretold by prophets “both ancient and modern.”

YOu don’t have to heed the prophet’s warning, of course, but there are consequences for not doing so. As far as it goes for me, (as the bumper sticker says):

God said it.
I believe it.
That settles it.

This is simplistic, but I have a testimony that the prophet is a true prophet of God, so I for one will heed his warning against same-sex marriage. You can do as you please and vote as you please, of course.

P.S. I don’t think God is an “invisible sky man.” I believe He is an exalted, visible man with a tangible body of flesh and bones.

P.P.S. Yes, you are more knowledgeable about relationships than I am. The phrase, “Bully for you!” comes to mind. < g >.

86

Um, as previously stated, I give little heed to what the LDS church, or any other, has to say on much of anything. I am not a member and feel no need either to live by their precepts or to force complete strangers to do so.

Religious books say a lot of things. Most of them are quite likely false.

What, like no pudding after dinner or something? You know, Pat Robertson predicted that central Florida would be destroyed by fires and/or meteors because they let gays into Disney. Guess what? It never happened.

So you’re in favor of killing infants, then? You must be–God repeatedly has given orders to his followers to do so. He even did it himself a few times.

“I love God! He’s so deliciously evil!” - Stewie Griffin, Family Guy

87

Phil wrote:

I’m not trying to force anyone to live by LDS standards. I have repeatedly said that people are free to choose whether they will believe LDS doctrine or not.

Yeah, that “love thy neighbor” stuff really chaps my hide! How dare the Bible say something like that?

Guess what? Pat Robertson is not a prophet.

Personally, I don’t think I could kill an infant, even if God commanded me to. I would also have trouble living in a polygamous relationship, even if God told me to. But I do believe that God has reasons for what He does, and just because He hasn’t revealed all of them doesn’t make what He does wrong.

88

Bill, if you in any manner attempt to prevent consenting adults in loving relationships from being legally married, for no other reason than that they are the same gender and some alleged prophet says it’s bad, you are in fact forcing complete strangers to abide by LDS doctrine.

“I love God! He’s so deliciously evil!” - Stewie Griffin, Family Guy

89

Bill said:

See? There is at least one thing we all agree on! :slight_smile:

Now, down to brass tacks.

Bill, you are privileged to believe any old thing about God and about Gordon Hinckley that your faith leads you to accept. You are forbidden, by both the laws of this land and the tenets of Christianity (FDS and LDS), from attempting to force them on anyone else.

Harsh words, I know. But when you assert that the “sanctity of the family” requires that gay marriage be forbidden, you are requiring that the rest of us believe as you do on a matter which, on your own witness, you assert as motivated by your religious beliefs. If you believe that Joe and Moe (the gay couple of your earlier posts) are going to Hell for having the temerity to vow that they will remain true to each other in love, that is your privilege. If you demand that they be enjoined by law from doing so because of your beliefs, then you have transgressed and are sinning against God and your fellow man.

Two propositions, which I do not expect you to accept, and which may be offensive to you personally, but which my faith requires me to put up front for your consideration:

  1. The Doctrine of Eternal Progression is a calumny attributing human characteristics to the Most High God, Blessed Be He. Being merciful, He will forgive you your error when you learn the truth.

  2. Gordon Hinckley is a benighted self-righteous individual who is attempting to impose his view of what America should be on the devout Latter Day Saints who listen to him, and to influence legislators wherever his followers are strong enough.

I ask your forgiveness for any hurt I have caused you in these exchanges, and particularly in the assertions I have just made. But they are the truth.

(Sorry, David, I am not going fundamentalist on you, but I need to assert my beliefs here in contradiction to Bill’s. I would appreciate their not being shot down as unproven. I’m quite aware they are, except to me.)

The God who loved us enough to send Jesus is not out to condemn us for how we love, but rather for how little we love. After having done a beta test with 631 instructions, his final release featured a reduced set, only 2: Love Him. Love everybody else. They do have a corollary that everybody misses (including me): clean up your own act before you try to meddle in someone else’s.

90

Polycarp wrote:

So what you’re saying is, it’s against the law for me to vote against something that others don’t agree with. Give me a break. You’re the one trying to enforce your law upon me, by forbidding me to vote my conscience.

Fine, believe what you want. Just don’t try to tell me what position I can or can’t take on this matter.

Love between two men or two women isn’t forbidden. Sex between them is, IMHO. Feel free to disagree.

Thank goodness! I was really worried there that believing the truth would get me in trouble!

Gordon B. Hinckley is a prophet of God, a very humble and wonderful individual who is doing what God tells him to do. Feel free to disagree.

:: Splort! ::

Agreed. But sex does not equal love. The fact is, homosexual sex is an abomination and always has been. Feel free to disagree.

God is the same yesterday, today and forever. The commandment to Love God is explained by a further commandment, which I will paraphrase: “If ye love me, keep my commandments.” So although you are right about there being two main commandments, Jesus said that on these two commandments hang “all the law and the prophets.”

Let’s try a little logic here.

Given:

  1. The prophet has said that calamities will fall upon individuals who break up the institution of the family;
    and
  2. I don’t want these calamities to happen to me;

Therefore,
3. To preserve myself I will fight and vote against those laws that seek to break up the family.

I’m trying to preserve myself as well as others by speaking out on this issue.

91

Then let them marry. There is no rule that marriage=sex (quite the opposite, if one believes the comedians). They will likely have sex whether you allow them to marry or not; in fact marriage would hopefully cut down on straying, thereby reducing the number of partners and possibly the amount of Evil Gay Sex. So you need not endorse gay sexual acts to endorse gay marriage.

“Happiness is nonetheless true happiness because it must come to an end, nor do thought and love lose their value because they are not everlasting.”

  • Bertrand Russell
92

You just don’t get it, do you?

I am saying that you have no right to regulate other people’s lives by the tenets of your belief. I am not saying you have no right to regulate your own.

Sure, vote your conscience. You have every right to do that. For now.

So will the fundamentalists.

A man who was a keen observer of his fellow man, a futurist, a humanist, not constrained by any religious beliefs (at least that he cared to make public), noted the trends of this country. Being a competent fiction writer, he reported them under the guise of a series of stories set in a common future history. I’m old enough, at 50, to know that everything he predicted to date has proved out, not as he fictively cloaked them, but in the reporting of future trends. He died at age 80 in 1987.

His prediction for the end of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st was for a resurge of fundamentalism across the country, with a dominance of American politics sustained by television programming, and resulting in the raising up of a leadership that ended up replacing American freedoms with a theocracy early in the 21st Century.

If this goes on as it has to date, I have a strong suspicion he is not going to stop being right, insofar as this will be attempted. Except that I believe that another violent death, of a charismatic young man from a leading American family, will bring the American people to their senses just before it’s too late. And far from being Jubilant about this, I’m already grieving for him.

That, sir, is straight-up prophecy, with no additives or dilutants. You are more than welcome, as you said to me, to consider me out to lunch.

“The world goes as it will, and not as you or I would have it.”

93

Polycarp: I was about to read your latest post when I got kicked off AOL, so I signed back on, and lo and behold, your post was gone. I couldn’t reply to it if I wanted to (which I don’t). I’ve said all I’m going to say on this subject, and I will not be replying further in this thread. God be with you. :slight_smile:

94

At the risk of offending a couple of good friends here, since this thread got off on the subject of why Mormons oppose gay marriages, I’m resurrecting it, since a lot of what’s been going on in GD and the Pit on the subject of homosexuality has diverted itself to the “gay marriage” issue, and prior to the semi-tangent it took on Gordon Hinckley and whether or not he has any idea what God wants on this issue, it contained a lot of good comments.

So, Bill, Rose, Monty, forgive me for any negatives it may cause. I’m nowhere as disturbed by President Hinckley as I was when I posted some of the remarks above, and would retract them if we had erase capabilities. Here it is, for what value it may be.