Imagine Dragons, MD&D, Gay and me

[_Stem]

Over on MD&D there's a thread started that talks about Imagine Dragons' Dan Reynolds, mentions his desire to see change in the Church as it pertains to views of LBGTQ.

Interesting thread. I've always enjoyed the poster who started it.

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/699 ... cumentary/

I showed up with a couple of quick posts, which got me in trouble over there. Can't post anymore--at least for now. So I figured I'd bring some thoughts here--bear with me if you would.

I want to start out by saying, playing off my couple of quick responses over there, the distinction the Church makes between thinking you're gay and being gay is lame and completely problematic.

You'll find in the thread linked a few posters taking issue with the accusation that the Church considers being gay a sin. "that's not true the Church loves everyone; therefore I object to this guy's views. The Church doesn't consider being gay a sin but considering acting homosexually a sin" or whatever. I put myself in the shoes of being gay and wonder what in the world is the Church saying to me--in a number of ways.

If I'm gay and I think about being intimate with another man, isn't that thought sin in the eyes of the Church even to the point of saying it's as if I already had laid with him (insert New Testament passage that I'm too lazy to go get)?

Ok ok...that's one issue I have with this distinction.

If I'm gay and am convinced to remain celibate what sin do I commit when I happen upon a guy that I get all excited about? What if, in my loneliness, I decide to draw boundaries and yet find myself enjoying spending time with him--where as we do, flirting, and touching start to happen? I am then a sinner? Is this the behavior (homosexual behavior) that might be behind the idea that my fellow members love me but hate my sin?

ok ok....that's another issue I think that complicates it.

Now, I have dear friends who are gay, were raised in the Church (a couple remain but most are out). In Utah, and I'm sure other places, there are a few different avenues of groups, at least for gay men (sorry everybody else in the LBGTQ spectrum but you simply haven't the same type of support at least not as varied with as many participants), to support each other in the Church or in the Mormon culture while being gay. Last week a friend of mine told me, essentially, that there are gay men in the Church, faithful as they are, most of whom are married to women, who meet for weekends occasionally, to have hug-ins. Just so these men can get together and release some of their cravings a bit by hugging and touching other men in appropriate places I suppose, away from their wives. Great, fine...whatever works I suppose. But, this friend also indicated, he having remained single in the Church trying to suppress and remain celibate, that at some point most guys in these groups start to stray--finds another, leak out and becomes what the Church calls gay. So would hug-ins also be considered sinful behavior?

[_candygal]

This thread is so evolving...I am trying to keep my cool...need you there!! The stressing of members and the church have great love for those who are gay is so conditional but they don't see it. It goes back to...we love you..but...

[_Jersey Girl]

Stem I think the scripture you have in mind is Matthew 5:28....lusted after a woman/already committed adultery. But yes, the same principle should apply in all of the situations you mentioned.

Here's the thing and I harp on this from time to time. There are NO same sex relationships represented in the Bible that are equal or committed relationships as we see in today's society. The relationships that are referred to are those involving Pagan fertility rites including the use of temple prostitutes. There's also the whole thing in ancient Greek culture of which pederasty was a part. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty ... ent_Greece

Look, I'm a little rusty on this having researched it a good 15+ years ago, but in my mind there is enough to give one pause as to whether or not the LBGTQ community is getting screwed over by God believing communities.

If you doubt any of this, then search your scriptures and tell me when you locate any equal (power-wise/socially equitable) or committed same sex relationships represented therein.

I double dog dare anyone to find me even one.

[_Meadowchik]

Stem I think the scripture you have in mind is Matthew 5:28....lusted after a woman/already committed adultery. But yes, the same principle should apply in all of the situations you mentioned.

Here's the thing and I harp on this from time to time. There are NO same sex relationships represented in the Bible that are equal or committed relationships as we see in today's society. The relationships that are referred to are those involving Pagan fertility rites including the use of temple prostitutes. There's also the whole thing in ancient Greek culture of which pederasty was a part. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty ... ent_Greece

Look, I'm a little rusty on this having researched it a good 15+ years ago, but in my mind there is enough to give one pause as to whether or not the LBGTQ community is getting screwed over by God believing communities.

If you doubt any of this, then search your scriptures and tell me when you locate any equal (power-wise/socially equitable) or committed same sex relationships represented therein.

I double dog dare anyone to find me even one.

Indeed. And further, religion is inherently about seeking the condescension and communion with the Divine. So, the more you close that door of communion to others, in my opinion, you close it for yourself, too.

[_moksha]

Stem, my guess is that the capricious actions of the MD&D can be reversed when they come to their senses. That said, the LDS Church's war on Gays will keep apologists on high alert for the next several decades. That translates into requiring board members to either bury their head in the sand or else to be true to their Authorities.

I imagine they would give more latitude to differing opinions on non-wartime issues.

Even if you were to say, "Our Authorities right or wrong - our Authorities!" Smac97 and Scott Lloyd would enter the fray and castigate you for using the word wrong. They would insist that what you should have said was, "Our Authorities right and righter!" You would then get a timeout.

[_The Dude]

Even if you were to say, "Our Authorities right or wrong - our Authorities!" Smac97 and Scott Lloyd would enter the fray and castigate you for using the word wrong. They would insist that what you should have said was, "Our Authorities right and righter!" You would then get a timeout.

I haven't posted over there in a decade at least. It is nice (?) to see the same old defenders. They are more arrogant and self assured than ever. They are like fish trapped in a slowly evaporating pond, yet growing more snobby by the day that their filthy, stagnating water is God's own paradise.

[_Nightlion]

Over on MD&D there's a thread started that talks about Imagine Dragons' Dan Reynolds, mentions his desire to see change in the Church as it pertains to views of LBGTQ.

Interesting thread. I've always enjoyed the poster who started it.

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/699 ... cumentary/

I showed up with a couple of quick posts, which got me in trouble over there. Can't post anymore--at least for now. So I figured I'd bring some thoughts here--bear with me if you would.

I want to start out by saying, playing off my couple of quick responses over there, the distinction the Church makes between thinking you're gay and being gay is lame and completely problematic.

You'll find in the thread linked a few posters taking issue with the accusation that the Church considers being gay a sin. "that's not true the Church loves everyone; therefore I object to this guy's views. The Church doesn't consider being gay a sin but considering acting homosexually a sin" or whatever. I put myself in the shoes of being gay and wonder what in the world is the Church saying to me--in a number of ways.

If I'm gay and I think about being intimate with another man, isn't that thought sin in the eyes of the Church even to the point of saying it's as if I already had laid with him (insert New Testament passage that I'm too lazy to go get)?

Ok ok...that's one issue I have with this distinction.

If I'm gay and am convinced to remain celibate what sin do I commit when I happen upon a guy that I get all excited about? What if, in my loneliness, I decide to draw boundaries and yet find myself enjoying spending time with him--where as we do, flirting, and touching start to happen? I am then a sinner? Is this the behavior (homosexual behavior) that might be behind the idea that my fellow members love me but hate my sin?

ok ok....that's another issue I think that complicates it.

Now, I have dear friends who are gay, were raised in the Church (a couple remain but most are out). In Utah, and I'm sure other places, there are a few different avenues of groups, at least for gay men (sorry everybody else in the LBGTQ spectrum but you simply haven't the same type of support at least not as varied with as many participants), to support each other in the Church or in the Mormon culture while being gay. Last week a friend of mine told me, essentially, that there are gay men in the Church, faithful as they are, most of whom are married to women, who meet for weekends occasionally, to have hug-ins. Just so these men can get together and release some of their cravings a bit by hugging and touching other men in appropriate places I suppose, away from their wives. Great, fine...whatever works I suppose. But, this friend also indicated, he having remained single in the Church trying to suppress and remain celibate, that at some point most guys in these groups start to stray--finds another, leak out and becomes what the Church calls gay. So would hug-ins also be considered sinful behavior?

The only problem in the LDS Church is that it is NOT Christ's Zion. If Zion then there is that gate which no nonsaint can pass which door keeper is Jesus Christ. Either you take his name upon you with full purpose of heart by forsaking the world, (yes this means you do not get to become a billionaire or even a doctor, lawyer or great business owner, scholar or BANKER or even a mechanic or a lowly scientist of this world's elk, unless such is given to you after your acceptable sacrifice has been validated by the Father's promise of the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost. After that you should not much give a crap about the envy of men and the wealth of the world.

The main point here is that at the age of eight years old, failing to repent as the scripture's command and not thereby entering the gate of Christ's keeping YOU CANNOT BE A MEMBER OF HIS CHURCH.

Today, of course there are an abundance of gay folks in the LDS Church, even General Authorities. All are not saints and all are an abomination before the Lord. No difference between a straight man and a gay person as far as their abominations of hypocrisy are concerned.

Gay people will never reach the celestial kingdom any sooner than the straight hypocrite. What you have is politics of prejudice and nothing about the gospel. How royal for GAs filled with the abomination of pretense in high office imputing sin upon others. Quite laughable. No Zion here anyways so it matters little to me. Just saying.

Oh, and it ought to at least be attempted once for a sexually crossed person to come down into the depths of humility and wholly forsake all trust in this world, to cry out in the depths of sincerity for God to root out of his breast the natual (gay in this case) man and give him a new creation by the powers of the promise of the Father, justified in the shed blood and atonement of Jesus Christ, to rescue one of this sort and set their feet upon a rock of righteousness, just to see if sexual confusion gets fixed in this way.

No LDS leader will advice this course because it is beyond their own experience. They can only pander hypocrisy and that's all you see going on in the church today. There is not one man among all the GAs who rightly got the gospel as Jesus commanded it. None have been wrought upon and truly born again of fire and of the Holy Ghost. They have never given off the slightest spark of it all the days of my life. What fools these money-grubbing-sycophants are. And tyrants of high position, and yet stupid in the acts thereof.