The new website by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, www.mormonsandgays.org, was created for people who share same-sex attraction. It was designed to keep families of LGBT loved ones content with the church’s teachings on the matter, and to preserve membership numbers.
It is not a new stance on the tolerance of gay people — though it appears to be — but rather it is a distortion of the same old sin principle. It amounts to devising an artificial, newfound acceptance to hide the same old dogma.
No doubt the site is well crafted. It explains the church’s ingrained prejudge with condescending and highly pretentious banality. The site uses feel-good words like hope, understanding, love, eternity, God and family to surround the debate with cute euphemisms and to lightly tread around the core issues of passion, intimacy and the scientific basis for same-sex attraction.
It is not a smart idea for Mormons to keep their policy in place. During the last decade, the LDS church has been losing and alienating members by its lack of progress on the issue. The hierarchy wants to keep LGBT individuals who are dedicated, driven and successful people in church roles as well as young people who overwhelmingly support gay rights, while at the same time remaining steadfast in its position. The LDS church cannot have its cake and eat it, too.
I am certain many LGBT Mormons welcome the LDS church’s reframed approach that emphasizes tolerance in name but not in practice, and dissuades gay Mormons from acting on their feelings. If these people are happy living in celibacy and hiding from themselves, who am I to argue with them?
The active Mormon LGBT friends that I know do see the website as the first step toward full acceptance, but the future steps look uncertain at best.
One of the LDS church’s top leaders, Dallin H. Oaks, made it clear his institution will never associate itself with loving affinity or marriage between same-sex couples.
At the core of the website, after cutting through the euphemistic language, the LDS church refers to same-sex attraction as a “struggle” that members must presumably “beat.”
Though the LDS church takes the significant step of acknowledging same-sex attraction as natural, it does not go so far as to agree it is not by choice or changeable.
In “Suzanne’s story,” Suzanne is a lesbian with a deep love for God. However, if she remains Mormon, her family will always be limited. There was no mention of a life partner for Suzanne or of children.
Sharing a bed in committed embrace with another loving adult is no one else’s business to pass judgment on, and having the chance at raising a family is something from which no one should be prohibited. Anyway, as I have written before, what better test from God than to design us with differences and see if — and to what extent — we choose to accept one another?
The thickest smoke screen on the website emerges from the push for “eternal perspective” — that is, living lonely and isolated in this life with the hope that somehow the gay will go away after death.
Another church leader, D. Todd Christofferson, said in his video on the website, “Stay with us.” The motivation is to secure more names on church roles and more dutiful tithing payments by ensuring people feel — but not actually are — accepted.
I prefer a God who sees our care and kindness toward other people and invites all of us into the fold, and I like to think of the battle for equality as his test of us.
LDS website creates tolerance facade
April 12, 2013
14
0
Really? • Apr 17, 2013 at 3:05 pm
“It is not a smart idea for Mormons to keep their policy in place”? Zing!
Rose, obviously you are so steeped in theological experience that you are qualified to be giving a nearly 200 year-old church pointers on doctrinal policies. Where exactly did you gain such vast knowledge?
While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, did it occur to you that sitting down to talk with an LDS bishop, stake president or apostle could possibly, in anyway at all, better inform your opinion? Or did you just conspire with like-minded acquaintances until this ill-informed, hateful column spewed forth like a garbage disposal filled with anger, resentment and bile?
As a former counselor in an LDS bishopric, I can assure you of one thing: in all of the decisions made to serve those in or out of our ward, not once did the bishop or any other leader express concerns that “tithing payments” would decrease. Love was always the motivating factor.
Hey, if the career in journalism doesn’t pan out, I’m sure there are some churches out there looking for a policy consultant, but I’m positive the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints isn’t one of them.
Really? • Apr 17, 2013 at 3:05 pm
“It is not a smart idea for Mormons to keep their policy in place”? Zing!
Rose, obviously you are so steeped in theological experience that you are qualified to be giving a nearly 200 year-old church pointers on doctrinal policies. Where exactly did you gain such vast knowledge?
While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, did it occur to you that sitting down to talk with an LDS bishop, stake president or apostle could possibly, in anyway at all, better inform your opinion? Or did you just conspire with like-minded acquaintances until this ill-informed, hateful column spewed forth like a garbage disposal filled with anger, resentment and bile?
As a former counselor in an LDS bishopric, I can assure you of one thing: in all of the decisions made to serve those in or out of our ward, not once did the bishop or any other leader express concerns that “tithing payments” would decrease. Love was always the motivating factor.
Hey, if the career in journalism doesn’t pan out, I’m sure there are some churches out there looking for a policy consultant, but I’m positive the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints isn’t one of them.
ColoradoRob • Apr 16, 2013 at 12:00 pm
“I prefer a God who…”
We Mormons have an article of faith for that.
“We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own cconscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.”
ColoradoRob • Apr 16, 2013 at 12:00 pm
“I prefer a God who…”
We Mormons have an article of faith for that.
“We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own cconscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.”
Jeff • Apr 12, 2013 at 1:54 pm
Sounds like the author is jaded. She needs to listen to some good Aerosmith and calm down: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHjKEwV2-ZM
Jeff • Apr 12, 2013 at 1:54 pm
Sounds like the author is jaded. She needs to listen to some good Aerosmith and calm down: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHjKEwV2-ZM
Nathan • Apr 12, 2013 at 1:06 pm
You can have love for an individual but disagree with their lifestyle. Rose Jones never rights an artical that doesn’t show some sort of false arguments
Nathan • Apr 12, 2013 at 1:06 pm
You can have love for an individual but disagree with their lifestyle. Rose Jones never rights an artical that doesn’t show some sort of false arguments
Nellie • Apr 12, 2013 at 7:07 am
Isn’t the ability to have an opinion and to get it published a wonderful freedom in this country. Still this article is simply that, an opinion and like most opinion pieces in newspapers bears little resemblance to truth or fact.
CommonSense • Apr 12, 2013 at 8:10 am
I agree with Nellie’s comment 100%. That is exactly the way it is.
Sean • Apr 12, 2013 at 11:17 am
In other words:
“Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.”
…in the opinion section.
Nellie • Apr 12, 2013 at 7:07 am
Isn’t the ability to have an opinion and to get it published a wonderful freedom in this country. Still this article is simply that, an opinion and like most opinion pieces in newspapers bears little resemblance to truth or fact.
CommonSense • Apr 12, 2013 at 8:10 am
I agree with Nellie’s comment 100%. That is exactly the way it is.
Sean • Apr 12, 2013 at 11:17 am
In other words:
“Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.”
…in the opinion section.