tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5395279188098967498.post372304474476660979..comments2023-10-20T04:37:31.989-07:00Comments on Defying Gravity: Say Whendracohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11984716489966065319noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5395279188098967498.post-55145388368563428602007-10-27T15:10:00.000-07:002007-10-27T15:10:00.000-07:00Holy mother of batman!Yours must be one of the bes...Holy mother of batman!<BR/>Yours must be one of the best ever blogs out there. <BR/>And don't call it a "lifestyle", because that implies a choice of a style. Homosexuality isn't.<BR/><BR/>I'm not gay, but my brother is. And we are both filthy, nasty apostates, so don't read my blog!<BR/>Peace!<BR/>Mistymhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16665363192631460911noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5395279188098967498.post-74526395449335149102007-10-20T15:02:00.000-07:002007-10-20T15:02:00.000-07:00haha- yeah, I was pretty sure I'd get some interes...haha- yeah, I was pretty sure I'd get some interesting feedback on this post.<BR/><BR/>brady:<BR/>Even though blacks and the priesthood might be a 'policy issue,' I think polygamous relationships definitely deal more with the law of chastity. And I totally smoked you at bowling.<BR/> <BR/>biggins:<BR/>I'm not that optimistic about it either. Your point about official statements is interesting. I am also unaware of any official church proclamation that stated that blacks would never receive the priesthood, but both Bruce R. McConkie and Joseph Fielding Smith firmly believed that it would never happen and published their opinions in Mormon Doctrine and Doctrines of Salvation. With polygamy, we do have an official statement- Official Declaration 1 in the back of the D&C: "We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice... And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land." And isn't gay marriage (for the most part) similarly impeded by the law of the land?<BR/> <BR/>And to -L- <BR/>Perseverating- that's a great one :) -I have a special affinity for big words.<BR/>I know that I probably sound pretty apostate and I appreciate your concern. I confess that sometimes I even disturb myself. I'm not sure if my inquisitive mind is a blessing or a curse in this case; I know that the Church discourages most speculation, but I suppose I've always had a hard time accepting appeals to authority as legitimate premises in religious arguments. I don't think that saying that the Church is true and infallible eliminates the possiblility of fallibility among its members- even its leaders.<BR/>It really all comes down to my testimony of the Church, which is admittedly wavering. <BR/><BR/>forever barred:<BR/>I hate the disenchantment that I feel right now toward the Church. I wish that I could just reconcile all of my feelings and beliefs because living in limbo can be draining. <BR/>It was nice meeting you too- I'm sure I'll be seeing you around :)dracohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11984716489966065319noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5395279188098967498.post-11394240335883466612007-10-20T09:44:00.000-07:002007-10-20T09:44:00.000-07:00I want to live in your world.Wait, that didn't sou...I want to live in your world.<BR/><BR/>Wait, that didn't sound the way I intended- I want to live the world you are going to make when you become divine. There, clearer intent.<BR/><BR/>I think this comment will evolved into a draft for a future post. I used to cling desperately to the expectation that one day I would change and no longer have same gender attractions. Every day that I didn't change was a disappointment, and grounds for self abuse.<BR/><BR/>That wasn't healthy. Fortunately, I have been able to accept myself and stop expecting a change. It is great. The only problem is, I got rid of one unhealthy expectation only to adapt another.<BR/><BR/>Now I hope and cling to the expectation that the Church will change. It makes sense. I tried to change me, and I couldn't, so maybe I can try and change the church. I think the new expectation has the same effects as the former. Every General Conference and every Sunday where there is no change is a disappointment. This time instead of abusing myself, I abuse the Church.<BR/><BR/>But even after acknowledging that, I still cling to the hope.<BR/><BR/>It was nice to meet you yesterday, by the way.Daniel (Old Account)https://www.blogger.com/profile/09853938564287982268noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5395279188098967498.post-58496219046061128902007-10-20T09:38:00.000-07:002007-10-20T09:38:00.000-07:00I suppose I should clarify that I don't think talk...I suppose I should clarify that I don't think talking about it necessarily does any harm. It's an interesting topic. But, when I see people perseverating about it and building up a whole view of the church as changeable (equivocating to fallible) and spending all their time and effort on bringing about the change they desire rather than spending efforts trying to learn and follow the church as it is, that's when I get disturbed.-L-https://www.blogger.com/profile/02854867259876731599noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5395279188098967498.post-28785648342714576562007-10-20T08:29:00.000-07:002007-10-20T08:29:00.000-07:00There's a qualitative difference between the churc...There's a qualitative difference between the church's changes on many topics in the past and gay relationships. There is, in my view, absolutely no way to hold out hope that any gay sexual relationship is or ever will be approved by God. Speculation otherwise is understandable by those of us who it influences on such a personal level, but I do fear that it does harm.-L-https://www.blogger.com/profile/02854867259876731599noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5395279188098967498.post-6020621645534045612007-10-19T16:56:00.000-07:002007-10-19T16:56:00.000-07:00That would be great if the First Presidency decide...That would be great if the First Presidency decided to do that, but I'm not too optimistic that it'll happen. Certainly not any time soon. There is certainly precedent for big changes, blacks and the priesthood and the whole being required to live polygamy to enter the celestial kingdom doctrine being two good examples. The big difference to me, though, is that the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve have authored an official joint statement basically saying that only marriage between a man and a woman is OK. To my knowledge, while there were certainly many (perhaps virtually all) General Authorities who in the past thought blacks would never have the priesthood, there wasn't ever an official proclamation saying they wouldn't. That doesn't mean it can't happen, but it would be overturning precedent on a whole new level, I think. I like the idea though.austinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16710012254870960445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5395279188098967498.post-91196355068971706002007-10-19T15:03:00.000-07:002007-10-19T15:03:00.000-07:00I think I'd be pretty happy if the First Presidenc...I think I'd be pretty happy if the First Presidency announced a change in the policy, too! :)<BR/><BR/>I've thought about a lot of these ideas many times before. It does seem that there is a precedent for change in the church, even with big and "unalterable doctrines" like blacks and the Priesthood as it was taught in the early days of the church. It has been argued that the law of chastity is totally different from 'policy issues' like the priesthood thing, but I'm not entirely convinced. I can see lots of ways that gay marriage could be sanctioned by the church at some point in the future if it became socially acceptable. Maybe I'll write a post about that...Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04981028573755481938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5395279188098967498.post-8189316919772248892007-10-19T09:57:00.000-07:002007-10-19T09:57:00.000-07:00Thanks- I'll look that one up :)Thanks- I'll look that one up :)dracohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11984716489966065319noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5395279188098967498.post-69743802717267986042007-10-19T06:31:00.000-07:002007-10-19T06:31:00.000-07:00will I be able to make worlds where homosexuality ...<I>will I be able to make worlds where homosexuality is the norm and heterosexuality is a horrible sin? I sure hope so.</I><BR/><BR/>Sounds like you should watch "Almost Normal". It's about a gay man going through a mid life crisis who is yanked back in time to his high school days; however, this time the world is gay and to be straight is considered deviant behavior. It's not rated; but, I would give it a PG-13 since there isn't any nudity or sex (although, I watched it on Logo which does edit out objectionable scenes; so, I don't know if there would be anything inappropriate on the DVD).Abelard Enigmahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13166049686152203530noreply@blogger.com