Equality Ride's visit to BYU

[maklelan]

Hi everybody. My name's Dan. I just joined this forum after getting an interesting e-mail about a future visit to my college campus. I attend BYU here in Provo, Utah. Reading the mission statement of this organization got me a little concerned about the assumptions that both sides of this issue seem to be making. I'd like to comment on Tobi's concerns first, sharing what I believe about the situation.

I don't believe I am defined by my sexuality. I don't believe it's a concrete thing that I'm born with, but I do believe genetics gives us a propensity toward one or the other ends of the spectrum of sexual orientation. I believe that, to some degree or another, almost everyone has entertained (at least mentally) sexual desires that fall oustide the particular orientation they generally subscribe to. These urges come and go inexplicably, but I don't believe the Lord holds us responsible for mere urges. A leader in our church (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) compares various kinds of sins to birds flying around over our heads. It's ludicrous to think we can keep them from swooping down and swatting us from time to time, but what we can do keep them from building a nest in our hair. In every single sin ever committed there is a choice. The choice is not whether or not we will have certain desires, but whether or not we will act on them. Therein is the responsibility. Is it a choice? To have those tendencies - of course not. To act upon them - absolutely.

I joined the Mormon church when I was twenty, and I dabbled in a lot of different things before I became religious. My conversion was a very special experience for me, and I've never looked back, but I know how strong certain desires can be. I have a friend who is barely able to control some of the urges he has. He feels a very strong attraction to some mebers of his own gender, even though he is very happily married. He has spoken with ecclesiastical leaders about his concerns on many occasions, and the counsel is always the same: we all have difficult struggles. Some struggle with alcoholism, some with gambling, some with pornography and some with homosexual proclivities. There's no reason to be depressed or self-condemning because we suffer from these afflictions, we just have to live every day the best way we can and know that those with bigger hurdles to overcome in this life will be the ones with greater recompenses in the life to come.

I have to go, but I'd like to continue discussing the mission of this organization and its goals.

[awediot]

Hi Dan, Hope your experience with this group is a comfort and challenge....Dated a guy who attended BYU. Good school, good people, peculiar rules.

I appreciate your openness and less than damning attitude. I also see that you underestimate homosexuality and lump it into a fairly trivial catagory. I think we all at some time in life ponder "experimenting" and have the chance to satisfy a natural curiousity. Its called HORNINESS. Growing up gay is more like discoverring those birds already built that Birdhouse in your Soul with your hair. Swatting them away wasn't given as an option. It is not about a simple desire or lust, friendship with perks or lack of will to abstain, it is what you can't help but to Love and want to Love you back. And it is as deep and difficult as if you HAD to change your desire for the ladies (I assume). Is the feeling you have for them mere urges that come and go? Do you remember wanting to be straight? If you couldn't turn gay, could you turn celibate, give up the idea of finding someone and be alone the rest of your life? Could you Fake it enough, ogle guys to not look suspicous, flirt with the waiter or get a phony partner to keep in school, or keep your parents, or friends, job, house or keep from getting the hell beat out of you, or tied to a fence and left to die? Could you fake it to your other half to get all these things? Would you try to fake it to a God that wouldn't help you change it?--If this is not worthy of depression, nothing is.-- At sixteen I wanted my license and car mostly so I could hit a train on accident to fool God it wasn't suicide (ah, the good old days)... But I chose instead to eventually ACT on my proclivity and found acceptance, Love, warmth, companionship and a desire to survive for the first time. I also found God still there, telling me to treat my boyfriend well. That's all, same rules apply...

I do not want to presume anything about your friend, but if he is experiencing the normal, gay turmoil, I would suspect he would prefer to be a drunken, gambling straight perv if God would only remove the anguish likely going on in His Soul. Your sympathy for him is kind. But your comprehension of his struggle is so far nonexistant... Your time on this site may not be meant only for you... Tell him about it.

[Zerbie]

Awediot makes several important points, and I'd like to lend support to one. He mentions that maybe Dan's friend would rather be a gambler and an alchoholic and be straight, than be gay and living a well-adjusted life. It's entirely possible, I know b/c I went through something like that. I'm bi, but wasn't attracted to men at all when I was very young. Only ladies. When I was 19, a much older married man became interested in me and though we were NOT being physical, we did become inseparable for a couple of years and everyone around us assumed that we were having an affair. I remember the night it started, I was about to pull away in order to avoid getting entangled and letting people think I would do such a thing, when I had this lightning bolt of brilliance: 'If everyone thinks I"m having an affair with a married man, then they won't think I'm homosexual!' And so from then on, I encouraged it, because I would rather have been perceived as an immoral straight chick, than as a moral lesbian. I shake my head at all that now.

[maklelan]

If you want to live that life that's fine with me. I'd never tell anyone how to think, but that brings me to my next point. The mission statement I read for this Equality Ride is this:

"The Soulforce Equality Ride will take thirty-two young adults on a seven-week bus tour from New York to Los Angeles to confront nineteen religious schools and military academies that ban the enrollment of GLBT students. Their journey is unique - never before have young activists banded together to challenge homophobia at the institutions that are largely responsible for GLBT discrimination."

Your "confrontation" appears to be designed to get policies to change. You have your religious beliefs, and we have ours. To go to this school you have to sign an "honor code" that states the mission of our school. We are trying to provide an education for people who want to do so in an atmosphere consistent with the values and beliefs we hold. There are many things we agree not to do. We agree not to be in the apartment or house of a member of the opposite sex after midnight. We agree not to view pornography, drink alcohol, and engage in many other activities our faith is not consistent with. We are a private University, and we have the right to require that our students abide by these principles. If you want to come to this school you have to sign that agreement. If you don't want to abide by the policies, don't come to this school. You're in effect, telling us that we are not allowed practice our religion even in our own space and on our own dime. The policies we subscribe to are the doctrine of our church. They are the same standards that we have anywhere else.

The other problem I have with this statement is the assumption that what we promote is homophobia. We teach and believe that all people, no matter what, are our brothers and sisters, and all sons and daughters of a father in heaven. We teach acceptance and love for all. It's inevitable that some grow intolerant, but that exists among every single group on the planet. Gays and lesbians have just as much a tendancy to be intolerant as anyone else. I do not fear gays and lesbians. My aunt is a lesbian and I lived with her and her wife for a summer. I am perfectly comfortable around them, but I find it hypocritical to come to our campus to tell us that we must change so that you don't have to. I must respect your right to believe and practice what you want, but you don't have to respect mine?

Our school does not ban gays and lesbians, but we do not allow anyone to enroll who won't abide by certain principles, and homosexual activity happens to be one of them. Many gay students put their extra cirricular activities on hold during enrollment, and many students have to do the same for other activities. You can be gay here, we just ask that you don't participate in homosexual sex, just like we ask that unmarried students don't participate in pre-marital sex. Why should your urges be granted sanction while ours are not?

[Jamie McDaniel]

Dan, from your posts I am guessing you are not homophobic, but you are dealing with heterosexism. Homophobia is a fear of same-gender attraction, whether it is one's own attractions or anothers. Heterosexism, on the other hand, is the belief that a heterosexual sexual orientation is superior to a homosexual one. Heterosexism is often tied up in religion, and so it becomes a belief that one sexual orientation is the morally superior one.

You said that you and your school had your religious beliefs and that you should be entitled to those beliefs. Ok, there is certainly some truth in that. But Dan, you are also part of Christianity, a valued member of the body of Christ, the Church (with a capital "C"). And there are things that are not ok for Christians to believe. It is not ok to believe that black people cannot be full members of a church. It is not ok to believe that women cannot be preachers. It is not ok to excommunicate divorced people.

Now these are all things that some Christians believe and in one sense they are free to believe these things -- after all, everyone has free-will and this is a free country. However in a much larger sense, these beliefs are not ok because they violate the work of the inclusive Spirit of God.

Here's my statement and it may shock more than a few.
Not all religious views are equal. Those of us who identify as liberals can sometimes get tripped up with inclusiveness that it actually becomes a danger to justice. In our fight for inclusiveness, we include views that are wrong.

I feel that Martin Luther King argues this point in his article titled “Pilgrimage to Nonviolence” (A Testament of Hope, page 35) where he actually says that he found some aspects of liberalism in his day wanting.

Among those who hold anti-gay beliefs, this is sometimes argued like such: “You liberals champion tolerance yet you are intolerant of my religious views.” Dan, I feel that this echoes your complaint about the Equality Ride coming to BYU.

Yes, we all should be on a journey towards truth, and indeed we all have components of the bigger truth -- but if one's religious views are such that they make a legitimate group of people second-class, then those beliefs deserve to be challenged in hopes of positive change. One can hold such beliefs, of course, but they should not be seen by the larger community as being equal.

Bottom-line: People should be equal, not beliefs that keep us from being equal.

[maklelan]

But Dan, you are also part of Christianity, a valued member of the body of Christ, the Church (with a capital "C"). And there are things that are not ok for Christians to believe. It is not ok to believe that black people cannot be full members of a church. It is not ok to believe that women cannot be preachers. It is not ok to excommunicate divorced people.

This is where I disagree. Not on the issue of race or divorce. I disagree with the assertion that homogeny is Christ's will. I also disagree with the idea that you speak on behalf of Christ's Church. Your idea of Christ's Church and mine are completely different. I'm not telling you you're not allowed to believe those ideas, but your doctrine is not universal. It doesn't claim to be revealed truth either; it has come from a human interpretation of the scriptures, guided by the fickle system of ethics that is blown by the winds of moral relativity. I do not believe in moral relativity and I do not believe that everyone should have all the same roles. Men and women are different for specific reasons. The scriptures give women certain roles and men others. I can't give birth to a child, but I don't argue, fuss and fight about how God delegates privileges and responsibilities. I believe His will is beyond us, and I don't question it. Rather than change the scriptures to fit my values, I try to change my values until they are in line with the Lord's. This is, I believe, is the problem with much of religion today. I am not a slave, and I am not a sheep. I seek out divine confirmation and knowledge of every tenet I subscribe to, but I put His will above my own.

Not all religious views are equal.

I agree with you here, but I see your goals as trying to apply a uniform value system onto the world's different religions. I believe in absolute truth, and I believe that there is one true religion and thousands of others that are really good guesses, but I don't force my values upon those that disagree with me. I live my life and I hope you are happy living yours; but what you ask is for me to compromise my values to put them in line with yours. There is no compromise on your part. It is complete and total surrender that you seek, and, this may surprise you, it may not, but that will never happen at BYU. We believe our University to be under the general administration of men of God, and they are guided by revealed principles that are non-negotiable.

Among those who hold anti-gay beliefs, this is sometimes argued like such: “You liberals champion tolerance yet you are intolerant of my religious views.” Dan, I feel that this echoes your complaint about the Equality Ride coming to BYU.

My concern with the Equality Ride is similar, but I do not oppose it entirely. If you want to bring awareness and tolerance that's perfectly fine. I'll show up and I'll wear one of your T-shirts, but to say that you're on a journey to "confront" our University and try to change its policies is a violation of the very same principles you hold to. You demand equal rights. We ask that you respect our right to practice our religion according to our own beliefs. We afford you that right. We are not coming after you, but you are coming after us.

The right to attend a University is not a natural right. It is not a natural right because you must qualify to attend any university. You do not have a natural right, no matter who you are, to attend our university. Our university sets ethical standards as a qualification, and our standards reflect the values that we hold very, very sacred. One of those is that homosexual relations are a grevious sin. You are demanding that we overturn the values we believe God has revealed to us. You are telling us that we are not allowed to believe that homosexuality is a sin. You are infringing upon our natural and constitutionally protected right to practice our religion as we see fit. You mask this argument in "equality," but you would have equality only for you. If you were allowed into BYU then you would be given license to break our Honor Code while everyone else must adhere to it. Is that equality? Your rights are to be fought for and taken, but ours are to be dashed to pieces because you feel we are discriminating against you. We also discriminate against murderers, rapists, and thieves. I'm not putting you in their category, but we believe all these things to be sin, and we have a right to do so.

[Jamie McDaniel]

Our university sets ethical standards as a qualification, and our standards reflect the values that we hold very, very sacred. One of those is that homosexual relations are a grevious sin.
To say that homosexual people, when they love and care for their partners, is a "grevious sin" is not just another opinion -- it is a way to make a whole group of people less-than, both in church and in society. It may be a value of yours, but it's source is not the Divine.

Every group has values. The White Citizens Council had values. That's why they came together, so they could promote those values to society. But those values were immoral.

[Jamie McDaniel]

At this point, it is appropriate to remind everyone of the Soulforce Community Guidelines (http://www.soulforce.org/forums/faq.php?faq=soulforce_faq_item#faq_soulforce_faq_i tem1). GLBT people have few safe places and I will not allow these forums to be used in order to give new life to those same, tired, old arguments that demean homosexuals.

[maklelan]

I don't mean to demean homosexuals at all. I would fight alongside you for your right to equality, but I just don't see this as an example. We believe that homosexual sex is a sin. We are allowed to believe this, and just because you think we're wrong does not give you the moral or legal right to demand it be changed. I respect your feelings on homosexuality. I'm not trying to convince anyone to stop, but please respect our right to practice our religion as we see fit. You ask the same of us.

[zephyr013]

:love:

"The Soulforce Equality Ride will take thirty-two young adults on a seven-week bus tour from New York to Los Angeles to confront nineteen religious schools and military academies that ban the enrollment of GLBT students. Their journey is unique - never before have young activists banded together to challenge homophobia at the institutions that are largely responsible for GLBT discrimination."

Perhaps if you can detach yourself for a moment, and view this mission statement and the equality ride as something other than an offensive, I sincerely hope that you can lower your defenses and see what the mission statement really is about.

In Luke 4:18-19 (KJV), Jesus said:
"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord."

There are brokenhearts on BYU campus. They are broken-hearted for a number of reasons. One reason is definitely the perceived attack on their right to happiness to live life married to someone of the same sex, in complete equality with heterosexual couples. That is something that BYU cannot offer them with the obvious discriminatory restrictions on homosexual marriage relationships. There may be some broken hearts at BYU who no doubt feel the oppression and captivity of such restrictions.

Equality riders visit to have dialogues (preaching the gospel of love and equality if you will) with students and hopefully administrators in hopes of opening their eyes to such oppression. We seek to do this because we have our truth and we believe that you are a victim of untruth. We do not wish to forcefully change your minds, but we hope that by meeting with us and discussing openly the issue, your eyes, or another's eyes will be opened and that by accepting our truth you may more fully experience God.

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. -MLK Jr.

I admit this sounds a bit bigoted, as if we have the monopoly on truth. But we don't. And that is the paradox! We may very well be suffering form the untruth.

Open dialogues are the only way that you will be able to help us, your fellow humans to fully live, if this is indeed the case.

Please, Dan, open your mind so that perhaps you will change ours.

In love,
Kyle

[maklelan]

Let me explain a little about our religion in general, so you understand why that expectation is a little presumptuous.

We believe that the Church that Christ established during the meridian of time, and all the ordinances and authority thereof, was lost at the time the Bible ended. We believe man injected Christ's gospel with the philosophies of the imperfect human mind. Fourth century Christianity and the creeds that go along with it are the predecessors of almost all Christian churches today, but those creeds and that brand of Christianity was heavily, pero heavily influenced by Neo-platonic, Gnostic and Aristotelian philosophies. Basically, it was no longer Christ's Church, it was man's church.

We believe this apostasy was predicted, and that a restoration would take place in the which all authority, ordinances and blessings of Christ's Church would be restored. We believe that these prophecies were fulfilled in the early 19th century, when God the Father and Jesus Christ visited a boy by the name of Joseph Smith and called him to be the prophet to restore all that was lost. We believe those principles found in the Bible (prophets, apostles, scripture, revelation and prophecy) have been restored. We believe the president of our church (currently Gordon B. Hinckley) is a prophet just as Moses, Isaiah, Paul or any other prophet from the scriptures. We believe they have the authority to say 'Thus sayeth the Lord" and really mean it.

I joined this church because I was looking for truth. I found it in bits and pieces all over the place, but I read the Book of Mormon and prayed about it, and I received an answer. I know the Book of Mormon is the word of God, and so does every faithful Latter-day Saint on the BYU campus. We don't base that belief on research, science or logic, we base it on the testimony of the Holy Ghost, and I have received that testimony. We believe (because we've prayed and received confirmation from God) that our leaders are inspired men that have received divine appointments to guide the Church. This is how we feel about our Church and our school.

What you are asking all of us to do is deny that testimony and accept that our leaders are not inspired, guided or called of God. You ask us to deny the veracity of all of our church. We often le tothers know that our church is either the very Church of Christ, restored in our time, or the biggest hoax to ever fool mankind. You may believe the latter, but I do not, and I do not appreciate people trying to convince us of it. You will not succeed at that. Ever. I cannot speak for everyone, but I believe these things are true because the Spirit of the Lord has confirmed them in my heart and in my mind. I cannot and will not deny that testimony for any reason whatsoever. I know it is true, and (as Paul said in Galatians 1:8) even an angel from heaven couldn't convince me otherwise.

You may believe what you want. One of our articles of faith states that "we claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may." I take that very seriously. I have spent years of my life in third world countries sharing the Gospel, and I have grown to respect and love many different faiths as a result. I would never tell another person what they should believe. I show them the light we have and invite them to investigate the truthfulness of it themselves.

Our last article of faith, and the basis for our honor code, states the following: "We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed we may say we follow the admonition of Paul - We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things."

I would never tell anyone what to believe or who to love. I would never try to convince another that they must change or be living contrary to God. I would never go out of my way to try to make someone else's life harder. I also would never deny the actuality of the testimony that I have received, nor do I accept that I must do so in order to be living in accordance with the will of God. I pray several times every single day that I may understand His will better, and I believe I am getting there. I do not agree with you, but (as the saying goes) I would die to protect your right to believe that way. I really would. All I ask is that you respect our rights and our beliefs.

Coming into my school in an effort to try to convince me that my faith is a lie is not something that I take lightly, nor do I believe such a course to be a noble one. I hope you can understand how our faith precludes any of the concessions you intend to be granted. You will be frustrated if you expect to achieve them. I'm not saying that to be vindictive, I'm just telling you that it cannot happen, so don't get your hopes up, and don't get upset when it doesn't happen.

[Zerbie]

What an amazing conflict. It's entirely possible that this one never will resolve. As sure as you are of what you received from the holy ghost, I am just as sure of a mutually exclusive set of spiritual certainties. I appreciate your heart to care for others and hope it applies to all of us on this board, also when we run into these Butt Heads moments. I hope if you saw someone hurting me you would speak out and say it's wrong, and take steps to defend me, and I hope if I saw someone hurting you I would do the same. But we may never resolve the differences in belief.

I think it's okay to have different beliefs. Whatever The Truth is, it is whether we believe it or not. . .what's important here is how we treat one another. I can't possibly speak for the Equality Ride, only for myself. But it's worth wondering if their mission is to get you to change your highly valued beliefs, or if it might rather be to lend visible emotional support to any conflicted gay students there might be on your campus who feel lost because of a conflict between how they perceive themselves and what their religion teaches. If that is the goal, I wholeheartedly support them in that.

Personally, I tend to believe that a private organization should be allowed to create it's rules, even if they are rules I disagree with. There was a big feud where I am about a religious club at the university that was sued for excluding homosexuals from membership - and I supported that group for a long time until I learned that they were using public funds (funds to which I personally contributed) to exclude gay Christians. Only then did I stop supporting their right to define membership to exclude gay people. On your own turf, yes, you should do as you please, just don't do it with MY money, and the public's money. I would never consider joining such a group or attending a university like yours, because it would be so unbelievably wrong for me and such a poor fit. But I also recognize that there might be legitimate reasons why a gay student might end up there at your school. And I wish those people to be supported.

[Jamie McDaniel]

It should at least be noted that one of the Equality Riders grew up Mormon and also that members from the gay and lesbian Mormon group, Affirmation (http://www.affirmation.org/), will be participating during the stop at Brigham Young University.

[DoofSFNYC]

I'm very interested in your explanation of the unity of belief in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I'm a cradle Catholic myself, and have been taught something similar (by no means identical) about my own Church - that denying even the smallest part of the doctrine of the Church is denying the Church's authority as a whole, from the Pope on down to the parish priest who I know and love. However, at various times in the history of my church, changes to that doctrine have been made, big and small, without, in our opinion, changing the authority of the whole Church - in other words, the church has the ability to revise it's doctrine as greater revelation is received. Does the Mormon church have the same ability? Have there ever been beliefs or testimony, to use your word, that has been repudiated or changed or edited? I'm asking because I honestly don't know, but I can see how your experience would lead you to a complete rejection of our point of view (theologically speaking) since accepting it would mean rejecting your entire church. I know I wouldn't want to do that, but becuase my church has changed in the past, I know I don't have to. Yet :)


What you are asking all of us to do is deny that testimony and accept that our leaders are not inspired, guided or called of God. You ask us to deny the veracity of all of our church. We often le tothers know that our church is either the very Church of Christ, restored in our time, or the biggest hoax to ever fool mankind. You may believe the latter, but I do not, and I do not appreciate people trying to convince us of it. You will not succeed at that. Ever. I cannot speak for everyone, but I believe these things are true because the Spirit of the Lord has confirmed them in my heart and in my mind. I cannot and will not deny that testimony for any reason whatsoever. I know it is true, and (as Paul said in Galatians 1:8) even an angel from heaven couldn't convince me otherwise.

You may believe what you want. One of our articles of faith states that "we claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may." I take that very seriously. I have spent years of my life in third world countries sharing the Gospel, and I have grown to respect and love many different faiths as a result. I would never tell another person what they should believe. I show them the light we have and invite them to investigate the truthfulness of it themselves.

Our last article of faith, and the basis for our honor code, states the following: "We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed we may say we follow the admonition of Paul - We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things."

I would never tell anyone what to believe or who to love. I would never try to convince another that they must change or be living contrary to God. I would never go out of my way to try to make someone else's life harder. I also would never deny the actuality of the testimony that I have received, nor do I accept that I must do so in order to be living in accordance with the will of God. I pray several times every single day that I may understand His will better, and I believe I am getting there. I do not agree with you, but (as the saying goes) I would die to protect your right to believe that way. I really would. All I ask is that you respect our rights and our beliefs.

Coming into my school in an effort to try to convince me that my faith is a lie is not something that I take lightly, nor do I believe such a course to be a noble one. I hope you can understand how our faith precludes any of the concessions you intend to be granted. You will be frustrated if you expect to achieve them. I'm not saying that to be vindictive, I'm just telling you that it cannot happen, so don't get your hopes up, and don't get upset when it doesn't happen.

[maklelan]

I think it's okay to have different beliefs. Whatever The Truth is, it is whether we believe it or not. . .what's important here is how we treat one another. I can't possibly speak for the Equality Ride, only for myself. But it's worth wondering if their mission is to get you to change your highly valued beliefs, or if it might rather be to lend visible emotional support to any conflicted gay students there might be on your campus who feel lost because of a conflict between how they perceive themselves and what their religion teaches. If that is the goal, I wholeheartedly support them in that.

There are many gay and lesbian students at BYU and there are more than a couple support groups here that are aimed at helping those students deal with the situation. I don't pretend to understand what it's like, but those of us who really and truly are trying to foster the pure love of Christ in our lives want to help anyone who needs it. Those who are intolerant don't represent the school or its policies any more than a fish represents the stock market.

I'm very interested in your explanation of the unity of belief in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I'm a cradle Catholic myself, and have been taught something similar (by no means identical) about my own Church - that denying even the smallest part of the doctrine of the Church is denying the Church's authority as a whole, from the Pope on down to the parish priest who I know and love. However, at various times in the history of my church, changes to that doctrine have been made, big and small, without, in our opinion, changing the authority of the whole Church - in other words, the church has the ability to revise it's doctrine as greater revelation is received. Does the Mormon church have the same ability? Have there ever been beliefs or testimony, to use your word, that has been repudiated or changed or edited? I'm asking because I honestly don't know, but I can see how your experience would lead you to a complete rejection of our point of view (theologically speaking) since accepting it would mean rejecting your entire church. I know I wouldn't want to do that, but becuase my church has changed in the past, I know I don't have to. Yet

I'd like to talk about this, but I have to do a massage right now. There have been changes in our past of administration, but not doctrine or beliefs. Those changes have come about as a result of growth, and identical changes are found throughout the Bible. I believe a church should change its administration to account for many things, but I gotta go. I'll get back to you on this.

[awediot]

I posted this in another thread and I so enjoy the look of my own words, decided to spread it around a bit where it fits. It sums up alot.

In some belief systems, there is no room for a gay person at all, only levels of messed up straight ones. If one is thought of as a homosexual, they are either acting on it, sinning away and have given up the fight, or obsessed (posessed) with sinful urges, refraining and seeking help. Responsible, acceptable action is never okay. We're either really sick and deserving sympathy and prayer, (gee thanks, not too insulting) or a little less sick but at least we know it. (prayers answered)

Gay actions are done by straight people experimenting and being naughty. Gay people are just trying to love in the only natural way they know how...

[maklelan]

OK, I wanna address two issues that are always brought up when people talk about beliefs changing. Those are polygamy and denying blacks the priesthood. I'm sure a lot of you will be familiar with these issues, but for those who are not, until 1978 black men could not hold the priesthood, and until 1881, the LDS church practiced, in a small degree, plural marriage. People always point to these as examples of us changing our beliefs due to societal pressures. This could not be further from the truth, and here's why.

PLural marriage is a dodgy issue, but it was practiced in the Bible, and for an important reason. God wanted, fro mthe beginning, His people to be a strong and mighty nation. He promised Abraham his seed would be as numerous as the sand on the seashore. As there have always tended to be more women in the world than men, and men can reproduce much more repidly than women, God ordained the practice of polygamy. This was to strengthen the foundation of His people and increase numbers rapidly. This was important from Abraham all the way to Moses. When the people grew strong enough it was done away with. There is a chapter in the Book of Mormon that talks about how God delights in chastity and virtue. He likes His people to be monogamous. He later adds that He will command His people otherwise if He needs to "raise up seed" unto Him. Some see this as inconsistent, but keep in mind the Lord commanded the Levites to kill only four chapters after saying, "Thou shalt not kill." In our church we began as a very small group of people, and we were pillaged and plundered from town to town, until the UNited States succeeded in actually kicking us out. We are the only group of citizens to actually be forceably ejected from the country. Our foundation needed strengthening and the Lord commanded that certain people enter into the practice. When the church was strong that commandment was withdrawn. It was an administrative change made because of issues with growth.

As far as the priesthood goes, when the Lord gave it to Moses and Aaron He let only Aaron's sons administer in it. Later, as more people needed to be administered to, it was extended to all Levites, and still later (in the New Testament) to worthy Jews. The Lord prohibited more than two thirds of his people from holding the priesthood throughout the Bible. In our day similar practices took place. At first only certain men were called to perform priestly duties. Later it was extended to just about everyone except African Americans. Why the restriction? I have no idea. I don't know why the Lord does most of the things He does, but I have faith in Him. Most of the other tribes in Moses' day didn't get upset because they couldn't hold the priesthood. As the church grew and more members needed to be adminsitered to (specifically in the U.S. and Africa) it was extended to all worthy males. Another change in administration to account for growth in the church. Our beliefs and our faith never changes, but our administration must keep up with our size and our scope of influence.

these ar etwo of the examples people often cite when discussing changes. Change is a normal part of God's church, and I don't find in any passage in the entire Bible where God says He will not change His church. Doctrine never changes, but administration sure does.

[maklelan]

By the way, concerning the visit to my campus: I do the editorial cartoon for the BYU newspaper and I've been asked by my editor to come up with some material concerning your visit. It appears many people are concerned about your plan and your intentions. Any suggestions as far as what I should do? Keep in mind my feelings on the issue are pretty consistent with the student body, and I'm not out just to tick anyone off.

[maklelan]

OK, I was just looking over the e-mail I received from y'all about the Equality Ride, and I'm annoyed by something I found.

"This is the result of discrimination taught at Brigham Young University."

Discrimination is not taught at BYU. We are taught to love and accept everyone, and we are taught to be obedient. We have our values and we understand and respect yours. This statement is then made:

"BYU administration has reportedly told the student body that the Soulforce Equality Ride will be allowed onto campus to speak with students. Communication between the school and the Soulforce Equality Ride has been stilted, but we look forward to the opportunity to dialogue with students, faculty and administration about the misuse of scripture to oppress GLBT persons."

The administration has stated that Soulforce is welcome on campus just like anyone else who wants to, but they must follow the same rules that everyone else follows. Soulforce told us to make acceptions so they can fulfill their agenda and BYU said no. What kind of equality comes from exceptions?

The "misuse of scripture" quoted here is a joke. We have our very own canon of scripture and we believe we are guided by prophets. You can't really misuse your own scripture; I personally believe you are misusing the Bible, but that's your prerogative and I would never tell you to stop.

I would appreciate it if your litany afforded me the same equality and rights that you are coming half way across the country to demand from me.

[zephyr013]

On a cynical note:

We do not afford you rights. For one, we can not afford rights, they are not ours to afford or remove, and for another, you have more rights than we do.

I agree with you that "misuse" is the wrong word, because "use" without the "mis-" would have sufficed. Scripture should not be used to deny any God-imagined human equal rights.

[themattperry]

maklelan,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but your post above implies that your church extended the priesthood to African American men when it became practically necessary to do so (when the Church's scope increased and black people needed to be ministered to.) This to me implies that there was not a sufficiently compelling moral reason why this change had to be made.

My question to you: do you feel it was a moral mistake for your Church to deny African American men the priesthood for as long as it did?

In fact, is it possible for your church to make moral errors in its policies and teachings at all? I know that it is for mine, and such errors have and continue to be made! The reason I ask is simply that there's little point in having much of a conversation about your Church's teachings and policies if you insist that they are by definition right.

Have a great weekend!

[maklelan]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but your post above implies that your church extended the priesthood to African American men when it became practically necessary to do so (when the Church's scope increased and black people needed to be ministered to.) This to me implies that there was not a sufficiently compelling moral reason why this change had to be made.

I don't know the Lord's motivations for everything, and I don't need to know. I trust He knows what He's doing and I only seek a confirmation of the inspiration of our leaders when it comes to policy. If I get an answer that it's inspired then what more do I need to know?

My question to you: do you feel it was a moral mistake for your Church to deny African American men the priesthood for as long as it did?

Of course not. A church run by revelation from God is not subject to "moral mistkaes" in administration. Our leaders are not perfect, and they have their own problems, but the Lrod has promised that He will never allow the church to be misled.

The reason I ask is simply that there's little point in having much of a conversation about your Church's teachings and policies if you insist that they are by definition right.

Which is why this Equality Ride is not going to accomplish what you want it to. We believe our church is guided by divine sanction. That's non-negotiable. If you don't agree that's perfectly fine. my family doesn't agree, but I still love 'em to death. I just ask that you respect my right to believe what I want.

[QUOET=themattperry]Have a great weekend![/QUOTE]

Hey, you too.

[maklelan]

On a cynical note:

We do not afford you rights. For one, we can not afford rights, they are not ours to afford or remove, and for another, you have more rights than we do.

I agree with you that "misuse" is the wrong word, because "use" without the "mis-" would have sufficed. Scripture should not be used to deny any God-imagined human equal rights.

You are correct, our rights do not come from you; but you have more rights than I do from my perspective.

As far as scripture goes, the word "should" is a difficult word to support an argument on. It means you have superior moral judgment. It means you know what's best for me and for everyone else. It arrogates to you a lot more authority over my values than anyone really has.

You use the word "rights" like it means something concrete and specific, but it does not. John Kery said Americans have the "right" to import drugs from Canada, but nowhere is that considered a natural right of Americans. You do not have a natural right to come to my University. I do not have a natural right to come to mine either. We are not denying you a "right" that was given you by any authority on this planet. If you want "rights' to be general then I am denied a lot more rigths by being a Latter-day Saint and a BYU student than you are by not being so. Our "rights' are inequal in your favor, but I don't think it's about "rights".

[Jamie McDaniel]

My question to you: do you feel it was a moral mistake for your Church to deny African American men the priesthood for as long as it did?

In fact, is it possible for your church to make moral errors in its policies and teachings at all?

Of course not. A church run by revelation from God is not subject to "moral mistkaes" in administration.
Wow. I really don't know what to say regarding this justification of injustice. This is disturbing to me, Dan, because outside of religion, you're probably a very reasonable person.

[Venari]

You use the word "rights" like it means something concrete and specific, but it does not .... You do not have a natural right to come to my University. I do not have a natural right to come to mine either. We are not denying you a "right" that was given you by any authority on this planet. If you want "rights' to be general then I am denied a lot more rigths by being a Latter-day Saint and a BYU student than you are by not being so. Our "rights' are inequal in your favor, but I don't think it's about "rights".

maklelan,

You make a strong point I have be contemplating my self. What is the difference between a "right" and "Right" or is there any. I think it is best to say a "Right" is something we as Americans thought the Constitution and the Bill of Rights grants us and as humans the Geneva Convention grants us. Namely these are basic rights which state another person cannot come and deprive us of our "Life, Liberty or Pursuit of Happiness."

Yet there is a strong confusion when it comes to a "right." Being a freedom we have but is not fundamental to our basic human identity. A perfect case is at Regent University Haven Harren, the co-director of the Equality Ride, stated she had a right to talk to those students. She’s partly correct; she has the right in the freedom to talk to anyone she wants to. But it is not a fundamental right and it is one that can be taken away, as in the school saying "you cannot come on to campus." She still as the freedom to choose to talk to any student but it now carries potential legal repercussions because that right was rescinded.

Also the assertion the right is fundamentally hers only shows a deep disrespect for the school and the students. It is tantamount to me as a Pentecostal trying to "witness" to you to tell you LDS is wrong, I am acting in good faith to my conscience that I am trying to save you. Yet when you ask me to stop and I do not I cross the line and impede on your right in favour of my own.

Of course this only works in a perfect world... where we recognize what our "Rights" and "rights" are and respect the "Rights" and "rights" of others.

-Venari

[Jamie McDaniel]

If you want "rights' to be general then I am denied a lot more rigths by being a Latter-day Saint and a BYU student than you are by not being so.
Having grown up in Kentucky, I would speculate that there is unfair treatment of Latter-day Saints and also Jehovah's Witnesses in the South. Perhaps in the area of employment? I haven't heard personal stories, I'm just going by my observation of southern Protestant and Catholic views towards those two groups. Perhaps you can provide more insight on that that.

But in comparison, LDS members can adopt children, serve openly in the military, give blood, and marry each other in all fifty states.

[maklelan]

Wow. I really don't know what to say regarding this justification of injustice. This is disturbing to me, Dan, because outside of religion, you're probably a very reasonable person.

In the Bible I'm sure everyone thought the same thing about the nation of Israel and the Christians. I'm quite used to people not accepting my faith.

[maklelan]

Of course this only works in a perfect world... where we recognize what our "Rights" and "rights" are and respect the "Rights" and "rights" of others.

I promise you I do my best to repsect the rights of others (and I'm not always perfect), but I do get a little defensive in situations where I feel my rights are coming under assault.

[closetcougar]

I was ecstatic to see that Soulforce was coming to BYU. I am a gay student at BYU (as I write, I look around to make sure that nobody will see). I have been through 4 years of therapy trying to change. I have "fasted" to the point that I weighed 105 lbs. I lost 35 pounds in a year trying to "fast" my sexual desires away, as the prophet suggested in a book called the Miracle of Forgiveness (aka the most depressing book in the world). I apologize for the vagueness of my email, but the paranoia at BYU is incredible, and the vagueness is necessary in order to ensure my continuing student status at BYU. The BYU student editor on your forum expresses a belief that BYU is a sympathetic and caring place. I wholeheartedly believe this. The students at BYU ARE kind, friendly, and do try hard to do what is right. Unfortunately, their right is dictated by a heterosexual man who was born in the early 1900s. If the BYU editor would hold true to his journalistic principles, then he would find that homosexuality wasn’t an issue in the “restored gospel” teachings until the Civil Rights movement and that George Albert Smith was gay (read A Peculiar People), and bi-sexual at the least. I believe that members of the BYU and LDS community have the right to hold to, and practice, their beliefs and standards at their private university. However, change will never take place without people like Soulforce who give voice to those who cannot.

I did not come to terms with my sexuality until I felt like I was too invested in my education at BYU to transfer schools. With a cost-benefit analysis I traded my self-respect and my choice to be authentic with those around me, for an easier route to my educational goals. I did make the choice to attend BYU initially, but when you have been inundated since the age of 18 months with the message that there is a part of you that is unacceptable, when you are 18 and decide to attend BYU, you expect those feelings to go away as a function of your dedication and faithfulness to the LDS teachings, especially with the help of the honor code Nazis as they police the websites you surf and plea bargain with those who have already been turned in for their sexual transgression in exchange for names of others like you. This is not Christ-like. Jesus did not hunt down those around him and force them to turn others in. Jesus did not hold courts of judgment (although by your teachings, He is one of the few with the right to do such) and send letters to parents of adult human beings to tell them that their son/daughter has been expelled from BYU. Jesus did not kick people out of His presence because they challenged His beliefs, or lived lives that were contrary to His way of life.

I have been in a committed monogamous gay relationship for many years. I do not understand how a person's actions, commitments, and expressions of love can be seen as sinful and worthy of being expelled from their educational institution. The LDS church preaches about agency and choice and has a history of their own in dealing with oppression and hate from others. I am not asking to have premarital sex. I am asking to be able to show those around me who I really am. Sexuality is such a small part of me, but at a campus like BYU, my sexuality is an indirect topic of discussion 6 out of 7 days of the week. I am not able to share my experiences that I have with the person I love, with my classmates, professors, or anyone else.

I have walked across campus thousands of times. I have never heard anyone call another student by racially or culturally derogatory names, with the exception of the words “fag”, and the phrase “that’s so gay.” This is not an exception to the rule. I have heard it dozens of times; on the sidewalks, in the WILK, during classroom discussions and even classroom presentations. I sit and say nothing. And neither do those around me. It is BYU's version of the Red Scare.

I have a lunch date with my partner, so I must go, but I want you to know that your visit to BYU is an answer to many, many, many gay prayers.

[awediot]

Wonderful! Thank you too SF:)

[maklelan]

Having grown up in Kentucky, I would speculate that there is unfair treatment of Latter-day Saints and also Jehovah's Witnesses in the South. Perhaps in the area of employment? I haven't heard personal stories, I'm just going by my observation of southern Protestant and Catholic views towards those two groups. Perhaps you can provide more insight on that that.

But in comparison, LDS members can adopt children, serve openly in the military, give blood, and marry each other in all fifty states.

I cannot give blood. I have been spit on, shot at, had rocks thrown at me(on several occasions), and several people have attacked me at knife point. My friends have been denied access to schools because they were Mormon, and I have been kicked out of several public places. Granted, a lot of this took place in other countries, but everyone has to deal with some form of prejudice or another. I can't walk around certain parts of Dallas (my home town) because I'm white. I used to get harrassed at gay clubs I would go to with my friends because I was straight. They would tell me I wasn't welcome because it was "their" club. That stuff doesn't really bother me, but we all have to deal with unequal treatment.

To the BYU stdent: I'm sorry people make you feel like you have to hide who you are, but it's one of the problems of have too sheltered and bigoted a childhood. I grew up surrounded by gays, blacks, Muslims and cult members.

the "rights" you mentioned are not dictated by a man. We believe they are dictated by God, and the values we practice haven't changed since the church began. George Albert Smith was not gay. Every person in history (from Abe Lincoln to George Bush), at some point or another, is accused of being gay. Usually it's because they had close friends of the same gender. I have a friend that I would do anything for. We tell each other we love each other, we served missions together in Uruguay and slept in the same room for six months. We are perfectly straight.

I suggest you finish reading Miracle of Forgiveness, because the second half of the book lets us know that sin is inevitable, but it doesn't matte, because the Atonement wipes it all away. Some people will never get rid of homosexual desires, but that doesn't mean you have no choice but to engage in homosexual sex. Many people choose lives of celibacy because of one reason or another, and they're perfetly happy.

As far as the "honor code Nazis" go, only about 2% of all recorded honor code violations had to do with homosexual conduct. The vast majority of it is just ignored. Your conspiracy theory about some professor bashing his fists into a steel table and demanding names from a cowering little offender may evoke indignation, but it is completely false. There's no such thing as an honor code "plea bargain" and they don't grill people so they can go track down others. If you've heard stories like that I'm afraid you're misinformed.

"Fag" and "that's so gay" have just become colloquial parts of speech, and I hear it come more often from gays than from straights. I don't use that kind of language, but if you dont want straight people using it so much then let other gay people know it isn't helpful to use phrases like "breeders" and "gayly forward" and stuff like that. Two wrongs don't make a right. If you want to be equal then don't use language to try to hold up those barriers.

[Jamie McDaniel]

Closetcougar, if you don't know about Affirmation, I hope that you'll check them out. Their website is www.affirmation.org (http://www.affirmation.org)

Also, if you haven't seen the movie Latter Days (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0002I84KS/soulforce-20), it is a really sweet movie about a gay Mormon.

And Family Fundamentals (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0009PW3QA/soulforce-20) is a good documentary that tells the story of Christian families with gay members. One of the families is Mormon. Watching that film is the first time I learned about sacred underwear. :)

[keltic63]

I promise you I do my best to repsect the rights of others (and I'm not always perfect), but I do get a little defensive in situations where I feel my rights are coming under assault.


sounds like we're in agreement here at SoulForce then.

[Haven Herrin]

We do not come to tell you that your faith is a lie. We come to look at the pain that your religion causes as articulated by the gay and lesbian students on your campus. We come to talk about human suffering and what we, as the larger community that includes you and me and anyone of compassion, can do to solve that. And, yes, right now, the obvious solution to me is a change in your religion. If we view that the religion is the root of the suffering, then of course we want to address the root. But let's focus on a middle ground where we can come together and establish our common concerns and common pursuits. The is a lot to be learned by everyone concerned, and I hope that we can get to brass tacks, as they say, and engage in civil discourse about it rather than miss this opportunity for dialogue simply because we disagree.

[zephyr013]

Maklelan,

At the risk of sounding patronizing, I would like to commend you on your conduct on this board. It is no doubt frustrating to fight for your beliefs when you are so outnumbered.
I encounter that daily.

I am deeply hurt when I learn of people suffering from misinformation and untruth. I am sorry for religious discrimination you have faced because of untruth of other authorities of other forms of Christianity. I do believe that Mormons are blessed by God. And I am reminded of what King said:

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

That's why I will stand for Truth and not for a particular ideology. And not just for my Equality, but for all Equality, for EVERYONE.

Maklelan, you deserve to be able to express your beliefs in the way you've found to be honest for you.

Don't I deserve to to be able to express my love in the way I've found to be honest for me?

Whether or not you believe that the answer to that question is yes, it does not change the Truth that we all deserve equal treatment.

[closetcougar]

I cannot give blood. I have been spit on, shot at, had rocks thrown at me(on several occasions), and several people have attacked me at knife point. My friends have been denied access to schools because they were Mormon, and I have been kicked out of several public places. I used to get harrassed at gay clubs I would go to with my friends because I was straight. They would tell me I wasn't welcome because it was "their" club. That stuff doesn't really bother me, but we all have to deal with unequal treatment.
Maklelan, I have no doubt that you know what it is like to be a minority and I am guessing that if you could have the option of not being spit on, shot at, held at knife point, kicked out of public places, denied entry into some schools, harassed at gay clubs etc. then you would do what you could do change it. That is what we are trying to do. We all have to deal with unequal treatment, but that doesn’t make it right and that doesn’t mean it can’t change. Furthermore, such unequal treatment certainly isn't Christ-like.
To the BYU stdent: I'm sorry people make you feel like you have to hide who you are, but it's one of the problems of have too sheltered and bigoted a childhood. I grew up surrounded by gays, blacks, Muslims and cult members.
I'm not quite sure I understand what you were trying to say above... but thanks for your apology? Me having to hide who I am is more a result of being at BYU, a community of 30000 people living sheltered lives, rather than a sheltered bigoted childhood. Most kids who come out, before they come out, have been harassed much of their lives about their sexuality. I’m guessing that most gay people, no matter when they came out, didn’t live that sheltered or unbigoted a childhood. I'm not quite sure I understand the meaning of your upbringing, either. Is that to say that you are used to being different? You forget, regardless of times when you feel like a minority, and you may be, the majority of your life is spent as a straight white male.

the "rights" you mentioned are not dictated by a man. We believe they are dictated by God, and the values we practice haven't changed since the church began. George Albert Smith was not gay. Every person in history (from Abe Lincoln to George Bush), at some point or another, is accused of being gay. Usually it's because they had close friends of the same gender. I have a friend that I would do anything for. We tell each other we love each other, we served missions together in Uruguay and slept in the same room for six months. We are perfectly straight.
I applaud you for being on this site and hope I do not speak hurtfully, as I admire your attempt to be open, and am grateful for the opportunity to have some sort of dialogue with someone from BYU. Regarding George A. Smith, just read the book. Not every person in history has had a book written about their gayness. My brother and his companion, who are both attractive socially adjusted people, post mission have lived together for 6 years, his companion was on the ballroom dance team, my brother (age 27) has never kissed a girl, and they are both planning on attending the same law school. I don’t know about you, but when it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and acts like a duck, I call it a duck. It may not be a duck, but I give it my best estimate.
Which God are our rights dictated by? Yours or mine? The values that the LDS faith has practiced HAVE changed. . . blacks receiving the priesthood, women no longer standing in ordination or blessing circles, the word of wisdom, the temporal end of polygamy, birth control, abortion, etc…
I suggest you finish reading Miracle of Forgiveness, because the second half of the book lets us know that sin is inevitable, but it doesn't matte, because the Atonement wipes it all away. Some people will never get rid of homosexual desires, but that doesn't mean you have no choice but to engage in homosexual sex. Many people choose lives of celibacy because of one reason or another, and they're perfetly happy.
Sin is also subjective. The book also states that if you ever engage in a sin that you have repented of, it’s as though you were never forgiven for any of the past offenses of that sin. Some people will never get rid of heterosexual desires either, but MY God will still let you in, as long as you have treated people in a Christ-like manner. Imagine if the prophet came out tomorrow and said that God told him that homosexuality was the new law. You could no longer be with your wife/husband and if you were, you were living in sin. Any psychology book will tell you that social support is a necessary part of a psychologically healthy life and that marriage is good for your health, all around. Why then, would the church discourage such a bond? The best and only reason I have ever heard, is that “it’s a sin.” I can’t really argue with that and I do respect people who have beliefs, but it doesn’t mean that I won’t have a dialogue about it (obviously).
As far as the "honor code Nazis" go, only about 2% of all recorded honor code violations had to do with homosexual conduct. The vast majority of it is just ignored. Your conspiracy theory about some professor bashing his fists into a steel table and demanding names from a cowering little offender may evoke indignation, but it is completely false. There's no such thing as an honor code "plea bargain" and they don't grill people so they can go track down others. If you've heard stories like that I'm afraid you're misinformed.
I actually don’t have that conspiratorial (I looked that word up on the thesaurus:) view of most of my professors. Although I don’t have conversations about my personal life with them, many of them seem frustrated by the suffocating nature of the “board of directors” at BYU and the strict code to which faculty must adhere, thereby limiting the hiring options at BYU. Unfortunately the "honor code nazis" DO indeed exist and we hide behind usernames online and fake IDs at clubs, in order to vent without paying a price. To be hones with you, I am surprised that you admit going to a gay club due to the honor code office. My partner was turned into the honor code office by his/her ex-boy/girl friend because the bishop told him/her that in order to be fully forgiven s/he needed to report those whom s/he had sexual relations with. When my partner was called into the honor code office, they showed him/her a file of incidences that they had tracked. My partner was told that if s/he would give names of other students, s/he would only be put on probation, rather than expelled. When s/he refused to do so, they kicked him/her out. S/he had only one semester left in order to graduate, and spent the next 2 years finishing his/her degree at another university. There are all sorts of ways of getting a more lenient sentence from the honor code office; if you are worried that someone has turned you in, go and turn yourself in and they will think that you have felt the guilt of the spirit and would like to change your life. Another popular method is apologizing profusely and thanking them for catching you so that you could turn your life around.
"Fag" and "that's so gay" have just become colloquial parts of speech, and I hear it come more often from gays than from straights. I don't use that kind of language, but if you dont want straight people using it so much then let other gay people know it isn't helpful to use phrases like "breeders" and "gayly forward" and stuff like that. Two wrongs don't make a right. If you want to be equal then don't use language to try to hold up those barriers.[/QUOTE]
I hear the N word from black people, but I sure as hell am not going to go around saying that because I know that it is hurtful. However, I also don't judge black people who do. They are coming from a different place than myself and using the N word for them, serves a different purpose than it would for me. Being gay has become a way of life that a large part of the world has adjusted to. By your logic, you should no longer consider homosexuality a sin b/c it’s a colloquial part of life in much of the world. Like you, I have taken the example of Maya Angelou and I try to promote tolerance among people by letting my gay friends know that “that’s so gay” “fag” and “breeder” isn’t acceptable speech. I am only saying that a double standard does exist on campus and I hear it MUCH more often from heterosexual people than from gay people. The N word is never used and neither are many other racial epithets, with the exception of gay terms. Even though BYU claims that gay human beings are welcome to attend school as long as we don’t practice, the remarks and other statements made by students, send mixed messages. The students are tomorrows church leaders members and policy makers and the people who I believe that Soulforce will influence. In all fairness I have never heard such phrases or words come from those in authority positions. I am not saying that YOU are to blame for the individual behavior on BYU campus. I'm just saying that Soulforce is something that many of us look forward to.
Gotta go prepare my sunday school lesson :)

Soulforce member,
Thank you for referrals. I have seen Latter Days and I have visited the Affirmation website. I can resonate with your take on it. Keep up the good work and thank you, thank you, thank you.

[maklelan]

I need to make a clarification regarding my earlier post. When I referenced a "sheltered bigoted childhood" I was referring to the proclivity of some LDS parents to teach their children that homosexuals are bad people. My dad hated my Mom's sister beause she was openly gay, and the idea of having me stay with her in San Fransisco for any period of time irritated the crap out of him. I was raised in a somewhat bigoted family, but they've chilled out a ton since then. Many, many students here come from similar circumstances, and they jsut act on the principles they wer eraised with. While we do believe homosexual relations are a sin, we are taught by the church that we need to love and appreciate all people as daughters and sons of God, irrespective of the trials and tribulations they're called upon to go through in this life. If an LDS person judges you personally or forces that kind of dominion over you because of some perceived moral superiority, you can rest assured that they ar not acting in accordance with the principles of the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ. We believe the church is perfect, but we're well aware of the fat that not a single member of it is. It is a tragedy that that kind of oppression is present, and your visit could do much to change that, but not if your intention is to tell us our religion is wrong. This is where you shoot yourselves in the foot. Come to promote better understanding and we (should) welcome you with open arms. Come to tell us our religion is wrong and must be changed and you only drive the wedge of misunderstanding and inconsideration deeper. Please consider that befor before you tell me I need to open my mind.

[awediot]

Your Religion IS wrong. My Religion is wrong. Untill a perfect religion sweeps across this planet, flawlessly fillig in every gap, all we have are reflections... Challenge all Prophets. True ones invite skepticism. Unquestionable declaretion of Law is a sign of corruption. Carefully open your mind.

This is an attack on false teaching anywhere, everywhere, by no means just BYU. You wrote early on that." My conversion was a very special experience for me, and I've never looked back,", and that is deep and True and I would never soil that. I'm hoping that you gain the confidence in God, to start looking back, and with His help, examine where your Church, and their Church and my church, may have certain particulars wrong... They do. They all do. Rooting them out only leads to Truth.

[maklelan]

That's an interesting perspective, and I believe my religion does fill all the gaps, but you don't because you're different. We're all different, and to say that a religion will, should, or can fill all the gaps means we have to give up our individuality to be a part of it. God does not develop religion to pander to our will. God creates religion to help us levitate to His. The true religion is not the one that says no one has to change. The tre religion is theone that affords man the pathway by which he may become more like God. I am a student of the Bible. My major is Ancient Near Eastern Languages, and I study the Bible in the original tongues. If there's one thing that is inescapable in the Bible it is that men must conform to the will of God, and not the other way around. From Adam to John we are told that we must become more like Him and forsake all that does not fit. If you want to believe another dogma that's your prerogative, but it is not Biblical. If you would like to engage me in a discussion of Biblical issues or Christianity I would be happy to oblige.

[closetcougar]

Dan,
I don't know if this is in the Bible or the BOM, but we are also told, "men are that they might have joy." I have had personal revelation that my happiness brings me closer to God and he is pleased with my decision to live an authentic life, one which also happens to make me happy (aka gay).

[awediot]

I believe my religion does fill all the gaps, but you don't because you're different. We're all different, and to say that a religion will, should, or can fill all the gaps means we have to give up our individuality to be a part of it.

Your interpretation, nothing to do with what I said... But do you mean you have given up your individuality for your gapless religion? I don't see The Truth wiping out individuals. There's way too many aspects within it to homogonize all its followers.

If there's one thing that is inescapable in the Bible it is that men must conform to the will of God, and not the other way around. From Adam to John we are told that we must become more like Him and forsake all that does not fit. If you want to believe another dogma that's your prerogative, but it is not Biblical.

Well, the Book of Mormon is certainly not Biblical to the majority of Christians (another topic).

But, I absolutely agree. This is not meant as a justification to bend the Bible to my will (though that is exactly what God Himself has forced me to do). I am simply forsaking that which does not fit: Him thinking me an Abomination being a big one. (The automatic damnation of those who add to scripture being another) I have only felt that from the world. Never from Him...

You would no doubt wipe the floor with me in scripture and hermeneutics, and thank the Lord formal education is not a prerequisite of grace. My point is that there is knowledge and Truth outside of whatever Holy texts one is following, and not only can it at times be incorporated with no harm done, it can enliven and solidify the often dry tomes of wisdom telling us to stop reading and get a life. They are brilliant, yet incomplete with out some doubt.

[Daniel]

An interesting- and intense- series of posts.

ClosetCougar- I can see you have the makings of a psychologist. I mean this as a compliment. Would that I had been as self-aware as you seem to be when I was attending an Assembies of God School years ago. My self-awarenss of being gay- of being different- lead me to question everything. And one of the more subtle matters was the lingo I heard used. It became increasingly clear to me how I was inducted into a system of thought where phrases and words brought with them an agreed-upon meaning. Subsequent study of Eastern religions and meditation in particular lead me to conclude that these words and phrases were not concrete.

Maklelan- For you, matters are very concrete indeed ("My religion does fill all the gaps"). And you seem to be iin a great hurry to dispense with any messy self-inquiry ("we have to give up our individuality to be part of it"). While no scholar of original languages myself, I do remember that the good book asserts that the "Kingdom of heaven is within you."? Of course, I could be glib and say that I found it in my boyfriend's eyes as well as on the cushion- but it would also be the truth. Love is a great teacher.

[Daniel]

ClosetCougar-

This isn't a term that I normally think of using, but I understand and applaud the self-knowledge that leads you to do so. (I guess I would, if pressed, use the phrase 'self-realization', but this hardly seems the point.) I recall just such a moment- or rather a series of moments. They came after periods of intense introspection and have informed, as such things do, a great deal of my thinking.

[closetcougar]

I take your words as a compliment and owe it to gay individuals who have dared to break the mold, and question "reality," before me that I am able to be as comfortable as I am in my own skin. Many Mormons forget that the LDS church originated with a 14 year old boy who challenged the religious movement at that time, and many saw him as a heretic and psychotic (delusions and hallucinations), while many more today believe him to be a prophet of God.

[closetcougar]

Perhaps a bit tangential for his thread, but when you speak of such moments in your life, which come to mind? I am just interested in understanding the overarching principles that help people listen to their own voice. It seems that this is in line whith the Soulforce agenda of helping people see gay and lesbian individuals as people and, even if they still disagree, can be concilliatory in allowing us the basic rights that are afforded every other human being in the U.S.

[Daniel]

Not tangential at all. The overarching principals for listening to that 'still small voice' reflect and make use of, for me at least, the following conditions (there are many books and perspectives as well as 'methods' on this subject):

1) Making time to be quiet. At least 20 minutes a day if possible. Studies have shown that there is a lasting, favorable and measurable effect on the brain when a person undertakes a meditative or spiritual practice.

2) Conscious relaxation: this means focusing one's awareness from head to toe and letting each area become 'relaxed'. A jumpy body implies a jumpy mind. Getting it calmed down is key.

3) Deep Slow Breathing. Long exhalations slow down one's brainwaves, heart rate and respiration. It's the one skill that is now taught to people to reduce their stress and was proven from research in bio-feedback studies.

4) Eye Fixation: meditative/prayer methods- across the boards- make use of this in one way or another. Breath and eye movement come to a standsill when you are concentrating intently. Try to thread a small needle and you will see what this means.

We don't seem to cultivate this kind of inner awareness- or practices that lead to it- very much unless we are impelled to do so by our circumstances. Realizing I was gay was the kicker.

Getting quiet is about active listening. How can we have dialogue with each other when all we hear is a lot of chatter in our heads? It takes a degree of skill to quiet things down enough to see what is really going on in there. Then one can Act instead of React.

[cris]

Hi Dan,
I welcome your sincere interest in grappling with the issues that you raise here. I am not afraid of debate or discussion, which is something I have dealt with most of my life. But I really question your openness, not only to what others are saying, but also to what your church teaches.

Are you being honest with yourself about the beliefs of your church? I find it ironic that your main issue with Soulforce is regarding the Freedom Riders’ “invasion” of your sacred space, BYU, and your perceived attack on the beliefs of Mormonism. The irony is in the fact that one of the key components of the growth of your church has been through proselytizing. It has been in fact one of the tactics encouraged in your missionaries for years.

My family moved to a small town in Utah when I was 14. I spent my four years of high school in that community, where we were first scorned as “outsiders” and “Gentiles” until the goal changed to make every effort to convert those of us who were not LDS. I had to “defend my faith” on a daily basis at school. The goal of my peers, and even friends, was to convince me that my beliefs were wrong, and that I must accept the Book of Mormon and the Mormon Church as the true church of Christ.

I still love my friends, but it took me years to overcome my resentment of that experience in my life. It was so rough on us that some in my family think this is what “turned me”gay. Well, I’m able to tell you that it had nothing to do with where I lived. It’s only that while I lived there, I came to terms with my sexuality, although I kept it well hidden from anyone other than a close friend.

Please don’t assume that I am bitter or resentful against Mormons. I look back on that time with gratitude for what it taught me. In God’s own creative and sometimes humorous way, I have overcome any feelings of anger through timely encounters with other Mormons that I have known since that time, especially very recently, and even more so through having a relationship with another man, who had been a devout Mormon his whole life, was married for 15 years and had 5 children, until finally facing the fact that all the reparative efforts of bishop and church were to naught, and he was and will always be gay. (Probably our break-up was partly the result of his continuing struggle with guilt issues that never really allowed me into his life.) He and many others like him, some that I know personally, are suffering for their honesty, being openly ex-communicated from the church because of it. He was “safe” when putting up a good front, but his heart would not let him live a lie. Who would choose to do this if there really was a choice, as you seem to believe? Why would any of us make that initial choice, knowing that we risk social or religious disgrace?

When you say that you don’t really know why God would change his mind about polygamy or black men becoming priests, I wonder why you do not research the reason for these changes. Do you not know? The polygamy change came at the time of Utah’s attempts to join the Union and came more out of compulsion. Many practicing polygamists today do not believe that this change was a mandate that must be followed. As for the priesthood I well remember the change in the ruling on blacks and the priesthood, when a Portland bishop openly baptized a black man, creating a firestorm of publicity. Many other changes such as permission to drink Coke or tea that is in a bag have come recently. Why? Check it out for yourself. What would happen if you were to enquire into your church’s history, even as to the changes in the Book of Mormon since its original printing?

Am I being critical? Perhaps. But my intention is really to ask you if it is so impossible for organizations such as BYU to change their policy of discrimination. Most of the 3,000+ same-sex couples in the Salt Lake area hold little hope that the policy of the church will change in their lifetimes, but they continue their efforts nevertheless. In the same way that my former denomination, Southern Baptists, excused support of slavery on the grounds that it was scriptural but have only recently recanted, I believe that other religions will one day face the reality that being homosexual is not a choice. It is who we are, part of the creative assortment as assigned by God. Why would God create someone as gay or lesbian? Why would God in fact assign some as hermaphrodites? Is it evil or just a part of the natural selective process present in his creation?

Instead of being encouraged to make good choices as a gay man, your moral standard says that no matter what I choose, I am living in sin. Thus, many young people, such as those at BYU, who are trying to find their own way as lesbians or gay men, are given no set of standards as to how they should live. They’re not empowered to make wise and safe choices within the realm of their own sexuality. They are expected to behave as you do, even though it is not part of their true makeup.

In the same way that these Freedom Riders have no intention of changing anyone else’s religious beliefs, this is really not about you or your church. It is about those who are gay or lesbian, who want to be a part of your church-based school, who are fearful because of a policy that singles them out on the basis of who they are. (If you say that there is no discrimination against them for this, only for their behavior, I respond by reminding you that you have a choice of dating and marrying. They don’t.) For me it is worth facing the scorn and anger if someone can be reached with a message that I have learned: God does not reject you. Be whole!

Please seriously consider what I’ve written.

Yours sincerely,
Cris

[maklelan]

Your interpretation, nothing to do with what I said... But do you mean you have given up your individuality for your gapless religion? I don't see The Truth wiping out individuals. There's way too many aspects within it to homogonize all its followers.

What I'm saying is that your gap is another man's glory, and for that to be filled would rob another of their happiness. If God must pander to our desires then He must do exactly that, but His charge to us is not to do whatever makes you feel good. His charge is to keep the commandments and find a superlative happiness that transcends the pleasures sought for by most people in the world.

Well, the Book of Mormon is certainly not Biblical to the majority of Christians (another topic).

(The automatic damnation of those who add to scripture being another).

You're right, it's not biblical, and that's because the Bible is one book, and the Book of Mormon is another (and the Bible is a Catholic creation). The idea that the canon has closed is also a Cathoilic notion set forth in the mid sixteenth century when Revelation was added to the end and the canon was closed to try to cut the knees off of any reformers that might bring forth additional scripture. That would undermine the authority of the Catholic church and their subsidization would cease. Look it up, if you really want to know the truth rather than what is told you by others. Your "damnation" doctrine is a Catholic propoganda tool and absolutely nothing more.

By the way, that's one person who has condemned me to the zero people I have condemned.

But, I absolutely agree. This is not meant as a justification to bend the Bible to my will (though that is exactly what God Himself has forced me to do).

So your desires supercede inspired scripture and doctrine?

I am simply forsaking that which does not fit: Him thinking me an Abomination being a big one.

He does not think you are an abomination, and my religion does not teach that. I don't know who told you that, but they were sadly mistaken.

My point is that there is knowledge and Truth outside of whatever Holy texts one is following, and not only can it at times be incorporated with no harm done, it can enliven and solidify the often dry tomes of wisdom telling us to stop reading and get a life. They are brilliant, yet incomplete with out some doubt.

I agree. I've read many different holy texts, from the Bahgavad Gita to the Lao Tzu and I find amazing truths in all of them. I also find sublime truth in atheism, nature and science. I feel everyone can be inspired, and I never said that one must confine their existence to a book, but what I am saying is that we must not confine God to our desires. Giving our agency to Him is the only thing we can give Him that he doesn't already have. I believe you refuse to do that, and that's your prerogative. I also believe you think it's a measure of self-mastery that is too much to ask of you. If the men and women in the Bible gave up their lives for the gospel what makes you think your recompense will be equal by refusing to give up the pleasures of the flesh? I understand it differently than you and I'm not trying to convince you that I'm right. What I'm trying to do is show you that we have spent a good amount of time trying to find out what God wants from us (which we believe is more important than what we want from God), and we feel good with what we have. We just ask that you allow us to practice those beliefs without interference.

[awediot]

What I'm saying is that your gap is another man's glory, and for that to be filled would rob another of their happiness.
Not in the perfect religion we were discussing (or say when the Kingdom is established again) I see the the two existing simultaneously as contradictory.
You're right, it's not biblical, and that's because the Bible is one book, and the Book of Mormon is another (and the Bible is a Catholic creation). The idea that the canon has closed is also a Cathoilic notion set forth in the mid sixteenth century when Revelation was added to the end and the canon was closed to try to cut the knees off of any reformers that might bring forth additional scripture. That would undermine the authority of the Catholic church and their subsidization would cease.
Well too late for the Catholics. Alot of us snuck out. Maybe WE on this site ARE reformers, just like you.
By the way, that's one person who has condemned me to the zero people I have condemned.
Put back in context: " I am simply forsaking that which does not fit: Him thinking me an Abomination being a big one. (The automatic damnation of those who add to scripture being another)"... I did the exact opposite and was actually defending you... Or perhaps I was condemning your actions, not your person...
So your desires supercede inspired scripture and doctrine?
No, desires are controllable. The nature of my Soul supercedes the claim of inspiration. That I have no choice in.
If the men and women in the Bible gave up their lives for the gospel what makes you think your recompense will be equal by refusing to give up the pleasures of the flesh?
I cannot blame you for seeing my human need to bond and love and share and nurture as mere pleasures of the flesh. The fact it is as ingrained and Holy as your longing for a woman (?) and family is impossible for you to understand, and I will remain deludeing myself in your eyes. It is a measure of self mastery that is too much to ask. I nearly mastered suicide first and know the idea of giving up my life for the gospels INTIMATELY...

He does not think you are an abomination, and my religion does not teach that. I don't know who told you that, but they were sadly mistaken.

My core, my essence and very Soul is the abominable sin you think I can just master. If I'd just get over that, I'd be ok. The inability to see we are GAY, not fighting off Gayness, does indeed teach I am an abomination.

It is teaching the same to your friend as well.

[maklelan]

You define yourself by your sexuality, and I don't. You're perfectly allowed to believe the things you want, and I'm not telling you to stop, I'm just trying to defend my right to do the same. Do you still feel you need to attack that right?

[awediot]

Others use my sexuality to define me. I am not juicy gossip to myself. My 'attacks' are not on your right to believe, they are on the belief itself. It is easy for you to allow me to believe what I want, mine don't hurt anybody. Sorry if I can't return the favor, but yours nearly killed me...

Can you defend them without resorting to "they told me so"?

[Zerbie]

Maklelan,

You have the right to believe what you want. No one is attacking your right to believe anything. Many of us vigorously disagree with your belief itself, we think it's incorrect. You think we are incorrect. That has been established. But you have a right to believe what you wish, that right is not under attack anywhere, least of all on this board. Even if we raise questions about the belief itself. Perhaps especially.

Awediot tells you that the kind of teaching you reiterate on this thread nearly drove him to suicide, and you respond as if completely unmoved. The sense I get from your posts is that you ARE completely unmoved by the severity of suffering caused by the widespread proseltyzing of a belief that is anti-gay to its core (yes now I know that you don't find it to be anti-gay, it's established that we disagree about that qualification too. That's fine. It's okay to disagree). But I am amazed that you continue to post here day after day, not allowing this worn old thread to die in peace, but instead you come back after awediot tells you that he was a near-suicide because of internalized homophobia and you turn around and call that information an attack on your belief?!

It is *information!* It is a personal tragedy! It is anything else but an attack.

You and I believe vastly different things. We are the north and south pole. No, farther apart than that. Waaay farther. But we are each allowed to believe whatever we want to believe. If you are secure in your belief, you can read and hear arguments against it and come back with your belief reinforced. Or you might even - heavens! :eek: choose to revise your belief in the light of further information. Your choice, your right. So why do you come here repeatedly claiming to defend your right to believe? Why are you so interested? Or are you merely trolling?

[closetcougar]

Maklelan,

First of all, I can't help but feel positively toward you. You are my brother, my uncle, my father, my best friend... Next,

My, my, my... How hasty you are to forget the history of your own religion. Joseph Smith was considered by many to be a heretic, a treasure hunter, and a hebaphile, (he married a 14 year old woman). He is hailed as a martyr and saint by millions. Your and my ancestors (Robert D. Lee, Jacob Hamblin, Emma Smith, etc.) fought civilly for the right to express their beliefs and they did not stop until that right was granted. They traveled almost as far as the Freedom Ride is traveling, in order to have the right to worship however and whomever they may. They pissed a lot of people off in the process. They did not only worship with permission. They worshipped regardless, because they believed in it.

Why do you discourage the same behavior from others? I know that you are saying we have the right to believe what we do and you yours, but you also say that your beliefs as a church will never change.

Hmmmmm....
If there were a world wide web in the 1960's (which, by the way, I am disappointed that God did not give the glory of such an invention to a fellow Mormon) the subject matter would be black people and the priesthood.

If there were a world wide web in 1900, the subject matter would be polygamy. Your beliefs claim that polygamy is an eternal principle that may no longer be practiced on earth, but will be again in Heaven. Can you not then, for little ol' me, still consider homosexual sex an eternal abomination, but suspend this eternal principle and allow us to cohabitate your campus, just for the temporal life?

I would agree with you in that the Freedom Riders are not going to change the policies today, or tomorrow, or even next year. They will, however, affect you, your friends, my brother, my sister, my cousins, and my classmates.

Also, your newspaper, just yesterday stated this:
Community journalism, of which this department professes to practice, involves a discussion on why a story is deemed newsworthy. It strives to bring out the opinions of those members of the community who are affected, but not normally those who are the opinion makers. Opinions are those moments when standing for something is imperative to that person's moral judgment.
This past week, it was reported that a BYUSA staff member had been terminated, in part, due to his participation in this form of free expression.
We stand up for his right to speak his opinion. While the topic - BYUSA -- is a controversial and "touchy" subject on the part of the administration, this member of our community has a right to speak out without consequence. We, too, have spoken out on the subject of the BYUSA presidency and council. We, too, have been challenged for our opinions.
We, the members of The Universe's editorial board, are first to admit that we, too, have room for improvement. Our errors and foibles are displayed daily, and we are subjected to scrutiny of the faculty, staff and administration.
But there is no shame another department on this campus should face the same scrutiny, and that that scrutiny should not result in the firing of a "whistle-blower" or someone with an alternate opinion. When free speech is held back because of repercussion, or implied repercussion, there is no free speech.
Please help me understand this discrepancy.

[closetcougar]

Letters to the editor from BYU's daily newspaper:

I write this letter in response to Janet Scharman's e-mail, and Wednesday's editorial on Soulforce. I would like to add some thoughts regarding showing true respect and love.
In the first place, "soulforce" is a beautiful term that I feel is used completely out of context, since the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. (the man who coined the term) was fighting against real oppression, and Soulforce is fighting against an imagined enemy, much like Don Quixote.
BYU and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have never uttered "anti-gay rhetoric." This church and its affiliates have spread a message that is widely seen to be one of love, tolerance, equality and (once again) love.
Finally, I encourage all of us to be as Ammon and his brothers. Instead of fearing to offend, I believe we should pray for opportunities to have good, open conversations with the Equality Riders. And in faith, filled with the Spirit, we should go up to them. I personally would like to understand their viewpoint, and I would like to show them that as children of God, they are worthy of a love that may be far beyond what they have ever imagined.
Why should we hide? Why should we hide this candle under a bushel?
Jared Garrett
Anchorage, Alaska


I appreciated Wednesday's editorial encouraging us to respond civilly and respectfully to the presence of Soulforce on campus in April. However, while we are patting ourselves on the back for our "Christian" attitude of tolerance, it seems that we are merely pursuing a self-interested attempt to maintain an image and, as the Universe's editorial stated, "take the higher road." Although the e-mail sent to all students so kindly assured us that "no one is under any obligation to visit with or listen to a member of this group," perhaps the true higher road would be to listen to and recognize the importance of the message Soulforce is trying to communicate to us.
Regardless of personal views or religious convictions regarding such lifestyle choices, it is imperative that we recognize there are many people in the church and at BYU who struggle with the stigma and condemnation associated with their sexuality. Soulforce's agenda may not correspond directly with the church's approach to homosexuality, but both have in common an interest in and love for all of our brothers and sisters, and both advocate acceptance of individual agency and personal understanding of God's will.
It is ironic that the Universe and BYU's administration are encouraging us to follow President Hinckley's counsel and treat the Equality Riders with love and respect, while overlooking Soulforce's underlying goal of seeking love and respect for the GLBT people the organization represents. We might consider that a more Christian approach would be to seek to understand the reality of the oppression and persecution faced by these people in homogeneous societies like our own and to grant them the humanity they deserve.
Katherine Fisher
Salt Lake City


Letter from the editor:In 1998, the Southern Baptist national convention was held in Salt Lake City. That year, the Southern Baptists had reaffirmed their official stance that The Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-day Saints is not a Christian church, and they planned on doing missionary work to help the LDS people understand true Christianity. Utahns were bracing themselves for the Baptist onslaught, and some were undoubtedly brushing up on their Bible bashing techniques.
That same year, before the convention, President Gordon B. Hinckley addressed the issue in his April General Conference address. "We must teach our children to be tolerant and friendly toward those not of our faith," he said. In the same talk, he told the church, "A holier-than-thou attitude is not becoming of us . . . . Love and respect will overcome every element of animosity."
After all was said and done, the Baptist convention came and went without making too much of a ruckus. No great theological battles were reported, and though the media made a big deal out of the whole affair, the Baptists came and went pretty quietly.
A similar situation will be occurring in Provo on April 10. The Soulforce Equality Riders will be at Kiwanis Park "to tell BYU that their anti-gay rhetoric causes [gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgender] suffering," according to the group's Web site. Monday, Janet S. Scharman, BYU's student life vice president, sent out a campus-wide e-mail, encouraging everyone to act civilly toward Soulforce members that may come on campus. We at The Daily Universe echo Scharman's suggestions and encourage students to continue practicing that same civility at Kiwanis Park, where the main rally will take place.
The Soulforce visit is still a couple of weeks off, but we as a campus should be ready and must decide to take the higher road before they arrive. Students who aggressively confront the Equality Riders with a "holier-than-thou attitude" will only reinforce the group's beliefs that Latter-day Saints, and BYU students in particular, are intolerant and prejudiced. More bad than good will come from students feeling the need to call the group to repentance. This message will be transmitted on from them to others across the nation and will only paint the university and the church that owns it in a negative light.
BYU students should follow President Hinckley's council and treat the Equality Riders with love and respect. Those students who can't find it within themselves to do so should just avoid the group all together.

[maklelan]

Are you being honest with yourself about the beliefs of your church? I find it ironic that your main issue with Soulforce is regarding the Freedom Riders’ “invasion” of your sacred space, BYU, and your perceived attack on the beliefs of Mormonism. The irony is in the fact that one of the key components of the growth of your church has been through proselytizing. It has been in fact one of the tactics encouraged in your missionaries for years.

If you are not afraid of debate then I hope you will accept my criticism and correction of some of your remarks. Many, many people who come to know the Mormons are guided into a circle of understanding that does not quite encapsulate what we really think and what we really believe. This comes as a result of observing the actions of members who don't always act in accordance with the teachings of the church; members who speak out erroneously about beliefs and history as if they had some authority; and accepting the definitions and explanations of non-members. I see some of that has crept into your perception of my church and that is perfectly normal.

First, we do not "invade" or "attack" anything as missionaries. Our goal as missioanries is to let our light so shine in a manner that will testify to those we come in ontact with that we possess something special. This is our one and only tactic. We achieve this through the interposition of the Holy Ghost, whic hwe seek to obtain via strict obedience to God's comandments and the promptings of said Holy Ghost. There are many missionaries who enjoy "Bible bashing", attacking, invading and arguing, but they act in defiance of our beliefs and the instructions we receive before being set aart as misionaries. I ask that these poor examples not represent to you the essence of our missionary work.

My family moved to a small town in Utah when I was 14. I spent my four years of high school in that community, where we were first scorned as “outsiders” and “Gentiles” until the goal changed to make every effort to convert those of us who were not LDS. I had to “defend my faith” on a daily basis at school. The goal of my peers, and even friends, was to convince me that my beliefs were wrong, and that I must accept the Book of Mormon and the Mormon Church as the true church of Christ.

This is the effect that people can have when their priorities are screwed up. Those people are not following the Spirit, and are not in harmony with the teachings of the church. My father is not a member, but is good friends with several peope from my ward in Dallas. A while ago a newly assigned home teacher made a special effort to befriend my dad. My dad said, "If you really want to be my friend that's great, but I'm ot interested if you just want another notch on your belt. The man responded that he did indeed want another notch on his belt. This is a similar example of how many people in our church drop the ball when it comes to their responsibilities as members. I am not thinking of converting anyone when I make friends outside the church. I am thinking of making a good friend. If my example or spirit happens to touch that person then I'm ecstatic, but my priority is to people, not to numbers. I'm sorry the church was so horribly represented, but it is in no way indicative of what we're taught.


Who would choose to do this if there really was a choice, as you seem to believe? Why would any of us make that initial choice, knowing that we risk social or religious disgrace?

If you read my quote you will see that I never said I believed being gay was a choice. What I believe is that there is a choice on this side of every single action we take. To have those feelings is no sin or choice. I also said that we wil be judged based on the manner in which we obey the light and knowledge that we personally have acquired in this life.

When you say that you don’t really know why God would change his mind about polygamy or black men becoming priests, I wonder why you do not research the reason for these changes. Do you not know? The polygamy change came at the time of Utah’s attempts to join the Union and came more out of compulsion. Many practicing polygamists today do not believe that this change was a mandate that must be followed.

I hope you will forgive my directness, but I have studied this subject more than you could ever hope to, and I understand it very, very well. It seems to some that it was a decision made of compulsion, but that is what you see when you merely glance once at what someone else has assumed about it. I'd like to quote from the president of the church responsible for the change: "I should have let all the temples go out of our hands; I should have gone to prison myself, and let every other man go there, had not the God of Heaven commanded me to do what I did do." The decision was made because God commanded it to be made. You will say that t is suspiciously convenient, but Wilford Woodruff kept a journal every single day for almost 63 years, and we have his most intimate recordings of all that led to this decision. It occured as he said. It is true that part of the reason was to protect our temples and our people (statehood had nothing to do with it), but Wilford Woodruff would never have made the call unless the Lord commanded it. He and all our people were quite used to being thrown in jail and they were not afraid of it.


As for the priesthood I well remember the change in the ruling on blacks and the priesthood, when a Portland bishop openly baptized a black man, creating a firestorm of publicity. Many other changes such as permission to drink Coke or tea that is in a bag have come recently. Why? Check it out for yourself. What would happen if you were to enquire into your church’s history, even as to the changes in the Book of Mormon since its original printing?

I have looked into every single change made to the Book of Mormon. I am also tired of the requests of people (outside my church) begging me to learn as much about my own church as they think they know. Do you really believe that you could share something with me that I haven't already heard a hundred times? Again, you are judging our church on assumptions, weak members and incomplete data. There has been no "permission" given to drink Coke, nor has there been a prohibition on drinking Coke. It is and always has been a choice that is between the person and the Lord. Tea in a bag? Are you serious? The church is indeed backing away from the specific and direct counsel it has often offered in the past, but this is to separate the wheat from the tares. It is to purge the church of people who cannot find the answers from the guidance of the Spirit. If people ar eto be commanded in all thingsthey have no real faith. D&C 58:26.

Am I being critical? Perhaps. But my intention is really to ask you if it is so impossible for organizations such as BYU to change their policy of discrimination. Most of the 3,000+ same-sex couples in the Salt Lake area hold little hope that the policy of the church will change in their lifetimes, but they continue their efforts nevertheless. In the same way that my former denomination, Southern Baptists, excused support of slavery on the grounds that it was scriptural but have only recently recanted, I believe that other religions will one day face the reality that being homosexual is not a choice.

You presuppose that all of these religions are false, and I do not. If a religion be true, then it cannot be guided by false principles. I believe we are a true religion, and I do not apologize for my beliefs, just as I do not expect you to apologize for yours. A member of my church that supposes it has a better understanding of God's will than the prophet and the twelve Apostles has no testimony of their calling, their authority, their divine guidance or the truthfulness of the church itself. Why do those people insist on trying to change a church they don't even believe in?

Instead of being encouraged to make good choices as a gay man, your moral standard says that no matter what I choose, I am living in sin. Thus, many young people, such as those at BYU, who are trying to find their own way as lesbians or gay men, are given no set of standards as to how they should live.

This is simply not true. We believe having homosexual sex is a sin, but being gay (a very subjective categorization) carries the weight of no intrinsic sin. What of those with an insatiable desire for children? By whose morals are they to live?

In the same way that these Freedom Riders have no intention of changing anyone else’s religious beliefs, this is really not about you or your church.

The mission statement and the e-mail I received regarding BYU states that their goal is for us to see the light and change our policies. Our policies are ditated by and are 100% consistent with our beliefs. They are inseperable. BYU will send every administrator to jail and close its doors forever before it will change its policies regarding homosexual sex. You can spout litany all you want about it being wrong, but we have our beliefs, and we will not change them.

It is about those who are gay or lesbian, who want to be a part of your church-based school, who are fearful because of a policy that singles them out on the basis of who they are. (If you say that there is no discrimination against them for this, only for their behavior, I respond by reminding you that you have a choice of dating and marrying. They don’t.)

And your beliefs grant you the right to engage in pre-marital sex, as well as many other liberties that my beliefs preclude me from participating in. Who's being discriminated against more?

Please seriously consider what I’ve written.

Joseph Smith once said that the first thing you should do when presented with criticism is to make a concerted effort to find the truth in the criticism, and then thank the person for giving you the opportunity to better yourself. I recognize that our members could do a much better job of treating gays and lesbians. I also recognize that we could do a better job at representing the church. I hope you believe me when I say that I have considered your arguments.

To the closet cougar, I have explained why those things happened, and no beliefs were changed, only administration. There were black men ordained to the priesthood during Joseph Smith's day, and polygamy has moved in and out of God's church in the past. Nothing was a stark reversal of morality. Yours is a false analogy.

[closetcougar]

Maklelan, just a quick question - purely personal.
If you knew someone to be actively gay at BYU, would you turn them into the honor code office?

[themattperry]

Meklelan,

I want to mention a few things that your post brought up for me, and also ask you to please be careful about a certain matter.


Joseph Smith once said that the first thing you should do when presented with criticism is to make a concerted effort to find the truth in the criticism, and then thank the person for giving you the opportunity to better yourself. I recognize that our members could do a much better job of treating gays and lesbians. I also recognize that we could do a better job at representing the church. I hope you believe me when I say that I have considered your arguments.

In the spirit of Joseph Smith's advice, Meklelan, I can say that GLBT people have not always been very focused in our demands for justice. Many are the undisciplined, the frustrated, the angry, the hurt and the plain careless who over-reach the simple request that we all seem to share that religious organizations of all kinds end overt discrimination against glbt people, and instead move into the territory of personal and spiritual invictive. I for one, take what you say as a caution to clearly keep away from attacking your beliefs ... I don't wish to do that. I just want to focus on matters of justice and ending discrimination.


If you read my quote you will see that I never said I believed being gay was a choice. What I believe is that there is a choice on this side of every single action we take. To have those feelings is no sin or choice. I also said that we wil be judged based on the manner in which we obey the light and knowledge that we personally have acquired in this life.


I guess my question about this Mekelan, is just ... how then would you have us live? What is your vision for God's glbt people? If it's not a choice, and the feelings themselves not a sin, then please tell me how I am to live out this un-asked-for, morally neutral state of being. (By the way, that is precicely how I do actually view my own sexuality -- I'm glad we can agree about that.) Aparently you would recommend celibacy? Or is it conversion I should seek out? Given my created state, how exactly do I, or any glbt person, need to live out our lives as sexual and loving creatures?


We believe having homosexual sex is a sin, but being gay (a very subjective categorization) carries the weight of no intrinsic sin. What of those with an insatiable desire for children? By whose morals are they to live?


This is where I must ask you, in all humility, to please be careful. The drawing of parallels and comparisons between gay and lesbian people and pedophiles has a long and terrible history, and I am hoping that you will simply tell me that you in no way wish to continue it by what you say above. At best, you've made a poor choice of words, at worst ... I'm not sure what. But at least, please be careful when drawing parallels between the type of love and desire that my partner and I share (however "subjectively" that love ends up categorizing me) and the desire of some people to be sexual with children. I am not going to waste space explaining the difference.

Again, I don't have any desire to attack your beliefs ... I doubt that anyone here really does. All I want is the simple removal of discriminatory language wherever it may still be found, and an end to the opression of glbt people at BYU and everywhere else.

[Jamie McDaniel]

This is simply not true. We believe having homosexual sex is a sin, but being gay (a very subjective categorization) carries the weight of no intrinsic sin. What of those with an insatiable desire for children?
BYU will send every administrator to jail and close its doors forever before it will change its policies regarding homosexual sex. You can spout litany all you want about it being wrong, but we have our beliefs, and we will not change them.
This thread is being closed. While I do believe some things were learned about BYU and the Church of Latter-day Saints, I've decided the anti-gay comments are now well beyond the boundaries we've set up in the guidelines (http://www.soulforce.org/forums/faq.php?faq=soulforce_faq_item#faq_soulforce_faq_i tem1).