BSA's proposed gay policy change

[cornhole153]

I get that it's a sin in our religion, but calling sexual relationships between monogamous hetero partners moral and gay partners immoral doesn't make much sense. Same as drinking--yes it's a sin in our religion but I wouldn't call non member drinkers immoral.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Exactly - it's not a sin - unless you read the scriptures and listen to the Prophets down through the ages. Other than that, it's all subjective and a matter of perspective.

Breaking the sabbath is also a sin, if you read the scriptures and listen to the Prophets, I just wouldn't call Buddhists immoral for going to he mall on Sunday.

Or more fittingly... calling monogamous homosexuals immoral, to me, is like calling 7th Day Adventists immoral for observing the Sabbath on on Saturday instead of Sunday.

[Ddawg]

I get that it's a sin in our religion, but calling sexual relationships between monogamous hetero partners moral and gay partners immoral doesn't make much sense. Same as drinking--yes it's a sin in our religion but I wouldn't call non member drinkers immoral.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Exactly - it's not a sin - unless you read the scriptures and listen to the Prophets down through the ages. Other than that, it's all subjective and a matter of perspective.

Breaking the sabbath is also a sin, if you read the scriptures and listen to the Prophets, I just wouldn't call Buddhists immoral for going to he mall on Sunday.

Or more fittingly... calling monogamous homosexuals immoral, to me, is like calling 7th Day Adventists immoral for observing the Sabbath on on Saturday instead of Sunday.

What point are you trying to make? That it's "Ok" to lead a homosexual life if you are monogamous with your male gay or female lesbian partner? That lifestyle is not immoral?

[SpiffCoug]

He has no point. He is all about relative moralism. There is no right there is no wrong. Cornhole is one of the enlightened few who know better than the rest of us.

2 Nephi 28:21-22:

21 And others will he pacify, and lull them away into carnal security, that they will say: All is well in Zion; yea, Zion prospereth, all is well—and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell.

22 And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no hell; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none—and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance.

[Cougarfan87]

I don't think that same sex attraction is a major and defining characteristic of a person unless they choose to act upon it. I, therefore, don't consider someone "gay" unless they are choosing to live the lifestyle,.

What if they just hold hands, or kiss a little?

Sounds like acting upon it to me.

Is it immoral?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Yes, acting on homosexual feelings is immoral.

Is this your view or is this from the handbook or other source? I've looked to see what immoral homosexual action is and cannot find anything more specific than one cannot engage in homosexual conduct. We of course teach heterosexuals that they cannot engage in sexual relations outside marriage but I do not think holding hands qualifies, although that might be viewed as acting on heterosexual feelings. I honestly want to know and am not trying to troll

Somewhere there is a quote by President Hinkley about two young men dancing with young women. It has something to do with one of the young men dancing and just having a good time, whereas the other one is full of lustful thoughts as he dances with a girl. One is engaged in sin and one is not.

I would not say holding hands qualifies as sexual contact, or even a peck on the lips (not passionate kissing that causes arousal), just like I would not condemn a heterosexual couple for the same conduct. These acts are very common in other cultures, even among heterosexuals. However, for the homosexual couple, I would say they are playing with fire, because unlike the heterosexual couple, there is no future where they can grow together and live in an unsinful sexual relationship with eachother. They are just tempting themselves. Likewise, it would be extremely inappropriate for a male missionary to hold hands with or kiss a female, even though those same actions would be perfectly appropriate in another setting, post mission.

It is important to remember we are ultimately judged not only by our acts, but also our thoughts and words. Lustful thoughts, even in not acted upon, such as in President Hinkley's example of the young man just dancing, are still sinful--whether you are heterosexual or homosexual. It is also important to remember that there is no sin in being tempted (so long as it is kicked out immediately), but there is sin in yeilding to temptation through thought, word, or deed.

There does appear to be a double standard often times in the church. We should shudder at all sexual sin--both unmarried heterosexual and homosexual. Both are very serious in the eyes of God.

[Cougarfan87]

He has no point. He is all about relative moralism. There is no right there is no wrong. Cornhole is one of the enlightened few who know better than the rest of us.

2 Nephi 28:21-22:

21 And others will he pacify, and lull them away into carnal security, that they will say: All is well in Zion; yea, Zion prospereth, all is well—and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell.

22 And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no hell; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none—and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance.

I don't have time to look it up, but there is an even more relevant scripture about "making laws unto ourselves" or something to that effect. Essentially, the idea is that man has ignored God's laws and come up with some laws for himself. +5,000 to whoever finds it first. I'm thinking it is somewhere in the Nephis, but it is possibly in the D&C.

[Schmoe]

I don't think that same sex attraction is a major and defining characteristic of a person unless they choose to act upon it. I, therefore, don't consider someone "gay" unless they are choosing to live the lifestyle,.

What if they just hold hands, or kiss a little?

Sounds like acting upon it to me.

Is it immoral?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Yes, acting on homosexual feelings is immoral.

Is this your view or is this from the handbook or other source? I've looked to see what immoral homosexual action is and cannot find anything more specific than one cannot engage in homosexual conduct. We of course teach heterosexuals that they cannot engage in sexual relations outside marriage but I do not think holding hands qualifies, although that might be viewed as acting on heterosexual feelings. I honestly want to know and am not trying to troll

It is my view based on what I have gathered from the words and teachings of the prophets of the Lord. Just as acting on adulterous feelings is immoral, even holding hands and kissing. We must understand that gender is not some creation of society, but an eternal and important part of our identity. Also, sin is sin, regardless of who does it (yes, even Buddhists).

[SpiffCoug]

D&C 88:35?

35 That which breaketh a law, and abideth not by law, but seeketh to become a law unto itself, and willeth to abide in sin, and altogether abideth in sin, cannot be sanctified by law, neither by mercy, justice, nor judgment. Therefore, they must remain filthy still.

[Cougarfan87]

D&C 88:35?

35 That which breaketh a law, and abideth not by law, but seeketh to become a law unto itself, and willeth to abide in sin, and altogether abideth in sin, cannot be sanctified by law, neither by mercy, justice, nor judgment. Therefore, they must remain filthy still.

+5,000. I knew it was in there somewhere.

[BroncoBot]

this has gotten off track again, thanks to one cornhole. so let me attempt to bring it full circle.

I don't want my young son being taught and influenced by a male leader who is kissing or holding hands with other men. I don't care if he claims to be heterosexual. That's not someone I want my young son with.

[SpiffCoug]

this has gotten off track again, thanks to one cornhole. so let me attempt to bring it full circle.

I don't want my young son being taught and influenced by a male leader who is kissing or holding hands with other men. I don't care if he claims to be heterosexual. That's not someone I want my young son with.

And to be honest, putting young males in a position where their leaders could be attracted them isn't fair to the gay leader. We don't put young men with the young women's leaders. In most cases it won't be a problem. But for some it might be, so we just avoid the entire situation and possibility.