I believe she is right, at least in part. What group did Jesus push away? Some would say he pushed away all Gentiles, but that was only true for a short season while he apparently prepared his inner group, then he commanded them to go to all the world. So I believe she is right, and that it is not Christ-like to push groups away, or be hateful towards anyone in any way or for any reason.

On the other hand, that cannot be interpreted to mean that we should vote to allow gay marriage, etc. There are many who will say that denying gays the right to marry is pushing them away, but I believe they are wrong. They are spinning the issue to their own purposes.

As Jesus would, let gays come to the flock, let them learn, let them strive to follow Him the best they can, like the rest of us. But let them not try to dictate to Christ or his representatives what that entails. Let them be humble, let them seek and struggle to conform their lives to His teachings and that of his prophets, just like we all do.

I hear many people saying that the gay life style is wrong, unhealthy etc. I would like to know what is the alternative for people who are wired differently than the rest of us.

Are people expecting gay people to live empty hollow lives the rest of their lives? Are we asking them to live without companionship or to marry hetrosexually?

If they were to marry hetrosexually this wouldn't be fair to their spouse. (every spouse wants someone who is genuinely interested in them).

Who among us would be willing to live without companionship or a sexual relationship? I am hetrosexual and I know I am not willing. Because I am not willing I am unwilling to insist that other people do this either.

Who is worse, hating people who through no fault of their own are different? Or people who make it their lifes work to make their life difficult?

"...pushed away all Gentiles?"
And that in affect is why this guy calls himself "Joe Moe".

Amen Joe.. In my family we have a aunt who has chosen the gay life style. Though we can't condone her choice she isn't excluded from family activities even if she brings her partner. Her partner is a very nice person. We love her dispite her choice. But that dosn't mean I believe in gay marrage in the least. They have chosen a life style contrary to the laws of God, but we don't shune her from the family we lover her anyway.
Let us be loving, let us be kind, even though we can't condone it. I know many will say its hipocritical, but its not, some times you have to realise, right is right and wrong is wrong.

Your completely wrong ma'am. Obvisouly you were "raised" LDS but must have missed the last General Conference? The LDS leaders warned that many of todays evils are concealed in the face of what people call "tolerance." They say love and respect the person, but we will NEVER accept evil as normal. And lest you think this is LDS driven, I dare you go to a predominant Muslin country where beng gay is punishable by death. EVERY major religion in the world flat out rejects the act of homosexuality, so dont tell us what is evil and what is not.

Joe Moe, you hit the nail right on the head.

...go thy way and SIN no more....

It's an old statement that says God loves the sinner, not the sin. We should love them, but not what they do.

I am empathetic towards homosexuals wanting inclusion via same-sex marriage. I endorse the Savior's admonition to love the sinner but detest the sin. But I am compelled to resist their efforts for the following reasons:

1. Homosexuality is predatory by nature. Young boys are prime targets. The time-revered virtue of chastity is trashed in the sea of moral perversions.

2. Homosexuals may or may not be born that way, any more than adulterers are born that way. There is ample evidence of EX-homosexuals who have won their battles over same-sex attraction.

3. The radical homosexual agenda recruits children via the liberal public school system. In Massachusetts, books like "Heather Has Two Mommies" or "King and King" have been used in the classroom to confuse gender orientation of innocent children.

These reasons alone should be sufficient proof for any sensible, reasonable, loving parent to resist the mainstreaming of moral perversity.

Homosexuality is as perverse and wrong just as is adultery or fornication. Promoting and mainstreaming moral perversions is blatantly contributing to the deterioration of our civilization's moral fabric.

Lyle,
Get a grip buddy, you're going off the deep end.

1. No, it's not.
2. So? The same can be said of heterosexuals.
3. Teaching tolerance does not equal "recruitment". Save your radical religionist indoctrination for church. Don't worry, we'll undo your bad works in the "liberal" public school system.

you have found a way to justify your bigotry.

to jackhp:
In your caustic attempt to put down Lyle, you only reinforce his points, especially with your last item, sarcastic intent notwithstanding.

All bigots I've met are republicans.
Most Mormons are republicans.
Draw your own conclusion (and read the many quotes prior to 1978).
Does it surprise anyone that legal rights are being questioned?

thank you Wrong and Lyle. Oh, and Jackhp, get a grip, YOU went of the deep end long ago.

I make periodic comments on the topic of gay marriage and homosexuality, mostly focusing on legal issues. I am deviating from that pattern here and want to preamble this comment with the acknowledgement that I am ambivelent as to the religious elements of the debate.

I saw first hand during my teenage years an active recruitment process, led by 40-something year-old men mostly of wealth and positions of power, seeking out lost, depressed, otherwise impressionable teen and pre-teen boys. I fled. But it occured, occurs, is unacceptable.

Conclusions: 1) Homosexuality may be natural, but in some cases it is learned, or adopted as a means of acceptance into a group.

2) Homosexuality may not be necessarily predatory, but there is no doubt, in some groups, a recruitment process invovling statutory rape.

I don't think that the LDS Church pushes any group of individuals away. I don't hate homosexuals, nor do most, if not all of my family and friends. However, I don't, and never will acquiesce or accept that lifestyle. What people do in the privacy of their own homes, IS certainly their business. However, when individuals or groups begin to proselyte and push their lifestyle on me, my children and grandchildren, then the issue is NOT tolerance. The issue is philosophical indoctrination. That indoctrination is being forced in public AND some private education. That indoctrination is being forced in government. That, . . . I do not condone, or agree with. That disagreement is philosophical, not personal.

Would the homosexual agenda be like the the heterosexual agenda where they try to recruit gay people into their straight lifestyle?

Where straight people flaunt their sexual orientation in my face every day?

I don't have any problem with people choosing the heterosexual lifestyle, but do they need to throw it in my face by all this showing of affection in public places?

I mean, I can't even go to a movie without seeing two straight people with their arms around each other or sneaking a kiss in the dark. After all, children are around and you are confusing them in their choice of gender orientation.

Who is the author of the line that we should tolerate evil practices? Who is the author of the line that we need to embrace wrong-doing? Who is the author of the line that a practicing homosexual only hurts himself?

Who would promote those lies? Who is the father of lies?

If you had a wolf at the door, would you go around saying, "Nice doggy. Nice doggy." or would you chase that wolf into the next county?

Homosexual activists who play the part of the martyr are simply following their program. They're beginning to get away with it because those that know that the act of homosexuality is wrong are usually nice, loving, kind people who don't want to offend anyone. Those "nice" people let the homosexual activists lead the debate. They let the homosexual activists dictate the terms of the debate. They let the homosexual activists mock everything that is good, everything that is proper, everything that is noble, as they write their graffiti on our minds and in our hearts.

There is nothing noble about the homosexual agenda. Those of us who oppose them cannot be intimidated by their tactics.

Lyle, Reparative therapy success is like the marketing from the latest diet pushers.

"Look at all the people who say our diet works."
It's the same with this therapy data.
"Do you feel less gay today?" "Well, yeah kind of."

Just like the diet claims, there is little long-term, non-self-reporting independent research about people being "repaired".

To Robert Oh -
So, Black is White,
And White is Black.
How confused and mixed up can one Homo be??

The Bible is quite clear in condemning the practice of homosexuality (both the Old and New Testament). Don't try and twist morality around by saying the scriptures teach "tolerance" of every immorality under the Sun. If Jesus and the Apostles had preached "do whatever you want to do" I doubt if worldly people would have persecuted them.

What does "tolorance" mean? How do I love the person who is committing the sin? The church teaches us to love them, but doesn't say what that means. Does that mean that I should tell them that I love them but they need to change? Does that mean that I just let them be and act like they are normal? What does the church want me to do?

Religion does not equal morality. Morality transcends religion and in most cases would be better served without religion masquerading in its place.

The sooner people accept this fact and start doing what is right and good for humanity as a whole the better off we all will be. Otherwise, you can all continue to do what your made up gods say is right and good and we can continue killing each other over it.

What does closeted `straight' businessmen (probably republican christian senators and televangelists) propositioning boys or girls have to do with, as an example, the first same-sex couple to be married in California, two elderly women who had been partners for 50+ years? It seems some people feel marriage is about LOVE and commitment, and unfortunately a lot of LDS people feel it is about sex (with lots of young women in the early days of the church) and having exponentially more children. And the idea of civil unions might be nice, but contrary to the advocates of anti-marriage amendments, once they are passed they do deny legal benefits to same sex couples. The Michigan supreme court recently ruled that the University of Michigan must stop giving partner health care benefits even though it wanted to because it helped them hire the best people.

ediddy,
If you say so . . . <rolls eyes>

The church wants me to marry your sister. I'm gay, but am willing to follow the prophet. Are you cool with me marrying your sister?

Thanks Joe Moe, you are right on.

I think each of us has our own weakness. Whether it be sexual, emotional, or behavioral in nature. We can choose to give in to our weaknesses by saying "this is just who I am" or we can try to overcome them. For those of us who believe in Jesus Christ, we are taught to follow Him and to become more like Him. Yes, the Savior loves us all, but He doesn't condone sin in any form.

I've decided that most religious people are right.

Therefore, I have now decided to hate everybody. The world is evil, everyone is evil, I'm such a martyr as a religious person, I...er...I mean God is always right; It's so much easier that way!

I know Jesus said to love everyone as our neighbor, but thanks to the efforts of many Christians I can now see that He didn't really know what he was talking about.

That must be on the "mistaken" translations, right? Perhaps the "true" scriptures say "Love thy neighbor, except for that guy, and that guy, and that guy, and DEFINITELY not those guys!"

Sounds like your Jesus to me.

Over and over again, the same comments.

The bigots will hate and try to cause people pain and suffering. They will never change. After all they have scriptures and books that have never been wrong.

The people who defend human rights for all living human beings, will never become bigots and haters.

What is the point of all of this?

To Talyn,

You may have grown up attending church, but you are woefully unaware of the way church leaders and members use certain words.

Go bakc and read Elder Oaks Ensign article from the mid-1990s on how "homosexual" is not a noun.

What we are calling evil is homosexual acts and behavior. I even have to clarify the latter. Homosexual behavior in my mind is sexual acts with a member of the same sex. I will go as far as to say two men passionately kissing is wrong. However, I will also say that a man kissing another man is not wrong if it is not done passionately and with sexual attraction being expressed. Nor will I say that some things that people stereotypically associate with homosexual men, like knowing lots about fashion, are inherently wrong.

My point is that we are not saying that homosexual are totally evil people anymore than are pedophiles. Both people have urges to commit sexual sin, however a man or woman who has pedophilic desires and does not act on them is no more a sinner than a man or woman who has homosexual urges and does not act on them.

To jackhp's response to Lyle,

Lyle may have been a bit too strong in some of his statements. However I still think they have general validity.

The first one is a bit too broad. However it does at least seem to be supported by the evidence that a much higher percentage of abuse of children involves same-gender sexual abuse than would be reflected by the percentage of consentual adult same gender parings. There is a higher correlation between homosexuals having sexual relations with minors and polygamists doing the same. However it is unfair to judge a whole group on a percentage of it, so this may not be a worthwhile argument in the wrong one. However do not dismiss it because it matters.

Points two and three actually work together. Heterosexual attractions are a result of societal support. Children raised by couples involved in same gender sex have a much higher rate of at least considering that arrangement than children raised by a father and a mother. Societal reinforcement is a key componant to people having proper gender identities. I guess if you feel that homosexuality is a good thing than this is not bad.

My 2 cents...

The LDS Church does teach unconditional love for ALL people, but what many fail to understand is that it means love the person, not the sin. Tolerance is used to justify acceptance, or allowing this behavior to say it is okay, in which in reality it is not. More of a "tough love" stance is more appropriate.

I beleive the scriptures warn of those who "call good evil, and evil good" and this is an excellent situation that this would apply to.

"The Bible is quite clear in condemning the practice of homosexuality (both the Old and New Testament)."

Well, if the Bible were a remotely reliable source of information as to how humans should treat each other, that might be an interesting perspective.

However, since the Bible is an incoherent and self-contradictory collection of stories glorifying genocide, rape, slavery, child-murder and incest, a growing number of people seek their wisdom from saner sources.

"What does "tolorance" mean? How do I love the person who is committing the sin? The church teaches us to love them, but doesn't say what that means. Does that mean that I should tell them that I love them but they need to change? Does that mean that I just let them be and act like they are normal? What does the church want me to do?"

DBG says "More of a "tough love" stance is more appropriate."

Is this what the rest of you think? I have an aunt that is homosexual and I really don't know how to act around her. Please give me some advise.

"I beleive the scriptures warn of those who "call good evil, and evil good" and this is an excellent situation that this would apply to."

I don't suppose it's ever occurred to you that what you're worried about is exactly what you're doing yourself.

Two people are committed to each other and want to make their commitment official. You call them "evil" because they're the same gender but otherwise law-abiding, tax-paying, productive members of society.

Meanwhile, you hold irrational beliefs regarding your "righteousness" and use those irrational beliefs as a basis for perpetuating bigotry, and call it "good."

Scriptures only matter to people who believe they are somehow real.

Modern day acceptence of all living beings, and their rights in America are the same as everyone else.

Good people who live moral lives, no matter what church (or no church) they might attend or not is anybodys business in these modern times. I don't want my life, and the lives of my children to be affected by 12th century dogma!

Many good people who have morals, and help their fellow human beings have no relgion at all. (My own parents). Even if my parents don't know it or care, their lives would make the original Jesus proud.

I hear all this talk about love the sinner, not the sin - thats nice if you are like Christ, but I don't see any distinction, all I read it hate, fear and rhetoric from all sides.

If there is a gay agenda, it is to let all people be equal like the constitution requires. If you don't what the constitution affords its citizens then you can move, I hear there is a nice religiously run country in the middle east. I think all these Mormon and Christian extremists will fit in Iran just fine.

All I know is this all sounds like stuff that Gayle Ruzicka has thrown up over the last few decades. You know the same woman who prides herself on overturning Hate Crimes laws.

That is really someone I would like to ally myself with.

"...knowing lots about fashion" isn't inherently wrong.

Wow, John Lambert with the philosophical masterpiece of the day.

You people are crazy!

Lame logic.
All dogs have hair.
All cats have hair.
Therfore, all cats are dogs.
Though I rarely agree with your ulta permissive ideology, surely you haven't sunk to such lame logic?? Or, maybe you have.

I'm sick of those who say "love the sinner but not the sin" then in the next sentence pass judgement or post some comment that contradicts what they say. If this is how you love, leave me alone.

And it's interesting how many of you condem me without knowing me, but are so eager and willing to accept my help when it suits you. When you need help on the side of the freeway with a tire or car problem, and I stop to help, do you question whether I am gay or not? Do you question whether I am LDS or not? No. When you need assistance after an accident would you feel less appreciative for the help I offer because of who I am? Probably not. You accept my help willingly then go on about your life backstabing and back biting those who reached out to help you when you needed it. How would you feel if I didn't help you when you neede it because you are straight? Or I didn't help because your LDS and I find the LDS lifestyle offensive and immoral even though I'm tolerant of it?

Be careful who you hate.

Enlighten me. What exactly DOES Jesus say about homosexuality? What does the New Testament say about it?

C'mon, lets see those old scripture chase skills at work.

Also, the scriptures refer to both dragons and unicorns as though they existed. Am I to believe this too?? Or can I cherry pick the bits of the bible I want to follow too?

You come almost close to saying you ARE LDS when you say you were raised in the LDS church. It comes across as a poor attempt to give the impression that you speak from the position of an active and practicing member of that church. Are you or aren't you? Or are just another one of those who no longer wishes to be a member but wants to appear here to be seen as tolerant of a lifestyle which is not in harmony with the teachings of the LDS faith.
The position of the LDS Church is not going to change with regards to homosexuality being an unacceptible lifestyle, nor is it going to change with regards to the requirement to respect and love those practice it. The time is coming (has come), however, when those who sit on the fence with respect to deciding which side they are on, will have to declare one way or the other. I think Taralyn, you have declared. There will be no middle ground in this conflict.

Wasn't the bible written by people who thought that the world was flat?

good to see Joe Moe, Lyle, Bear Rug and a few others out defending truth and righteousness today.

Commonsense says the act of homosexuals is wrong and unnatural. It's sad that so many people are so confused about the purpose of this life and the rewards in the hereafter.

Homosexual behavior is not acceptable nor should it ever be condoned by giving it the status of marriage. It matters not that homosexuals love each other, are committed to each other or any other excuse for the behavior.

For the commenter who is unable to check his/her sexual desires until marriage and fidelity after marriage, the answer is yes. Thou shalt not commit adultery/fornication. It's quite simple for a concept to understand.

There are many who go through life without finding their mate. I had an uncle who was in that category and a grandmother who was widowed at 35 and never remarried. Both were true to themselves throughout their lives.

It's called self-mastery.

The usual suspects are up to there daily name calling and vitriolic posts. And they claim that they are the tolerant side in this discussion. Interesting claim to say the least.

Personally I agree that being intolerant of gays (the people) is bad. The earlier opinion piece that I think spawned this one was about, "Gay SEX ACTS are evil". There's a big difference.

I don't think you have to accept and "Normalize" the SEX ACTS to be tolerant of the people.

I know there are some exceptions, but most people don't dislike gay people.

If you inisist that everyone must embrace and accept the SEX ACTS as "Normal", then your going to get some resistance. Don't equate that with being "Intolerant of gays". People are more than just their sexual preference.

If you quit trying to get everyone to agree that the sex acts are OK you will be able to make more headway in feeling accepted by many people (especially those who have moral qualms with the physics of the sex acts).

Homophobia is one of the worst evils this country has ever seen.
The adherents have not noticed how hate-filled they have become.
May God have mercy on their souls!

You talk about separating the action from the person. How would you feel if my son who is Gay, but obeys the law of chastity, was assigned to be your son’s missionary companion or decided to marry your daughter.

Somehow I think you wouldn’t be able to just accept and love the person.

Who, among you posters, has had the experience of someone that you are very close to and love a lot, coming out as gay? I need to know how to act around this person. I would appreciate a little help from some of you that have dealt with this. Should I preach to her? This is someone that I have idolized my whole life and now I am at a loss of how to "love the sinner, but hate the sin."

ANYONE?

The question of the morality of homosexuality is inherently a religious question (religion being defined broadly as "the source of one's sense of right and wrong"). Therefore we must allow for the use of one's religious texts in the discussion thereof.

Law, by definition, is the codification of public morality. In other words, the law represents that which we, the people, consider moral. How do we arrive at this morality if no by religion? Is not the law, then, inherently religious? Is not the Bible, therefore, valid in this debate?

So first off let me understand that it's okay for you to comment and judge but when the opposition does so they are wrong, got it. I agree that name calling on BOTH SIDES is childish and wrong, but you seem to take a lot of delight in pointing that out time after time.

You express your opinions, but fail to support them. Maybe it's just what you believe and have never really looked at why. Examining our beliefs takes courage and sometimes, dare I say it?? A mind open to change when needed. And isn't the purpose of this life to learn, love and grow as an individual? Men are that they might have joy, isn't that correct?

Maybe homosexuality is un-natural. For you. For me, it's very natural and normal. And as far as your uncle and grandmother, I feel sorry for them. How sad and lonely were their lives?

What is the difference between self-mastery and self denial? Is one better than the other?