07-29-2008, 05:51 PM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Valencia CA
Posts: 1,384
|
|
07-29-2008, 05:59 PM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,484
|
The inclination to find pragmatic arguments for God's will is understandable. That is why "wickedness never was happiness" is one of the most powerful catch phrases in the BofM. The pragmatic reason to follow any of God's commands? An increase in happiness.
Ultimately, then, the Church believes that the gay person who refrains from having gay sex will be happier. But how does that argument work for a sexually active gay couple who want to get married? Surely marriage would bring them an increase in happiness. So it goes back one step to the gay sex argument: that if they had ultimately decided to refrain from gay sex, they would be happier. But that is not the world we live in. Committed couples are having gay sex. Marriage would bring them an increase in happiness. The pragmatic arguments, including the ultimate "happiness" argument, fail with gay marriage. You have to go back a step to gay sex. How does Lehi's refrain work for the person who was born with strong, complete same-sex attraction? For the person who is raised outside of conservative religion and is taught that being gay is okay and a good, then I suppose it only works if we believe they will initially feel a natural impulse of guilt from the light of Christ that is in them. But that cannot last long. Do they always feel a huge void inside, a loss of the presence of any Godly spirit? That is not the experience of my gay friends who are close to God. It is more complicated for the person who is born in the Church. Apart from the light of Christ, they feel the guilt of repeated teachings that they were born with a predisposition to sin (how else to explain it?), and if they drink to satisfy their thirst, it is a grave and damnable thing. The wickedness-never-was-happiness catch phrase works well with them; apart from the guilt, there is the shame. In the end, the First Presidency wants to fight against a "wicked" world as it defines wicked. And as for pragmatic reasons, the ultimate one is the one Lehi gave: wickedness never was happiness. Explaining to a gay member how they will be happier if they refrain from having gay sex is a difficult undertaking. Explaining it to a person not raised in conservative religion, is next to impossible. Explaining it to a couple who wish to get married is close to offensive. The Church should not be making pragmatic arguments in the Prop. 8 debate.
__________________
"Now I say that I know the meaning of my life: 'To live for God, for my soul.' And this meaning, in spite of its clearness, is mysterious and marvelous. Such is the meaning of all existence." Levin, Anna Karenina, Part 8, Chapter 12 Last edited by Levin; 07-29-2008 at 06:09 PM. |
07-29-2008, 06:02 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 9,483
|
I keep thinking about Eddie Murphy as "Velvet Jones" in those old SNL skits.
__________________
Fitter. Happier. More Productive. "Everyone is against me. Everyone is fawning for 3D's attention and defending him." -- SeattleUte |
07-29-2008, 06:04 PM | #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,484
|
would have been a first-rate preacher in the antebellum South.
__________________
"Now I say that I know the meaning of my life: 'To live for God, for my soul.' And this meaning, in spite of its clearness, is mysterious and marvelous. Such is the meaning of all existence." Levin, Anna Karenina, Part 8, Chapter 12 |
07-29-2008, 06:13 PM | #25 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Correction:
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
07-29-2008, 06:50 PM | #26 |
AKA SeattleNewt
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,055
|
|
07-29-2008, 07:12 PM | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Norcal
Posts: 5,821
|
|
07-29-2008, 07:35 PM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Bluth Home
Posts: 3,877
|
Quote:
I am not telling gay people they can't be married, I just don't know why they want to be. Pseudo-acceptance by a tradition that rejects them? Maybe you can explain.
__________________
The Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go. -Galileo |
|
07-29-2008, 07:37 PM | #29 | |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,367
|
Quote:
It seems like for some gays, religion IS important. While we reject them, gays don't reject religion (at least not all of them). So your point isn't fair. |
|
07-29-2008, 07:57 PM | #30 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Bluth Home
Posts: 3,877
|
Quote:
My point is that I assume that like gays who are raised Mormon, that vast majority of people who are gay and raised in some other faith will reject organized religion rather than seek out a denomination who accepts them. If you have rejected organized religion as all but the tiny minority who seek a new one out do, then what you desire is that trapping and ritual of a tradition that has rejected you. Again, I don't say they aren't entitled to it. Maybe I lay to much emphasis on the religious. Perhaps it is a secular enough ritual now that it is really the imprimatur of societal approval that is at issue. I just think if I were gay I would not remotely care what any religion or government thought of my relationship. I would find the idea that I should want their approval demeaning. But that's just me.
__________________
The Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go. -Galileo |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|