And Forbid Them Not...
Written by: Cheeky Mormon - 8th Nov, 2015 - 8:39pm
Well, I suggest that you grab your stones quickly and start aiming at me because let me tell you I do not agree at all with the new amendment to the LDS Handbook 1 preventing children in same-sex marriages from being blessed, baptized and participating in other ordinances.
But wait, I cannot even believe I am writing this post but I tend to forget that we justify and rationalize everything as long as the leaders say so. Heck, one day a leader could ask us to dig our nose while reading the Book of Mormon so we could increase our spiritual experience and we will find a scripture to support it and even share a few revelations of following the counsel.
Now before you say you don’t give a crap what I think (Fair enough) and that all it matters is how the Church sees it (Well, that’s up to debate), I would like to share with you why I think this amendment sucks and it’s nothing shorter than embarrassing for a Church that spent millions of dollars in trying to appear as understanding and approachable with regards to LGTB- related issues. The change seems to have been done in haste and fear and is definitely not aimed only to the children of these couples but also sends a very strong and direct message to any member who happens to support same-sex marriages. Watch out. Runnnnnnn, all those gays and gay-friendly folks will take over the Church so we better ensure they don’t come at all!
Why we don’t say it like it is: The gay “issue” is getting out of proportion for the Church, particularly in the internet era and since we cannot do anything with regards to the existent gay folks so what a better way to dissuade the new generation of gay supporters from joining than putting road blocks of all sorts on their way so they never become members of the Church and we can ensure they do not contaminate our pure, worthy and unshakable kind. Isn’t beautiful? Love it.
I can only imagine those babies in sacrament meeting receiving a blessing. The nerve! How can they expect a name and a blessing from the Lord if they are nothing but the offspring of sinners! We are the true Church upon this Earth and have the true Priesthood so it is within our right to deny them a blessing even though they have done nothing wrong, nada, zero.
You don’t understand Cheeky Mormon, the change was done to “protect” the children in same-sex families from receiving mixed messages in their home and Church. Really? I say baloney. How many children from heterosexual parents go through that every single day? I met once a girl whose father was a Nazi-supporter and in their home the father practically worshiped Hitler. She was never denied a baby blessing neither baptism. What about children being born from inter-religious couples? Are they denied a blessing as well? The answer is no. I don’t know what bothers me most, the actual amendment or the failed attempt to explain the unexplained with cheap rhetoric.
One thing is for sure, if we are going to announce an amendment denying a baby a blessing and baptism, solely on the fact that they happen to have gay parents, shouldn’t the Church also announce an amendment to Matthew 19:14?
“But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not (Except if you are a child of a same-sex marriage), to come unto me (How dare you child of sin!): for of such is the kingdom of heaven (Only if your parents are heterosexual obvvvviously).
Nice. Just what Jesus would do. Don't you feel the Spirit?
Written by: Guest - 8th Nov, 2015 - 10:56pm
Comments: Amen, Sister Cheeky, amen. I wholeheartedly agree on not knowing which is worse. I can almost understand The Brethren doing this to protect the church. But the public explanation? Really? No doubt it was cobbled together after the outrage, without much thought.
It's easy for them to dismiss exmos, but when so many of us faithful called out the policy for what it is, they had to say something. It's nice to have you back. I've missed your wit. I just wish it was something better that prompted you to weigh in.
Written by: Guest - 8th Nov, 2015 - 11:16pm
Name: Josh C.
Comments: Let's be fair.The children aren't being banned from the Church. They can attend meetings just like any other person and when they reach the age of 18 they will be able to enjoy all the blessings if they renounce their parent's sinful lifestyle. It's not the Church's fault if they want to join! If they want to be part of it, they have to make the necessary adjustments to fit our dogma and not the other way around. Sounds bad? So be it. These children will be indoctrinated with the idea that homosexuality is good and acceptable and who knows they may become gay themselves. I'm very glad the Church created this new policy.
Written by: Guest - 8th Nov, 2015 - 11:40pm
Comments: Humph. Josh C with all due respect you should search more about homosexuality before you decide to write whatever crosses your mind.
Homosexuality isn't contagious and these children aren't going to turn gay just because the parents are gay... With that sense guess who produces gay children? Heterosexual couples buddy.
About the policy I agree it sucks but I'm not surprised.
Written by: Guest - 23rd Jul, 2016 - 11:08pm
Title: There is more to this than meets the eye.
Comments: I bring my neighbor's daughter, a young primary aged girl to church with me every sunday. She has been attending for several years with me. Her family approves of her going and her uncle is currently taking the discussions. When she turned 8 I assumed she would be baptized.
She has born her testimony in church more frequently than my two primary aged kiddos have combined and her mom tells me she can't swear around her daughter without getting lectured about it. This is but two examples of where she is at spiritually. Thus I assumed she was ready to be baptized, as previously mentioned.
When I spoke to the Bishop about it, he said he would get back to me on that, and he soon did. He felt we should wait until either an adult family member joined or she turned 18. I was really surprised, and a little irked initially. But as I've watched this young girl advance in her understanding and as I've given room to consider and ponder about this prayerfully, I experienced a change of heart.
I began to see through the spirit that the Lord was directing events in the direction that He had, via the Bishop, for this little girl's sake. I felt softened and began to conceive there really was wisdom in waiting for her, a concept I had not previously considered to be wise or fair.
So when the church updated the handbook, I had already worked through this. I don't pretend to know the Lord's reasoning behind this policy, but I can testify to its being inspired and being in the best interest of the children. For what its worth, that was my experience.
Written by: Guest - 9th Mar, 2017 - 1:27am
Comments: I think the thing that you are forgetting is that the LGBT lifestyle is next to perdition. It is one of the very worst things that you can do. LGBT people are not spiritual creatures who need our understanding and compassion. They are filthy animals who are ruled by the baser instincts that Satan uses to control them.
The new rules in the handbook are written explicitly for people who have strayed so far from the church that they are not only actively committing the spiritual crime of sodomy, but have made a legally binding act that commits them to that lifestyle. Furthermore, they are trying to mimic the family, the fundamental unit of the church, by bringing children into that unholy and sacrilegious union. The bottom line is that children who are raised in that type of household are so entirely consumed by the influence of satan in their home that they need to be distanced from the rest of us until they are old enough, and mature enough to make the rational decision to completely reject the abominable lifestyle of their sodomite parents.
I mean, lets be rational here. As Mormons, we are told that god is the same today, yesterday, and forever. And this is the same god that turned Lot's wife into a pillar of salt just for looking back at Sodom while he was destroying it.
So, it makes perfect sense that this same unchanging God would demand that in order for children who were raised in Sodom to be fully embraced as members of the church, then they too need to forsake Sodom and all of its ways without ever looking back.
And as long as those children have to go back home to Sodom every single night, then they aren't capable to forsaking it. It makes perfect sense to keep these kids in a place where they don't have to choose between loyalty to the lifestyle of their sinful parents, or the truth of the gospel. Let them choose after they are adults. Its not fair to put them in that position as minors.
The ones that you should really be upset at are the homosexual parents who decided to drag children into their social experiment of sin. Those horrible people are the real problem here, not the leadership of the church.