I may just know really liberal Mormons, but all the ones I know are livid about this. I’ll be interested to see what my father-in-law has to say, though. He works PR for the LDS church.
I realize that Mormons are something of a fork of Christianity, with assorted doctrinal differences; but do they really deviate from the ‘love the sinner, not the sin’ stuff so much as to adopt a “fuck the sinner and, y’know what, their kids can go to hell too!” position?
(More pragmatically, and cynically, why would you deliberately alienate children born into the faith, when that group is typically a good bet for retention? Is the hereditary gay that scary? Are you hoping that kiddo will shun his parents rather than you?)
Short of Fred Phelps grade “God basically hates everyone because there are non-burned homosexuals around”, going after kids because of their parents is easily nastier than even the relatively strict protestant flavors and more traditional catholic subgroups, who are real serious about going after the gays; but don’t deny sacraments to people who just happen to be related to them.
How did this even get out of the planning stages at Mormon HQ?
The Mormon church has a long history of racism, bigotry and chauvinism. Their leaders always conveniently change their rules/views at the last second.
This is one of the relatively recent changes they made after people were criticizing the church for some anglo-centric views and policies.
There’s also polygamy and that whole story. I still think one of the biggest changes that has yet to happen is their views of women in the faith but then again most major religions have this issue.
Given the fact that there can only be either gay parents or mormon parents, this practically is a non-issue.
Because there are no closeted gay Mormons? Did I miss a snark tag?
"Some" Well put and it’s the truth too.
This was a deliberate attempt at keeping gay families and their children away from the rest of the regular church going members. We can’t have Peter Priesthood and Molly Mormon associating with gays or their children at church! They might find out that they are good people and so are their children! HEAVENS NO!!
The church wants no part in having members start to accept gay families as ok.
This “policy change” goes against everything Mormons have been taught for decades regarding original sin, the Mormon version of the “atonement”, and particularly how child “conversion” with missionaries. Only the completely oblivious will defend this kind of nonsense.
There are some inaccuracies in the story as reported by @beschizza. For example, children of a gay couple who are married or co-habitating do not have to “denounce homosexuality” in order to be baptized at 18, but they do have to disavow the practice of gay marriage. The Church itself does not “denounce homosexuality”.
Also, the Church didn’t “tweak” the rules at the last minute, they clarified them. The clarification is available on the homepage of lds.org and includes the sentence: “All children are to be treated with utmost respect and love. They are welcome to attend Church meetings and participate in Church activities. All children may receive priesthood blessings of healing and spiritual guidance.”
To call the Church’s actions shunning is a bit of a misrepresentation, since their intent is to protect the family from tension that might result from the dichotomy between the beliefs and lifestyle of a gay couple and the teachings of the Church that gay marriage is wrong. Family is central to the Church, and it seeks as much as possible to avoid discord in the family no matter what form that family takes.
This commentary by the Managing Director of the Church Public Affairs Department gives much more context to both the proposed changes and the controversy that surrounded them both in and out of the Church, if you’re genuinely curious.
Calling a religious group with whom you do not agree a “cult” is unfair. Anyone who is curious about what the Church actually teaches and believes about homosexuality can go to MormonsAndGays.org for official statements. You might be surprised.
It’s easy to paint Mormons with the same brush as many anti-gay churches and groups, but the reality is Mormon belief is much more nuanced. Hence, as alluded to in the @beschizza post, “the Mormon Church is one of the largest in this country to offer support of LGBT anti-discrimination laws, second only to the United Methodist Church. The country’s two largest Christian denominations, the Catholic church and Southern Baptist Convention, have opposed the Employee Non-Discrimination Act, or ENDA.” (Source: CNN.com)
No one’s asking you to believe, or even support, what Mormons are doing or teaching. But at least understand and/or report it accurately. You may not be any less upset, but at least you’ll be upset at a fact instead of someone’s spin.
Many people—particularly those raised with a strong sense of religious identity—don’t come out as gay, even to themselves, until after they’ve reached adulthood and started a family.
What do the LDS elders believe happens to the souls of the children who die before they reach 18 and can be baptized?
I just saw this the other day. I LOVE Lewis Black. While it appears he did not write this material, he delivers it perfectly.
@funruly Mormons differ from many other religions in this respect. Mormons do not believe anyone is “damned” for not being baptized, and children who die before they are baptized are not denied any blessings in the next life, according to Mormon theology. That’s the idea behind the Church’s bizarre-sounding doctrine of “Baptism for the Dead”. (It’s less weird than it sounds.)
Yes, they posthumously baptized Anne Frank a few years ago didn’t they?
It’s exactly as weird as it sounds.
Yeah Anne Frank has been baptized by idiots in the Church a bunch of times. The Church has now prevented this from ever happening again.
Oh, it could be weirder…
But aren’t you denied access to Super Heaven, or whatever they call the higher levels of heaven, if you are only baptized posthumously rather than sealed in a temple?
Does this mean that if I have some homosexuals in my family that they wont baptize me or my ancestors via proxy?
Depending on how far they extend the concept of family, that would pretty much shut down the whole process. Who doesn’t have at least one gay/lesbian cousin?
I think you’re referring to “The Celestial Kingdom”, and as far as I understand the doctrine, no, there is no difference between mortal and posthumous baptism in terms of where you end up in the afterlife.
No, it doesn’t mean that. The Church has many homosexual members; there’s no problem from the Church’s standpoint with being a member and being gay. But they do draw the line at sexual activity and marriage for homosexuals.