3rd hour meeting on fostering love with members of the LGBTQ community

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Grunt said:

If I were not legally married to my SO and had several children, would the church allow me to be baptized?

No.  They would not.

The verbiage that defines the Law of Chastity says "to whom they are legally and lawfully wedded."  This provides for cultural norms throughout the world where common law marriages are the legal norm.  The legal norm is supposed to be a reflection of cultural norms in this regard.

However, if homosexual "marriages" are legal in the US, then we would have had some difficulty with this vis-a-vis the LoC.  The response was that anyone in a homosexual marraige was considere apostate anyway.  So, case closed.

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, Jane_Doe said:

And such marriages were recognizable and involved some form of commitment to each other, which was socially acknowledged. 

Speaking as to US states where common-law marriage is legally acknowledged, the Church still requires a formal "I do" before baptism.

Speaking as to Peru and Brazil and where common-law marriage is the norm and legal marriage is rare, the Church still requires a formal legal "I do" before baptism.

I'm not sure what you mean by saying I Do, but there are no US States to my knowledge where common-law relationships are legally acknowledged as a marriage.  There are certain privileges that the law may grant upon couples who are not legally married but has shared a residence for X number of years or has children, but the law does not claim  their relationship as legally married.  For example, the Philippines have a reciprocal relationship with the US where anybody legally married in the US will have their marriage also legally recognized in the Philippines.  The Philippines do not recognize common-law marriages in the US even as they receive certain US privileges.  To be legally married - they have to go to a legal agent and get a marriage certificate.

The Church, to my knowledge, does not consider common-law marriages as valid.  Their marriage have to be recognized as legal somewhere before it is valid.

[Anddenex]

As to my knowledge and experience in Texas with common law marriages, couples were still required to have "papers" specifying their marriage by common law was accepted. This was my understanding in California also from missionaries who served there. Legal papers -- if a person wants to call this "I dos" I suppose that works also -- signifying and separating the couple from a traditional cohabitating couple.

Edited February 4, 2018 by Anddenex

[Jane_Doe]

4 hours ago, anatess2 said:

I'm not sure what you mean by saying I Do, but there are no US States to my knowledge where common-law relationships are legally acknowledged as a marriage.  

Colorado does.  A common law marriage has the same legal barring as a "normal" one.  For example, If you break up, divorce is filed and it's super messy.  

4 hours ago, anatess2 said:

The Church, to my knowledge, does not consider common-law marriages as valid.  Their marriage have to be recognized as legal somewhere before it is valid.

That is true, including in Colorado.

[Jane_Doe]

4 minutes ago, changed said:

This thread, and the attitudes on here, really sadden me.  Of all the pain and suffering in the world, rather than worry about drug addictions, wars, poverty - the real issues in this world, everyone is worried about same-sex marriages?

Homosexuals are not the ones who killed Jesus... it was organized religious people who did that...

What the?  Did you really just go there?  No.  Just no.

[Anddenex]

5 minutes ago, changed said:

This thread, and the attitudes on here, really sadden me.  Of all the pain and suffering in the world, rather than worry about drug addictions, wars, poverty - the real issues in this world, everyone is worried about same-sex marriages?

Homosexuals are not the ones who killed Jesus... it was organized religious people who did that...

It appears you are letting a personal bias interfere with the "LOVE" you suggest people and the Church should have, particularly your last statement doesn't amount to much. Beat that straw-man as much as you want, it doesn't satisfy any intelligent argument.

The Lord is worried about same-sex marriages. The Lord is worried about drug addiction, pornography, war, etc... People on Mormonhub are worried about same-sex marriage as it doesn't lead anyone to be exalted. People on Mormonhub are also concerned with drug addiction, etc... And the topic was regarding a meeting at a ward pertaining to same-sex attraction. So the comments shouldn't surprise anyone within the main topic "LDS Gospel Discussion" as it pertains to LDS principles and doctrine.

[Guest MormonGator]

10 minutes ago, changed said:

This thread, and the attitudes on here, really sadden me.  Of all the pain and suffering in the world, rather than worry about drug addictions, wars, poverty - the real issues in this world, everyone is worried about same-sex marriages?

Homosexuals are not the ones who killed Jesus... it was organized religious people who did that...

I think I know what you mean. Sometimes we can get wrapped up in this or that issue so much that we ignore the big picture-like war, poverty, addiction, hunger.  

Try to remember that everyone here is worried about those issues too-war, hunger, poverty, addiction. The church does a huge amount for those who suffer from the effects of said issues. 

 

[Just_A_Guy]

5 hours ago, anatess2 said:

I'm not sure what you mean by saying I Do, but there are no US States to my knowledge where common-law relationships are legally acknowledged as a marriage.  There are certain privileges that the law may grant upon couples who are not legally married but has shared a residence for X number of years or has children, but the law does not claim  their relationship as legally married.  For example, the Philippines have a reciprocal relationship with the US where anybody legally married in the US will have their marriage also legally recognized in the Philippines.  The Philippines do not recognize common-law marriages in the US even as they receive certain US privileges.  To be legally married - they have to go to a legal agent and get a marriage certificate.

The Church, to my knowledge, does not consider common-law marriages as valid.  Their marriage have to be recognized as legal somewhere before it is valid.

I think you’re pretty much right as to the US.  It’s always dangerous to generalize; but my experience is that in states that recognize common-law marriage, you still have to go to a judge or court clerk and ask for an order that the elements of a common-law marriage have been met.  You can ask for the finding to be retroactive; but technically—until you’ve actually gotten the order signed, you aren’t married (I did this once as a lawyer in Utah for a polygamous wife who wanted a divorce property settlement from her husband whom she had never legally married—it worked, but the husband’s not objecting probably had a lot to do with it).

I do think @changed has a point, in a roundabout way.  The same efforts we’re making to “understand the experience” of gay Mormons, should really be made to “understand the experience” of a number of other marginalized sub-communities within Mormonism; including prisoners, convicts, addicts, pedophiles, and the mentally ill.  Because all of those folks also have very difficult, often-lonely roads to walk within Mormonism.

[Vort]

2 hours ago, changed said:

This thread, and the attitudes on here, really sadden me.  Of all the pain and suffering in the world, rather than worry about drug addictions, wars, poverty - the real issues in this world, everyone is worried about same-sex marriages?

:eyeroll:

Never talk about anything that changed doesn't think qualifies as worthy to discuss. Gotcha.

2 hours ago, changed said:

Homosexuals are not the ones who killed Jesus... it was organized religious people who did that...

Pretty sure it was the polytheistic Roman soldiers who killed Jesus, most of whom likely gave little thought to religious observance.

[NeuroTypical]

Surprising thing I learned last year doing taxes for people: You can get married at the tax desk when you declare your filing status.  If you and your significant-other-of-the-opposite-sex-that-you've-never-married, show up and do taxes together, and you file as "married filing jointly", then the IRS considers you married.  

This is a one-way thing.  Once MFJ, you remain married in the eyes of taxes.  If you split up, you can do married-filing-separately.  But without a legal divorce, done by a court, you can't go back to filing as single.

The way tax law currently works, this is not something that happens for same-sex couples.  It doesn't matter which state you're in, if you're same-sex, you need a marriage license (or a same-sex union thing back when they had those).  

You don't explain tax law, you just apply it.  And you don't look for right/wrong to be enshrined in the tax code either.

Edited February 4, 2018 by NeuroTypical

[mirkwood]

4 hours ago, changed said:

This thread, and the attitudes on here, really sadden me.  Of all the pain and suffering in the world, rather than worry about drug addictions, wars, poverty - the real issues in this world, everyone is worried about same-sex marriages?

Homosexuals are not the ones who killed Jesus... it was organized religious people who did that...

 

You might want to go spend some time reading The Family: A Proclamation To The World.  It is a real issue.  

 

Here, I'll provide you the link to make it easier:  https://www.lds.org/topics/family-proclamation?lang=eng&old=true

 

 

[mirkwood]

Love the sinner and not the sin.  Go read the link I posted.  It is a serious issue.

[Guest MormonGator]

3 minutes ago, changed said:

 How do you show your love to sinners?

He listens to Nickleback. 

[Anddenex]

13 minutes ago, changed said:

so, when was the last time you sat down for a meal with a sinner?  How do you show your love to sinners

Christmas, with my cohabitating brother-in-laws, my homosexual brother-in-law, and not to mention we are all sinners according to scripture and have all fallen short of the glory.

So let's take this literally, every day I have dinner with my family I am sitting with sinners, and they are sitting down with their father who is striving, as them, to become like Christ.

I believe pride to be a bigger sin than homosexuality.

Are you referring to the "gay pride" in this also? Or just the bias toward Church members you obviously have? Are you referring to the "pride" you have toward the Church in this statement also? Or just the "pride" you want to point out?

[Guest MormonGator]

5 minutes ago, changed said:

 

I'm totally teasing. While it's true, I'm not a Nickelback fan I think they are over bashed. The reality is that if you  can get anyone to give you money for your art you are talented in some way. 

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, changed said:

Pride in anyone, in any group.  There are good and bad people in all groups - in the church, in any political movement out there, in all groups.  

It is important, than when you see people being excluded, being persecuted, being shunned and cast away to do what you can to stop harmful and unloving behaviors.  Some wear their sin on their shirtsleeve, others try to hide their sins and pretend to be perfect... Those who wear their sin on their shirtsleeve are more honest and humble - and they are being crucified for their honesty.  

I think it would do everyone more good to let these honest humble people come into the church buildings, and hold the microphone.  Communication - talking through issues, actually listening and understanding one another - walking a mile in their shoes, more of this needs to happen.

You and @Anddenex are both right. My personal view is that people who are always screaming about certain sins (no, I'm not seeing it here) are usually too obtuse to see their own or worse, too arrogant and self righteous (again, no, I'm not seeing it here on this thread). 

But @Anddenex makes a good point that every time we sit down to dinner with our family we dining with sinners. 

[estradling75]

4 minutes ago, changed said:

Interesting, how people flock around and support those who try to keep things real and honest, who do not pretend to be perfect, who do not condemn others for not being perfect... ... united in one heart and one mind - let's look around and see what unites people, and what divides....  no one needs to condone or agree with anything, but we do need to love and support one another.  

You mean you?  This thread was pretty untied until you came along and condemned us for not being "Good Enough"

Maybe you should start taking your own medicine

[Just_A_Guy]

1 hour ago, changed said:

Interesting, how people flock around and support those who try to keep things real and honest, who do not pretend to be perfect, who do not condemn others for not being perfect... ... united in one heart and one mind - let's look around and see what unites people, and what divides....  no one needs to condone or agree with anything, but we do need to love and support one another.  

Changed, when was the last time you asked your ward council to hold a pedophilia outreach event?

Edited February 4, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

2 hours ago, MormonGator said:

I'm totally teasing. While it's true, I'm not a Nickelback fan I think they are over bashed. The reality is that if you  can get anyone to give you money for your art you are talented in some way. 

Okay, new high water mark for me to reach for - getting someone to PAY me for my art.  Hmmmm....off to ponder.  

[NightSG]

On 2/3/2018 at 1:01 PM, Jane_Doe said:

Speaking as to US states where common-law marriage is legally acknowledged, the Church still requires a formal "I do" before baptism.

Are you sure?   I know Texas has the "declaration of informal marriage" that's filed the same way as a marriage license would be, (and effectively meaningless; the marriage is presumed effective, and therefore legal, from whatever time you represent yourself to others as married, so the declaration just gets it on file with the state) but I've dealt with folks from other states where the common law marriage was recognized, and couldn't actually be formalized without dissolving it first.  That's a bit of a problem since the process usually involves separating for some period and/or a formal divorce process: if the couple has kids, that's a big mess for everybody just to satisfy the Church's paperwork requirements.

[Grunt]

5 hours ago, MormonGator said:

He listens to Nickleback. 

He asks too much.

[Jane_Doe]

37 minutes ago, NightSG said:

Are you sure?   I know Texas has the "declaration of informal marriage" that's filed the same way as a marriage license would be, (and effectively meaningless; the marriage is presumed effective, and therefore legal, from whatever time you represent yourself to others as married, so the declaration just gets it on file with the state) but I've dealt with folks from other states where the common law marriage was recognized, and couldn't actually be formalized without dissolving it first.  That's a bit of a problem since the process usually involves separating for some period and/or a formal divorce process: if the couple has kids, that's a big mess for everybody just to satisfy the Church's paperwork requirements.

I can't speak for Texas (never lived there), but Colorado has the same laws you're describing (including the mess with split parents), and you still need formally get married to be baptized.  

[Jane_Doe]

5 hours ago, changed said:

so, when was the last time you sat down for a meal with a sinner?

That would be lunch, about 20 minutes ago.  My husband and I sat down for it, so there was a total of 2 sinners in attendance.  

[zil]

9 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

That would be lunch, about 20 minutes ago.  My husband and I sat down for it, so there was a total of 2 sinners in attendance.  

On fast Sunday, no less!  Sinner!!!

[mirkwood]

6 hours ago, changed said:

so, when was the last time you sat down for a meal with a sinner?  How do you show your love to sinners?

 

Friday at lunch.

Your quoted scriptures don't change the fact that this is a real and serious issue.  Unless you are taking exception to the counsel of leadership of the LDS church?