Family Search- same sex marriages

[Grunt]

25 minutes ago, miav said:

Because you now have children who have parents that are same sex couples and the children and their grandchildren and grear grandchildren will view both of the parents line as their genealogy. The church indexes millions of records each year. No doubt theybwill start indexing same sex marriage certificates, birth certificates of children born to same sex parents and eventually census records that include same sex households.

Family history isn't all about doing temple work. It's about turning th hearts to the father's and the father's to the children, and that goes beyond just temple work. Genealogy is expanding to every culture, every nation. The interest in genealogy is getting bigger and bigger. And it's just not for church members. Here is a link to the Mormon Newsroom ( https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/familysearch ) that talks about Family Search, it's not just for members it's for EVERYONE. And if you don't see that or understand that, then you haven't caught the whole meaning of Family Search. Read the article attached to the link and start working on Family Search, you'll soon see it's a much bigger picture than you realize.

And yes you can add two sets of parents to Family Search. You can add adoptive and biological if you want to. You can and step parents, you can have your divorced parents listed as your parents, you can have their other spouses in too. And you can add multiple wivea to one man. You can even add people that were your gaurdians as parents, if you choose. So making  to add same sex couple is not a big deal.

 

You will not be able to seal the same sex couple together, but I am assuming that their other work can be done. As in all complicated scenarios God will figure it out in the end.

 

 

Meh.  It's kind of a big deal to me, whoever one that affects me not at all, so it's not like I'm losing sleep over it.

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Grunt said:

Meh.  It's kind of a big deal to me, whoever one that affects me not at all, so it's not like I'm losing sleep over it.

Then why comment at all? I hope you at least read the website I gave so you can understand Family Search better and realize it's not just for members.

[Overwatch]

1 hour ago, miav said:

Then why comment at all? I hope you at least read the website I gave so you can understand Family Search better and realize it's not just for members.

I honestly don't feel comfortable with showing my children that two men are married and listed in the church data base as such. I was recently given a task by a religious leader to get into genealogy, with this news it makes me feel uneasy. I am not sure if it is my own feelings but I do not feel all warm and fuzzy about it. In fact, I feel alarmed and cautious about proceeding with the assignment.  

[Guest]

38 minutes ago, Overwatch said:

I honestly don't feel comfortable with showing my children that two men are married and listed in the church data base as such.

Since you don't have two men who are married to each other in your family, you dont have any reason to show your children. All they need to worry about is their line. 

[Grunt]

9 hours ago, miav said:

Then why comment at all? I hope you at least read the website I gave so you can understand Family Search better and realize it's not just for members.

Because, as I clearly stated, it is a big deal to me.  I have an opinion on the subject.  The fact that it doesn't directly impact me doesn't detract from that.

[Overwatch]

9 hours ago, miav said:

Since you don't have two men who are married to each other in your family, you dont have any reason to show your children. All they need to worry about is their line. 

I have an actively homosexual relative, not sure if he is married yet, nor am I in a hurry to find out. I find it interesting that something that is condemned in the scriptures and entire cities have been destroyed because of it, is being treated so "tolerantly". Just because something becomes legal doesn't mean embrace it or give it place with us. So what is going to happen when people can marry livestock?  

The mental retardation that is coming as a result of deep spiritual sin in the people is turning our people into a joke. The stench is becoming unbearable and I am afraid the smell is already at heaven's door. It is only a matter of time before the cleaners come. I am afraid there is no place to go now to escape the destruction like Lehi and his family.

As a member I am deeply concerned about these changes. I am going to have to pray and fast if this continues to be an issue for me. I want my family to be unspotted from the world and I want them to know their church is actively against the sins of Sodom, Gomorrah, and Pompeii.

 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Grunt said:

Because, as I clearly stated, it is a big deal to me.  I have an opinion on the subject.  The fact that it doesn't directly impact me doesn't detract from that.

I guess your comment was confusing, when you start with Meh,  it shows a disinterest. 

If you want to know more about Family Search and why they church decided it needed to make the change, then you need to learn more about Family Search, it's mission and goal. You can do that by reading the article I gave and going on Family Search and reading their facts about the site. Also start indexing and working on your own tree ( as a convert you have a huge opportunity to find ancestors that need their work done). 

This change wasn't just something the church did without carefully making the decision. There are general authorities who are over Family Search (I assume at least one of the 12 oversees it and several of the 70 who are on the Board of directors) ,  do you not think they studied this issue out and took it to the Lord to seek his guidance? Do you think they would act contrary to the will of the Lord? I have faith that when this decision was made it was carefully and prayfully studied out, they then took their question or ideas to the Lord and received inspiration on the will of the Lord. Because this is such a sensative subject, I am sure they sought the opinion of the First Presidency, who again took it before the Lord. Apparently they felt the Lord had given His approval, or the change wouldn't have happened. I don't believe this was a decision that was made lightly.

 

So you can either accept their inspiration or not, it's a big deal for you, so I suggest you also take it to the Lord. When i feel there are issues that are a big deal to me, I take it to the Lord and I find direction and peace from the answers given to me.

[JamesZA]

I'm surprised at the reaction to this.
 

Sure, the homosexuality topic touches a nerve for some. The church isn't legitimising it here. Merely acknowledging that it exists.

 

We also believe infant baptism is an abomination but we'll happily use records of infant baptism in our family history. This has been done right since the beginning and it hasn't led to the church practising infant baptism either for the living or the dead. It's not a slippery slope at all. Just part of our keeping a record of what happened. No fundamental doctrines were changed.

 

Similarly with this. No doctrines are in danger of being changed.

 

Sure. It may be uncomfortable to show your children the family tree if there are such couples represented in it. Family trees can be uncomfortable anyway. My great grandfather was a serial womaniser and had children by several women. Recording these children's births is uncomfortable but it happened. Doesn't legitimise sinful behaviour one bit.

 

[BeccaKirstyn]

I think if you take the emotion out of it, and look at it from a logistic standpoint, the decision makes a lot of sense and will really help the Church keep accurate records of everything. 

Our Church is a Church of order, including the records we keep of both members and non-members. If someone is legally married as a same-sex couple, omitting that fact from Family Search is like having only 50% of their data recorded. It's not fully accurate. Whether we agree with it or not is not important for the purpose of Family Search and genealogy work. 

[Overwatch]

So what about current polygamist families?  Are they allowed to be recorded on family search? What about couples who are just living together? Are they recorded on family search? I am going to have to dive into this and see what is really going on with these records. Even there are issues with proxy work, it is my understanding there are a ton of issues with proxy work for the dead, such as wrong records, people having work done repeatedly and even wrong information being submitted. I wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing gets audited at the second coming and most of it has to be redone. 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Overwatch said:

So what about current polygamist families?  Are they allowed to be recorded on family search?

Yes they can, you can add multiple marriages to Family Search. Same with couple living together they could add that to Family Search and leave the marriage information blank.

[Grunt]

3 hours ago, miav said:

I guess your comment was confusing, when you start with Meh,  it shows a disinterest. 

If you want to know more about Family Search and why they church decided it needed to make the change, then you need to learn more about Family Search, it's mission and goal. You can do that by reading the article I gave and going on Family Search and reading their facts about the site. Also start indexing and working on your own tree ( as a convert you have a huge opportunity to find ancestors that need their work done). 

This change wasn't just something the church did without carefully making the decision. There are general authorities who are over Family Search (I assume at least one of the 12 oversees it and several of the 70 who are on the Board of directors) ,  do you not think they studied this issue out and took it to the Lord to seek his guidance? Do you think they would act contrary to the will of the Lord? I have faith that when this decision was made it was carefully and prayfully studied out, they then took their question or ideas to the Lord and received inspiration on the will of the Lord. Because this is such a sensative subject, I am sure they sought the opinion of the First Presidency, who again took it before the Lord. Apparently they felt the Lord had given His approval, or the change wouldn't have happened. I don't believe this was a decision that was made lightly.

 

So you can either accept their inspiration or not, it's a big deal for you, so I suggest you also take it to the Lord. When i feel there are issues that are a big deal to me, I take it to the Lord and I find direction and peace from the answers given to me.

I'm not disinterested in the topic.  I'm disinterested in mounting an argument that supports why the acceptance, and normalization, of same-sex marriage, is bad for the individual, society, and the church when others clearly believe it's a great thing and the divisiveness my argument and the ensuing discussion could create in the forum isn't worth "winning" an argument to me.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Grunt said:

I'm not disinterested in the topic.  I'm disinterested in mounting an argument that supports why the acceptance, and normalization, of same-sex marriage, is bad for the individual, society, and the church when others clearly believe it's a great thing and the divisiveness my argument and the ensuing discussion could create in the forum isn't worth "winning" an argument to me.

When did Iever say it was a "great thing". I never said that nor did anyone else who has replied to you or understands why family search now allows it.  You were given the links to understand Family Search  more and why the church has the program. You might not agree with their purpose or mission but that's not up to you or me to decide, it's up to the Lord and who he has placed in charge of that program, and I have no doubt that they prayed and asked for the Lord's guidance on this issue. If you want to understand the reasoning behind it, you should get involved in family search and do some genealogy, and if it a a big issue than pray about and I am sure the Lord will help you with this problem.

[NeuroTypical]

6 hours ago, Overwatch said:

Just because something becomes legal doesn't mean embrace it or give it place with us. 

Current normal genealogy practice, includes recording divorce, or illigitimate children born out of wedlock.  Doesn't mean we embrace or condone divorce or fornication.  Quite the opposite.  

It is now becoming normal genealogy practice, to record same-sex marriages.  Doesn't mean we embrace or condone same sex marriages.  Quite the opposite.  

 

[Grunt]

43 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Current normal genealogy practice, includes recording divorce, or illigitimate children born out of wedlock.  Doesn't mean we embrace or condone divorce or fornication.  Quite the opposite.  

It is now becoming normal genealogy practice, to record same-sex marriages.  Doesn't mean we embrace or condone same sex marriages.  Quite the opposite.  

 

False equivocation.  Whether or not we should record divorces is a topic worth discussing.  Being born of fornication doesn't change your bloodline.

[Grunt]

1 hour ago, miav said:

When did Iever say it was a "great thing". I never said that nor did anyone else who has replied to you or understands why family search now allows it.  You were given the links to understand Family Search  more and why the church has the program. You might not agree with their purpose or mission but that's not up to you or me to decide, it's up to the Lord and who he has placed in charge of that program, and I have no doubt that they prayed and asked for the Lord's guidance on this issue. If you want to understand the reasoning behind it, you should get involved in family search and do some genealogy, and if it a a big issue than pray about and I am sure the Lord will help you with this problem.

I'm assuming, perhaps falsely, people who argue with a direction agree with it.  If not, then they are just arguing to argue.  

I have no problem understanding what you state are the reasons.  As I very clearly stated, I disagree with them.

[Overwatch]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

Current normal genealogy practice, includes recording divorce, or illigitimate children born out of wedlock.  Doesn't mean we embrace or condone divorce or fornication.  Quite the opposite.  

It is now becoming normal genealogy practice, to record same-sex marriages.  Doesn't mean we embrace or condone same sex marriages.  Quite the opposite.  

 

Hey Neuro,

Divorce is not illegal or wrong for certain circumstances. Being born out of wedlock doesn't change your genealogical line.

The fact that gay couples weren't recognized until the law changed is just bothersome to me. This isn't just about the gays.

This changing things as things start changing in the country. examples:

- US hates polygamy. Saints quit and ban the practice so all the men don't go to jail and the Temples aren't confiscated.

- Civil Rights Movement comes along "Okay, tada, guess what, The Lord says EVERYONE gets the priesthood now!" (Which I am glad because before it was just dumb to begin with, I will inquire of the Lord when I am dead to see what Really happened there. He will be able to help me understand)

- Country legitimizes the forbidden and now church recognizes their unions.

Why? Is mammon going to confiscate our temples if we don't? Are we going to run and hide again because the gentiles will hates us and kill our men again? How bad we got rocked before has always been a concern to me but I KNOW The Book of Mormon is true. They killed brother Joseph and the Saints lived in fear. Where is the faith? Where is the trust to defend? Then when some saints struck back they are condemned and vilified (meadow massacre)

These are confusing times. Even the Pope telling a homosexual man God made him that way is confusing (my family converted to Mormonism from Catholicism but fell away because of circumstances) Troubling times indeed

[NeuroTypical]

It dawns on me I don't really have a dog in this fight.  Overwatch and Grunt (and everyone else here for that matter), y'all are ok in my eyes.

[Grunt]

6 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

It dawns on me I don't really have a dog in this fight.  Overwatch and Grunt (and everyone else here for that matter), y'all are ok in my eyes.

Same here.  That's why I said "meh".  It wasn't a topic I wanted to "argue" about.  Just make my opinion known.

[Overwatch]

19 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

It dawns on me I don't really have a dog in this fight.  Overwatch and Grunt (and everyone else here for that matter), y'all are ok in my eyes.

lol Thanks Neuro. It's just hard for me, something I have to take to the Lord for sure.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Grunt said:

I'm assuming, perhaps falsely, people who argue with a direction agree with it.  If not, then they are just arguing to argue.  

I don't agree with it or disagree with it, I just understand the reasoning behind the decision.

Edited June 17, 2018 by miav

[Guest MormonGator]

1 hour ago, miav said:

I don't agree with it or disagree with it, I just understand the reasoning behind the decision.

Even if we agree or disagree with it, it's happening. So we better adapt. 

[Grunt]

13 hours ago, MormonGator said:

Even if we agree or disagree with it, it's happening. So we better adapt. 

I don’t see anything to really “adapt” to personally.   If you don’t have same-sex partners in your tree, you’ll just drive on as normal.  

[Guest]

On 6/14/2018 at 4:44 PM, Grunt said:

I'm not sure what the point is.  Why do it?

On 6/16/2018 at 1:13 AM, Overwatch said:

Well then they can have the name of one parent and [Sperm]or [Egg] Donor in the other block. The madness is thick.

Consider that this is no different than an adoptee getting to have two sets of records (birth family and adoptive family).  I'm allowed to have two sets because I'm adopted.  Although, I don't know how to do it yet.

If a child has same-sex parents, obviously, he was adopted by at least one of those parents.  So, the same rules would apply as adoption. 

Note that I'm only sealed to one set of parents.  Sealings are quite different than simply doing genealogy.

Edited June 23, 2018 by Guest

[carlimac]

So here's a logistics question. Normally the father goes on the top line and mother on the bottom line in the family tree. If there are two mothers or two fathers, which one goes on which line? Seems like a dumb question, but the Lord's house is one of order so...