History of homosexuality

Public forum to discuss interesting and helpful books.
User avatar
gospeltangents
Posts: 156
Joined: 10 Jul 2017, 22:50
Location: Utah
Contact:

History of homosexuality

Post by gospeltangents » 26 Sep 2017, 12:04

Greg Prince did an interview yesterday on Radio West. Apparently he is writing a book on the history of homosexuality in the church.

Did you know that the word "homosexuality" was never mentioned in an official LDS Church publication until 1968?!!!

Prince says Kimball was quite progressive on his views of race, but regressive on his views of sex. Must listen to the interview.

See http://radiowest.kuer.org/post/history- ... osexuality
See my latest interviews on Mormon History, Science & Theology at www.gospeltangents.com

User avatar
LookingHard
Posts: 2781
Joined: 20 Oct 2014, 12:11

Re: History of homosexuality

Post by LookingHard » 26 Sep 2017, 18:17

I really like Greg's writing. I am excited for the book he is working on. I like his David O. McKay book and have his Leonard Arrington book on my "to read" list.

I found it really interesting that he says he has reliable "leaks" and a Utah Stake President said 10% of his stake resigned over the Nov 2015 policy on gays and kids of gays. Also the first year after the policy change 60K people resigned from the church.

User avatar
Beefster
Posts: 479
Joined: 04 Aug 2017, 18:38

Re: History of homosexuality

Post by Beefster » 28 Sep 2017, 22:02

I thought his demeanor was very fair to the church. I feel this is yet another personal step toward a more empathetic understanding of gays. I was blind to the reality of damage the 2015 policy caused to members of the church.

At this point in time, my belief regarding LGBT people is that their orientation is a condition of mortality, much like depression or anxiety (though I hesitate to lump them in with a list of 'bad' things), and as such, it will no longer be an issue after the resurrection. God is fully understanding of it because sexual orientation and gender identity are almost entirely (if not entirely) outside the control of the individual. I don't yet have a solid belief on how this figures into temple blessings, but I do believe that everything is going to work out in the end.

On a tangential note, I'm honestly appalled that the church spent our tithing money on political campaigns. Sure, that's from before I made money and therefore paid significant tithing, but it still bothers me retroactively. I know it was a drop in the bucket in comparison to the yearly donations, but it's the principle of it that matters. I would much prefer that money be spent on extravagant buildings and college tuition. :shifty:
Boys are governed by rules. Men are governed by principles.

Often I hear doubt being presented as the opposite of faith but I think certainty does a better job of filling that role. Doubts can help faith grow, certainty almost always makes faith shrink. --nibbler

Roy
Posts: 4716
Joined: 07 Oct 2010, 14:16
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: History of homosexuality

Post by Roy » 01 Oct 2017, 10:02

Beefster wrote:
28 Sep 2017, 22:02
At this point in time, my belief regarding LGBT people is that their orientation is a condition of mortality, much like depression or anxiety (though I hesitate to lump them in with a list of 'bad' things), and as such, it will no longer be an issue after the resurrection. God is fully understanding of it because sexual orientation and gender identity are almost entirely (if not entirely) outside the control of the individual. I don't yet have a solid belief on how this figures into temple blessings, but I do believe that everything is going to work out in the end.
I actually believe that this is more or less the current church stance on the issue. However it raises some important questions. Does it seem reasonable that a person's homosexuality would be removed in the afterlife but a person's heterosexuality would remain? That the individual would no longer be attracted to their mortal SSM spouse but would instead be attracted to something else? In the interest of being fair, it seems appropriate that all sexuality would be removed.

Why stop there? Gender roles, expectations, and inequality is a mess. There are individuals that are intersex (both genders, on a sliding scale) and individuals of a certain gender that feel deeply inside that they should be the other (transgender). Even for those that are firmly male and firmly female, the history of polygamy and the current sexism of the temple endowment demonstrate seemingly eternal imbalances. In the interest of being fair, it seems appropriate that gender would be removed.

That actually seems to be pretty consistent with what Jesus taught, "The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are considered worthy to share in the age to come and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage."

P.S. I am not fully committed to a sexless genderless eternity (I honestly do not know what eternity might be like) but I hope that this exercise is helpful to detecting the problems of supposing that everyone in the resurrection will magically turn into cisgender, heterosexual, white folk. :mrgreen:
"It is not so much the pain and suffering of life which crushes the individual as it is its meaninglessness and hopelessness." C. A. Elwood

“It is not the function of religion to answer all the questions about God’s moral government of the universe, but to give one courage, through faith, to go on in the face of questions he never finds the answer to in his present status.” TPC: Harold B. Lee 223

"I struggle now with establishing my faith that God may always be there, but may not always need to intervene" Heber13

DancingCarrot
Posts: 160
Joined: 23 May 2014, 18:24

Re: History of homosexuality

Post by DancingCarrot » 01 Oct 2017, 11:47

Continuing on with what Roy posited, the main reason I hear heterosexuality will be the norm in the afterlife is because male and female reproductive systems combined make babies, and since the eternities are mostly filled with having spirit babies, instructing them, and sending them to Earths, we all need to have the complementary junk (pun intended). However, this falls apart for me when I consider that as far as I've heard anyone teach about resurrected bodies, they don't operate like human bodies IE not needing to eat or detoxify the blood or breathe etc etc. If that is actually true, then the endocrine and circulatory systems can't help keep reproductive systems as we know them operating. Women menstruate - and only for a period of their lives, and men create sperm. As for this woman, I sure don't want to be spending any part of the afterlife with a period. Let alone pregnant. People who say "Well, that may be and it may mean we don't understand it, but it's best to have faith. Heavenly Father wants you to have faith." lack imagination, in my opinion. There are major inconsistencies with a human-like afterlife, and I think it's fun to posit on what COULD be, instead of buckling down on trying to believe in what doesn't make sense.

In regards to homosexuality, I can't answer the question of what aspects of personality are human and what parts would carry over? I consider my introvertedness a central part to who I am, but a gay person says the same thing about their homosexuality. Are they different? How are they different? Why would one be kept and the other one not? I don't understand, and I don't get much from trying to force the belief.

I hadn't ever heard of any numbers regarding resignations following the policy. 10% of a Utah stake and 60K overall is quite something, in my book.
It does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live. -Dumbledore

Roll away your stone, I'll roll away mine. Together we can see what we will find. -Mumford & Sons

User avatar
Beefster
Posts: 479
Joined: 04 Aug 2017, 18:38

Re: History of homosexuality

Post by Beefster » 01 Oct 2017, 13:22

Roy wrote:
01 Oct 2017, 10:02
Does it seem reasonable that a person's homosexuality would be removed in the afterlife but a person's heterosexuality would remain? That the individual would no longer be attracted to their mortal SSM spouse but would instead be attracted to something else? In the interest of being fair, it seems appropriate that all sexuality would be removed.
It seems weird to imagine. I would imagine the love for a SSM spouse would still remain and their mortal life as a gay person would still define them in some way. I suspect I won't be dealing with unpredictable moods anymore after the resurrection, but I will still feel that the depression has shaped who I am. I know they're not exactly comparable, but I think the principle is the same.
Roy wrote:
01 Oct 2017, 10:02
P.S. I am not fully committed to a sexless genderless eternity (I honestly do not know what eternity might be like) but I hope that this exercise is helpful to detecting the problems of supposing that everyone in the resurrection will magically turn into cisgender, heterosexual, white folk. :mrgreen:
Our mortal bodies work via chemical and electrical impulses, which sometimes do not operate in the typical manner. While I definitely believe our experiences with our mortal body shape our eternal identity, they do not solely define it. With bodies that work in a presumably better designed way, chemical/electrical problems just don't exist anymore. Assuming that any condition will continue to exist into eternity implies that the identity existed in the premortal existence.
Boys are governed by rules. Men are governed by principles.

Often I hear doubt being presented as the opposite of faith but I think certainty does a better job of filling that role. Doubts can help faith grow, certainty almost always makes faith shrink. --nibbler

User avatar
gospeltangents
Posts: 156
Joined: 10 Jul 2017, 22:50
Location: Utah
Contact:

Re: History of homosexuality

Post by gospeltangents » 01 Oct 2017, 17:08

If anyone is interested in watching Greg Prince's lecture on this topic, here is the link:

https://youtu.be/gssnz1WZ3dU

He goes into greater detail than the RadioWest interview. It was an amazing presentation, and I'm glad I was able to attend, as well as interview him prior to this presentation.
See my latest interviews on Mormon History, Science & Theology at www.gospeltangents.com

DancingCarrot
Posts: 160
Joined: 23 May 2014, 18:24

Re: History of homosexuality

Post by DancingCarrot » 01 Oct 2017, 19:04

Beefster wrote:
01 Oct 2017, 13:22
It seems weird to imagine. I would imagine the love for a SSM spouse would still remain and their mortal life as a gay person would still define them in some way. I suspect I won't be dealing with unpredictable moods anymore after the resurrection, but I will still feel that the depression has shaped who I am. I know they're not exactly comparable, but I think the principle is the same.

--------

Our mortal bodies work via chemical and electrical impulses, which sometimes do not operate in the typical manner. While I definitely believe our experiences with our mortal body shape our eternal identity, they do not solely define it. With bodies that work in a presumably better designed way, chemical/electrical problems just don't exist anymore. Assuming that any condition will continue to exist into eternity implies that the identity existed in the premortal existence.
I've heard from some members who experience male pattern baldness that they're excited for the day in the resurrection that they'll finally be made "whole" and have an entire head of hair, but that's often because baldness is seen as a less desirable, less sexually attractive trait, at least for the general population. If baldness was seen as a source of intelligence, brawn, or leadership, maybe men would be pining for The Balding Days of the Resurrection. My point is, if a trait of a person wasn't maligned or deemed morally inferior, in this case homosexuality, and we admitted as a church that no one has any idea how resurrected bodies work or more importantly how spirit bodies are formed, then we might finally be less zealous about outlawing homosexual expression.

It's quite problematic to say that homosexual sexualities are issues that need to be handled or endured. Putting them on par with mental illness is even more problematic, and honestly condescending. As Prince mentioned, both in animal and human nature, homosexuality is a natural and biological phenomenon. "Homosexual brains", if they can even be called that, are created in utero, meaning that some part of homosexuality is genetically determined, just like heterosexuality is genetically determined. There is nothing abnormal about homosexuality in the sense that it causes the body or mind to have a maladaptive response to its environment. To contrast that, depression/anxiety/mental illnesses by definition are maladaptive and do not have healthy ways of relating to the environment. Illness is abnormal because it is maladpative and impinges on healthy functioning. Therefore the difference in mental illness and homosexuality lie not in the low percentages experienced by the general population, which some people construe as being abnormal, but by the healthy or unhealthy ways in which they incline the person who has the trait.
It does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live. -Dumbledore

Roll away your stone, I'll roll away mine. Together we can see what we will find. -Mumford & Sons

User avatar
Beefster
Posts: 479
Joined: 04 Aug 2017, 18:38

Re: History of homosexuality

Post by Beefster » 01 Oct 2017, 20:14

I think you make a good point, DC. I don't mean to be disparaging or condescending when I compare homosexuality to depression. I really need a better analogy.

There is only one thing that is maladaptive to homosexuality and that is the lack of reproductive ability. That's not really a problem within modern society where we aren't clamoring for survival and passing on our genes. Nowadays, gay men can have their own children using surrogate mothers and lesbian women can do the same through sperm donation, so it no longer hinders us like it once did.

I don't know how it all fits into eternity, though the evidence suggests that sexuality is a trait of a physical body. I do not know whether that extends to the resurrection or not or to what extent it does. Maybe gays are welcome with open arms in the CK and we'll have gay sealings someday. Maybe it's a mortality-only thing. But considering that homosexuality wasn't even on the church's radar until the late 60s, that does make it seem like the former is more likely. I don't have the answers. I'm just going to love everybody and trust God.
Boys are governed by rules. Men are governed by principles.

Often I hear doubt being presented as the opposite of faith but I think certainty does a better job of filling that role. Doubts can help faith grow, certainty almost always makes faith shrink. --nibbler

DancingCarrot
Posts: 160
Joined: 23 May 2014, 18:24

Re: History of homosexuality

Post by DancingCarrot » 02 Oct 2017, 04:05

Beefster, that's a fair point about the inability of a same-sex pairing being maladaptive in the sense that it can't reproduce. I guess I usually flit over that for some of the reasons that you mentioned above.

I also found it interesting that the church was mostly mute on the subject until the late '60s. Prince mentioned the Stonewall riots in 1969 and a light flicked on in my head regarding a connection between the two, similar to learning about the priesthood ban and the situation around the first temple in Brazil. It adds another layer to my understanding.

I've also heard some people speculate that only people I the highest level of the CK will be able to have sex and therefore have spirit babies. That begs more questions such as what happens to everyone else's reproductive systems? Do they have them? Are they not there? What sort of medical device is implanted to account for the dead space inside them now? Do class action lawsuits exist if the medical devices malfunction? Can we sue God??




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live. -Dumbledore

Roll away your stone, I'll roll away mine. Together we can see what we will find. -Mumford & Sons

Post Reply