dianaiad
Well-Known Member
No, IN THE OPINION OF KIDS WHO HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN THROUGH IT.
The resources exist specifically because people in the LDS community recognize how painful these situations are for gay kids.
And I'm sure the religious people who once taught that interracial marriage is sinful and "against God's plan" felt similarly.
That said, the reduction of a person's sexuality to mere "wants" and "preferences," as though it's not integral to their identity and is of no more import than them "preferring" chocolate over vanilla, is absurd and dehumanizing.
My opinion aligns with the actual experiences of the human beings who live through the repercussions what we're talking about. I've now explained repeatedly what I meant by calling your church's teaching sad. I can only re-explain it so many times. It's a teaching that causes pain, and it's a teaching that's unnecessary.
Gay children often don't have the choice to simply leave their families and the entire support network that has been built around them their whole lives. How are you not comprehending this?
How are you not even ATTEMPTING to comprehend my POV?
Because you are so wedded to your own opinion that you think everybody else must bow to it?
EVERYBODY has a choice. Everybody does. Gay children have those choices, too. They can leave, when they are old enough. Plenty do. Do NOT tell me that they have no choice, because that is simply not true.
Many people make choices where the consequences are extremely painful for them and their families. They make them anyway. That's called courage.
Nobody would coerce another; nobody would threaten another if that other were not able to make a different choice. The guy who ties a man's family to chairs and tells him that if he doesn't rob the bank he works at, his family will die...has a choice. There would be no need to threaten the man if he did NOT have that choice. The 'laws of God' all say 'do this or that will happen.' If we didn't have the choice to disobey, there would be no need to list consequences of disobedience.
There would be no need to pass ordinances defining the amount of fines imposed upon people who run red lights...if nobody could run red lights.
And there would be no need to threaten being disowned or the loss of support systems if the one being threatened had no choice as to whether to leave it.
BTW, it is very much against church teachings for families to do that sort of thing.
On the other hand, if...say...you belong to a choir that has grooming and dress standards, and requirements to attend rehearsals, and in return you get to sing with a group of REALLY good singers, get to associate with them on weekend barbecues and get help when you move from your fellow choir members......
Is it fair for you to demand all those perks if you refuse to attend rehearsals, or break the rules against beards, or wear a bright puce shirt when everybody else is supposed to be wearing blue choir robes?
You make your choices, and you take the consequences of those choices. Simple. Not EASY, certainly, but it's simple.