Thursday, October 23, 2008

Affirmation link

I found this very interesting, and enlightening.

Letter from Joseph Dallin to Richard Wilkins

10 comments:

Travis Butterfield said...

Hi again. I read the letter you linked to, and it is very good. He makes some very good arguments, and I have to agree with many of them. However, at the risk of offending you, I thought I'd share this talk by Dallin H. Oaks. I think this will help clarify what the church's doctrines on this matter are, in spite of what Richard Wilkins may have written. I think It's important to realize that "bishop" Wilkins is not perfect, and his website is not necessarily church doctrine. However, I think Dallin H. Oaks is much more qualified to speak on this matter. So. Here you go:
http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=f318118dd536c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=bf10226fecfdb010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1

k said...

No problem, I'm not offended hearing both sides. However, I am already familiar with Oaks's explanation of doctrine. I just find it lacking in terms of what Joseph Dallin has gone through. If Joseph Dallin feels like God accepts him the way he was made, who am I to deny how sure he is of that? Also, he's not the only gay person to tell such a story. I find it hard to believe that God would be communicating with gay children (that he MADE gay, IMO) in a peaceful way on the one hand, and then telling this bishop to do what he's doing on the other hand. I realize that Oaks is just doing what he can to clarify to broad swath of people, but he doesn't address the core issue for me: what if God made them that way? IMO, I think God did, and I think he isn't upset if they want the same respect as heterosexuals, not to mention the fullness of life found in having real intimacy with a spouse, love, and family and children. I know that's a little radical, but it feels more right to me than any explanation I've settled on before, Elder Oaks explanation being one of them.

Hubers said...

What does IMO mean? Sorry, I'm a dunce.

Ryan M said...

Looks like another namby-pamby waffle-stomper leftist blog post.

I'll be glad when the election's over and we can get back to the innocuous postings about what our kid did that day. That's what the people want to hear about.

k said...

R, HA! M is a funny child, I should update the peeps with his various quotes. Also, IMO means in my opinion.

Brian Neesham said...

We talked earlier, but I really like the point counter point he puts out. I also got an email today randomly from a non supporter of 8 in my ward. http://www.sltrib.com/ci_10797630 There is a quote in there from a 70 that basically says that if you don't agree, it's ok. God is not going to strike down upon thee with vengeance, so again, you know who's comment, is way off base. "Latter-day Saints are free to disagree with their church on the issue without facing any sanction, said L. Whitney Clayton of the LDS Quorum of the Seventy. "We love them and bear them no ill will." "

k said...

Brian, that's cool that someone is sending that quote around, especially in CA where it's little crazy right now.

Travis Butterfield said...

Whose comment is way off base? Ryan's? I thought it was a joke . . . . I hope it wasn't mine. Anyhoo. I also agree that it's not the biggest deal in the world if people don't support these propositions. I hope I have never come across that way. I still think you're pretty dang awesome. I just find this issue interesting. It's a tough issue. I agree with Ryan. I'll be glad when the election is over. It's been a long two years . . .

k said...

No it's not your comment Travis. I'm looking forward to the election being over too. There are too many signs on every corner in Tempe for my taste. I'm glad you're reading the links and whatnot, I find it really interesting too. And I think you're awesome :)

Brian Neesham said...

Another great point I got in an email today. "To answer your question, as an American I believe the right for an
adult to marry another consenting adult is a civil right, like freedom
of religion, and that we as a society should uphold this and all other
civil rights. But as a Mormon, I recognize that there is a basis in
LDS theology for advocating for a traditional definition of gender and
thus marriage. So I believe such advocacy should be limited to the
interpretation or practice of a civil right like marriage, such as how
gender and marriage are defined in school textbooks. Prop 8 is about
denying a civil right to a class of citizens, not how this right is
practiced, so I oppose."