What's new
By:

Don't discriminate against da gays.

Beer said:
Disagree, a private institution should have certain rights to operate as they please. They should also not be able to receive govt benefits though.
Click to expand...

That is not the church's position. Their position is that they should be allowed to operate as they please but other private institutions/individuals should not be able to.
 
colton said:
So you think the U.S. government will threaten to take away the LDS church's tax exempt status unless they change their views on the morality of homosexual relationships? What kind of time frame do you have in mind for that?

Personally, I think you are wrong on both counts. (a) Like LogGrad I think the U.S. will make religious exemptions for situations that make sense, and (b) Even if they threaten the church with a law like that, the LDS church won't change its views on homosexual behavior. The statements against homosexual relations are far more numerous and codified into LDS doctrine than was the issue of blacks and the priesthood (which I'm sure you have in mind).
Click to expand...

It'll be a bit. I'd back of the envelope that at 20 years. The gov't also wouldn't mandate that they change their views, just tell them they have to hire homosexuals anyway or the discrimination will come at a cost.
 
I'm surprised that there has been some public backlash about this. As an LDS person, maybe I'm biased. However, this only seems like a well-intended message suggesting mutual respect and fair treatment for all.

"We reject persecution and retaliation of any kind, including persecution based on race, ethnicity, religious belief, economic circumstances or differences in gender or sexual orientation.”

I realize this isn't a perfect situation, regardless of your personal views or choices. However, opening up discussion and taking steps towards a better relationship seems like movement in the right direction if you ask me.

Let's not forget that there are people in this world that feel this way (see below):

effwestboro.jpg
 
AlaskanAssassin said:
I'm surprised that there has been some public backlash about this. As an LDS person, maybe I'm biased. However, this only seems like a well-intended message suggesting mutual respect and fair treatment for all.

"We reject persecution and retaliation of any kind, including persecution based on race, ethnicity, religious belief, economic circumstances or differences in gender or sexual orientation.”

I realize this isn't a perfect situation, regardless of your personal views or choices. However, opening up discussion and taking steps towards a better relationship seems like movement in the right direction if you ask me.

Let's not forget that there are people in this world that feel this way (see below):

effwestboro.jpg
Click to expand...

What terrific Christian examples!
 
So when a customer comes in can they demand that a baker make them a cake with a Bible and an anti-gay saying on it?

I mean, after all, we wouldn't want bakers denying anyone service, right?
 
Why shouldn't religions have the right to discriminate however they want? To my knowledge, religions still can deny any mixed marriage they want. So why would gays receive better treatment than those of different races?

If people don't like churches that discriminate, they could always stop giving them money, right?

If BYU wants to only hire white male balding RMs with names starting with C shouldn't that be their prerogative?
 
The Thriller said:
Why shouldn't religions have the right to discriminate however they want? To my knowledge, religions still can deny any mixed marriage they want. So why would gays receive better treatment than those of different races?

If people don't like churches that discriminate, they could always stop giving them money, right?

If BYU wants to only hire white male balding RMs with names starting with C shouldn't that be their prerogative?
Click to expand...

I think y'all are still missing what I was trying to say. I must not have communicated it very well. I am not advocating to force the church to do anything. I'm not advocating for any legal action.

I'm simply pointing out what I see as hypocrisy. "It is so morally objectionable to discriminate based on sexual orientation that there ought to be a law against it *unless you have religious reasons." Is that what the LDS church strives to be? An excuse to discriminate?
 
heyhey said:
I think y'all are still missing what I was trying to say. I must not have communicated it very well. I am not advocating to force the church to do anything. I'm not advocating for any legal action.

I'm simply pointing out what I see as hypocrisy. "It is so morally objectionable to discriminate based on sexual orientation that there ought to be a law against it *unless you have religious reasons." Is that what the LDS church strives to be? An excuse to discriminate?
Click to expand...

Is that what the fine print says? Is that how some are interpreting it? Or is that how you're interpreting it?

I get what you're saying and I don't believe individuals should discriminate. However, I don't blame the church from asking for their ability to discriminate what the institution deems as an immoral lifestyle. BYU should be able to deny employment to a homosexual professor. At least, isn't that what the church is thinking?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top