A plain white mare.
June 21, 2012 10:11 PM   Subscribe

A gay-straight marriage story from a member of the LDS church. "About a year after my divorce, I was chatting with my new bishop, who I had known for several years prior to that. He asked me, "So, Ashley, why did you and Matt get divorced?" I replied, "Matt is a homosexual." I just looked him in the eye after I said this and waited a few seconds while he absorbed it. Then he asked, "Well, was there another problem as well? Like drinking? Or gambling?" I looked him in the eye a second time and replied, "Nope. Just that." He was genuinely confused."
posted by Dynex (62 comments total) 15 users marked this as a favorite

 
That was a good read, and I'm glad Ashley got her head around what the causes of her depression. It seems like she and Matt have worked something out (they remain "best friends" post-divorce) but I wonder what their arrangement is? They have children together, and that's given as a major complication in a mixed-orientation marriage like theirs was. Laying out how they are dealing with the dissolution of their marriage, if only as a blueprint for other families to follow or take inspiration from, might have been a better way to end this essay. Instead we just get some vague warnings about the danger of Club Unicorn.

The post about which might have been a good piece to accompany the link in this post:
Club Unicorn: In which I come out of the closet on our ten year anniversary
posted by carsonb at 10:39 PM on June 21, 2012 [1 favorite]


So brave.
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 10:46 PM on June 21, 2012


Of course, Club Unicorn previously on MeFi, just a few weeks ago.
posted by carsonb at 10:50 PM on June 21, 2012 [1 favorite]


related: an amazing coming out interview from (former) devout mormon and winner of so you think you can dance, benji schwimmer.
posted by nadawi at 11:06 PM on June 21, 2012


Is it just me, or is it raining gay mormons these days? I'm curious if when the history of these times is written, there's a particular case that opened the floodgates, or is it just that society has advanced such that the even the LDS hold on it's members wasn't strong enough to keep it all repressed? I also wonder how long before the LDS supremo has The Revelation? I give it five years after the incumbent kicks it, but I might be woefully optimistic.
posted by amorphatist at 11:31 PM on June 21, 2012 [2 favorites]


God, that made me cry. Especially this part:

"When my husband came out, a friend he’s known for several years contacted him and told Matt he was also gay. He is also LDS and has never acted on his desires. He went on to tell Matt that many times he’d seriously contemplated suicide. Some of those times, he actually planned out the suicide. He knew exactly how he was going to kill himself, but when the time came to go through with it, he couldn’t. His words to Matt were, “everyday I regret that I did not have the courage to end my life.” Again, this man, never has acted on his desires and remains faithful to the church."


I will never, ever, understand how some people think it's OK to treat a person like they are "broken" or guilting them into thinking that they are going to hell for just being themselves. EVERYONE deserves to love and be loved in return.

I just want to give everybody a hug now.
posted by littlesq at 11:34 PM on June 21, 2012 [36 favorites]


Metafilter: I just want to give everybody a hug now.
posted by Night_owl at 11:55 PM on June 21, 2012 [10 favorites]


Then there was BYU and the theatre department. All I was WILLING to perceive was that there were some men that seemed more masculine than others. I didn't entertain the thought of anyone being gay. We were all at BYU for heaven's sakes! The 2 things just didn't go together. The end.

I used to work & study in that department. I cannot understand how anyone could spend more than a week there without figuring out that there were homosexuals around.

It's sad though. One thing a lot of students don't realize is that putting on the "we were all at BYU for heaven's sakes" blinders is just setting yourself up for losing your faith later. "I was deceived!"

As someone who's a currently-active Mormon, I know there are people who are comfortable believing along those lines of "everything is perfect in my religion, no homosexuals here, lalalalala" faux-faith, but it just frustrates me--faith is a process of exploration, not "I'll accept whatever you tell me, anybody with a white shirt and necktie on."

I made my first gay friends at BYU and am incredibly grateful for that experience. So I thought it was awesome to read about the standing room-only BYU gay student panel. I know there are many LDS bishops who sighed in relief to hear about it, too.
posted by circular at 12:01 AM on June 22, 2012 [7 favorites]


Of course, Club Unicorn previously on MeFi, just a few weeks ago.

This seems to be very much a response to that:

So in the title of this post, I mentioned a certain other blog post that seems to have gone viral. I am frightened at the message that the other post is sending. Some couples might be able to achieve what the Club Unicorn couple is (hell, Matt and I did when the denial and repression were working), but in most cases that type of arrangement can only end badly...and where children are involved, let me tell you first-hand...

A lot of the comments reflect this too.
posted by dubitable at 12:14 AM on June 22, 2012


I also wonder how long before the LDS supremo has The Revelation? I give it five years after the incumbent kicks it, but I might be woefully optimistic.

I'm not an expert in Mormon theology, but I think they're going to have a hard time with that. To my limited understanding, one of the foundational tenets of the religion is that men and women are incomplete without one another, and that they only go to Heaven together. In the early church, apparently one man was enough for many women, but that changed to better match mainstream cultural values.

I suspect that they'll have to change in at least two stages; at one level, a homosexual pairing will be acceptable, but the couple will be denied entry to Heaven. Only after most of the current members have died out, and everyone's gotten used to the idea that a gay couple can be an asset to the community just as much as a hetero pairing, will a new revelation take place. At that point, it will be announced that, gee, Uncle Paul and Uncle Bob got to go to Heaven after all.

Or maybe they'll come up with something where gay people can be posthumously 'cured', like with the baptisms.

They can't change this too fast, or it will be entirely too obvious that their religion, like all the others, is fundamentally Calvinball.
posted by Malor at 1:12 AM on June 22, 2012 [16 favorites]


"He went to his bishop, who put him in a sex addiction group. Others in the group, he found, were struggling with the same things...When I finally came out, all the mental health issues washed away over night."

That BYU gay student panel doesn't sound all that positive to me. This "It's okay to be gay, as long as you never act on it" routine is just window dressing on bigotry and hatred.
posted by PJLandis at 1:19 AM on June 22, 2012 [9 favorites]


"Club Unicorn" ... oh, Sigmund... Why don't they just call it the "Cock Club" and have done with it?
posted by Segundus at 1:20 AM on June 22, 2012 [1 favorite]


"Why don't they just call it the "Cock Club" and have done with it?"

...ever hear the acronym LGBT? L stands for lesbian.
posted by PJLandis at 1:22 AM on June 22, 2012 [5 favorites]


Closeted Mormons are the new closeted Republicans.
posted by bardic at 1:32 AM on June 22, 2012 [1 favorite]


Since it's kind of buried at the end of the previous thread, I wanted to point out that Joshua Weed, the Club Unicorn guy, is actually an ex-gay reparative therapist.
posted by MrVisible at 1:45 AM on June 22, 2012 [9 favorites]


Yeah, telling gay men they can live perfectly fine lives married to women is how he makes his money.

I don't think I have to point out how gross and damaging ex-gay therapy is .
posted by The Whelk at 1:49 AM on June 22, 2012 [3 favorites]


They can't change this too fast, or it will be entirely too obvious that their religion, like all the others, is fundamentally Calvinball.

Malor, you say this almost like it means anything. Presumably, their religion will propel itself, calvin-ball like, across the millennia, contradicting both the most superficial logic and its own historical tradition, just like every other religion ever.
posted by eurypteris at 2:01 AM on June 22, 2012 [2 favorites]


Sure, religions change over long periods of time, but they don't usually change fast enough so that individual people are very aware of the fact that Present Absolute Certain Truth directly contradicts Past Absolute Certain Truth.

If the Mormons are too suddenly okay with gay marriage, they will be directly attacking the roots of the religion, so it will have to change much more slowly than that. They'll probably need to wait for a bunch of people to die out, and new people to be trained in the new version of 'truth', before they can bend 'truth' again to more closely match what everyone else thinks.

Religion is absolutely Calvinball, but the most important part of the con is hiding that from the rubes. Changing rules too quickly reveals the racket.
posted by Malor at 2:09 AM on June 22, 2012 [7 favorites]


http://exmormon.org/

Here is a link to an exmormon site with many heartbreaking stories of gay Mormons as well as others. Many Bishops believed that marriage to a woman would "cure" a gay man and encouraged it, which led to much suffering. Their theology is such that only married couples can reach the highest level of heaven, the Celestial Kingdom, where there will be polygamy to take care of those women not married in this life. There have been many gay suicides and suicide attempts. Such a waste.
posted by mermayd at 3:20 AM on June 22, 2012 [2 favorites]


Also if you feel like you need a good cry: It Gets Better BYU.
posted by psoas at 4:23 AM on June 22, 2012 [2 favorites]


I would have thought that a religion with such a history of polygamy might have been more open to gay men, if nothing else through practicality.
posted by MuffinMan at 4:41 AM on June 22, 2012 [5 favorites]


re: We were all at BYU for heaven's sakes!

You know, if you look deep enough I wonder if this isn't actually the solution. Not the concept that everybody at BYU shouldn't be themselves... but the concept that everybody should just be themselves and stop trying to throw a title at it.

Drop the concept of giving it a name; gay, lesbian, bi, transgender, curious, freaky, closeted, out, whatever, and just... well... be.

We were all at BYU people for heaven's sakes!
posted by Blue_Villain at 4:59 AM on June 22, 2012


Drop the concept of giving it a name; gay, lesbian, bi, transgender, curious, freaky, closeted, out, whatever, and just... well... be.

The telling part of that sentence was that 'straight' wasn't on the list. These labels exist because otherwise everyone will assume we are straight/cis and, at a minimum, that's a wee bit irritating.
posted by hoyland at 5:17 AM on June 22, 2012 [15 favorites]


Sure, religions change over long periods of time, but they don't usually change fast enough so that individual people are very aware of the fact that Present Absolute Certain Truth directly contradicts Past Absolute Certain Truth.

It's not quite the example you're looking for, but Vatican II? Mass exclusively in Latin is certainly in living memory.

Papal infallibility, which is sort of a mechanism for doing this precise sort of truth revision if all else fails, dates only to 1870 at Vatican I.

These are more technical issues than truth revisions, but they do happen.
posted by hoyland at 5:24 AM on June 22, 2012


'straight' wasn't on the list

You're right. I messed up... I didn't include every category known to man on the list.

My apologies.
posted by Blue_Villain at 5:43 AM on June 22, 2012


The only time the LDS changed so as quickly as people in this thread are suggesting, their religion was essentially outlawed in the United States. Well, polygamy was outlawed and every, and I mean every, member of the higher level of the church had multiple wives. They all went into hiding and the church was disincorporated with all its assets seized, as it was an organization that promoted polygamy. See the Edmunds-Tucker Act for more details. Even with the church being outlawed, it took 3 years for them to finally renounce polygamy.

So yeah, the church's change on homosexuality will be longer and more painful than the revelation that black people actually can go to heaven, which only took them 130 years after Joseph Smith's statement saying that slavery was bad, mkay.
posted by Hactar at 5:44 AM on June 22, 2012 [2 favorites]



I think about how much has changed over the years and how far we still have to go. I'd like to think that faith helps through times of doubt and depression, but organized, dogmatic faith can be the cause of doubt and depression more often than not.
posted by Ruthless Bunny at 5:53 AM on June 22, 2012 [1 favorite]


Black Mormons could always go to heaven, they just couldn't go to the highest level of heaven because they weren't allowed in the temple. And that was racist Brigham Young's doing. Joseph Smith was an abolitionist.

And i think you might be surprised at how fast change actually does happen in the LDS church, especially compared to other churches. Even if it changes fundamental doctrine. Rascist footnotes in the BoM regarding Lamanites have been changed. When was the last time the Catholic church edited the KJV to better suit the times?
posted by elsietheeel at 6:19 AM on June 22, 2012 [4 favorites]


Sure, religions change over long periods of time, but they don't usually change fast enough so that individual people are very aware of the fact that Present Absolute Certain Truth directly contradicts Past Absolute Certain Truth.

This is a nice thought, but not true. These types of things are switches that are pulled - not dials turned - even if the narrative after the fact is that they're changes that have been a long time coming. Mormon history is a prime example of that... It's a religion that, in its birth, was an abrupt and radical transition within the Christian framework. And its stance on polygamy changed from white to black practically overnight. It's not something uniquely Mormon: abrupt doctrinal changes based on particular circumstances are par for the course.

Cultural memory is short and easily clouded. There's not much need for sleight of hand.
posted by pokermonk at 6:23 AM on June 22, 2012


You're right. I messed up... I didn't include every category known to man on the list. My apologies.

Oh come on now, don't be snarky; hoyland makes an excellent point. The reason these labels exist is because in our culture, the default sexual orientation is straight. We cater to straight people and assume everyone is straight until proven otherwise. If you are an 'other', if you are anything higher than a 1 on the Kinsey Scale, your world view and experiences are seen as the norm. In addition, these experiences and world views are going to be different than those of traditionally heterosexual people, just as the experiences of ethnic minorities (in America) or physically disabled individuals are different than white Americans or able-bodied individuals.

We can't just close our eyes, stick our fingers in our ears and 'LA-LA-LA-LA-I-CAN'T-HEAR-YOU' the differences away. There are differences between people of various sexual orientations and there's nothing wrong with acknowledging that.
posted by chara at 6:32 AM on June 22, 2012 [2 favorites]


Reading over the Club Unicorn post, and the comments here on metafilter, I'm surprised that no one really noticed how the wife says she initially rebuffed her husband because she wanted a partner who desired her, but eventually came around because she was jealous and a friend told her she would never find someone she'd love like Matt. Of course, at the time, the pair was very young (like most Mormons contemplating marriage), but it seems to me there's something wrong in an institutional sense in a culture where a girl says she's worried her partner will never desire her because he's gay and that concern is dismissed. In fact, I'd wager that it's seen as virtuous, helping a gay man achieve a temple marriage. I think this post is a good testament to the silent tragedy of women in this situation.
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 6:40 AM on June 22, 2012 [9 favorites]


I didn't include every category known to man on the list.

.....Um.

Emphasis mine and I have nothing further.
posted by clavicle at 7:13 AM on June 22, 2012 [1 favorite]


When was the last time the Catholic church edited the KJV to better suit the times?

Hopefully never given that the King James Version was put together by the Church of England. You are right though ... The New Revised Standard Edition dates from the 80s but you have to remember that the church doesn't say it should be read Literally.

I agree though in general... Organized religion really is not good at changing.
posted by cirhosis at 7:17 AM on June 22, 2012 [3 favorites]


Anything that promotes tolerance and understanding is a good thing.

But I'd be lying if I said I didn't find this blog post hysterically funny.
posted by Fritz Langwedge at 7:22 AM on June 22, 2012


You're right. I messed up... I didn't include every category known to man on the list.

My apologies.


Yep, that was what the critique was, that you didn't include every category known to man. Is that what you actually think the critique was?

Someone was pointing out the practical consequences of your utopian vision of a labelless society and your immediate response is snark.
posted by Falconetti at 7:28 AM on June 22, 2012 [4 favorites]


I will never, ever, understand how some people think it's OK to treat a person like they are "broken" or guilting them into thinking that they are going to hell for just being themselves.

Society's most powerful mechanism for controlling behavior, be it something simple like littering or heinous like murder or rape, is shame. Particularly when you throw religion in as the big societal rule setter, all sorts of seemingly arbitrary and uncontrollable things (such as race or gender) can be considered "bad". Once something is deemed wrong by whatever powers that be the controlling mechanisms are set in motion. Shame is the first and biggest step, but other penalties can be applied like financial sanctions, ostracization, scare tactics, imprisonment, corporal punishment, and/or ultimately capital punishment. Any and all these methods have been applied to homosexuality over the years.
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 7:38 AM on June 22, 2012


You say shame. I say fear.
posted by spitbull at 8:03 AM on June 22, 2012


Black Mormons could always go to heaven, they just couldn't go to the highest level of heaven

Sort of like the bus used to be.

Separatism can cut two ways, a good chance to quote one of my favorite Steel Pulse lyrics from "Not King James Version":

In Esau's chapter of history
So little mention of you and me
We rulers of kingdoms and centuries
I don't wanna lose ya
Phoenicians, Egyptians and the Moors
Built civilization, that's for sure
Creators of the alphabet
While the West . . . illiterate

A dis here version
Are no King James version
'Cause out of Africa
Came the Garden of Eden

posted by spitbull at 8:07 AM on June 22, 2012 [1 favorite]


Not defending the actions of the LDS church now or in the past (I am neither Mormon or ex-Mo), just pointing out that change happens in the church, even when it's related to doctrine, and that the original priesthood ban was put in place by another prophet, not the founder of the religion itself.

Re: The KJV, I admit my knowledge of Catholicism is spotty. It's just too vast for me!
posted by elsietheeel at 8:17 AM on June 22, 2012 [1 favorite]


You say shame. I say fear.

I also said fear.
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 8:28 AM on June 22, 2012


I'm glad she wrote about how forcing gay people into straight marriages is bad for BOTH partners. Not only does he deserve to be open about himself and to not be judged for how he was born, but she deserves to be in a marriage where her husband desires her.
posted by jb at 8:36 AM on June 22, 2012 [1 favorite]


she deserves to be in a marriage where her husband desires her

In one of those jaw dropping religious contradictions, they argue both that they should have stayed married because marriage is about more than sex and that gay people shouldn't be married because marriage is about sex.
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 8:58 AM on June 22, 2012 [10 favorites]


In one of those jaw dropping religious contradictions, they argue both that they should have stayed married because marriage is about more than sex and that gay people shouldn't be married because marriage is about sex.

I thought it was more "marriage is about making babies biologically. Lots and lots of babies."

In which case, it's not really a contradiction. If they can make it through some perfunctory, bad sex, it seems like it would do the job.
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 9:10 AM on June 22, 2012


Is there any way in which 'Club Unicorn' bullshit is not just 'Club Gay Uncle Tom'?
posted by FatherDagon at 9:56 AM on June 22, 2012 [3 favorites]


what benji's story showed is that some bishops are now discouraging their gay members from marrying women, but they're also clear that you can never act on your "same gender attraction" - so basically they're saying, "god wants you to be alone." which is strongly against the teachings of the church. there's not been any confirmation i've seen but benji was also told that any physical issues around "same gender attraction" and your record will be marked and you can't serve callings that involved people under 18 or the missionaries, even if you repent, even if you marry someone of the opposite sex. benji was told that he wouldn't be able to be his (at this point imaginary) son's cub scout leader.

it's a sticky situation for the mormon church - so much of their religion is based upon absolute roles for men and absolute roles for women (and absolute definitions of men/women - their approach to trans rights is even worse than gay rights). people who bring up polygamy and black people holding the priesthood might not understand that both of those things nearly destroyed the church. there are still polygamist offshoot groups going strong that were started way back when the mormons gave up polygamy. i think they'll eventually find a way to ret-con acceptance of gays, but i'm not optimistic that we'll live to see it.

and finally, the thing that i notice is mostly missing from the conversation - lesbians in the mormon church. i wonder if they are pushed as hard towards pray away the gay. i remember being a young mormon girl, suddenly realizing that all that "gays are bad" stuff meant women kissing women was as much forbidden as men kissing men (which was bad for me, since i had already kissed some girls). i do feel like the lesbian side was never condemned as hard - they spent that energy condemning feminism and women taking the roles of men, which is sort of a sideways dig at lesbians, but they weren't as focused on the "sinful acts" two women could get up to.
posted by nadawi at 10:59 AM on June 22, 2012 [1 favorite]


They can't change this too fast, or it will be entirely too obvious that their religion, like all the others, is fundamentally Calvinball.

Meh. The very foundational principles of Mormonism include the premise that man's ability to understand and do God's will is fundamentally and inherently flawed, and that continuing revelation is necessary in order to effectuate the continual process of gradually bumbling closer to an understanding of actual truth. There is no doctrine of infallibility or inerrancy in Mormonism. The opposite is, in fact, the doctrine of Mormonism: Our ability to understand divine truth is limited by our own intellect, culture, perspective, and willingness and ability to challenge prior assumptions and then receive divine guidance.

So, is it Calvinball? Sure, to the extent that everything else in the world that concedes that it is not perfect and must, therefore, be constantly reexamined and redefined is also Calvinball. Which is to say that, when everything is Calvinball, nothing is Calvinball.

Mormonism makes the extraordinary claim that canonized scriptures and past statements of belief are inherently inadequate and flawed because they rely on interpretation of the divine by man's imperfect understanding. Mormonism's most critical doctrines have been constantly reexamined, challenged, and changed since the very beginning of the religion's existence.

Because the Church has an organized and correlated hierarchy and leadership structure designed to keep uniformity in spite of a nearly entirely lay administrative structure, the last hundred years have seen some crossover between the administrative exigency of leaders having the "last word" on administrative matters and the cultural notion that that "last word" is something more than merely a point of order in terms of administration.

But that cultural notion runs directly contrary to doctrine that is relied on over and over again as the Church's beliefs and doctrines are continually challenged, analyzed, taken to the higher authority, and then changed in accordance with that greater understanding.

It is very discouraging and frustrating that Mormonism's culture of absolutism and dogmatism - which is directly contrary to its doctrines rejecting absolutism and dogmatism - leads to erroneous cultural ideas like racism and homophobia remaining deeply ingrained in the Church as false doctrinal opinions. The Church moves too slowly on such matters and I think that moving so slowly denies would could be the benefit of divine guidance.

it's a sticky situation for the mormon church - so much of their religion is based upon absolute roles for men and absolute roles for women

This is true in the present, but even those "absolute" roles have changed significantly in the Church over the years. Women have not always been excluded from officiating in priesthood ordinances, for example (and they do officiate in priesthood ordinances in the temple). There is a myopic culture of stagnant absolutism in the Church that is contrary to the Church's actual history of constant, dynamic change consistent with the doctrine of human imperfection and divine guidance.

benji was told that he wouldn't be able to be his (at this point imaginary) son's cub scout leader.

As I understand it, that is an accurate statement of the official policy of the Boy Scouts of America. The Church's entanglement with that organization's policies will, I predict, eventually lead to a dramatic separation of the two that will eliminate a primary source of the Boy Scouts' funding and huge changes in the Church's young men's programs.

That said, I find the policy to be absolutely disgusting, and I think it's unconscionable that the Church goes along with or agrees with it.

what benji's story showed is that some bishops are now discouraging their gay members from marrying women, but they're also clear that you can never act on your "same gender attraction" - so basically they're saying, "god wants you to be alone." which is strongly against the teachings of the church.

This, a thousand times.
posted by The World Famous at 11:06 AM on June 22, 2012 [3 favorites]


I'm not expecting the mainstream LDS church to go gay-friendly anytime soon. I am, however, waiting for the day where a liberal group splinters off. It seems like a lot of more liberal (LGBT and otherwise) Mormons are having increasing issues with the established church.

I just want to be like: Hey, guys. What you need isn't for somebody else to have a revelation. What you need are a few theses and a nail.
posted by gracedissolved at 11:45 AM on June 22, 2012 [2 favorites]


I just want to be like: Hey, guys. What you need isn't for somebody else to have a revelation. What you need are a few theses and a nail.

Except that the basic foundation of Mormonism is the idea of an organizational hierarchy established directly by God, outside of which there is no authority or entitlement to critical saving rites. To splinter off, a group would have to decide either that there's no such thing as divine authority or that they have received an explicit revelation that they have the divine authority.
posted by The World Famous at 11:50 AM on June 22, 2012 [2 favorites]


i understand how the church splintered in the early days - first with the death of joseph and arguments about who the next president/prophet would be, then with the polygamy thing. but those were both, in the scheme of things, very early in the history of the LDS church.

i don't know how that would work now - i mean, someone in the splinter group will have to take on the role of president/prophet/seer/revelator and they'll have to convince the rest of the splinter group that the 12 apostles made the wrong choice with thomas s. monson. even liberal mormons would have a hard time saying the entire hierarchy of the church is wrong and that this person far outside of that system should be the prophet. it seems more likely that liberal mormons will keep trying to change it from the inside or leave mormonism all together for a more liberal congregation.
posted by nadawi at 11:55 AM on June 22, 2012


or, if i had previewed, what The World Famous said better.
posted by nadawi at 11:55 AM on June 22, 2012


That does not sound markedly different to me from the Roman Catholic Church circa Luther, to be honest. The Reformation was a huge leap, at the time, and obviously the whole thing was risky, but if someone is telling me that God put them in charge and at the same time they're making decisions that I see as hurting people, I'd at least be having some serious second thoughts about whether God meant for them to be in charge.

But I was raised Congregationalist, admittedly, and we have some long-running issues with that kind of authority.
posted by gracedissolved at 12:23 PM on June 22, 2012 [1 favorite]


well, one of the big differences is that pre-reformation, there weren't a crap ton of other churches to pick from. also the current leadership isn't making decisions that hurt people, so much as they're following the status quo and not making changes. i think at this point the church is probably more in danger to splinter if they announce a revelation allowing practicing gay members full benefits and blessings in the church, because that would be a change.
posted by nadawi at 12:35 PM on June 22, 2012


Is it just me, or is it raining gay mormons these days?

I think the Mormons are just getting a lot more attention in general these days because of Romney. If that means gay Mormons and former Mormons and other oppressed people in the Mormon universe feel safer speaking out because more non-Mormons will hear them, then Romney's done something good, whether he intended to or not.

Of course, all these stories make very clear how horrible conservative the Mormons actually are, so the fundamentalist Christians who up to now thought the Mormons were satanists or something will feel ok voting for Romney now.
posted by headnsouth at 12:38 PM on June 22, 2012


All Dead Mormons Are Now Gay
posted by Wordwoman at 12:45 PM on June 22, 2012 [1 favorite]


it's not my experience that the fundamentalist christians were ever confused about how conservative the mormons are. i think they view the mormons closer to the anti-christ, not satanists - as in, the mormons claim to be of god, and have a lot of similarities to fundamentalist christians, but they have some views that are so antithetical that they must be an agent of satan to lead good conservative people astray.

my hope (that i don't think will be realized) is that the fundies stay home this election because they can't find their way through a mormon and black seekrit muslim. but, i think what will really happen is that since romney pays lip service to the big issues that the fundies care about, then he'll be fine by them. i also expect him to pick a nice fundie running mate.
posted by nadawi at 12:49 PM on June 22, 2012


and finally, the thing that i notice is mostly missing from the conversation - lesbians in the mormon church.

Sonia Johnson wrote a book about her experience in 1989.
posted by Wordwoman at 12:56 PM on June 22, 2012


correction: 1981
posted by Wordwoman at 1:01 PM on June 22, 2012


i mean from the current conversation. i think there's been a lot of small changes to how women in general are treated in the church since the 70s. that book was one of the first i read when leaving the church around '97. i found it on some message board for ex-mormons.
posted by nadawi at 1:10 PM on June 22, 2012


Of course, Club Unicorn previously on MeFi, just a few weeks ago.

Yeah, this is pretty clearly a double, as that post is still very much open.
posted by mrgrimm at 3:21 PM on June 22, 2012


"Club Unicorn" ... oh, Sigmund... Why don't they just call it the "Cock Club" and have done with it?

I sort of figured it was because, like unicorns, gay Mormons aren't supposed to exist (of course, they obviously do, which is where the metaphor falls apart).
posted by asnider at 5:24 PM on June 22, 2012


and finally, the thing that i notice is mostly missing from the conversation - lesbians in the mormon church. i wonder if they are pushed as hard towards pray away the gay.

I was just reading this interview with Bridey Jensen, current president of BYU's Understanding Same Gender Attraction club, after an old school friend posted it on fb.

Relevant passage:
When I went to talk to the bishop, I told him I was scared and that I thought I might be gay. I told him I was afraid that I would be kicked out of BYU. My bishop said, “That’s not true. If you haven’t acted on it in any way, then you’re fine. You’re just like anybody else here at BYU who hasn’t acted on their feelings.” That was the first time that I realized I could still be a good Mormon and have this trial in my life.
posted by polymath at 7:30 PM on June 22, 2012 [1 favorite]


When was the last time the Catholic church edited the KJV to better suit the times?

The answer to that is never, and that because the King James Bible isn't the version of the bible that Catholics use. Catholics use the Jerusalem Bible or the Revised Standard Edition.
posted by echolalia67 at 7:32 PM on June 22, 2012 [1 favorite]


« Older "Dwarfing even the $2 trillion borrowed for the Ra...  |  Kame Chan is a cockatiel that ... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments