Generally, Not Even Close to Murder

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

If I were given the chance to influence one aspect of Mormon culture and scripture interpretation, one thing that would be at the top of my list would be the notion that sexual sin is “next to murder.” Generally, I believe that sexual sin is not even close to murder. But before I explain this idea, an idea I got from Michael R. Ash, let me say that sexual sins that are close to murder are the only sexual sins that are close to murder. The easiest example of this is Moroni 9:9-10, wherein the Nephites rape, torture, kill, and eat Lamanite women. Now that is sexual sin that is next to murder. Other sexual sins that are next to murder would be sins that irreparably damage souls, sins like incest, molestation, and rape.

When we are speaking with youth about sexual sin, in general it is not the above sins that we have in mind. While sexual sins like masturbation, fornication, and adultery are serious, sometimes very, very serious, I do not believe that they are anywhere near murder.

SCOTUS - Reflecting on My LDS Friend and His Two Moms

Tweet

by Mike Maxwell:

I grew up in Holladay, Utah in the 1980’s as a member of a pretty conventional Mormon congregation. In my 9th grade year, a new family moved into the neighborhood and a 10th grade boy (I’ll call him Doug) from that family began attending our Teachers Quorum. Doug and I shared common interests in sports and music and quickly became friends. I recall many evenings shooting baskets in his driveway with Molly Hatchet blaring from the car stereo in the carport.

I visited Doug’s home a few weeks after meeting him at church and met his mom. She was nice to me but seemed an otherwise unremarkable woman. I asked Doug about his dad and he told me his mom and dad divorced when he was a kid. His dad worked in the Las Vegas gaming industry and he rarely saw him. He didn’t seem to want to talk about it further so I did not press him.

After a few more visits to Doug’s home, I realized there was another adult woman living there. Over time, I learned that the woman and Doug’s mom were a couple. My 14-year-old Mormon boy self had no frame of reference for “lesbians” so I just kind of rolled with it. I got to know them better and found them to be considerate, caring, pleasant people who were as dedicated to raising a good son as were any of my other friend’s parents.

Are Mormon Men Unintentionally Discriminating at Work

Tweet

by Alex Fuller:

I recently attended a seminar on gender discrimination in the workplace and was surprisingly conflicted afterwards. I had begun the seminar thinking, "Of course I treat men and women equally." After, however, I was left wondering if I regularly discriminate without realizing it.

This seminar happened the same week that I heard a comment that equally surprised me. The comment came from a LDS female coworker who observed that LDS men are often less inclusive and less open with women in the workplace. She was the only woman in a small minority of Mormons in the organization. Despite her shared beliefs, she often felt excluded by her male LDS coworkers. They were tackling similar projects, but she frequently had to find her own support group.

How could this happen?

Although I don't think most LDS men discriminate on purpose, I wonder how many times we shy away from women either unconsciously or deliberately.

Tools for Dealing with Pornography Struggles (Specifically After a Mission)

Tweet

by Anonymous:

Someone I know recently returned from a mission. He loved being a missionary and found great joy and satisfaction in doing the Lord’s work. He also experienced no or nearly no struggles with pornography. This was remarkable in part because it had been a struggle before his mission. Now that he’s home, he’s glad for how much he has learned and grown and glad to “have that behind him.” Sort of. What he has found, instead, is that getting home from a mission for many young people means, unfortunately, a return to previous struggles. This is devastating for some, since they believed that this difficulty would never plague them again. Here are some tips that might help a young person—male or female—who finds that this struggle is not in the past.

1. Find some sort of peace with this struggle

It is painful to feel like, no, that struggle is not in the past, especially after all you have done, learned, and experienced. I’m sorry, but having that struggle is just there, and it may not go away any time soon. Finding peace with that struggle does not mean liking it. It means not feeling guilty that you have it. Perhaps talking with Heavenly Father as openly and honestly as you can about it will help you see its role and place in your life. Perhaps making peace with it is realizing that it is a struggle that will call forth your courage, diligence, patience, and compassion. Perhaps it is resistance or weight that will help you develop strength.

2. Don’t use the devil’s tools to do the Lord’s work

MMM Library: Let's Talk About …

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

The other night at Institute we had a very interesting discussion. My students asked the age-old chastity question about what physical intimacy is appropriate before marriage. They happened to ask the simultaneous question of what is appropriate inside of marriage. I find the second question to be easier to address than the first one, but in answering the second a new thought occurred to me about the first.

I told the students that it is my opinion that the church does not have very many specific or hard-and-fast rules about what intimacy is appropriate in marriage. It seems to me that for obvious reasons that intimacy should not involve other people either directly or indirectly. It also seems obvious that the expression of intimacy should never be demeaning, manipulative, or coercive. Beyond that, it seems to me that every married couple must communicate openly about sexual expression, about what each person wants or needs or finds satisfying. I also told my students that these discussions are probably ongoing throughout a marriage.

Gender Incongruence and the LDS Church: Frontier of Understanding (Parts 1-4)

Tweet

by Russ Peterson:

Note: This is the full installment of this week's multi-part post. Parts 1, 2, 3 & 4 here, here, here and here.

In The Family: A Proclamation to the World, the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve have taught that "gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose." Although we are accustomed to thinking of this doctrine as unique to the LDS tradition, it is in fact among the first truths recorded in scripture:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them (Genesis 1:27).

The image of God, which includes male and female, is the image and pattern after which God created Adam and Eve, whereupon which He commanded them to multiply and replenish the earth (Genesis 1:28). Latter-day Saints believe the family is "ordained of God." In other words, we hold the family—consisting of man, woman, and children—to be divinely organized by God for the accomplishment of His work, which is to "bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man" (Moses 1:39).

The fact that man and woman act together in the creation of life is in accordance with divine design. Latter-day Saints believe that sexual relations within the bonds of matrimony constitute a sacrament of marriage, binding two souls together according to the covenant they have made. This pattern, instituted of God for the happiness of His children, neither originated in nor concludes with the mortal sphere. According to the plan of happiness, the family is the fundamental social unit both in time and eternity.

For the vast majority of His children, the nuclear family—consisting of man, woman and children—is congruent with individual development in terms of biology, identity, and attraction. For example, most individuals that appear to be male have functional male sexual anatomy, experience an internal sense of being male, as well as feelings of attraction toward women. Conversely, most individuals that appear to be female have functional female sexual anatomy, experience an internal sense of being female, as well as feelings of attraction toward men. For the purposes of this article, I will refer to this agreement of biology, identity, and attraction as gender congruence.

Gender congruence is so common to the human experience that it is difficult for many to imagine a state of incongruence between biology, gender, and attraction. Furthermore, gender congruence—the most common outcome of human development—is so innate to personal experience that few individuals outside the social sciences even become aware that biology, gender, and attraction are separate constructs that can and do develop independently of each other.

When we consider the central role of procreation in the Plan of Happiness along with the declaration that "gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose," it should not surprise us to realize that these teachings undergird a set of cultural beliefs within the Church about those whose experiences are different from the gender congruent majority. These beliefs might be summarized as follows:

1. Since gender "is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal and eternal identity," matters of gender and sex are always clearly defined in the mortal state.
2. A loving Father in Heaven wouldn’t create circumstances that give rise to gender uncertainty, gender incongruence, or same-sex attraction.
3. Uncertainty (or confusion) about sex or gender is a Sign of the Times and/or evidence of the deterioration of society.
4. Gender incongruence proceeds from an individual’s decision to deviate from the Plan of Happiness.

My purpose is to give members of the Church the understanding necessary to "bear one another's burdens" in terms of gender incongruence, just as we are under covenant to do so with regard to every other problem incidental to the mortal sphere. Although I will not be writing in technical terms, some basic biological concepts bear explanation and discussion; my goal is to do so in a manner accessible to the general membership of the Church.

Gender Incongruence and the LDS Church: Frontier of Understanding (Part 4)

Tweet

by Russ Peterson:

Note: This is the final installment of a multi-part post. Continued from Parts 1, 2 & 3 here, here and here.

Crossroads

With the recent revolution in thinking about gender incongruence, the world will be increasingly unable to discern our Christianity if it continues to witness the perceived rejection of those who struggle. Thus the Church stands at a cultural crossroads: If it changes its policies toward same-sex marriage or other gender-incongruent situations, the Church risks diluting its focus on the eternal family as it is currently defined. However, if the Church is not perceived as welcoming of gender-incongruent individuals, it will increasingly fail to be seen as a light to the world.

Observing the ever-changing attitudes and values of society—and hopeful for the Second Coming of the Savior—some members of the Church have adopted a defeatist attitude toward the world and the issues set forth herein. Some expect that the Lord will come and save the Saints from having to wrestle with gender incongruence and related challenges.

Church members study the signs of the times and prepare for the return of the Messiah, but ultimately the Lord will come when He chooses. Until then, He has set forth his expectation that, as Saints, we are to study the issues and work out our own salvation. With a perfect knowledge of human development and sexuality, the Lord is neither limited in His capacity to understand nor inclined to judge according to the contracted notions of men. Rather, He loves all of His children and seeks to save each of them. We are not fit for His kingdom until our attitudes fully reflect His. There is much room for growth among Latter-day Saints in the care, love, and welcoming of those with gender incongruence.

When we consider the doctrine that "It is not good that … man should be alone" along with the understanding that gender incongruence (including same-sex attraction) is not purposely chosen, it is clear that for most in the world, the issue of same-sex marriage is viewed not through the lens of righteousness versus wickedness, but rather from the perspective that mutual commitment is worth honoring. Imagine for a moment that the men of the Church were given a commandment to remain single throughout mortality. Would we offer support to them, or would we leave them to carry this burden alone? In either case, what kind of success might we expect? Certainly there is more room for compassion and understanding regarding this issue than is common in our discourse.

Regarding the cultural crossroads at which the Church now stands, we may remember that the Church faced a similar juncture regarding polygamy. When the Church faced a threat to its mission and its very existence over plural marriage, the prophet changed the policy—but not the doctrine—of marriage. The Manifesto clearly outlines the thought process behind the change. Members of the Church were asked to consider whether the entire work of the Church should cease because of the persecution that surrounded the issue of plural marriage. The answer was that the Church would observe the law of the land in order to realize its mission. Are echoes of the past applicable today?

Finally, we return to The Family: A Proclamation to the World, which teaches that "Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation." Earlier we considered one circumstance that called for individual adaptation. Are there others? Is there space for us to acknowledge that certain individual and family situations are beyond doctrinal reconciliation here in mortality? Can we grow such that as Church members we support our brothers and sisters with gender incongruence, offering encouragement and love while withholding judgment? Can we do less and still call ourselves Latter-day Saints?

Gender Incongruence and the LDS Church: Frontier of Understanding (Part 3)

Tweet

by Russ Peterson:

Note: This is Part 3 of a multi-part post. Continued from Parts 1 & 2 here and here.

Cultural Beliefs Revisited

Earlier we summarized a set of cultural beliefs within the Church about those whose experiences are different from the gender congruent majority. In light of what we have just considered, let us revisit each of them in turn:

1) Since gender "is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal and eternal identity," matters of gender and sex are always clearly defined in the mortal state.

LDS doctrine asserts that gender is immutable and eternal. This gospel principle suggests an ideal that frequently is not met in mortality. We have considered a few of the many disorders of sex development, along with some of the genetic and hormonal conditions that may seriously complicate matters of sex and gender identity and development. While biological sex, gender, and attraction usually develop according to a pattern that naturally perpetuates life, each is separate. Whether in matters of biological sex, gender identity, or attraction, gender incongruence usually unfolds outside of an individual’s awareness and/or control.

2) A loving Father in Heaven wouldn't create circumstances that give rise to gender uncertainty, gender incongruence, or same-sex attraction.

This is one of the most infatuating and divisive beliefs regarding matters of sex and gender in LDS culture—and certainly one of the most persistent. The belief originates from a misapplication of logic: If the eternal pattern of life and procreation includes perfect agreement between sex, gender, and attraction, how could the children of God—being His creations—experience anything different? Or, in other words, "Why would a loving Father do that to His children?"

The answer is that he wouldn't. And doesn't—any more than He creates war, famine, disease, or natural disasters. Each of these is common to a fallen, mortal state. But the fact that God doesn't create gender incongruence is not to say that many of His children don't experience the same, because they do. Matters of sex, gender, and individual development are not immune from the effects of the Fall.

As a church, we collectively invite nonbelievers to take the proverbial "leap of faith"—to choose to believe in something they have not yet experienced. Many refuse to do so, saying they cannot believe in something without experiencing physical proof. When we say, in effect, that gender incongruence does not exist because we personally haven't experienced it (or because we don't want to believe it exists or because it makes us uncomfortable), are we not essentially making the same mistake? At the very least, we are allowing personal ignorance and biases to interfere with the support and compassion we might otherwise render to our brothers and sisters who struggle with some of the more difficult challenges of mortality.

3) Uncertainty (or confusion) about sex or gender is a Sign of the Times and/or evidence of the deterioration of society.

This has been a common interpretation of the increasing visibility given to matters of gender incongruence, particularly as those outside the gender-congruent majority have been more vocal in asserting their points of view. However, other factors are at play here, and in the interest of our discussion I will observe a few of them.

First, from the scientific community has come the understanding that gender incongruence is neither consciously chosen nor likely to change over time. This understanding has been at odds with the cultural/religious belief (still to be revisited) that gender incongruence proceeds from an individual's decision to deviate from the Plan of Happiness. However, this understanding has prompted a seismic shift in thought about those who struggle with gender incongruence. The effects of that revolution are still being realized.

Second, in our day modern technology increasingly facilitates communication between those with common interests who had previously been unable to connect. This happens not only with regard to gender congruence/incongruence, but also with many other issues, concerns, and interests. Communication networks have provided a voice to many groups who have not previously been accorded an audience in the public square.

Third, when we finally do hear these voices, is it surprising that the gender congruent majority would be uncomfortable with their messages—particularly when they focus on what has been termed "radical self-acceptance"? Or to use the words of one observer: "That's fine if [gay and lesbian individuals] want to live their lives however they want, but do they have to demand that the rest of us accept it and call it normal?"

This question strikes at the heart of the acceptance that gender incongruent individuals seek for themselves. For a frame of reference, recall that several decades ago, left-handed individuals were encouraged (and often forced) to adopt right-handedness because it was viewed as "correct" in the minds of many educators. We might suppose that left-handed individuals disliked this coercion and welcomed the day when they could choose to exercise their preferences without it.

From that frame of reference, we might understand the greater aversion that gender-incongruent individuals have to the messages that they are defective and that they therefore must live their lives according to someone else's determination of what is right for them. For many of these individuals, the process of "coming out" involves an acceptance of self that is likewise a final and deliberate rejection of self-hatred and self-loathing. We might not agree with the message, but from this example hopefully we can understand its context, and how it doesn't stem from a person's desire to be "wicked."

4) Gender incongruence proceeds from an individual's decision to deviate from the Plan of Happiness.

As understanding replaces ignorance, this belief persists primarily among those who cling to tradition over truth, and who prefer to render judgment instead of compassion. Can we pass judgment on that which we haven't experienced? Or can we continue to deny the reality of gender incongruence because we haven't personally experienced it? Does personal discomfort prevent us from rendering Christlike compassion?

Not always but often, discomfort with a particular issue can be an indication of inner conflict. Being at peace with our own individual sexuality can help us think clearly and render support without judgment to those whose struggles might be very different from our own.

Gender Incongruence and the LDS Church: Frontier of Understanding (Part 2)

Tweet

by Russ Peterson:

Note: This is Part 2 of a multi-part post. Continued from Part 1 here.

Gender and Individual Identity

Consider for a moment the experience of an individual with androgen insensitivity syndrome—one of the disorders of sex development described in the previous section. These individuals that are genetically male (with X and Y chromosomes) nevertheless develop as females, along with outwardly female sexual anatomy. Most do not become aware of their condition until they are medically examined to find the cause of infertility when they are trying to conceive children.

Imagine what it might be like to grow up normally as a female, only to learn during adulthood that you are genetically male, and that your female gender presentation is due to a genetic error. In the context of the current discussion, imagine further what we might say should such an individual express feelings of gender confusion (e.g., that the externally manifested gender did not match the individual's internal experience).³

This illustration helps us separate the concept of biological sex from that of gender identity. Whereas biological sex refers primarily to sexual anatomy and physical characteristics, gender identity refers to an individual's internal experience of gender. Most often gender identity is consistent with biological sex, but sometimes it is not. For reasons not clearly understood, there are cases where the inner sense of gender identity does not match the outward manifestation of biological sex. Interestingly, most often this incongruence cannot be explained by a recognized disorder of sex development spoken of in the previous section.

What we do know is that gender formation and identity are highly influenced by culture. That is, parents typically convey to children expectations about gender in accordance with a child's biological sex; thus children learn to identify with a particular gender based on these experiences and expectations. Furthermore, gender identification happens early in a child's development—well before the age of 8, and this gender identity is most often stable over time. Typically, when an individual announces as an adult that outwardly perceived gender is opposite that of inner experience, that individual is most often acknowledging later in life a gender identity that formed earlier during childhood.

For the gender congruent majority, the separation of biological sex and gender identity is difficult both to imagine and to understand. Few outside the social sciences are able to clearly separate gender identity from biological sex. This is because: 1) gender is so innate to personal experience that most lack a frame of reference for understanding how gender can differ from biological sex; 2) gender incongruence is seldom disclosed; and 3) exposure to these topics is limited outside college courses that specifically address them.

We also know that identification with a particular gender is a developmental process; gender identity is not something an individual consciously chooses. This is true both for gender-congruent and gender-incongruent individuals. For a frame of reference, ask yourself if you can remember choosing to see yourself as male or female. Alternatively, you might ask why an individual would bring upon him or herself shame and ridicule by choosing to identify with a gender that is opposite his or her biological sex. Sometimes gender-incongruent individuals seek surgical intervention for their condition. In doing so, they are generally not trying to change gender; rather, they are seeking to make their external appearance and biology congruent with their internal sense of gender identity.

Gender Incongruence and the LDS Church: Frontier of Understanding (Part 1)

Tweet

by Russ Peterson:

Note: This is Part 1 of a multi-part post to run the rest of this week.

In The Family: A Proclamation to the World, the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve have taught that "gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose." Although we are accustomed to thinking of this doctrine as unique to the LDS tradition, it is in fact among the first truths recorded in scripture:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them (Genesis 1:27).

The image of God, which includes male and female, is the image and pattern after which God created Adam and Eve, whereupon which He commanded them to multiply and replenish the earth (Genesis 1:28). Latter-day Saints believe the family is "ordained of God." In other words, we hold the family—consisting of man, woman, and children—to be divinely organized by God for the accomplishment of His work, which is to "bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man" (Moses 1:39).

The fact that man and woman act together in the creation of life is in accordance with divine design. Latter-day Saints believe that sexual relations within the bonds of matrimony constitute a sacrament of marriage, binding two souls together according to the covenant they have made. This pattern, instituted of God for the happiness of His children, neither originated in nor concludes with the mortal sphere. According to the plan of happiness, the family is the fundamental social unit both in time and eternity.

For the vast majority of His children, the nuclear family—consisting of man, woman and children—is congruent with individual development in terms of biology, identity, and attraction. For example, most individuals that appear to be male have functional male sexual anatomy, experience an internal sense of being male, as well as feelings of attraction toward women. Conversely, most individuals that appear to be female have functional female sexual anatomy, experience an internal sense of being female, as well as feelings of attraction toward men. For the purposes of this article, I will refer to this agreement of biology, identity, and attraction as gender congruence.

Fighting Words

Tweet

by Reid:

Recently I read an editorial in which owners of a wedding chapel in Idaho face fines and possible jail time for refusing to perform same-sex marriages. The husband and wife owners are both ordained ministers and believe same-sex marriage to be contrary to their religious beliefs. But the recent court rulings on same-sex marriage now make it legal in Idaho. As a result, they are in potential violation of local non-discrimination ordinances because their wedding chapel is registered as a business, not a church.

So it begins.



In reality the battle lines have been forming for quite some time now and the Church has anticipated this fight. To those that are in favor of same-sex marriage--and even those that are completely indifferent about it--the Church's position is difficult to understand. "Why not concede on this one issue and then everyone can get along with no further quarrel?"

148 years ago, critics were asking the same question of the Church regarding it's position on marriage. Brigham Young's response then is something that would work pretty well today--if we simply substitute 'polygamy' for 'same-sex marriage':

[If] we would give up polygamy ... would they be satisfied with this? No; but they would next want us to renounce Joseph Smith as a true prophet of God, then the Book of Mormon, then baptism for the remission of sins and the laying on of hands for the reception of the Holy Ghost. Then they would wish us to disclaim the gift of prophecy, and the other gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit, on the ground that they are done away and no longer needed in our day, also prophets and apostles, etc.

They want us to yield all these points, transgress the laws God has revealed for the salvation of the world, and change all the ordinances of God's house, and conform to the dogmas of modern Christianity and to the corruptions of the age. Will the Latter-day Saints do this? No; they will not to please anybody. Shall we have a warfare? We shall; we will war and contend for the right, and trust in our God until righteousness is established upon the earth, until peace shall reign everywhere, until the children of men shall lay down the weapons of their warfare and cease to exhaust their ability and ingenuity in forming weapons of destruction to slay their fellow men, until the minds and affections of mankind shall be turned unto the Lord their God, and their energies be directed to beautifying the earth and making it like the garden of Eden. We calculate to struggle on, and continue to exercise faith and enjoy our religion, keeping all the commandments of God, observing the ordinances of his house, trying to fulfill all his words, trusting in him, and we shall see what this course will come to. (Brigham Young - Journal of Discourses 11:239)

His words are eerily prophetic. Were the Church to concede on the issue of same-sex marriage, it wouldn't end there. There would be "just one more thing." I think we are in for a fight no matter what.


Reid is an endocrinologist from Henderson, Nevada. He's blessed with wonderful wife and three great kids. His interests are charitably characterized as eclectic: cycling, fly-fishing, history, travel and the coinage of the Flavian dynasty of Imperial Rome. With a deep-seated belief that people habitually do dumb things, he's trying really hard to keep things positive. People are not making it any easier these days. The gospel has helped a lot. Blog: reidlitchfield.com.

MMM Library: The Birds & the Bees (& Babies)

Tweet

by Aimee:

As a marriage and family therapist (and someone who just enjoys chatting about the subject), I hear a lot of couples discuss their struggles with getting back into the intimacy groove once the baby(ies) joins the family. As a new mom, an article titled Sex and The Baby Years really helped me get my head back in the game a few weeks after having our baby boy.

The CNN Health author, Ian Kerner, takes a fun, realistic approach on the issue of sexuality for couples after babies. One of my favorite lines from the article reads:

We believe that sex matters. It’s the glue that binds couples together. It’s what makes us more than just friends. Without sex, lovers become roommates, and a bedroom becomes just a place to sleep in (often with a kid or two in it as well).

Amen. Sex matters! A lot. And as committed couples, working hard to make sex an enjoyable, safe and pleasant experience can make all the difference in our overall health.

Also note the great advice for dads (hint: Don't Give Up!) and the direct, healthy advice for moms in point number four.

This post was originally published August 5, 2011.


Raised by a self-declared "Zen Mormon,” Aimee was exposed to a unique, open approach to mormonism. This allows her to easily relate to people of all different backgrounds. She will be contributing to Modern Mormon Men with her insights as a marriage and family therapist and has the great pleasure of writing on topics regarding mental and emotional health, parenting, couplehood, sexuality, and anything else she sees fit to share. Aimee served a mission in the beautiful countryside of Sendai, Japan. She graduated from Seattle Pacific University and practices in Redmond, Washington. She loves her (above-average) charming husband and son. Aimee is world renowned for her parallel parking skills and vertical leap. If you ever run into her, she will be happy to demonstrate either.
Image credit: Charlotte (used with permission).

Guest Post: Far Between, A Documentary About Gay Mormons

Tweet

A few years ago, Kendall Wilcox called me and asked if I’d like to help him produce a documentary about gay Mormons. Being an accountant and having absolutely no experience in documentary filmmaking, of course I said yes. A short time later, he flew up to Portland and we set to work with post-it notes and a couple of sharpies, littering a bare wall in my condo with notes about all the people we should talk to, the organizations we should talk about, the tone we should strike, etc.

After laying the groundwork, I traveled quite a bit that summer with Kendall, helping out with interviews in the Bay Area; Kirtland, OH; Utah; New York City and the Pacific Northwest. It was an incredible experience. It became a process of Kendall working through his own reconciliation between his sexuality and his spirituality by talking to others in various stages of that same reconciliation and on various and diverse paths. It also became a process for me of reconciliation, learning to listen to stories much different than my own and learning to sit with the tension of placing my story alongside those that contradicted my own.

Sitting with that tension was probably the most important thing I could learn. It helped me explore important questions about myself and my place in the world and my responsibility to others. Kendall is a fiercely curious person and also incredibly respectful of each person’s story. He very conscientiously creates a space that invites in a range and multiplicity of voices. This shows in the diversity of stories he has collected; everything from a Boy George lookalike writer of horror fiction who spent 30 years outside of the church to more traditionally Mormon, temple married couples.

In listening to all these assorted stories, I developed more of an understanding of and respect for why people make choices different than my own. At the same time, it helped me flesh out my own understanding of why I have made the choices I did. I learned to sort through important questions like how do I resolve differences between my beliefs and how others choose to live their life? How do I form my values? How do I process conflicts between internal and external forces? How attracted am I to the same sex versus opposite sex and in what ways? What role does religion play in my life? How much of my overall identity is bound up in my religious identity? What happens when someone else thoughtfully and conscientiously arrives at different answers to these questions?

I’m certainly not the only one who has been faced with important questions. During the past few years the national conversation about homosexuality and gay marriage has exploded. In that time, the number of states where marriage is legal for same-sex couples has more than tripled, with dozens of challenges to state gay marriage bans advancing through the federal legal system. Some states have pushed back by attempting to pass and enact laws protecting discrimination based on religious beliefs. Religious leaders have pushed back and asked for religious freedom protections. The Boy Scouts of America changed their membership rules to allow gay youth and continues to face pressure to also allow gay leaders. The problem is the questions around the role of religion and sexuality too often play out in the political realm, which too often polarizes and fails to empower individuals to address some of the questions I mentioned above in a way that brings greater understanding of self and therefore more peace and respect for the process and decisions of others.

I don’t have a crystal ball and don’t know for sure where the gay marriage debate will end, but I do know that whether gay marriage becomes the law of the land or is abolished completely, the polarization is frustrating for people on all sides of the issue. I also know there will still continue to be religiously oriented individuals who also experience a strong orientation of attraction to their own gender. There will still be a segment of the population (both inside and outside Mormonism) who have to wrestle with the tough questions that bubble to the surface as a result of the at times seemingly irreconcilable conflict between their religious and spiritual identities. This is why I got involved with the documentary film project (titled Far Between) and why I think it’s so important. These questions don’t just affect those who are gay and Mormon. These are questions that affect all of us: gay, straight, transgender, religiously affiliated, non-religiously affiliated, etc.

We currently have hundreds of hours of footage, encompassing over 180 interviews, loads of research and a detailed outline (a script of sorts) to guide us to completion. We now need to assemble a postproduction team, including editors, colorists, sound designers, etc. to create the final product. Our goal is to enter the final product in the Sundance Film Festival so that we can take the ongoing conversation to a broad audience. If this conversation is important to you, or if these are questions you’d like to explore yourself, please donate to Far Between, like our facebook page, or share our Kickstarter page with your friends and family in order to keep the conversation going.


Jon Hastings lives in Portland, Oregon and is an accountant by day and by night and on occasional weekends is an associate producer for Far Between, a documentary that explores the experience of being homosexual and Mormon.

21 Lessons from a Lesson on David and Bathsheba

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

So I was asked to substitute for Sunday School, and the lesson dealt with David and Bathsheba. (For a slightly amusing take on this challenge, see here.) Here are 21 lessons I learned from preparing the lesson:

1. When David saw Bathsheba in the bath, she was performing a ritual washing or Mikveh. She was not just chillin' in the tub after a long day. In fact, the verses tell us she was doing this because she had just finished her period.
2. Jerusalem is on a hill, so David could have looked out from the roof and seen Bathsheba.
3. There is nothing, NOTHING!, in the scriptures to suggest that Bathsheba had put herself on display, wanted to be seen by anyone (including David), or was doing anything but performing a ceremonial washing. In fact, the verses mention her bath and her period to drive home the point that Bathsheba's child was David's and could not have been Uriah's.
4. David saw a beautiful woman performing a ceremonial washing, became sexually aroused, had his men take her, and then had non-consensual sex with her.
5. The sex between them is non-consensual because David had all of the power, had compelled her to come to him, and someone in Bathsheba's position is not completely free to say yes or no to sex. What David did was beyond adultery; it was rape.

Brother Jake Defends Modesty

Tweet

by Brother Jake:



Brother Jake is the caboose of a big Mormon family. He enjoys playing video games and making silly videos. After serving a mission in Peru, he married a violinist, transferred schools, and finished his undergrad at Indiana University. He is currently pursuing a Master's degree in analytics (a dumb word for "statistics") at NC State. He has extremely stretchy elbow skin.

LOL at Sexual Assault

Tweet

by Kyle:

Twitter is a great place. I say “place” as if it is somewhere that I actually hang out, and if you were to ask my wife she’d probably say I “hang out” there a lot. It’s a great place for news, sharing ideas, and cat pictures. The thing I love most about Twitter is the ability to share news, ideas, and cat pictures with people you normally wouldn’t have access to. One of my proudest Twitter moments is that time I got Chuck Todd’s attention right before a live broadcast.

With all the great things about Twitter, there are also the dark sides. Over the past few weeks there’s been some trouble terrorizing female BYU students. That trouble is a serial groper—a guy wearing a hoodie jogging around campus groping women as they pass by. The first incident was reported on January 23 with the most recent reported March 19. So far, the person(s) behind the groping have not been caught.

If this wasn’t a big enough problem by itself, the reports of the serial groper have caused an additional problem. In the last couple of weeks two Twitter accounts have popped up in an attempt to parody and even glorify this sexual predator. Now I love a good parody account. When done correctly and done well they are not only hilarious but add to the conversation of whatever they happen to be mimicking. These parody accounts, however, are nowhere near what is acceptable. @BYUgroper and @TheREALGroper are taking a sexual predator and attempting to make it cool, funny, and really no big deal at all. Here's just a few of their tweets.

I should have shouted out my 14th tweet to the 14 grope victims, guess I'll have to get 6 more tonight to catch up😝
— TheREALGroper (@TheSerialGroper) March 21, 2014

Thoughts on Same-Sex Marriage

Tweet

by Pete Codella:

Note: This post has been mulling around in my head for a while now. I’ll share the two separate concurrent Sunday conversations that motivated me to finally write it, then provide a few thoughts.

Conversation 1

Heard in Relief Society, as retold to me by my wife last Sunday afternoon ...

Question posed by the teacher: What threats do our families face in this day and age?

One woman's answer: The gays.

Conversation 2

A thought I shared in Elders Quorum that same Sunday during a lesson on the divine nature of the family ...

What the LDS community has is an opportunity to live with love and charity towards all; to be accepting of everyone even when their values don’t align with ours. There are plenty of laws in the U.S. and other countries that are contrary to the laws of the gospel.

Even when homosexual marriage becomes a federal civil right (which I believe will happen during President Obama’s second term) we can still honor and support marriage and the family as described by living prophets:

“The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity.” — The Family, A Proclamation to the World

This approach is no different than keeping the Word of Wisdom when others choose to smoke, do drugs or drink alcohol.

Some Additional Thoughts

I was amazed by the bigoted comment shared in the women’s Sunday meeting. Can you imagine how a comment like that would be received if it were focused on people of a certain race or religion?

The One True-to-Real-Life Story Behind the Soldier Actor in BYU-Idaho's Wounded Soldier PSA

Tweet

by Seattle Jon:

Note: BYU-Idaho's Housing and Student Living Office recently made an inspiring PSA. The video overlaps imagery of a wounded soldier with President Kim B. Clark's words encouraging his students to turn in reach out to those who struggle with pornography and masturbation. For the first time in print, MMM exclusively presents the backstory of the PSA's main actor, a BYU-I student named O.N. Pecks. As you will read, some months prior to the release of the video Brother Pecks spoke with his agent. The report then brings us to the two weeks after the PSA aired.

Six months before PSA airs

Actor (answers phone): Hello?
Agent: Hey, you got a second?
Actor (shuts computer on which he was viewing porn): Sure, what's up?
Agent: Your scenes from Saints and Soldiers 3 were cut in post-production.
Actor: Ah man, are you serious? That was some of my best work.
Agent: Yeah, I thought so too. Which is why I shopped your scenes. Turns out BYU-Idaho wants to use them for a student housing PSA. How does $500 cash grab ya?
Actor: Seriously! Are you for real?! Just yesterday I was down to my last $20 with two weeks still to go in the month, but chose to pay tithing instead of eating knowing something like this would probably happen.

Two weeks after PSA airs

Actor's Friend: Thanks a lot man, my roommate turned me into my bishop after watching your PSA.
Actor: That sucks. Want to see Saints and Soldiers 3 tonight at the dollar theater?




Seattle Jon is a family man, little league coach, urban farmer and businessman living in Seattle. He currently gets up early with the markets to trade bonds for a living. In his spare time he enjoys movies, thrifting and is an avid reader. He is a graduate of Brigham Young University and the Japan Fukuoka mission field. He has one wife, four kids and three chickens.

Guest Post: Lessons from The Tree of Life for a Gay Mormon

Tweet

BKH is a gay Mormon. This has been cause of much anxiety, depression and frustration. It has made his dating, family life and education at BYU somewhat difficult. He is trying to figure out how to reconcile what he believes with how he feels, but doesn't know what he's doing most of the time. These thoughts came as a result of a series of days where he had a major freak out about all this.

In the Book of Mormon, a man named Lehi had a dream about the Tree of Life -- a tree whose fruit brings life and happiness.

I have recently fallen in love with this story again because of its simple power in portraying what we want in life, regardless of our spiritual persuasions, or lack thereof.

In the dream, Lehi see a tree with beautiful fruit, fruit he says is "desirable to make one happy." It makes sense he'd want that fruit, right? If I found a tree with fruit that could make me happy, I'd be all over that. Lehi sees a lot of other things -- a rod that leads to the tree, an intense fog, a big floating building, and hoards of people going towards the tree. His son Nephi wants to understand the symbolism in this dream, and so he prays about it. Pretty soon, an angel appears to explain the dream of Nephi's father.

The angel shows Nephi the tree and asks, "What do you see?"
"A tree … (awkward pause) ... with fruit that … (awkward pause) ... makes people happy."
"Perfect," the angel says.
"Do you want to know what it means?"
"That's why you're here, right?"
"Right."

This is not exactly a scriptural account, but pretty much how it would go if I were Nephi.

So, the angel tells Nephi that the tree of life represents the love of God. People were trying to get to the fruit to taste of the love of God. They wanted to feel loved.

The Things We Say

Tweet

by Kyle (bio)

A couple weeks ago in our ward, my wife was attending the Gospel Principles class where the topic of that week's lesson was on the the law of chastity and the atonement. I was not in the class; I was pacing the halls with my nine-month-old daughter trying to get her to sleep. But when the class was over my wife told me about the lesson.

The brother teaching the class said something during his discussion of the atonement that caused her to raise an eyebrow. What he said is something I've heard other people say before too, which to me means it's a saying that has been around for a while.

The teacher said: "I'd rather have my son come home in a coffin, than for him to lose his virtue on his mission."

Think about that for a second. This person, and those who've repeated it, if given the choice between death or sin for their child, would choose death.

I'm not saying the law of chastity isn't serious, but death? Really? Your own child, dead?

Here's why this one matters.