Sign up for Email Updates

Posted November 12th, 2010 by Evan Hurst

My favorite thing about when churches change their minds, even slightly, on the subject of church teachings or sin or whatever else, they always move immediately into this “We have always been at war with Eastasia” stance, where the new definition of sin is, of course, timeless and eternal and revealed by the almighty Wizard God, and certainly not subject to the whims of the man behind the curtain, etc. It’s all so arbitrary.

So anyway, apparently the Mormon church now probably feels that their old guidelines on gayness were hurting their bottom line financially, so they’re tinkering a bit with the Revealed Eternal Truths to try to appear a little bit nicer. Don’t be shocked or anything, though — it’s not like they’re recognizing gay peoples’ dignity or anything:

Changes to LDS Church policy on homosexuality will be presented to LDS lay clerical leaders worldwide this Saturday, November 13.

The changes are being introduced through a global leadership training satellite broadcast for the release of the newly revised Church Handbook of Instructions (CHI), a 400-page lay priesthood manual reserved for use by LDS Church members in local and regional lay leadership positions.

Multiple advance copies of the CHI leaked on the internet reveal significant changes to Church policy on homosexuality.

Basically, here’s what’s changed: You’re no longer a hellbound sinner just for thinking gay thoughts, and they’ve decreed that if you are one of those homosexual thought-havers, but you promise to live under the authoritarian thumb of the church and never seek personal fulfillment, they will let you have all the perks of being a Mormon, which, from what I’ve heard, is quite a goodie bag!

Anyway, I don’t see that the fundamental message has changed. If you’re a gay person of integrity and love, you’re still unwelcome in the LDS church.

Posted September 8th, 2010 by Evan Hurst

As P.Z. Myers says, here’s a pretty good reason not to attend a religious university.  A Mormon student at Brigham Young wrote a letter to the school’s newspaper addressing the LDS’s positions on Prop 8 and gay rights, which was published for a hot minute before the paper decided to censor the student and pull the letter:

Yesterday, Brigham Young University’s student paper The Daily Universe featured a letter to the editor that argued that the legal case for Proposition 8 is “indefensible.” Its author, BYU student Cary Crall, also asked Mormons to admit that their only opposition to gay marriage is religious. The letter attracted enormous attention and praise from both the Mormon and ex-Mormon online communities. People were most impressed that BYU—in a refreshing display of academic freedom—published it.

But shortly after the letter was posted to the Universe‘s website, it was quietly pulled. This is disappointing, but not terribly surprising; the letter nearly didn’t get published at all. Crall told me in a Facebook message that he submitted the letter to the Universe a few weeks ago, but it was rejected by the summer editor who felt it was inappropriate for a “newspaper funded by the LDS Church.” It wasn’t until after some edits and the approval of a new editor that it was published, albeit briefly.

If you click the above link, the letter is posted in its entirety, and it’s probably getting more attention than ever for being censored, so that’s good. Here’s a key passage:

It is time for LDS supporters of Prop 8 to be honest about their reasons for supporting the amendment. It’s not about adoption rights, or the first amendment, or tradition. These arguments were not found worthy of the standards for finding facts set up by our judicial system. The real reason is that a man who most of us believe is a prophet of God told us to support the amendment. [This is a privately held religious belief that we are using to support legislation that takes away a right from a minority group. If our government were to enact legislation based solely on such beliefs, it would set a dangerous precedent, possibly even more so than allowing a homosexual to marry the person he or she loves.] We must be honest about our motivation, and consider what it means to the delicate balance between our relationship with God and with His children here on earth. Maybe then we will stop thoughtlessly spouting arguments that are offensive to gays and lesbians and indefensible to those not of our faith.

I tend to agree with P.Z.’s assessment — the letter is just a tad bit too honest for the Mormon church.

Posted December 9th, 2008 by Wayne Besen

In a breathtaking display of lies and hypocrisy, a group of anti-gay culture warriors and long-time Mormon bashers placed a full page ad in the New York Times pretending to be both victims of alleged homosexual “mobs” and staunch defenders of the Latter Day Saints (Mormons). Both claims are absurd and a cruel attempt for the victimizers to claim the mantle of the victimhood – which is a manipulative and cynical political ploy.

The dishonest Times ad essentially claimed that violent mobs of gay protesters were attacking the Mormon Church and its followers in the aftermath of California voters narrowly approving Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage in that state. They even launched a website www.NoMobVeto.org. (It seems they forget that they put basic human rights up for a vote, which is essentially mob rule)

This Times ad is full of blatant lies – much like the immoral television ads attacking same-sex families during the Prop. 8 campaign. The fact is, the vast majority of the rallies across America were peaceful. Considering gay families just got stripped of their basic rights by deception and deceit, the protests were remarkably tame. If any other group had been subject to such humiliation through a multi-million dollar smear operation, there would likely have been riots in the streets – not the fake “violence” conjured in the bogus Times ad.

The anti-gay organizations and individuals who sponsored this “Big Lie” ad are trying to pull off a remarkable feat: They are both crying wolf, while being the wolf in sheep’s clothing. The degree of chutzpah is remarkable and eye-popping. (Read More)