So I would like to share this, which I found last night. It's exactly what I would like to say--to everyone, not just BYU students.
A response to the hateful and deceiving articles in our Daily Universe [BYU's student newspaper] against our homosexual brothers and sisters:
We of the BYU community who are sympathetic to our homosexual brothers and sisters were extremely hurt by the ignorant articles in the Daily Universe comparing homosexuals to prostitutes and serial killers. Gay students are in every classroom, every ward, and every apartment complex at BYU and we want to reach out in love to help you better understand.
-Utah leads the nation in youth suicides and teen homelessness, a large number of which are gay youth. (Utah Suicide Stats Alarming, Salt Lake Tribune, 2007)
-Gay youth who are rejected by family or peers are 8 times more likely to commit suicide, 6 times as likely to be depressed, and 3 times as likely to use illegal drugs and engage in unsafe social behavior. (Ryan, Huebner, Diaz, & Sanchez. 2009. Pediatrics)
Attempts to “love the sinner and hate the sin” more often than not come across as rejection, hate, and hostility. The hostility directed toward anonymous populations instead spiritually wounds your brothers and sisters all around you. If you don’t think you know a gay person, you’re wrong. They just don’t trust you enough to tell you.
The attitude and environment at BYU represented by those articles creates and reopens wounds that the Son of God Himself died to heal. Gay members of the church struggle under the burden of self-loathing encouraged by a culture that inadvertently teaches that those attracted to the same sex are not worthy of God’s love. Only through much pain and the mercy of Jesus Christ are those wounds healed. And it is not your place to undo what He has done.
Some people believe that homosexuality is a sin, but what does that have to do with love? The task of any religion is not to teach us who we’re entitled to hate, but who we’re required to love.
To our gay brothers and sisters at BYU you are not alone. We love you. There is a place for you, with us and with God.
For more information, see the Facebook group: ShameOnYouDU.
I fully support gay marriage being legal, think the LDS church was wrong to support Prop 8, and believe that the way most of the Christian world is treating homosexuals is absolutely un-Christian.
If churches don't want to perform the ceremonies, they shouldn't have to. But as far as recognition from the government goes, there is not one reason why religious beliefs should have any say in the matter. The United States government is not an arm of your religion, no matter what religion it is.
Stop trying to force people to live according to your standards--you don't have that right. Stop trying to change them yourself--it's not your responsibility. Stop focusing on their sins--focus on their humanity. Love them--not in the "I love you so I have to hurt you" way, but just in the "I love you because you are a child of God just like me and everyone else" way. Mind your own business and stay out of their sex lives. Stop thinking that allowing them to get married will somehow have any effect on you--their marriage is not about you. And most of all, stop alienating, judging, and abusing them. Please. It's time for this to stop.
Thank you, thank you, thank you.
ReplyDeleteHi Miri! Thanks for your thoughts, your post was a very good read. I do have one lingering concern though, regarding your take on how you feel the church should not have been involved in the gay marriage propositions. I'm posting the question here because perhaps you have an answer for it (I'd like the concern to be addressed, I'm not trying to start an argument).
ReplyDeleteIf/when gay marriage is legalized, the church's concern was about potential law suits that would ensue. Such as, what happens when a gay couple to be married, now backed by law, desires to have the ceremony inside an LDS chapel and the church refuses? Or, what happens when a gay married couple now wants to get baptized but they can't, because they are gay? The church's beliefs could then legally be counted as discrimination instead of the church saying that they can't get baptized because they are "living in sin". I'm pretty sure that's why the church was so involved in the various propositions that ran in different states. Are these concerns unfounded?
Hey! I'm glad you commented. Those concerns are totally not unfounded, and I'll be honest, I don't know how to answer them because I don't know what the legal framework is/would need to be like. All I know is what I think the outcome should look like: that no consenting adults are prevented from marrying the person they love because of other people's beliefs, and that no churches are required to do something that goes against their beliefs.
ReplyDeleteBasically I think there needs to be a distinction between the legal institution of marriage and the religious one. Churches shouldn't be dictating what the government does, and obviously government shouldn't dictate what churches do either; people need to understand that they can't force their church to change its beliefs according to their lifestyle. I understand the Church's fear, and I think it's a valid one, but the solution is not to continue oppressing homosexual people. There just needs to be some kind of protection in place for churches (and isn't there something like this already? I know you can be exempt from compulsory schooling and vaccination for religious reasons, and that there are exemptions in the Affordable Care Act: from the individual mandate if someone belongs to a religion that bans it, and--for religious employers--from offering contraceptive care. So it seems like there's already a framework for this kind of thing).
>>All I know is what I think the outcome should look like: that no consenting adults are prevented from marrying the person they love because of other people's beliefs, <<
ReplyDeleteSincere question: Are you OK with polygyny, polyandry, and group marriage being legalized as well? I think they all fit in the "consenting adults marrying the person they love" category and I'm sincerely curious as to whether LDS members who support same sex marriage are OK with other forms of marriage being legal as well. If not, can you explain the distinction in your mind?
Ryan
I actually am, Ryan, although this is a really recent development because I cannot personally stomach the concept. I think it's a demeaning and creepy practice, to be honest, but I also don't see why we should prevent people--adults--from making that choice for themselves.
ReplyDeleteIt has just occurred to me to wonder about legal ramifications, as far as taxes and that kind of thing go; I don't know what that would mean, but I'm sure it could be worked out.
"Such as, what happens when a gay couple to be married, now backed by law, desires to have the ceremony inside an LDS chapel and the church refuses?"
ReplyDeleteThis fear is totally unfounded. A private organization can refuse to perform a civil service for two people.
Legalizing gay marriage does not require the LDS church to change its religious practices, and to say so is to perpetuate a myth based in fear.
Miri,
ReplyDeleteI commend you for being honest with your beliefs on such a touchy subject.
My husband has a friend who is gay and who has been in a committed relationship for a long time. It is quite ridiculous that even though they live as domestic partners, his partner can't claim him on his health insurance.
Polyandry and polygyny are completely different issues. Bringing them up does not address the issue at hand, which is of gay marriage.
Miri, you are a gem. This widely accepted excuse that the church would be required by Lawton Marty gay couple does not hold water. It is merely a scare tactic. The catholic church has never been successfully sued for refusing to marry divorced people (when that was policy).
ReplyDeletePolygamy would in fact, in my opinion, be ok if so many of those who practice it were not marrying underage children.
The church should not take a political stand by contributing time and or resources as an institution to ANY political group or action for several reasons, not the least of which is division among members.
If people want to stand up for marriage as an institution civil or religious they should be singling out the bachelor, the bachelorette, celebrity 10 minute weddings, television shows, infidelity websites, pornography, substance abuse, poverty, economic inequality, childhood disease and illness, mental health care, a whole HOST of other things that are threats to the institution of marriage.
Thanks, Katy. I absolutely agree; I've never been able to fully understand why people feel so threatened by someone else's relationship. It's actually a little narcissistic in a way, isn't it? That Christians think this issue is about them? For some reason that thought is funny to me. :)
ReplyDeleteReally, though, there are so many other things we could be worried about that really DO undermine the institution. The list you posted is an excellent start.
This is a really amazing blog post about the subject:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.danoah.com/2011/11/im-christian-unless-youre-gay.html