In today’s episode, RFM tackles the recent leak of a 1981 official manual of the Church Of Jesus Christ if Latter-day Saints on the topic of homosexuality. RFM demonstrates conclusively that the Church held many views officially that were demonstrably wrong and deeply unhealthy. RFM then, in traditional fashion, dissects the why of the Church needing to look consistent and the mechanisms of maintaining authority. So put on your headphones, grab a glass of eggnog, plug in the Christmas tree, grab a Christmas cookie, and enjoy Radio Free Mormon’s “Ghost of Homophobia’s Past”
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
I remember my mission president, in an effort to make sure we did not masturbate while serving, taught us repeatedly that masturbation would lead to homosexuality.
I think it is important for a people worried that homosexuality may be innate to come up with alternative causations, no matter how ridiculous.
Fantastic episode! I enjoy all of your podcasts! I also love your snarky sense of humor!
I’m so glad that this old paper was leaked, and I’m so glad that you took the time to talk about it. I would’ve missed hearing about it otherwise. I know people who are living the “false life” you describe. I wonder how they do it … (sigh.)
Thanks for the time and energy you spend providing these podcasts for us.
Thanks so much for your kind words, Karen!
It is an important reminder to me that just because I am aware of something that has been leaked, not everybody else may know about it.
I will try to keep that in mind for future episodes!
RFM
You quoted Franklin Richards, 1897 policy to simply avoid issues, not speak about them, and steer away from them when they come up. The Adam God theory was the impetus for the quote.
This single factor is, to me, a CLEAR choice to avoid accountability. The LDS church, if they have a problem they don’t like, can simply marginalize it, not be accountable for it, and let whatever consequences follow as long as they (the church) can avoid the fallout.
This, from the church of JESUS CHRIST?
That is like me pushing the button that blows up a building, and just never talking about it nor being accountable for the choice or the consequences.
How many people, LDS church, have you sacrificed on the blade of this deceptive policy?
The power of your words really hit home to me, rob4hope!
I read your comment twice, the first time to absorb the depth of your feelings on the issue; the second time to try to understand why it is you feel so strongly.
I confess I was thinking of this policy to not emphasize things when the LDS Church wants them to “go away” more from an academic point of view.
But you are right. When the rubber hits the road, it is the members who pay–and it is usually those members who know what they were taught when they were young, and continue to believe it and probably do not even notice it has stopped being emphasized.
And not only do they believe it, they direct their entire lives by it, limiting themselves to certain directions and opportunities because of what church leaders taught.
Only to find after they have foreclosed all those options and are doing what they were taught when they were young that the current crop of leaders has actually taken a different turn.
Such members are well and truly sacrificed indeed!
RFM, you mentioned your friend Maurice being the first to help open your eyes. My first friend who helped open my eyes was an ex LDS bishop, currently excommunicated, divorced, and disowned by his family, because he could no longer live a lie. I’ve held him when he trembled and shook with soul racking sobs. Ever have a friend do that?…it OPENS YOUR EYES. He subjected himself to shock treatment countenanced by the church. He forced himself into marriage, countenanced by the church. And he prayed, fasted, read scriptures, and did everything he could. He is now judged with “Oh, you failed to heal. You JUST DIDNT HAVE ENOUGH FAITH.”
After seeing the pain and suffering in this guys life, I not only intellectually reject the idea he ‘chose’ this–I emotionally can NOT accept it. I REJECT REJECT REJECT it was a choice!
Thank you for this clear rebuttal of a false doctrine RFM, countenanced by a church that is incapable of repentance itself.
That is a powerful story, rob4hope!
It is one thing for a church to say you should conform to a certain moral code, such as not robbing banks. I think we all get that point of view.
It is another thing entirely for a church to say that, in order to be acceptable to God, you must change the sexual orientation God gave you.
You must do something that is inherently impossible to do. All the while telling you that you can do it, and not only that, there are a host of other people who have successfully changed their sexual orientation, so obviously you can, too.
The process of healing can only begin within the LDS Church when the leaders formally and officially say they were wrong about all of this.
But it appears the reputation of the LDS Church is more important than the welfare of its members.
Dueling Prophets – an eternal dilemma in the Corporation, not to be discussed, by commandment.
I realized something a couple of years ago when reviewing the Fourteen Fundamentals of Following the Prophet; particularly the premise that living prophets trump dead prophets.
The thing I realized is that idea would never have needed to be expressed in the first place unless there were instances of modern prophets contradicting earlier prophets.
If the speaker (ETB) did not know that earlier prophets taught things contradictory to what modern prophets teach, it never would have occurred to him to put that particular point in his talk.