https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/language-materials/33382_eng.pdf?lang=eng

Start at the last paragraph of page 13 through page 17.


Next-in-line to the LDS presidency, Boyd K Packer, provides the LDS apostolic doctrine on homosexuality.

This was part of a mandatory meeting for young men ages 12 and up.

Seems like a proper answer to the modern rhetoric of today's PR meeting.

"There is no mismatching of bodies and spirits"

What a clueless old fart.

Firstly, what he tries to describe is gender dysmorphia, not homosexuality.

He then seems to think gay men aren't masculine. Well most of the gay men I've met could have taken Pecker out when he was a young man. I'm masculine, but I like other masculine men instead of women. How could that be considered spirit and body mismatching? I don't want to be a girl.

I remember reading this piece of garbage as a teen. It scared me, mainly because I had all the feelings toward dudes Pecker warns about and couldn't stop having them. This idiot asserts that a straight guy can be enticed or tricked into gay sex with a man. My God, it now makes me wonder how many gay youth got caught and made up a story about getting tricked so parents and church would not think it was *they* who was gay. This twisted sick way of looking at homosexuality has caused people to be blamed for "enticing" youth; it's caused gay youth and adults to suicide, hate themselves, lie, hide, engage in risky sex in dangerous places because they can never feel safe enough to meet and fall in love and be with another gay person.

It makes me angry. Scum like Packer have blood on their hands. They should be dragged into the fucking Hague and done for crimes against humanity.

I can't wait for this insane criminal to croak. I'll celebrate by getting drunk, looking at some hot gay porn, and pulling myself silly.

Talking about manly gay men: One of the mountain rangers on Mt. Hood is gay. He has the job of hiking in and climbing up the mountain or dropping from a helicopter to rescue people stranded on the mountain. It's the stuff of extreme manliness. I'm tired of people mixing up being gay with being things like limp-wristed, cowardly, "recruiting" kids, paedophelia, etc. But I guess it's convenient for the phobic to also prey on the ignorant.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Bingham

On a day where the American politicians and bureaucrats failed To do their jobs for Americans against practitioners of another fundamentalist faith, one of the most heroic people was Mark Bingham from the SF Bay Area.

Were the Muslims practicing freedom of religion? Murder? Both. It is my understanding that in their doctrine, they were justified and celebrated. Religious freedom, it fundamentally gets you dead, unless you kill first.

I think the part about beating the piss out of men who hit on you is the worst. His cavalier attitude about beating up gay men, or men who make a pass at you is tantamount to promoting hate crimes. After all, you must protect your virtue at all costs. He makes it sounds like Homosexuals are deviants who will try to rape you if you are alone with them. Even after all the time that has passed since that talk, he probably still believes every-single-word he spoke that day- gays are perverts, you should beat them up, they choose to be that way, little factories exist in your junk, et al.

Him and Bruce R. McConkie always were my absolute least favorite GA's.

I think most people from that era remember it more of an anti-masterbastion talk than an anti-gay talk. See for example:
http://www.mormonsivemet.com/mormons-ive-met-unique-understanding-little-factory/

But no--it hasn't been disavowed. But then neither has almost anything that church leaders have said or done. The church just doesn't disavow things. It is not in the program.

Well, most people aren't gay so that stuff didn't hit you as hard.

Those of us who *were* gay and sat through that thing (and later got multiple copies handed to them in the bishop's office) absolutely zoomed in on that story that justified physical violence against a young gay man and on the other harshly anti-gay passages.

This is part of how the Church maintains the doctrine while engaging the world with PR and political concessions that ultimately mean very little to the general community.

The Church is seeking a kinder rhetoric while it seeks the legalizations of its doctrinal bigotry.

I do not think this will persuade many other than the already persuaded.

Boyd Packer is a major leader in the LDS church, next-in-line for the Mormon prophet and not a word from him yesterday on the concern and not a word about him on the concern.

This is still doctrinal and this makes it clear that homosexuality is unnatural to Mormons and the source of this unnatural behavior is a choice to sin and the source of this sin is Mormon devils and Mormon Satan. They must disavow this work,by their living leader to adapt into their modern rhetoric or remain the unpopular minority throughout the world, apart from Utah, USA.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/28/2015 10:32AM by gentlestrength.

I had a curious conversation with yet another bishop who expressed his inner frustration with me at all the young men he can't get to stop jerking off and looking at porn.

I told him porn was not a problem to me anymore––which is true, even though I still do it––so he asked me how I was able to do that, because he had never had success with the other guys.

That confused me, but I realized he was talking about perfect abstinence from pornography and masturbation. I pressed him about it, and he said there had been improvement, of course, but no one had ever been able to kick the habit, because "porn is that addicting."

SMH!

For Young Men Only might not be pushed in the open anymore, but the ideology behind it is still very much alive. All the bishops I've ever met drive for perfect abstinence, and anything-but is equally and totally disappointing. Most of them see porn as a drug, not just another expression of innate human behavior

I told my bishop that the key is to forgive yourself for being human. He retorted with "the natural man is an enemy to God" and made the very what-are-you-gonna-do gesture from Brother Jake's videos.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/28/2015 08:41AM by Cold-Dodger.

The church simply has no right to question young boys about their private sexual habits. They need to relax this rule or someone's going to make a huge public stink about legions of older men tallking to scores of little boys about how often they touch their weiners. Seriously. It hasn't occured to me until recently how inappropriate a conversation like that is between a little boy and someone who is more than likely a stranger to that boy.

Mrs. Packer, "Void, can I play with your factory tonight?"

Mr. Pecker, "No, it's broke down again."

It's funny they think of them as factories, alone, in another themselves. It is not a factory. Neither is the woman's womb, or her well, tulips, or yoni.

So easily they forget, or never really think, with their small mindedness: the factory is nature, who produces these things. (A mother gives birth and certainly carries the creature to the cradle, while the father, using his so called factory, or fertilizer, offers opportunity for furthering fathering.)

The real factory, here on earth, is ignorance - the church (&members!) - and forgetfulness of the fact that it is not only what one produces, but why, and how.

They may explain it as an erupting volcano... but that may make boys want to do it even more (and the girls a little more curious), if that were possible.