Charlie Bird's entire grift is based on being gay and an active Mormon. Charlie became famous because he was Cosmo the BYU mascot that danced around He's written multiple books. He has a podcast. His Instagram is filled with posts of him and his husband just being so gosh darn righteous and faithful and patient. His primary message is that he was born gay, God made him that way, and so there's no need for him to repent or change. For example:
https://www.instagram.com/p/C8kkImaBLjT/?igsh=MXV0ZWQwdXA2M3U2cA==

These two men are active members and live in the Mormon Belt. There is some conflicting info on their callings but pretty sure, they're on the Activities committee or some such (although, I could have sworn that committee/calling was done away with years ago - but if we've learned anything, it's that the Holy Handbook and most other things in the church change daily, so who knows anymore...).

It’s no shocker that a certain subset of gay men like Taylor Swift but here we have two gay men, active in the LDS church, dressing in drag, cosplaying a woman. They describe this as "... a way to give back to others.." for their "fandom". Taylor Swift herself has been openly supportive of abortion, gay and transgender. She even had a module recently devoted to her "philosophy" on a BYU course.

Maybe I’m making too much of this but the hypocrisy in the church is astounding. In one year, the church actively persecutes homosexuality and campaigns against same sex marriage, and then in another turns a blind eye to it. Right now, TSCC sends out mixed messages out about the subject resulting in pain and confusion for some and self-endorsement for others. One thing's for sure, the modern church isn't what many members think it, or what many RFM regulars think either.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/charlie-bird-ryan-clifford-utah-taylor-swift-swifties/

From the instagram: "He stressed that being gay and being religious is not an oxymoron..."

Uh, I think it may just be when it comes to the Mormon Church.

What on earth???

How are they allowed to be active and to have callings in the church?

Ballard says "The attraction itself is not a sin, but acting on it is".

So which is it? Is the church just trying to have it every which way? Confuse and befuddle everyone and pretend they're inclusive?

I have NO CLUE how these guys can be active members and even less clue about why they would want to be.


EDIT to add the following excerpts from the 2nd link in the OP:

"A portion of the proceeds from the sale of the calendars was donated to two Utah nonprofits: Encircle and Lift+Love. Lift+Love provides resources to LGBTQ+ youth and their families in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

"As active members, faith plays a big part in the couple's lives. For Ryan, it's grounding — and helps him remember who he is at his core. It's important for everyone to be able to live authentically, he said.

"We work so hard to come to terms with who we are and what we believe inside," Ryan said. "Believe us when we tell you that faith and being gay works."

I agree that it could "work" for some people but I'm amazed that these guys feel comfortable within Mormonism, a faith that denies who they are at their very core.

However, obviously it's up to them how or where or if they choose to worship. If they are happy in LDS World, it's not up to me to assess, judge, criticize or try and flip them to something different.

I'm not judging them - I'm just standing here All Amazed at their apparent participation and contentment in the church. Also (as an aside) at the statements about how they can make it work within Mormonism. Not to mention their bishops etc apparently going along with it.

Wow.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/26/2024 08:33PM by Nightingale.

OK, I'll judge. I'm a smaller person. Stockholm Syndrome is real. Their pleas of "we're so happy" feel like there is an undercurrent of anguish, so color me dubious.

I have no interest in trying to drag them out of Mormonism. I expect that problem will eventually take care of itself, and if they successfully negotiate a full lifetime within Mormonism, maybe they will have some impact on the church. I'm not even much good at predicting the past, much less the future. They don't need my advice.

That was my thought as well, BoJ, that it's a case of Stockholm Syndrome.

Isn’t same -gender public affection at the BYU facilities currently punishable?

GNPE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Isn’t same -gender public affection at the BYU
> facilities currently punishable?

Pride Month is celebrated by some people in BYU now although the staff themselves seem to be divided on the issue.

There are figures like Aaron Sherinian (church PR director) and Sharon Eubank who post about 2SLGBTTQIAV on their social media.

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2024/06/16/leadership-roulette-leaves-same/

"Janette Petersen, a lifelong member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, didn’t think much of it when she heard that her stake president wanted to meet with her.

Maybe this regional lay leader wanted to offer her a volunteer assignment, also known as a calling. Or maybe he just wanted to see how life was going for the 31-year-old with a baby boy and a wife, Tammy, who, despite not being a church member, attended faithfully with her each Sunday.

Petersen, who lives in West Orange, Texas, said the stake president informed her that, because she was married to a woman, she was breaking the faith’s law of chastity. Unless she sought a divorce, she recalled him saying, a council would be held to determine whether to withdraw her church membership.

Through social media, she had learned of Charlie Bird, a former Cosmo the Cougar mascot for church-owned Brigham Young University, and his husband, Ryan Clifford, a famously active and married gay couple in Utah. Word had it they were allowed to not just keep their membership, but also hold callings and participate in the sacrament, or Communion. She said her stake president acknowledged that he knew about Bird and Clifford.

“So, I asked, ‘Why is there so much inconsistency?’” she recalled. “Why can he be married and…I’m over here getting kicked out?”

To which, she said, he responded: “‘Not all stake presidents take seriously their jobs as judges in Israel.’”

In other words: leadership roulette."

"Three other women — another couple living in Texas and a woman living in Utah — in same-sex marriages cited leadership roulette as primary factors, as far as they could tell, in their own membership removals.

“This is 100% speculation, but we believe it was because of a new bishop,” said the Utah woman, who married in 2021. She and her wife had their memberships removed a little more than a year later (she asked that her name not be used “out of respect for those within the church who continue to love and support us”)."

"The other Texas couple, whose membership was withdrawn earlier this year after four months of marriage, thought it was significant that their council was called shortly after a new stake president was installed (they also requested that their names not be used for fear of retribution).

In contrast, Ryan and Liz Giles of the Instagram account The Fourth Option have lived in two wards, or congregations — one in Houston and their current ward in Yakima, Washington — since their marriage in 2021. They have yet to have their membership challenged.

“I would guess it has more to do with leadership roulette than anything,” Ryan said, explaining that extends past stake presidents to higher-ranking area authorities, who “may push excommunication when local leaders may wish to just leave things alone or offer more freedoms.”

Indeed, both Petersen and the other Texas couple said their bishops each told them they were against the final decision to withdraw their memberships."

"Even if Bird and Clifford were to one day find themselves under the leadership of someone less friendly to queer Latter-day Saints like them trying to remain in the fold, the women agreed: The couple, with their almost 300,000 Instagram followers between them and titles with church owned-Deseret Book, are almost certainly safe."

I agree that it is probably a case of leadership roulette. But the church has shown in the past that it is willing to work with Mormon influencers (who in one case got a special new temple tour,) so that may play into it as well.

This is under 3 minutes long. Charlie Bird and his husband get a mention. The church is not what many people think it is. There is open promotion of LGBT in some quarters despite the rhetoric against it elsewhere.

Maybe they had to wait for Boyd K. Packer to die or the church had to boost their ESG scores.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1f-0-rrf4d4

Under three minutes long and still a waste of time--as it was when you posted it in the other thread.

You need new material.

I think it's going too far to call their Taylor swift thing "drag". It's just costumes. Straight men dress in women's costumes all the time in the entertainment industry. Mrs. Doubtfire, A bunch of straight (and gay) men have impersonated famous women throughout Saturday Night Live history. Then there's Mrs. Brown, if you're not familiar, here's a topic-appropriate clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QarofaycN3c

I do agree about the hypocrisy of approving of some gay couples and not others, or approving of any when they've also taken so many stances against gay people and gay couples!

In the '90s, I went to a tailor who was a gay man. He and his live-in partner had been together for 35-40 years. They were both devout, hardcore Catholics. They went to mass every day, and observed the religion pre-vatican II style. I asked how he reconciled the polarities between the two most important parts of his life, he said it was simple. They were chaste, scriptures only speak against sex with other men, there's nothing prohibiting love. Idk, seems like following the letter of the (nonsense religious) law but not the spirit. Anyway, maybe this mentality is how Charlie became accepted.

anonynon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think it's going too far to call their Taylor
> swift thing "drag". It's just costumes. Straight
> men dress in women's costumes all the time in the
> entertainment industry.

That's still drag. Only recently has it become weaponized. It used to be a form of entertainment, especially when the men were unconvincing.

The church used to be pro polygamy until the US Government persuaded it. The church changes when it’s forced to change.