New Mormon policies towards same sex couples & children

[Janes Heir]

Yes, SDA church also has doubled down on a policy re LGBT issues and has stated that church employees (which includes teachers at SDA schools, etc) may be terminated for "participating" in same sex marriage ceremonies.  

 

ETA: "Participating" means "going to a ceremony."  Not just performing or standing up for a couple.  

Here is the relevant section from the North American Division SDA document which just came out last week: "Seventh-day Adventist Church employees are not to officiate, perform, or have an active, participatory role in same-sex wedding ceremonies. Attending a same-sex ceremony is a matter of personal conscience and should be considered with discretion." Source: http://www.nadadventist.org/site/1/2015 Documents/NAD Statement on Human Sexuality-Nov 2 2015.pdf

So maybe going to a ceremony is not outright banned, but the restrictions placed on this vague thing "participation" could be limitless. Not to mention, church employees would (I assume) not just be pastors, but everyone from the janitor at a church university to the administrative assistant in a department. 

 

 

[bionicmlle]

Here is the relevant section from the North American Division SDA document which just came out last week: "Seventh-day Adventist Church employees are not to officiate, perform, or have an active, participatory role in same-sex wedding ceremonies. Attending a same-sex ceremony is a matter of personal conscience and should be considered with discretion." Source: http://www.nadadventist.org/site/1/2015 Documents/NAD Statement on Human Sexuality-Nov 2 2015.pdf

So maybe going to a ceremony is not outright banned, but the restrictions placed on this vague thing "participation" could be limitless. Not to mention, church employees would (I assume) not just be pastors, but everyone from the janitor at a church university to the administrative assistant in a department. 

 

 

Yes - You are completely correct as for the letter of the law, however the folks I know that work for the church are a bit, shall we say, scared shitless about this.  I can see why, It can be easy to be blacklisted.  I had to stop reading the comments on Spectrum Magazine about this the day after it came out because I was getting so viscerally upset about it.  There were 17 dissenting opinions.....  there is quite a bit of discussion on whether the dissent was because the statement was too liberal or too conservative.

[SpoonfulOSugar]

The Mormon leadership has clarified themselves, but I'm not sure it really improved anything.

Here is one article about the impact the policy is having:

http://wesa.fm/post/barred-baptism-mormon-kids-same-sex-couples-face-fraught-choice

One element that I keep thinking about is their justification that "this is also how we deal with children in polygamous families."  But most polygamous families still have access to faith settings because of the offshoots.  So they aren't being forced to chose between faith traditions and family.  That makes it different to me.  I don't know if that difference is justified, but it's a nuance that really matters to me.

[TXGirlInAMaterialWorld]

So it sounds like to me they are going to try to make the children of same sex couples denounce their parents before they will baptize them even as adults.  I kind of got the feeling that it what they asked Maddie Brown to do.  They knew who her parents were from the outset, so why make her go through all the missionary talks only to turn her down?  I think they wanted to get her to speak out against polygamy and she said no.  To me that is one difference between a church and a cult.  A church says what their members should and shouldn't do and people can decide for themselves.  A cult says not only should we control what our members do but we want to control what everyone else does too.  

[NerdyHil]

I can almost ALMOST understand the polygamy denouncing bit. Polygamy is such a weird topic in the mainstream LDS church. Those who currently practice it are seen as such a perversion of mainstream mormon beliefs, but you are taught in church that you will have to practice polygamy in the next life. Oh, and so many members (especially in the jello belt) have polygamous ancestors. I had one that did time for it. However, the thing is polygamy, especially mormon based polygamy, is often not theologically compatible with the mainstream LDS church. So, the justification is that, like any other convert, a person would have to say they don't believe in their former religious beliefs. The shitty thing with a convert from a polygamous background is the denouncing of their former religious beliefs is also a denouncing of their family. That's why this new policy change makes me so angry. This is not about a person making a religious change, it's just kids being punished and humiliated because they have a parent or two who were born a certain way. I've seen from several dickhole "friends" on FB posts about this being the "separating the wheat from the chaff" regarding this issue. I truly feel that this policy change is about making sure the 'right' people are part of the church pipeline. This way there isn't any awkward dealings with those who don't fit the mold for a good church member.