Marriage, Back door laws and policies, and tolerance issues

Remove all ads!

It's really weird Aldeth....

Basics of Mormon belief of the afterlife:

1. You'll be resurrected with a perfect body -- no defects either mental or physical. Kind of like the Stratford wives. I think all these "perfect" people would be pretty boring. But, yes, infertility would be corrected, as would any other physical or mental ailment.
2. The women can have children -- but they will not have bodies, only spirits or souls. So any poop would be spiritual poop. And, of course, the babies will be perfect -- so no 2AM feedings and other inconvenient stuff like that (I made those last two sentences up -- they just sounded good -- but why would women ever want an eternity of that???).
3. While the women are making billions of spiritual babies, the men are making worlds. Typical for a male dominated organization -- the ultimate "woman's place" thing. Worlds like this one to send the spiritual babies down to be tested just like we're being tested. In fact, according to Brigham Young, Adam and a few others from the old testiment are already Gods of other worlds.

Edit: Oh yes... that's only for "the most worthy" who enter the "highest degree of glory." For the rest of us who don't quite make it to the top the details are a bit fuzzy, but the nearest I can tell is we will not have a gender, because only those in the "highest degree of the celestial kingdom" can have children. Also the rest of us will not be gods.

I recommend until Gnarff proves divine origin of the word marriage we all just ignore him. (Edit: in this thread....)

 

So what about transgendered people? would they be resurrected with the body their soul feels it should have? If that would be the case would it be okay for transgendered people to marry in this life?

I'd think being the wrong gender is an imperfection at best, so would it count?

 

Interesting.

My brief exposure to TLDS was many long years ago but I have a vague recollection that in order to go to heaven a woman had to be married. I am curious as to whether this is true or not. If that is true what happens to women who are not married or to a girl child who dies before being old enough to marry.

 

8people: You're asking for a religious answer for transgender -- you may not like the answer. Transgender and homosexuality are mental issues to most religions; some religions only believe those issues to be temptations that must be overcome. The real hardcore individuals I've known have expressed belief that homosexuality is only a temptation for "spiritually weakest among us." That's not my belief so don't shoot the messenger.

Using the statements I made above, the mental or physical "defect" which made the sexuality of the person off would be corrected. In religious terms that means the men will be attracted to women and vice versa. Basically, the "transgendered" feelings would be gone and the person would feel like a "normal" heterosexual of the sex they were born with.

My understanding is a transgendered person who has a sex change is still their original sex in the eyes of most religions -- to marry another of the "same sex" would be seen as Gnarff has explained it, an abomination. Once again, don't shoot the messenger.

Nakia: Both men and women must be married to enter into the "highest degree of the celestial kingdom" and be like God. There will be opportunities to marry in the afterlife. This is especially true for children who have died. I think one of the most compassionate beliefs of the Mormon church is children are perfect in God's eyes and an early death automatically means the child is worthy to enter the highest degree of the celestial kingdom (after marriage, of course).

For a quick rundown:

Celestial Kingdom: Where the most worthy go.

Highest Degree -- men can be gods, women make babies ... billions of babies. Must be married to be here.
Middle Degree -- basically angels like Gabriel.
Lowest Degree -- again, basically angels like Gabriel.​

What's the difference between middle and lowest? Don't know... don't really care.

Terrestial Kingdom: Where basically good people go who weren't quite good enough. Don't really know what these people will do for eternity. Sit around ... drink beer ... watch TV ... they're genderless, so sex is out. Kinda sucks.

Telestial Kingdom: Big time sinners go here. Joseph Smith said if people could see the Telestial Kingdom they would kill themselve to leave life on earth and spend eternity here (which is appropriate since suicides go here). Again, there is no solid information what these people will do either.

Outer Darkness: The Mormon version of hell. Satan and his followers will go here along with those who committed "blasphemy against the Holy Ghost." The only example given of this is Cain.

Whether or not an individual can progress between Kingdoms and degrees is kind of fuzzy. One past president of the church claims people could, but the next president said no. Which prophet was right? Your guess is as good as mine.

 

What? If people would be willing to kill themselves to spend eternity here, then it implies it's a good thing. However, you say big time sinners go here, which would imply it's not a place you'd want to go. So which is it? Good or bad? Or am I completely misinterpreting what you're saying? Or is it because I have no background in the LDS Church that makes this sound like gibberish?

 

Ah, come on, BTA, there isnt anything wrong with Earth that couldn't be fixed by getting rid of the people.

If the big time sinners go there it should be interesting and you wouldn't have to put up with those paladin types. If the preachers are all in the Celestial Heaven you wouldn't have to listen to them. Not bad at all if you ask me, which you didn't.

A new pair of eyes and a typing lesson would be nice.)

Aha, a thought enters my brain. It has been said before in many ways but I'll try it my way.

The LDS church along with many other denominations be lieve in "THE LAW". It applies whether we agree with it or not, believe in or don't. A bit like gravity, jump off a cliff and you fall down not up. The blind can't see the rising sun but it is there none the less. Unless you live in New Jersey, USA. I've been told there is a sun.

 

If what T2 says about the Mormon's idea of afterlife is true, then I can only say that it either requires some further explanation, or the entire system is full of holes. For instance, what if you were considered 'most worthy' and be sent to the celestial kingdom while your spouse was considered only 'good, but not good enough' and was sent to the terrestial kingdom? Could you still consider yourself to be married then, with your spouse reduced to a sexless being? Considering the discussions in this topic, I would hazard that this would be an objectionable thing, as you are no longer a man and a woman in a so-called sacred marriage, but you're now a man/woman and a sexless being.

Would this then cause you to be ejected from the highest degree or even the celestial kingdom for no longer being married? And if the former, would you then be required to remarry before being considered 'most worthy' again? But in order to do that you would first need to be divorced, or have your previous marriage nullified, either of which seems like a Bad Thing (TM) and would necessitate your removal from the top layer.

Also, this would undermine Gnarf's argument about equality of men and women somewhat, at least from a LDS perspective. Just look at the top layer. The men get to go off and play god somewhere, while the women appear to be little more than glorified baby factories.

As an aside, I wonder where atheists like me would fit into this picture. terrestial, telestial or even worse? I'd much prefer oblivion over living in heaven or wherever anyway. Living on and on for an eternity seems like an awefully boring thing, regardless of scenery.

 

Wow. To think I only spent years and years learning this stuff and need to go into complex details in just a few paragraghs -- but I'll try:

It's a great place, but little to no chance of improving yourself. You get to spend eternity thinking about what it would have been like to be a god. Remember, the Mormons do not really believe in a hell. There is no eternal punishment for sinners (except the aforementioned 'blasphemy against the Holy Ghost'). Personally, I'm going to open a distillery -- an eternity of blissful drinking (without a hangover) is not bad.... But I agree, it sounds like gibberish.

Henkie: wow, a lot of questions. A point to make here is that men are allowed more than one wife in the hereafter -- women must share their husband (I guess that eases the burden of having billions of children). So, if one spouse doesn't make it and the other is 'worthy to make it', he or she just remarries. The woman's original marriage is voided, but there is no need for the man's to be voided. Once you're in -- you're in. Nobody dies, and no one will ever commit another sin so won't get kicked out of the club. There are actually entire lessons in Sunday School about the possibility of spouses being seperated due to sin (kind of a 'scared straight' tactic).

Oh yeah -- the guys from the better places are allowed to visit the lower places to check on family. Just not the reverse. It's like visiting hours at the local prison.

Equality of men and women -- that's an interesting subject. Equality, according to the Mormons means the woman has the power to create life, the man has the power of God (without the life creation part -- this is spiritual life in the hereafter we're talking about). The powers are divided, so one cannot exist without the other -- it must be a partnership. There cannot be a God without spiritual offspring. Sounds more like the women are glorified termite queens to me. But it's not stated that way because how many women do you know that would actually want that for an eternity?

Atheists can go to any of the kingdoms. It depends on how they lived their lives and whether or not they accept Mormonism in the hereafter. So a basically good athiest person who, after they die, accepts that Jesus was the Christ and that the Mormons were right can become a God. Now let's face it, after I die and if there's anything I'll certainly be willing to accept whatever the guys in charge are telling me. If Jesus actually shows himself in "all his glory" as the Mormons believe, he is going to have an instant convert here (I may not make it to the top, but any existance is better than none).

Also, you should realize I'm no longer a member of the Mormon church -- so some of my comments may be biased. I was the first member of my family (going back six generations of Mormons) to be excommunicated that I know of. I'm the black sheep; a big time sinner who drinks alcohol, coffee, and diet coke; I even lived with Mrs Bruno before we were married (that was a problem for quite a few of my family).

 

Hoo-Ah! There's a chance for me then too! But that is strange. I thought the entire point of religion is that it is based on faith. If Jesus actually shows himself to people when they die, well then it wouldn't be faith that would be the cause for you to accept Christ - it would be fact. And jeez - if I get irrefutable proof of the existance of Jesus as God then you bet I'll become a convert. Basically I'm with you here T2B - I'll believe whatever the guys in charge are telling me I should believe.

 

Ah, but how do you know they're actually the guys in charge? Maybe they're really the "you have been waylaid by enemies and must defend yourself" types of guys (except without the voiceover) just pretending to be the the ones in charge.

Or maybe you're already dead but don't realize it, and the guys in charge are telling you what to do, but you don't accept it because you don't know they're in charge.

(Oh, by the way - I command you to send me all your money. )

 

Gnarff is going to put up the longest post in BoM history... I can feel it.

As for the suicide to get into the Telestial kingdom, that quote wasn't necessarily true... Apparently (I didn't do this research) none of his or Brigham Young's writing mentions this, and it was a later prophet (Wilford Woodruf) who said that Joseph told him:

"That if the People knew what was behind the veil, they would try by every means to commit suicide that they might get there, but the Lord in his wisdom had implanted the fear of death in every person that they might cling to life and thus accomplish the designs of their creator."

Or something like that, but yeah... I think you're probably correct in that it includes the Telestial.

 

As long as he starts with the his proof the word "marriage" has divine origin it should be interesting to read....

I stand partially corrected -- it was a popular statement in the seventies and eighties in Mormon church, nearly everyone heard it in church. It was even taught in seminary (more intense religious courses for Mormons) during the D&C course. However, from The Radiant Life (1994) by Truman Madsen, Professor of Philosophy, BYU:

...but the telestial kingdom is still supposed to be better than life on earth.

 

Why does everyone insist that I defend why Marriage is sacred, but nobody wants to touch this one? Everyone is very content to try to tell me that something my faith considers to be sacred is nothing but a piece of paper, but nobody wants to tell these people they're just picking a fight.

It's illegal for polygamy, so why should other alternatives be legal?

But at the same time, they should not have authority to make laws that override religious sacrements. You want to separate church and state, then they should not have stuck their nose in marriage.

Think of it as part of the fine print. We are all considered spirit children of God. You want to marry one of his daughters, you abide His covenants. Likewise, women have to accept that covenant to be considered worthy of His sons.

Exactly! A refusal to address that leads me to believe that this is not about gay rights, but rather to publicly tear down the religious organizations that have for thousands of years believed their chosen behaviour to be a greivous sin.

But open, deliberate misuse of religiously sacred terms has been offensive to them for thousands of years.

Then why don't they do that and leave us and our doctrine alone?

Because Marriage is itself a sacred ordinance, regardless of what some politicians or activists say. Further, Religious doctrine teaches that homosexuality is immoral. Therefore hiomosexual unions can NEVER be the same as true marriage. Using the word to apply it to such unions is offensive to those that might otherwise be sympathetic to questions of gay rights.

Then get the politicians off their asses and justify their abominably high salaries and actually govern. It is the role of government to protect that degree of equality. While Marriage is a religious ordinance, gay rights is a civil matter. Until politicians figure this out, this is not going away. And if the Gay Rights activists insist on calling it marriage, they are picking a fight with the people they need to win over in order to put sufficient pressure on these politicians to resolve these matters. By picking a fight, you drive a great many of these people to politicians that make gay rights a low priority...

Actually, I have no wife. Going beyond that is more personal than I care to go at this time...

And it's the offensive usage of the term marriage that we are opposing.

And with Satan bound and powerless in the millenium and the afterlife, there will be no temptation, therefore, there will be no homosexuality or transgender people.

I would challenge that. The "spiritually weaker" people would be protected from such temptations. I've heard somewhere that we are not tempted beyond our ability to resist. Tempted beyond the limits of our vigilance on a daily basis, tempted beyond our willingness/desire to resist on occasion, but never beyond our capacity to resist.

Two things: First, men and women both become Gods, each with their own power, authority and responsibilities. Second, I have heard that marriage is not mandatory, but there are other roles for those that don't marry.

We enter our respective kingdoms with our resurrected bodies in tact--complete with genitalia and gender identity. But the ability to organize families is not given us.

I've heard that some murderers will also go there. Shedding "innocent blood" is one setp below blasphemy against the Holy Ghost...

Under the law of the United States of America, marriage is specifically limited to ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN. It should be the same for Mormons--who ultimately were coerced into changing their doctrine to acommodate this law--as it is for homosexuals. That means that Gay Rights issues must be separated from the definition of Marriage.

It can and has overridden religious practice. Case in point, Official Declaration 1. Basically my religion was forced to chainge their practice under duress of law.

What two consenting adults do in whatever privacy they can legally procure is none of my damned business, but I resent the attempts to use political correctness to attempt to bully me off an unpopular opinion.

---------- Added 0 hours, 29 minutes and 18 seconds later... ----------

Imagine Earth without all the crap that we've done to the planet (pollution, devastation, vandalism and grafitti), but without Satan trying to persuade everyone to act like [insert disgusting derogatory term here]. Sounds nice, but it's not as glorious as it could be, and you know it. Friends and Relitives that have moved on to Higher glories can come to see you, and you see the Glory that they attained through their greater faithfulness. And you KNOW where you messed up...

Exactly why heterosexual marriage is so sacred to us. Gay Marriage is an open mockery of God's Divine plan...

I think the behaviour towards people who do what you do (the alcohol, Coffee, living with a woman) is different in areas that are not as highly concentrated within the church. Even though it wasn't much of a secret that I liked my booze, dope and those unmanly Euorpean coffees they serve at Tim Horton's, when I showed up at church, they were happy to see me. Granted, they were happier when I gave up the booze and dope...

We lay the groundwork for our eternal reward here in this life. If we are faithful in this life, we have an advantage in learning all we need to learn in order to become like God.

It's more than just belief, but structuring our lives according to God's will. While we will know that Jesus is the Christ, it is only sufficient to save us from our sins (and thus the place in Outer Darkness). To attain Celestial Glory, we must still seek to structure our lives as God requires.

At the Judgement seat, there will be no doubt of the true Identity of Jesus Christ. But there will be some who still deny Him at the seat of Judgement, and thus refuse the Atonement of Christ (and thus blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, who will also bear witness of Chirst).

I blame my internet provider for forcing me to fall behind on this thread (and a few others). AS a result, catching up will take a long time...

Second Chapter of Genesis is all the proof that I need. Marriage is the word used for the ordinance, therefore associating it with a blatantly opposing practice is offensive to us.

 

What happens if his daughter is 'emancipated'? (As in, she removes God from her life by becoming areligious.) Then is she still His daughter?

Err, didn't we just discuss that and find that the Bible doesn't really have much to say negatively about homosexuality that cannot be refuted?

So then if we have our genitalia and gender roles but cannot have families, do we just have sex all the time? I thought that was bad? What else are our genitals for?

If you know it, then it isn't faith, it is fact... so are you faithful or do you for certain (111% certain) without a doubt that Jesus is the Christ?

This goes along with the previous statement: didn't you just say you already knew his identity, without doubt?


And I am not trying to be offensive, just trying to figure this out.

(P.S. That was an epically long post Gnarff)

 

No, we had a discussion where the people who don't believe in the Bible decided they still don't, and the people who do decided they still do. In other words, it didn't really go anywhere.

 

I've addressed this so many times that I won't repeat myself. My previous comments still stand.

Well, not being familiar with the bible, I googled genesis chapter 2, and came up with many results. They were all the same; this one is an example. Nowhere does it use the word "marry" or "marriage". Please find a section in the bible where the actual word "marriage" is used. Unless you can do that, you have no legitimate basis for claiming that the word "marriage" has divine origin, and therefore have no basis for restricting its usage to religious marriages only.

(I'm back in this debate because Gnarff supposedly provided new evidence. As it turns out, he proved nothing. Big surprise there.)

 

Gnarff: It is a common misconception that murderers can be sent to outer darkness, even though doctrine clearly states murders go to the telestial kingdom and only those who commit the "unforgivable sin" will get cast out. Murder, contrary to popular belief, is a forgivable sin -- just not in this life (once again, read your church doctrine). The only unforgivable sin is blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. The confusion comes from many people believing the sin Cain committed was murder -- he did commit murder, which was bad enough -- the unforgivable sin was that he had a "true testimony" of God. Cain had walked with God and spoken with God and he still took the life of his brother, turning his back on God in the process. But enough of this drivel....

Some part of our bodies must be missing for this to be true... you have your interpretation of the doctrine (which is often quite flawed) and I have mine.

Surely by now Gnarff you should know the bible is a translation, it is not in it's original form, or even uses any of the original words. Rather, it is filled with man's interpretation of the words. Using a modern day translation of the bible is not proving divine origin of anything -- try again. This time put some thought into it.