ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

The Mormon Church Makes A Huge Anti-LGBT Statement

Updated on May 15, 2017

Earlier this week, the Church of Latter Day Saints made an announcement that rocked the Boy Scouts of America to its very organizational foundations. The Mormon Church is currently the largest sponsor of the Boy Scouts across the nation. But that legacy will be disappearing in short order, as all Mormon boys between the ages of 14 and 18 will be quitting the organization permanently. This exodus accounts for about 180,000 of the 2.3 million Boy Scouts nationwide. The LDS Church is starting their own similar type of organization to replace Boy Scout membership; an organization that will not likely be open to gay or transgendered youth. The Church will allow the boys between 8 and 13, another 280,000, to remain until they have a youth program fully developed. The Mormon faith teaches that homosexuality is a sin and they strongly opposed gay marriage.

Timeline 2013

During the past five years, the Boy Scouts of America have made some drastic policy changes; specifically focused on appeasing the LGBT community. Each of these decisions was seen as near-landmark as they were happening. It started in 2013, when the Boy Scouts opened up membership to all boys, regardless of their sexual orientation. At the time, the LDS Church issued a statement which seemingly amounted to their acceptance of gay Scouts in church sponsored units, "as long as they agreed to abide by church standards." Although they attempted to hide their disdain for gay Scouts, this statement telegraphed their real feelings. By using the "Church standards" angle, the LDS Elders were able to effectively control or limit the behaviors of a homosexual member, thus denying him the opportunity to fully express himself. Shortly after this event, the concept of a church sponsored type of organization began brewing behind the scenes. With the still looming possibility that the Boy Scouts would go one step further and allow openly Gay Scoutmasters and other leaders, many members of the church wanted a route out of the Boy Scouts, but not one which would take away the experience for their straight boys.

Timeline 2015

Intense pressure from the Disney corporation and their threat to pull funding from the Boy Scouts led to the group rolling over totally and letting Gay men become troop leaders. Disney has been promoting homosexuality for several decades and it's widely known that more than a quarter of Disney employees, including leadership, are gay. Mormon donoations to Scouting started dropping and the church stated it was "deeply troubled" by the decision of the BSA to let gay men have complete authority over groups of very young boys. The official church statement almost came right out to state that the church would be coming out with its own program and soon.

Timeline 2017

Another two years passed and with it came another policy change by the Scouts; this time it was to announce that the organization would accept transgendered youth into the program. This decision came as the BSA once again folded to pressure from an outside group. The National Organization for Women demanded transgendered youth be allowed to join and the demands were met. This decision was obviously the last straw, and the LDS Church announced shortly afterwards the decision to separate the older boys; moving the Mormon Scouts into a church approved program and once again demonstrating their intolerance for homosexuality or transgenderism.

Summary

The Church is claiming that the decision to separate was independent of anything related to LGBT, but if that's the case, then where is any evidence? Church leaders are unable to show any reason for separating from the Boy Scouts other than the policy changes. They were huge supporters, but once the Scouts accepted homosexuality, the playing field changed and the Mormons left. I'd be willing to bet that the younger kids are whisked away as soon as possible as well. Other religious leaders are supporting the decision and a few are calling for all people of faith to also leave Scouting.

Comments

Submit a Comment

  • tsadjatko profile image

    TSAD 8 days ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

    Will LGBT leaders condemn the Mormons for leaving and/or welcome their departure being that the Mormons are the real problem, and glad to see them go. Maybe the answer is for the LGBT movement to start their own LGBT Boy Scouts and call it the LGBT BS?

  • Jodah profile image

    John Hansen 8 days ago from Queensland Australia

    This is all very interesting, Ralph. I wasn't aware that the Disney Corporation was such a supporter of gay rights. I can, however, understand the Church of LDS stance on the matter. I agree that boys of all sexual orientation should be allowed to join the scouts I am not sure that allowing gay scout masters is a good idea however. A number of scout masters have been convicted of sexual abuse of boys in their care. Though paedophilia and homosexuality are often too separate things. We need to be careful.

  • tsadjatko profile image

    TSAD 8 days ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

    But Jodah, gay boy scouts grow up to be what?

    Answer: Gay Scout Masters.

  • Kathleen Cochran profile image

    Kathleen Cochran 8 days ago from Atlanta, Georgia

    "A number of scout masters have been convicted of sexual abuse of boys in their care. Though paedophilia and homosexuality are often too separate things. We need to be careful." Restricting gay scout masters is not the definition of being careful. Look at statistics and find that most sexual predators are heterosexual.

    My Southern Baptist Church has abandoned their 75-year-old scout troop for fear of attracting homosexuals. I find this action non-Christian at its core. How many young men will now not come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ through this contact with our church because of fear and ignorance? Are we also going to cancel Wednesday night suppers for fear obese people might come and overeat (also advised against in the Bible)? The day will come (soon I hope) when we will look back with shame on our attitudes just as we do looking back on slavery and bigotry.

  • RJ Schwartz profile image
    Author

    Ralph Schwartz 8 days ago from Idaho Falls, Idaho

    Tsad - I'm inclined to think the LGBT community will make some stink with the Church, however I don't think the Church cares one bit. As far as the LGBT community making their own groups - my bet is no way....one of their biggest weapons is forcing other groups to change in order to accommodate their behaviors

  • tsadjatko profile image

    TSAD 8 days ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

    As usual Kathleen, you state an irrelevant statistic then use it as a straw man argument.

    Fact: A tiny percentage of the population [homosexual men], commit one-third or more of the cases of child sexual molestation."

    Here are the pro and con arguments

    http://borngay.procon.org/view.answers.php?questio...

    which prove at the very least you can not honestly say "Look at statistics and find that most sexual predators are heterosexual." and think that has anything to do with the issue.

    Fact: A tiny percentage of the population [homosexual men], commit one-third or more of the cases of child sexual molestation."

    Goodbye, cause it's been my experience that once your deceptive behavior has been revealed you disappear from the conversation. Sad because there is healing in admitting you are wrong.

    I agree Ralph, I was just being snide. (LGBT BS)

  • profile image

    Old Poolman 8 days ago

    My bottom line on this applies to any organized group and is not limited to just the boy scouts.

    If you don't like the way the organization is headed, just quit and start your own group of like minded people. And that is what the Mormon church is doing.

    When we look at all of the organizations that have been forced to change their polices due to the complaints of a few members, it makes me wonder what happened to the majority rule?

    Nobody is forced to join or be a member of any organization.

  • Carolyn M Fields profile image

    Carolyn Fields 8 days ago from the USA

    Okay, I'm going out on a limb here, but I don't see this as "anti-gay" so much as it is "pro Church teachings." The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (as they prefer to be called), has every right to promote their beliefs and teachings, as they see them. That is the core of religious freedom. They are not required to promote the LGBT agenda. There is a lot of disagreement within the Christian community about what is and what is not the correct interpretation of biblical teachings on homosexuality. One completely valid interpretation is to disapprove of the homosexual lifestyle, yet embrace a homosexual person as a child of God. It's far more complicated than merely headlines, so I'll stop there. Except to say that I am not LDS, and therefore should refrain from further commentary.

  • RJ Schwartz profile image
    Author

    Ralph Schwartz 8 days ago from Idaho Falls, Idaho

    Carolyn - I think your response is appropriate, but from a timing perspective looks much worse for the LDS church than it might actually be. I've often wondered why all Christian religions don't step up and follow their own rules.

  • MizBejabbers profile image

    MizBejabbers 8 days ago

    There is some question about whether the BSA is a secular or religious organization because it affirms a belief in God. However, it has a history of receiving federal funding, so which is it? There is no question that LDS is a religious organization and is free to exercise its own beliefs. I don't think we have the right to criticize the church from establishing its own "boy scout" type organization as long as it pays for it without public moneys. Unless or until the Boy Scouts give up using taxpayer dollars to fund some of their activities and projects, they have no choice but to have an anti-discrimination policy. Polarization is tearing this country apart. Even religious and quasi-religious groups have their own versions of polarization.

  • John Welford profile image

    John Welford 7 days ago from Barlestone, Leicestershire

    Your statement that the Disney Corporation has been "promoting homosexuality" is an interesting one, as it suggests that gayness is a product like Coke that can be sold on the open market.

    Let's get this straight once and for all. Being LGBT is not a matter of choice - you are either gay or you are not. It cannot therefore be a "sin" (whatever that means) to be gay. How you choose to express your sexuality is a different matter, as is how you choose to respect (or otherwise) the sexuality of other people. Disney may be keen to promote the toleration of homosexuality, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

    There is no such thing as a "sin" that does not harm other people - that is surely the whole definition of morality. If a gay person tries to force him/herself on another person in a sexual way, that is wrong, and the same is true if a straight person tries to do so.

    What is also completely wrong is demonizing other people because of their sexuality, or pretending that they are in some way less worthy as human beings because they do not conform to the norms of the majority.

  • Kathleen Cochran profile image

    Kathleen Cochran 7 days ago from Atlanta, Georgia

    tsadjatko Here's a reply. You can disagree with a person without being insulting. And I leave a conversation when there is no point in trying to contribute further to it.

  • Carolyn M Fields profile image

    Carolyn Fields 7 days ago from the USA

    John W.,

    Let's get THIS straight once and for all . . . there is no consensus in the scientific community regarding genetic predisposition to homosexuality. From a 2016 John Hopkins report:

    "The three-part, 143-page report, which appeared in the Fall 2016 edition of The New Atlantis, also investigated other commonly accepted ideas about homosexuality and transgenderism. The report found insufficient evidence to back up the idea that people are born with innate sexual attractions. Mayer and McHugh examined past studies which show a modest association between genetic factors and sexual orientation, but these studies have not been able to pinpoint particular genes responsible. Other hypothesized biological causes, such as prenatal development and hormones, have also been linked to sexual orientation, but that evidence is also limited. Studies of the brains of homosexuals and heterosexuals have found some differences, but have not demonstrated that these differences are inborn rather than the result of environmental factors that influenced both psychological and neurobiological traits."

    There is more here:

    https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/08/23/johns-hopk...

    Okay, now you show me YOUR report that says the opposite. And on and on. I get it. My point is this: don't tell me that the debate is settled. It's not. So don't lecture me. It's far from the established fact you claim it to be. And you may choose to believe what you wish. Just don't claim it's conclusive and dismiss other peoples' perspectives.

    Now, that said, I'm all for tolerance. I do not wish to demonize anyone. I also agree that NO PERSON should push a particular sexual orientation on another against their will. That's just wrong.

    I'm also for religious freedom. As long as a church doesn't use "public" funding, they can promote or not promote as they see fit, as long as they are not advocating violence. And I don't see the LDS church doing that.

    Stepping off my soapbox now.

  • John Welford profile image

    John Welford 7 days ago from Barlestone, Leicestershire

    Carolyn,

    You seem to be arguing against a statement that I did not make. I merely said that one does not choose to be gay - although you might find a few people who say that they did. I did not venture any particular reason why this might be so - genetic, environmental, or anything else.

    So are you denying the fact and are you saying that the majority of gay people have made a conscious choice to adopt a certain sexuality? That would be a very hard line to defend, surely!

  • tsadjatko profile image

    TSAD 7 days ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

    Kathleen, yeah, you are right, but just as always with you, what you just said, implying it applies to your behavior, again is a lie, another straw man. That is all you how how to do, then you disappear or as in this instance try to change the subject. Describing to a tee your repeated behavior is not an insult, merely an observation meant to reveal a dishonest and deceiving nature.

  • RJ Schwartz profile image
    Author

    Ralph Schwartz 7 days ago from Idaho Falls, Idaho

    John - /Your statement that the Disney Corporation has been "promoting homosexuality" is an interesting one, as it suggests that gayness is a product like Coke that can be sold on the open market./

    Of course a lifestyle choice can be promoted - I'm not going to even being to enter the born gay/chose gay argument, but I will use a plain truth for discussion sake. The fact is that people CAN choose to live a homosexual lifestyle if they want to. Therefore if a person CAN choose, then they CAN be influenced to make a choice.

  • tsadjatko profile image

    TSAD 7 days ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

    Well said Ralph.

  • tsadjatko profile image

    TSAD 6 days ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

    I have to say, did you notice Kathleen only came back to attack me with innuendo. Not to admit what I said about what she said was totally accurate or to admit she was wrong. Was she wrong? Since she's gone and doesn't want to contribute (translation deceive) further let's take a closer look at her tactics for the sake of the lesson to be learned here.

    Kathleen says to John's comment, "Restricting gay scout masters is not the definition of being careful. Look at statistics and find that most sexual predators are heterosexual."

    What John said,"A number of scout masters have been convicted of sexual abuse of boys in their care." was totally correct, and what she said, "that most sexual predators are heterosexual" using it as some sort of significant statistic is pure deception and laughable. When the number of homosexuals is such a (tiny) minority of course most predators will be heterosexual. The significant statistic, which by the way she ignores, is that the "tiny percentage of the population [homosexual men], commit one-third or more of the cases of child sexual molestation." which shows her statement to be totally irrelevant. Yet she makes that her argument? A straw man if I ever saw one. But that's not all. She says,

    "My Southern Baptist Church has abandoned their 75-year-old scout troop for fear of attracting homosexuals."

    She finds "this action non-Christian at its core?" That's priceless, a so called "christian" who's ashamed of her church shepherding it's flock. If anyone's action is non christian it is hers. So what is her idea of Christianity? Giving homosexual pedophiles a free reign to prey upon innocent boy scouts?

    She says, "How many young men will now not come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ through this contact with our church."

    There are hundreds of ways for youngsters to come to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ and also through other contacts with her church. Her church? If she's a church member there they need to have a serious talk with her. Maybe invite her to an actual Bible study because it is obvious she has never done that. On top of that just how does an episode of pedophilia lead a child to Christ if it happens when it could have been easily avoided.

    She says her church is acting "out of Fear and ignorance?" That's her attacking and labeling the messenger, no different than playing a race card. That church is actually being the good shepherd, protecting it's innocent sheep from unnecessary exposure to wolves. By her stated reasoning she would prefer to have "her" church provide a killing field for Satan!

    Then she raises another straw man, comparing pedophiles to obese people! That is simply unbelievable, but knowing her as I do, totally not unexpected. Jesus said of anyone who would harm a child "But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea." He did not equate harming children with obesity! Proverbs says "Be not among drunkards or among gluttonous eaters of meat, for the drunkard and the glutton will come to poverty, and slumber will clothe them with rags." A warning for your protection, not a torturous judgement! Does she not understand pedophilia is incurable and as evil an assault as there is on a child yet she compares it to a bad habit that harms no one but the person who is obese?

    Kathleen always takes these loony stances on subjects, bashing Christians and conservatives and I wonder how she can do that with a conscience. But that is exactly what's to be expected of someone who supports abortion which says it all about HER "Christianity." A wolf in sheep's clothing if you ask me.

    Given the state of the media today I am not surprised to find she was a newspaper reporter and editor - she fits in with that crowd of left wing self-deluded deceivers working for today's fake news media.

Click to Rate This Article