In spite of members always saying "doctrine will not change" (hahahahahahaha) I think it's clear to those that study Mormon history that they always cave when it's necessary, and I'm quite sure they will cave on gay marriage eventually and will allow it fully (than say those that opposed it did so as men, just like they do with blacks and the priesthood). My question is, how long do you think it will take them to do this? 5 years? 10? 20? 30? Personally I bet they do it within 20. What do you guys and gals think?

The Mormons will be the last mainstream Christian religion to support same-sex marriage--and maybe even after the more moderate Muslims. I think it will be two or three generations, still (50+ years).

50+ years? Don't you think their tithing will get hurt badly before then and they'll cave? They're already on the defensive now it seems. At least that's the perspective of a complete outsider looking in.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2015 02:48AM by iamanevermormon.

But the Mormon church has a core membership that pays tithing and massive investments besides to see then well into the future. While conversion rates may trail off in the next couple of decades due to the same-sex marriage issue, this will have little effect on the church's financial position.

I would love to be wrong and see the church change its opinion before I'm gone (I'm 50 years old now), but have little hope that will happen. The entertainment value of the apologetics they'll put out there would be worth sticking around for alone!

Good point. you're probably right. Well I'm only in my 20's so I'll be an old man by that point, I would love to see the apologetics and tell the young ones that they are lying (in these apologetics, they will probably try to downplay the bigotry of SWK or BKP or Oaks the same way they try to downplay the bigotry of ETB, JFS or BRM)

Seriously, I would guess never. Should be interesting.

No, I think they will eventually. They ordained blacks to the priesthood after saying they never would for years (that hilarious "Mormon doctrine is not going to change" quote)

It makes me wonder which purist racist bastard they were waiting on to croak that took them till 1978 to admit that racism was bad.

Oaks and (fudge) Packer are both self loathing closeted gays. They have to die before the mood in the Q15 moderates. Hopefully they will both die at the same time. Oaks will die of a heart attack while choking Packer for erotic asphyxiation, and no one will be there to release the choker.

I would love to see that get cleaned up.

No choking required. He just takes off the oxygen hose when he's feeling sassy.

As soon as enough members notice that the LDS dictated celestial marriage and their entire argument against SSM, that being man and wife as a mirror of God's marriage to Heavenly Mother is entirely baseless theological speculation.

I have been told that the church is now planning to let all members marry in civil ceremonies before the temple ceremony. That would make the temple ceremony a religious sealing not a marriage ceremony. It would be a very simple and clever way of accepting and discriminating at the same time. It would also appease all the people clambering to have non-member family at weddings.

Of course, they are not going to move on anything until they are forced.

Yeah, that is probably what they will do.

What???

SSM will Never be accepted in the inner circles, however the PR team may or may not be aware.

In Morland, it's Always about the image, Never the substance.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2015 12:01PM by GNPE.

I remember hearing a story about when it was finally announced in General Conference that blacks could receive the priesthood. People stood up and screamed, 'nooo!'

These are people brainwashed by past Mormon doctrine. They've donated money fighting against gay rights. They've argued, written letters, put time and money against allowing gays to marry.

What a waste.

When it changes, I expect to hear screams at general conference.

It will change. The church is always on the wrong side of social changes. That's what you get when you're led not by inspiration but by old men.

You may remember hearing the story. That doesn't mean it happened. If anyone stood up and screamed "nooo", it was in their living room, watching GC on television.

The announcement of the change was made in June at a press conference. I doubt anyone at October GC was stunned and surprised.

I wasn't there. so my story is from a gentleman claiming to have attended general conference that fall. He relates that when the revelation was read from the pulpit (for church sustaining) that there was very loud grumblings and people standing up yelling 'no'.

He says they were escorted out prior to the person reading the revelation asking for a sustaining vote. Their voices didn't count against it.

If you were there, I will certainly listen to your side of this event not happening.

here is where it was read aloud in general conference. interestingly, this source is from the church and claimed that it was unanimously sustained...my source claimed differently, however.

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/od/2



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2015 02:59PM by hopefulhusband.

One last comment....the person who told my quorum about people yelling 'nooo!' at general conference is an ultra TBM.

If you were there and remember this announcement differently, I would love to hear about it. I am close enough to this guy that I would love to talk to him and see if he mis-remembers the event....especially as the church (in the link above) claims that the church sustained unanimously.

It would lead us into a great discussion about the church rewriting history. So, let me know if you have other info about this event.

I think Brother of jerry questioned your story because you said when it was "announced" in GC, not "sustained." It was announced before GC but your clarification about the revelation being sustained in GC makes more sense since people already knew about the policy change several months before GC.

They'll die first -- all of the top men in the hierarchy will die before accepting SSM.

TSCC will probably then splinter into those accepting SSM and those still rejecting it.

Not a bad theory actually. Maybe another FLDS like breakaway?

I've known my ex is gay for 31 years now. NOTHING MUCH has changed. At least they don't say gays are damned just for being gay or shall we say saying they are gay as, of course, they chose to be gay.

That is the ONLY change I've seen. They make a pretense of being supportive. To me, it is just more offensive.

Agree ultimately. But I do tend to notice that they always fold when the pressure on them really heats up, so I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they fold on this one too.

Pride before the fall.

This issue will destroy LDS Inc.

Google will kill LDS Inc, and Youtube will give the death blow.

Hopefully, but who knows, they still have a lot of money

The church has a lot of money, but they are doing a lot of belt tightening. They have cut janitors, cut Deseret News jobs, and they are probably losing money on City Creek. Attendance is done, so tithing has to be done. They haven't built many of the temples they've announced and they aren't announcing new ones.

I wouldn't count on their financial empire holding up forever.

The comments from Oaks about telling your child they can't stay in your home with a same sex partner is sad and disturbing. My idiot TBM cousin is whining about the press attacking him for it because "it's about respecting our religious beliefs." No him saying that is justifying hate and bigotry. I thought about calling her on it but when I've called her on things in the past it usually ends with her deleting her entire post because she can never accept that she's wrong or hateful. She also is the type that falls for every crazy internet hoax she sees.

I haven't attended church in years and never had a temple recommend when active. They can do whatever they want in their damn temples and call it religious freedom. But don't tell members not to support their gay family members and allow them to stay in their homes.

I am not gay but I fully support gay rights and if my young son were to one day tell me he was gay, I would have no issue with allowing him and his partner/husband staying in my home.

I do agree that if they ever change the official church stance on it to be more accepting, there will be a fracture of members. I can see it in my own family. There are people like my cousin who are super bigoted and love using religion to justify it. Then there are people like my sister who are still active members but openly support gay rights. Of course I think the more time that lapses with the church continuing to maintain the closed minded and prejudiced stance, the more people that will leave.

There is no logic or truth in any of the arguments presented against SSM and I think more people will wake up to that. And also wake up to the fact that a church that changes its stance on things due to changing society isn't being led by any real inspiration but it's more that the leaders are a corporate PR machine covering themselves to be more socially acceptable just like with the changed stance on race back in the 1970s and even back when they stopped openly supporting and practicing polygamy to comply with the law. Not the "true church" when the truth keeps on changing to serve an agenda.

Agreed.

As soon as it's profitable.

One thing gays have that blacks didn't is Mormon relatives. As soon as prominent LDS families see their children excommunicated who are legally married, the church will hear it.

They won't embrace it at first, but they will stop talking about it. The US Supreme Court will rule on it this summer, and it's highly unlikely they will roll things back. The best LDS, Inc. can hope for is that states don't have to issue marriage licenses, but they will have to recognize out of state marriage. They will roll back the remaining portion of DOMA, but they may or may not force states to treat gays equally.

This spring, I'm attended a wedding between a Mormon friend and his boyfriend. His parents and most of his siblings will be there. It becomes hard to listen to the church bash gays when your son is married to a nice young man who makes him happy.

I'm going to be optimistic and say 20 years. Or 10 years after it's legal in every US state, and it's legal in a lot of states now.

When the rest of the world marches on and leaves them behind politically.

There will be a day which even conservatives will change their ideas on it. Several already have. Remember when some of the presidential candidates were saying they believed marriage should be between a man and a woman? Well that seemed right to me and it was only a few years ago! Now it is preposterous I ever thought that way. I bet they don't say it in this next presidential election.

Also, who would have predicted so many Christian people would change their minds as well, and even some of their churches.

Pretty soon, any candidate for higher office will have a hard time getting elected.

Political power and their desire for it may change things. The landscape is changing rapidly.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 01/29/2015 07:52PM by snuckafoodberry.

No more than 25 years from now they will be performing SSM in the temples. They will use the "Law of Adoption" sealings performed under Brigham Young et al as the doctrinal justification...let it be written, let it be done.

Twenty years.