This was tweet I got from John; really sad and rough...http://janariess.religionnews.com/2015/11/10/mormon-boy-denied-priesthood-ordination-because-his-mom-is-living-with-a-woman/

I really, genuinely have nothing but gross disdain for Mormons.

I used to be "meh, agree to disagree, I'll go my way, you go Yahweh", but now, I'm in a fighting mood.

This post by a parent. A heartbreaking example of the EVIL result of the new LDS policy.
"Today I finally sat down with my two active, Mormon children to explain the new policy to them. My son is 12 and is supposed to be ordained next week. My daughter is 14 and last week I received a call to give my permission for her to receive a calling. She was previously a Beehive President. I am gay and inactive but still have a strong testimony of many of the Church's teachings. I fully support all five of my children's faith choices--those who joined the Church and those who chose not to. My son's first question was 'will I still be ordained?' My daughter's first question was 'do I have to move out?' Neither feels like they can sit in the Bishop's office and agree that homosexuality is a sin. My daughter just cried and cried. I feel lost and unequipped to help them. Both shook their heads and said, 'it's not fair. We didn't do anything wrong.' I feel like the policy is aimed at making me feel like so horrible of a mother that I will leave my partner and live a straight life just so my kids won't suffer."
https://www.facebook.com/carl.mcgrath.9/posts/10206895997291579?fref=nf

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/mormontherapist/2015/11/a-family-affected-by-new-policy.html

And so now it's going to go on and on... Everyone says, "Who will this really affect?" These are not just exceptions, but if a rule hurts just one child isn't that enough to make it wrong?

"My son is 12 and is supposed to be ordained next week.

"My son's first question was 'will I still be ordained?'"

The big problem here is if the boy wants to be active in his ward, and he can't be ordained to the priesthood, he'll be a second-class citizen in his peer group. While his classmates pass the sacrament, he'll have to stay in a pew. When his deacon's quorum class has lessons about duties of the priesthood etc., he'll have to sit through them and feel left out. He'll feel like a red-headed stepchild throughout his entire childhood. It would be far better for his self-esteem to just not associate with the church.

Exactly! And supposedly the LDS Church's decision was supposed to be taking AWAY a conflict. Actually, it is CREATING a conflict that is MORE VISIBLE and MORE UPSETTING to the child - acceptance by his peers vs acceptance of his own family.

I agree, Levi.

Now that they have taken to bashing children, I no longer am willing to pretend that I don't know that Mormonism is idiotic, a joke, an OBVIOUS hoax, and a cult for the intellectually lazy.

They ended polite discourse when the codified child abuse into their handbook.

Time to show Mormons what we think of their stupid cult.

Amen!

What is this new policy? My wife and i have been out for a while. I'm really kind of upset about it and i don't even fully understand it!

Here's the article from, well, it's been about a year ago now. I couldn't post the link so I'm just quoting it. When this policy came out a year ago, that's the day I submitted my formal resignation after 25 years of just being inactive. I just couldn't even have my name associated with the LDS church anymore.

***********************************
In a stunning announcement Thursday evening, the Mormon Church has decreed that children of same-sex couples may not be baptized or blessed.

"A natural or adopted child of a parent living in a same-gender relationship, whether the couple is married or cohabiting, may not receive a name and a blessing," the addition to the Mormon Handbook reads in a new section titled, "Children of a Parent Living in a Same-Gender Relationship."

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also announced that children may not be baptized until they have reached "legal age" and do not "live with a parent who has lived or currently lives in a same-gender cohabitation relationship or marriage."

Before being allowed to be baptized or to go on missionary service, that adult child must first receive permission from the Office of the First Presidency. That adult child must also accept and be "committed to live the teachings and doctrine of the Church," and disavow "the practice of same-gender cohabitation and marriage."

For members of the Mormon Church who enter into a same-sex relationship or marriage, there are equally harsh new rules.

"Under the new church policy, people in 'same-gender' marriage have been added to the list of those acts of circumstances that are considered apostasy and would be subject to disciplinary action," the Salt Lake Tribune reports. "Historically, the church has excommunicated some members who have acted on their same-sex attractions."

This is the first time the sentence of apostasy has been imposed on Mormons who are in same-sex relationships.

In a statement the Mormon Church noted these new rules are effective immediately and "have been approved by the Council of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles," the highest leadership of the LDS Church.

'Intellectually lazy'hardly begins to describe Mormons. The evidence denouncing this massive hoax has been accumulating for decades, and yet the members refuse to educate themselves or evaluate the scientific proof. Apparently, Mormons do not believe in DNA evidence or archaeology. Also,there seems to be a pervasive Mormon amnesia associated with constant doctrinal changes, even though these changes can be traced through previous editions of Mormon 'scripture'. The Mormons are a people of sheep, willing to be lead to any conclusion and to believe anything their 'prophets' tell them, regardless of how ridiculous or contradictory of previous disclosures.To paraphrase de Tocqueville, Mormons get the religion they deserve.

Probably without realizing it, this mother explained the reason for the policy. About her two active kids, she said, "Neither one of them could sit in the bishop's office and agree that homosexuality is a sin." This is it. Her kids are two little Trojan horses in the ward. They must be marginalized. What choice does TSCCC have?

Two little evangelicals, along with the biased, liberal MSM and Hollywood, could normalize homosexuality within all of the young people in the ward. Add to this the lawsuit against the public school policy of pretending same-sex relationships are so off-limits they don't, and can't exist--which lawsuit the state will certainly lose--and hating gays will be yet another distraction TSCC won't be able to use to control the flock.

Since when is the suffering of individuals more important than preserving the institution of the Church itself? Why is she complaining? Yeah, it's cold in the arctic. Big news.

Yep, this is a horrific example of children being marginalized and treated cruelly. But this quote at the end of the article is sort of poignant:

>“But I don’t know how we’re supposed to sustain something that
>tears our family apart.”

Mormons have been doing that forever. This is almost no different. Can't have people thinking rationally and evaluating the rules. That would result in all sorts of unacceptable reform. Most importantly, it would jeopardize having everyone pay, pray and obey. And I don't even think the royalty even care about prayer. They want people paying, and obeying (by paying). Any sort of free thinking jeopardizes that. So they will continue to come down on people who rock the boat, even if it "hurts" in the short term, because their long term survival depends on having a boat full of unquestioning sheeple.

You got it all wrong. LDS is not against those children gaining priesthood it is against them being demoralized by sinful gay parents. They are 12 so they can move out, run away, live on the streets (they will start tithing earlier), or maybe the church will build them compound where they can live with LDS leaders. You know these children are only few dozen months shy of 15 years so if a girl is 8 she will be taken care of.

Sorry for sarcasm but what if a child really chooses church instead of family. If a child calls family services and tells them "I do not want to live with my moms because I want to get baptized and go to haven" Will church support the child after all parents are sinful.

And lastly when I think of those 18 year old who are supposed to disavow their parents I can only think of Pavlik Morozov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavlik_Morozov

The trouble the bretheren face is trying to decide how high to set the standards in this mixed up confused world. How "pure and clean" can people live at present. Most people prefer a lower standard. Even ultra tbms are struggling on this one. Maybe a lower standard (the policy before) is a better one for society as a whole, would offend less people, and would accomplish a better good. It's hard for me to say?

I don't consider the church's standards "high" by any means. The world is considerably less "confused" than it used to be because science has demonstrated that homosexuality is a natural phenomenon and genetically based. It follows that God, if such a being exists, created LGBTQ people, presumably "in his own image" in every sense that actually matters. Even the church's gay website acknowledges that homosexuality is a natural, genetic phenomenon.

So what business does anyone have judging people's nature and prohibiting them from forming normal human relationships? Punishing people for being gay--or limiting their legal rights for that reason--is not "raising standards" but in fact lowering them. It represents regression towards barbarism since it means arbitrary and cruel punishment of people for (trivial) characteristics over which they have no control.

Going the further step and punishing the children of gay people for the "sins" of their fathers is even worse. It explicitly renounces the article of faith and the teachings of Jesus that people are accountable only for their own "sins." This is yet another step backwards towards barbarism.

If it were really led by God, the church would not insist on arbitrarily and capriciously denouncing and penalizing certain groups of his children. It would uphold the higher standards of love and support for all people and families regardless of their race, gender or other genetic heritages. That, it seems to me, is the only policy that treats humans with dignity and embodies respect for God's creation.