posted by Affirmation at 06:17
Most Definitely. While he may not have fully understood the challenges we face or where we fit in the plan of salvation, he definitely provided leadership which allowed a re-thinking of the "chosen versus genetic" by the Church's leaders. We cannot overstate how important his contribution was to giving church members a greater understanding.
I do not think that he has done anything to promote GLBT issues. I rather think he was the most conservative LDS leader of our time. I know some of the speeches he gave, where he basically said “we do not condemn our GLBT brother's and sisters, but we condemn the nature of their relationships.” But if they are in good standing with the church, he said they will be redeemed.I think one of these days all religious leaders will find out that they’ve done more harm than any good. angelika bertrand utah/usa
I guess he was the first to say that he didn't really understand homosexuality and seemed to open the door for a biological basis. Still, I hesitate to give him much credit because of the harm he continues to do to LGBT persons who are stuggling with serious internal issues. His stance that we cannot achieve eternal salvation due to our "acting on" our sexuality is hurtful and damaging to us. Greg
For having only a small understanding of what gays and lesbians who grow up LDS must endure, I feel that he has paved the way for positive change. He was by no means an advocate, but instead looked more on the people as what they are: people. Regardless of sexual orientation, each of us could do a little better each day. I hope very much that his acceptance of the person behind the label can evolve into grater acceptance for their families, every kind.
Hinckley advocated a general love for all members, and was not afraid to use the word "gay" -- though he didn't use it in the way LGBT people would have preferred. I sincerely believe that Hinckley's moderate stance has given some hope to some localities wherein bishops will push the boundaries as far as they can, allowing gay members and their partners to attend services, particate in ward activities, etc. But I'm talking about places like NYC or maybe Seattle, and not every LGBT Mormon is apt to move to those places. The "progressiveness" is in the hearts of local bishops. Not Hinckley.Any church president should be expected to advocate love for church members. This is not enough. Hinckley did little to foster an understanding of LGBT people, which is the only thing that can lead to an acceptance of LGBT members in the Church.Good luck, Affirmation, in your request to meet with President Monson. I think it's a wonderful request, however it turns out.
Yes, I think he was more progressive, without a doubt, given the open negativity that has come from previous presidents. He wasn't nearly as progressive or understanding as he should have been, though, considering that he served at the turn of the millennium.Remember also that it was during Hinckley's tenure that Dallin Oaks emerged as the new voice for Mormon doctrine on homosexuality—a brilliant PR move on Hinckley's part, since it allowed the office of the President to keep its hands unsullied from the debate while still promoting a fairly hard-nosed stance on how church members should deal with their "same-gender-attracted" friends and family.
Yes, he was a great mover for change in regard to GLBT Mormons, and the Mormon community better understanding gays in the Church. His contribution was great, and he will be missed. Hopefully other leaders can continue where he left off, on many fronts! Thanks for this discussion.
I utterly disagree. I loved his courage but his personality was far too conservative. But then again what can u expect from a 80-something man ? The Church needs a younger leadership
How many millions of $ did the church spend over the last 10 years fighting gay issues?I loved the man as a prophet, but he did next to nothing to gain understanding or foster a loving atmosphere within the church and its gay members.
He developed a reptutation for being more media-friendly than past presidents. But I look at it this way...you can coat prejudice in a ball of sugar which makes it easier to swallow but it still ain't nutritious.Gay people should be self respecting, and not thank glad-handers who give out crumbs of acceptance while saving the cake for themselves. And then when society becomes more progressive, in order to maintain their power and not look like outdated dinosaurs, they open the release valve a little to take some pressure off, and say "Well, we understand you this way now" or "Yay that you can participate in this little way", while they stand at their Rameumpton or however that's spelled, lol, and continue to abuse power and spread ignorance.It doesn't matter what their understanding is or what they choose to accept. We should be too busy living life with the rest of the normal empathetic people out there to care about getting caught up in social games and shoring up the mormon church's narcissism.
I think President Hinckley did his part on a grander sceem for GLBT. you cant expect him to openly say that its just okey to be gay at this time. Doing so would drive so may from the church and damage more people and there salvation then it would help. I beilieve he had an understanding of this and chose a path that would alow the minds of the body of the church to change. that change even as slow as it may be will eventualy leat to the acceptance of Gay and Lesbian Mormons.
I think he was an awesome leader for the church. Of course he was much older than myself, I think he had never seen homosexuality as an open thing. It was probably never talked about when he was growing up. I know in my heart he still love us as children of God.
President Hinckley was a nice old man who cared about people and his family, but just because he could say the word gay doesn't make him any sort of advocate. I do not think that he brought the church any closer to accepting glbtq people! If anything he drove them farther away by showing that although being glbtq is genetic, the church still does not need to accept them. I think that there will be a day when the Mormon church accepts glbtq people. However, this day is a long ways away! Think about how long it took the Mormon church to allow blacks membership! This was long after the world saw blacks as equal people. LGBTQ people will not be accepted in the Mormon church until they have already been accepted by the rest of the world for a long time. It's sad, but we have to admit it, the Mormon church is way behind the times.Sadly, Rebekah
I just wanted to say how grateful I am to have found this website. I am LDS, and I am not gay (I am happily married with 2 children). But I have been struggling lately with the Church's position on homosexuality. I know too many gay men and women to believe in my heart that their lifestyle is sinful or wrong. I have been depressed lately about what this means in the greater scheme of my faith in the Church. If the Prophets have been wrong on this (as I believe they are), that makes me question the truthfulness of the Church in general. I cannot seem to reconcile the Church's stance with my own conscience. I am so grateful that there is a site like this that speaks respectfully and honestly about this issue.
It is because of the Church and its leaders that I am not only still a member if this great Religion, but that I am alive at all. If President Hinckley did anything of value it was that he inspired me to believe that I am a child of worth and a son of God. The law of Chastity is a law of God and I think President Hinckley and many other Church leaders have fostered a growth of love for individuals and has made it clear that whether you are gay or straight, sexual actions outside the appropriate relationships are not of God. Although that leads me to a little heartache I stand by it and will always stand by it.
Create a Link